Panther Salvage Project Biological...

United States Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Panther Salvage Project Biological Evaluation/Assessment

Happy Camp Ranger District Klamath National Forest

Prepared by: /s/ Trish Johnson Date: 7/15/2009 Wildlife Biologist VMS Reviewed by: /s/ Sue Stresser Date: 7/16/2009 Wildlife Biologist Klamath National Forest Approved by: _/s/ Ken Harris________ Date:_7/16/2009 District Ranger Happy Camp Ranger District

July 15, 2009

Wildlife Biological Evaluation/Assessment Panther Fire Salvage Project 2

INTRODUCTION

The Panther Fire Salvage Project is located on the Happy Camp Ranger District in Siskiyou County, California. The project is entirely within the Elk Creek drainage. The legal location is T44N R12W Sections 18 and 19 MDM, T15N R8E, Sections 27, 28, 33, and 34 HM. Elevations range from about 2,400 feet to 4,600 feet.

The Panther Fire started from a lightning storm on July 22, 2008. The fire had consumed over 50,000 acres by the fall of 2008. It made its final and most intense run on October 1, 2008, burning an additional 13,000 acres before the rains halted its advance. This event impacted approximately 2,500 acres of the Elk Creek drainage within the general forest, partial retention, and Riparian Reserves land allocations. A combination of topography, fuel loading and a major weather event resulted in intense fire activity, causing considerable tree mortality across these additional acres. Portions of the project area experienced intense fire behavior during the 2002 Stanza Fire and again during the Panther Fire. The intensity of the Panther Fire has reduced the availability of the conifer seed source to naturally reforest the landscape. The heavy fuel loadings and overhead snag hazards present unsafe work conditions for firefighters and render the project area vulnerable to future intense wildfires.

Within this land base, the Happy Camp interdisciplinary team (IDT) identified 255 acres of timber land suitable for commercial salvage harvest and related activities. Some of the factors considered in developing the proposed action included limiting soil and water disturbance, economic feasibility, standing timber’s resistance to decay and degradation, and the ability to remove commercial material through conventional harvesting systems.

Current management direction

The Klamath National Forest (KNF) is currently operating in full compliance with the Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl (ROD; USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1994). The Forest Plan adopts the ROD as the Federal contribution to the management and/or recovery of species associated with late-successional forest ecosystems such as the northern spotted owl and Pacific fisher. The KNF expects the network of areas withdrawn from active timber management (e.g., wilderness, late-successional reserves, riparian reserves, and administratively withdrawn areas) along with standards and guidelines related to snag, log, and hardwood retention to provide habitat adequate to maintain viable well-distributed populations of Forest Service Sensitive species.

Compliance with Management Direction This document is a site-specific Biological Evaluation and Assessment (BE/BA) to identify and evaluate the effects of proposed Forest Service actions on Threatened, Endangered, Proposed and Sensitive (TES) species, and to ensure that these actions do not adversely affect any Threatened, Endangered, Proposed species or Critical Habitat or cause a trend to federal listing or loss of viability for any Sensitive species. This BE will provide biological information to ensure USDA Forest Service and the Klamath National Forest compliance with the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Forest Service Manual 2670, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended [16 U.S.C. 1536 (c) et seq. 50CFR 402], and follows the standards established in the Forest Service Manual direction (FSM 2672.42; USDA Forest Service 1991) and 1995 Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) for the Klamath National Forest. This document complies with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act to disclose effects on listed species and their

habitats. Additionally, this document provides a standard process to provide full consideration of federally Threatened or Endangered, and Sensitive species, and their habitats in the decision-making process.

Objectives The objectives of this Biological Evaluation and Assessment (BE/BA) are to: 1) Comply with the requirement of the Endangered Species Act that actions of Federal Agencies not jeopardize or adversely modify critical habitat of Federally listed species. 2) Provide a process and standard by which to ensure that Federally Threatened, Endangered and Proposed species receive full consideration in the decision making process (FSM 2672.41). 3) Identify the need for any additional mitigation measures to protect TES species, habitat, or potential habitat from the effects of the proposed management actions. 4) Ensure that Forest Service actions do not contribute to loss of viability of, or contribute to trends toward federal listing of, any wildlife species.

Methodology for Analysis

Methodology for the analysis included field review, literature and research review, GIS analysis, and local expertise for the consideration of direct, indirect and cumulative effects. With the exception of the analysis for the northern spotted owl (see below), the term analysis area focuses on the distribution of effects relative to the wildlife species listed below. Based on field review and consideration of direct and indirect effects, the analysis area is defined as: the area directly affected by timber harvest and associated activities (units), the area potentially affected by noise disturbance (up to ½ mile from noise generating equipment depending on topographic features which may limit noise), and the area potentially affected by smoke (up to ¼ mile from burn piles or within the drainage feature). Project area refers directly to the harvest units described in the Proposed Action. The KNF Species Reference Document (USDA-Forest Service 2009), current scientific literature, and local expertise (wildlife biologists with the KNF or USFWS Yreka Field Office) were used for this analysis and for the following habitat descriptions.

Consultation History


On July 15, 2009, US Forest Service biologists Susan Stresser, Patricia Johnson, and Karen West and regulatory biologists Jan Johnson, Laura Finley, and Brian Woodbridge from the Yreka field office of the US Fish and Wildlife Service, met to discuss the master’s thesis, Clark (2007), as it pertains to the usage of high and moderate severity burned areas by northern spotted owls (NSO) and potential impacts of the Panther Fire Salvage project. While severely burned coniferous forest is not considered suitable nesting, roosting, foraging or dispersal habitat for NSO’s, Clark’s study had telemetry detections within some areas that were burned with high and moderate severity. The condition of the burned stands, such as the percentage of mortality, the presence of green trees, the ratio of high, moderate and low burn severities, and the juxtaposition of usable NSO habitat in Clark’s study area is unknown, and may or may not be representative of the Panther burn area. The NSO telemetry locations occurred in severely burned areas within the 1.3 mile homerange circle. Use of these areas may have occurred for a variety of reasons that are unknown at this time. Because of these unknowns, and the Emergency Situation Determination for the Project, the Level 1 Team recommended a determination of “not likely to adversely affect” northern spotted owls, rather than a “no effect” determination that would normally be made when no disturbance,

habitat removal or habitat modification is proposed. The determination made for the northern spotted owl for this Biological Assessment reflects this recommendation.

Species Addressed within this document

FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES A forest-wide list, from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Arcata Field Office of Proposed, Endangered, and Threatened species, which may occur in or be affected by projects in the area of the Klamath National Forest (02-17-2009-891) within USGS quad (Huckleberry Mtn.), was accessed on February 23, 2009 and again on June 9, 2009. The following wildlife species from that list will be addressed within this document:

Threatened: Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus)

Critical Habitat for the northern spotted owl was designated by the USFWS on January 15, 1992. Revised Critical Habitat was designated on August 13, 2008. Critical Habitat for the marbled murrelet was designated by the USFWS on May 24, 1996. On July 20, 2000, the Klamath National Forest received a letter, Technical Assistance on the Final Results of the Status of the Marble Murrelet in Interior Northwestern California, from the USFWS regarding future consultation within marbled murrelet zone 2. This letter clarified the implications of negative survey results detailed within the Status and Distribution of the Marble Murrelet in Interior Northwestern California: Final Report (May 18, 2000). Additionally, the USFWS letter stated, “…implementation of existing and future projects in this area will not result in harassment of nesting marled murrelets; therefore, section 7 consultation relative to disturbance of marble murrelets will not be necessary.” The USFWS also supports the Forest Service recommendation to discontinue any further surveys for murrelets in the central study area. The proposed project lies within the central study area of marbled murrelet zone 2. It is highly unlikely marbled murrelets occur within the central study area. Additionally, no marbled murrelet habitat is present within or directly adjacent to the proposed project area. Therefore, no marbled murrelet habitat will be degraded or removed as part of this salvage effort. The proposed project will not affect the marbled murrelet. The marbled murrelet will not be further addressed in this document.

REGION 5 FOREST SERVICE SENSITIVE SPECIES This BE/BA follows the standards established in Forest Service Manual direction (FSM 2672.42). The Klamath National Forest provided the Region 5 Forest Service Sensitive list. This document addresses the following species from that list:

Northern goshawk (Accipter gentilis) Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni) Greater sandhill crane (Grus canadensis tabida) Sierra Nevada red fox (Vulpes vulpes necator) Willow flycatcher (Empidonax trailii) Pacific fisher (Martes pennanti pacifica) American marten (Martes americana)


Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus)

Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) California wolverine (Gulo gulo luteus) Great gray owl (Strix nebulosa) Western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata) Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) Cascade frog (Rana cascade) Southern torrent salamander (Rhyacotriton variegatus) Siskiyou mountains salamander (Plethodon stormi) Blue-gray taildropper Tehama chaparral *Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) **Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum)

There are no large (>10acres) wet meadows within the project area or any large openings with meadow habitat characteristics (seasonally wet, grassy); consequently, there is no habitat for the great gray owl or for the greater sandhill crane within or directly adjacent to the proposed project area. Additionally, there are no perennial grassland or grassy shrub-steppe, or agricultural landscapes within or adjacent to the project area, therefore there is no habitat for the Swainson's hawk. There is no riparian shrub (specifically willow) habitat within a proposed treatment area. No suitable habitat for the willow flycatcher exists in the riparian areas that are proposed for treatment. Consequently, there will be no negative impact to habitat for the willow flycatcher from the proposed project. The proposed project is within lower elevational moderate and high severity burned coniferous forests located on the west side of the Klamath NF, where habitat criteria for the Sierra Nevada red fox will not be met. There will therefore be no negative impact to this species or its habitat. Townsend’s big-eared bats are strongly correlated with the availability of caves, abandoned buildings or abandoned mines for roost sites during all seasons and stages of their life cycle (Fellers and Pierson 2002, Sherwin 2000). Caves or cave-like structures do not occur in, near or adjacent to the project area. There will, therefore, be no impacts to this species as a result of the proposed project. The Siskiyou mountains salamander is highly associated with rocky talus slopes. It is restricted to an area of about 377 sq km in the Siskiyou Mountains in southern Oregon (mostly upper Applegate River watershed, Josephine and Jackson counties) and northern California (Siskiyou County: near Hutton Guard Station, the Cook and Green Guard Stations, along Joe and Dutch creeks in upper Applegate River drainage and along Seiad and Horse creeks in upper Klamath River watershed) (NatureServe 2009). The proposed project is not within the range of this species. There will, therefore, be no impacts to this species as a result of the proposed project. The Blue-gray taildropper and the Tehama chaparral require constant ambient moisture to support respiration and egg production. Absence of suitable moisture also serves as a barrier to movement (Frest and Johannes 1995, Furnish 2005). The lack of constant ambient moisture due to the post fire condition of the severely burned coniferous forest in the project area precludes occupancy by these species.


* The bald eagle was de-listed from the Endangered Species Act by the USFWS on July 9, 2007 and is now analyzed as a FS Sensitive Species. Nesting territories are generally associated with lakes, reservoirs, rivers, or large streams and are usually within two miles of water bodies that support adequate food supply (Lehman 1979, USDI 1986). The nearest known bald eagle nesting territory is located over 6 miles from the proposed project area. The project area does not contain the combined habitat elements of large bodies of water that provide fish and water fowl for foraging, in close proximity to large limbed, late seral conifers (generally pine), necessary for

bald eagle nesting. Without these habitat elements, bald eagles cannot feed in this area, thereby precluding occupancy and nesting within or adjacent to the project area. There will be no removal of bald eagle habitat and no impacts as a result of disturbance. Therefore, there will be no impacts from the proposed project to the bald eagle. **Though no longer a federally listed or FS Sensitive species, habitat needs were considered during project reconnaissance to determine if suitable habitat was present and possible impacts would occur in compliance with Forest Plan direction (Pg 4-37). There are no large cliff structures available for American peregrine falcon, nor any suitable foraging habitat (large lakes, river corridors, marshes, or grasslands) (USDA 2009) within the proposed project area. Thus, there is no habitat for the peregrine falcon within the project area. Because of the location of the project outside the ranges of these species and the lack of habitat as described above, there will be no further discussion in this document for the above-mentioned species. Only the Pacific fisher, American marten, California wolverine, Northern goshawk, pallid bat, southern torrent salamander, western pond turtle, foothill yellow-legged frog, and Cascade frog will be addressed further.

EXISTING AND DESIRED CONDITION

Existing Condition

The proposed project is located on 255 acres of the 60,767 acres of the Elk Creek watershed. It is generally located south of the community of Happy Camp in Siskiyou County, California within the Klamath National Forest. The elevation ranges from approximately 2,400’ to 4,600’. The habitat is mixed conifer forest (interspersed with madrone, black oak, and manzanita) burned with moderate to high intensity by the Panther Fire.

PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS

Proposed Action


The Happy Camp Ranger District of the Klamath National Forest proposes salvage harvesting, slashing, and appropriate fuels treatments on National Forest lands encompassing approximately 255 acres within 12 units. Trees to be harvested include commercial size timber killed by the 2008 “October run” of the Panther fire or those determined to have a 90 percent or greater probability of mortality, based on research by Hood et al. (2007) and mortality guidelines presented in Smith and Cluck (2007). Other surviving overstory conifers and sprouting hardwoods would be retained. The salvaged trees would be sold as commercial sawtimber. The predominant logging system would be cable, as there is little opportunity for ground-based harvesting. No new system roads would be constructed. Approximately 200 feet of temporary landing access road would be constructed; the road would be decommissioned following completion of project activities. Fuels treatments within salvage units would include slashing and hand piling, yarding of unmerchantable material or a combination of the three. The appropriate fuels treatment would be chosen to meet immediate project objectives as well as desired future

conditions. Conifer reforestation would follow the fuels treatment activities as needed. Harvest activities are scheduled to begin in 2009 and would likely be completed by 2010; associated activities would likely be completed by 2013.

PROJECT DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS TES Species Northern Spotted Owl (NSO): Currently, there are no NSO nests within the project area. Field verification of NSO habitat maps indicate no suitable NSO nesting/roosting habitat within 0.25 miles of project activities that would require seasonal restrictions for noise or smoke or pre-implementation protocol presence/absence surveys. No activities are proposed that would remove or modify suitable NSO nesting/roosting habitat. All proposed activities are over 0.25 miles from known NSO activity centers and suitable nesting/roosting habitat. The following restrictions apply if NSO nests are discovered during project implementation. Seasonal Restriction of 2/1-7/31 on

• activities that create noise above ambient levels, when they occur within 0.25 mile of an active nest site or unsurveyed nesting/roosting habitat.

Seasonal Restriction of 2/1-7/31 on • activities that create smoke within 0.25 mile of an active nest site or unsurveyed nesting/roosting habitat.

FS Sensitive Species Northern Goshawk: There are no known goshawk nests within or adjacent to the project area. Field verification and habitat maps indicate no suitable goshawk nesting habitat within the project area or within 0.25 miles of project activities. Currently there are no seasonal restrictions for noise or smoke in place and no pre-implementation presence/absence surveys required, due to the lack of nesting habitat within the project area. No activities are proposed that would remove or modify suitable goshawk nesting habitat. All proposed activities are over 0.25 miles from known goshawk nests and/or nesting habitat.

• There are no goshawk nests or Goshawk Management Areas (GMA) within, near or adjacent to the project area. If nest sites are discovered during project implementation, no burning or use of heavy equipment will occur within 0.25 mile of the nest site from 3/1 - 8/31.

Furbearers (American marten, Pacific Fisher):

• Retain between 5-20 downed logs per acres of the largest logs available. • Where present, retain the largest (>12” dbh) hardwood snags and fire damaged hardwood trees, when

retaining snags and burned trees to meet snag retention standards, particularly those with cat faces, burned out cavities, or those that are otherwise damaged to the degree that a cavity may form. These will provide valuable habitat for possible fisher or marten use when canopy conditions return to a level suitable for use by these species.


• Hazard trees larger than 14” dbh that require felling for safety reasons, and do not qualify for harvest, within the Riparian Reserves would be left on site.

Snag Retention

• Retain all pre-existing (pre-fire) large snags (>14” dbh). If these must be felled for safety, leave on landscape as downed wood.

• When selecting trees for retention, retain largest snags in units. • Retain a minimum of 5 snags per acre where available.

⇒ Retain snags in clumps or groups, situated around the largest snags and live trees where possible.

⇒ Select for snags with broken tops as first priority for retention.

*Is important to note that while these guidelines will be applied to harvest units they will likely vary throughout the project area, depending on the burn pattern and severity, and on the locations of unburned patches and trees.

Snag retention guidelines for this project are based on KNF LRMP Standards and Guidelines, however the actual number of snags left in the project area will be higher due to the retention of leave patches for other resource areas (i.e. scenery, hydrology, soils). Only burned trees that meet the criteria for mortality (see Chapter 2 for a description of Mortality Guidelines) would be selected for removal, leaving many trees that may die but do not meet these criteria within the units. This would likely also result in additional remaining snags, above required levels, within the project area. In addition, the remaining burned areas of the forest that will not be treated will provide abundant snags along the perimeter of the project area and the forested areas beyond.

FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL (Strix occidentalis caurina) Status: Federal Threatened

Spatial Scales Analyzed for the analysis of the northern spotted owl The project area includes only the areas that would be directly impacted by the proposed actions (i.e. harvest

units). The analysis area was established by a 1.3 mile buffer around any NSO activity center within, or adjacent to, the

project area. This area was deemed appropriate for the following reason: Based on available radio-telemetry data (Thomas 1990), the USFWS estimated the median annual home range size for the northern spotted owl in California. Because the actual configuration of a home range is rarely known, the estimated home range of a northern spotted owl pair in California is represented by a 1.3-mile circle (3,340 acres) centered upon an owl activity center (e.g., nest site). Suitable habitat within a home range would likely be utilized to some extent within any given year by territorial owls. Therefore, any effects to habitat, both positive and negative, from the proposed project would likely affect any current or potential future owl activity centers in the area. The USFWS uses a 0.5-mile radius circle around an owl activity center to delineate the area most heavily used (territory or “core area”) by owls during the nesting season. These areas assist the USFWS during project level consultation related to possible impacts to individual owl pairs.


Affected Environment and Species Account All of the proposed salvage unit treatments are located within Matrix and/or Riparian Reserves. The proposed project area is not within the area of NSO Critical Habitat designated by the USFWS on August 13, 2008, or within Late Successional Reserves. Suitable habitat definition for the northern spotted owl (NSO) on the Klamath NF includes multi-layered, multi-species forest stands with >60% total canopy cover for nesting/roosting, a minimum of 40% canopy closure for foraging; large (>18") overstory trees, large amounts of down woody debris, presence of trees with defects or other signs of decadence in the stand. For this analysis, suitable NSO habitat was identified using these definitions, Spotted Owl Habitat Modeling (USDA Forest Service 2004), Suitable Spotted Owl Habitat Definitions using GIS, aerial photos and ground verification. The amount of suitable habitat for spotted owl nesting, roosting, and foraging available in the analysis area before and after the wildfire is listed in Table 4. Determinations of suitability also consider size of stand and adjacency to other habitat types, which owls can utilize. Small, isolated patches are not regarded as suitable. Forested stands with reduced acreage due to past land management activities or natural occurrences such as wildfire can create limiting habitat attributes essential to individual owl viability. Wildfire can potentially limit foraging resources, as well as predator protection and thermal protection. These foraging resources are prey abundance and essential cover for protection during foraging endeavors; both are depreciated or lost when intense wildfire moves through a forested stand. Habitat attributes such as coarse woody debris (prey habitat) and cover for foraging (multi-layered stand) can be altered drastically and be extremely limiting after intense wildfire. Replacement woody debris may replenish from falling snags and trees or may remain in areas where fire intensity was less severe. Foraging impacts from direct mortality of prey species due to immediate changes in habitat or direct kill are also associated with wildland fires. Additionally, burned over forested stands lack protection from weather and predators and will take many years to re-establish the multi-layered stands necessary to compliment other essential suitable habitat attributes as described above. Suitable NSO habitat within the project area burned with variable intensity and severity of impacts, ranging from severe, stand-replacing intensity to low intensity.

Fire severity levels are mapped according to the following definitions of low burn severity, moderate burn severity, and high burn severity. Fire severity is mapped using remote sensing (satellite) and aerial photography and is provided soon after the fire is controlled. Fire severity mapping is generated for the Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (BAER) team and is used to target areas for rehabilitation. The definitions provided below from Parsons et al. (2003include other indicators that are valuable in determining feffects to vegetation (habitat). Fire severity classificatiwere reviewed in the field (both ground and aerial reconnaissance) to determine how the fire effects to vegetation correlated with suitable NSO habitat before an

after the fires. Areas of suitable NSO habitat (NSO nesting/roosting and forage habitat) that burned at low severity continue to provide suitable NSO habitat after the fires. Areas of suitable NSO habitat that burned at moderate to high severity had most of the vegetation, including overstory trees, killed by the fire and

) ire

ons

d

no longer provide suitable NSO habitat.


Low burn severity. Low soil heating or light ground char occurs; minerals in soil are not changed; leaf litter may be charred or partially consumed, and the surface of the duff may be lightly charred with the original forms of surface materials. Indicators including very small diameter (<1/4 inch) foliage and twigs are consumed but some small twigs may remain. Generally, foliage may be yellow and above-ground portions of vegetation may be consumed, but root masses are intact. Moderate burn severity. Moderate soil heating with moderate ground char; soil structure is usually not altered and decreased infiltration due to fire-induced water repellency may be observed. Litter and duff are deeply charred or consumed and shallow light colored ash layer and burned shoots and rhizomes are usually present. Indicators including understory foliage and twigs (¼ to ¾ inch) are consumed; rotten wood and larger diameter woody debris are deeply charred or partially consumed. In forested ecosystems, brown needles or leaves may remain (but not always) on overstory trees.

High burn severity. High soil heating, or deep ground char occurs. Duff is completely consumed soil structure is often destroyed due to consumption of organic matter. Top layer of mineral soil may be changed in color (but not always) and layer below may be blackened from charring of organic matter in the soil. All or most organic matter is removed and essentially all plant parts in the duff layer are consumed. Indicators such as large fuels >3/4 inch including major stems and trunks are consumed or heavily charred. In forested ecosystems, generally no leaves or needles remain on standing trees.

Within the Elk Creek Watershed and the project area, NSO nesting, roosting and foraging habitat was burned. The impacts within the watershed were hvariable, with 13% of the watershed burned in highto moderate severity, 3% burned in low severity, and 84% unburned (Table 2).

ighly

Table 1: Total acres of Elk Creek watershed

Acres of watershed burned in high or moderate severity

% of watershed burned in high or moderate severity

acres of watershed burned in low severity

% of watershed burned in low severity

60,767 7,846 13% 1,736 3%


Areas proposed for salvage harvest represent a very small portion (3%) of the high and moderate severity burned areas (Table 3; Figure 1). Only those areas that are accessible by road, without steep slopes, can be yarded existing landings, are within unregulated land or Riparian Reserves land allocations, require very minimal temporary road construction and have merchantable timber that will contribute to the local economy were

out to

onsidered for the project. This totals 255 acres, with the remaining 7,592 acres left untreated.

:

e 1: Acres of Elk Creek 5 field watershed affected by the Panther fire salvage project.

c Table 2

thFigur

Acres proposed for harvest

% of watershed burned in high or moderate

rity

% of burned area propose

% of total watershed proposed

d for harvest for

harvest seve

255 13% 3% .4%

Total acres of Elk Creek 5th field watershed

60,767

Acres burned in high to moderate severity

7,846

Acres of watershed unburned 51,185

Acres burned NOT proposed for harvest

7,592

Acres burned proposed for harvest 255

(97% of high/mod burn area) (3% of the high/mod


burn area)

Direct and Indirect Effects - Proposed Action

O

m ng

ity to the proposed harvest units in order to assess whether any impacts would result om the proposed project.

otential impacts to NSO by way of possible disturbance to owls if present within .25 miles of the project

rea.

No proposed harvest units are within 0.25 mile of NSO activity centers.

There are no NSO nest within the project area. This analysis is spatially bounded by the habitat suitable for NSnesting, roosting, or foraging within the 1.3 mile home ranges for the two NSO activity centers in the analysis area. It is this area that serves as bounding for the analysis because the source of potential impacts to owls frothe proposed project could be noise and disturbance from project implementation. While no nesting/roostihabitat would be removed or modified with the proposed project, habitat within two NSO home ranges is evaluated based on its proximfr Temporal bounding for this analysis is the total time for project implementation because this would be the sourceof the pa

• • There are 5 units (units 10, 30, 40, 50, and 120) either entirely or partially within the NSO home range 1.3

mile management buffers of KL0245 and KL0229. These units were burned with moderate to high severity by the Panther fire and are no longer suitable nesting, roosting, or foraging habitat. See Appendix 1.

• Approximately 3 acres of the southern portion of one unit (30) is within 0.75 miles of NSO activity center

KL0245 and is the closest unit to the activity center. This unit does not contain nesting/roosting habitat, as extensive mortality of almost the entire stand occurred during the fire and in the months following.

d

reas of KL0229 est core did. No currently suitable nesting/roosting habitat is proposed for harvest

Nesting and roosting habitat within the two NSO home ranges (KL0245 and KL0229) burned with moderate anhigh severity on 1,692 acres, of which 52 acres are proposed for harvest (see Table 3). These acres consist of stands that had extensive mortality of over 95% of the stand during the fire and in the months following and are no longer suitable NSO habitat. KL0245 nest core did not burn in the Panther fire, though some an (see Map 1).

the ct area, until such time as conifer

generation and growth provides more in the way of cover and structure.

Foraging habitat also burned within these home ranges with moderate and high severity on 532 acres, of which 125 acres are proposed for harvest (see Table 3). These areas may have been used for foraging by resident owls prior to the wildfire. If the owls continue to use severely burned areas, it would possibly be for foraging alongedges of unburned suitable habitat (Clark 2007) that occur outside the projere


Table 3: Affected habitat of northern spotted owl within the analysis area for the proposed project .

Areas of high and moderate burn severity are no longer considered suitable habitat for long term occupation by spotted owls (see description of suitable NSO habitat in Affected Environment and Species Account Section above) because these areas no longer supply the habitat attributes needed for thermal protection, nesting structure and cover from predators necessary for long term viability. The extent to which owls will use severely burned areas of previously suitable nesting, roosting or foraging habitat is unknown. Research is inconclusive and contradictory regarding the use of severely burned coniferous forests by spotted owls (Bond 2002, Gaines 1997, Yasuda 1997, Elliot 1985). Some studies have shown owls to exhibit short term site fidelity, mate fidelity, and reproductive success after fires have burned with low to moderate severity within their core areas (Bond 2002). Others studies have shown owls to move completely away from previously occupied areas after high intensity burns (Elliot 1985, Gaines 1997) particularly when burns occurred within nest core areas of resident birds. Clark (2007) found that severe wildfires in NSO homeranges caused owls to increase their homerange size in order to encompass more suitable habitat. He also found that spotted owls with territories located immediately adjacent to moderate and high severity burned areas, avoided these areas and had < 5% of their locations fall within the boundaries of the fire. Owls that ventured into the burned areas were typically individuals that were displaced by fire and periodically visited their old territory. So, according to Clark’s study, when given the opportunity, owls focused their activities in unburned habitat. In his study, several owls with territories inside the fire frequently traveled long distances to forage in unburned habitat, supporting his prediction that owls would focus activities in the oldest forest stands with the least amount of fire damage. Some use of severely burned areas may still occur for foraging along the edges within transition zones between burn severities or between burned areas and unburned suitable habitat (Clark 2007). The Panther project area does not contain edge habitat that would provide this foraging opportunity, as the 255 acres of treatment are surrounded by forest that also burned with high to moderate severity. Slope, land allocation, access, and other complexities precluded entry into these additional severely burned acres adjacent to the treatment units.


NSO Home range

Acres of available Nesting/Roosting and foraging habitat within home ranges and nest cores Pre-fire

Acres of Nesting/Roosting habitat burned with High to Moderate severity and proposed for harvest

Acres of Foraging habitat burned with High to Moderate severity and proposed for harvest

KL0229 Total N/R = 1,736 Total Forage = 549

Burned acres

Proposed for harvest from burned acres

674 acres 18 acres 2. 5%

Burned acres

Proposed for harvest from burned acres

249 acres 21 acres 12%

KL0245 Total N/R = 2,577 Total Forage = 550

Burned acres

Proposed for harvest from the burned acres

1,018 acres 34 acres 3%

Total: 1,692 acres

Total: 52 acres (3%)

Burned acres

Proposed for harvest from the burned acres

283 acres 104 acres 36%

Total: 532 acres

Total: 125 acres (23%)

The opportunity for owls to forage along edge habitat created by the wildfire in the project area is extremely limited. A small amount of edge habitat is located over .25 mile away on the opposite side of the northern peak of the drainage that contains the project area. It is highly unlikely that owls would forage within the project area, given that it is over .25 mile away from any suitable habitat and cover. Habitat mapping was ground truthed and revisited in the spring after the fire occurred to assess mortality of the stands that had moderate severity burns. Extensive mortality was indicated throughout the areas within and outside of the project area. Areas near the activity center for KL0245 and unit 30 that had originally been typed as potential habitat suffered a high degree of mortality and are no longer suitable NSO habitat (see Appendix 1 at the end of this document for photos). In Clark’s 2007 study, high and moderate severity burned areas that had the highest number of NSO detections were nesting/roosting habitat prior to the burn, while foraging habitat that burned with high intensity was not selected by owls. In the Panther Project area, much of the area proposed for harvest contained foraging, marginal foraging and dispersal habitat within treatment units, with small pockets of nesting/roosting habitat near riparian areas prior to the Panther fire. It is important to note that while in certain circumstances, such as Clark’s study, an owl may be present within severely burned areas, it should not be concluded that these areas are suitable habitat for long term occupation by spotted owls. The burned areas may contain individual features that are providing a short term structure for either roosting or foraging but are not suitable for long term sustainability of a given owl or owl pair. It is the spatial context of the overall habitat available for use by owls that is critical for an analysis of habitat suitability. The proportion and juxtaposition of unburned (or low severity) suitable habitat within a homerange that has had a moderate or high severity burn would determine the likelihood of use by NSO’s. Under some conditions, some positive effects of fire on spotted owls are possible, but is very dependent upon the size of burned patches and the overall amount and severity of burned habitat in the owls’ home ranges. Habitat that supports prey for NSO is an important component for the survival of owls and their offspring. Woodrats are one of the two of the more important prey species for NSO on the Klamath NF, the other being northern flying squirrels. Franklin et al. (2000) hypothesized that wildfire may serve to enhance spotted owl habitat by creating openings that provide habitat for prey such as woodrats and an increased edge effect that may facilitate the foraging effort. However, due to the large size and high severity of the Panther fire, any benefits to spotted owls from this particular fire are likely outweighed by the extensive mortality of the coniferous forest and subsequent loss of habitat in the area. In summary, areas where the Panther fire burned most intensely, and are therefore least likely to be occupied by NSOs, are the areas where tree removal, planting and fuel reduction treatments would occur. Removal of standing dead trees from within habitat already degraded by the fire itself would not cause any further degradation or an increased loss of habitat. Total area within NSO home ranges affected by proposed activities is listed in Table 3. There is a very low likelihood that northern spotted owls would be negatively impacted by the project due to the lack of suitability of the harvest units, the small size of the total area to be harvested, the overall lack of unburned habitat that could offer cover, and the distance from occupied NSO activity centers.


Map 1. Northern spotted owl activity centers, home ranges and affected habitat in the analysis area.


Cumulative Effects of the Proposed Action – ESA and NEPA Analysis

Under the Endangered Species Act, cumulative effects on the environment are “those effects of future State or private activities, not involving Federal activities, that are reasonably certain to occur within the action area of the Federal action subject to consultation” (50 CFR 402.02). Cumulative effects on the environment are those effects that result in incremental effects of the proposed action when added to the effects of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions on state, tribal, local, or private lands. Cumulative effects to habitat elements of importance for federally listed, proposed or petitioned species occur when small, incremental amounts of habitat are lost over time through a variety of management activities across a landscape. The analysis area is on Federal lands administrated by the Klamath National Forest, Happy Camp Ranger District. There is no private land within the project area. Standards and Guidelines in the LRMP would be met, or exceeded, within the project area post-harvest, including guidelines for Riparian Reserves and snags/CWD levels. Temporal bounding for this analysis is defined by both those actions in the reasonably foreseeable future (10 years) and by the total time of project implementation because the disturbance from project implementation would be the source of the potential impacts from the proposed project. Because potential impacts would be disturbance-oriented, the analysis is spatially bounded by the area that would potentially be impacted by noise disturbance from the proposed actions, up to ½ mile from the project area boundary and haul roads, such that projects that would overlap in space and time and would generate noise above ambient levels within this bounding would be accounted for in this analysis. Baseline habitat conditions for NSO in the analysis area are a product of the intensive timber harvest practices of the mid to late 1900s, several large stand replacing fires, and a century of fire suppression. The effects of this and recent wildfires has been included in the NSO habitat baseline for this project. Currently, there is no additional commercial timber harvest planned within the Elk Creek Watershed. The Klamath NF has a preliminary proposal for additional replanting in approximately 2,053 acres of the moderate and high severity burned area of the October “run” of the Panther fire. Planting activities would involve hand planting mixed species of pine, Douglas fir and incense cedar in areas within and surrounding the analysis area. Proposed planting activities would not occur within ½ mile of NSO territories during the nesting season and therefore would not affect nesting NSOs. In addition, these activities would not generate a high degree of noise above ambient levels, nor would they remove or modify any existing NSO habitat. No incremental, negative impacts to NSO habitat are expected from this project. Beneficial impacts may result from planting the area impacted most severely by the burn by accelerating the return of the mature, coniferous forest habitat preferred by this species. There are no future foreseeable or concurrent actions on National Forest lands that overlap in space and time with the Panther Salvage project that would result in additive impacts to northern spotted owls or their habitat. See Table 5 below for a complete list of Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions in the Panther Project Area. Direct and Indirect Effects – No Action Alternative


No discernable or measurable direct effects are expected from the No Action alternative. Possible indirect impacts may come from the slower regeneration of conifer stands resulting from no site prep or replanting activities. With no action, the mature forest habitat preferred by the owls would eventually return, though at a much slower rate as the successional stages of forest regeneration pass. These areas will regenerate naturally over time, but not

necessarily with the coniferous species mix that would be planted with the proposed project. The impacts of a slower regeneration time are unknown. But, given the small size of the project in relation to the overall area burned with the Panther fire, impacts are not expected.

Compliance with Management Direction As directed in the ROD, there are Standards and Guidelines (S&G's) common to all land allocations, and specific S&G's also required for specific land allocations, such as Riparian Reserves or unregulated lands. Direction for all land allocations directs us to meet S&G's in our Forest plan (LRMP). Consequently, wildlife/biodiversity S&G's for unregulated lands and Riparian Reserves will be met post-harvest. Post-harvest snag and coarse woody debris will be met. As the project area is located within unregulated lands and Riparian Reserve, S&G's for these lands must be met. There are no 100-acre late successional reserves within the project area.

DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS for the Biological Assessment

The following conclusions led to my final determination of the effects that the proposed Panther Salvage project would have on Federally listed species: 1) Marbled Murrelet: The proposed project area is exonerated from consultation requirements because the proposed project is not degrading or removing suitable habitat. It is my determination that the proposed the Panther Salvage project will not affect the marbled murrelet. 2) Northern spotted owl: There is no suitable northern spotted owl habitat within the proposed salvage units. All units are located within high or moderate intensity burned areas; habitat that may have existed prior to the wildfire no longer meets suitable habitat definitions due to the intensity of the Panther burn. The proposed project will not remove or degrade suitable nesting/roosting northern spotted owl habitat. There will be no effect from noise or disturbance due to the distance and topography between NSO activity centers and proposed treatments. The Panther project area does not contain edge habitat that would provide foraging opportunities as described in Clark (2007) whereby high severity burned areas are visited by NSO when suitable habitat is in close enough proximity to the open, severely burned areas as to provide cover while foraging, as the 255 acres of treatment areas are surrounded by forest that also burned with high to moderate severity. It is my determination that the proposed Panther Fire Salvage project activities may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect northern spotted owls because although the project is occurring in non-habitat, is within a very small proportion of the watershed, does not contain suitable edge habitat for foraging, and the distance to the nearest NSO activity center is over ½ mile from the nearest unit thereby eliminating the potential for noise disturbance, certain features within the burned landscape may receive some use by owls for a short term following a wildfire as described by Clark (2007).


It is my determination that the proposed Panther Salvage project will have no effect on the Critical Habitat for the northern spotted owl or the marbled murrelet because Critical Habitat does not occur in the Project Area.

R5 FOREST SERVICE SENSITIVE SPECIES

The following Region 5 Forest Service Sensitive Species will be addressed based on whether the project is within the species’ range, the presence of suitable habitat within the analysis and/or project area, or current or historical locations within or near the project area.

American marten, Pacific fisher, California wolverine, Northern goshawk, pallid bat, northwestern pond turtle, foothill yellow-legged frog, and Cascade frog.

AMERICAN MARTEN (Martes americana) Affected Environment and Species Account American marten tend to use high elevation (>5,000 feet), multi-storied mature and old growth conifer (white fir/red fir) forests with moderate to dense canopy closure. Habitat consisting of a dense overstory exceeding 70% with minimum tree size of 24”dbh and sufficient understory including slash, rotten logs and stumps to provide hiding cover and denning areas is preferred. In most studies of habitat use, martens were found to prefer late-successional stands of mesic coniferous forest, especially those with complex physical structure near the ground (Buskirk and Powell 1994). This complex physical structure near the ground addresses three important life needs of martens: it provides protection from predators, access to the subnivean space where most prey are captured in winter, and protective thermal microenvironments, especially in winter (Buskirk and Powell 1994). Therefore, martens are most limited to the narrowest range of habitats within their home ranges during the winter months. Martens gain access to subnivean spaces created by coarse woody debris at lower snow depths, and by lower branches of live trees in deep snow (Corn and Raphael 1992). In general, these subnivean access points have higher volumes of coarse woody debris, more log layers, and fewer logs in advanced states of decay. Martens generally occupy stands that are located within ¼ mile from water with forest openings less than one acre in size. They are most abundant in forested areas adjacent to meadows or riparian corridors, but use travel ways comprised of closed canopy forests to move between foraging areas (Powell and Zielinski 1994, Ruggiero 1994). Martens generally avoid habitats that lack overhead cover, and tend to avoid crossing large openings ( >300 yards), especially in winter. However, when they do use or cross these areas, they tend to focus on coarse (large) woody debris, low growing branches, or patches of shrub. Several aspects of marten life history predispose it to being affected by human activities including: its habitat specialization for mesic, structurally complex forests; its low population densities; and its low reproductive rate for a mammal of its size (Ruggiero 1994). The distribution of marten on the west side of the Klamath is not well known due to limited survey data. Surveys for forest carnivores were conducted on Klamath NF from 1992-1997, and from 2003-2006. Surveys were conducted using baited trip cameras and baited 35mm camera stations. Marten were detected at only one of the survey stations on the west side of the Klamath NF, in the Marble Mountains Wilderness, in 2005 (USDA PNW 2009) though multiple detections were made on the east side (Goosenest district) in high elevation true fir forests. Incidental sightings of marten have been recorded on the west side districts, but have not been confirmed.


Elevation for the analysis area is between approximately 2,500’ to 5,000’ and is within elevational parameters described as habitat for both marten and fisher. While suitable marten habitat existed in the project area before the Panther fire, it was burned with varying degrees of severity, primarily high severity, throughout the area. Though surveys in the Elk Creek drainage have been conducted, marten have never been detected or incidentally sighted in the analysis area. They may have used the area prior to the fire, but the with the lack of important habitat elements such as canopy cover, stand decadence, and thermal cover reduced or eliminated by the wildfire, the area is now marginal habitat at best. If marten are present, use may occur during winter months in areas along the periphery that still contain some vegetative cover. Direct and Indirect Effects – Proposed Action Direct effects may result from the proposed action in the form of disturbance to marten that may be using the unburned edges of the forested areas. Individuals may abandon the area temporarily during project implementation due to the presence of humans, equipment and increased noise. Large woody debris, especially in the form of large-diameter boles, is an important feature of marten habitat. Logs are most useful to martens for gaining access to subnivean areas and for resting. Removal of large (coarse) woody debris from forests or interfering with processes that make it available in suitable sizes and stages of decay by removing standing trees and snags may indirectly effect martens by reducing habitat quality. The Klamath LRMP EIS describes habitat guidelines for marten and fisher as: snag density >3 (>24" DBH)/ac, live tree/snags and replacement snags >9 (24" DBH)/ac. Optimal cover for coarse woody debris is greater than 20 (>15"x15') logs per acre (Klamath LRMP EIS, Appendix I, pg. I-11 & I-12). While the removal of this aspect of marten and fisher habitat may reduce habitat quality directly within the units, the areas proposed for harvest are of such marginal suitability, that use of these areas even prior to salvage treatments would be likely minimal. Because the Project Design Specifications include retention of existing large, downed logs and standing, pre-existing snags for downed log recruitment, the short term impacts from the project will be alleviated. These design specifications also call for the retention of all burned trees that do not meet the mortality guidelines for salvage (see the Proposed Action for details on mortality guidelines). This will alleviate some of the impacts to species that depend on the recruitment of large woody debris. However, future downed log recruitment will be limited once these structures have decayed beyond effective use by marten. The lack of standing, live trees due to wildfire will result in lack of future recruitment and thus a long term shortage of snags and downed logs in the area affected by the wildfire. Given the total acreage of the proposed project (255 acres) in relation to the total area burned with moderate and high severity with the Panther fire (7,846 acres), the impacts from the proposed activities would be negligible. The removal of standing dead or dying trees on 255 severely burned acres in the Elk Creek drainage will not have measurable or distinguishable impacts on the marten that may occur the area. Because the project area lacks important habitat elements (canopy cover, stand decadence, and thermal cover) and is such a small portion of the watershed, combined with the retention of snags and downed logs to meet LRMP Standards and Guides, impacts to marten would be incidental.

Cumulative Effects – Proposed Action


Temporal bounding for this analysis is defined by both those actions in the reasonably foreseeable future (10 years) and by the total time of project implementation because the disturbance from project implementation would be the source of the majority of impacts to marten from the proposed project. Because the majority of impacts would be disturbance-oriented, the analysis is spatially bounded by the area that would potentially be impacted by noise disturbance from the proposed actions, up to ½ mile of project area boundary and haul roads, such that

projects that would overlap in space and time and would generate noise above ambient levels within this bounding would be accounted for in this analysis. The analysis area is on Federal land administrated by the Klamath National Forest, Happy Camp Ranger District. There is no private land within the project area. Standards and Guidelines in the LRMP will be met, or exceeded, within the project area post-harvest, including guidelines for Riparian Reserves and snags/CWD levels. Baseline habitat conditions in the analysis area are a product of the intensive timber harvest practices of the mid to late 1900’s, several large stand replacing fires, and a century of fire suppression. Currently, there is no additional commercial timber harvest planned within the Elk Creek Watershed. The Klamath NF has a preliminary proposal for additional replanting in approximately 2,053 acres of the moderate and high severity burned area of the October “run” of the Panther fire. Planting activities would involve hand planting mixed species of pine, Douglas fir and incense cedar in areas within and surrounding the analysis area. Currently, there is no signed decision to implement this project. However, if these activities overlap in space and time with Panther project actions, the resulting disturbance may cause any marten that may occupy the area to leave. No incremental, negative impacts to marten habitat would result from this project, though, as the project activities are not above ambient noise levels and the area proposed for planting is not currently suitable marten habitat. Beneficial impacts may result from planting the area impacted most severely by the burn by accelerating the return of the mature, coniferous forest habitat preferred by this species. See Table 5 below for a complete list of Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions in the Panther Project Area.

Table 5 – Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Federal Actions in the Panther Project Area


Activity Description Date(s) Location Scope

Past Timber Sales High to low intensity timber harvest 1955-1995 Throughout project area 7,556 acres

1987 Fire Wildfire 1987 Surrounding project area 10,311 acres H, M intensity

East Fire Wildfire 1999 Outside of project area, to the north

1,047 acres H, M, L intensity

Stanza Fire Wildfire 2002 West edge of project area 1,731 acres H, M, L intensity

Titus Fire Wildfire 2006 Outside project area, to the west

614 acres H, M, L intensity

Elk Fire Wildfire 2007 Outside project area, to the south


Titus-Wingate Wildfire 2007 Outside project area, to the west


Panther Fire Wildfire 2008 Throughout project area 9,694 acres H, M, L intensity

Elk Thin TS Light thinning and underburn 2008

Road side hazard (FSRD 15N03, 15N03A, 15N03B,

15N06, 15N69, 16N05 989 acres

HCFP Phase 2 Underburn 2008 Outside of project area 1,479 acres

Activity Description Date(s) Location Scope

Reforestation in the Panther Fire area Conifer Planting 2009

Throughout project area (see project file for a stand-

by-stand description of treatments accomplished)

55 acres planting with no site prep

in existing plantations.

78 acres planting with no site prep in natural stands

or stands with incidental past

harvest

Direct and Indirect Effects – No Action There would be no direct effects from the No Action alternative. Indirect effects of the No Action alternative would be the slower regeneration of the coniferous forest where canopy was lost to high severity burning. With no action, the mature forest habitat preferred by the marten would eventually return, though at a much slower rate as the successional stages of forest regeneration pass. The impacts of a slower regeneration time are unknown. PACIFIC FISHER (Martes penantes) Affected Environment and Species Account Populations of fisher currently occur in the North Coast Ranges of California and the Klamath-Siskiyou Mountains of northern California and southern Oregon. Additionally, surveys and sightings in California place fisher throughout much of the Sierra Nevada range. The Klamath region population, which includes the project area, may be the largest remaining in the western United States (Carroll 1999). The West Coast Distinct Population Segment (DPS; in California, Oregon, and Washington) of the Pacific fisher was designated as Candidate in 2004 by the USFWS. USFWS concluded that loss of the species from the west coast range would represent (1) a significant gap in the species range, (2) the loss of genetic differences from fisher in the central and eastern United States, and (3) the loss of the species from a unique ecological setting. Therefore, it qualified as an entity considered for listing. According to the USFWS Notice of Candidate Review, major threats that fragment or remove key elements of fisher habitat include various forest vegetation management practices such as timber harvest and fuels reduction treatments. Major threats to fisher that were noted to lead to direct mortality and injury included vehicle collisions, predation, and disease. The USFWS considered the magnitude of threats as high and resulting in a negative impact on fisher distribution and abundance. However, they considered threats to be non-imminent with greatest long-term risks to be the isolation of few, small populations. West Coast DPS listing is warranted but precluded with a number six listing priority.


This forest carnivore occupies late seral stage habitat in mature and old growth mixed conifer stands with a home range that can be very large (up to 11,000 acres in low quality habitat)(CDFG 2003). Fisher are generalized predators, and will eat any animal they can catch and overpower, generally small- to medium-sized mammals and birds. They readily eat carrion and fruits. In the western mountains, fishers prefer late successional forests

(especially for resting and denning) and occur most frequently where these forests have the fewest non-forested openings (Powell and Zielinski 1994). Historically, trapping for fur reduced populations. Intensive timber harvesting could reduce populations by reducing suitable habitat. When fisher are not hunting or traveling, they use structures for resting. These rest structures are important habitat components, serving as secure locations from predators, prey consumption, and thermal regulation in both summer and winter. Drainage bottoms may be used more often for resting compared to ridge-tops and mid-slope locations (Yeager 2005) possibly due to increased access to water, increased prey abundance, larger trees, and denser canopy cover. Riparian areas provide concentrations of rest site elements, such as broken-top trees, snags, and coarse woody debris. Whether for prey availability, water access, riparian vegetation or microhabitat conditions, Self (2001) found fisher selectively used rest sites within 500’ of water , and rarely farther than 1,100’ from water. Fisher tend to use large live trees with cavities, particularly oak species more often than logs for rest structures (Zielinski 2004). Self (2001) found that large (≥ 40”dbh), green trees (most frequently Douglas fir with mistletoe brooms and/or forks) were used for rest sites 79% of the time, while conifer snag cavities were used 15%, and logs used 6%. Other studies have found that fisher will use cavities within hardwoods as preferred structure for denning (Seglund 1995). The Klamath LRMP EIS describes habitat guidelines for marten and fisher as: snag density >3 (>24" DBH)/ac, live tree/snags and replacement snags >9 (24" DBH)/ac. Optimal cover for coarse woody debris is greater than 20 (>15"x15') logs per acre (Klamath LRMP EIS, Appendix I, pg. I-11 & I-12). Marginal denning/resting/foraging habitat for fisher can be found in the unburned periphery of the analysis area. Forest carnivore surveys were conducted on the Scott River, Oak Knoll, Happy Camp and Ukonom Districts of the Klamath NF from 1992-1997, and from 2003-2006 using baited trip cameras and baited 35mm camera stations (USDA PNW 2009). Positive detections for fisher occurred at many of the stations on Scott River, Happy Camp/Oak Knoll and Ukonom districts, indicating that fisher were foraging in the area and were drawn into the bait stations. No den sites for fisher detected. Incidental sightings of fisher have also occurred in several locations, for the most part along major roads and highways associated with rivers or large creeks. In March of 2009 a fisher was sighted in the drainage that bounds the project area to the south near Elk Creek. Elevation of analysis area is between approximately 2,500’ to 5,000’ and is within elevational parameters described as habitat for both marten and fisher. While suitable fisher habitat existed in the project area before the Panther fire, it was burned with varying degrees of severity, primarily high severity, throughout the area. They may have used these areas prior to the fire, but with the critical habitat elements such as canopy cover, stand decadence, and thermal cover reduced or eliminated by the wildfire, the area is now marginal habitat at best. While fisher are continuing to use the area, and have been sighted adjacent to the project area, they are likely moving within the unburned or lightly burned areas that retained more vegetative cover post fire than the severely burned harvest units. Direct and Indirect Effects – Proposed Action Direct effects may result from the proposed action in the form of disturbance to fisher using the lightly burned or unburned edges of the forested areas. Increased traffic on the roads would increase the chances of vehicle caused mortality. Individuals may abandon the area temporarily during project implementation due to the presence of humans, equipment and increased noise.


Indirect effects may result from habitat modification by the removal of standing snags that would have eventually fallen and become large downed logs. As described above, large woody debris, especially in the form of large-

diameter boles, is an important element of fisher habitat. Removal of large (coarse) woody debris from forests, or interfering with processes that make it available in suitable sizes and stages of decay by removing standing trees and snags, may indirectly affect fisher by reducing habitat quality. Because the Project Design Specifications include retention of existing large, downed logs and standing, pre-existing snags for downed log recruitment, the short term impacts from the project will be alleviated. These design specifications also call for the retention of all burned trees that do not meet the mortality guidelines for salvage, (see the Proposed Action described above for details on mortality guidelines). This will alleviate some of the long term impacts to species that depend on the recruitment of large woody debris. However, future downed log recruitment will be limited once these structures have decayed beyond effective use by fisher. The lack of standing, live trees due to wildfire will result in lack of future recruitment and thus a long term shortage of snags and downed logs in the area affected by the wildfire. Given the total acreage of the proposed project (255 acres) in relation to the total area burned with moderate and high severity with the Panther fire (7,846 acres), the impacts from the proposed activities would be minor. The removal of standing dead or dying trees on 255 severely burned acres in the Elk Creek drainage will not have measurable or distinguishable impacts on the fisher in the area. Because the project area lacks important habitat elements (canopy cover, stand decadence, and thermal cover) and is such a small portion of the watershed, combined with the retention of snags and downed logs to meet LRMP Standards and Guides, negative impacts to marten would be incidental. Retention of hardwood snags and fire damaged trees, particularly those with cat faces, burn out cavities, or that are otherwise damaged to the degree that a cavity may form, will provide valuable habitat for possible fisher use when canopy conditions return to a level suitable for use by these species. Cumulative Effects – Proposed Action Spatial bounding for this cumulative effects analysis is the area burned in the Panther fire in the Elk Creek 5th field watershed because the habitat affected by the proposed project consists almost exclusively of forest impacted by moderate and high severity burn. Temporal bounding is defined by both those actions in the reasonably foreseeable future (10 years) and by the total time of project implementation because the disturbance from project implementation would be the source of most of the impacts from the proposed project. The analysis area is on Federal land administrated by the Klamath National Forest, Happy Camp Ranger District. There is no private land within the project area. Standards and Guidelines in the LRMP will be met, or exceeded, within the project area post-harvest, including guidelines for Riparian Reserves and snags/CWD levels.


Baseline habitat conditions in the analysis area are a product of the intensive timber harvest practices of the mid to late 1900’s, several large stand replacing fires, and a century of fire suppression. Currently, there is no additional commercial timber harvest planned within the Elk Creek Watershed. The Klamath NF has a preliminary proposal for additional replanting on approximately 2,053 acres of the moderate and high severity burned area of the October “run” of the Panther fire. Planting activities would involve hand planting mixed species of pine, Douglas fir and incense cedar in areas within and surrounding the analysis area. Currently, there is no signed decision to implement this project. However, if these activities overlap in space and time with Panther project actions, the possible disturbance may cause any fisher that may occupy the area to leave. No incremental, negative impacts to fisher habitat would result from this project, though, as the project activities would not be above ambient noise levels and the area proposed for planting is not currently suitable fisher habitat. Beneficial impacts may result from planting the area impacted most severely by the burn by accelerating the return of the mature, coniferous forest habitat preferred by this species.

See Table 5 above for a complete list of Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions in the Panther Project Area. Direct and Indirect Effects – No Action There would be no direct effects from the No Action alternative. Indirect effects of the No Action alternative would be the slower regeneration of the coniferous forest where canopy was lost to high severity burning. With no action, the mature forest habitat preferred by fisher would eventually return, though at a much slower rate as the successional stages of forest regeneration pass. The impacts of a slower regeneration time are unknown. CALIFORNIA WOLVERINE (Gulo gulo luteus) Affected Environment and Species Account Wolverines are generally considered a solitary species, with adults apparently associating only during the breeding season (Ruggiero 2007). The species occurs at low densities and is highly secretive, making estimation of population trends difficult (Banci 1994). Historical trapping reduced populations in various parts of the United States range, including California. Limiting factors for this species include habitat fragmentation and human disturbance, which have prevented population recovery since the days of trapping. Wolverines are generally described as opportunistic omnivores in summer and primarily scavengers in winter (Ruggiero 1994). In winter, most large prey is carrion, but large snowbound prey such as deer, elk, and moose, may also be killed. Wolverines cache food, and may be able to locate and retrieve prey under deep snow. During the summer, marmots, ground squirrels, gophers, mice, berries, insects, and even porcupines maybe taken while foraging in open to sparse tree habitats on the ground, in trees, burrows, among rocks, and sometimes in shallow water (Zeiner 1990). Distribution in California includes the North Coast mountains and Sierra Nevada. A scarce resident in California, known habitat distribution occurs from Del Norte and Trinity counties east through Siskiyou and Shasta Counties, and south through the Sierra Nevada to Tulare County (Zeiner 1990). Most sightings in the North Coast mountains and the southern Sierra Nevada fall within the 1600-4800 ft. elevational range in Douglas fir and mixed conifer habitats. Wolverines likely also use red fir, subalpine conifer, alpine dwarf-shrub, lodgepole, wet meadow, Jeffrey pine and montane riparian habitats (Schempf and White 1977; Zeiner 1990). Similar vegetation types occur on the Klamath National Forest. There is currently no available information on what habitats on the Happy Camp district or within Siskiyou County wolverines might utilize due to lack of data (no known territories). Wolverines are highly dependent upon mature conifer forests for survival in winter, and generally move downslope in winter into heavier timber where food is available (Ruggiero 1994). The Klamath LRMP does not provide specific guidelines for this species; however, general guidelines direct improvement of habitat capability for mature and over mature eastside pine, mountain meadows, mature/over mature forest, and riparian habitats.


There were 10 unverified sightings of wolverine on the Klamath National Forest within the last 20 years (Klamath Environmental Impact Statement for LRMP 1995), none of which occur within or near the project area or on the Happy Camp district. There have been several reported sightings of wolverine prior to the 1990s (USDA 2009, CNDDB 2008), but those sightings cannot be verified, and there have been no confirmed detections in the Coastal Ranges for over 80 years despite extensive survey efforts. A single wolverine was observed near Truckee,

California in 2008; however, it was determined to be a transient individual with genetic make up that does not match that of the California wolverine. Furbearer surveys were conducted on the Happy Camp District from 1992 to 1997, and again from 2003-2006 using infrared camera systems and track plates, as described previously for fisher and marten, and no wolverines were detected. Direct and Indirect Effects - Proposed Action A small amount of possible wolverine habitat exists adjacent to the proposed project area. Wolverines are known to inhabit large, sparsely inhabited wilderness areas, and are considered rare in California. Due to the fragmented project area and the existing level of human and natural disturbance within the watershed, this species is not expected to occur within or adjacent to the analysis area. Therefore, no direct or indirect impacts to wolverine are expected to occur. Effects of the proposed project are based on effects to potential habitat. Replanting the burned area will allow the landscape to attain late-seral characteristics faster than if left alone. Components of this species' habitat such as snags and coarse woody material will be retained to meet LRMP standards and guidelines. These components would be important to the future stand. Cumulative Effects - Proposed Action Due to the lack of direct or indirect effects, no cumulative effects are expected. Direct and Indirect Effects - No Action alternative Because the species is not expected to occur in the project area, there are no direct effects anticipated from the No Action alternative. Indirect impacts are assessed to potential habitat and may result from slower regeneration of the coniferous forest with late seral characteristics preferred by this species. NORTHERN GOSHAWK (Accipiter gentilis) Affected Environment and Species Account Northern Goshawks can be found in middle and higher elevation mature coniferous forests; usually with little understory vegetation and flat or moderately sloping terrain. Moderate and high quality habitats contain abundant large snags and large logs for prey habitat and plucking posts (Squires and Reynolds 1997). Goshawks generally breed in mature, coniferous, mixed, and deciduous forest habitats. This habitat provides large trees for nesting, a closed canopy for protection and thermal cover, and open spaces allowing maneuverability below the canopy. Timber harvest is a primary threat to nesting populations (Squires and Reynolds 1997). Nests can be destroyed by harvest activities and harvest methods that create large areas of reduced forest canopy cover may be especially detrimental (Squires and Reynolds, 1997). In California, nesting densities remained fairly high despite fragmentation of mature forests through timber harvest (Woodbridge and Detrich 1994); however, territories associated with large contiguous forest patches were more consistently occupied compared to highly fragmented stands. Timber harvest activities near nests can cause abandonment (Squires and Reynolds, 1997).


On the Klamath NF, habitat consists of mid- and late-successional mixed conifer forest with scattered harvested and natural openings. Many of the known goshawk sites on Scott River, Salmon River and Oak Knoll Districts are associated with northern spotted owl sites and goshawks were found incidentally while surveying for owls. Therefore suitable goshawk habitat for this analysis is considered the same as late-successional habitat defined for spotted owls above. Foraging habitat is variable and includes mid- and late-successional forest, natural and man-made openings, and forest edges. There are no known northern goshawk territories in the analysis area. There is one goshawk territory approximately 2 miles northwest of the western edge of the analysis area and was last occupied in 1997. This site was burned through with moderate and high severity with the Panther fire. There is no suitable nesting habitat within the proposed project area. Foraging habitat exists adjacent to the Panther burn along the edge where forested stands meet the lightly burned or unburned areas. The close proximity of canopy closure to the edge of the burn area may allow for potential cover and could potentially be used by goshawks for foraging. Some stands adjacent to proposed project area were once suitable habitat for northern goshawks prior to the Panther fire, but after field review, were determined to be so small in acreage they would not support a nesting pair of northern goshawks. These small areas are also geographically located over ¼ mile away, over ridges from the proposed harvest units. Direct and Indirect Effects – Proposed Action There are no known northern goshawk nests, territories, or suitable nesting habitat within or adjacent to the analysis area, so direct impacts to nesting goshawks are highly unlikely. There is potentially suitable foraging habitat adjacent to some of the harvest units, though not within units themselves, that could offer suitable canopy cover to allow for foraging along the forest/burn edge. Disturbance to foraging goshawks from noise created by the salvage operation could cause the birds to abandon the area temporarily. Distance between unit boundaries and suitable foraging habitat in the burn edges is variable, with some potential foraging areas adjacent to the units, while other areas are .25 miles away on the opposite side of the peak from project activities. Increased distance and topography may help to alleviate some of the noise disturbance if goshawks were in the area during project implementation. Indirect effects are generally associated with habitat modification or removal and subsequent impacts to the viability of the individual or population of the species. Because no suitable nesting or foraging habitat for goshawks will be modified or removed with the proposed project, no indirect effects are expected. Replanting the burned area will allow the landscape to attain late-seral characteristics faster than if left alone. Components of this species' habitat such as snags and coarse woody material will be retained to meet or exceed LRMP standards and guidelines. These components would be important to the future stand. Cumulative Effects – Proposed Action Because the only anticipated, potential impact from the proposed project is disturbance during project implementation, the temporal bounding for the cumulative effects analysis for this species is the implementation timeframe for the project activities. Past actions in the area provide the habitat baseline for habitat for this species (see Table 5 above). This baseline would not change, due to a lack of suitable habitat removal or modification with the proposed activities.


This analysis is spatially bounded by the area potentially affected by noise disturbance. Any on going activities in addition to the proposed project activities that would contribute to noise levels above ambient levels could

negatively impact goshawks using the area. Guidelines in the KNF Forest Plan provide protection buffers for ¼ mile buffer from noise and smoke generating projects when they are adjacent to either suitable or known occupied nesting habitat. Therefore, these distances will provide the spatial bounding for the analysis of cumulative impacts for this project. The Klamath NF has a preliminary proposal for additional replanting on approximately 2,053 acres of the moderate and high severity burned area of the October “run” of the Panther fire. Planting activities would involve hand planting mixed species of pine, Douglas fir and incense cedar in areas within and surrounding the analysis area. Currently, there is no signed decision to implement this project. However, if these activities overlap in space and time with Panther project actions, the resulting disturbance may cause any goshawks using the area to leave. There are no other projects within the foreseeable future in the analysis area that would have additive impacts to this species or its habitat. See Table 5 above for a complete list of the Past, Present and Future Foreseeable projects in the analysis area.

Direct and Indirect Effects – No Action There would be no direct impacts from the No Action alternative. Indirect effects of the No Action alternative would be the slower regeneration of the conifer forest where canopy was lost to high severity burning. With no action, the mature forest habitat preferred by the goshawk would eventually return, though at a much slower rate as the successional stages of forest regeneration pass. The impacts of a slower regeneration time are unknown, particularly because there are no known territories directly within the analysis area. PALLID BAT (Aztrozous pallidus) Affected Environment and Species Account Throughout California, the pallid bat is usually found in low to middle elevation habitats below 6,000 ft. however, the species has been found up to 10,000 ft. in the Sierra Nevada (Sherwin 1998). Populations have declined in California within desert areas in areas of urban expansion, and where oak woodlands have been lost (Pierson 2007). Varieties of habitats are used, including grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and coniferous forests (Sherwin 1998). Pallid bats most often occur in open, dry habitats that contain rocky areas for roosting. They are a yearlong resident in most of their range and hibernate in winter near their summer roost (Zeiner 1990). Day roosts may vary but are commonly found in rock crevices, tree hollows, mines, caves and a variety of human-made structures. Tree roosting has been documented in large conifer snags, inside basal hollows of redwoods and giant sequoias, and bole cavities in oaks (Pierson 2007, Gellman and Zielinski 1996). Cavities in broken branches of black oak are very important and there is a strong association with black oak for roosting (Pierson 2007). Roosting sites are usually selected near the entrance to the roost in twilight rather than total darkness. The site must protect bats from high temperatures, as this species is intolerant of roosts in excess of 104 degrees Fahrenheit. Pallid bats are also very sensitive to roost site disturbance (Zeiner 1990, Sherwin 1998). Night roosts are usually more open sites and may include open buildings, porches, mines, caves, and under bridges (Sherwin 1998, Pierson 2007).


The Klamath LRMP does not provide specific management guidelines for this species, however, general guidelines direct improvement of habitat capability for hardwood associated species. The LRMP does have standards and guidelines for the pallid bat (4-185, AMA-6), which requires protection of caves, mines and abandoned wooden bridges, and buildings for the presence of roosting bats. As an interim measure, all timber

harvest is prohibited within 250 feet of sites containing bats. The LRMP also states protection measures should be taken to disallow destruction, vandalism, disturbance from road construction or blasting, or any other activity that could change cave or mine temperatures or drainage patterns. Pallid bats have been observed at Soda Creek, near Castle Crags in Shasta County. Pallid bats are known to occur in Siskiyou County and most likely occur on the Happy Camp Ranger District. Direct and Indirect Effects – Proposed Action While there are no mines, caves, human made structures or suitable large rock outcroppings present within or adjacent to the proposed project area, suitable habitat does exist due to the presence of numerous dead and dying trees, which could potentially offer cavities or hollows. There have been no surveys for the pallid bat within or adjacent to the project area. No known roost sites for pallid bats have been located within the proposed project area. Harvest would not occur within preferred suitable habitat for pallid bats. Large dying and dead trees (snags), and large down logs would be retained to meet or exceed Klamath LRMP standards and guidelines. Additionally, burned over trees that do not meet salvage mortality guidelines would remain within harvest units. Direct effects to this species could occur if individual bats were to occupy snags within the units. Noise generated during project implementation could disturb the bats and cause temporary abandonment of the area. Direct mortality could result from the of felling snags actively being used as roosts. Indirect effects may result from the removal of dead and dying trees and the potential roost habitat that these represent. However, impacts may be alleviated by the retention of all large snags that existed prior to the wildfire. These older snags may be selected by bats for roosting over recently burned trees, as hollows and cavities would already be present in the snag and may have been a roost site before the wildfire occurred, if the appropriate microclimate existed within the roost. The project area would meet or exceed Klamath LMRP standard and guidelines for snags and CWD, which would retain some essential habitat elements but not protect all possible roosting bats. Given that these bats are sensitive to disturbance, the proposed project could affect individuals. Due to the wildfire, there has been an increase in potential bat habitat throughout the watershed with the creation of abundant snags which could potentially offer roosting habitat, provided these burned over trees offer suitable roosting opportunities (cavities, appropriate microclimate). The proportion of the moderate to high severity burned area affected by the project is so small (3%), that while some bats may be negatively impacted by the removal of the burned trees, there is much more available habitat of this type directly adjacent to and within dispersal distance of the project area (see Tables 2 & 3 above). Within the entire burned area, there were 7,846 acres burned in high or moderately high severity, with only 255 acres (3%) of this proposed for harvest. So, if this species found favorable habitat elements within the project area, these same elements are prevalent throughout the watershed. Cumulative Effects - Proposed Action


Baseline habitat conditions in the analysis area are a product of the intensive timber harvest practices of the mid to late 1900’s, several large stand replacing fires, and a century of fire suppression. Spatial bounding for this analysis is the project area as defined above because impacts to this species would be localized, site specific removal of individual potential roost trees within a relatively small, specific area. Maternity roosts or large colonial roosts will not be affected, so that additive impacts to a single, immobile resource (i.e. cave or bridge) would not occur as a result of projects overlapping in the same space and time. Bats are highly mobile and are

capable of moving to new areas when disturbed. No other activities are planned in the project area that would remove potential roost trees and therefore have additive, cumulative impacts to this species. Currently, there is no additional commercial timber harvest planned within the Elk Creek Watershed. The Klamath NF has a preliminary proposal for additional replanting on approximately 2,053 acres of the moderate and high severity burned area of the October “run” of the Panther fire. Planting activities would involve hand planting mixed species of pine, Douglas fir and incense cedar in areas within and surrounding the analysis area. Currently, there is no signed decision to implement this project. However, if these activities overlap in space and time with Panther project actions, the resulting disturbance may cause any pallid bats that may occupy the area to leave. There are no other projects within the foreseeable future in the analysis area that would have additive impacts to this species or its habitat. See Table 5 above for a complete list of the Past, Present and Future Foreseeable projects in the analysis area.

Direct , Indirect and Cumulative Effects - No Action alternative There are no negative direct, indirect or cumulative impacts expected from the No Action alternative. NORTHWESTERN POND TURTLE (Clemmys marmorata)

Affected Environment and Species Account Northwestern pond turtles are habitat generalists associated with permanent or nearly permanent water from sea level to 6,000 feet in elevation (Holte 1998). They prefer quiet stretches of moving water of ponds, lakes, major rivers and streams. Important habitat elements such as partially submerged logs, rocks, mats of floating vegetation, or open mud banks, are used as basking sites and refuge from predators (Zeiner 1988). Nest sites generally occur within ¼ mile of water sources, and are usually characterized as open areas dominated by grasses and herbaceous annuals with a southern exposure (Holte 1998). These turtles can be found in much of California including some aquatic habitats on the Klamath National Forest. The distribution of northwestern pond turtles on the Forest is not well known due to lack of survey information. The causes of population decline include habitat loss and alteration (both aquatic sites used for feeding and basking, and nest sites), population fragmentation, predation on young, especially by raccoons and introduced predators (e.g. bullfrog), and commercial harvest for the pet trade. Equipment is excluded from within 170’ of either side of perennial stream banks and 50’of ephemeral and intermittent drainages within Riparian Reserves, though project activities such as planting, hand piling brush, and end-lining burned trees would occur along areas within the inner gorge of some ephemeral and intermittent drainages in order to reduce the potential for a chimney of heavy fuels and to provide rapid soil stabilization from conifer root mass through planting. These activities would not require the use of heavy equipment within the inner gorge and would not occur on unstable streambanks or in areas where treatment would result in the destabilization of the soil within the streambank, in accordance with geologic and hydrologic design standards.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Proposed Action


There is a small amount of marginally suitable habitat near one perennial stream (Bear Creek), located near harvest units 120, 10, 30 which may provide small amounts of basking, nesting, and/or feeding habitat. Unit 120 is closest to Bear Creek, but no activities are proposed within 300’ of the creek. If this area is occupied by pond turtles, proposed activities may impact this species through disturbance to nest sites. Turtle nests may also be disturbed during any ground disturbing action within grassy or herbaceous sites within ¼ mile of occupied waters. Impacts may include direct mortality if individual turtles were present outside of the equipment exclusion zones.

Other Riparian Reserves in the project area have treatments proposed, though are currently devoid of vegetation due to the intensity of the wildfire that burned through, and currently do not contain habitat conditions favorable for pond turtles. Within these areas, equipment is excluded from within 170’ of either side of perennial stream banks and 50’of ephemeral and intermittent drainages. Project activities that do not require the use of heavy equipment, such as planting, hand piling brush, and end-lining burned trees would occur along areas within the inner gorge of some of these drainages. The current habitat within the Riparian Reserves proposed for treatment is of such poor to marginal condition that it is unlikely that this species occurs in these areas in any significant number. Therefore, while direct or indirect impacts may occur to individuals, no population level impacts would be expected.

Cumulative Effects - Proposed Action There are no projects within the foreseeable future in the analysis area that would have additive impacts to this species or its habitat, as none of the above listed projects (Table 5) would occur in suitable habitat for this species. See Table 5 above for a complete list of the Past, Present and Future Foreseeable projects in the analysis area.

Direct and, Indirect and Cumulative Effects - No Action alternative There are no direct or indirect negative impacts expected from the No Action alternative. SOUTHERN TORRENT SALAMANDER (Rhyacotriton variegatus)

Affected Environment and Species Account

This species occurs from northwestern California (Mendocino County) northward through the Coast Range of Oregon (Polk, Tillamook, and Yamhill Counties) in mid to low elevations (Blaustein 1995). Southern torrent salamanders require cold mountain streams, springs, and/or seepages that are well shaded (Stebbins 1966) and require water for all stages of their life cycle. They are seldom more than one meter from free-running water (Nussbaum and Tait 1977). Declines of torrent salamanders have been attributed to increased amount of sediments and increased water temperatures as a result of timber harvesting within their preferred habitat. Changes in forest canopies and the hydrology of seeps and streams can affect southern torrent salamanders. Riparian Reserves within the proposed harvest units are devoid of vegetation due to the intensity of the wildfire that burned through. Therefore, habitat conditions are unfavorable for the southern torrent salamander due to the severely burned condition of the Riparian Reserves and aquatic habitats and the lack of stream shade. The Panther Fire dramatically reduced the suitability of whatever habitat may have existed prior to the fire. Within the analysis area, habitat may exist within the Riparian Reserve associated with Bear Creek (perennial stream), where no activities are planned.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Proposed Action Because this species is so closely associated with the presence of stream shade, and is seldom farther than 1 meter from flowing water, direct impacts to this species are not expected. Indirect impacts to this species are associated with increased amounts of sediment and increased water temperatures resulting from a loss of stream shade. Indirect impacts are not expected because proposed activities are not projected to cause an increase in sediment, an increase in water temperature, or a loss of stream shade (see Panther Fire Salvage Fisheries Biological Assessment (May 2009) and Hydrology Report (April 2009)) within suitable salamander habitat.


Cumulative Effects - Proposed Action

There are no projects within the foreseeable future in the analysis area that would have additive impacts to this species or its habitat, as none of the above listed projects (Table 5) would occur in suitable habitat for this species. See Table 5 above for a complete list of the Past, Present and Future Foreseeable projects in the analysis area.

Direct and Indirect Effects - No Action alternative

There are no direct or indirect negative impacts expected from the No Action alternative. FOOTHILL YELLOW-LEGGED FROG (Rana boylii)

Affected Environment and Species Account Foothill yellow-legged frogs are relatively common along the banks of the Klamath River, and other smaller drainages on the Happy Camp Ranger District. Their aquatic habitats are similar to pond turtles, preferring slow moving water or pools. Breeding occurs in the spring, where adults congregate in habitats consisting of shallow, slow flowing water with pebble and cobble substrate, preferably with shaded riffles and pools (Jennings and Hayes1988). Pebble/cobble river bars along both riffles and pools, with at least some shading seem to be preferred by sub-adults and adults. This species is also known to utilize moderately vegetated backwaters, isolated pools, and slow moving rivers with mud substrates. Historic distributions ranged through most Pacific drainages west of the Sierra/Cascade Crest from the Santiam River, Oregon to the San Gabriel Drainage in southern California (Jennings and Hayes 1988). Current distribution and abundance of this species has been reduced drastically in the southern portion of its range but still occurs in significant numbers in some coastal drainages. Listed as a California Species of Special Concern, the foothill yellow-legged frog is at risk due to various anthropogenic and environmental threats throughout their range. No formal surveys have been conducted for this frog on the Klamath National Forest. Equipment is excluded from within 170’ of either side of perennial stream banks and 50’of ephemeral and intermittent drainages within Riparian Reserves, though project activities such as planting, hand piling brush, and end-lining burned trees would occur along areas within the inner gorge of some ephemeral and intermittent drainages in order to reduce the potential for a chimney of heavy fuels and to provide rapid soil stabilization from conifer root mass through planting. These activities would not require the use of heavy equipment within the inner gorge and would not occur on unstable streambanks or in areas where treatment would result in the destabilization of the soil within the streambank, in accordance with geologic and hydrologic design standards. Within the proposed project area, habitat may exist within the unburned portions of the Riparian Reserves associated perennial streams, where no activities are planned. Some of the Riparian Reserves within the proposed harvest units are completely devoid of vegetation due to the intensity of the wildfire that burned through.



Foothill yellow-legged frogs are not expected to occur in the project area due to the severely burned condition of the Riparian Reserves and aquatic habitats within and adjacent to the project area and the higher elevation of project area than would be typical for this species. The lack of a permanent water source directly within the project area would also deter occupancy by this species. There may be small suitable aquatic habitats near the

project area, but the areas that have activities proposed do not have conditions favorable for this species due to the severely burned condition of the Riparian Reserves and aquatic habitats. In addition, because no suitable habitat would be removed or modified, indirect impacts are not expected.


There are no concurrent or future foreseeable projects within the analysis area that would have additive impacts to this species or its habitat, as none of the above listed projects (Table 5) would occur in suitable habitat for this species. See Table 5 above for a complete list of the Past, Present and Future Foreseeable projects in the analysis area.

Direct and Indirect Effects - No Action alternative There are no direct or indirect impacts expected from the No Action alternative. CASCADE FROG (Rana cascade)

Affected Environment and Species Account

The Cascade frog is a medium sized frog, olive-to-olive brown with sharply defined dark splotches on the back. It is a montane species found in the Olympic Peninsula, Washington, and in the Cascade Range of Oregon, Washington, and northern California (Blaustein 1995). Populations appear to be declining throughout the range. Reasons for this decline are not well understood, but locally populations have been impacted by predation from introduced, non-native aquatic species. Habitat for this species includes: montane meadows, marshes, ponds, small bodies of water, ephemeral pools, potholes without vegetation, and along small creeks (Blaustein 1995). They are typically found at elevations above 2500 feet (Corkran and Thoms, 1996) and are closely restricted to water (Stebbins 1966). Marginally suitable habitat may be found in riparian areas near still waters near, but not directly within, the project area. Although there have been no Cascade frogs identified within the proposed project area, it is possible they occur within the unburned portions of Riparian Reserves, where no activities are proposed. Equipment is excluded from within 170’ of either side of perennial stream banks and 50’of ephemeral and intermittent drainages within Riparian Reserves, though project activities such as planting, hand piling brush, and end-lining burned trees would occur along areas within the inner gorge of some ephemeral and intermittent drainages in order to reduce the potential for a chimney of heavy fuels and to provide rapid soil stabilization from conifer root mass through planting. These activities would not require the use of heavy equipment within the inner gorge and would not occur on unstable streambanks or in areas where treatment would result in the destabilization of the soil within the streambank, in accordance with geologic and hydrologic design standards. Within the proposed project area, habitat may exist within the unburned portions of the Riparian Reserves associated perennial streams, where no activities are planned. Some of the Riparian Reserves within the proposed harvest units are completely devoid of vegetation due to the intensity of the wildfire that burned through it.



It is unlikely that Cascade frogs occur in the project area due to the highly marginal quality of the aquatic habitats for this species within the project area. The lack of a permanent water source within the project area would also

deter occupancy by this species. There may be small suitable aquatic habitats near the project area, but the areas that have activities proposed do not have conditions favorable for this species due to the severely burned condition of the Riparian Reserves and aquatic habitats. In addition, because no suitable habitat would be removed or modified, indirect impacts are not expected.


There are no concurrent or future foreseeable projects within the analysis area that would have additive impacts to this species or its habitat, as none of the above listed projects (Table 5) would occur in suitable habitat for this species. See Table 5 above for more details and a complete list of the Past, Present and Future Foreseeable projects in the analysis area.

Direct and Indirect Effects - No Action alternative

No direct or indirect effects to this species are expected from the No Action alternative.

DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS FS SENSITIVE SPECIES

It is my determination that the proposed Panther Fire Salvage project will not affect the peregrine falcon, Townsend’s big-eared bat, Sierra Nevada red fox, California wolverine, Swainson's hawk, great gray owl, greater sandhill crane, Blue-gray taildropper, Tehama chaparral, Siskiyou mountains salamander, southern torrent salamander, foothill yellow-legged frog, Cascade frog or the willow flycatcher. The Panther Fire Salvage project may affect, but is not likely to result in a trend to Federal listing or loss of viability the northern goshawk, Pacific fisher, American marten, pallid bat, and northwestern pond turtle.

Document Prepared By: _/s/ Patricia Johnson Date: May 31, 2009 Patricia Johnson Wildlife Biologist Klamath National Forest

Document Reviewed By: _____________________ Date: _______________ Document Approved By: ____________________ Date: _______________


LITERATURE CITED

Banci, V. 1994. Chapter 5. Wolverine. in Ruggiero, L.F., K.B. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk, L.J. Lyon, and W.J. Zielinski,

technical editors. 1994. The Scientific Basis for Conserving Forest Carnivores: American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine in the United States. USDA-FS, General Technical Report RM-254. 183 pp.

Blaustein, A.R., J.J. Beatty, D.H. Olson, and R.M. Storm. 1995. The biology of amphibians and reptiles in old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest. U.S. Forest Service. Pacific Northwest Research Station. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-337.

Bond, M.L., R.J. Gutierrez, A.B. Franklin, W.S. LaHaye, C.A. May, and M.E. Seamans. 2002. Short-term effects of wildfires on spotted owl survival, site fidelity, mate fidelity, and reproductive success. Wildlife Society Bulletin (30) 1022-1026.

Buskirk S.W., Powell RA. 1994. Habitat ecology of fishers and American martens. In: Buskirk SW, Harestad AS, Raphael MG, Powell RA, editors. Martens, sables and fishers: biology and conservation. Ithaca (NY): Cornell University Press. p 283-296.

Carroll C.R., Zielinski W.J., Noss R.F. 1999. Using presence/absence data to build and test spatial habitat models for the fisher in the Klamath region, USA. Conservation Biology 13(6):1344-59.

CDFG NDDB. California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Database. 2003. Full report for Pacific fisher. Sacramento (CA): California Department of Fish and Game.

CDFG NDDB. California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Database. 2008. Sacramento (CA): California Department of Fish and Game.

Clark D.A. 2007. Demography and Habitat Selection of Northern Spotted Owls in Post-Fire Landscapes of Southwestern Oregon. M.S. Thesis. Oregon State University. 218pp.

Corkran, C. and C. Thoms. 1996. Amphibians of Oregon, Washington and British Columbia. Lone Pine

Publishing.

Corn, J.G. and Raphael, M.G., 1992. Habitat characteristics at marten subnivean access sites. Journal of Wildlife. Management 56, pp. 442–448.

Elliott, B. 1985. Changes in distribution of owl species subsequent to habitat alteration by fire. Western Birds 16:25-28.

Fellers, G..M. and E.D. Pierson. 2002. Habitat use and foraging behavior of Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in coastal California. Journal of Mammalogy, 83(1):167–177.


Franklin, A.B., D.R. Anderson, R.J. Gutierrez and K.P. Burnham. 2000. Climate change, habitat quality, and fitness in northern spotted owl populations in northwestern California. Ecological Monographs 70:539-590.

Frest, T.J. and E.J. Johannes. 1999. Field Guide to Survey and Manage Freshwater Mollusk Species. Bureau of Land Management, Oregon State Office, Portland, Oregon. 117 pp.

Furnish, J. and Monthey, R. 1998. Management recommendations for survey and manage aquatic mollusks. Version 2.0. USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, OR, WA, and CA.

Furnish, J. 2005. Sensitive Aquatic Mollusks of the U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region. Unpublished report, USDA Forest Service.

Gellman, S.T. and W.J. Zielinski. 1996. Use by bats of old-growth redwood hollows on the north coast of California. Journal of Mammalogy, 77(1):255-265.

Gaines, W.L. R.A. Strand and S.D. Piper. 1997. Effects of the Hatchery Complex fires on northern spotted owls in the Eastern Washington Cascades. In J.N. Greenlee ed. Proceedings of the Fire Effects on Rare and Endangered species and habitats conference, International Association of Wildlife and Forestry, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho.

Holte, D.L. 1998. Nest site characteristics of the western pond turtle at Fern Ridge Reservoir in west central Oregon. MS. Oregon State University. 106pp.

Hood, S., S. Smith and D. Cluck. 2007. Delayed conifer tree mortality following fire in California. In: Powers, Robert F., tech. editor. 2007. Restoring fire-adapted ecosystems: proceedings of the 2005 national silviculture workshop. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-203. Albany, CA. Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. p. 261-283.

Jenness J.S. 2000. The effects of fire on Mexican spotted owls in Arizona and New Mexico. MS Thesis, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona

Jennings, M.R. and M.P. Hayes. 1988. Natural history and decline of native ranids in California. Pp. 61-72 in Proceedings of the Conference on California Herpetology. Eds. H.P. DeLisle, P.R. Brown, B. Kaufman, and B.M.McGurty.

Laymon, S.A. and M.D. Halterman. 1985. Yellow-billed Cuckoos in the Kern River Valley: 1985 population, habitat use, and management recommendations. California Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Bird and Mammal Section Rep. 85.06.

Lehman, R.N. 1979. A survey of selected habitat features of 95 Bald Eagle nests in California. Calif. Dept. Fish and Game. Wildlife Management Branch Admin. Rep. 79-1, Sacramento, CA 23pp.

McIver, J.; and L. Starr. 2000. Environmental Effects of Postfire Logging: Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. USDA-Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 72p.

NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer.

Nussbaum, R.A. and C.K. Tait. 1977. Aspects of the life history and ecology of the Olympic salamander, Rhyacotriton olympicus (Gaige). American Midland Naturalist. 98: 176-199.


Parsons, A., Orelemann, A., Davis, M., McCammon, B., Howes, S., Robichaud, P. Sirucek, D., Shovic, H. 2003. Burned area emergency rehabilitation soil burn severity definitions and mapping guidelines. USDA Forest Service.

Peterson, D., J. McIver, D. Dykstra, and T. Spies. 2007. Managing Forests After Fire: Science Update. Issue 15. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw.

Pierson E.D. and W.E. Rainey. 2007. Bat distribution in the forested region of northwestern California. Report

prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game. Contract Number FG-5123-WM. Sacramento, California, USA

Powell R.A, Zielinski WJ. 1994. Fisher. In: Ruggiero LF, Aubry KB, Buskirk SW, Zielinski WJ, tech. editors. The scientific basis for conserving forest carnivores: American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine. Fort Collins (CO): USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mtn. Forest and Range Exp. Station. GTR-RM-254. p 38- 73.

Powell R.A. 1993. The fisher: life history, ecology and behavior. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Ruggiero, L.F., K.B. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk, L.J. Lyon, and W.J. Zielinski, technical editors. 1994. The Scientific Basis for Conserving Forest Carnivores: American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine in the United States. USDA-FS, General Technical Report RM-254. 183 pp. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/publications/pnw_gtr285/

Ruggiero, L.F., K.S. McKelvey, K.B. Aubry, J.P. Copeland, D.H. Pletscher, M.G. Hornocker. 2007. Wolverine Conservation. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(7) 2144-2146.

Schempf, P.F., and M. White. 1977. Status of six furbearer populations in the mountains of Northern California. USDA, Forest Service. San Francisco, CA. 51pp.

Seglund A.E. 1995. The use of rest sites by the Pacific fisher [MSc thesis]. Arcata (CA): Humboldt State University. 66 pp.

Self SE, Kerns SJ. 2001. Pacific fisher use of a managed forest landscape in northern California [Unpublished report]. Redding (CA): Sierra Pacific Industries. Available at http://www.spi-ind.com/Our_Forests/PDF/WRPNo6.pdf.

Sexton J. Ecological Effects of Salvage Logging and Grass Seeding Following the Lone Pine Fire, Winema National Forest. Fire and Wildlife in the Pacific Northwest-- Research, Policy, and Management: Post-Fire Rehabilitation and Recovery; Spokane, WA. 61-64.

Skinner C. 2002. Fire History in Riparian Reserves of the Klamath Mountains. Symposium on Fire in California Ecosystems: Integrating Ecology, Prevention, and Management; San Diego, CA.

Sherwin, E.R. 1998. Presentation to the Western Bat Working Group Workshop. Feb. 9-13. Reno, Nevada

Sherwin, E.R., D. Stricklan and D.S. Rogers. 2000. Roosting affinities of Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in northern Utah. Journal of Mammalogy 81(4):939–947.

Smith, S.L. and D.R. Cluck. 2007. Fire salvage marking guidelines. USDA Forest Service. Forest Health Protection, Region 5, Susanville, CA. Report # RO-07-01. 14 pp.


Squires, J.R. and R.T. Reynolds. 1997. Northern Goshawk. In The Birds of North America, No. 298 (A. Poole and F.Gill, eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C.

http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw

http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/publications/pnw_gtr285/

http://www.spi-ind.com/Our_Forests/PDF/WRPNo6.pdf

http://www.spi-ind.com/Our_Forests/PDF/WRPNo6.pdf

Stebbins, R.C. 1966. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston. 279 pp.

Taylor AH, Skinner CN. Fire History and Landscape Dynamics in a Late-Successional Reserve, Klamath Mountains, California, USA. Forest Ecology and Management. 1998;111:285-301. Western Birds 16:25-8.

Thomas J.W, Forsman E.D, Lint J.B, Meslow E.C., Noon B.R, Verner J. 1990. A conservation strategy for the northern spotted owl. Portland (OR): Interagency Scientific Committee to address the conservation of the northern spotted owl. USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service.

USDA-FS 2009. Klamath National Forest Wildlife Species Reference Document.

USDA Pacific Northwest Research. 2009. Forest Carnivore Surveys in the Pacific States website. Available at http://maps.fs.fed.us/carnivore//Modules/application/home.html.

USDA Forest Service. 1995. Klamath National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Klamath National Forest, Yreka, California.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Pacific Bald Eagle Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Or. 163 pp.

Woodbridge, B.; Detrich, P. J. 1994. Territory occupancy and habitat patch size of Northern Goshawks in the southern Cascades of California. In: Block, W. M.; Morrison, M. L.; Reiser, M. H., eds. The Northern Goshawk: ecology and management: Proceedings of a symposium of the Cooper Ornithological Society; 1993 April 14-15; Sacramento, CA. Studies in Avian biology. Cooper Ornithological Society 16: 83-87.

Yasuda, D. 1997. Report on prescribed burning and spotted owls. In L. Larson and T. Locker, eds. Resource Management ; the fire element newsletter. California Fuels Committee, USDA Forest Service PSW, San Francisco, California.

Zielinski, W.J., R.L. Truex, G. Schmidt, R. Schlexer, K.N. Schmidt, and R.H. Barrett. 2004. Home range characteristics of fishers in California. Journal of Mammal. 85:649-657.

Zielinski, W.J., R.L. Truex, G. Schmidt, R. Schlexer, K.N. Schmidt, and R.H. Barrett. 2004. Resting habitat selection by fishers in California. Journal of Wildlife Management 68:475-492.

Zielinski, W. J., T.E. Kucera, R.H. Barrett. 1995 Current distribution of the Fisher (martes pennanti) in California. Calif. Fish and Game 81(3):1O4-112.

Zeiner, David C . ; Laudenslayer Jr., W.F.; Mayer, K.E.. 1988 . California's Wildlife, Vol. I. Amphibians and Reptiles. California Department of Fish and Game . Sacramento, CA

Zeiner, David C., Laudenslayer Jr., W.F.; Mayer, K .E. White, M . 1990. California's Wildlife, Vol. III. Mammals . California Department of Fish and Game . Sacramento, CA.


Appendix 1

Project area prior to the 2008 Panther fire


Project area after the 2008 Panther fire – Photos taken in the Fall of 2008, just after the fire. Note that the areas shown with green trees remaining experienced high mortality since photos were taken.



Project area after the 2008 Panther fire – pictured above and below.

Panther Salvage Project Biological...

Documents

Transcript of Panther Salvage Project Biological...