6. Modify text on p. 80 of the Monument Plan, and on p. 62 of Volume | of the FEIS, to correct the
wording and citation of the F4 Public Safety felling criterion.

Change “F4. Public Safety: If maintaining one or more standing trees on site would
create a public safety hazard. Forest Service policy is to eliminate safety hazards from
recreation sites, administrative sites, and the public transportation system of roads and
trails, including trees or tree limbs identified as hazardous (FSM 2332).”

To “F4. Public Safety: If maintaining one or more standing trees on site would create a
public safety hazard. Forest Service policy is to mitigate safety hazards from recreation
sites, administrative sites, and the public transportation system of roads and trails,
including trees or tree limbs identified as hazardous (FSM 2330.6a).”

Thank you for working with us on the Giant Sequoia National Monument Management Plan. For
additional information, please contact Annette Fredette at (559) 784-1500, extension 1138.

Sincerely,

KEVIN B. ELLIOTT
Forest Supervisor


e Where PACs, Den Sites, and HRCAs overlap with TFETA, change “Apply PACs.
and den sites-WUI usually applied over HRCA” to “Apply PACs and/or Den Sites in
their respective allocations. Apply WUI Threat Zone in HRCAs outside of den sites,”
and add a footnote to read: “There are no standards and guidelines specific to the
TFETA, so the standards and guidelines for the WUI Threat Zone would be used in
the HRCAs outside of den sites.”

e Where PACs, Den Sites, and HRCAs overlap with Giant Sequoia Groves, change
“Apply PACs, den sites, HRCAs” to “Apply PACs, Den Sites, and HRCAs in their
respective allocations.”

5. To address Instruction #3 regarding hazard tree removal, modify text on p. 79 of the Monument
Plan, and on p. 62 of Volume | of the FEIS, to correct an oversight and to clarify the intent of the
R3 Public Safety removal criterion.

Change “R3. Public Safety: If keeping one or more trees on site would create a public
safety hazard or attractive nuisance. Forest Service policy is to eliminate safety hazards
from developed recreation sites, including trees or tree limbs identified as hazardous
(FSM 2332). Depending on the situation, down trees in a developed recreation site may
present a hazard if people are likely to climb on them and potentially fall and get hurt
(becomes more likely if the logs are large and/or they are piled on top of one another).””

to “R3. Public Safety: If keeping one or more trees on site would create a public safety
hazard or attractive nuisance. For example, Forest Service policy is to mitigate safety
hazards in developed recreation sites, including trees or tree limbs identified as hazardous
(FSM 2330.6a). Depending on the situation, down trees in a developed recreation site or
administrative site may present a hazard if people are likely to climb on them and
potentially fall and get hurt (becomes more likely if the logs are large and/or they are
piled on top of one another). Down trees may also present a hazard in administrative
sites, developed recreation sites, and along roadsides where they would add to existing
fuel loads, making fire control and emergency evacuation more difficult; or increase the
likelihood of vehicle accidents along roadways. Examples of where down trees could
contribute to traffic accidents include but are not limited to instances where trees or tree
limbs would obstruct drivers’ lines of sight, provide hiding cover for wildlife, or could
become an obstruction in the roadway (FSH 7709.59, Sec. 41.7).”


Mi


United States Forest Sequoia National Forest 1839 South Newcomb Street
USDA Department of Service Giant Sequoia National Porterville, CA 93257-9353
Agriculture Monument (559) 784-1500
(559) 781-6650 TDD

File Code: 1920
Date: September 23, 2013

Dear Interested Parties:

The Giant Sequoia National Monument Management Plan (Monument Plan) and Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FEIS) were published in September 2012. Two previous errata letters have been
mailed listing errors that were found and corrected, the first in November 2012 and the second in April
2013. This third letter addresses other inconsistencies discovered during the appeals process and the
instructions given in the appeal decision of May 15, 2013. All of these and previous errata have been
incorporated into new electronic copies of the Monument Plan and FEIS which can be found at
http://www.fs.usda.gow/goto/sequoia/GSNMPlan. New published copies of the Monument Plan which
incorporate all errata will be provided as soon as possible in hardcopy and CD formats.

The following errata include responses to the instructions in May 15, 2013 appeal decision and related
clarifications and corrections.

1. To further address Instruction #2 regarding the management direction to follow when land
allocations overlap, modify text on p. 31 of the Monument Plan (Land Allocations and
Management Areas section of Part 2), and on p. 54 of Volume | of the FEIS, to clarify what
management direction will be used where land allocations overlap.

Change “Where they overlap, the area with the most restrictive direction is given priority,
as stipulated in the 2001 SNFPA or this document. Land allocations/management areas
that have more restrictive management direction preempt those with less restrictive
direction...” to “Where they overlap, the more restrictive standards and guidelines would
be applied, except where noted in the Dominant Management Direction table (Table

3/4).”

2. To further address Instruction #2 regarding the management direction to follow when land
allocations overlap, modify text on p. 32 of the Monument Plan (Land Allocations and
Management Areas section of Part 2), and on p. 57 of Volume 1 of the FEIS, to point to the
overlapping management direction tables where exceptions are noted.

Change “Land allocations with standards and guidelines that protect special habitats or
protected species have a higher priority than land allocations or management areas that
allow more active management.” to “Except where noted in the following table, land
allocations with standards and guidelines that protect special habitats or protected species
have a higher priority than land allocations or management areas that allow more active
management.”

Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recyced Paper

&


3. Add the following explanation and example on p. 32 of the Monument Plan, and p. 57 of
Volume | of the FEIS, to clarify the meaning of “Apply both” in the Dominant Management
Direction table.

Add “Where the standards and guidelines for the two overlapping allocations are equally
restrictive, or use different measures, so that both sets should be used in the overlapping
area, the table indicates “apply both.” For example, standards and guidelines for Riparian
Conservation Areas (RCAs) and Critical Aquatic Refuges (CARs) minimize disturbance
of ground cover and riparian vegetation, while those for the Southern Sierra Fisher
Conservation Area (SSFCA) support fisher habitat requirements such as overstory trees
and canopy cover. Therefore, where these allocations overlap, both sets of standards and
guidelines can and should be applied in the overlapping area, as shown in Table 3.

4. To further address Instruction #2 regarding the management direction to follow when land
allocations overlap, modify Table 3 on pp. 33-34 of the Monument Plan, and Table 4 on pp. 58-
59 of Volume | of the FEIS, to clarify the intent of what management direction will be used
where land allocations overlap.

After the column heading General Monument, add a footnote to read: “The 2001
SNFPA called this land allocation General Forest. For the Monument, it is called
General Monument and includes any area in the Monument that is outside of other
allocations. It therefore does not overlap with any other allocations.”

In every table cell that shows an overlap with General Monument, change the
contents to “N/A” since, by definition, this land allocation does not overlap with
others.

Where Southern Sierra Fisher Conservation Area (SSFCA) overlaps with Tribal Fuels
Emphasis Treatment Area (TFETA), change “Apply general Monument plus SSFCA-
specific” to “Apply SSFCA and General Monument,” and add a footnote to read:
“There are no standards and guidelines specific to the TFETA, so fire and fuels
management in the TFETA is accomplished using the standards and guidelines for the
General Monument allocation, in addition to those standards and guidelines specific
to the SSFCA.”

Where SSFCA, Old Forest Emphasis Area, and TFETA overlap with Wildland Urban
Intermix (WUD): Defense Zone, change “Apply SSFCA-except fuel treatments in
WUI’ to “Apply SSFCA. Exception: where fuels treatments are needed to meet fire
behavior outcomes, apply WUI Defense Zone (S&G #15, p. 85).””


Where SSFCA, Old Forest Emphasis Area, and TFETA overlap with WUI: Threat
Zone, change “Apply SSFCA-except fuel treatments in WUI” to “Apply SSFCA.

Exception: where fuels treatments are needed to meet fire behavior outcomes, apply
WUI Threat Zone (S&G #18, p. 86).”

Where SSFCA, Old Forest Emphasis Area, and Giant Sequoia Groves overlap with
Protected Activity Centers (PACs), Den Sites, Home Range Core Areas (HRCAs),
change “Apply PACs, Den Sites, and HRCAs” to “Apply PACs, Den Sites, and
HRCAs in their respective allocations.”

Where SSFCA and Giant Sequoia Groves overlap, change “Apply groves” to “Apply
both.”

Where Old Forest Emphasis Area and Giant Sequoia Groves overlap, change “Apply
groves” to “Apply both.”

Where WUI: Defense Zone and Giant Sequoia Groves overlap change “Apply WUI”
to “Apply Groves.”

Where WUI: Threat Zone and Giant Sequoia Groves overlap change “Apply WUI” to
“Apply Groves.”

Where TFETA and Giant Sequoia Groves overlap, change “Apply WUI threat” to
“Apply Groves.”

Where WUI: Defense Zone overlaps with PACs, Den Sites, and HRCAs, change
“Apply special PACs and den sites” to “Apply PACs and/or Den Sites in their
respective allocations. Apply WUI Defense Zone in HRCAs outside of den sites.”

Where WUI: Threat Zone overlaps with PACs, Den Sites, and HRCAs, change
“Apply special PACs and den sites” to “Apply PACs and/or Den Sitesin their
respective allocations. Apply WUI Threat Zone in HRCAs outside of den sites.”

Where Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) and Critical Aquatic Refuges (CARs)
overlap with PACs, Den Sites, and HRCAs, change “Apply both except where PACs,
den sites, and HRCAs are more restrictive” to “Apply all applicable S&Gs.
Exception: where S&Gs conflict, apply most restrictive.”

Where RCAs and CARs overlap with TFETA, change “Apply both” to “Apply RCAs.
and CARs.”