Chapter 2 

Alternatives 
Chapter 2 

Table of Contents 

Chapter 2............................................................................................................... 1

Alternatives............................................................................................................ 1

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 1

2.2 Changes Made Between the Draft EIS and Final EIS ................................ 2

2.3 Alternatives Considered In Detail................................................................ 2

2.4 Design Criteria Common to All Action Alternatives..................................... 5

2.5 Comparison of Alternatives....................................................................... 10

2.6 Identification of the Preferred Alternative.................................................. 14

2.7 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated From Detailed Study.................. 17

2.8 Mitigation................................................................................................... 17

2.9 Monitoring.................................................................................................. 17
Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 1 

Chapter 2 

Alternatives 

2.1 Introduction 

This chapter describes and compares the alternatives considered by the 

Forest Service for the Kuiu Timber Sale to meet the Purpose and Need and 

responds to the significant issues as described in Chapter 1. The following 

topics are discussed: 

• The development of the Proposed Action and alternatives, 

• A description and map of each alternative considered in detail, 

• An overview of design elements, 

• A comparison of the alternatives focusing on the evaluation criteria for 

the significant issues, 

• Alternatives eliminated from detailed study, and 

• Mitigation and monitoring. 

Chapter 2 presents the alternatives in comparative form to inform the 

public and other agencies, and to provide a basis for a decision by the 

responsible official (40 CFR 1502.14). For a more complete discussion of 

the effects used to compare alternatives in Chapter 2 consult Chapter 3, 

"Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences." 

A Logging System and Transportation Analysis (LSTA) was developed to 

include all suitable commercial forest land as identified by the National 

Forest Management Act and the Forest Plan. From that LSTA, potential 

timber harvest units were identified. These units were field-verified to 

ensure their suitability, to identify any concerns, and to determine which 

silvicultural prescriptions would be feasible. 

In response to the significant issues and comments received during 

scoping, three alternatives to the Proposed Action were developed, in 

addition to a No-Action Alternative. Other alternatives were considered 

but dropped from detailed analysis. The development of the alternatives 

led to deferring many potential timber harvest units from further 

consideration at this time. 

2.1.1 

Proposed 

Action and 

Alternative 

Development 
2 Alternatives 

2 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

2.2 Changes Made Between the Draft EIS 

and Final EIS 

• Reclassified up to 6.5 miles of temporary road construction as new 

National Forest System (NFS) roads based on a re-evaluation of the 

Project Area’s long-term management needs. 

• Due to a calculation error in the DEIS, total miles of new NFS and 

temporary road construction decreased from a maximum of 19 miles to 

a maximum of 10.4 miles in the FEIS. 

• Due to soil stability analyses, unit boundaries were revised in Units 

101, 207, 303 and 305 to avoid unstable slopes. 

• Acres were dropped in Units 204 and 208b to form a buffer between 

these two units to ensure no opening would exceed 100 acres. 

• Issue 2 was refined to be more responsive to public comments. 

• Timber volume estimates were revised based on reduced acreage. 

• The timber sale economics analysis was updated due to 1) the use of 

NEAT_R (Version 2.10) which uses the residual value appraisal 

method and 2) the allowance of interstate shipping. 

• In response to the allowance of interstate shipping, helicopter 

economic mitigations that left all trees less than 16 inches diameter at 

breast height (DBH) and western hemlock greater than 36 inches DBH 

were dropped. 

• In accordance with the settlement agreement between NRDC vs US 

Forest Service, the Crane and Rowan Mountain Timber Sales ROD 

was withdrawn. This withdrawal occurred after the analysis for the 

FEIS was complete; therefore, where appropriate, the unharvested 

Crane and Rowan units are included as reasonably foreseeable 

activities in the cumulative analyses. 

• Additional information was added, where appropriate, as requested 

through comments on the Draft EIS. 

2.3 Alternatives Considered In Detail 

The No-Action (Alternative 1), Proposed Action (Alternative 4) and three 

other action alternatives were considered in detail. Figures 2-1 through 2-5 

display the five alternatives. Tables 2-1 and 2-2 compare the proposed 

activities and effects of the alternatives. 

Alternative 1 proposes no timber harvest, road construction, changes to 

road management objectives, changes to small Old-growth Reserves 

(OGRs), or other activities within the Project Area at this time. It 

2.3.1 

Alternative 1 

(Figure 2-1) 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 3 

represents the existing condition of the Project Area, and does not 

preclude future timber harvest or other activities from this area. 

Alternative 2 was developed to minimize impacts to wildlife and 

watersheds, and to have no direct effects to inventoried roadless areas or 

unroaded areas. The proposed timber harvest would result in the 

production of approximately 9.6 million board feet (mmbf) of timber from 

approximately 477 acres. Only ground-based logging systems would be 

used. The amount of trees remaining in a unit after harvest would vary 

from zero to fifty percent of the stand’s pre-harvest basal area. 

To provide stand structure for wildlife habitat, approximately 50 percent 

of the stand basal area would be retained where operationally feasible. 

Harvest units in the Recreational River Land Use Designation (LUD) 

would retain 50 percent of the stand basal area to maintain scenic values. 

Logs would be transported to an existing Logging Transfer Facility (LTF) 

in either Saginaw Bay or Rowan Bay. 

Approximately 1.8 miles of NFS road and 1.5 miles of temporary road 

construction would be necessary for timber harvest. Road construction 

would not cross any Class I or II fish streams in this alternative. 

Additionally, approximately 4.1 miles of roads currently closed (Roads 

6417, 6443, 46091, and 46094) would be opened and reconditioned to 

access timber. This would require the installation of three crossing 

structures on Class I streams, and three crossing structures on Class II 

streams. Road construction and reconditioning would require placement of 

one crossing structure on a Class III stream, and five crossing structures 

on Class IV streams. 

After timber harvest activities are complete, all new and reconditioned 

NFS roads would be closed and all temporary roads would be 

decommissioned. In addition, approximately 7.8 miles of currently open 

roads that would be used to access timber for this project would be closed 

to motorized traffic and placed in storage (Roads 6413, 46021, and 

46096). 

Included in Alternative 2, the boundaries of three small OGRs (in VCUs 

398, 399, and 402) were adjusted by an interagency group of biologists to 

meet Forest Plan criteria. 

Alternative 3 was developed by modifying Alternatives 2 and 4 to reduce 

impacts to resources such as wildlife, hydrology, and fisheries while 

providing a larger economic return. The proposed timber harvest would 

result in the production of approximately 15.9 mmbf of timber from 

approximately 786 acres. Only ground-based logging systems would be 

used. The amount of trees remaining in a unit after harvest would vary 

from zero to fifty percent of the stand’s pre-harvest basal area. 

To provide stand structure for wildlife habitat, approximately 50 percent 

of the stand basal area would be retained where operationally feasible. 

2.3.2 

Alternative 2 

(Figure 2-2) 

2.3.3 

Alternative 3 

(Figure 2-3) 
2 Alternatives 

4 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

Logs would be transported to existing LTFs in either Saginaw Bay or 

Rowan Bay. 

Approximately 5.4 miles of NFS road and 2.1 miles of temporary road 

construction would be necessary for timber harvest. One bridge would be 

placed across a Class II fish stream on NFS Road 46030 to reduce 

potential impacts to fish. About 3.0 miles of roads currently in storage 

would be reconditioned to access timber (Roads 6417, 46091, and 46094). 

The opening of these roads would require the installation of two crossing 

structures on Class I streams and three crossing structures on Class II 

streams. Road construction and reconditioning would require placement of 

eight crossing structures on Class III streams, and 19 crossing structures 

on Class IV streams. 

After timber harvest activities are complete, all new and reopened NFS 

roads would be closed and all temporary roads would be decommissioned 

In addition, approximately 8 miles of currently open roads that would be 

used to access timber for this project would be closed to motorized traffic 

(Roads 6413, 6418, and 46096). 

Included in Alternative 3, the boundaries of three small OGRs (in VCUs 

398, 399, and 402) were adjusted by an interagency group of biologists to 

meet Forest Plan criteria. 

The Proposed Action for the Kuiu Timber Sale would result in the 

production of approximately 33.3 mmbf of timber from approximately 

1,387 acres. A mix of ground-based and helicopter logging systems would 

be used. Helicopter logging would be used to access units on steeper 

ground. Helicopter use reduces the need for road construction and allows a 

more selective harvest on steeper slopes. The amount of trees remaining in 

a unit after harvest would vary from zero to fifty percent of the stand’s 

pre-harvest basal area. 

To provide stand structure for wildlife habitat, approximately 50 percent 

of the stand basal area would be retained where operationally feasible. 

Harvested units in the Recreational River LUD would retain 50 percent of 

the stand’s basal area for scenic values. Where helicopter logging is 

specified, 50 percent of the stand basal area would be left to improve 

economics. Logs would be transported to existing LTFs in either Saginaw 

Bay or Rowan Bay. 

Approximately 6.5 miles of NFS road and 3.9 miles of temporary road 

construction would be necessary for timber harvest. Road construction 

would require the installation of two crossing structures across Class II 

fish streams. Additionally, 6.1 miles of roads currently closed would be 

reconditioned to access timber (Roads 6417, 6422, 6443, 46091, and a 

portion of 6427). This would require the installation of three crossing 

structures on Class I streams, and three crossing structures on Class II 

streams. Road construction and reconditioning would require placement of 

2.3.4 

Alternative 4 

Proposed 

Action 

(Figure 2-4) 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 5 

14 crossing structures on Class III streams, and 19 crossing structures on 

Class IV streams. 

After timber harvest activities are complete, all new and reconditioned 

NFS roads would be closed and all temporary roads would be 

decommissioned. In addition, after timber harvest is complete, 10.5 miles 

of roads that are currently open and would be used to access timber for 

this project would be closed to motorized traffic (Roads 6413, 6418, 

46021, 46096, and a portion of 6427). 

Included in Alternative 4, the boundaries of three small OGRs (in VCUs 

398, 399, and 402) were adjusted by an interagency group of biologists to 

meet Forest Plan criteria. 

Alternative 5 proposes even-aged management with clearcut harvesting of 

timber to increase the economic return. The proposed timber harvest 

would result in the production of approximately 31.4 mmbf of timber from 

approximately 1,208 acres. Only ground-based logging systems would be 

used. Logs would be transported to existing LTFs in either Saginaw Bay 

or Rowan Bay. 

Approximately 6.5 miles of NFS road and 3.5 miles of temporary road 

construction would be necessary for timber harvest. Road construction 

would require the installation of two crossing structures across Class II 

fish streams. Additionally, 6.1 miles of roads currently closed would be 

reconditioned to access timber (Roads 6417, 6422, 6443, 46091, 46094, 

and a portion of 6427). This would require the installation of three 

crossing structures on Class I streams, and three crossing structures on 

Class II streams. Road construction and reconditioning would require 

placement of 15 crossing structures on Class III streams, and 19 crossing 

structures on Class IV streams. 

After timber harvest activities are complete, all new and reconditioned 

NFS roads would be closed and all temporary roads would be 

decommissioned. In addition, after timber harvest is complete, 10.5 miles 

of currently open roads that would be used to access timber for this project 

would be closed to motorized traffic (Roads 6413, 6418, 46021, 46096, 

and a portion of 6427). 

Included in Alternative 5, the boundaries of three small OGRs (in VCUs 

398, 399, and 402) were adjusted by an interagency group of biologists to 

meet Forest Plan criteria. 

2.4 Design Criteria Common to All Action 

Alternatives 

All alternatives, including the Proposed Action, are consistent with the 

Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan. All applicable Forest Plan 

Standards and Guidelines have been incorporated into the design of the 

2.3.5 

Alternative 5 

(Figure 2-5) 
2 Alternatives 

6 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

proposed units and alternatives. Additional direction comes from 

applicable laws and Forest Service Manuals and Handbooks. Site-specific 

descriptions and resource considerations for each potential harvest unit are 

included as Unit Cards in Appendix B. These Unit Cards serve as the 

prescription or design narrative for the project. Design elements for NFS 

roads are also described in detail in Appendix B. 

The small OGRs mapped in the Forest Plan FEIS have been evaluated for 

size, spacing, and habitat composition. An interagency review by 

biologists from the USDA Forest Service, Alaska Department of Fish and 

Game (ADF&G), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 

determined that alternative small OGRs within VCUs 398, 399, and 402 

would better meet the requirements for size, connectivity, and acres of 

productive old-growth habitat. The review team recommended that the 

boundaries of the existing small OGRs be adjusted. All action alternatives 

would require a non-significant Forest Plan Amendment to adopt these 

recommendations. 

The modified interagency OGR for VCU 398 would be approximately 

2,305 acres, compared to 2,237 acres identified in the Forest Plan. 

The modified interagency OGR for VCU 399 would be approximately 

4,159 acres, compared to 2,628 acres identified in the Forest Plan. 

The modified interagency OGR for VCU 402 would be approximately 

5,273 acres, compared to 4,044 acres identified in the Forest Plan. 

The beach fringe extends 1,000 feet inland from mean high tide along all 

marine coastlines. The estuary fringe is an area of approximately 1,000 

feet slope distance around all identified estuaries. The Forest Plan 

classifies the beach and estuary fringe as unsuitable for timber harvest 

(Forest Plan p. 4-5). No timber harvest or new roads are proposed at 

Saginaw Bay or Security Bay, which are the only beach and estuary 

fringes in the Project Area. 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for riparian areas are applied to all 

fish streams (Class I and II streams) and to non-fish-bearing streams 

(Class III and IV streams) within the Project Area. These areas are 

delineated according to the process group direction in the Forest-wide 

riparian standards and guidelines. This protection exceeds the 

requirements of the Tongass Timber Reform Act (TTRA), which 

mandates at least a 100-foot buffer zone where no commercial timber 

harvest can occur on either side of all Class I streams and on Class II 

streams that flow directly into Class I streams. No Riparian Management 

Area (RMA) buffers were adjusted for this project, and no timber harvest 

is proposed within any RMA for this project. Best Management Practices 

(BMPs) would be implemented to minimize the risk of land management 

activities impairing water quality on streams that are likely to require 

specific protection measures during implementation. Protection measures 

may include timing restrictions for in-stream activities, or site-specific 

2.4.1 

Small Oldgrowth 

Reserves 

2.4.2 

Beach and 

Estuary Fringe 

2.4.3 

Fish Habitat 

and Water 

Quality 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 7 

design of stream crossing structures. Any activities that occur on NSF 

roads are addressed on the Road Cards in Appendix B. 

Site-specific design criteria for road management objectives show the 

timing restrictions for in-stream activities such as the replacement of 

bridges (see Table B-3 in Appendix B). Timing windows for in-stream 

work for roads and/or replacement of bridges would be coordinated with 

the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 

All BMPs would be incorporated during sale design and harvest 

administration. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit 

has been obtained for the Rowan Bay and Saginaw Bay LTFs. This permit 

provides for protection of water quality by eliminating discharge of 

surface water directly from the working area to the environment through 

the use of settling ponds and a drainage system. 

Operators who maintain storage facilities for oil or oil products would take 

appropriate preventive measures to ensure that spills do not occur. If a 

spill did occur, action would be taken using emergency response materials 

to prevent petroleum products from entering any stream or other waters. A 

Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan that meets 

applicable EPA requirements would be prepared and maintained. Timber 

sale administrators would inspect petroleum storage facilities and the 

Purchaser’s plan for spill prevention would ensure prepared emergency 

response plans are in place. 

Field inspections located a few areas inside proposed timber harvest units 

that had slope gradients greater than 72 percent. On-site stability analyses, 

documented in the planning record and on Unit Cards, showed which 

areas are stable enough for timber harvest to occur. Harvest settings would 

be designed to achieve partial or full suspension where needed to 

minimize soil disturbance. 

New NFS and temporary roads would be located and designed to avoid or 

minimize effects to wetlands where possible. Where roads would cross 

wetlands, shot rock would be used, and drainage structures would be 

designed to ensure that subsurface flow is not restricted. 

Proposed harvest units and treatments have been designed and prescribed 

to meet Forest Plan adopted visual quality objectives for the applicable 

land use designation. 

Windthrow concerns within riparian buffers are addressed in the unit card 

narratives. Riparian buffers on south facing slopes in units with a 

prescription other than uneven-aged management by single tree selection 

would be protected by retaining additional trees adjacent to the buffers. In 

units with a two-aged, clearcut with reserves or uneven-aged, group 

selection prescription, some of the retention would be along the riparian 

buffers. In units with uneven-aged, single tree selection prescriptions, the 

distribution of trees across the unit would help protect the buffers. In units 

2.4.4 

Soils 

2.4.5 

Wetlands 

2.4.6 

Scenery 

2.4.7 

Windthrow 
2 Alternatives 

8 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

with an even-aged prescription, the windthrow prone buffers would be 

protected by feathering the edge for a distance of 50 horizontal feet where 

trees are less than 16 inches DBH. Those trees than cannot be felled away 

from the buffer, would be retained. 

Roads placed in Maintenance Level 1 (ML 1) for this project would be 

open only for authorized activities and would not be open at any time for 

public use. A range of options exist to closing roads and meeting ML 1 

standards following the timber sale activities. However, the 

implementation of BMPs and motorized closure is required for proper 

storage with all ML 1 roads to insure appropriate resource protection, 

regardless of the methods used to close the road. Given this, the actions 

taken to most effectively and efficiently meet BMPs and close roads to 

motorized use can vary depending on individual road characteristics. In 

limited situations, effectively closing roads to motorized use may require 

only a permanent gate. Most ML 1 road closures, however, will require at 

least an adequately sized tank-trap somewhere near the road’s beginning. 

Commonly roads require additional deterrents for the first quarter to a half 

mile, depending on circumstances. These deterrents are usually provided 

by, but not limited to, removing drainage structures such as culverts. Each 

road is evaluated for the most effective and efficient closure prior to 

project implementation. 

New rock quarries may be developed to support new road construction 

and road maintenance. Quarry sites would be developed within 500 feet of 

a road and avoid Class I and II stream buffers, old-growth habitat reserves, 

eagle and goshawk nest tree buffers and non-developmental LUDs. With 

either the expansion of an existing quarry or the development of a new 

site, the area footprint would not exceed five acres. 

The existing permitted LTFs at Rowan Bay and Saginaw Bay may be 

used. In addition, an existing sort yard located near the LTF on the 

uplands would be used if necessary. 

The Saginaw Bay LTF would require reconstruction, but the “footprint” of 

the LTF would not change. An existing sort yard located near the LTF on 

the uplands would be used if necessary. In addition to the storage area, a 

sort yard at the end of Road 6448, approximately one mile from the 

Saginaw LTF site is proposed for log sorting prior to storage at the LTF 

site. This site would be located at the old logging camp site. 

An area for a land-based logging camp at Rowan Bay, about five miles 

south of the Project Area, has been in use intermittently since the 1970s 

and could be used with the appropriate permits. A floating logging camp 

would also require permits. No camp is planned at Saginaw Bay. 

2.4.8 

Transportation 

2.4.8 

Rock Quarries 

2.4.9 

Log Transfer 

Facility (LTF) 

and Sort Yard 

2.4.10 

Logging 

Camps 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 9 

Table 2-1. Proposed activities by alternative for the Kuiu Timber Sale Area 

Alternative 

Proposed Activity 

1 2 3 4 5 

Acres of Timber Harvested by Treatment 

Even-aged 

Management Clearcut 0 197 409 1,025 1,208 

Single tree selection - 50% basal 

area retention 0 87 72 193 0 

Uneven-aged 

Management Group selection - 50% basal area 

retention 0 19 19 41 0 

Two-aged 

Management 

Clearcut with reserves - 50% area 

retention 0 175 286 128 0 

Total Acres 0 478 786 1,387 1,208

Acres of timber harvest by logging system 

Cable 0 395 751 1,092 1,059

Shovel 0 83 35 147 149

Helicopter 0 0 0 148 0

Miles of road maintenance/reconditioning/construction 

Maintenance: miles of open NFS roads after harvest 56.2 48.0 47.8 45.2 45.2 

Reconditioned: existing NFS roads (closed after harvest) 0 4.1 3.0 6.1 6.8 

New Construction: NFS road (closed after harvest) 0 1.8 5.4 6.5 6.5 

New Construction: temporary roads (decommissioned after 

harvest) 0 1.5 2.1 3.9 3.5 

Miles of road closure 

NFS Roads (Maintenance Level 2 or above) 0 7.8 8.0 10.5 10.5
2 Alternatives 

10 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

2.5 Comparison of Alternatives 

The following discussion focuses on how each alternative responds to 

each significant issue. The existing condition will change over time for 

some resources even if no proposed activities are implemented. Table 2-2 

at the end of this section compares alternatives in terms of their effects on 

each resource analyzed. For a complete discussion of the significant issues 

and other environmental considerations, refer to Chapter 3. 

This issue relates to timber harvest and the construction of new roads to 

facilitate timber harvest in roadless areas or in the smaller unroaded areas 

(Figure 3-1). Additional roads and timber harvest could result in reducing 

the amount of roadless acreage within the Project Area, and could affect 

roadless area values as identified in the Forest Plan SEIS. No alternative 

proposes timber harvest or road building in the Security Inventoried 

Roadless Area or would indirectly affect this IRA. 

Alternatives 1 and 2 are the only alternatives with no proposed timber 

harvest or road construction within the North Kuiu Roadless Area. 

Alternative 1 does not propose any harvest or road construction within 600 

feet of, or roads within 1,200 feet of, the edge of the roadless area, referred 

to as the zone of influence (refer to the discussion under Issue 1 – 

Roadless Areas, Chapter 3). Timber harvest and road construction in 

Alternative 2 would slightly affect the zone of influence, extending it into 

the roadless area. 

Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 propose timber harvest and road construction 

within the North Kuiu Roadless Area. 

In Alternative 3, approximately 67 acres (8 percent) of the 786 acres 

proposed for harvest are in the North Kuiu Roadless Area. About 0.06 

mile of new NFS road and 0.13 mile of temporary road construction is 

proposed in the roadless area. Alternative 3 would also result in a total of 

257 acres removed from the roadless area, including the 600-foot and 

1,200-foot buffers. 

In Alternative 4, approximately 205 acres (15 percent) of the 1,387 acres 

proposed for harvest are in the North Kuiu Roadless Area. About 0.33 

mile of new NFS and 0.13 mile of temporary road construction is 

proposed in the roadless area. Alternative 4 would result in the greatest 

number of acres (551) removed from the roadless area, including the 600-

foot and 1,200-foot buffers. 

In Alternative 5, approximately 112 acres (9 percent) of the 1,208 acres 

proposed for harvest are in the North Kuiu Roadless Area. About 0.33 

mile of new NFS and 0.13 mile of temporary road construction is 

proposed in the roadless area. Alternative 5 would also result in a total of 

397 acres removed from the roadless area, including the 600-foot and 

1,200-foot buffers. 

2.6.1 

Issue 1 – 

Roadless 

Areas 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 11 

For Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 the overall size of the North Kuiu Roadless 

Area would be reduced. However, the area would still be eligible for 

inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and the values 

identified in the Forest Plan SEIS for roadless areas would be retained. 

There are three smaller unroaded areas between 1,000 and 5,000 acres 

within the Project Area, totaling approximately 8,723 acres. Alternatives 1 

and 2 would not harvest timber or build any roads within these unroaded 

areas. Alternative 3 proposes harvest of 68 acres within these areas and 

construction of 0.55 mile of new NFS road and 0.09 mile of temporary 

road. Alternatives 4 and 5 propose harvest of 167 acres and construction 

of 0.55 mile of new NFS road and 0.3 mile of temporary road within the 

unroaded areas. No timber harvest would occur in unroaded areas less than 

1,000 acres in any of the alternatives. 

This issue relates to cumulative effects on deer habitat from past, present, 

and proposed activities and the potential corresponding effect to 

subsistence hunting. It considers the affects on productive old-growth 

(POG), on low elevation, high volume POG and travel corridors, 

particularly those between high and low elevation habitat. 

Alternative 2 would harvest 477 acres of POG, with 280 acres retaining 50 

percent of the stand’s pre-harvest basal area. Alternative 3 would harvest 

786 acres of POG, with 377 acres retaining 50 percent of the stand’s preharvest basal area. Alternative 4 would harvest 1,402 acres of POG, with 

399 acres retaining 50 percent basal area. Alternative 5 would harvest 

1,206 acres of POG, clearcutting 100 percent of the acres harvested. 

Low elevation productive old-growth has a high value for many wildlife 

species. Alternative 2 would harvest 101 acres of low elevation, high 

volume POG of which 60 acres would retain 50 percent of the stand’s preharvest basal area. Alternative 3 would harvest 82 acres of low elevation, 

high volume POG, of which 57 acres would retain 50 percent of the 

stand’s pre-harvest basal area. Alternative 4 would harvest 259 acres of 

low elevation, high volume habitat, of which 112 acres would retain 50 

percent of the stand’s pre-harvest basal area. Alternative 5 would harvest 

156 acres of low elevation, high volume habitat, all of which would be 

clearcut. 

Subsistence, an Alaska concern and a right protected by law, is a 

significant issue. Since 1954, there has been a 39 percent reduction in 

important deer winter range (HSI 0.6-1.0) within WAA 5012. The Project 

Area makes up approximately 32 percent of the WAA. At most, the action 

alternatives would reduce the important deer winter range within the 

WAA from the current condition by one percent. Considering reasonably 

foreseeable future harvest, cumulative habitat reductions within the WAA 

would still fall between 39 and 40 percent from historic condition. At 

present the deer population on Kuiu Island is below carrying capacity. A 

2.6.2 

Issue 2 – Deer 

Habitat and 

Subsistence 

Use 
2 Alternatives 

12 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

slight reduction in habitat should have little impact on deer populations 

because there is more habitat available than is currently utilized. 

Among the action alternatives, Alternative 2 responds best to meeting 

wildlife and subsistence needs because it would retain the most winter 

habitat, and affects the fewest wildlife travel corridors. Alternative 5 

proposes clearcut harvest and would affect the greatest number of wildlife 

travel corridors. Alternatives 4 and 5 would retain the least amount of 

winter habitat. Alternative 4, however, would retain more stand structure 

with several units retaining 50 percent of the basal stand area, which 

would allow more functional habitat and corridors than Alternative 5. 

This issue relates to the economic viability of the proposed timber sale or 

sales. It also relates to the potential local employment and revenues 

generated for local communities. If proposed timber harvest alternatives 

are not designed to be economically viable across fluctuating market 

conditions, there is a concern that the forest products industry in Southeast 

Alaska cannot remain viable. 

Timber economics depends on several factors. These factors include: 

• The amount of timber harvested, 

• The value of the timber harvested, and 

• The cost of harvesting the timber. 

More timber generally means a higher economic return and more jobs, or 

jobs over a longer period of time. 

The value of the timber is determined by species composition, the amount 

of defect in the wood, and the value of the products that can be obtained 

from the wood. Road construction and helicopter logging increase the cost 

of timber harvest. 

The amount of timber that would be harvested varies from none in 

Alternative 1 to 33.3 mmbf in Alternative 4, the Proposed Action. 

Alternative 5 proposes the next highest volume with 31.4 mmbf. 

Alternatives 2 and 3 propose the lowest volumes for harvest, 9.6 mmbf 

and 15.6 mmbf, respectively. 

A financial analysis was done using the NEPA Economic Analysis Tool 

Residual Value (NEAT_R) developed by the Alaska Region. For this 

analysis, it was assumed that all timber volume would be sold at one time. 

The analysis showed that all of the action alternatives have a negative 

expected bid value. This reflects current economics and may change by 

the time the timber sale goes to bid. 

All alternatives show a less negative expected bid when the Saginaw Bay 

LTF is used rather than the Rowan Bay LTF. This is due to a shorter tow 

distance from the Saginaw Bay LTF to the nearest mill. 

2.6.3 

Issue 3 – 

Timber 

Harvest 

Economics 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 13 

If the Rowan Bay LTF is used, Alternative 5 would have the highest 

expected bid value of $-141.28/mbf. Alternative 4 has the second highest 

value at $-155.11/mbf, and Alternative 2 is next with $-157.99/mbf. 

Alternative 3 has the lowest expected bid value of $-179.99/mbf, due to 

the high ratio of partial harvest acres to the miles of temporary and NFS 

road construction. 

If timber is hauled to the Saginaw Bay LTF, Alternative 5 would have the 

highest value of $-126.92/mbf, followed by Alternative 2 with an expected 

bid value of $-136.27/mbf. Alternative 4 would have the second lowest 

bid of $-136.71/mbf and Alternative 3 would have the lowest expected bid 

value of $-158.94/mbf. 

Direct employment would be the same for all alternatives with 128 

expected full time jobs. In March 2007 the Regional Forester approved a 

limited interstate shipping policy which authorizes shipment of specified 

unprocessed spruce and western hemlock sawlogs to the lower 48 States. 

This issue relates to the cumulative effects of timber harvest and 

construction of roads in watersheds with previous management, 

particularly those watersheds in which over 20 percent of the watershed 

area has been harvested within the last 30 years. 

Two watersheds are in excess of 20 percent harvested within a 30-year 

period, initiating a more intensive analysis in these watersheds. 

Alternative 1 would have the least effect on all watersheds in the Project 

Area, with no timber harvest or road construction proposed. If Alternative 

1 were implemented, the 30-year cumulative harvest levels would be less 

than 15 percent in all Project Area watersheds by the year 2010. 

Alternatives 2 and 3 would have the same two watersheds as Alternative 1 

in excess of 20 percent harvested within a 30-year period. Alternatives 4 

and 5 would have three watersheds in excess of 20 percent harvested 

within a 30-year period. However, by the year 2010, the cumulative 

harvest in all watersheds in all action alternatives would be less than 16 

percent. 

A sharp decline in the 30-year cumulative harvest levels between years 

2001 and 2010 reflects a sharp decline in harvest rates within the Project 

Area since the 1960s and 1970s. Therefore, the cumulative watershed 

effect shows a general trend toward recovery of slope stability, pre-harvest 

rates of canopy interception, and evapotranspiration. Under the action 

alternatives the proposed harvest would cause small increases in the 30-

year harvest levels. However, the overall trend in 30-year cumulative 

harvest levels is decreasing. 

2.6.4 

Issue 4 –

Cumulative 

Watershed 

Effects 
2 Alternatives 

14 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

2.6 Identification of the Preferred 

Alternative 

In the DEIS, Alternative 4 was identified by the interdisciplinary team as 

the Preferred Alternative and approved by the Forest Supervisor. This was 

based on the environmental analysis and public and agency comments 

received to date. The Forest Supervisor may select this alternative, another 

alternative, or a modification of one of the alternatives. The Forest 

Supervisor may also select another OGR option from the small OGR 

options discussed in the Wildlife section in Chapter 3. 

Table 2-2. Comparison of alternatives by issue and effects 

Units of Measure Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 

Issue 1 – Roadless Areas 

Acres harvested within Inventoried 

Roadless Area (IRA) 0 0 67 207 114 

Miles of NFS roads constructed within 

IRA 0 0 0.06 0.33 0.33 

Miles of temporary roads constructed 

within IRA 0 0 0.12 0.13 0.13 

Percent of affected IRA including zones of 

influence (600’ for harvest, 1,200’ for 

roads) 

0 0 3% 6% 4% 

Change in IRA roadless characteristics? No No No No No 

IRA still eligible for Wilderness 

designation? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Acres harvested within unroaded areas 0 0 68 167 167 

Miles of NFS roads constructed in 

unroaded areas 0 0 0.55 0.55 0.55 

Miles of temporary roads constructed 

within unroaded areas 0 0 0.09 0.3 0.3 

Issue 2 – Deer Habitat and Subsistence Use 

Acres of POG maintained within the WAA 90,586 90,379 89,800 89,199 89,648 

Acres of important deer winter range (HSI 

= 0.60 – 1.0) remaining after harvest in 

WAA 5012 

21,971 21,843 21,841 21,660 21,725 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 15 

Table 2-2. Comparison of alternatives by issue and effects (continued) 

Units of Measure Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 

Issue 2 – Deer Habitat and Subsistence Use (continued) 

Subsistence 

Implementations of any action alternative for this project, in 

combination with past and reasonably foreseeable future 

timber harvest, will not likely result in a significant restriction on 

subsistence use of resources. However the Forest Plan 

predicts that by completing the harvest schedules at the end of 

the rotation (2095) there may be possible future restrictions for 

subsistence hunting for deer. 

Issue 3 – Timber Harvest Economics 

Amount of volume (mbf) 0 9,617 15,859 33,300 31,354 

Indicated bid ($/mbf) to Rowan Bay LTF 0 ($157.99) ($179.99) ($155.11) ($141.28) 

Indicated bid ($/mbf) to Saginaw Bay LTF 0 ($136.27) ($158.94) ($136.71) (126.92) 

Total Logging Costs per mbf (including 

road costs) to Rowan Bay LTF 0 $397.10 $417.05 $393.10 $378.35 

Total Logging Costs per mbf (including 

road costs) to Saginaw Bay LTF 0 $375.38 $396.00 $374.70 $361.28 

Road costs per mbf (construction and 

reconstruction) to Rowan Bay LTF 0 $59.94 $79.52 $49.28 $54.09 

Road costs per mbf (construction and 

reconstruction) to Saginaw Bay LTF 0 $59.94 $79.52 $49.28 $54.09 

Issue 4 – Cumulative Watershed Harvest Since 1977 

Acres of extreme risk hazard (MMI-4) soils 

in units 0 0 0 14 18 

Cumulative timber harvest acres - % of 

Dean Creek Watershed (WS) 24.0 24.0 24.0 26.7 26.7 

Cumulative timber harvest acres - % of 

Saginaw Creek Watershed (WS) 8.2 9.4 12.4 13.3 12.2 

Cumulative timber harvest acres - % of WS 

#109-45-10090 18.8 19.9 18.8 23.4 23.4 

Cumulative timber harvest acres - % of WS 

#109-44-10370 8.3 10.8 10.6 10.8 10.8 

Cumulative timber harvest acres - % of 

Security Creek 22.5 23.3 24.4 25.2 25.2 
2 Alternatives 

16 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

Table 2-2. Comparison of alternatives by issue and effects (continued) 

Units of Measure Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 

Cumulative timber harvest acres - % of 

Rowan Creek Watershed 8.0 9.0 8.8 9.8 10.0 

Cumulative timber harvest acres - % of 

Kadake Creek Watershed 17.3 17.7 17.8 18.2 17.9 

Other Environmental Considerations 

Effects on TES Species Activities may impact individual goshawks but would not result in 

a trend toward listing. No effect for other species. 

Effects on Wildlife 

Project Area open road density (mi/mi2) 0.78 0.67 0.66 0.63 0.63 

WAA 5012 open road density (mi/mi2) 0.46 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.41 

Acres of high value marten habitat (HSI > 

0.89) after harvest in WAA 5012 51,614 51,211 50,984 50,438 50,676 

Acres of coarse canopy old-growth that 

would remain after harvest in the WAA 22,956 22,738 22,629 22,172 22,415 

Acres low elevation / high value wildlife 

(POG below 800 feet) that would remain 

after harvest in the WAA 

22,956 22,637 22,547 21,913 22,259 

Effects on Water Quality 

Number of Class I stream crossings on 

closed roads and proposed temporary 

roads 

0 3 2 3 3 

Number of Class II stream crossings on 

closed roads and proposed temporary 

roads 

0 3 4 5 5 

Number of Class III stream crossings on 

closed roads and proposed temporary 

roads 

0 1 8 14 15 

Number of Class IV stream crossings on 

closed roads and proposed temporary 

roads

0 5 19 19 19 

Miles of temporary road construction 0 1.5 2.1 3.9 3.5 

Miles of currently open roads placed in 

storage (structures removed and roads 

waterbarred) 

0 8.2 8.4 11.0 11.0 

Effects on Wetlands 

Miles of temporary road on wetlands 0 0.01 0.1 0.6 0.6 

Effects on Recreation None 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 17 

Table 2-2. Comparison of alternatives by issue and effects (continued) 

Units of Measure Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 

Effects on Scenery 

Acres harvested in Recreational River 

LUD 0 18 0 49 0 

Effects on Heritage Resources None 

Effects on Land Status None 

2.7 Alternatives Considered but 

Eliminated From Detailed Study 

Not all alternatives considered during the planning were included in the 

EIS for detailed study. The alternative dropped from detailed analysis is 

described briefly below with the rationale for not considering it further. 

The possibility of developing a helicopter logging only alternative, which 

would eliminate the need for additional road construction, was considered 

at the request of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other commenters. 

Helicopter logging is the most expensive yarding method, and using this 

method solely would not allow the cost to be offset by more cost-effective 

conventional ground-based systems. Forest Service handbook direction 

requires that the least cost methods be used to meet objectives and 

mitigate resource concerns. No resource concerns were identified that 

precluded road construction activities. Using the NEAT_R economic 

model and given present market conditions, preliminary economics of 

helicopter logging showed that the alternative was cost prohibitive, 

therefore was eliminate from detailed study. 

Microsales were considered but were dropped because no communities 

exist on the island. 

2.8 Mitigation 

The analysis documented in this EIS discloses the possible adverse effects 

that may occur from implementing the actions proposed under each 

alternative. Many of these effects are reduced or avoided by using Forest 

Plan direction, including management prescriptions, standards and 

guidelines, and Best Management Practices (BMPs), which meet the 

requirements of the Clean Water Act. All unit-specific and/or alternativespecific mitigation is identified in Appendix B. 

2.9 Monitoring 

Monitoring is a tool which involves gathering data and information and 

observing the results of management activities as a basis for evaluation. 

2.7.1 

Helicopter 

logging only 

2.7.2 

Microsales 
2 Alternatives 

18 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

Monitoring activities can be divided into project-specific monitoring and 

Forest Plan monitoring. The National Forest Management Act requires 

national forests to monitor and evaluate their forest plans (36 CFR 

219.110). Chapter 6 of the Forest Plan includes the monitoring activities to 

be conducted as part of the Forest Plan implementation. 

Forest Plan monitoring items are either contingent on management 

activities, such as those associated with this project, or are based on the 

condition of the Tongass National Forest as a whole. Much of the 

monitoring at the Forest Plan level consists of annually surveying a 

representative sample of harvest units or roads. Any implemented 

activities in the Project Area could be incorporated as described in the 

Monitoring and Evaluation Guidebook for the Tongass Land and Resource 

Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2000). 

Implementation monitoring is conducted at the project level. The selected 

management activities need to be consistent with the design criteria used 

to analyze the environmental effects during the planning stage. This 

ensures that the effects would not change from what was predicted. 

2.9.2.1 Implementation Monitoring 

The IDT prepared unit and road cards to provide site-specific analysis and 

guidance for unit layout, road location during timber harvest, and road 

construction and road reconditioning needs. Unit cards include a unit map 

and a narrative explaining resource concerns and how the concerns could 

be addressed in the design of each unit. Road Management Objectives 

were developed for each NFS road (Road Cards, Appendix B). 

Staff members who prepare timber sale contracts are required to confirm 

and certify that the contract is in agreement with the decision document. 

This certification verifies that items such as maps, number of acres, 

location of units, harvest methods, and stand numbers are consistent. The 

certification also ensures that all mitigation measures identified in the EIS 

relating to timber sale contract requirements are included in the contract. 

Implementation monitoring continues through harvest and contract 

inspections. As a routine part of project implementation, sale 

administrators and road inspectors monitor harvest and construction 

activities. Through provisions contained in the timber sale contract or 

other contracts, contract administrators and inspectors ensure that the 

prescriptions contained on the unit and road cards are implemented. Sale 

administrators and road contract inspectors have the authority to initiate 

action to repair resource damage and suspend operations until problems 

have been corrected. This process ensures that project elements and Forest 

Plan Standards and Guidelines are implemented as designed. The Contract 

Administrators monitor all units and roads for implementation of the 

appropriate BMPs. 

2.9.1 

Forest Plan 

Monitoring 

2.9.2 

ProjectSpecific 

Monitoring

 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 19 

Figure 2-1. Alternative 1 No Action 

Replace with electronic file 

11x17 color fold-in 

Filename = f2_3alt1.pdf 
2 Alternatives 

20 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

Backside of map 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 21 

Figure 2-2. Alternative 2 

Replace with electronic file 

11x17 color fold-in 

filename = f2_4alt2.pdf 
2 Alternatives 

22 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

Backside of map 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 23 

Figure 2-3. Alternative 3 

Replace with electronic file 

11x17 color fold-in 

filename = f2_5alt3.pdf 
2 Alternatives 

24 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

Backside of map 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 25 

Figure 2-4. Alternative 4 Proposed Action 

Replace with electronic file 

11x17 color fold-in 

filename = f2_6alt4.pdf
2 Alternatives 

26 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

Backside of map 
Alternatives 2

Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS Chapter 2 • 27 

Figure 2-5. Alternative 5 

Replace with electronic file 

11x17 color fold-in 

filename = f2_7alt5.pdf 
2 Alternatives 

28 • Chapter 2 Kuiu Timber Sale FEIS 

Backside of Map