Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Forest

Service

Stanislaus R5-MB-270 August 2014

National Forest

United States Department of Agriculture

Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Stanislaus National Forest

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service

Cooperating Agencies: None

Responsible Official: Susan Skalski, Forest Supervisor

Stanislaus National Forest

19777 Greenley Road

Sonora, CA 95370

(209) 532-3671

Information Contact: Maria Benech, Team Leader

Stanislaus National Forest

19777 Greenley Road

Sonora, CA 95370

(209) 288-2116

Abstract: An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that discusses alternatives for the Rim Fire Recovery

project is available for public review in the Forest Supervisor's Office at 19777 Greenley Road, Sonora, CA, 

95370. This Record of Decision (ROD) documents the Deciding Officer’s decision pertaining to the alternatives

identified in the EIS.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national 

origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic 

information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not 

all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program 

information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a 

complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C.-20250-

9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Cover Photo: view north from over Corral Creek at the 

heart of the Rim Fire Recovery project area shows a 

mosaic of vegetation burn severities. The Clavey River 

drainage is on the left, Reed Creek is in the middleground and Hull Creek is in the background. EIS 

Appendix P (Photos), which is available in the project 

record, contains a wide-range of other photos related to 

this project.

Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Table of Contents

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.01 OVERVIEW OF THE RIM FIRE AND ITS IMPACTS ...................................................................................... 3

1.02 LOCATION.......................................................................................................................................... 7

2. Decision .................................................................................................................................... 8

2.01 DECISION COMPONENTS AND APPROVED ACTIONS................................................................................ 8

2.02 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPROVED ACTIONS....................................................................................10

3. Reasons for the Decision......................................................................................................11

3.01 OVERARCHING CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................................................11

3.02 ACHIEVEMENT OF THE PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION......................................................................12

3.03 MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS ..........................................................................................................20

4. Other Alternatives Considered .............................................................................................20

4.01 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL BUT NOT SELECTED ................................................................20

4.02 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED STUDY .................................................22

4.03 ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ...................................................................................26

5. Public Involvement ................................................................................................................27

5.01 INITIAL PUBLIC SCOPING ON THE PROPOSED ACTION...........................................................................28

5.02 CONTINUED SCOPING AFTER THE COMMENT PERIOD............................................................................29

5.03 DEIS COMMENT PERIOD...................................................................................................................29

5.04 EIS AND PROPOSED RECORD OF DECISION ........................................................................................30

6. Legal and Regulatory Compliance .......................................................................................31

6.01 FINDINGS REQUIRED BY LAWS AND REGULATIONS...............................................................................31

6.02 FINDINGS RELATED TO SPECIAL AREAS .............................................................................................35

7. Implementation.......................................................................................................................37

8. Administrative Review Opportunities..................................................................................37

9. Contact Person.......................................................................................................................37

10. Signature and Date ................................................................................................................37

References ....................................................................................................................................38

A. Management Requirements ..................................................................................................39

B. Treatments..............................................................................................................................53

B.01 SALVAGE HARVEST, FUELS AND WATERSHED TREATMENTS ................................................................53

B.02 ROAD TREATMENTS..........................................................................................................................61

List of Maps and Figures

Figure 1.02-1 Rim Fire Recovery Proposed Action Treatment Units ..................................................... 7

Modified Alternative 4 Map ......................................................................... map package

Record of Decision Comparison Map ........................................................project record

List of Tables

Table 2.01-1 Comparison of Original Alternative 4 and Modified Alternative 4...................................10

Table A.01-1 Units and roads associated with California red-legged frog breeding habitat ................40

Table A.01-2 Growing seasons and appropriate identification periods for select Sensitive Plants......43

Table A.01-3 Operating requirements for mechanized equipment operations in RCAs ......................46

Table A.01-4 Management requirements incorporating BMPs and Forest Plan S&Gs .......................47

Table B.01-1 Harvest, Fuel and Watershed Treatments in Modified Alternative 4 ..............................54

Table B.02-1 Road Treatments in Modified Alternative 4....................................................................61

i 
Stanislaus

National Forest

ii
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

1. Introduction

This Record of Decision documents my decision for the Rim Fire Recovery project. I and my staff 

spent the last year designing a project that helps restore the land impacted by the Rim Fire, the largest 

conifer forest fire in California history, while simultaneously providing for public safety, ecological 

integrity, scientific research, and socio-economic benefits.

The path to reaching this 

decision was not an easy one, 

and I found no simple solution 

that can fully achieve all the 

goals that I, the Forest Service, 

and members of the public have 

for the Rim Fire area. In some 

instances public safety goals are 

in tension with environmental 

protection goals; in other 

instances socio-economic goals 

are in direct tension with fuel 

reduction goals; and, in other 

instances the needs of one 

wildlife species are in tension 

with the needs of another. 

Recognizing that no perfect 

decision exists, I did my best to 

balance all these important 

goals, with the intent of 

providing a decision that best 

serves the public interest.

As discussed in more detail in this Record of Decision (ROD) and in the lengthy Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) that supports this decision, my six main goals for this project include all 5 

elements from the Purpose and Need (EIS Chapter 1.03) and one additional Research objective 

associated with Alternatives 3 and 4 (EIS Chapter 2.01): 1) capture economic value through salvage 

logging; 2) provide worker and public safety; 3) reduce fuels for future forest resiliency; 4) improve 

road infrastructure to enhance hydrologic function; 5) enhance wildlife habitat; and, 6) provide 

opportunities for scientific research. I believe that the decision described in the following pages can 

effectively achieve all these goals. 

Providing a comprehensive EIS covering treatments across an area the size of the Stanislaus National 

Forest portion of the Rim Fire was a huge undertaking in and of itself. The technical complexity, 

including carefully considering and analyzing the information provided in the huge volume of public 

scoping comments and comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) alone 

normally takes many months. Given the limited time window required to provide the comprehensive 

analysis as fire-killed trees deteriorate in timber value, and continue to pose a safety risk, required 

extraordinary effort and commitment of agency resources and staff. Adding significant staff met the 

challenge to provide quality analysis in a timely manner; however, other challenges remained such as 

addressing the complex public natural resource and social issues resulting from the Rim Fire.

Photo 1: The evacuated Groveland Ranger Station as fire begins to cross Highway 

120 on August 19, 2013. Schools closed due to smoke and thousands of households 

evacuated during the fire.

1 
Stanislaus

National Forest

Photo 2: August 22, 2013 view of the Rim Fire at 5 percent containment looking north with the Clavey and Tuolumne River canyons 

separated by Jawbone Ridge in the lower middle-ground. The smoke column left of center is from the Corral Creek and Femmons 

Meadow area. The smoke on the right is from the Camp Mather and Yosemite area. The smoke rising out of the lower left is from the 

Tuolumne canyon between Pine Mountain Lake and Paper Cabin Ridge. (Loretta Tam)

2 
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Time is of the essence since the Rim Fire started just over one year ago, and the trees killed by the 

fire have already lost substantial economic value. With every passing day, the deterioration process 

will continue, to the point that it becomes economically infeasible to conduct the project. Therefore, it 

is imperative to begin implementing the project in the upcoming weeks and months to maximize the 

amount of work that can be achieved before this year’s operating season ends in the late fall. Any 

delay jeopardizes the agency’s ability to offer economically viable contracts; without viable contracts, 

the Rim Fire Recovery (Rim 

Recovery) project will not be 

implemented. This would mean 

that public and worker safety 

would be threatened for years to 

come, critical environmental 

restoration work would not occur, 

major research opportunities 

would be lost, and the area would 

be at heightened risk of yet another 

extreme fire like the Rim Fire.

I realize that my decision will not 

please every member of the public; 

however, I believe it strikes a 

reasonable balance that is 

responsive to the vast majority of 

public input I received, and is the 

best solution to achieve the 

multiple public benefits for which 

this project was designed. 

1.01 OVERVIEW OF THE RIM FIRE AND ITS IMPACTS

The Rim Fire started in a remote 

section of the Stanislaus National 

Forest on August 17, 2013 and 

burned 257,314 acres, or 400 

square miles, including 154,530 

acres of National Forest System 

(NFS) lands, becoming the largest 

conifer forest fire in California’s 

recorded history. The fire burned 

with high vegetation burn severity 

across 98,049 acres (38% of the 

burned area) consuming nearly all 

woody materials located on the 

ground (USDA 2014e). 

The Rim Fire threatened the City 

and County of San Francisco’s 

Hetch Hetchy Water and Power 

facilities which provide drinking 

water and power for over 2.5 

million San Francisco Bay Area 

Photo 4: The South Fork Tuolumne River, at Rainbow Pool on February 27, 

2014 with mud and ash in water immediately after 2-2.5 inches of rain, flows 

directly into the Tuolumne Wild and Scenic River and Lake Don Pedro.

Photo 3: The Rim Fire resulted in large swaths of high vegetation burn severity 

with almost total consumption of woody material and no soil cover. 

3 
Stanislaus

National Forest

customers. The San Francisco Public Utility Commission (SFPUC) spent an estimated $900,000 to 

purchase alternative energy when two of its three hydroelectric powerhouses were taken off-line 

during the fire. The SFPUC estimates it will cost several million dollars to repair damage to its 

facilities from the fire.

The fire also directly impacted the Don Pedro Reservoir on the Tuolumne River and Lake McClure 

on the Merced River, which serve the greater Modesto, Turlock, and Merced areas. Together, these 

two reservoirs provide drinking water and power for over five hundred thousand San Joaquin Valley 

customers, as well as irrigation water for over 350,000 acres of farmland. 

The portion of the Stanislaus National Forest affected by the Rim Fire has a long history of 

recreational use. Highway 120, 

passing through the burn area, 

is one of the major gateways to 

Yosemite National Park, which 

generates recreation-related 

tourism and numerous 

economic benefits. The Rim 

Fire affected summer camps, 

private resorts and other 

recreational facilities on public 

and private lands. 

Due to the dangerous 

conditions, access is currently 

closed to the general public in 

much of the burned area 

beyond some core travel 

corridors. Recreation 

opportunities that traditionally 

draw thousands of people per 

year to Tuolumne and Mariposa 

Counties are limited. 

Wildfires that are unusually 

large, complex, and resistant to control, such as the Rim Fire, are described as extreme fires or 

“mega-fires” (Long 2014). In the Research Brief: Impacts of Extreme Fire in the Sierra Nevada, 

Long 2014 describes the impacts of extreme fires as:

Extreme fires like the Rim fire become giant by spreading rapidly under extreme weather conditions. This extreme 

fire behavior kills large swaths of trees, including large, old-growth trees that historically survived many lower 

intensity fires. The resulting patches of dead trees and severely burned soils are larger than what these 

landscapes typically experienced in recent centuries. Patches of fire-killed trees can become short-term haven for 

many wildlife species, including deer, woodpeckers and other birds, as well as fire-following grasses, forbs, 

shrubs, and young trees. However, gains for fire-following species may come at the expense of many old-forest 

species, such as California spotted owls that have to find new nest sites. Patches of dead trees may be so large 

that is takes long periods for seeds of coniferous trees to reach the expanses of burned areas and reestablish 

forests. During that period, shrubs may become dominant, and high-intensity fires may recur before trees have 

grown enough to survive fire. Such repeated fires may be more likely in areas that have flammable shrubs and 

heavy fuels resulting from fire-killed trees. As a result, extreme fires can transform large areas of forest into fields 

of shrubs and small trees that persist for decades or even centuries. Within large patches of dead trees, 

reestablishing mature forest, understory diversity, and habitat structures within decades may be infeasible.

Those are just a few examples of the serious adverse impacts of extreme fires such as the Rim Fire. 

Photo 5: Rim Fire smoke towers over Groveland and Yosemite on Labor Day. Air 

quality reached unhealthy levels from Yosemite to the San Joaquin Valley, according 

the National Weather Service.

4 
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

The State of California Sierra Nevada Conservancy describes the following adverse impacts of the 

Rim Fire in several “fact sheets” and other materials available online at: 

http://www.sierranevada.ca.gov/our-region/rim-fire1

. 

Impacts of the Rim Fire were Widespread

- On August 23rd, Governor Brown declared a state of emergency for the City of San 

Francisco due to the threat that the fire posed to water and power resources at Hetch Hetchy 

Reservoir which serves 2.6 million people in the Bay Area.

- An Air Alert was issued for San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Mariposa, Merced, Madera, Fresno, 

Kings, Tulare, Tuolumne, and Kern Counties due to smoke impacts from the Rim Fire. Air 

alerts are issued when conditions leading to ozone formation occur, placing the valley at risk 

for exceeding Federal ozone standards. Ozone, even at low levels, can harm human health 

and affect our forests and wildlife.

- Air quality warnings were issued for Lake Tahoe, Carson City, and Reno - more than 100 

miles away from the fire. Some hotels in South Lake Tahoe experienced as much as a 20% 

drop in business as a result of the smoke. The Washoe County School District and Nevada 

Interscholastic Activities Association cancelled outdoor school activities including football 

games and recess.

The Rim Fire Released Carbon Stored in the Forest as Greenhouse Gas that Effects our Climate

- Initial estimates indicate that the Rim Fire released 11,352,608 metric tons of greenhouse gas 

emissions, roughly equivalent to annual greenhouse gas emissions from 2.3 million cars.

Impacts from the Rim Fire will be Long-Term

- The fire burned so hot in some areas, five times hotter than boiling water, that it changed soil 

chemistry and structure. These "high burn" areas are more erosion-prone. 

- Denver Water is still spending millions of dollars to stem erosion 12 years after the Hayman 

Fire burned across 215 square miles in the foothills south of Denver. The Rim Fire consumed 

nearly 2 times that area at 402 square miles.

- Vegetation across nearly 100,000 acres, about 40% of the area, burned at high severity. These 

dead zones leave a scarcity of seed sources and make it hard for the forest to regrow.

Removing Excess Vegetation Makes our Forests Healthier and can Protect Homes and Lives

- Prior fuels treatments allowed firefighters to effectively protect cabins, a campground, and 

the communities of Groveland, Big Oak Flat and Pine Mountain Lake. 

The Rim Fire Affected Important Wildlife Habitat

- The fire affected 100,000 acres of winter range for migratory California mule deer. 

- The fire destroyed three-quarters of the known great gray owl nests in the area, and one 

quarter of the areas where spotted owls and goshawks roost and nest. 

- The fire also impacted suitable habitat for the federally threatened California red-legged frog 

and the endangered Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog. 

1 Including: The Rim Fire: Why investing in forest health equals investing in the health of California at 

http://www.sierranevada.ca.gov/factsheets/10.31rimfirefactsheet.pdf; Rim Fire Forest Facts at http://www.sierranevada.ca.gov/ourregion/rim-fire/rimfireforestfacts.pdf; Rim Fire Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Air Quality Impacts at http://www.sierranevada.ca.gov/ourregion/rim-fire/rimairqualityfacts.pdf; and, Rim Fire Wildlife Facts at http://www.sierranevada.ca.gov/our-region/rim-fire/rimwildlifefacts.pdf

5 

 
Stanislaus

National Forest

The Economic Impact of the 2013 Rim Fire on Natural Lands describes the economic and ecological 

impacts of the fire, estimating environmental benefits lost from $100 million to $736 million in the 

first year after the Rim Fire2

. 

Even as I write this decision, 

other fires burned or are burning 

in California3

. These include the 

5,000 acre El Portal Fire, on the 

Stanislaus National Forest and 

Yosemite National Park, just 

south of the Rim Fire area. 

My hope is that through this 

project, we will not only restore 

a portion of the landscape 

damaged by the Rim Fire, but 

will also reduce the risk of 

another extreme fire burning 

through this area in upcoming 

decades.

2 Online at: http://www.eartheconomics.org/FileLibrary/file/Reports/Earth%20Economics%20Rim%20Fire%20Report%2011.27.2013.pdf 3 Nearly 12,000 lightning strikes reported in state, sparking fires online at: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lightning-strikesspark-fires-20140812-story.html. Lightning starts more North State fires online at: http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/lightningstarts-more-north-state-fires

Photo 6: A firefighter surveys the smoldering ruins of the Berkeley Tuolumne Camp 

near Groveland on August 26, 2013. (Don Bartletti/Los Angeles Times)

Photo 8: The Rim Fire, just outside the City and 

County of San Francisco Camp Mather on August 

22, 2013.

Photo7: High severity burn with total consumption of woody material and no 

remaining soil cover in a small creek.

6 

 
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

1.02 LOCATION

The Rim Recovery project is located within the Rim Fire perimeter in the Stanislaus National Forest 

on portions of the Mi-Wok and Groveland Ranger Districts in Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties. The 

project boundary includes all NFS lands within the fire plus a few isolated locations where road and 

roadside improvements extend slightly outside the fire perimeter. Figure 1.02-1 shows the location of 

the Rim Recovery project Proposed Action treatment units within the Rim Fire perimeter and the 

boundaries of the Stanislaus National Forest and Yosemite National Park. 

Figure 1.02-1 Rim Fire Recovery Proposed Action Treatment Units

7 
Stanislaus

National Forest

2. Decision

Based on my review of the EIS and its supporting documentation along with extensive discussions 

with agency staff, other governmental bodies, and members of the public, I decided to select 

Alternative 4, with the modifications described below (hereafter referred to as “Modified Alternative 

4”). A large scale Modified Alternative 4 Map in the separate map package displays the approved 

treatment units and other information associated with my decision.

I selected Modified Alternative 4 because it meets all the elements of the project’s Purpose and Need 

(EIS Chapter 1.03), while also responding to significant issues related to: Health and Safety; Snag 

Forest Habitat; New Road Construction; Wildlife Habitat; and, Soil and Watershed Impacts (EIS 

Chapter 1.08). While the original Alternative 4 also meets the Purpose and Need and responds to the 

significant issues noted above, I decided to scale back the scope of Alternative 4 based on public 

comment on the DEIS (USDA 2014d) and recent input from representatives of the environmental 

community and timber industry. I will further explain the reasons for my decision in the next section, 

but first I would like to describe my decision according to the following decision components and 

approved actions. 

2.01 DECISION COMPONENTS AND APPROVED ACTIONS

The EIS (Chapter 2.01) describes six Primary Objectives that reflect the Purpose and Need and 

respond to the significant issues raised by the public during the NEPA process: 1) Economic Value; 

2) Public and Worker Safety; 3) Fuel Reduction; 4) Enhance Hydrologic Function; 5) Enhance 

Wildlife Habitat; and 6) Research. Modified Alternative 4, like the original Alternative 4, meets all of 

these objectives. 

Modified Alterative 4 implements the approved actions framed within the following “Decision 

Components” which are described in detail as activity groups in EIS Chapter 2.01. Each decision 

component describes how Modified Alternative 4 compares to the original Alternative 4. The 

approved actions listed below generally track with the Primary Objectives, but in some instances, the 

actions may achieve multiple objectives (e.g., salvage logging serves both the Economic Value and 

Fuel Reduction objectives). 

Table 2.01-1 below compares the treatments proposed under the original Alternative 4 with those 

approved under Modified Alternative 4. Table B.01-1 (Appendix B) lists the treatment units along 

with the primary objectives for each unit included in Modified Alternative 4. The project record 

includes a large scale Record of Decision Comparison Map showing the proposed treatment units 

from the original Alternative 4 and the approved treatments under Modified Alternative 4. 

Salvage and Fuel Reduction

Modified Alternative 4 reduces the amount of salvage logging and associated fuel treatments from 

that proposed in the original Alternative 4. Modified Alternative 4 approves salvage logging and fuel 

reduction on 15,383 acres including: 14,495 acres of ground based; 651 acres of helicopter; and, 237 

acres of skyline treatments. Modified Alternative 4 approves fuels treatments on 26,890 acres4

including: 2,671 acres of biomass removal; 1,150 acres of mastication; 1,450 acres of drop and lop; 

18,381 acres of machine piling and burning; and, 3,238 acres of jackpot burning. 

4 Modified Alternative 4 fuel reduction treatment acres include fuels reduction on 11,507 acres that do not include salvage.

8 

 
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Hazard Tree Removal and Fuel Reduction

Modified Alternative 4 includes the same hazard tree removal and associated fuel treatments as 

proposed in the original Alternative 4, with the addition of roadside hazard removal within units 

excluded from salvage. Modified Alternative 4 approves felling and removing of hazard trees and fuel 

reduction adjacent to about 325 miles (17,335 acres) of forest roads outside of approved salvage units. 

Some non-merchantable trees may be felled and left in place.

Roads

Modified Alternative 4 includes the same road treatments as proposed in the original Alternative 4 

except for about 10 miles of roads that accessed units excluded from salvage and fuels reduction. 

Modified Alternative 4 approves: reconstruction of 315 miles and maintenance of 209.3 miles of 

permanent roads; construction of 6.1 miles of new temporary roads; reconstruction of 17.5 miles of 

existing temporary roads (these temporary roads will be decommissioned after use and are not 

intended to be a permanent part of the NFS road system); and, reconstruction of 0.6 miles of existing 

temporary routes that will be converted back to their original use after the conclusion of treatment 

actions. Table B.02-1 (Appendix B) lists the road treatments approved in Modified Alternative 4. 

Modified Alternative 4 does not include new construction of permanent NFS roads. 

Wildlife Habitat Enhancement

Modified Alternative 4 includes the same wildlife habitat treatments as proposed in the original 

Alternative 4. Modified Alternative 4 approves 4,087 acres of critical deer winter range treatments, 

within the Stanislaus National Forest and adjacent to Yosemite National Park to achieve desired 

forage/cover ratios and to provide for deer passage and access (Appendix A, item 13.g).

Research

Modified Alternative 4 includes the same research activities as proposed in the original Alternative 4, 

although consolidated into fewer units. Modified Alternative 4 provides opportunities for research 

scientists to undertake an integrated package of 7 studies and activities to investigate key questions 

related to fire management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire (EIS Appendix D). 

Forest Plan Amendment

Modified Alternative 4 does not include the Forest Carnivore Connectivity Corridor (FCCC) Forest 

Plan Amendment as proposed in the original Alternative 4; however, Modified Alternative 4 now 

includes one additional management requirement (similar to Alternative 1) to manage the same FCCC 

salvage units to Old Forest Emphasis Area (OFEA) snag and down woody material retention 

standards (Appendix A, item 13.a). 

Management Requirements

Modified Alternative 4 includes the same management requirements as proposed in the original 

Alternative 4 with one additional management requirement to protect habitat for fisher and marten 

(Appendix A, item 13.a). Modified Alternative 4 approves the Management Requirements shown in 

Appendix A. 

9 
Stanislaus

National Forest

Table 2.01-1 Comparison of Original Alternative 4 and Modified Alternative 4

Treatments1 Original

Alternative 4

Modified

Alternative 4

Salvage ground based (acres) 24,176 14,495

Salvage ground based/skyline swing (acres) 16 0

Salvage aerial based helicopter (acres) 2,568 651

Salvage skyline system (acres) 1,066 237

Subtotal Salvage (acres) 27,826 15,383

Hazard Tree Removal (miles) 324.6 324.6

Subtotal Hazard Tree Removal (acres) 15,692 17,3352

Total Hazard Tree and Salvage (acres) 43,5183 33,0813

Biomass Removal 7,975 2,671

Mastication 1,309 1,150

Drop and Lop 1,798 1,450

Machine Piling and Burning 20,320 18,381

Jackpot Burning 3,650 3,238

Total Fuels (acres) 35,0523 26,8903

New Construction (miles) 0.0 0.0

Reconstruction (miles) 315.0 315.0

Maintenance (miles) 209.3 209.3

Subtotal Construction and Maintenance (miles) 524.3 524.3

Temporary Road (new miles) 8.4 6.1

Temporary Road (existing miles) 22.1 17.5

Temporary Use – Revert (miles) 3.3 0.6

Subtotal Temporary Roads (miles) 33.8 24.2

Total Roads (miles) 558.1 548.5

Private Roads Needing Right-of-Way (miles) 11.2 11.2

Rock Quarry Sites 7 7

Potential Water Sources 94 94

1 Salvage includes removal of dead trees and fuel reduction; Hazard Tree includes removal of 

hazard tree and fuel reduction. 

2 Hazard Tree acres increase due to addition of roadside hazard removal along roads within units 

excluded from salvage. 3 Salvage and Hazard Tree acres overlap with Fuel Reduction acres and do not total.

2.02 IMPLEMENTATION OF THEAPPROVED ACTIONS

 Salvage harvest of trees initially killed by the Rim Fire would be accomplished through timber 

sales that would occur over the next 2 seasons, culminating in winter 2015. Deterioration of the 

dead trees occurs quickly and by winter 2014 half of the value of most of the trees will be gone. 

Later, additional die back may be removed for up to the following 3 years. 

 Roadside hazard tree removal may occur for at least the next 5 years where additional die back, a 

safety hazard for forest visitors, will be abated either through a commercial timber or fuelwood 

sales or force account (i.e., Forest Service fire crews falling and leaving trees).

 Biomass removal, tractor piling, and jackpot burning may also occur up to 5 years after the 

decision, but the goal to implement and accomplish all approved actions within the first 3 years. 

 Watershed and Soil protection treatments must occur the same season as the timber harvest. 

 The Annual Operating season for timber sales is May through mid-October; operations can occur 

on either side of those dates if weather and ground conditions allow as determined by Forest 

Service Soil Scientists and/or Hydrologists while meeting all approved management requirements 

(Appendix A).

10
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

3. Reasons for the Decision

3.01 OVERARCHING CONSIDERATIONS

In reaching my decision, I struggled with two important considerations. The first involves 

determining the right amount of active forest management within the Rim Fire area. On the one hand, 

I know that a significant amount of management is necessary to protect public safety, help restore the 

environment, and minimize the risk of another fire like the Rim Fire. On the other hand, I know that 

not every acre of ground burned by the Rim Fire requires, or would even benefit from, human 

intervention. The second consideration involves determining how much active management can 

actually be achieved in a cost-efficient manner. Given the rapid deterioration of fire-killed trees and 

the limited industrial capacity to harvest and process such trees, only a limited number of acres can be 

treated in the time before the burned trees lose all economic value.

I believe Modified Alternative 4 strikes a reasonable balance based on these considerations and will 

treat the land for safety and ecological purposes in the most critical areas, while simultaneously 

leaving the majority of the Rim Fire area to recover naturally. This decision is the result not only of 

the exhaustive analysis conducted in the EIS, but also the product of active public participation. 

Members of broad segments of the population commented on the proposed project and many 

encouraged the agency to take an active role in conducting salvage operations, removing hazard trees, 

reducing fuels, facilitating ecological recovery, and promoting research. However, representatives of 

both environmental groups and the timber industry informed me that the action alternatives in the EIS 

proposed more management than the environmental groups thought desirable and the timber industry 

thought practical. Therefore, I scaled back the scope of Alternative 4 to a size that would be practical 

to implement, while retaining the key treatments to attain the project’s Purpose and Need.

Some members of the public may be concerned about the reduced treatment acres under Modified 

Alternative 4. However, I feel that it is pointless to include more salvage timber than can be 

accommodated by the local timber industry, which recently informed me that it does not have the mill 

capacity to handle all the timber volume included in Alternative 4 (or the other action alternatives). If 

I adopted Alternative 4 without any modifications, there would be a significant risk of losing potential 

contract bidders if the Forest Service required bidders to remove more timber than their capacity to 

harvest and process. Furthermore, despite the reduction in acres to be treated, Modified Alternative 4 

focuses salvage timber harvesting in those areas where it will lead to the best realization of all the 

Rim Recovery project’s objectives. Finally, Modified Alternative 4 retains the most important hazard 

tree removal, fuel reduction, road maintenance, wildlife habitat, and research components from 

Alternative 4.

Other members of the public may believe that Modified Alternative 4 still proposes too much timber 

harvest, and that the project should solely focus on ecological restoration. However, the six objectives 

of the Rim Recovery project are interconnected, and capturing the economic value of burned trees 

within the Rim Fire is essential to accomplishing the human safety, fuel reduction, ecological 

restoration, and research objectives of the Rim Recovery project. This is true not only in terms of 

generating funds to accomplish restoration goals, but also because timber sale contracts include many 

mandatory components such as restoration actions (e.g., road maintenance and fuel reduction). 

Therefore, above and beyond the socio-economic benefits it provides, timber harvest is necessary to 

advance non-economic aspects of this project.

Given the roles that salvage logging plays in this project, I want to stress the importance of quickly 

moving forward with project implementation. It is well known that burned timber loses its economic 

value rapidly. Even before a fire is completely extinguished, wood-boring insects, various fungi, and 

11
Stanislaus

National Forest

the weather all begin to decay the wood of dead trees. The Rim Fire started just over one year ago, 

and reports from the field indicate that it is no longer economically feasible to cut and remove trees 

less than sixteen inches in diameter, due to the deterioration within such trees. With each passing 

month, that minimum salvageable diameter will increase, and more units of the Rim Recovery project 

will become economically infeasible to treat. At this point, only a few months are left in this year’s 

operating season. Due to the current condition of the timber and the progressive deterioration process, 

beginning operations in the upcoming weeks is critical to ensuring the cost-effective implementation 

of this project. If project implementation is delayed, the timber sale contracts designed to implement 

this project may lose their economic viability and not receive any bidders. If that happens, this entire 

project, and all the public benefits it was designed to serve, may be lost.

3.02 ACHIEVEMENT OF THE PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION

As previously discussed, my six main goals for this project include all 5 elements from the Purpose 

and Need (EIS Chapter 1.03) and one additional Research objective (EIS Chapter 2.01): 1) capture 

economic value through salvage logging; 2) provide for worker and public safety; 3) reduce fuels for 

future forest resiliency; 4) improve road infrastructure to enhance hydrologic function; 5) enhance 

wildlife habitat; and, 6) provide opportunities for scientific research. The following sections explain 

how Modified Alternative 4 meets each of these important objectives.

1. Capture Economic Value through Salvage Logging

The overall success of the Rim Recovery project depends on our ability to harvest some of the trees 

burned by the Rim Fire while they still have economic value. Modified Alternative 4 is designed to 

focus salvage logging on those areas that are the most cost-efficient to harvest, best advance the 

project’s other purposes, and which can be completed by the end of the 2015 operating season, when 

the burned timber is expected to lose the majority of its economic value. In response to public input, 

Modified Alternative 4 avoids salvage harvest in certain areas of environmental concern, like the 

Clavey Proposed Wild and Scenic River, and eliminates some of the most cost-prohibitive harvest 

units. 

My decision to exclude most of the proposed helicopter and skyline salvage harvest units from 

Alternative 4 was strongly informed by feedback I received from both the timber industry and 

environmental groups, neither of which supported harvest in such units. In the public interest of 

prompt implementation, it will be counterproductive to include numerous units in timber sales that 

will lessen their attractiveness to potential bidders. However, I retained some helicopter and skyline 

units, particularly along Pilot Ridge between the Merced River and Tuolumne River watersheds, 

whose location on the landscape makes their treatment essential to effectively reduce fuel loads in key 

areas. The retention of these few units is important to the fuel reduction purpose of the project and 

should not impact the economic viability of any timber sale contracts. 

I am pleased that Modified Alternative 4 will capture the economic values provided by 15,383 acres 

of salvage logging, expected to produce about 210 million board feet of timber. Providing a 

sustainable supply of timber and supporting local economies are always important components of the 

Forest Service’s multiple-use land mandate, and the Rim Fire already imposed considerable economic 

impacts on the tourism-dependent communities surrounding the Stanislaus National Forest. 

In sum, I believe that Modified Alternative 4 provides an excellent means of capturing economic 

value through salvage logging in a cost-effective way, while simultaneously providing for other 

important project objectives.

12
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

2. Provide Worker and Public Safety

My highest priority and greatest concern is always the safety of the public, Forest Service employees 

and other forest workers. Therefore, removing hazard trees and providing for safe recreation and 

working conditions are essential components of Modified Alternative 4 and are unchanged from 

Alternative 4. In total, Modified Alternative 4 includes the removal of hazard trees from about 325 

miles (17,335 acres) of roads outside of approved salvage units.

To anyone who believes that I misrepresented 

or over-stated the dangers posed by hazard trees 

in a forested landscape, I need only reference 

the recent tragic death of a visitor to 

Yellowstone National Park, who was killed by a 

falling tree burned in the 1988 Yellowstone 

Fire5

. I will do everything possible to minimize 

this risk on the Stanislaus National Forest. 

I also strongly disagree with those commenters 

who suggested closing the low standard roads 

proposed for treatment until all hazard trees fall 

on their own. Such suggestions completely 

ignore the variety of appropriate recreation 

activities (hunting, backcountry hiking and 

camping, mushroom gathering, bird watching, 

etc.) that would be constrained by a long-term 

closure of such roads. 

Furthermore, a wide variety of agency 

management activities, firefighting not least 

among them, require Forest Service employees 

to use the Forest network of low standard roads, 

whether open to the public or not. Leaving 

hazard trees standing in such areas will either 

put agency employees in harm’s way as they try 

to carry out their duties, or will impede their 

ability to effectively carry out their duties in 

order to remain safe. This is not a reasonable 

choice, since tens to hundreds of tons of fuel per acre would accumulate on the ground once these 

trees fall down. This complex of downed trees and the subsequent shrub growth will greatly increase 

the probability of another wildfire. Firefighter access will be difficult and in some cases impossible 

resulting in less direct attack options, possibly resulting in larger wildfires. More importantly, 

firefighter safety will be compromised by the hazards left in this untreated landscape. On the Tahoe 

National Forest, the 2013 American Fire burned over a portion of the 2008 Westville Fire; direct 

attack of the more recent fire was limited due to safety concerns about the hazards posed by falling 

snags left from the earlier fire resulting in containment lines constructed back from the activelyburning fire in places where it was safe to do so, ultimately increasing the fire footprint and 

suppression costs (USDA 2014f). 

5 Yellowstone Visitor Killed By Falling Tree online at: http://www.nps.gov/yell/parknews/14038.htm

Photo 9: Burned snags are a hazard for anyone accessing the 

forest.

13

 
Stanislaus

National Forest

For these reasons, my decision 

affirms and embraces all of hazard 

tree mitigation along low standard 

roads that is included in 

Alternative 4. This aggressive 

reduction of hazards was supported 

by comments on the DEIS, 

including those submitted by the 

Yosemite-Stanislaus Solutions 

group and several other 

independent environmental 

organizations. 

Unfortunately, with any significant 

delay in project implementation, 

we may not be able to fully achieve 

the goal of safe worker and public 

access, outlined above. The closure 

on public access that I imposed last 

year before the Rim Fire was 

extinguished had numerous 

consequences on the recreating public and the local economy. And yet, I stand firmly behind my 

responsibility to protect public safety and prevent any injuries or fatalities from a falling dead tree. 

Therefore, if, due to delay and timber deterioration, we are unable to remove hazard trees along 

public roads within the burned area, those roads will remain closed, perpetuating all the associated 

economic and recreational impacts while not entirely removing the risks of an employee or member 

of the public being struck by a tree. 

3. Reduce Fuels for Future Forest Resiliency

After providing for human safety, my second highest priority is reducing fuels to avoid another 

extreme fire like Rim, which had so many adverse consequences (Long 2014). I acknowledge that 

much debate and uncertainty remains regarding the efficacy of salvage logging to reduce fire hazard. 

However, the Rim Fire Vegetation Resiliency Strategy, recent research discussed in the EIS, expert 

advice from scientists at the Pacific Southwest Research Station, and Forest Service experience with 

serious reburns all convinced me that the approved fuel reduction treatments will be effective. And, 

even though some uncertainty remains and more research is needed, the negative consequences of not 

taking action are too great to wait for absolute certainty. The Rim Fire showed us just how damaging 

an extreme fire can be, and I intend to do everything I can to reduce the chances of another such fire 

in this area. 

The geographic scope of fuel reduction under Modified Alternative 4 is less than that of Alternative 4, 

since some of the salvage logging excluded from Modified Alternative 4 would have reduced fuel 

loading. However, Modified Alternative 4 retains all the most important fuel reduction actions 

proposed by Alternative 4, even in many units where salvage is excluded from Modified Alternative 

4. For example, I retained most fuel reduction actions associated with the Strategically Placed Land 

Area Treatments (SPLATS) for Alternative 4, because attaining the project’s overall fuel reduction 

objective relies on the integrity of the SPLAT system.

Some members of the public expressed concern about the effect of fuel reduction treatments on 

important ecosystem components, such as large downed logs and snags. However, I believe that

Modified Alternative 4 and its associated management requirements (Appendix A) will provide 

sufficient quantities of large downed logs and snags to meet ecosystem needs while creating a firePhoto 10: High winds on August 22, 2013 snapped the tops off trees burned by 

the Rim Fire on August 21, 2013.

14
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

resilient forest ecosystem. Indeed, even within treatment units, Modified Alternative 4 retains the 

largest pieces of large downed logs and snags, which are the most important for long-term ecosystem 

services. I am concerned that if we were to retain significantly more large downed logs and snags, our 

fuel reduction goals would be unduly compromised. Furthermore, because Modified Alternative 4 

only treats a fraction of the area burned by the Rim Fire, there will be tens-of-thousands of acres with 

extremely high levels of large downed logs and snags, providing the benefits for those particular 

species that thrive in burned forests, such as the black-backed woodpecker. 

Ultimately, the goal for the Rim Fire area is not to eliminate fire from the ecosystem, since these 

forests evolved with fire as major influence. Rather, the goal is to modify fire behavior and lower 

severity, to bring these areas back to a more natural fire regime. After an extreme fire like the Rim 

Fire, the first step toward more natural conditions is to remove some of the accumulation of fuel, 

which is outside the ecologically appropriate range of variability for these ecosystems. Modified 

Alternative 4 takes this step by treating fuels in some of the most strategically important areas. These 

treatments will not only reduce the risk of another extreme fire like Rim, but they will also set the 

stage for reintroducing natural and prescribed fire into the ecosystem. My hope is that this project will 

be the first step in a many-decade process of helping restore a heterogeneous, fire-resilient forest that 

supports a broad array of wildlife, and where fire is an integral part of the system, not a landscape 

altering force. 

Photo 11: This 2006 photo shows fuel loading from deteriorating snags burned 10 years earlier in the 1996 Charlton Fire on the 

Willamette National Forest in Oregon. (David Welton)

15
Stanislaus

National Forest

4. Improve Road Infrastructure to Enhance Hydrologic Function

Since few NFS roads receive frequent or regular maintenance, it is likely that revenue from the sale of 

salvage timber is the only funding source for transportation improvements. Given the damage to the 

NFS roads system caused by the Rim Fire and the vulnerability of the system to serious erosion, such 

improvements and maintenance are essential to minimize potential damage to watersheds and water 

quality, while still providing public access. 

Modified Alternative 4 will improve the Forest transportation system through road maintenance and 

improvement actions, such as culvert replacement, road surface replacement and regrading (as well as 

removing roadside hazard trees, discussed earlier). These treatments will provide long-term public 

and administrative access throughout the project area. In addition, the road treatments will enhance 

hydrologic function, leaving the system in a more stable and functional condition, minimizing adverse 

resource impacts in the future. If the project is not implemented, public and administrative access will 

be hampered, and the watercourses in the burned area will be at elevated risk from severe erosion and 

siltation, as winter storms impact the burned and fragile soils over the next several years.

Some members of the public expressed concerns about the effects that roads themselves, no matter 

how well designed, have on soils and watersheds. Part of the reason I chose Modified Alternative 4 

over the other action alternatives is precisely because no new roads will be built as part of my 

decision. However, I believe the existing road network needs to be repaired and maintained to 

minimize soil and watershed impacts, while keeping the Forest’s current level of access for the 

public, management, and research. With approved management requirements, I believe that the longterm benefits of improving our road network far outweigh any of the short-term effects caused by 

approved road actions. 

5. Enhance Wildlife Habitat

The conservation of wildlife is extremely important to me as it is to the members of the public that 

commented on the DEIS. Some of our commenters asserted that the Rim Recovery project is more 

concerned with money than ecological restoration and conservation of wildlife. I disagree, because I 

believe that multiple aspects of my decision speak to the importance I placed on minimizing shortterm impacts to species that use burned forests, while providing for long-term benefits to a wide range 

of other species. Modified Alternative 4 includes protective measures beyond those required by the 

Forest Plan and agency policy for species listed as Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive, and also 

Photo 12: Improper movement of water from the road system is 

one of the most potentially damaging factors for watershed and 

soils resources within the Rim Fire. Undersized culverts cannot 

handle post-fire flows with additional debris and sediments.

Photo 13: Due to debris and erosion following the Rim Fire, 

plugged culverts impact roads and watersheds from pooling, 

further erosion and sediment flows.

16
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

takes into account the needs of non-listed species, such as the mule deer and black-backed 

woodpecker. Indeed, the Forest developed the original Alternative 4 to addresses the Snag Forest 

Habitat issue with additional black-backed woodpecker habitat retention. 

While pondering how to craft a decision that would achieve all aspects of the Purpose and Need and 

simultaneously minimize impacts to wildlife, I was struck by the need to balance three trade-offs 

while considering a recent report from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife regarding 

wildlife impacts from the Rim Fire itself (CDFW 2014e): 

 Lost one year of fawn recruitment (19 fawns/100 does survived) in the fire area; possible 

restoration includes biomass removal in strategic deer migration corridors and wintering areas.

 Long term loss of late seral stage habitat; dependent species will likely decline in the fire area.

 Low severity burned areas will likely see increased biodiversity due to the mosaic burn pattern.

The first trade-off is between short-term and long-term effects. In the short term, salvage logging and 

fuel reduction actions will undoubtedly affect individual animals and patches of habitat. However, in 

the long term, failing to reduce the extreme fuel load on the landscape increases the likelihood of 

having another extreme fire similar to the Rim Fire. The Rim Fire burned through forty six California 

spotted owl Protected Activity Centers (PACs) and twenty-two northern goshawk PACs, destroying 

some of these Sensitive species’ important old-forest habitat. And, this is just a small snapshot of the 

wildlife impacts from the Rim Fire, a fire that burned 400 square miles, destroying the nests, dens, 

and habitat for scores of species, and surely causing the death of numerous individuals that were 

unable to escape the fire’s destructive path. So, being faced with the choice of causing minimal shortterm adverse effects to wildlife or increasing the risk of serious long-term impacts to wildlife, I opted 

for the former, with the strong conviction that doing so is better for wildlife6

. That said, I am also 

concerned about short-term impacts to wildlife, and therefore designed Modified Alternative 4 to 

include extensive management requirements (Appendix A), which ensure that short-term impacts are 

minimized and the most important ecological legacies (such as large downed logs and snags) are 

retained in treated areas.

The second trade-off involves the conflicting habitat 

needs of old-forest specialists like the California 

spotted owl, northern goshawk, and fisher, and the 

habitat needs of burned-forest specialists like the 

black-backed woodpecker. The ideal situation is to 

maintain a balance of habitat for both types of species 

in a heterogeneous distribution across the landscape. 

However, in the aftermath of the Rim Fire, this 

balance tipped strongly toward more post-fire habitat 

being available than old-forest habitat. Several 

scientific studies documented that fire frequency, size, 

and severity are increasing in the Sierra Nevada, 

which makes it likely that burned-forest habitat will 

continue to increase in upcoming years (just as more 

old-forest habitat is lost to those fires). At a more local 

scale, this decision will not conduct habitat-disturbing 

actions in about 71 percent of the NFS lands within the 

Rim Fire (83 percent of the total Rim Fire), such that 

an abundance of burned-forest habitat will remain 

even with full implementation of Modified Alternative 

6 As noted earlier, taking action is also essential for maintaining public safety and access, improving watershed conditions and other 

public benefits provided by this project.

Photo 14: Modified Alternative 4 retains an 

abundance of burned-forest habitat for species like 

the black-backed woodpecker. 

17

 
Stanislaus

National Forest

4. Finally, the California spotted owl and fisher are both Sensitive species whose habitat is at 

increasing risk from severe fires. Indeed, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined that severe 

fire is the single largest threat to the continued existence of spotted owls. On the other hand, the 

International Union for Conservation of Nature designated the black-backed woodpecker as a species 

of “Least Concern” based on the species’ extremely large range and apparently stable, large 

population7

. Also, current data at the rangewide, California and Sierra Nevada scales indicate that the 

distribution of black-backed woodpecker populations in the Sierra Nevada are stable as described in 

the Wildlife Management Indicator Species (MIS) Report. For all of these reasons, my decision leans 

more toward actions intended to protect surviving old-forest habitat and ensure that new patches of 

such habitat develop in the future. 

The third trade-off involves the conflicting needs of species that use burned-forests and needs of the 

Tuolumne and Yosemite mule deer herds. As described in the Wildlife Biological Evaluation (BE):

The Rim Fire burned through critical deer winter range and deer migration access to winter foraging areas is 

essential for thriving herds. Both the Tuolumne and Yosemite herds declined in recent decades, and downed 

trees and the potential for more dead trees to fall will inhibit herd access to critical winter habitat and browse in the 

Rim Fire area. Therefore, removing some burned trees that might otherwise provide habitat for the black-backed 

woodpecker and other species is essential to providing for the health and recovery of these two deer herds. 

Given the abundance of untreated burned forest and trend for more in the future, I approved the 

necessary actions for the benefit of the deer herds. 

Modified Alternative 4 excludes salvage harvest treatment in some of the units that overlap the deer 

7 Online at: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22681181/0

Photo 15: Downed trees and the potential for more dead trees to fall will inhibit deer herd access to critical winter habitat and food. 

Modified Alternative 4 includes a corridor linking wildlife populations to future habitat providing opportunities for these species to 

move north. (Tom Stienstra/San Francisco Chronicle July 10, 2014; Yosemite fire debate over harvesting burned trees online at: 

http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Yosemite-fire-debate-over-harvesting-burned-trees-5094993.php) 

18

 
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

migration corridor, such as units O201A, O201B and P201 adjacent to Yosemite National Park; 

however, some of the dead material within these units will be removed through fuels reduction in 

order to promote deer passage through this important area from Yosemite National Park to critical 

deer winter range on the Stanislaus National Forest. Overall, I believe that the deer habitat 

improvements included in Modified Alternative 4 are essential and outweigh any adverse impacts to 

burned-forest habitat in those areas.

Toward the goal of conserving old-forest habitat and species, Modified Alternative 4 includes a 

management requirement rather than a Forest Plan Amendment to provide for a forest carnivore 

connectivity corridor to Yosemite National Park. I received some strong feedback suggesting an 

alternate location for the corridor, where the action alternatives (EIS Chapter 2.02) did not propose 

treatments or where my decision excludes some actions. Although I decided this corridor should be 

determined through a Forest Plan revision, my decision meets the objective of managing some units 

for forest carnivore connectivity while not precluding future options for carnivore corridor locations. 

Like Alternative 4, Modified Alternative 4 includes management requirements which will benefit 

wildlife in general, but specifically tailored to benefit California spotted owls, great gray owls and 

northern goshawks:

 Snags, large downed logs, and un-merchantable material will be retained in harvest units to 

provide habitat elements important for these sensitive species and their prey species. All action 

alternatives would retain 10-20 tons of dead wood per acre, but Modified Alternative 4 

emphasizes retention at the higher end of that range. Modified Alternative 4 also excludes 

treatments from 2,571 acres of high value black-backed woodpecker habitat (Tingley 2014) 

leaving untreated large downed logs and snags for other species. As discussed above, the 

retention of dead wood versus its removal is a trade-off between the immediate habitat needs of 

some species and an increasing fuel load that could lead to another extreme fire destroying even 

more habitat. I believe Modified Alternative 4 strikes the best balance.

 Modified Alternative 4 requires the Forest Service to flag and avoid current and historic nest trees 

for these three species, which should protect nest trees and ensure compliance with the Migratory 

Bird Treaty Act. 

Given the concern expressed in several public comments about the management of California spotted 

owl and northern goshawk PACs, I would like to briefly address these species here: 

 California Spotted Owl PACs: The DEIS documented an initial plan to: a) remove ten spotted

owl PACs from the PAC network due to the extent of high severity fire and resulting habitat loss 

within those PACs; and, b) to change the boundaries of nine other PACs, where suitable habitat 

remained after the fire adjacent to the former PAC. Spotted owl occupancy surveys conducted 

since the release of the DEIS confirmed that spotted owls are still present in relatively unburned 

forest adjacent to six of the removed PACs. Therefore, the Forest established six new spotted owl 

PACs within the perimeter of the Rim Fire, none of which overlap to any meaningful degree with 

treatment units included in Modified Alternative 4. 

 Northern Goshawk PACs: The DEIS documented an initial plan to: a) remove four northern 

goshawk PACs from the PAC network due to the extent of high severity fire and resulting habitat 

loss within those PACs; and, b) to change the boundaries of three other PACs, where suitable 

habitat remained after the fire adjacent to the former PAC. Northern goshawk occupancy surveys 

conducted since the release of the DEIS confirmed that goshawks are still present in relatively 

unburned forest adjacent to two of the removed PACs. Therefore, the Forest established two new 

goshawk PACs within the perimeter of the Rim Fire, none of which overlap to any meaningful 

degree with treatment units included in Modified Alternative 4. 

While I do not believe that implementation of the Rim Recovery project poses any threat to the blackbacked woodpecker as a species, I heard the numerous concerns raised by some commenters about 

19
Stanislaus

National Forest

the threats they perceive. I am not convinced about the need to add black-backed woodpeckers to the 

list of species for which require a Limited Operating Period. 

In sum, I believe that Modified Alternative 4 strikes a careful and reasonable balance between the 

short-term impacts of management on some species and the long-term conservation of other species. 

Given that the needs of various species differ, and often conflict, there is no solution that will 

maximize benefits for all species, in all locations, and at all times. Modified Alternative 4 is the best 

solution I could find, particularly given the other important aspects of the project’s Purpose and Need. 

6. Provide Opportunities for Scientific Research

I’m saddened that the Rim Fire occurred; however, I’m genuinely thrilled that the Rim Recovery 

project provides opportunities for research scientists to undertake an integrated package of 7 studies 

and activities to investigate key questions related to fire management and landscape restoration after 

an extreme fire (EIS Appendix D). The Pacific Southwest Research Station is responsible for 

conducting the following research projects; Modified Alternative 4 only implements the specific 

treatments that will serve as data sources for scientific research. 

1. Addressing Levels of Post-Fire Snag Removal on Black-Backed Woodpecker Nesting and 

Foraging Behavior. 

2. Ecological Restoration Following the Rim Fire - Potential Learning Opportunities Regarding 

Replanting.

3. Effects of Postfire Salvage Logging and Mitigation Measures on Soils, Vegetation, and Erosion 

4. Effect of Varying Levels of Salvage on Snag Retention Rates, Rates at Which Snags Become 

Fuels, Rates of Natural Tree Regeneration and Understory Development, and Effects on NonNative Species Abundance over Time.

5. Landscape Fuel Treatment Effectiveness in the 2013 Rim Fire: A Spatially Explicit Assessment 

of Treatment Impacts on Fire Severity Patterns.

6. Effects of Salvage Logging, Resulting Snag Density and Distribution, and Green Tree Proximity 

on Wildlife Habitat and Use, Forest Recovery, and Forest Ecosystem Function.

7. Assessing the Response of California Spotted Owls to Wildfire and Salvage Logging on the Rim 

Fire.

3.03 MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS

Appendix A lists the approved Management Requirements guiding the implementation of Modified 

Alternative 4. Those requirements are designed to ensure compliance with the Forest Plan and to 

minimize or avoid adverse impacts.

4. Other Alternatives Considered

The following sections present the other alternatives considered in detail but not selected; the 

alternatives considered but eliminated from detailed study; and, the environmentally preferred 

alternative.

4.01 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL BUT NOT SELECTED

EIS Chapter 2.02 describes and compares the alternatives considered in detail for the Rim Recovery 

project. It presents the alternatives in comparative form, defining the differences between each 

alternative and providing a clear basis for choice among the options for the Responsible Official and 

the public. These include the Proposed Action (Alternative 1), the no action alternative (Alternative 

20
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

2), and two additional action alternatives (3 and 4) that provide a comprehensive range for the 

decision maker. EIS Table 2.05-1 provides a summary of the proposed activities and EIS Appendix E 

provides detailed information for each specific treatment unit.

The following information briefly describes the alternatives considered in detail along with my 

reasons for not selecting them.

Alternative 1 (Proposed Action)

This is the Proposed Action, as described in the Notice of Intent (78 Federal Register 235, December 

6, 2013; p. 73498-73499), with corrections based on updated data and map information and 

completion of PAC re-maps as stated in the scoping package (Chapter 1.04). These corrections and 

refinements provide additional resource protection and a more accurate and informed proposed 

action. I did not select Alternative 1 (Proposed Action) because: 

 Recent information indicates that local mill capacity cannot accommodate the timber volume that 

would be produced by this alternative.

 It includes new permanent road construction which was an important concern expressed by many 

commenters.

 It does not provide watershed treatments for additional protection of sensitive soils. 

 It does not provide the same increased opportunity for snag and down material retention as 

Modified Alternative 4. 

 It does not provide opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions related to fire 

management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

Alternative 2 (No Action)

Alternative 2 (No Action) serves as a baseline for comparison purposes (73 Federal Register 143, July 

24, 2008; p. 43084-43099). Under Alternative 2 (No Action), no proposed activities would occur. I 

did not select Alternative 2 (No Action) because: 

 Without salvage, no economic value would be recovered from this viable source. As a perishable 

commodity, harvest must occur in a timely manner in order for the value of the dead trees to pay 

for their removal as well as potentially future restoration treatments. 

 Without salvage, dead trees would not be removed from this area leaving tens to hundreds of tons 

of fuel per acre once these trees fall down. This heavy fuel loading and the subsequent shrub 

growth will greatly increase the probability of another extreme wildfire. Firefighter access will be 

difficult and in some cases impossible resulting in less direct attack options and wider 

containment lines resulting in a larger wildfire with higher suppression costs. 

 Leaving standing hazard trees in these areas will put agency employees in harm’s way or impede 

their ability to carry out their field duties. Firefighter safety will also be compromised in these 

areas with limited access given the presence of so many snags. The visiting public would also be 

at risk as the presence of hazard trees deters from a safe recreation experience.

 The maintenance and reconstruction of roads would not be implemented to accomplish the 

project goal of a properly functioning road infrastructure.

 Long-term impacts to critical wildlife habitat would not be addressed, in particular for the 

California spotted owl, great gray owl, northern goshawks, and mule deer herds in need of winter 

range land for foraging. 

 It does not provide opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions related to fire 

management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

Alternative 3

Alternative 3 responds to issues and concerns related to: Snag Forest Habitat; New Road 

Construction, Wildlife Habitat; and, Soil and Watershed Impacts (EIS Chapter 1.08). Compared to 

21
Stanislaus

National Forest

Alternative 1, it addresses those issues by proposing: additional wildlife habitat enhancement 

(including biomass removal in Critical Deer Winter Range and the FCCC Forest Plan Amendment); 

additional soil and watershed protection (mastication and drop and lop); and, less new construction. It 

also includes research to help answer wildlife, fuels, watershed, and soils questions. I did not select 

Alternative 3 because:

 Recent information indicates that local mill capacity cannot accommodate the timber volume that 

would be produced by this alternative.

 It includes new permanent road construction which was an important concern expressed by many 

commenters.

 It does not include the additional acreage set aside for post-fire dependent species such as the 

black-backed woodpecker included in Modified Alternative 4. It is obvious from public 

comments that the provision of habitat for post-fire species is of great concern to many. 

 Modified Alternative 4 better focuses salvage logging on those areas that are the most costefficient to harvest, best advance the project’s other purposes, and which can be completed by the 

end of the 2015 operating season, when the burned timber is expected to lose the majority of its 

economic value.

 Modified Alternative 4 excludes most of the proposed helicopter and skyline timber harvest units 

from Alternative 3 which was strongly informed by feedback I received from both the timber 

industry and environmental groups, neither of which supported harvest in such units. 

 Modified Alternative 4 includes management requirements rather than a Forest Plan Amendment 

to provide for a carnivore connectivity corridor to Yosemite National Park. I decided this issue 

should be determined through the full collaborative process of a Forest Plan revision. 

Alternative 4

Alternative 4 responds to issues and concerns related to: Snag Forest Habitat; New Road 

Construction, Wildlife Habitat; and, Soil and Watershed Impacts (EIS Chapter 1.08). Alternative 4 

replaces new construction with temporary roads and drops 2,500 acres of salvage logging in highly 

suitable black-backed woodpecker habitat. I did not select Alternative 4 because:

 Recent information indicates that local mill capacity cannot accommodate the timber volume that 

would be produced by this alternative.

 It does not include the additional acreage set aside for post-fire dependent species such as the 

black-backed woodpecker included in Modified Alternative 4. It is obvious from public 

comments that the provision of habitat for post-fire species is of great concern to many. 

 Modified Alternative 4 better focuses salvage logging on those areas that are the most costefficient to harvest, best advance the project’s other purposes, and which can be completed by the 

end of the 2015 operating season, when the burned timber is expected to lose the majority of its 

economic value.

 Modified Alternative 4 excludes most of the proposed helicopter and skyline timber harvest units 

from Alternative 4 which was strongly informed by feedback I received from both the timber 

industry and environmental groups, neither of which supported harvest in such units. 

 Modified Alternative 4 includes management requirements rather than a Forest Plan Amendment 

to provide for a carnivore connectivity corridor to Yosemite National Park. I decided this issue 

should be determined through the full collaborative process of a Forest Plan revision. 

4.02 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED 

STUDY

NEPA requires that federal agencies rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable 

alternatives and briefly discuss the reasons for eliminating any alternatives that were not developed in 

22
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

detail (40 CFR 1502.14). Public comments and internal scoping suggested the alternatives briefly 

described below along with a brief response discussing the reasons for eliminating them from detailed 

study. EIS Chapter 2.04 provides a detailed description these alternatives considered but eliminated 

from detailed study along with the reasons why each was eliminated.

a. Remove the Maximum Amount of Timber Value

This alternative, based on scoping comments would salvage every area within NFS lands 

containing 5,000 BF or more per acre. It would eliminate more expensive logging systems like 

helicopter and skyline to maximize returns. It would minimize the number and size of snags 

retained within treatment units and across the landscape, and drop biomass removal within each 

sale to reduce costs. Although it meets portions of the purpose and need; capture economic value, 

promote public and worker safety and improve road infrastructure to enhance hydrologic 

function, it was considered but eliminated from detailed study for the following reasons: 

- Recent information indicates that local mill capacity cannot accommodate the timber volume 

that would be produced by this alternative. 

- It does not meet the purpose and need of reducing fuels for future forest resiliency. Although 

most of the larger trees would be removed providing an initial fuel treatment, over 30,000 

acres of needed fuel treatments would not occur with this alternative.

- It does not meet the purpose and need of wildlife habitat enhancement. Dead trees and 

smaller biomass material within Critical Deer Winter Range would remain on site since the 

amount of merchantable material is minimal with most of the area having less than 5,000 BF 

of timber per acre making it uneconomical to treat. No additional snags would be left for 

various wildlife species and those retained on site would be smaller in diameter.

- It is not consistent with agency policy and Forest Plan Direction, which require special 

considerations in Roadless and other land management areas.

- It does not provide opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions related to 

fire management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

b. Hazard Tree Removal Only

This alternative, based on scoping comments, would only cut and remove dead trees adjacent to 

low standard NFS roads; all other dead trees would remain. It was considered but eliminated from 

detailed study for the following reasons: 

- It does not meet the purpose and need to capture the economic value since many large burned 

dead trees in dense stands would be left within the burn.

- It does not fully meet the purpose and need to provide for worker and public safety. If not 

removed by salvage treatments, tens to hundreds of tons of fuel per acre would accumulate on 

the ground. The complex of downed trees and subsequent shrub growth will greatly increase 

the probability of another extreme wildfire. Firefighter access will be difficult and in some 

cases impossible, resulting in less direct attack options and wider containment lines resulting 

in a larger wildfire. More importantly, firefighter safety will be compromised by the hazards 

left in this untreated landscape. 

- It does not meet the purpose and need to reduce fuels for future forest resiliency. If only 

roadside hazard trees are removed, over 30,000 acres of needed fuel treatments would not 

occur with this alternative. No biomass would be treated and only minimal fuels reduction 

would occur across this large landscape, making future fires difficult to manage and contain. 

- The maintenance and reconstruction of roads would not be implemented to accomplish the 

project goal of a properly functioning road infrastructure. 

- It does not meet the purpose and need of wildlife habitat enhancement. Under this alternative, 

long-term impacts to critical wildlife habitat would not be addressed, in particular for the 

23
Stanislaus

National Forest

California spotted owl, great gray owl, northern goshawks, and mule deer herds in need of 

winter range land for foraging.

- It does not provide opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions related to 

fire management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

c. Retain 100 Percent Black-Backed Woodpecker Modeled Pairs

This alternative, based on scoping comments raised during collaborative meetings, would retain 

100 percent of black-backed woodpecker pairs on the Stanislaus National Forest as modeled by 

Tingley et al. 2014. This alternative would need to retain about 21,000 more acres than 

Alternative 4. Compared to Alternative 4, this alternative would reduce salvage treatments to 

7,500 acres and hazard tree removal to 14,500 acres. It was considered but eliminated from 

detailed study for the following reasons: 

- It does not meet the purpose and need to provide for worker and public safety. Roadside 

hazard trees would be left standing making roads unsafe for the public and field workers. 

This is estimated to be over 85 miles of Level 2 roads. In addition, because hazard trees could 

be removed from only some road segments, certain roads may remain closed to public access 

because the risk of hazard tree failure threatens public and worker safety.

- It does not fully meet the purpose and need for reducing fuels for future forest resiliency. If 

not removed by salvage treatments, tens to hundreds of tons of fuel per acre would 

accumulate on the ground, increasing the probability of another large wildfire. Firefighter 

access would be difficult in future fires and their safety compromised by the hazards left in 

this untreated landscape. 

- The maintenance and reconstruction of roads would not be implemented to accomplish the 

project goal of a properly functioning road infrastructure.

- It may not fully provide opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions 

related to fire management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

d. Retain the Best 75 Percent of the Black-Backed Woodpecker Modeled Pairs

This alternative, based on scoping comments raised during collaborative meetings, would retain 

75 percent of the best habitat for black-backed woodpecker pairs on the Stanislaus National 

Forest as modeled by Tingley et al. 2014. This alternative would need to retain (not treat) about 

14,000 additional acres than Alternative 4, reducing proposed salvage treatments by half. It was 

considered but eliminated from detailed study for the following reasons: 

- It does not meet the purpose and need to provide for worker and public safety. Roadside 

hazard trees on 65 miles of Level 2 roads in the best habitat would be left standing making 

roads unsafe for the public, field workers, and firefighters. 

- It does not fully meet the purpose and need of reducing fuels for future forest resiliency. 

Some of the best Black-Backed Woodpecker habitat is located in areas that were identified as 

strategic fuel treatment areas to prevent a large complex of downed wood accumulation. 

- It would not meet the purpose and need of improving the hydrologic function of the road 

system. Because timber sales are used to fund road treatments, some road reconstruction and 

maintenance would not occur under this alternative. 

- It may not fully provide opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions 

related to fire management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

e. Retain Pre-Fire Spotted Owl PAC Boundaries, No PAC Remapping or Retiring

This alternative, based on scoping comments, would retain the 46 spotted owl PACs burned 

within the Rim Fire in their original location. PACs are remapped following fire to encompass the 

best available habitat, generally the areas with the most remaining large live trees. No remapping 

of boundaries into adjacent green habitat would occur and none that were completely consumed 

24
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

by the fire would be retired. These would be kept as suitable habitat for the owls. It was 

considered but eliminated from detailed study for the following reasons: 

- It is not consistent with Forest Plan Direction, which requires that habitat conditions be 

evaluated after a stand-replacing event and opportunities for remapping of PACs be 

identified. PACs are delineated to encompass the best available 300 acres of habitat. 

- It does not fully meet the purpose and need to provide worker and public safety since hazard 

trees would not be removed in retained PACs. 

- It does not fully meet the purpose and need of reducing fuels for future forest resiliency. In 

retained PACs, hazard trees would be felled and left in place and strategic fuel treatments 

would not occur. The large amount of fuel in these areas would make future fires difficult to 

manage and contain, jeopardizing future fire resiliency. 

- It may not fully provide opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions 

related to fire management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

f. Natural Succession

This alternative, based on scoping comments, would allow the forest to recover naturally. This 

differs from “No Action” by including measures to reduce erosion and sedimentation, 

decommissioning roads, and curtailing cattle grazing in recovering areas. Salvage logging would 

be reduced or eliminated in sensitive areas. Impacted fisheries would recruit new populations 

from endemic stock migration rather than hatchery augmentation. It was considered but 

eliminated from detailed study for the following reasons: 

- Road decommissioning, cattle grazing, and fisheries recruitment are outside the scope of this 

project.

- It does not meet the purpose and need to capture the economic value since many large burned 

dead trees in dense stands would be left within the burn.

- It does not meet the purpose and need of reducing fuels for future forest resiliency. No 

biomass would be treated and over 30,000 acres of needed fuel treatments would not occur 

with this alternative. The large amount of fuel in these areas would make future fires difficult 

to manage and contain, jeopardizing future fire resiliency. 

- It does not provide opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions related to 

fire management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

g. Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center

This alternative, based on DEIS comments, is similar to Alternative 4 but would incorporate 

selected aspects of Alternative 2 (No Action). This Alternative would increase snag retention 

levels in General Forest units, remove selected skyline and helicopter units, and remove units 

bordering private lands west of Cherry Lake while emphasizing treatments near residential areas 

or family camps. It was considered but eliminated from detailed study for the following reason: 

- It is similar to an alternative already considered in detail (Alternative 4) with effects within 

the range of the alternatives already considered in detail.

h. Sierra Forest Legacy

This alternative, based on DEIS comments, would reduce the area affected by salvage logging in 

order to minimize watershed impacts, eliminate skyline and cable logging in order to avoid high 

fuel loading in these units, retain old forest structure in old forest emphasis areas, implement 

landscape goals and landscape themes, and considers bioclimatic envelope mapping. This 

suggested alternative drops units from Alternative 4 in order to improve conservation of sensitive 

resources. It was considered but eliminated from detailed study for the following reason: 

25
Stanislaus

National Forest

- It is similar to an alternative already considered in detail (Alternative 4) with effects within 

the range of the alternatives already considered in detail. 

4.03 ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

The environmentally preferable alternative is often interpreted as the alternative that causes the least 

damage to the biological and physical environment, or the alternative which best protects and 

preserves historic, cultural and natural resources. But, other factors relevant to this determination are 

provided in Section 101 of NEPA (42 USC 4321) which states that it is the continuing responsibility 

of the Federal Government to: 

 Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as a trustee of the environment for succeeding 

generations; 

 Assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing 

surroundings; 

 Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradations, risk to health 

of safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; 

 Preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage and maintain, 

wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice;

 Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of 

living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and, 

 Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of 

depletable resources.

Based on my consideration of the factors listed above and the effects disclosed in the EIS, I believe 

that Modified Alternative 4 is the Environmentally Preferred Alternative for the following reasons:

 Modified Alternative 4 best provides for the long term management of the project area. 

 Modified Alternative 4 provides an excellent means of capturing economic value through salvage 

logging in a cost-effective way, while simultaneously providing for other important project 

objectives. The actions implemented by this decision will generate revenues through the sale of 

salvage timber to offset the need for public expenditures through Congressional appropriation to 

create a safe environment for current and future public use.

 Modified Alternative 4 removes hazard trees to provide for public safety and Forest Service 

employee safety which includes firefighters accessing the area in possible future fires.

 The fuel reduction through salvage harvest, biomass removal and other fuel reduction actions will 

provide for the creation of a resilient forest as well as enhance habitat for migratory deer. 

 Modified Alternative 4 will improve the Forest transportation system through road maintenance 

and improvements. No new permanent roads will be built as part of this decision, but the existing 

road network will be repaired to keep the current level of public and administrative access. 

 Modified Alternative 4 includes additional protective measures beyond the minimum required by 

the Forest Plan and agency policy for species listed as Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive 

while also taking into account the needs of non-listed species. This alternative is designed to 

strike a reasonable balance between minimizing short-term impacts on some species and longterm conservation of other species, specifically California spotted owls, great gray owls, and 

northern goshawks. 

 Modified Alternative 4 provides opportunities for research scientists to investigate key questions 

related to fire management and landscape restoration after an extreme fire.

 Modified Alternative 4 will not conduct habitat-disturbing actions in about 71 percent of the NFS 

lands within the Rim Fire (83 percent of the total Rim Fire). The treatments approved on the NFS 

lands can meet multiple objectives including protecting habitat for post-fire species and allowing 

natural processes to occur.

26
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

5. Public Involvement

Due to the enormity of the Rim Fire, the tremendous public interest in management of the burned 

area, and the urgent need to begin project implementation, the Forest Service made unprecedented 

efforts to seek early and broad public involvement for this project. This public outreach began while 

the fire was still smoldering and continued up until the point of this decision. I sought input from 

individuals, non-profit groups, industry representatives, local governments, public agencies and 

Native American tribes. As a result, interested parties submitted a staggering amount of comments – 

in person, on the phone, in public meetings, and in thousands of letters and e-mails. This public input 

not only informed me of people’s opinions, but also contributed a breadth of experience and 

knowledge to the project design process. Ultimately, Modified Alternative 4 is the direct result of the 

robust public process that progressed over the last year.

Of particular value during the public involvement process several collaborative groups representing a 

wide range of values and opinions provided constructive, consensus input. One group, Yosemite 

Stanislaus Solutions (YSS), includes a wide variety of local stakeholders including timber industry, 

environmental groups, government agencies and others. YSS fosters partnerships among private, 

nonprofit, state, and federal entities with a common interest in the health and well-being of the 

landscape and communities in the Tuolumne River Watershed. The group fosters an all-lands strategy 

to create a heightened degree of environmental stewardship, local jobs, greater local economic 

stability, and healthy forests and communities. 

Another group, the Rim Fire Technical Workshop group, consists of scientists and representatives 

from state and national environmental organizations, the timber industry, and government entities 

with a more national or statewide interest-base. This group was organized through the efforts of the 

Sierra Nevada Conservancy, a State of California agency, the mission of which is to initiate, 

encourage, and support efforts that improve the environmental, economic and social well-being of the 

Sierra Nevada Region, its communities, and the citizens of California. 

The Forest Service met with both YSS and the Rim Fire Technical Workshop group on several 

occasions during the past year, including field trips into the burn area and all day workshops. These 

meetings were essential in helping the Forest Service understand the views of important segments of 

the public, while simultaneously engaging in productive discussions to seek solutions that would 

strike the right balance between the broad range of values that were represented. These meetings and 

discussions directly contributed to the scope and content of the DEIS. 

However, as a review of the public comment on the DEIS makes clear, there was no single, consensus 

recommendation on how to best manage the land impacted by the Rim Fire. Nonetheless, after the 

close of the comment period on the DEIS and while the agency was in the final stages of preparing 

the EIS, the Sierra Nevada Conservancy again convened representatives from conservation 

organizations and the timber industry in hopes of finding common ground. This new group requested 

a meeting to present a consensus proposal based on their previously submitted comments on the 

DEIS. As with any member of the public who wishes to meet with me and express their viewpoints, I 

listened to their proposal. It was similar in many ways to Alternative 4, but reduced the scope and 

footprint of Alternative 4 by: 1) eliminating all of the helicopter salvage units and most of the skyline 

salvage units (for environmental and economic reasons); 2) focusing salvage treatments within a 

smaller area and eliminating treatment units from the upper Clavey River watershed; and, 3) reducing 

timber volume to a level commensurate with the industry’s harvesting, hauling and milling capacity.

While the group proposed treating less of the area burned by the Rim Fire than I originally 

contemplated, their input helped shape my decision for two reasons. First, their proposal was a 

consensus recommendation from important interest groups that often have divergent views on land 

27
Stanislaus

National Forest

management. Many of the key points of disagreement that were evident in the comments on the DEIS 

were held by members of the timber industry and environmental groups. Therefore, I thought a 

proposal from this group warranted serious consideration and might reflect as good a balance as I 

could hope for to address my, and the public’s, goals for this project. Second, the representatives from 

the timber industry informed me that it was simply not feasible to treat the amount of acreage in 

Alternatives 1, 3 and 4, due to their most recent analyses of the local industry’s limited capacity and 

the progressive deterioration of the burned timber. 

Ultimately, I incorporated the majority of the group’s input in fashioning Modified Alternative 4. I 

did not incorporate all of their recommendations, since doing so would compromise some important 

fuel reduction and wildlife habitat enhancement actions that were part of Alternative 4. In the end, I 

believe that Modified Alternative 4 strikes a reasonable balance that will achieve project objectives 

and will be feasible to implement. And, it was only through the active and creative public input that I 

could reach this point. 

The key stages of public input through which this project progressed are described below; each of 

which provided essential input for my decision-making process. The Scoping Summary (project 

record) identifies specific details for 4 open houses, 21 meetings, 6 field trips, 2 webinars, 2 

workshops and other public involvement activities the Forest conducted since initial development of 

the Rim Recovery project.

5.01 INITIAL PUBLIC SCOPING ON THE PROPOSED ACTION

The Forest held its first field trip into the Rim Fire on October 16, 2013 with individuals from the 

Tuolumne Band of Me-Wuk Indians, Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center (CSERC), Sierra 

Club, Tuolumne County Alliance for Resources and Environment (TuCARE), California Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Audubon Society, Tuolumne County Supervisors, logging companies, sawmills, 

Sierra Nevada Conservancy and the local collaborative group YSS. On November 14, 2013 the Rim 

Fire Technical Workshop group toured the burn area with several stops and discussions with Forest 

Service managers and researchers.

Soon thereafter, the Forest Service began its scoping process, according to the Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1501.7). In addition to other public involvement, 

scoping initiates an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed in the 

EIS and for identifying the significant issues related to a proposed action. This scoping process allows 

the Forest Service not only to identify significant environmental issues deserving of study, but also to 

deemphasize insignificant issues, narrowing the scope of the EIS process accordingly (40 CFR 

1500.4(g)). 

The Forest Service first listed the Rim Recovery project online in the Stanislaus National Forest 

Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) on December 5, 2013. That same day, the Forest Supervisor 

sent a scoping letter and package to 131 individuals, permittees, organizations, agencies, and Tribes. 

The letter requested specific written comments on the Proposed Action during the initial 30-day 

opportunity for public participation. 

On December 6, 2013, The Forest Service published a Notice of Intent (NOI) that asked for public 

comment on the proposal (78 Federal Register 235, December 6, 2013; p. 73498-73499). Interested 

parties submitted 4,200 letters during the comment period, including 174 unique letters and 4,026 

form letters. Other interested parties submitted 3,627 form letters after the comment period closed.

During the 30-day scoping comment period the Forest Service held public open houses at the Forest 

Supervisor’s Office on December 13 and 14, 2013. The open houses were advertised on local radio 

stations, in the local newspaper, on the Stanislaus National Forest website, through a “tweet” to more 

28
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

than 68,000 followers, through direct mailings to those on the SOPA mailing list, and to those who 

showed interest in the project. Over 25 people attended the open houses, where the Forest described 

the preliminary purpose and need for the project as well as proposed recovery treatments. ID Team 

members participated and answered questions regarding the project and proposed action. The Forest 

hosted a Rim Fire Technical Workshop to share scoping information on December 18, 2013. 

Significant Issues

Based on public comments, the Forest developed significant issues to formulate and compare 

alternatives, prescribe mitigation measures, or analyze and compare the environmental effects of each 

alternative. The EIS (Chapter 1.08) fully describes the process used to identify these 6 significant 

issues: 1) Health and Safety; 2) Snag Forest Habitat; 3) New Road Construction; 4) Wildlife Habitat; 

5) Salvage Logging; and, 6) Soil and Watershed Impacts. 

5.02 CONTINUED SCOPING AFTER THE COMMENT PERIOD

After the initial 30-day scoping period, the Forest continued scoping with interested parties. The 

Forest hosted another Rim Fire Technical Workshop to share the development of alternatives status 

on January 31, 2014. The Forest described the alternatives developed since the initial scoping at a 

public open house on February 13, 2014 attended by over 50 people. The Forest organized field trips 

with the Tuolumne Band of Me-Wuks on March 13, 2014 and March 17, 2014 followed by a Tribal 

consultation day on May 9, 2014. 

The Forest organized 24 tours into the Rim Fire area for congressional aides, local government, and 

other interested parties. The Forest also provided monthly updates to the Tuolumne Board of 

Supervisor’s Natural Resources Committee. Forest Service representatives also spoke with many 

local and statewide businesses, interest groups and service clubs including Hetch Hetchy, TuCARE, 

Blue Ribbon Coalition, American Forest Resource Council, Range Permittees, Rotary Clubs, 

Stanislaus Wilderness Volunteers, Sierra Forest Legacy, timber operators and the Lions Club.

5.03 DEISCOMMENT PERIOD

The initial Notice of Availability (NOA) for the DEIS appeared in the Federal Register on May 16, 

2014 (79 Federal Register 95, May 16, 2014; p. 28508), followed by an amended notice on May 23 

(79 Federal Register 100, May 23, 2014; p. 29759-29760).The Forest Supervisor sent a DEIS 

notification letter to the 174 interested parties who submitted unique comments during scoping along 

with other individuals, permittees, organizations, agencies, and Tribes interested in this project on 

May 16, 2014, requesting specific written comments by the filing deadline of June 16, 2014. The 

Forest Service also published the DEIS on the internet 

[http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=43033]. 

During this period, the Forest produced materials for social media outlets, including tweets, web 

features and photo pages; and, distributed some 60,000 newspaper inserts throughout the region 

explaining many of the proposed activities. The Forest hosted a public open house on May 22, 2014; 

and, a webinars on May 30, 2014 and June 25, 2014 for a variety of interested stakeholders including 

Tuolumne River Trust, Berkeley Camp, and industry representatives. The Forest organized 3 field 

trips with the Tuolumne Band of Me-Wuks on June 11, June 18 and June 25, 2014. The Forest hosted 

a field trip into the Rim Fire area on June 16, 2014 with over 40 attendees including a CEQ official 

and representatives from various environmental organizations, industry and local government. 

Interested parties submitted 5,589 total comment letters on the DEIS including 154 unique individual 

letters and 5,435 form letters from 8 different organized groups. The Response to Comments (EIS 

29
Stanislaus

National Forest

Appendix F) identifies specific comments submitted during the comment period and the Forest 

Service responses.

While making this decision, I also considered recent information including late comments submitted 

after the comment period. For example, on August 21, 2014 (over two months after the close of the 

comment period) the Wild Nature Institute along with the John Muir Project of Earth Island Institute 

and the Center for Biological Diversity submitted comments related to potential effects on the 

California Spotted Owl. Given the lateness of that letter and our accelerated timeline, authorized by 

the President’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), the EIS Response to Comments does not 

specifically respond to that letter; however, I considered the information in that letter as follows: 1) 

the recent spotted owl survey data cited in the comment letter is information generated by the Forest 

Service, incorporated in the EIS, and shaped the final decision; therefore, the Forest Service 

considered this “new information”; 2) a great deal of the August 21, 2014 comment letter contains 

assertions related to information available at the time of the publication of the DEIS; therefore, any 

comments related to such information should have been included in comments on the DEIS; 3) the 

comment letter relies upon an extensive analysis of site occupancy was not subject to peer review; 4) 

the new owl survey data do not substantially change the scope of the action or the environmental 

consequences of the alternatives; therefore, a supplemental DEIS is not necessary pursuant to 40 

C.F.R. §1502.9; and, 5) both the EIS and this decision recognize that owls forage in burned forests, 

and the EIS analyzes the effects of the various alternatives based on this understanding; therefore, the 

underlying point raised in the August 21, 2014 comment letter, that implementing the Rim Recovery 

Project may adversely affect spotted owls in the area, was already addressed in the EIS and factored 

into this decision.

5.04 EISAND PROPOSED RECORD OF DECISION

In order to facilitate implementation of this project, the CEQ granted alternative arrangements in 

accordance with 40 CFR 1506.11 on December 9, 2013. With these alternative arrangements for the 

Rim Recovery project, CEQ specifically approved the following: 

 Shortened the public comment period for the draft EIS from 45 to 30 days. 

 Eliminated the minimum 90-day requirement between the Notice of Availability of the draft EIS 

and the publication of the Record of Decision (ROD). 

 Eliminated the 30-day waiting period between the publication of the final EIS and the ROD. 

CEQ also included the following requirements for the Forest: 

 Continue to enhance public and stakeholder engagement during the scoping initiated by the 

December 6, 2013 Notice of Intent to prepare the EIS. 

 Continue active engagement of interested parties throughout the preparation of the EIS.

 Continue communication with the Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions collaborative group. 

 Attend and continue communication with the Sierra Nevada Conservancy and parties 

participating in the Rim Fire Landscape Restoration Technical Workshop on December 18, 2013. 

 Post the Final EIS and proposed ROD on the Forest Service website for public review 5 to 10 

business days prior to publishing the official Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. 

I believe the public involvement record described in this section shows that the Forest fully complied 

with all of the CEQ requirements, culminating with posting of the EIS and proposed ROD to the 

internet on August 27, 2014. 

30
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

6. Legal and Regulatory Compliance

My decision complies with the laws, policies and executive orders listed below and described in EIS 

Chapter 3. 

6.01 FINDINGS REQUIRED BY LAWS AND REGULATIONS

The Rim Recovery project was prepared in accordance with the following laws and regulations. 

National Environmental Policy Act

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires that all major federal actions 

significantly affecting the human environment be analyzed to determine the magnitude and intensity 

of those impacts and that the results be shared with the public and the public given opportunity to 

comment. The regulations implementing NEPA further require that to the fullest extent possible, 

agencies shall prepare EISs concurrently with and integrated with environmental analyses and related 

surveys and studies required by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966, and other environmental review laws and executive orders. Other laws and 

regulations that apply to this project are described below. 

Clean Air Act

The Clean Air Act of 1970 provides for the protection and enhancement of the nation’s air resources. 

No exceeding of the federal and state ambient air quality standards is expected to result from any of 

the alternatives. The Clean Air Act makes it the primary responsibility of States and local 

governments to prevent air pollution and control air pollution at its source. 

California has a plan that provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the primary 

ambient air quality standards. This project is located in an area designated as non-attainment for 

Ozone. The burn treatments under Modified Alternative 4 will be conducted under an EPA approved 

California Smoke Management Program (SMP). Under the revised Conformity Rules the EPA has 

included a Presumption of Conformity for prescribed fires that are conducted in compliance with a 

SMP; therefore, the federal actions conform and no separate conformity determination is indicated 

(EIS Chapter 3.02). 

Clean Water Act

The Clean Water Act of 1948 (as amended in 1972 and 1987) establishes federal policy for the 

control of point and non-point pollution, and assigns the states the primary responsibility for control 

of water pollution. The Clean Water Act regulates the dredging and filling of freshwater and coastal 

wetlands. Section 404 (33 USC 1344) prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters 

(including wetlands) of the United States without first obtaining a permit from the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers. Wetlands are regulated in accordance with federal Non-Tidal Wetlands Regulations 

(Sections 401 and 404). No dredging or filling is part of this project and no permits are required. 

Compliance with the Clean Water Act by national forests in California is achieved under state law. 

The California Water Code consists of a comprehensive body of law that incorporates all state laws 

related to water, including water rights, water developments, and water quality. The laws related to 

water quality (sections 13000 to 13485) apply to waters on the national forests and are directed at 

protecting the beneficial uses of water. Of particular relevance for the Rim Recovery project is 

section 13369, which deals with non-point-source pollution and best management practices. As 

described in the EIS (Chapter 3.14), all actions in Alternative 4 (hence Modified Alternative 4 also) 

31
Stanislaus

National Forest

result in the maintenance of the applicable beneficial uses of water in the Water Quality Control Plan 

for the California Central Valley Water Quality Control Board. 

Endangered Species Act

Section 7 (d) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 requires that after initiation of 

consultation required under section 7(a)(2), a Federal agency “shall not make any irreversible or 

irretrievable commitment of resources with respect to the agency action which has the effect of 

foreclosing the formulation or implementation of any reasonable and prudent alternative which would 

not violate subsection (a)(2).” 

The Rim Fire started on August 17, 2013. Several days later, it became clear the Rim Fire was a large 

incident, the forest initiated contact with the USFWS to alert them of potential impacts from the fire 

or fire suppression activities to listed species, including valley elderberry longhorn beetle and listed or 

candidate amphibian species. Forest service biologists conducted a field trip with a USFWS biologist 

in the Rim Fire burn area on November 4, 2013 to discuss conditions and concerns for listed species. 

The Forest Service then prepared a Biological Assessment (BA) and a subsequent addendum 

following a meeting with USFWS, considering the effects to three federally listed species: California 

red-legged frog (Threatened), Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog (Endangered), and valley elderberry 

longhorn beetle (Threatened) are found within the project analysis area in Tuolumne County, 

California (USFWS 2014). That BA requested concurrence with the determination that the overall 

project ‘may affect, not likely to adversely affect” the valley elderberry longhorn beetle, and “may 

affect, likely to adversely affect” California red-legged frog and Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog. 

As such, the Forest Service engaged with the USFWS in formal consultation and requested a 

Biological Opinion (BO) in support of these determinations with the acknowledgement that effects to 

individuals or habitat are not discountable. 

The determination of “may affect, likely to adversely affect” for California red-legged frog and Sierra 

Nevada yellow-legged frog was limited to 7 locales. Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires Federal 

agencies, in consultation with USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), to insure 

that their actions are “not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any” listed species (or 

destroy or adversely modify its designated critical habitat; 16 U.S.C. § 1536(a)(2)). As such, my 

decision is that no operational implementation activities will occur in those 7 locales as part of this 

decision until such time as formal consultation with USFWS results in issuance of a BO.

Approval and operational implementation of Rim Recovery project activities outside of the 7 very 

limited locales referred to above during consultation and prior to completion of formal consultation 

with USFWS and issuance of a BO is consistent with the requirements of ESA Section 7(d) because 

approval and/or conduct of these activities will not foreclose the formulation or implementation of 

any Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) measures that may be necessary to avoid jeopardy (or 

the likely destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat). The project does not lie within a 

critical habitat unit for the California red legged frog per the Federal Register (March 17, 2010; 

Volume 75, Number 51) and is not within a proposed critical habitat unit for the Sierra Nevada 

yellow legged frog per the Federal Register (April 25, 2013; Volume 78, Number 80). 

Consistent with such, the Rim Recovery project unit specific treatments detailed in Table B.02-1 

(Appendix B) reflect project management requirements and the content of the BA and subsequent 

addendum including minimization measures. No operational implementation activities or treatments 

associated with the 7 very limited locales related to California red-legged frog and Sierra Nevada 

yellow-legged frog will be undertaken prior to completion of formal consultation with USFWS and 

issuance of a BO.

32
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Environmental Justice

Executive Order 12898 “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations 

and Low-Income Population” requires that federal agencies make achieving environmental justice 

part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and 

adverse human health and environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income populations. As described in the EIS (Chapter 3.10), Alternative 4 

(hence Modified Alternative 4 also) will not disproportionally impact minority or disadvantaged 

groups. 

Floodplain Management

Executive Order 11988 applies to Floodplain Management. Floodplains are found along stream 

channels throughout the project area. Implementation of this decision would maintain or improve the 

existing condition of these floodplains by maintaining or improving meadow conditions. The intent of 

Executive Order 11988 would be met since this project would not affect floodplains in the Rim 

Recovery analysis area and thereby would not increase flood hazard. As described in the EIS 

(Chapter 3.14) no measurable changes in stream flow are anticipated from treatment actions under 

Alternative 4 (hence Modified Alternative 4 also).

Migratory Bird Treaty Act

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act decreed that all migratory birds and their parts (including eggs, nests, 

and feathers) were fully protected. Under the Act, taking, killing or possessing migratory birds is 

unlawful. The original intent was to put an end to the commercial trade in birds and their feathers that 

had wreaked havoc on the populations of many native bird species. On January 17, 2001, President 

Clinton signed an executive order (Executive Order 13186) directing executive departments and 

agencies to take certain actions to further implement the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (FR Vol. 66, 

No.11, January 17, 2001). 

The Forest Service and USFWS entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to promote the 

conservation of migratory birds as a direct response to the executive order (USDA and USFWS 

2008). One of the steps outlined for the Forest Service is applicable to this analysis: “Within the 

NEPA process, evaluate the effects of agency actions on migratory birds, focusing first on species of 

management concern along with their priority habitats and key risk factors.” The Forest Service 

additionally agreed, to the extent practicable, to evaluate and balance benefits against adverse effects, 

to pursue opportunities to restore or enhance migratory bird habitat, and to consider approaches for 

minimizing take that is incidental to otherwise lawful activities.

This decision complies with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act but may result in an “unintentional take” 

of individuals during implementation of the approved actions. However the project complies with the 

USFWS Director’s Order #131 related to the applicability of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to Federal 

agencies and requirements for permits for “take”. In addition, this project complies with Executive 

Order 13186 because the analysis meets agency obligations as defined under the January 16,2001 

Memorandum of Understanding between the Forest Service and USFWS designed to complement 

Executive Order 13186 (Migratory and Landbird Conservation Report 2014). If new requirements or 

direction result from subsequent interagency memorandums of understanding pursuant to Executive 

Order 13186, this project would be reevaluated to ensure that it is consistent. 

National Forest Management Act

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) of 1976 amends the Forest and Rangeland Renewable 

Resources Planning Act of 1974 and sets forth the requirements for Land and Resource Management 

Plans for the National Forest System.

33
Stanislaus

National Forest

The Forest Service completed the Stanislaus National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 

(Forest Plan) on October 28, 1991. The “Forest Plan Direction” (USDA 2010a) presents the current 

Forest Plan management direction, based on the original Forest Plan, as amended. The Forest Plan 

identifies land allocations and management areas within the project area including: Wild and Scenic 

Rivers, Proposed Wild and Scenic Rivers, Critical Aquatic Refuge (CAR), Riparian Conservation 

Areas (RCAs), Near Natural, Scenic Corridor, Special Interest Areas, Wildland Urban Intermix, 

Protected Activity Centers (PACs), Old Forest Emphasis Areas, and Developed Recreation Sites. 

The Forest Plan and its amendments were prepared pursuant to the 1982 version of the National 

Forest Management Act (NFMA) planning regulations (36 C.F.R. § 219 (1983)). The current 

regulations, adopted in 2012 supersede those regulations, as well as other versions of the NFMA 

planning regulations (36 C.F.R. § 219.17(c) “This part supersedes any prior planning regulation.”). 

The current NFMA planning regulations do not apply to this project (36 C.F.R. § 219.7(c) “None of 

the requirements of this part apply to projects or activities on units with plans developed or revised 

under a prior planning rule ...”). Therefore, the sole NFMA duty applicable to this project is for the 

project to be consistent with the governing Forest Plan8

. 

The Forest Plan Compliance document (project record) identifies the Forest Plan S&Gs applicable to 

this project and provides related information about compliance with the Forest Plan. Based on my 

review of that document and other information in the project record, I determined that Modified 

Alternative 4 is consistent with the Forest Plan and all other requirements of the National Forest 

Management Act.

National Historic Preservation Act

The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 is the principal, guiding statute for the 

management of cultural resources on NFS lands. Section 106 of NHPA requires federal agencies to 

consider the potential effects of a Preferred Alternative on historic, architectural, or archaeological 

resources that are eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places and to afford the 

President’s Advisory Council on Historic Preservation an opportunity to comment. The criteria for 

National Register eligibility and procedures for implementing Section 106 of NHPA are outlined in 

the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Parts 60 and 800, respectively). Section 110 requires 

federal agencies to identify, evaluate, inventory, and protect National Register of Historic Places 

resources on properties they control. 

The Stanislaus National Forest developed a specialized agreement: “Programmatic Agreement 

Among United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Stanislaus National Forest, the 

California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

Regarding the Program of Rim Fire Emergency Recovery Undertakings, Tuolumne County, 

California” (Rim PA 2014). This agreement defines the Area of Potential Effects (APE) (36 CFR 

800.4(a)(1)) and includes a strategy outlining the requirements for cultural resource inventory, 

evaluation of cultural resources, and effect determinations; it also includes protection and resource 

management measures that may be used where effects may occur. Additionally, this agreement 

provides opportunities to remove both commercially valuable timber and hazard trees from within site 

boundaries utilizing a variety of harvest methods. 

8 The Forest Plan, although developed pursuant to the 1982 planning regulations, did not incorporate any specific aspects of those 

planning regulations. For example, the Forest Plan includes Management Indicator Species (MIS) and was designed to maintain the 

viability of wildlife species, as required by the former 36 C.F.R. § 219.19 regulations, the Forest Plan did not incorporate any of the 

particular legal requirements from the 1982 regulations related to MIS or viability. Therefore, the 1982 regulations are not directly 

applicable to this project.

34

 
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Protection of Wetlands

Executive Order 11990 requires protection of wetlands. Wetlands within the project area include 

meadows, stream channels, springs, fens, and shorelines. The EIS (Chapter 3.03 and Chapter 3.14) 

and the Watershed Report (project record) address wetlands and riparian vegetation. This project is 

consistent with Executive Order 11990 since this project would maintain or improve the condition of 

wetlands in the Rim Recovery project area (EIS Chapter 3.14).

6.02 FINDINGS RELATED TO SPECIAL AREAS

As summarized below, my decision complies with the laws, regulations and policies that pertain to 

Inventoried Roadless Areas, Special Interest Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and Wilderness. 

Inventoried Roadless Areas

The EIS (Chapter 3.01) describes all or portions of 3 Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) located on 

NFS lands within the Rim Fire perimeter: 1) the Cherry Lake IRA (1,000 acres) is located in the eastcentral portion of the Forest adjacent to the Emigrant Wilderness and Yosemite National Park; 2) the 

North Mountain IRA (8,100 acres) is located in the southeast part of the Forest adjacent to Yosemite 

National Park; and, 3) the Tuolumne River IRA (17,300 acres) is located in the southwest part of the 

Forest. It contains the lower Clavey River and about 18 miles of the Tuolumne Wild and Scenic 

River. 

My decision does not include any actions within or adjacent to these IRAs. Nearby short-term road 

maintenance and other project induced noise is consistent with the Roadless Area Characteristics9

identified in the 2001 Roadless Rule. Therefore, my decision is not likely to result in direct, indirect 

or cumulative effects on those characteristics.

Special Interest Areas

The EIS (Chapter 3.12) describes 3 Special Interest Areas (SIAs) located within the Rim Fire 

perimeter: Bourland Creek Trestle Historic Area; Pacific Madrone Botanic Area; and, Jawbone Falls 

Heritage Area. The Rim Recovery project does not include treatment units within or adjacent to the 

Bourland Creek Trestle SIA; therefore, that SIA was not included in the analysis. Forest Plan 

direction for SIAs is to protect values, make educational opportunities available and preserve the 

integrity of the special interest feature for which the areas were established (USDA 2010a, p. 129). 

Pacific Madrone SIA

Salvage and fuels reduction in the Pacific Madrone SIA will be conducted in such a way that 

approved actions will not damage the integrity of the unique botanical features, the madrone trees, or 

seedlings and saplings. 

Jawbone Falls SIA

Salvage and roadside hazard tree harvest would have no adverse effect to the Jawbone Falls SIA. Use 

of existing breaches within linear sites, such as historic railroad grades and trails, would cause no 

adverse effect to the Jawbone Falls SIA. Use of existing and development of new water sources are 

not anticipated to affect the Jawbone Falls SIA.

9 Roadless Area Characteristics are: high quality or undisturbed soil, water, and air; sources of public drinking water; diversity of plant 

and animal communities; habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species and for those species 

dependent on large, undisturbed areas of land; primitive, semi-primitive non- motorized, and semi-primitive motorized recreation 

opportunities; reference landscapes; natural appearing landscapes with high scenic quality; traditional cultural properties and sacred 

sites; and, other locally identified unique characteristics. (66 Federal Register 9, January 12, 2001; p. 3245)

35

 
Stanislaus

National Forest

Wild and Scenic Rivers

The EIS (Chapter 3.12) describes one congressionally designated and two proposed Wild and Scenic 

Rivers within the Rim Fire perimeter. All 29 miles of the designated Tuolumne Wild and Scenic 

River on NFS lands is within the Rim Fire perimeter. The Clavey Proposed Wild and Scenic River 

includes 33 miles of Wild and 14 miles of Scenic segments. The Rim Fire affected 23.5 miles of the 

47 mile river corridor: 7.3 miles of Scenic classification and 16.2 miles of Wild classification. All 

two miles of the South Fork Tuolumne Proposed Wild and Scenic River is within the Rim Fire 

perimeter.

Modified Alternative 4 will not affect the free flowing conditions of any Wild and Scenic Rivers 

since no approved actions occur in the river channels. No approved actions will occur within the 

Tuolumne Wild and Scenic River and South Fork Tuolumne Proposed Wild and Scenic River 

corridors. Hazard tree removal on portions of roads 1N01 and 2N40 will occur within the Clavey 

Proposed Wild and Scenic River corridor with short-term effects on the Scenic ORV that would be 

mitigated over time by regrowth of vegetation.

The approved actions outside the river corridors are of short duration and do not degrade the Fish, 

Scenic, Recreation or Wildlife Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORVs) which were affected by the 

Rim Fire itself. Where approved actions are within sight distance of Wild and Scenic Rivers, distance 

and geographic features obscure most treatments from the casual observer or users of those areas. 

Vegetation recovery, woody debris in stream channels and hazard reduction at recreation sites all 

contribute to the eventual recovery of these compromised values. Temporary effects on recreational 

opportunities may occur along roads or trails, or in areas, that are closed during project 

implementation. 

EIS Chapter 3.03 (Aquatic Species) and EIS Chapter 3.14 (Watershed) address effects on water-based 

(Fish and Water Quality) values. EIS Chapter 3.08 (Recreation) addresses effects on Recreation and 

Scenic values. EIS Chapter 3.15 (Wildlife) addresses effects on wildlife values. Based on the analysis 

in the EIS, effects on ORVs within the river corridors are minimal and short-term, and no negative 

cumulative effects are expected.

Wilderness

The EIS (Chapter 3.12) describes two congressionally designated Wildernesses within the Rim Fire 

Perimeter: the Emigrant Wilderness on NFS lands; and, the Yosemite Wilderness in Yosemite 

National Park. The geographic extent of that analysis is the Wilderness within one half mile of 

proposed activities. No approved actions will occur within the Wildernesses and no approved actions 

are adjacent to the Emigrant Wilderness. 

Three approved treatment units (O201A, O201B and P201) are directly adjacent to the Yosemite 

Wilderness. Modified Alternative 4 excludes salvage harvest in those 3 units; however, some of the 

dead material within these areas will be removed through fuels reduction in order to promote deer 

passage through this important area from Yosemite National Park to critical deer winter range on the 

Forest. Portions of treatment unit Q14A are within 0.25 miles and likely visible from the Yosemite 

Wilderness.

Based on the analysis in the EIS, Modified Alternative 4 would have minor effects on the natural 

character of the Yosemite Wilderness due to short-term actions adjacent to the Wilderness. Modified 

Alternative 4 also provides beneficial effects by reducing potential future fire spread and intensity, 

contributing to preserving and protecting Wilderness character, including the natural quality of the 

landscape within and outside the Wilderness. 

36
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

7. Implementation

Implementation of this decision may begin immediately after publication of the Notice of Availability 

in the Federal Register.

8. Administrative Review Opportunities

Emergency Situation Determination

In order to facilitate implementation of this project, the Forest Service Chief granted an Emergency 

Situation Determination (ESD) pursuant to 36 CFR 218.21 (78 Federal Register 59, March 27, 2013; 

p. 18481-18504) on April 23, 2014. An emergency situation is a situation on NFS lands for which 

immediate implementation of a decision is necessary to achieve one or more of the following: relief 

from hazards threatening human health and safety; mitigation of threats to natural resources on NFS 

or adjacent lands; avoiding a loss of commodity value sufficient to jeopardize the agency's ability to 

accomplish project objectives directly related to resource protection or restoration (36 CFR 

218.21(b)). The determination that an emergency situation exists is not subject to administrative 

review (36 CFR 218.21(c)). With an ESD granted, the project is not subject to the pre-decisional 

objection process (36 CFR 218.21(d)).

9. Contact Person

For additional information regarding this project, contact Maria Benech at the Stanislaus National 

Forest; 19777 Greenley Road; Sonora, CA 95370; or, call (209) 288-2116. 

10. Signature and Date

August 28, 2014 

SUSAN SKALSKI

Forest Supervisor

Stanislaus National Forest

Date

37
Stanislaus

National Forest

References

CDFW 2014e. Wildlife Report to Tuolumne County Natural Resource Committee. August 12, 2014. 

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 

Frazier, J. 2006. Mechanized Equipment Operations in Riparian Conservation Areas. Unpublished. 

Forest Service, Stanislaus National Forest. Sonora, CA 

Long, J. 2014. Research Brief: Impacts of Extreme Fires in the Sierra Nevada. Research Brief, April 

2014. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. Davis, CA 

Rim PA 2014. Programmatic Agreement Among United States Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Stanislaus National Forest, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding the Program of Rim Fire Emergency 

Recovery Undertakings, Tuolumne County California. August 1, 2014. 

Tingley, M.W., R.L. Wilkerson, and R.B. Siegel. 2014. Modelling expected density of black-backed 

woodpeckers at the Rim fire, California: a decision-support tool for post-fire management.

USDA 2002. Investigating water quality in the pacific southwest region: best management practices 

evaluation program user’s guide. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. Vallejo, CA

USDA 2004. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Final Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement and Record of Decision, Biological Opinion, Assessment, and Evaluation. Forest 

Service, Pacific Southwest Region. Vallejo, CA

USDA 2010a. Stanislaus National Forest, Forest Plan Direction, April 21, 2010. Plus errata. Forest 

Service, Stanislaus National Forest. Sonora, CA 

USDA 2011a. FSH 2509.22 Soil and Water Conservation Handbook, Chapter 10 Water Quality 

Management Handbook, Best Management Practices. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest 

Region. Vallejo, CA

USDA 2012a. National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National 

Forest System Lands, Volume 1-National Core BMP Technical Guide. FS-990a. Washington, 

DC.

USDA 2012b. Region 5 Soil Management Handbook Amendment – 2550 FSM Amendment. Forest 

Service, Pacific Southwest Region. Vallejo, CA

USDA 2014d. Rim Fire Recovery Draft Environmental Impact Statement. April 2014. Forest Service, 

Stanislaus National Forest. Sonora, CA 

USDA 2014e. Rim Fire Hazard Trees and Rim Fire Recovery Emergency Situation Determination 

Request Relevant Information. March 2014. Forest Service, Stanislaus National Forest. 

Sonora, CA 

USDA 2014f. Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for Big Hope Fire Salvage and 

Restoration Project. June 24, 2014. Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest. Nevada City, CA 

USDA and USFWS 2008. Memorandum of Understanding between the US Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service and the US Fish and Wildlife Service to promote the conservation 

of migratory birds. FS Agreement #08-MU-1113-2400-264. Washington, D.C. 

USFWS 2014. Federal endangered and threatened species that may be affected by projects in the 

Stanislaus National Forest. U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service 

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists_NF-form-page.htm 

(February 19, 2014). 

38
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

A. Management Requirements

Aquatic Species

1. Meet habitat needs for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) aquatic species: 

a. To avoid California red-legged frog (CRLF) take, fell trees away from 1) 0.16 miles of 

Middle Fork Tuolumne River located in unit V10; 2) 2.7 miles of unnamed stream (flowing 

out of Birch Lake) and tributary in unit U01D; and 3) Homestead pond located in unit Y02. 

b. Ensure CRLF cover is provided in the upland habitat located within unit U01D. Consultation 

between the Sale Administrator and an aquatic biologist will occur during harvest. If the area 

is found to be deficient in downed material, drop and lop dead trees 8 to 16 inches dbh 

uniformly across the landscape at a rate of 3 to 5 tons per acre. 

c. Prohibit mechanical operations within 1 mile of areas identified as suitable CRLF breeding 

habitat during the wet season (the first rainfall event depositing more than 0.25 inches of rain 

on or after October 15 until April 15). 

d. To minimize direct impacts to CRLFs, do not locate burn piles within 100 feet of Homestead 

Pond located in unit Y02 (suitable CRLF breeding habitat), within 50 feet of the 0.16 miles of 

Middle Fork Tuolumne River located in harvest unit V10, or within 50 feet of the 2.7 miles of 

unnamed stream (flowing out of Birch Lake) and tributary in harvest unit U01D (suitable 

CRLF aquatic non-breeding habitat). 

e. When igniting hand piles within 1 mile of suitable CRLF breeding habitat, ignite only on one 

side, not to exceed half the circumference of the pile, on the side furthest from the nearest 

aquatic feature.

f. Locate roads and landings at least 300 feet away from suitable CRLF breeding and nonbreeding aquatic habitat. Construction within 1 mile of suitable habitat must occur during the 

dry season (typically April 15 through October 15). Table A.01-1 shows road treatments for 

the breeding habitat areas.

g. Retain existing downed large woody debris 24 inches and greater in diameter at the small end 

that is either crossing a perennial channel or within 30 feet of the stream edge. Tops may be 

removed if fuel issues are a concern; however, 50 percent of the tree bole should remain in 

the RCA.

h. To minimize direct impacts to foothill yellow-legged frogs (FYLF), do not fall timber 

directly across the stream in units F11, F15, F17, F18, H13A, K01, K02, L01, L02B, L203 

and L205. This requirement also applies to hazard tree removal along roads: 1N36, 1N41, 

1N50, 1N50A, 1N50C and 1N79B. 

i. Prohibit equipment operations in unit U01B, within 300 feet of Abernathy Meadow and Big 

and Little Kibbie Ponds from June 1 through July 15 and during periods when these features 

have no standing water. 

j. Use screening devices on water drafting pumps and use pumps with low entry velocity to 

minimize impacts to aquatic species. A drafting box measuring 2 feet on all sides covered in a 

maximum of 0.25 inch screening is required. 

k. Provide a minimum of 5 standing dead trees per acre within RCAs adjacent to all perennial 

channels that are within or bordering salvage units. These snags should have the largest 

diameters possible and be located within 100 feet of the edge of the active channel. 

l. To minimize direct impact to western pond turtle, limit the ground based equipment to the 

maximum extent possible in units S01, S04 (within 0.25 mile of the South Fork Tuolumne 

River), V10 and V14B between June 1 and July 15. 

m. Follow any additional site specific Management Requirements provided by the Fish and 

Wildlife Service within their Biological Opinion for this project.

39
Appendix A Stanislaus

Management Requirements National Forest

Table A.01-1 Units and roads associated with California red-legged frog breeding habitat

Breeding 

Habitat Treatment Units Hazard Tree Removal Road Treatments

Drew Creek W03, V06, V10 01N10, 01N10C, 01S30, 01S30B, 01S52, 01S58, 

01S58A, 01S58B, 01S58E, 01S58F, 01S61, 01S99Y, 

18E217, 18E219, 18EV420, 18EV421, 18EV422, 

18EV424, FR14720, FR14722, FR1981, FR36710, 

FR4100, FR4875, FR7858, FR9139

Temporary Road: 

FR4100, 18EV420, 

18EV422

Birch Lake 

and Mudd 

Lake

U01A, Q14A, 

Q14B, Q15, Q16

01S19, 01S19A, 01S20Y, 01S32, 01S68Y, 01S96, 

19EV211, 19EV214, FR8799

Reconstruct: 

01S18Y, 01S19, 

01S19A, 01S20Y, 

01S32, 01S68Y, 

01S96, 19EV214

Homestead 

Pond

Y021, Y031 01N10, 01S08YA, 01S21Y, 01S23E, 01S48Y, FR9772, 

TR9835

Reconstruct: 

01S08Y, 01S08YA, 

FR98671

Hunter Creek 

and ponds

none 01N01H, 01N01K, 01N02, 01N02B, 01N13, 01N13A, 

01N13B, 01N17, 01N17A, 01N18, 01N18A, 01N19, 

01N25, 01N25A, 01N25B, 01N27, 01N27A, 01N27B, 

01N34Y, 01N35, 01N38, 01N38A, 01N39, 01N40, 01N43, 

01N43B, 01N43C, 01N43D, 01N48, 01N48A, 01N48B, 

01N54, 01N67, 01N78, 02N11D, 02N11F, 11624B, 

11624C, 11708A, 11708B, 11717B, 11719C, 11721E, 

11728B, 11728C, 11729A, 11730C, 11731A, 16E179, 

18E317, FR7965

none

Harden Flat 

Ponds

R15, S11, V14B, 

X251, X1041, 

X109A1

, X109B1, 

X115, X116, 

X1201

01S03B, 01S62, 01S75, 01S75Y 01S03B, 01S09, 

01S62, 01S64, 

01S75Y, FR5310

1 Unit includes Fuels and Watershed treatments only. All other treatment units include Salvage and Fuel Reduction.

Cultural Resources

2. Project implementation shall also comply with the Programmatic Agreement Among United 

States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Stanislaus National Forest, the California State 

Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding the 

Program of Rim Fire Emergency Recovery Undertakings, Tuolumne County, California (Rim PA 

2014). 

a. All sites will be delineated on the ground prior to implementation to prevent impacts during 

planned treatment activities.

b. Any tree inadvertently felled into a cultural site boundary is to be left in place until the 

incident is evaluated by the Heritage Resource specialist and recommendations made to the 

deciding official.

c. If a transportation corridor is found to contain an archaeological deposit, all efforts shall be 

made to avoid using that portion of the travel-way. Alternatively, two foot padding may be 

placed on the travel-way to protect the resource if the placement of the padding is determined 

sufficient for resource protection by the Forest Engineer. In addition, the pads should be 

easily distinguished from the underlying deposit. 

d. In the event that new cultural resources are discovered during project implementation, the 

district archaeologist must be notified and all activities in the vicinity (150 feet) of the 

resource shall cease until consultations are completed; in accordance with the PA.

e. Heritage Resource Surveys: conduct surveys to determine presence of resources following 

Regional and Rim PA standards. 

40
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

f. SHPO Consultation: Forest Service consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer 

(SHPO) to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (must be 

completed prior to implementation). 

Fire and Fuels

3. Complete all burning under approved burn and smoke management plans. Acquire burn permits 

from the appropriate county Air Pollution Control District(s) which will determine when burning 

is allowed. The California Air Resources Board provides daily information on "burn" or "no 

burn" conditions. Design and implement burn plans to minimize particulate emissions. 

4. Retain 10 to 20 tons per acre coarse woody debris greater than 3 inches. The goal is to maintain a 

total fuel load of 10 tons per acre, and not to exceed 20 tons per acre when it is needed to meet 

other resource requirements. Do not exceed 5 tons per acre woody debris less than 3 inches in 

diameter.

5. Do not exceed 12 inch fuel depth within SPLATs and 18 inch fuel depth outside SPLATs. 

6. Whole tree yard merchantable trees within ground based salvage units where fuel levels exceed 

desired amounts.

7. Place all fuel piles as far from Wilderness and National Park boundaries as possible. Place piles 

behind remaining vegetation/topography and out of view.

Invasive Species

8. Prevent introduction and spread of noxious weeds. Conduct a pre-project implementation 

invasive plant inventory of all project areas subject to project associated ground disturbance. This 

inventory, along with previous survey information, will be utilized to implement the requirements 

below. 

a. Flag and avoid infestations of high and moderate priority weeds in all project locations 

subject to ground disturbance from either mechanical or foot traffic (e.g. project units, 

staging/landing areas, turnouts, roads). Units currently included are: B32, D04B, F11, F16, 

F23A, H11, H12X, K02, L04, L202, L203, L204, L205, L206, M202A, M203, N01A 

through N01J, Q14A, R04A, R04B, R12X, R17X, R19A, R19B, R19D, S02, S03, V10, V13, 

V14B, V14C, X04, X06, X116, X118X and X119X. 

b. In areas needed for implementation of the planned activities, manually treat new or 

expanding portions of post-Rim Fire infestations before seed dispersal. Manual treatment will 

entail the cutting, digging, or pulling of all flower heads and/or vegetative reproductive parts 

(i.e. rhizomatous root parts). The Weed Risk Assessment (project record) describes species 

specific treatments.

c. Where re-using landing and/or staging areas is necessary, the topsoil (top 6-8 inches) may be 

pushed into a wind-row and covered to prevent seed dispersal. Topsoil will be pushed back 

into place following project completion.

d. Conduct maintenance activities in a manner which reduces the risk of weed spread, such as: 

avoiding soil movement out of weed sites; grading toward weed infestations, not away; or 

utilizing manual methods. 

e. Implement the equipment cleaning requirements in the standard contract provisions for all 

contract operations and activities. 

f. The Forest Service will designate the order, or progression, of unit completion to emphasize 

treating uninfested units before treating infested units to reduce the risk of weed spread from 

infested units into uninfested units. Clean equipment before moving from infested sites and 

prior to being transported from the project area. 

g. Use certified weed-free mulches (woodstraw and rice straw are preferred) where available. 

Stage these materials in weed-free sites only.

41
Appendix A Stanislaus

Management Requirements National Forest

h. Obtain construction materials, including crushed rock, drain rock, riprap and soil, from 

sources free of high and moderate priority weeds. If sources do contain these priority weeds 

either flag and avoid or move topsoil to a nearby location that will not be disturbed and cover. 

Range

9. Protect range resources:

a. Maintain existing cattleguards to Forest Service standards during post-harvest maintenance.

b. Avoid damage to rangeland infrastructure (fences, water developments, cattleguards) during 

project implementation. 

c. Any serviceable or intact infrastructure that is damaged during implementation must be 

repaired to Forest Service standards. 

d. Avoid snag retention adjacent to critical range infrastructure.

Recreation

10. Protect recreation resources:

a. No log truck hauling will occur on Evergreen Road or Cherry Lake Road: from July 3 

through July 5; during Memorial Day and Labor Day weekends (3:00 p.m. Friday through 

Monday); or, on other weekends (3:00 p.m. Friday through Sunday) between Memorial Day 

and Labor Day. 

b. No operations on weekends beginning Memorial Day through Labor Day in areas adjacent to 

Lost Claim and Sweetwater Campgrounds (units Y01B, Y01D, V12A and V12B). 

c. Identify and protect National Forest System Trails (NFST) during operations. Trails, if 

damaged, will be restored in kind according to Forest Service standards including the 

placement of rolling dips. 

d. Close skid trails to motorized travel with earth berms, logs and/or rocks after operations are 

complete. Do not use stumps or root wads to close skid trails. 

e. Avoid using water sources in developed recreation sites while facilities are open to public 

use.

Sensitive Plants

11. Ensure consistency with Forest Plan and other direction for sensitive and watch list plants.

a. For roadside hazard tree abatement, where it is not possible to fully avoid a Sensitive Plant 

occurrence, a botanist will review the site with the Sale Administrator and advise on the least 

impactive method to use for the site, such as timing of impacts, directionally fall trees away 

from dense concentrations, full suspension removal of the log, partial suspension, or buck and 

leave the log.

b. Hide, obscure or block appearance of motorized access created by the project to “lava cap” 

habitats. Existing patches of live or dead brush or other vegetation on the edges of the “lava 

caps” can be utilized for this purpose.

c. In order to protect occurrences of Peltigera gowardii, conduct project activities in such a way 

that sediment is not added to or accumulates within occurrences, especially in Corral Creek at 

Sections 17 and 20, T1N, R18E, the unnamed tributary to Clavey River in Section 18, T1N, 

R18E; the unnamed tributary to Skunk Creek in Section 21, T1N, R18E; and, Twomile Creek 

in Section 36, T3N, 17E; and Section 1, T2N, R17E. 

d. During helicopter salvage operations, avoid flying logs over cliff habitats in and adjacent to 

unit X23. Off-road equipment will not track within 25 feet of the bases or tops of cliffs and 

large rock outcrops, or through gravelly openings with shallow soils in units X18, X19 and 

X23 nor in the roadside hazard tree removal of Forest Roads 1S60Y, 1S79, 1S80, 2S65D, 

2S66Y, and 2S66YA. Manual removal of fuels, directional felling and tree removal using an 

articulating arm or equipment which allows for full suspension may occur in these equipment 

42
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

exclusion areas during the dry, non-growing period for the rare plant species, approximately 

July 1 through November 30 

e. Avoid adverse effects to Pacific Madrone (Arbutus menziesii), Tanoak (Notholithocarpus 

densiflorus), California nutmeg (Torreya californica) and Sierra sweet bay (Myrica 

hartwegii) trees and saplings during all project activities. During reconstruction activities, 

avoid these species unless the trees or saplings create a safety hazard or interfere with the 

integrity of the road surface. Prune limbs to obtain sight distance rather than masticate the 

trees or saplings.

f. Flag and avoid known and new occurrences of Sensitive Plants except as allowed below: 

1. Manual fuel reduction may take place within Clarkia australis, Clarkia biloba ssp. 

australis, Mimulus filicaulis or Mimulus pulchellus occurrences only during the dry nongrowing period (Table A.01-2). Pile or scatter all material outside Sensitive Plant 

occurrences.

2. Mastication and skid trail legacy compaction subsoiling may be conducted within Clarkia 

australis occurrences only during the dry non-growing period (Table A.01-2). Do not 

track masticator through occurrences smaller than 0.25 acre. Minimize tracking in 

occurrences larger than 0.25 acres. Wherever possible, reach into occurrences with 

masticator head to conduct the work instead of tracking through. 

g. In order to protect the habitat for the Sensitive Plants which occupy “lava cap” soils all 

equipment and vehicles will remain on roads through this habitat type (i.e. no parking off 

road, landing construction or staging areas). 

Table A.01-2 Growing seasons and appropriate identification periods for select Sensitive Plants

Species Growing Season Identification Period Dry, Non-growing Period1

Clarkia australis December 1 - August 15 June 15 - August 15 August 15 - November 30

Clarkia biloba ssp. australis December 1 - July 31 May 15 - July 15 August 1 - November 30

Mimulus filicaulis March 15 - July 15 April 15 - June 30 July 15 - November 30

Mimulus pulchellus March 1 - June 15 April1 - June 1 June 15 - November 30 1 The actual dry, non-growing period will be determined by field observations year to year by a Botanist. The dry, non-growing period is 

the time when these species are most resistant to disturbance activities. All dates are approximate, varying with elevation, weather and 

site conditions.

Soils

12. Forest Service Manual 2550-Soil Management-R5 Supplement (USDA 2012b) and Forest Plan 

Direction (USDA 2010a) provide standards and guidelines for soil management and are the basis 

for soil requirements to minimize potential impacts: 

a. In high burn severity areas, leave a 20 foot buffer of small trees (non-merchantable) adjacent 

to motorized trail segments, and 10 to 20 tons of surface material. 

b. Ground-based operations will occur when soil moisture is relatively dry in the 4 to 8 inch 

depth range. Consultation with a Soil Scientist will occur prior to start-up of operations. 

Suspend operations whenever soil moisture conditions are such that excessive damage would 

occur. In high burn severity areas, use the Very High Erosion Hazard Rating when 

considering application of erosion control measures. 

c. Where present, maintain soil cover, surface organic matter and soil organic matter consistent 

with the Forest Plan. If the existing condition is deficient, watershed specialists may prescribe 

activities to increase soil cover on sensitive soils or where accelerated runoff and erosion 

could pose unacceptable risk to resources as a result of the planned activities. These activities 

could include mastication or lop and scatter of trees less than 10 inches for mastication and 

up to 16 inches for drop and lop, a cut-to-length logging system, drop and leave, certified 

weed-free straw mulch applications or seeding with approved native seed. Generally, these 

43
Appendix A Stanislaus

Management Requirements National Forest

treatments would only be considered in units with greater than 15 percent slopes, high 

Erosion Hazard Ratings and an existing or predicted deficiency in ground cover that would 

persist longer than one season. 

d. Use existing skid trails and landings except where unacceptable resource damage may result 

(i.e. skid trails running on 40 percent slope). Limit disturbed skid trail footprint (main and 

branching secondary trails) to less than 15 percent of the unit area or to the existing disturbed 

area.

e. Subsoil main skid trails and waterbar remaining skid trails prior to each winter season and 

unit close out. Subsoiling will occur on all primary skid trails and on secondary skid trails 

found to be creating an unacceptable risk to soil or water resources. In addition, landings and 

temporary roads will be subsoiled and all erosion control measures applied after use is 

completed. Subsoiling may be excluded from areas of high soil sensitivity, such as shallow or 

rocky soils, when recommended by a soil scientist. Obliterate out-sloped berms. Outslope reused skid trails where gullies formed from water concentration along insloped segments. 

f. Segments of pre-existing skid trails and landings causing watershed issues (i.e. concentrating 

water, gullying) will be subsoiled and waterbarred for resource protection, including those 

not used during implementation. 

g. Limit ground based equipment to less than 35 percent slopes unless a soil scientist evaluates 

operations on the steeper slopes. Feller bunchers may do short pitches up to 45 percent slope. 

Terrestrial Wildlife

13. Ensure consistency with Forest Plan and Regional Conservation strategies for terrestrial wildlife. 

Protected Activity Centers (PACs) apply to spotted owls, goshawks, and great gray owls. 

a. Provide for a Forest Carnivore Connectivity Corridor (FCCC) for fisher and marten, linking 

Yosemite National Park, the North Mountain inventoried roadless area west to the Clavey 

River, by managing the following salvage units to Old Forest Emphasis Area (OFEA) snag 

and down woody material retention standards: L02A, L02AX, L05AX, M1 through M10, 

M12, M13, M15, M16, M18, M19, and N01A through N01J. 

b. Snag retention in OFEA, Home Range Core Area (HRCA) and FCCC units: the intent is to 

retain legacy structure where it exists for long-term resource recovery needs (i.e., the 

development of future old forest habitat with higher than average levels of large conifer snags 

and down woody material). Retain all hardwood snags greater than or equal to 12 inches 

diameter at breast height (dbh). Retain an average of 30 square feet of basal area of conifer 

snags across each unit by starting at the largest snag and working down, with a minimum of 

four and a maximum of 6 per acre. 

c. In OFEA, HRCA, FCCC, and in roadside hazard units within PACs, retain the largest size 

classes of down woody material at a rate of 15 to 20 tons per acre on a unit basis. In all units, 

emphasize down woody material retention greater than 100 feet from roadsides. 

d. Where roadside hazard treatments are within PACs and HRCAs, add acreage to the PAC 

and/or HRCA equivalent to the treated acres of the most suitable habitat available.

e. Within viable post-fire PACs, flag and avoid current and historic nest trees and avoid altering 

screening vegetation within 500 feet; if hazard abatement is deemed immediately necessary, 

coordinate with a wildlife biologist and with other disciplines (e.g. recreation) as needed to 

identify options for the deciding official. 

f. Reduce LOPs in PACs to 0.25 mile area around a nest site if surveys are conducted.

g. Within critical winter deer range and migration corridors, remove or pile and burn nonmerchantable material to protect remnant oaks and achieve desired cover/forage ratios 

identified in collaboration with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and partners. 

This includes units L03, L04, L07, L201 through L206, M201 through M204, O201A, 

O201B and P201. 

44
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

h. Flag and avoid hardwood aggregations and meadows and seeps within units. Aggregations 

are 0.1 to 0.5 acre groups of sprouting hardwood or of meadow/seep vegetation. Groups or 

meadows/seeps may be linear along drainages. Reaching in and end lining allowed. Groundbased equipment prohibited. Exceptions should be limited but may be made for operability in 

consultation with the sale administrator and project biologist.

i. In all units retain:

1. All large hardwood snags greater than or equal to 12 inches dbh.

2. A minimum of 4 snags (in the largest size class available) per acre averaged across ten 

acres in mixed conifer forest type. 

3. A minimum of six snags per acre in red fir forest type.

4. The largest size classes of dead and downed logs greater than or equal to 12 inches in 

diameter at the midpoint at a rate of 10 to 20 tons per acre. 

j. Maintain a LOP prohibiting vegetation treatments, new construction, blasting, landing 

construction, and helicopter flight paths within 0.25 mile of a PAC during the breeding 

season for California spotted owls (March 1 through August 31), northern goshawks 

(February 15 through September 15), great gray owls (March 1 through August 15) and 

within 0.5 miles of the known bald eagle nest (January 1 through August 31) unless surveys 

conducted by a Forest Service biologist confirm non-nesting status. 

k. Conduct surveys in compliance with the Pacific Southwest Region’s survey protocols to 

establish or confirm the location of the nest activity center for spotted owl, great gray owl and 

goshawk.

l. Flag and avoid elderberry plants greater than one inch stem diameter that occur below 3,000 

feet elevation and within 100 feet of planned activities (units V10, V12A, V12B, V13, V14B, 

X15, X16, X25, Y01A, Y01C, and Y01D and roads identified for hazard tree removal).

1. Prohibit ground based mechanical operations and burning within 50 feet of elderberry 

plants.

2. Pile burning and mechanical activities within 100 feet of flagged shrubs will be subject to 

an LOP from April 1 through June 30 of any given year to avoid fire and dust impacts to 

beetles.

3. If additional elderberry shrubs with stems over 1 inch diameter are found prior to or 

during project implementation, they will be similarly avoided and the District wildlife 

biologist will be notified immediately and adequate mitigation measures will be taken.

m. Notify the District Wildlife Biologist if any Federally Threatened, Endangered, Candidate 

species or any Region 5 Forest Service Sensitive species are discovered during project 

implementation so that LOPs or other protective measures can be applied, if needed.

Vegetation

14. Apply a registered borate compound to all freshly cut fir stumps 14 inches and greater in diameter 

(green trees only) to limit the spread and establishment of new centers of annosum root disease 

within harvest areas where live trees still exist. Do not apply fungicide within 10 feet of surface 

water, when rain is falling or when rain is likely that day (i.e. National Weather Service forecasts 

50 percent or greater chance); follow all State and Federal rules and regulations as they apply to 

pesticides. 

15. Protect and avoid all surviving proven and candidate rust resistant sugar pine trees during 

operations. 

45
Appendix A Stanislaus

Management Requirements National Forest

Watershed

16. Management requirements designed to protect water quality and watershed conditions are derived 

from Regional and National BMPs (USDA 2011a, USDA 2012a) and Riparian Conservation 

Objectives (RCOs) (USDA 2004). Riparian resources within Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) and the Critical Aquatic Refuge (CAR) will be protected through compliance with the 

RCOs outlined in the Forest Plan (USDA 2010a). BMPs protect beneficial uses of water by 

preventing or minimizing the threat of discharge of pollutants of concern. BMPs applicable to this 

project are listed below with site-specific requirements and comments. Project planners and 

administrators (e.g., layout, Sale Administrator, Contracting Officer Representative) are 

responsible for consulting with a hydrologist and/or soil scientist prior to or during project 

implementation for interpretation, clarification, or adjustment of watershed management 

requirements.

Table A.01-3 Operating requirements for mechanized equipment operations in RCAs

Stream Type1 Zone Width

(feet)

Equipment

Requirements Element Operating Requirements

Perennial/

Intermittent 

and Special 

Aquatic 

Features 

(SAFs)

Exclusion 0 - 15 Mechanical 

Harvesting/

Shredding2: Prohibited

0 - 50 Skidding3: Prohibited

Transition 15 - 100 Mechanical 

Harvesting/

Shredding: Allowed

Streamcourse 

Debris

Remove activity-created woody debris to 

above the high water line of stream 

channels

Vegetation Retain remaining post-fire obligate riparian 

shrubs and trees that have live crown 

foliage or are resprouting (e.g., willows, 

alder, dogwoods and big leaf maples)

Streambanks Do not damage streambanks with 

equipment.

50 - 100 Skidding: Allowed Skid Trails Use existing skid trails except where 

unacceptable impact would result. Do not 

construct new primary skid trails within 

100 feet of the stream

Stream 

Crossings

The number of crossings should not 

exceed an average of 2 per mile

Outer 

(Perennial/SAFs)

100 -

300

Mechanical 

Harvesting/ Shredding/ 

Skidding: Allowed 

Skid Trails Allow skid trail density and intensity to 

gradually increase with distance from the 

Transition Zone

Outer 

(Intermittent)

100 -

150

Mechanical 

Harvesting/ Shredding/ 

Skidding: Allowed

Skid Trails Allow skid trail density and intensity to 

gradually increase with distance from the 

Transition Zone

Ephemeral Exclusion 0 - 15 Mechanical 

Harvesting/

Shredding: Prohibited

0 - 25 Skidding: Prohibited

Transition 15 - 50 Mechanical 

Harvesting/

Shredding: Allowed

25 - 50 Skidding: Allowed Stream 

Crossings

The number of crossings should not 

exceed an average of 3 per mile

1 Perennial streams flow year long. Intermittent streams flow during the wet season but dry by summer or fall. Ephemeral streams flow 

only during or shortly after rainfall or snowmelt. Special aquatic features (SAFs) include lakes, meadows, bogs, fens, wetlands, vernal 

pools and springs.

2 Low ground pressure track-laying machines such as feller bunchers and masticators. 3 Rubber-tired skidders and track-laying tractors.

46
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

a. Mechanized Equipment Operations within RCAs/CAR. On the Stanislaus National 

Forest, ground-based mechanized equipment operations in RCAs are divided into three zones. 

The exclusion zone, at the edge of streams or wetlands, prohibits mechanized equipment use. 

Next, the transition zone allows light mechanized activity. Last, the outer zone allows activity 

to increase to standard operations beyond the RCA. Together, these zones comprise a wide, 

graduated RCA buffer zone intended to achieve RCOs as well as vegetation management 

objectives. The purpose of mechanized RCA operations is to reduce fuel loading and improve 

riparian vegetation community condition close to streams and wetlands. These operations are 

carefully conducted to prevent detrimental soil impacts and retain a high percentage of 

ground cover in the RCA. Where ground cover is minimal in an RCA, such as following 

wildfire, specialized low ground pressure vehicles become the primary type of equipment 

used. They minimize disturbance during timber removal operations and can be used to 

increase ground cover by chipping and distributing woody debris. Forest guidance for 

Mechanized Equipment Operations in RCAs (Frazier 2006) as summarized above was 

developed for RCA vegetation management operations in unburned areas. It has since been 

revised to include post-wildfire operations. Table A.01-3 provides a summary of the 

operating requirements for mechanical operations in RCAs. 

b. Management Requirements Incorporating BMPs and Forest Plan S&Gs. Table A.01-4 

presents management requirements pertaining to: erosion control plans; operations in RCAs; 

road activities; stream crossings; log landings; skid trails; suspended log yarding; water 

sources, rock borrow pits/quarries, slope and soil moisture limitations, servicing and refueling 

of equipment; burn piles; application of registered borate compound; water quality 

monitoring; and, cumulative watershed effects. 

Table A.01-4 Management requirements incorporating BMPs and Forest Plan S&Gs

Management Requirements BMPs/Forest Plan1/Locations

Erosion Control Plan

- Prepare a project area Erosion Control Plan (USDA 2011a) approved by the 

Forest Supervisor prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing project 

activities. Prepare a BMP checklist before implementation.

Regional BMPs

2-13 Erosion Control Plans (roads and other 

activities)

1-13 Erosion Prevention and Control 

Measures During Operations

1-21 Acceptance of Timber Sale Erosion 

Control Measures before Sale Closure

National Core BMPs

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Forest Plan S&Gs

194 (RCO 4)

Locations: all areas where ground-disturbing 

activities occur.

Operations in Riparian Conservation Areas

- Delineate riparian buffers along streams and around special aquatic features 

within project treatment units as described above in Table A.01-3.

- Fell trees harvested within RCAs directionally away from stream channels and 

SAFs unless otherwise recommended by a hydrologist or biologist. Fall hazards 

trees that cannot be removed either parallel to the contour of the slope or into the 

channel, as recommended by a hydrologist or biologist.

- Maintain or provide ground cover (e.g., maintain post-fire conifer needle cast; 

provide logging slash, straw, wood chips, felled or masticated small burned trees) 

within 100 feet of perennial and intermittent streams and SAFs to the maximum 

extent practicable to minimize erosion and sedimentation. A minimum of 50% well 

distributed ground cover is desired. 

- Minimize turning mechanical harvesters/shredders in the RCA Transition Zone to 

limit disturbance.

- Exclude mechanized equipment between the near-stream roads that closely 

parallel both sides of Corral Creek [1N01, 1N08 on the west and 1N74 (south of 

junction with 1N74C) and 1N74C on the east] unless otherwise recommended by 

a hydrologist or soil scientist. Smooth out all end lining ruts within this area. The 

maximum mechanized equipment exclusion width is the RCA width (300 feet).

Regional BMPs

1-4 Using Sale Area Maps and/or Project 

Maps for Designating Water Quality 

Protection Needs

1-8 Streamside Zone Designation

1-10 Tractor Skidding Design

1-18 Meadow Protection During Timber 

Harvesting

1-19 Streamcourse and Aquatic Protection

5-3 Tractor Operation Limitations in Wetlands 

and Meadows

5-5 Disposal of Organic Debris

7-3 Protection of Wetlands

National Core BMPs

Aq Eco-2 Operations in Aquatic Ecosystems

Plan-3 Aquatic Management Zone Planning

Veg-1 Vegetation Management Planning

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Veg-3 Aquatic Management Zones

47
Appendix A Stanislaus

Management Requirements National Forest

Management Requirements BMPs/Forest Plan1/Locations

- The Sale Administrator shall coordinate with a hydrologist prior to operating 

around Scout Spring Gully (Unit T22).

- The Sale Administrator shall coordinate with a hydrologist prior to operating in unit 

T27B to protect the Bear Gully restoration site, the stream channel downstream of 

the site, and the alluvial flat.

- In areas with less than 50% soil cover and slopes greater than 15%, the following 

requirements apply:

- From 0-50 feet from perennial and intermittent stream banks, smooth out feller 

buncher or end lining ruts greater than 4 inches in depth.

- From 50-100 feet from perennial and intermittent stream banks, smooth out 

feller buncher or end lining ruts greater than 4 inches in depth or waterbar these 

ruts following the waterbar spacing guidelines for a very high erosion hazard 

rating. 

- Increase the ground-based equipment exclusion zone in RCAs to 100 feet on 

slopes greater than 25% with slope lengths greater than 100 feet, high burn 

severity, and immediately adjacent to perennial and intermittent channels within 

the following units: D04B, D12, E01B, E02, E03B, F11, G01, G03B, L02D, M01, 

M05A, M15, N01I, R16, S02, S04, T04B, T04C, T27B, U03, V13, V14B, V14C. 

Prior to implementation, these sites will be evaluated in the field by a hydrologist 

or soil scientist to identify on the ground areas where exclusion is required.

Veg-4 Ground-Based Skidding and Yarding 

Operations

Forest Plan S&Gs

193 (RCO 2)

194 (RCO 3)

194 (RCO 4)

195 (RCO 5)

Locations: All units containing RCAs and 

SAFs, and specifically the portions of units 

mentioned in this section of Table A.01-4.

Road Construction and Reconstruction

- Maintain erosion-control measures to function effectively throughout the project 

area during road construction and reconstruction, and in accordance with the 

approved erosion control plan.

- Stabilize disturbed areas with certified weed free mulch, erosion fabric, vegetation, 

rock, large organic materials, engineered structures, or other measures according 

to specification and the erosion control plan.

- Set the minimum construction limits needed for the project and confine 

disturbance to that area.

- Adjust surface drainage structures to minimize hydrologic connectivity by: 

discharging road runoff to areas of high infiltration and high surface roughness; 

armoring drainage outlets to prevent gully initiation; and, increasing the number 

drainage facilities within RCAs.

- Minimize diversion potential by installing diversion prevention dips that can 

accommodate overtopping runoff. Place diversion prevention dips downslope of 

crossing, rather than directly over the crossing fill, and in a location that minimizes 

fill loss in the event of overtopping. Armor diversion prevention dips when the 

expected volume of fill loss is significant.

- Locate and designate waste areas before operations begin. Deposit and stabilize 

excess and unsuitable materials only in designated sites. Do not place such 

materials on slopes with a high risk of mass failure, in areas subject to overland 

flow (e.g., convergent areas subject to saturation overland flow), or within the 

RCA. Provide adequate surface drainage and erosion protection at disposal sites.

- Do not permit side casting in RCAs. Prevent excavated materials from entering 

water or RCAs.

- Schedule operations during dry periods when rain, runoff, wet soils, snowmelt or 

frost melt are less likely. Limit operation of equipment when ground conditions 

could result in excessive rutting, soil compaction (except on the road prism or 

other surface to be compacted), or runoff of sediments directly to streams.

- Stabilize project area during normal operating season when the National Weather 

Service predicts a 50% or greater chance of precipitation.

- Keep erosion-control measures sufficiently effective during ground disturbance to 

allow rapid closure when weather conditions deteriorate.

- Complete all necessary stabilization prior to precipitation that could result in 

surface runoff. 

- Scatter construction-generated slash on disturbed areas. Ensure ground contact 

between slash and disturbed slopes. Windrow slash at the base of fills to reduce 

sedimentation. Ensure windrows are placed along contours with ground contact 

between slash and disturbed slope.

- Monitor contractor’s plans and operations to assure contractor does not open up 

more ground than can be substantially completed before expected winter 

shutdowns, unless erosion-control measures are implemented.

- Install erosion-control measures on incomplete roads prior to precipitation or the 

start of winter (November 16 through March 31) and in accordance with the 

Erosion Control Plan. Remove ineffective temporary culverts, culvert plugs, 

Regional BMPs

2-2 General Guidelines for the Location and 

Design of Roads

2-3 Road Construction and Reconstruction

2-8 Stream Crossings

2-13 Erosion Control Plans (roads and other 

activities)

National Core BMPs

Road-3 Road Construction and 

Reconstruction

Forest Plan S&Gs

62

193 (RCO 2)

194 (RCO 4)

Locations: all new construction and 

reconstruction.

48
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Management Requirements BMPs/Forest Plan1/Locations

diversion dams, or elevated stream crossings; leaving a channel at least as wide 

as before construction and as close to the original grade as possible. Install 

temporary culverts, side drains, cross drains, diversion ditches, energy 

dissipaters, dips, sediment basins, berms, dikes, debris racks, pipe risers, or other 

facilities needed to control erosion. Remove debris, obstructions, and spoil 

material from channels, floodplains, and riparian areas. Do not leave project areas 

for the winter with remedial measures incomplete. Provide protective cover for 

exposed soil surfaces.

Road Maintenance and Operations

- Clean ditches and drainage structure inlets only as often as needed to keep them 

functioning. Prevent unnecessary or excessive vegetation disturbance and 

removal on features such as swales, ditches, shoulders, and cut and fill slopes.

- Maintain road surface drainage by removing berms, unless specifically designated 

otherwise. 

- Accompany grading of hydrologically connected road surfaces and inside ditches 

with erosion and sediment control installation.

- Divert springs across roads to prevent them from pooling and diverting on or along 

the road. A layer of coarse rock with geotextile fabric or other treatments may be 

necessary.

- Ensure that after maintenance activities (i.e., grading/earthwork activities) the final 

road surface drainage system will remove water from the road surface with the 

purpose to minimize concentrated runoff to an area. Ensure that existing 

metal/drain gutters are in working condition and /or install them as needed.

- Conduct road watering for maintenance, dust abatement, and road surface 

protection using approved existing water sources locations. (See Water Sources 

Development and Use below)

Regional BMPs

2-4 Road Maintenance and Operations

2-13 Erosion Control Plans (roads and other 

activities)

National Core BMPs

Road-4 Road Operations and Maintenance

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Forest Plan S&Gs

193 (RCO 2)

194 (RCO 4)

Locations: all roads with maintenance or 

project use.

Stream Crossings

Design of New or Reconstructed Crossings

- Design permanent stream crossings (new construction and replacement culverts) 

to pass the 100-year flood flow plus associated sediment and debris; armor to 

withstand design flows and provide desired passage of fish and other aquatic 

organisms.

- Locate and design crossings to minimize disturbance to the water body. Use 

structures appropriate to the site conditions and traffic. Favor armored fords for 

streams where vehicle traffic is seasonal or temporary, and where the ford design 

maintains the channel pattern, profile and dimension. 

- Install stream crossings according to project specifications and drawings. Design 

should sustain bankfull dimensions of width, depth and slope, and maintain 

streambed and bank resiliency.

- Construct diversion prevention dips to accommodate overtopping of runoff if 

diversion potential exists. Locate diversion prevention dips downslope of the 

crossing rather than directly over crossing fill; armor diversion prevention dips 

based on soil characteristics and risk. Install cross drains (e.g., rolling dips; 

waterbars) to hydrologically disconnect the road above the crossing and to 

dissipate concentrated flows.

Construction, Reconstruction and Maintenance Operations

- Keep excavated materials out of channels, floodplains, wetlands and lakes. Install 

silt fences or other sediment- and debris-retention barriers between the water 

body and construction material stockpiles and wastes. Dispose unsuitable 

material in approved waste areas outside of the RCA.

- Inspect and clean equipment; remove external oil, grease, dirt and mud and repair 

leaks prior to unloading at site. Inspect equipment daily and correct identified 

problems before entering streams or areas that drain directly to water bodies. 

Remove all dirt and plant parts to ensure that noxious weeds and aquatic invasive 

species are not brought to the site.

- Remove all project debris from the stream in a manner that will cause the least 

disturbance.

- Minimize streambank and riparian area excavation during construction. Stabilize 

adjacent disturbed areas using mulch, retaining structures, and or mechanical 

stabilization materials. 

- Ensure imported fill materials meet specifications, and are free of toxins and 

invasive species. 

- Divert or dewater stream flow for all live streams or standing water bodies during 

crossing installation and invasive maintenance.

Regional BMPs

2-8 Stream Crossings

2-13 Erosion Control Plans (roads and other 

activities)

National Core BMPs

AqEco-2 Operations in Aquatic Ecosystems

Road-7 Stream Crossings

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Forest Plan S&Gs

62

193 (RCO 2)

194 (RCO 4)

Locations: all stream crossings on 

constructed, reconstructed and maintained 

roads.

49
Appendix A Stanislaus

Management Requirements National Forest

Management Requirements BMPs/Forest Plan1/Locations

Closure of Temporary and ML 1 Roads

- Remove road stream crossings and other culverts identified at high risk of failure 

and posing a threat to water quality before a road is closed. 

- Block closed roads to prevent vehicle access.

- Road-stream crossings deemed safe to leave in place will be treated to remove 

the potential for streamflow diversions in the event of a crossing failure or 

blockage, and, where needed, will have rock armor added to downstream 

crossing fill to prevent erosion.

- Ensure that the road, culvert, and all hydrologically connected drainage structures 

are cleaned, and sediment and erosion controls are intact and functioning prior to 

closure.

- Ensure road is effectively drained (e.g. waterbars, dips, outsloping) and treated to 

return the road prism to near natural hydrologic function. 

- Treat and stabilize road surfaces through subsoiling, scattering slash, and/or 

revegetation. Reshape and stabilize side slopes as needed. 

Regional BMPs

2-6 Road Storage

2-7 Road Decommissioning

2-13 Erosion Control Plans (roads and other 

activities)

National Core BMPs

Road-6 Road Storage and Decommissioning

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Forest Plan S&Gs

57

193 (RCO 2)

Locations: all roads post-project closed or 

ML1 status.

Log Landings

- Re-use log landings to the extent feasible. Existing landings within RCAs may be 

used when sedimentation effects can be mitigated by erosion prevention 

measures. 

- Do not construct new landings within 100 feet of perennial or intermittent streams 

and SAFs and 50 feet of ephemeral streams. 

- See the Soils Management Requirements for subsoiling requirements.

Regional BMPs

1-12 Log Landing Location

1-16 Log Landing Erosion

National Core BMPs

Veg-6 Landings

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Forest Plan S&Gs

194 (RCO 4)

Locations: all landings.

Skid Trails

- Design and locate skid trails to best fit the terrain, volume, velocity, concentrations 

and direction of runoff water in a manner that would minimize erosion and 

sedimentation. 

- Locate new primary skid trails at least 100 feet from perennial and intermittent 

streams and SAFs and new secondary skid trails at least 50 feet from perennial 

and intermittent streams and SAFs. Locate all skid trails at least 25 feet from 

ephemeral streams. Primary skid trails typically have 20 or more passes and 

result in detrimental compaction or displacement of soils. Secondary skid trails 

have fewer passes and result in minor compaction or displacement. 

- Use existing skid trails wherever possible except where unacceptable resource 

damage may result. Existing skid trails <100 feet from streams may be used if 

they are rehabilitated following use to improve infiltration from their current state.

- Skid trails within 100 feet of steams will be given priority for subsoiling.

- See Soils Management Requirements for additional requirements on rehabilitating 

skid trails. 

Regional BMPs

1-10 Tractor Skidding Design

1-17 Erosion Control on Skid Trails

National Core BMPs

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Veg-4 Ground-Based Skidding and Yarding 

Operations

Forest Plan S&Gs

194 (RCO 4)

Locations: all ground-based yarding system 

units.

Suspended Log Yarding

- Fully suspend logs to the extent practicable when yarding over RCAs and 

streams.

- Locate skyline corridors to minimize damage to live streamside trees or 

resprouting streamside burned trees and shrubs.

- Install skyline corridor erosion control measures prior to each winter season to 

ensure runoff will be well dispersed and not concentrated down corridors. 

Measures may include water bars constructed in alternating directions, smoothing 

of ruts, and/or logging slash lopped to contract specifications.

Regional BMPs

1-11 Suspended Log Yarding in Timber 

Harvesting

2-13 Erosion Control Plans (roads and other 

activities)

National Core BMPs

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Veg-5 Skyline and Aerial Yarding Operations 

Locations: all units using skyline yarding 

systems.

Water Sources

- For water drafting on fish-bearing streams: do not exceed 350 gallons per minute 

for streamflow greater than or equal to 4.0 cubic feet per second (cfs); do not 

exceed 20% of surface flows below 4.0 cfs; and, cease drafting when bypass 

surface flow drops below 1.5 cfs. 

- For water drafting on non-fish-bearing streams: do not exceed 350 gallons per 

minute for streamflow greater than or equal to 2.0 cfs; do not exceed 50% of 

surface flow; and, cease drafting when bypass surface flow drops below 10 

gallons per minute. Water sources designed for permanent installation, such as 

piped diversions to off-site storage, are preferred over temporary, short-term-use 

developments. Locate water drafting sites to avoid adverse effects to in-stream 

flows and depletion of pool habitat. 

- Do not allow water drafting from streams by more than one truck at a time.

- Do not construct basins at culvert inlets for the purpose of developing a waterhole, 

Regional BMPs

2-5 Water Source Development and 

Utilization

2-13 Erosion Control Plans (roads and other 

activities)

National Core BMPs

WatUses-3 Administrative Water 

Developments

AqEco-2 Operations in Aquatic Ecosystems

Forest Plan S&Gs

193 (RCO 2)

194 (RCO 4)

Locations: all water drafting sites.

50
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Management Requirements BMPs/Forest Plan1/Locations

as these can exacerbate plugging of the culvert.

- Gradually remove temporary dams when operations are complete so that 

released impoundments do not discharge sediment into the streamflow

- When diverting water from streams, maintain bypass flows that ensure continuous 

surface flow in downstream reaches, and keep habitat in downstream reaches in 

good condition.

- Locate approaches as close to perpendicular as possible to prevent stream bank 

excavation.

- Treat road approaches and drafting pads to prevent sediment production and 

delivery to a watercourse or waterhole. Armor road approaches as necessary from 

the end of the approach nearest a stream for a minimum of 50 feet, or to the 

nearest drainage structure (e.g., waterbar or rolling dip) or point where road 

drainage does not drain toward the stream. 

- Armor areas subject to high floods to prevent erosion and sediment delivery to 

water courses.

- Install effective erosion control devices (e.g., gravel berms or waterbars) where 

overflow runoff from water trucks or storage tanks may enter the stream, 

- Check all water-drafting vehicles daily and repair as necessary to prevent leaks of 

petroleum products from entering RCAs. Water-drafting vehicles shall contain 

petroleum-absorbent pads, which are placed under vehicles before drafting. 

Water-drafting vehicles shall contain petroleum spill kits. Dispose of absorbent 

pads according to the Hazardous Response Plan.

Rock Borrow Pits/Quarries

- Limit the area of disturbance to the minimum necessary for efficient operations.

- Rehabilitate and stabilize sites after operations are complete to minimize risk of 

off-site movement.

- Where appropriate, install temporary barriers between the extraction area and 

surface waters to prevent sedimentation. 

- Obliterate or decommission temporary access roads unless other treatment is 

required.

- Maintain system roads to quarries or borrow pits.

Regional BMPs

2-12 Aggregate Borrow Areas

2-13 Erosion Control Plans (roads and other 

activities)

National Core BMPs

Min-5 Mineral Materials Resource Sites

Locations: all borrow pits.

Slope and Soil Moisture Limitations

- See Soils report for specific slope limitations for operation of ground-based 

equipment.

- See Soils report for wet weather operating restrictions.

Regional BMPs

5-2 Slope Limitations for Mechanical 

Equipment Operation

5-6 Soil Moisture Limitations for Mechanical 

Equipment Operations

National Core BMPs

Veg-2 Erosion Prevention and Control

Veg-4 Ground-Based Skidding and Yarding 

Operations

Locations: all ground-based equipment units.

Servicing, Refueling, and Cleaning Equipment and Parking/Staging Areas

- Allow temporary refueling and servicing only at approved sites located outside of 

RCAs.

- Rehabilitate temporary staging, parking, and refueling/servicing areas immediately 

following use.

- A Spill Prevention and Containment and Counter Measures (SPCC) plan is 

required where total oil products on site in above-ground storage tanks exceed 

1320 gallons or where a single container exceeds 660 gallons. Review and 

ensure spill plans are up-to-date.

- Report spills and initiate appropriate clean-up action in accordance with applicable 

State and Federal laws, rules and regulations. The Forest hazardous materials 

coordinator’s name and phone number shall be available to Forest Service 

personnel who administer or manage activities utilizing petroleum-powered 

equipment.

- Remove contaminated soil and other material from NFS lands and dispose of this 

material in a manner according to controlling regulations.

- Install temporary wash sites only in areas where the water and residue can be 

adequately collected and either filtered on site or conveyed to an appropriate 

wastewater treatment facility.

Regional BMPs

2-10 Parking and Staging Areas

2-11 Equipment Refueling and Servicing

National Core BMPs

Road-9 Parking and Staging Areas

Road-10 Equipment Refueling and Servicing

Fac-7 Vehicle and Equipment Wash Water

Forest Plan S&Gs

193 (RCO 1)

Locations: designated temporary refueling, 

servicing and cleaning sites and 

parking/staging areas.

Application of Registered Borate Compound

- Do not apply fungicide within 10 feet of surface water, when rain is falling, or when 

rain is likely that day (i.e., National Weather Service forecasts 50% or greater 

chance).

Regional BMPs

5-7 Pesticide Use Planning Process

5-8 Pesticide Application According to Label 

Directions and Applicable Legal 

51
Appendix A Stanislaus

Management Requirements National Forest

Management Requirements BMPs/Forest Plan1/Locations

- Follow all State and Federal rules and regulations as they apply to pesticides. Requirements

5-11 Cleaning and Disposal of Pesticide 

Containers and Equipment

5-12 Streamside Wet Area Protection During 

Pesticide Spraying

National Core BMPs

Chem-1 Chemical Use Planning

Chem-2 Follow Label Directions 

Chem-3 Chemical Use Near Waterbodies

Chem-5 Chemical Handling and Disposal

Forest Plan S&Gs

193 (RCO 1)

Locations: portions of units with applications 

in RCAs.

Burn Piles

- Place burn piles a minimum of 50 feet away from perennial and intermittent 

streams and SAFs and 25 feet from ephemeral streams. Locate piles outside 

areas that may receive runoff from roads. Avoid disturbance to obligate riparian 

vegetation.

- Do not dozer pile in sensitive watershed areas (areas where mastication or drop 

and lop have been prescribed). Grapple piling is allowed in these areas, but is 

subject to the mechanized equipment restrictions for RCAs. When grapple piling 

in sensitive watershed areas, consult a hydrologist or soil scientist if less than 70% 

ground cover would be retained. 

- Minimize effects on soil, water quality, and riparian resources by appropriately 

planning pile size, fuel piece size limits, spacing, and burn prescriptions in 

compliance with state or local laws and regulations if no practical alternatives for 

slash disposal in the RCA are available.

Regional BMPs

6-2 Consideration of Water Quality in 

Formulating Fire Prescriptions

6-3 Protection of Water Quality from 

Prescribed Burning Effects

National Core BMPs

Fire-1 Wildland Fire Management Planning

Fire-2 Use of Prescribed Fire

Forest Plan S&Gs

194 (RCO 4)

Locations: all pile burning areas, sensitive 

watershed areas.

Cumulative Watershed Effects (CWE) Analysis

- CWE analysis will be conducted for the project.

Regional BMPs

7-8 Cumulative Off-Site Watershed Effects

Locations: All activities within the project 

watersheds will be analyzed

Water Quality Monitoring

- Conduct implementation and effectiveness monitoring using the Best 

Management Practices Evaluation Program (BMPEP) (USDA 2002) and the 

National Core Monitoring Protocols (FS-990b) (USDA 2012a). 

- Conduct project-level in-channel monitoring as required in the Water Quality 

Management Handbook (USDA 2011a).

Regional BMPs

7-6 Water Quality Monitoring

Locations: Monitoring locations will be 

detailed in a project monitoring plan.

1 Forest Plan S&Gs indicate page number from Forest Plan Direction (USDA 2010a).

52
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

B. Treatments

This Appendix lists the salvage harvest units, and the fuel, watershed and road treatments 

implemented in Modified Alternative 4. EIS Chapter 2.01 describes the specific actions. 

B.01 SALVAGE HARVEST,FUELS AND WATERSHED TREATMENTS

For each treatment unit, Table B.01-1 lists the primary objectives as described in EIS Chapter 2.01 

and the units (and acres) that will be salvage harvested with the associated harvest system. Fuel and 

watershed treatments for all acres whether salvage harvested or not are also listed below. 

Primary Objectives

1. Economic Value: Capture the economic value of hazard trees and dead trees which pays for 

their removal from the forest and potentially for other future restoration treatments.

2. Public and Worker Safety: Remove dead and dying hazard trees adjacent to Forest Roads and 

project access areas. This primary objective also includes the health and safety of workers and 

permittees during range fence installation and maintenance.

3. Fuel Reduction: Reduce fuels to provide for future forest resiliency and firefighting safety and 

success. Additional treatments in SPLATS and Defense Zones.

4. Enhance Hydrologic Function: Improve road infrastructure to enhance hydrologic function of 

roads. This only applies to roads so it will not be displayed in Table B.01-1 which displays unit 

acres.

5. Enhance Wildlife Habitat: Retain specific old forest components (large snags and down logs) 

and/or remove material to improve wildlife habitat. 

a. Deer Habitat Improvement: Removal of dead trees (commercial and non-commercial) for 

movement and access, and to achieve desired forage/cover ratios

b. Snag Retention 

6. Research: Utilize the unique scale and intensity of the Rim Fire to answer questions and provide 

more information on a wide range of research topics. 

Fuel Treatments

Fuel treatments are planned on all acres whether salvage is harvested or not. Treatments include 

biomass removal and/or machine piling on units that meet ground based equipment guidelines. 

Jackpot burning is proposed on steeper ground (skyline and helicopter units). 

Watershed Treatments

As described in EIS Chapter 2.01, watershed treatments are implemented in areas identified as 

watershed sensitive areas.

53
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Table B.01-1 Harvest, Fuel and Watershed Treatments in Modified Alternative 4

Unit Acres Primary

Objectives

Harvest Treatments Fuel Reduction Watershed Treatments

System Salvage Biomass Pile Jackpot Mastication Drop/Lop

A05C 85 1,2,5b 85

A08A 111 1,2,5b 111

A08C 18 1,5b 18

A09 81 1,5b 81

A14 8 1,3,5b 8

A14X 2 1,3,5b,6 2

A15 22 1,3,5b,6 22

AA01 34 1,2,3,5b 34

AA03 28 1,2,3,5b 28

AA04 28 1,3,5b 28

AA07 10 1,2,3,5b 10

AA08 19 1,2,3,5b 19

AA09 66 1,3,5b 66

AA11 12 1,2 12

AA12 4 1,2,3 4

AA13 12 1,2 12

B02 63 1,2 63

B03 18 1 18

B21 4 1 4

B22 8 1 8

B22X 19 1,5b,6 19

B23 100 1,2 100

B24X 87 1,5b,6 87

B25X 21 1,2,5b,6 21

B32 62 1,2 62

C02 86 1,5b 86

C03 39 1,2,3,5b 39

C04X 14 1,2,3,5b,6 14

C05 10 1,3,5b 10

C06 4 1,2,3,5b 4

D01B 1 1,5b 1

D01C 23 1,2 23

D01D 12 1,2 12

D01E 11 1 11

D03 26 1,5b 26

D04B 345 1,2,5b 345

D05 22 1,5b 22

D06 16 1,2,5b 16

D08 42 1,2,5b 42

D09 37 1,2,5b 37

D11 107 1,2,3 107

D12 408 1,2,3 408

D13 150 2,3 150

E03A 174 1,2 174

E03B 190 1,2 190

E04 72 1,2,3 G 72 72

54
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Unit Acres Primary

Objectives

Harvest Treatments Fuel Reduction Watershed Treatments

System Salvage Biomass Pile Jackpot Mastication Drop/Lop

E05 10 1 G 10 10

F01 196 1,5b,6 196

F02A 604 1,2,5b,6 G 604 280 323 1

F02B 34 1,2,5b G 34 15 19

F03 58 1,5b 58

F11 412 2,3,5b G 412 287 125

F12 121 1,2,5b G 121 3 118

F13 177 1,5b 177

F14 135 1,2,5b G 135 98 37

F15 33 1,2,5b 23 10

F16 69 1,2,5b G 69 69

F17 12 1,2,5b 12

F18 39 1,2,5b G 39 22 17

F19 12 1,2,5b G 12 6 6

F20 145 1,2,5b 145

F21 22 1,5b G 22 22

F22A 7 1,5b G 7 7

F22B 6 1,5b G 6 6

F23A 16 1,5b,6 G 16 16

F23B 10 1,2,5b,6 G 10 10

F23C 1 1,5b G 1 1

F23D 30 1,5b G 30 30

G01 66 1,2,5b 66

G01X 40 1,2,5b,6 40

G02X 5 1,2,5b,6 5

G03A 131 1,2,5b 131

G03B 119 1,2,5b 114 5

G04 24 1,2,5b 24

G05 23 1,2,5b 23

G06 23 1,2,5b,6 23

G07 2 1,5b,6 2

G08 24 1,2,5b 24

G08X 29 1,5b,6 29

G09 43 1,2,5b,6 43

G10 6 1,5b,6 6

G11A 5 1,2,5b,6 5

G11B 7 1,2,5b,6 7

G11C 15 1,2,5b,6 15

G12 10 1,2,5b,6 10

G13A 16 1,2,5b 16

G13B 5 1,2,5b 5

G14A 6 1,5b,6 6

G14B 6 1,2,5b,6 6

G15 95 1,2,5b 95

G25 60 1,2,5b,6 60

G26 24 1,2,5b,6 24

G35 3 1,2 3

H01 4 1,2,3,5b 4

55
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Unit Acres Primary

Objectives

Harvest Treatments Fuel Reduction Watershed Treatments

System Salvage Biomass Pile Jackpot Mastication Drop/Lop

H02 9 1,3,5b 9

H06 34 1,2,5b 34

H09 21 1,2,5b 21

H11 27 1,2,5b 15 12

H11X 17 1,2,5b,6 11 6

H12 6 1,2,5b 6

H12X 31 1,2,5b,6 31

H13A 54 1,2,5b 54

H13AX 52 1,2,5b,6 52

H13B 13 1,2,5b 13

H13BX 52 1,2,5b,6 52

K01 11 1,2 11

K02 132 1,2 132

L01 39 1,2,5b 39

L02A 258 1,2,3,5b G 258 258

L02AX 5 1,2,3,5b,6 G 5 5

L02B 176 1,2,3,5b G 176 176

L02BX 148 1,2,3,5b,6 G 148 115 33

L02C 610 1,2,5b G 610 138 418 54

L02CX 148 1,2,5b,6 G 148 74 47 27

L02D 257 1,2,5b G 257 218 39

L02E 62 1,2,5b 62

L02F 185 1,2,3,5b G 185 119 66

L03 31 1,2,5a,5b G 31 31

L04 79 1,2,5b G 79 25 54

L05AX 6 1,2,5b,6 6

L05BX 17 1,5b,6 17

L07 5 1,2,5a,5b G 5 5

L201 92 5a,5b 92

L202 142 2,5a,5b G 100 42 79 21

L203 695 2,5a,5b G 17 250 445

L204 1,519 2,5a,5b G 54 340 1,179

L205 756 2,3,5a,5b 756

L206 81 2,5a,5b G 1 15 66

M01 701 1,2,5b,6 G 701 663 35 3

M02A 141 1,2,3,5b,6 G 141 141

M02C 30 1,5b,6 G 30 30

M04A 260 1,2,5b G 260 260

M04B 13 1,2,5b G 13 13

M04C 15 2,5b G 15 15

M05A 34 1,3,5b H 34 34

M05B 120 1,2,3,5b H 120 120

M05C 24 2,3,5b G 24 24

M05D 76 1,2,3,5b G 76 53 23

M05E 21 1,2,3,5b G 21 21

M05F 39 1,3,5b G 39 39

M05G 11 1,3,5b G 11 11

M06 97 1,2,5b G 97 68 29

56
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Unit Acres Primary

Objectives

Harvest Treatments Fuel Reduction Watershed Treatments

System Salvage Biomass Pile Jackpot Mastication Drop/Lop

M07 21 1,2,5b G 21 21

M08A 98 1,2,5b G 98 62 36

M08B 29 1,2,5b G 29 29

M08C 11 1,2,5b G 11 11

M08D 27 1,2,5b G 27 27

M08E 8 1,5b G 8 8

M09 224 1,2,5b,6 224

M10 71 1,2,5b G 71 71

M12 12 1,2,5b G 12 12

M13 10 1,2,5b 10

M15 28 1,2,5b G 28 28

M16A 10 1,2,5b G 10 10

M16B 86 1,2,3,5b G 86 57 29

M18 58 1,2,3,5b G 58 58

M19 27 1,2,5b G 27 27

M20 15 1,2 G 15 15

M201 74 2,5a,5b G 31 43 31

M202A 117 1,2,5a,5b G 6 111 6

M202B 21 1,2,5a,5b 21

M203 63 1,2,5a,5b G 1 62 1

M204 282 1,2,5a,5b G 7 275 7

N01A 37 1,2,5b G 37 14 23

N01B 13 1 G 13 13

N01C 225 1,2,5b G 225 122 103

N01D 14 1,5b G 14 1 13

N01E 71 1,5b G 71 27 32 12

N01F 2 1,5b G 2 2

N01G 5 1,5b G 5 5

N01H 49 1,5b G 49 21 28

N01I 28 1,5b G 28 2 26

N01J 21 1,2,5b G 21 12 9

N02A 24 1,2 G 24 7 17

N02B 5 1,2 G 5 5

N03 26 1,2,5b 26

O03 46 1,5b 46

O06 33 1,5b 33

O07 48 1 48

O08 27 1 27

O09 10 1 10

O10A 14 1,3 14

O10B 6 1 6

O11A 27 1 27

O11B 39 1,2 39

O11C 15 1,3 15

O201A 156 2,5a,5b 156

O201B 121 2,5a,5b 121

P201 185 1,5a,5b 185

Q06 19 1,2,5b 19

57
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Unit Acres Primary

Objectives

Harvest Treatments Fuel Reduction Watershed Treatments

System Salvage Biomass Pile Jackpot Mastication Drop/Lop

Q07 13 1,2,5b 13

Q13 81 1,5b G 81 81

Q14A 395 1,2,5b,6 G 395 309 86

Q14B 146 1,5b,6 G 146 146

Q15 17 1,2,5b 17

Q16 8 1,5b,6 8

R01B 11 1,2,3,5b G 11 11

R04A 52 1,2,3,5b,6 G 52 52

R04B 41 1,2,3 G 41 33 8

R06A 12 1,3 12

R06B 21 1 21

R07A 98 1,2 98

R07B 19 1,2 19

R12 8 1,5b G 8 8

R12X 55 1,5b,6 G 55 55

R15 66 1,3,5b G 66 66

R16 98 1,2,5b G 98 98

R17X 72 1,2,5b,6 G 72 72

R18 83 1,2,5b 83

R18X 17 1,5b,6 17

R19A 52 1,3,5b,6 G 52 52

R19B 12 1,2,3,5b,6 G 12 12

R19D 91 1,2,3,5b,6 G 91 91

R19DX 24 1,2,5b,6 G 24 24

R19E 4 1,2,5b,6 G 4 4

R19F 11 1,2,5b,6 G 11 11

R20 50 1,5b,6 50

R22 28 1,2,3,5b 28

R23 13 1,2 13

R24A 41 1,2,5b 41

R25X 34 1,2,5b,6 34

R31 120 1,2,3,5b G 120 120

R31X 67 1,2,3,5b,6 67

R32 31 1,2,6 G 31 31

R33X 12 1,2,3,5b,6 12

R35A 10 1,2,3,5b 10

R35B 16 1,2,3,5b G 16 16

R36 12 1,2,3,5b G 12 12

R37 25 1,2,5b G 25 25

R38 20 1,2,3 G 20 20

R39 3 1,2,3,5b G 3 3

R40A 32 2,3,5b G 32 32

R40B 52 2,3,5b G 52 52

S01 53 1,5b G 53 53

S02 135 1,2,5b G 135 135

S03 168 1,2,5b G 168 168

S04 266 1,2,5b G 266 237 20 9

S05B 7 1,2,5b 7

58
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Unit Acres Primary

Objectives

Harvest Treatments Fuel Reduction Watershed Treatments

System Salvage Biomass Pile Jackpot Mastication Drop/Lop

S06 28 1,3,5b G 28 28

S08 81 1,2,5b S 81 81

S10 9 1,3,5b 9

S11 24 1,3 G 24 24

T01 19 1,3 G 19 19

T02 32 1,2,3 G 32 32

T03 29 1,2 S 20 29

T04A 235 1,2,3 G 235 235

T04B 876 1,2,3 G 876 642 234

T04C 101 1,3 G 101 101

T04D 9 1,3 G 9 9

T20 9 1,3 G 9 9

T21B 18 1,3,5b G 18 18

T22 18 1,2,5b G 18 18

T23 28 1,2,5b G 28 28

T23X 54 1,2,5b,6 G 54 54

T24 154 1,2,3,5b G 154 154

T25 6 1,2 6

T25X 26 1,2,5b,6 26

T26 15 1,2 15

T27A 926 1,2,3,5b G 926 778 148

T27AX 150 1,2,3,5b,6 G 150 103 47

T27B 450 1,2,3 G 450 349 90 11

T27BX 320 1,2,3,6 320

T27C 97 1,2,3 G 97 97

U01A 3 1,2 G 3 3

U01B 26 1,2 G 26 26

U01C 12 1 G 12 12

U01D 617 1,2,3,5b,6 G 617 545 72

U01DX 33 1,2,5b,6 G 33 33

U02 56 1,2 G 56 56

U03 320 1,2,3 G 320 320

V01 20 1 G 20 20

V02 16 1,2 G 16 16

V03 25 1,2 G 25 14 11

V04A 2 1,2 G 2 2

V04B 3 1,2 G 3 3

V05B 6 1 6

V06 4 1 4

V10 50 1,2,3 G 50 50

V12A 9 1,3 G 9 9

V12B 16 1,2,3 G 16 16

V13 119 1,2,3 G 119 119

V13X 69 1,2,3,5b,6 G 69 69

V14A 15 1,2,3 G 15 15

V14B 321 1,2,3 G 321 279 42

V14C 70 1,2,3,5b G 70 70

V15 26 1,2 S 26 26

59
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Unit Acres Primary

Objectives

Harvest Treatments Fuel Reduction Watershed Treatments

System Salvage Biomass Pile Jackpot Mastication Drop/Lop

W01 51 1,2 G 51 51

W02 226 1,2 G 226 226

W03 21 1,2,3 21

W04 74 1,2 G 74 74

W05A 3 1 G 3 3

W05B 5 1 G 5 5

W06A 13 1 G 13 13

W06B 7 1 G 7 7

X01A 8 1,3 G 8 8

X01B 3 1,3 G 3 3

X02 43 1,2,3 H 43 43

X03 58 1,2,3,5b S 58 58

X04 7 1,2,3 7

X05 33 1,2,3 H 33 33

X06 60 1,2,3 H 60 60

X07 43 1,2 43

X08 20 1 20

X09 5 1,3 G 5 5

X10 8 1,2,3,5b H 8 8

X100 22 1,2,5b 22

X101 31 1,2 31

X102 23 1,2 23

X103 28 1,2,3 28

X104 72 1,2,3,5b 72

X105 14 1,2 14

X106 18 1,2 18

X107 70 1,2,3 G 70 70

X108 183 1,2,3,5b 183

X109A 28 1,2,5b 28

X109B 8 1,2,5b 8

X109C 18 1,2,3,5b 18

X109D 13 1,2,3,5b 13

X109E 9 1,2,5b 9

X110 18 1 G 18 18

X111X 32 1,2,5b,6 G 32 32

X112 14 1,2 G 14 14

X114X 18 1,2,5b,6 G 18 18

X115 150 1,2,3,5b G 150 150

X116 110 1,2,3,5b G 110 110

X117 9 1,2,5b G 9 9

X118 7 1,2 G 7 7

X118X 156 1,2,5b,6 G 156 156

X119X 113 1,2,5b,6 G 113 113

X12 23 1,2,3,5b 23

X120 24 1,3,5b 24

X13 19 1,2,3,5b 19

X15 116 1,2,3,5b 116

X16 16 1,2,5b 16

60
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Unit Acres Primary

Objectives

Harvest Treatments Fuel Reduction Watershed Treatments

System Salvage Biomass Pile Jackpot Mastication Drop/Lop

X17 51 1,2,3,5b,6 51

X18 19 1,2,3,5b,6 19

X19 4 1,2,3,5b,6 4

X22 52 1,2,3,5b S 52 52

X23 353 1,2,3,5b H 353 353

X24 76 1,2,5b 76

X25 253 1,2,5b,6 253

X26 75 1,2,3,5b 75

X27 34 1,2,5b 34

X40 8 1,2 8

X41 21 1,2,3 21

Y01A 36 1,3 G 36 36

Y01B 18 1,2,3 G 18 18

Y01C 3 1 G 3 3

Y01D 22 1,2,3 G 22 22

Harvest System: G=Ground based equipment; H=Helicopter; S=Skyline

B.02 ROAD TREATMENTS

This decision includes road treatments such as maintenance and reconstruction of existing roads, and 

development of new temporary roads. Table B.02-1 displays the route number, status, miles, Motor 

Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) and road treatments in the decision. The MVUM identifies public motor 

vehicle use by Vehicle Class (4 wheel drive, All Vehicles, Highway Legal Only, etc.) and whether the 

season of use is closed, open year round or seasonal (open April 15 through December 15). 

Table B.02-1 Road Treatments in Modified Alternative 4

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

01N01 Existing 8.53 ALL, year round Maintain

01N01 Existing 0.82 ALL, year round Reconstruct

01N01A Existing 0.50 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N01E Existing 0.45 Closed Reconstruct

01N01H Existing 0.66 ALL, year round Maintain

01N01K Existing 0.60 ALL, year round Maintain

01N01L Existing 0.12 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N02 Existing 1.47 ALL, year round Maintain

01N02 Existing 2.67 Closed Maintain

01N02B Existing 0.64 Closed Maintain

01N02Y Existing 1.49 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N04 Existing 0.38 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N04B Existing 0.63 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N04D Existing 0.53 Closed Reconstruct

01N04Y Existing 0.50 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N04Y Existing 0.25 Closed Reconstruct

01N05 Existing 0.14 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N05 Existing 2.21 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N07C Existing 0.60 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N07Y Existing 1.57 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N09 Existing 0.83 Closed Maintain

01N09 Existing 0.57 Closed Reconstruct

61
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

01N09 Existing 2.44 Closed Reconstruct

01N09Y Existing 0.36 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N10A Existing 0.53 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N11 Existing 2.06 ALL, year round Maintain

01N11Y Existing 0.13 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01N11Y Existing 2.30 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N12 Existing 0.54 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N12 Existing 0.49 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N12Y Existing 0.28 Closed Reconstruct

01N13 Existing 2.05 ALL, year round Maintain

01N13A Existing 0.38 ALL, year round Maintain

01N13B Existing 0.97 ALL, year round Maintain

01N14 Existing 3.76 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N14A Existing 0.82 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01N14F Existing 0.44 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01N14G Existing 0.13 Closed Maintain

01N15 Existing 1.23 Closed Reconstruct

01N15Y Existing 0.53 Closed Maintain

01N16 Existing 0.03 ALL, year round Maintain

01N17 Existing 0.21 ALL, year round Maintain

01N17 Existing 2.15 ALL, year round Maintain

01N17A Existing 0.10 ALL, year round Maintain

01N18 Existing 1.37 ALL, year round Maintain

01N18A Existing 0.17 ALL, year round Maintain

01N19 Existing 1.33 ALL, year round Maintain

01N19 Existing 0.12 Closed Maintain

01N24 Existing 2.24 ALL, year round Maintain

01N24 Existing 1.47 ALL, year round Reconstruct

01N24A Existing 0.10 ALL, year round Maintain

01N24B Existing 0.34 ALL, year round Maintain

01N24C Existing 1.18 ALL, year round Maintain

01N25 Existing 0.34 ALL, year round Maintain

01N25A Existing 0.11 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N25B Existing 0.33 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N25Y Existing 0.73 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N26 Existing 2.79 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N26 Existing 1.07 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N26A Existing 0.26 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N26B Existing 0.41 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N26C Existing 0.31 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N26D Existing 0.25 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N26YA Existing 0.35 Closed Maintain

01N27 Existing 0.82 ALL, year round Maintain

01N27B Existing 0.45 ALL, year round Maintain

01N28 Existing 0.39 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N28A Existing 0.12 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N30 Existing 0.71 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N30 Existing 2.10 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N30A Existing 0.05 Closed Reconstruct

01N31Y Existing 0.39 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N31Y Existing 0.54 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

62
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

01N31YA Existing 0.34 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N31YB Existing 0.39 Closed Reconstruct

01N32 Existing 0.27 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N32 Existing 0.65 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N32A Existing 0.12 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N32Y Existing 0.12 Closed Temporary Road

01N34 Existing 0.40 Closed Maintain

01N34C Existing 0.22 Closed Maintain

01N34Y Existing 1.08 ALL, year round Maintain

01N35 Existing 0.93 ALL, year round Maintain

01N36 Existing 0.71 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N36A Existing 0.21 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N37 Existing 1.43 Closed (mitigation) Reconstruct

01N38 Existing 0.26 ALL, year round Maintain

01N38 Existing 0.19 Closed Maintain

01N38A Existing 0.03 Closed Maintain

01N39 Existing 0.89 ALL, year round Maintain

01N39Y Existing 0.12 Closed Reconstruct

01N39Y Existing 0.56 Closed Reconstruct

01N40 Existing 0.22 ALL, year round Maintain

01N40Y Existing 1.50 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N40Y Existing 0.41 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01N41 Existing 0.27 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N42Y Existing 1.14 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N42YC Existing 0.28 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N43 Existing 5.94 ALL, year round Maintain

01N43A Existing 0.82 ALL, year round Maintain

01N43B Existing 0.63 ALL, year round Maintain

01N43C Existing 0.53 ALL, year round Maintain

01N43D Existing 0.21 ALL, year round Maintain

01N43D Existing0.05 Closed Maintain

01N44 Existing 0.52 ALL, year round Maintain

01N46 Existing 0.91 ALL, year round Reconstruct

01N48 Existing 0.83 ALL, year round Maintain

01N48A Existing 0.57 ALL, year round Maintain

01N48B Existing 0.19 ALL, year round Maintain

01N49 Existing 1.31 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N49 Existing 0.85 ALL, year round Maintain

01N49 Existing 0.15 ALL, year round Reconstruct

01N49A Existing 0.22 ALL, year round Maintain

01N49B Existing 0.38 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N50 Existing 0.03 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N50 Existing 2.95 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N50A Existing 0.44 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N50C Existing 1.18 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N51 Existing 0.65 ALL, year round Maintain

01N56 Existing 0.15 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N56 Existing 3.09 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N56A Existing 0.65 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N56A Existing 0.52 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N57 Existing 2.18 ALL, seasonal Maintain

63
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

01N58 Existing 1.59 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N58 Existing 0.29 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N58A Existing 0.39 Closed Maintain

01N58B Existing 0.22 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N59 Existing 0.19 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N60 Existing 0.76 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N60A Existing 0.35 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N61 Existing 1.78 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N67 Existing 1.06 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N72 Existing 0.68 Closed Reconstruct

01N72 Existing 0.43 Closed Reconstruct

01N74 Existing 4.32 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N74A Existing 0.46 Closed Reconstruct

01N74C Existing 0.33 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N75 Existing 0.27 Closed Reconstruct

01N76 Existing 2.38 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N77 Existing 0.12 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N78 Existing 0.38 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N79 Existing 3.35 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N79A Existing 0.51 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N79B Existing 0.38 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N79B Existing 0.35 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N80 Existing 1.45 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N80A Existing 0.34 Closed Reconstruct

01N82 Existing 0.30 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N83 Existing 0.02 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N83 Existing 1.93 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N83 Existing 0.11 Closed Reconstruct

01N86 Existing 1.07 Closed Reconstruct

01N88 Existing 0.63 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N89 Existing 0.52 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N91 Existing 0.28 Closed Reconstruct

01N94 Existing 0.26 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01N94 Existing 0.29 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N94A Existing 0.40 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N96 Existing 4.94 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N96E Existing 0.53 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01N97 Existing 5.01 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01N97C Existing 0.11 Closed Reconstruct

01S01 Existing 0.14 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

01S01 Existing 0.62 Closed Reconstruct

01S01Y Existing 0.07 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S01Y Existing 0.59 Closed Reconstruct

01S01YA Existing 0.17 Closed Reconstruct

01S01YB Existing 0.59 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S02Y Existing 0.15 Closed Reconstruct

01S03 Existing 0.45 HLO, year round Reconstruct

01S03B Existing 1.03 Closed Reconstruct

01S04 Existing 2.96 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S04A Existing 0.85 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S05 Existing 4.00 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

64
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

01S05A Existing 0.65 Closed Reconstruct

01S06 Existing 2.69 Closed Maintain

01S06B Existing 0.10 HLO, year round Maintain

01S08 Existing 1.46 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S08Y Existing 0.95 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S08YA Existing 0.11 Closed Reconstruct

01S09 Existing 2.03 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S11 Existing 0.29 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S11 Existing 0.71 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S11 Existing 2.12 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S11A Existing 0.56 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S11A Existing 0.31 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S11F Existing 0.58 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S11Y Existing 1.45 Closed Reconstruct

01S12G Existing 0.36 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S12G Existing 0.41 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S12H Existing 0.58 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S12H Existing 0.19 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S13 Existing 15.93 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S13C Existing 2.00 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S13Y Existing 1.22 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S14 Existing 5.91 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S14M Existing 0.43 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S15Y Existing 3.06 Closed Reconstruct

01S15YA Existing 1.36 Closed Reconstruct

01S15YB Existing 0.18 Closed Reconstruct

01S16Y Existing 0.70 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S16Y Existing 1.17 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S18Y Existing 0.67 Closed Reconstruct

01S19 Existing0.54 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S19 Existing 2.15 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S19A Existing 0.99 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S19B Existing 0.01 Closed Reconstruct

01S19B Existing 0.52 Closed Reconstruct

01S19C Existing 0.24 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S19Y Existing 0.21 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S19Y Existing 0.26 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S20Y Existing 0.22 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S20Y Existing 0.43 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S21Y Existing 0.88 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S23 Existing 3.03 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S23D Existing 0.35 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S23E Existing 0.23 Closed Maintain

01S23H Existing 0.08 Closed Maintain

01S23X Existing 0.57 Closed Maintain

01S23Y Existing 0.66 HLO, year round Maintain

01S24 Existing 0.51 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S24 Existing 2.85 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S24 Existing 0.03 Closed Reconstruct

01S24A Existing 1.08 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S25 Existing 0.63 ALL, seasonal Maintain

65
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

01S25 Existing 2.26 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S25A Existing 2.37 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S25C Existing 0.15 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S25C Existing 0.48 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S25D Existing 0.52 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S25E Existing 0.24 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S25F Existing 0.52 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S25Y Existing 0.47 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S25Y Existing 0.47 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S25YA Existing 0.26 Closed Reconstruct

01S26 Existing 1.95 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S26 Existing 2.92 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S26B Existing 0.41 Closed Reconstruct

01S26C Existing 0.68 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S26E Existing 0.21 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S28Y Existing 0.32 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S30 Existing 1.24 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S30B Existing 0.55 Closed Maintain

01S32 Existing 0.18 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S32 Existing 0.26 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S32 Existing 1.65 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S36 Existing 1.37 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S36B Existing 0.20 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S39Y Existing 0.89 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S39YA Existing 0.10 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S41 Existing 1.44 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S41A Existing 0.52 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S48 Existing 0.52 ALL, year round Maintain

01S48Y Existing 0.72 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S49 Existing 2.38 ALL, year round Maintain

01S49Y Existing 0.11 Closed Reconstruct

01S51 Existing 2.24 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S51B Existing 0.71 Closed Reconstruct

01S53 Existing 0.31 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S53 Existing 0.76 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S54 Existing 2.09 Closed Reconstruct

01S57 Existing 1.96 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S58 Existing 2.47 Closed Maintain

01S58B Existing 0.52 Closed Maintain

01S58D Existing 0.08 Closed Maintain

01S58F Existing 0.70 Closed Maintain

01S58G Existing 0.07 Closed Maintain

01S60 Existing 1.93 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S62 Existing 0.10 Closed Maintain

01S62 Existing 1.33 Closed Reconstruct

01S62A Existing 0.39 Closed Reconstruct

01S62Y Existing 0.72 Closed Reconstruct

01S62YA Existing 0.30 Closed Reconstruct

01S63Y Existing 0.13 Closed Reconstruct

01S63Y Existing 2.25 Closed Reconstruct

01S63YA Existing 0.14 Closed Reconstruct

66
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

01S64 Existing 1.60 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S66 Existing 1.80 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S66A Existing 0.34 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S68 Existing 0.40 Closed Reconstruct

01S68Y Existing 0.63 Closed Reconstruct

01S69 Existing 1.26 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S70 Existing 1.10 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S70 Existing 1.64 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S70A Existing 0.34 Closed Reconstruct

01S70B Existing 0.42 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S71 Existing 1.65 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S72Y Existing 1.16 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S73Y Existing 0.85 Closed (mitigation) Maintain

01S74 Existing 0.31 Closed Maintain

01S74 Existing 0.73 Closed Reconstruct

01S75 Existing 1.10 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S75A Existing 0.37 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S75Y Existing 1.56 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S75YA Existing 0.69 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S75YB Existing 0.32 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S76 Existing 1.65 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S77 Existing 1.12 Closed Reconstruct

01S77A Existing 0.21 Closed Reconstruct

01S77B Existing 0.27 Closed Reconstruct

01S78 Existing 4.05 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S78A Existing 0.81 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S79 Existing 0.09 Closed Reconstruct

01S79 Existing 1.83 Closed Reconstruct

01S79A Existing 0.19 Closed Reconstruct

01S80 Existing 1.94 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S80 Existing 0.87 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S80A Existing 0.55 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S81 Existing 1.90 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S81A Existing 0.58 Closed Reconstruct

01S82 Existing 0.13 HLO, seasonal Maintain

01S82 Existing 1.26 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S84 Existing 0.20 Closed Reconstruct

01S85 Existing 1.68 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S88 Existing 0.28 Closed Maintain

01S89 Existing 2.13 ALL, seasonal Maintain

01S94 Existing 0.76 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

01S96 Existing 1.52 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S96A Existing 0.22 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

01S98Y Existing0.10 Closed Maintain

01S98YA Existing 0.07 Closed Maintain

01S98YA Existing 0.03 Closed Maintain

01S99Y Existing 0.11 Closed Maintain

02N03 Existing 0.54 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N04 Existing 1.08 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

02N04Y Existing 0.43 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N05 Existing 1.66 ALL, seasonal Maintain

67
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

02N05 Existing 2.13 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N05A Existing 0.30 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N05A Existing 2.27 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N05C Existing 1.03 Closed Reconstruct

02N05X Existing 0.03 Closed Maintain

02N06 Existing 4.49 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N06Y Existing 0.78 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N06Y Existing 0.39 Closed Temporary Road

02N08Y Existing 1.62 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N08Y Existing 2.67 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N08YA Existing 0.35 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N08YB Existing 0.42 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N08YB Existing 0.74 Closed Reconstruct

02N08YD Existing 1.22 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N10B Existing 0.76 Closed Maintain

02N10Y Existing 0.03 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

02N10Y Existing 4.17 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

02N10YA Existing 0.28 Closed Reconstruct

02N11 Existing 4.76 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N11 Existing 4.08 ALL, year round Maintain

02N11 Existing 0.92 ALL, year round Reconstruct

02N11B Existing 0.10 Closed Maintain

02N11C Existing 0.45 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N11D Existing 0.20 ALL, year round Maintain

02N11E Existing 0.76 Closed Maintain

02N11F Existing 0.60 ALL, year round Maintain

02N11F Existing 0.41 Closed Maintain

02N12 Existing 0.75 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N13 Existing 1.13 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N13 Existing 1.11 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N13 Existing 0.31 Closed Maintain

02N15 Existing 1.25 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N16 Existing 1.26 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N16A Existing 0.43 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N18 Existing 1.47 HLO, seasonal Maintain

02N20 Existing 1.44 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N20A Existing 0.26 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N22 Existing 1.28 HLO, year round Reconstruct

02N22A Existing 0.76 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N23 Existing 0.97 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N23A Existing 0.33 Closed Maintain

02N24 Existing 1.62 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N24 Existing 1.66 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N29 Existing 2.26 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N29 Existing 2.12 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N29 Existing 1.49 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N29A Existing 0.57 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N29Y Existing 0.95 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N30 Existing 0.40 Closed Maintain

02N30 Existing 0.47 Closed Reconstruct

02N31 Existing 0.95 Closed Maintain

68
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

02N31Y Existing 0.66 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N31YA Existing 0.51 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N31YB Existing 0.07 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N32 Existing 2.79 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N33 Existing 1.15 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N40 Existing 2.53 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N40 Existing 0.36 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N41 Existing 0.36 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N43 Existing 0.33 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N43 Existing 0.23 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N43 Existing 1.50 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N44 Existing 1.43 HLO, year round Maintain

02N44A Existing 0.15 HLO, seasonal Maintain

02N45 Existing 0.35 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N46 Existing 0.08 Closed Maintain

02N46 Existing 1.32 Closed Reconstruct

02N46A Existing 0.10 Closed Maintain

02N48 Existing 1.51 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N48A Existing 0.49 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N52 Existing 1.69 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N52 Existing 0.33 Closed Maintain

02N52A Existing 0.11 Closed Maintain 02N52A Existing 0.43 Closed Maintain

02N53 Existing 1.21 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N53A Existing 0.34 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N54 Existing 0.48 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N54 Existing 0.15 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N54 Existing 2.79 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N56 Existing 3.44 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N56 Existing 0.29 Closed Reconstruct

02N57 Existing 0.29 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N57A Existing 0.07 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N58 Existing 0.70 Closed Maintain

02N59 Existing 1.78 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N60 Existing 1.03 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N60 Existing 0.29 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N61 Existing 0.88 Closed Maintain

02N62 Existing 2.77 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N66 Existing 0.31 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N66 Existing2.67 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N69 Existing 0.08 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N76 Existing 0.63 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N76 Existing 0.86 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N77 Existing 0.20 Closed Reconstruct

02N77Y Existing 0.50 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N78 Existing 0.60 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N81 Existing 0.32 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N81 Existing 1.76 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N81A Existing 0.16 Closed Reconstruct

02N82 Existing 1.42 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N84 Existing 0.62 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

69
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

02N85 Existing 1.35 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N87 Existing 0.13 Closed Maintain

02N94 Existing 0.16 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02N94 Existing 1.87 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02N98 Existing 0.10 Closed Maintain

02N98A Existing 0.26 Closed Maintain

02S01 Existing 1.51 HLO, seasonal Maintain

02S01 Existing 3.60 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

02S01A Existing 0.92 HLO, seasonal Maintain

02S01C Existing 0.31 HLO, seasonal Maintain

02S01D Existing 0.51 Closed Reconstruct

02S07 Existing 2.88 Closed (mitigation) Maintain

02S07A Existing 0.67 Closed Maintain

02S15Y Existing 1.01 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S19Y Existing 0.33 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S19Y Existing 1.37 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S19YA Existing 0.51 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S19YB Existing 0.31 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S25 Existing 2.07 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S25 Existing 1.36 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S25B Existing 0.39 Closed Reconstruct

02S30 Existing 0.26 other public road Reconstruct

02S30A Existing 0.18 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

02S30C Existing 0.57 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S30E Existing 0.46 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S35Y Existing 0.33 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

02S35YA Existing 0.06 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

02S38Y Existing 0.38 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S40 Existing 1.36 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S50Y Existing 0.73 HLO, seasonal Maintain

02S51Y Existing 1.90 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S51YA Existing 0.55 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S60 Existing 1.93 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S60B Existing 0.51 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S60C Existing 0.21 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S62 Existing 5.60 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S62B Existing 0.66 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S64 Existing 1.61 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S65 Existing 0.86 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S65 Existing 1.26 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S65 Existing 1.25 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S65A Existing 0.36 Closed Reconstruct

02S65D Existing 0.22 Closed Maintain

02S66Y Existing 1.82 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S66YA Existing 0.09 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S68 Existing 1.81 Closed (mitigation) Reconstruct

02S68A Existing 0.25 Closed Reconstruct

02S68B Existing 0.18 Closed Maintain

02S68B Existing 0.13 Closed Reconstruct

02S72 Existing 0.47 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S87 Existing 0.01 Closed Reconstruct

70
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

02S87 Existing 1.08 Closed Reconstruct

02S88 Existing 0.78 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S88 Existing 0.29 ALL, seasonal Maintain

02S88 Existing 1.31 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S89 Existing 4.95 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

02S93 Existing 2.52 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N01A Existing 0.29 Closed Maintain

03N01C Existing 0.11 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

03N01C Existing 0.47 Closed Reconstruct

03N01G Existing 1.00 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N01K Existing 0.67 Closed Reconstruct

03N01M Existing 0.71 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N01N Existing 0.37 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

03N01N Existing 0.42 Closed Reconstruct

03N01P Existing 0.44 HLO, seasonal Reconstruct

03N01Q Existing 0.20 HLO, seasonal Maintain

03N01R Existing 0.56 Closed Reconstruct

03N01S Existing 0.36 Closed Reconstruct

03N01T Existing 0.17 Closed Maintain

03N04Y Existing 0.50 Closed Reconstruct

03N07 Existing 0.25 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N21 Existing 1.53 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N22 Existing 1.90 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N22A Existing 1.32 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N45Y Existing 0.85 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N56Y Existing 0.13 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N56Y Existing 0.86 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N56Y Existing 0.28 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N56YA Existing 0.62 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N83 Existing 5.12 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

03N83 Existing 0.29 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

03N83A Existing 1.02 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N83B Existing 0.59 ALL, seasonal Maintain

03N83C Existing 1.44 Closed Reconstruct

03N86 Existing 2.14 ALL, seasonal Maintain

11705B Existing 0.31 Closed Maintain

11805A Existing 0.09 Closed Temporary Road

11806A Existing 0.47 Closed Temporary Road

11807A Existing 0.08 Closed Temporary Road

11821J2 Existing 0.69 Closed Temporary Road

11824P2 Existing 0.10 Closed Temporary Use - Revert

11833A Existing 0.23 Closed Temporary Road

11833D Existing 0.29 Closed Temporary Use - Revert

11833F Existing 0.09 Closed Temporary Road

11906G1 Existing 0.03 Closed Maintain

11906G2 Existing 0.04 Closed Maintain

11906G3 Existing 0.06 Closed Maintain

17EV11 Existing 0.91 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

17EV11 Existing 0.33 Closed (mitigation) Reconstruct

17EV34 Existing 0.27 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

17EV438 Existing 0.17 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

71
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

18DC429 Existing 0.08 Closed Temporary Use - Revert

18DC431 Existing 0.08 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

18DC434 Existing 0.04 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV274 Existing 0.80 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV277 Existing 0.09 ALL, seasonal Maintain

18EV400 Existing 0.57 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV402 Existing 0.61 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV407 Existing 0.22 ALL, seasonal Temporary Use - Revert

18EV409 Existing 0.53 Closed (mitigation) Reconstruct

18EV409 Existing 0.09 Closed (mitigation) Reconstruct

18EV410 Existing 0.30 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV411 Existing 0.19 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV420 Existing 0.59 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV422 Existing 0.12 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV427 Existing 0.15 Closed (mitigation) Reconstruct

18EV433 Existing 0.07 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV435 Existing 0.51 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

18EV440 Existing 1.42 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

19DC124 Existing 0.13 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

19EV117 Existing 0.50 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

19EV129 Existing 0.23 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

19EV130 Existing 0.39 4WD, seasonal Temporary Use - Revert

19EV135 Existing 0.55 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

19EV142 Existing 0.17 ALL, seasonal Reconstruct

19EV148 Existing 0.44 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

19EV154 Existing 0.69 Closed Temporary Road

19EV155 Existing 0.52 Closed Temporary Road

19EV213 Existing 0.77 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

19EV214 Existing 1.26 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

19EV215 Existing 0.60 4WD, seasonal Reconstruct

1S1806A Existing 0.15 Closed Reconstruct

1S1824 Existing 0.36 Closed Temporary Road

1S1907A Existing 0.39 Closed Temporary Road

1S1922D Existing 0.36 Closed Temporary Road

1S1928A Existing 0.12 Closed Temporary Road

1S25YB Existing 0.34 Closed Reconstruct

21709O Existing 0.28 Closed Maintain

21801E Existing 0.05 Closed Maintain

21802N Existing 0.20 Closed Maintain

21812C Existing 0.07 Closed Maintain

21831A Existing 0.07 Closed Temporary Road

21907B Existing 0.24 Closed Maintain

21907B Existing 0.20 Closed Temporary Road

2S1815 Existing 0.51 Closed Maintain

FR10142 Existing 0.03 Closed Maintain

FR11091 Existing 0.07 Closed Maintain

FR14878 Existing 0.27 Closed Temporary Road

FR15090 Existing 0.07 Closed Maintain

FR15120 Existing 0.12 Closed Maintain

FR15120 Existing 0.04 Closed Maintain

FR1981 Existing 0.27 Closed Maintain

72
Rim Fire Recovery (43033)

Record of Decision

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

FR36710 Existing 0.60 Closed Maintain

FR3993 Existing 0.07 Closed Maintain

FR4100 Existing 0.13 Closed Temporary Road

FR4875 Existing 0.08 Closed Maintain

FR5230 Existing 0.68 Closed Temporary Road

FR5310 Existing 0.09 Closed Temporary Use - Revert

FR5318 Existing 0.05 Closed Maintain

FR5473 Existing 0.23 Closed Temporary Road

FR5606 Existing 0.55 Closed Maintain

FR5766 Existing 0.15 Closed Temporary Road

FR5817 Existing 0.47 Closed Maintain

FR5818 Existing 0.27 Closed Temporary Road

FR5819 Existing 0.03 Closed Temporary Road

FR6469 Existing 0.25 Closed Maintain

FR7208 Existing 0.03 Closed Maintain

FR7209 Existing 0.04 Closed Maintain

FR7209 Existing 0.30other public road Reconstruct

FR7858 Existing 0.46 Closed Maintain

FR7955 Existing 0.05 Closed Temporary Road

FR7965 Existing 0.21 Closed Maintain

FR8430 Existing 0.01 Closed Maintain

FR8591 Existing 0.05 Closed Maintain

FR8592 Existing 0.25 Closed Temporary Road

FR8593 Existing 0.34 Closed Temporary Road

FR8594 Existing 0.25 Closed Maintain

FR8597 Existing 0.09 Closed Temporary Road

FR8611 Existing 0.36 Closed Temporary Road

FR8781 Existing 0.17 Closed Temporary Road

FR8799 Existing 0.24 Closed Maintain

FR8988 Existing 0.22 Closed Maintain

FR8992 Existing 0.11 Closed Temporary Road

FR9357 Existing 0.15 Closed Temporary Road

FR9573 Existing 0.19 Closed Temporary Road

FR9582 Existing 0.23 Closed Maintain

FR9712 Existing 0.01 Closed Temporary Road

FR9713 Existing 0.25 Closed Temporary Road

FR9723 Existing 0.12 Closed Temporary Road

FR9723 Existing 0.13 Closed Temporary Road

FR9724 Existing 0.17 Closed Temporary Road

FR9725 Existing 0.14 Closed Temporary Road

FR9726 Existing 0.16 Closed Temporary Road

FR9727 Existing 0.39 Closed Temporary Road

FR9734A Existing 0.03 Closed Temporary Road

FR9771 Existing 0.07 Closed Maintain

FR9773 Existing 0.80 Closed Temporary Road

FR9777 Existing 0.12 Closed Temporary Road

FR9787 Existing 0.05 Closed Maintain

FR98541 Existing 0.07 Closed Temporary Road

FR99001 Existing 0.36 Closed Maintain

FR99002 Existing 0.48 Closed Maintain

FR99003 Existing 0.05 Closed Maintain

73
Appendix B Stanislaus

Treatments National Forest

Route Status miles MVUM Modified Alternative 4

FR99004 Existing 0.11 Closed Maintain

FR99005 Existing 0.32 Closed Maintain

P11807A-1 Existing 0.09 Closed Temporary Road

P1N01-1 Existing 0.41 Closed Temporary Road

P1N01A-1 Existing 0.40 Closed Temporary Road

P1N11Y-1 Existing 0.21 Closed Temporary Road

P3N01-3 Existing 0.11 Closed Temporary Road

PFR8592-1 Existing 0.13 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 1 New 0.66 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 3 New 0.51 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 9 New 0.17 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 14 New 0.21 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 14 New 0.19 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 21 New 0.13 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 23 Existing 0.27 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 24 Existing 0.19 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 28 New 0.51 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 32 New 0.32 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 36 Existing 0.58 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 37 New 0.30 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 38 Existing 0.12 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 39 Existing 0.29 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 40 New 1.02 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 41 New 0.20 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 42 Existing 0.16 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 43 Existing 0.07 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 44 Existing 0.28 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 45 Existing 0.21 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 47 New 0.37 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 48 Existing 0.45 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 49 New 0.26 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 50 Existing 0.10 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 51 Existing 0.74 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 52 Existing 0.38 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 53 New 0.18 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 54 New 0.24 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 56 New 0.49 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 57 Existing 0.03 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 59 New 0.16 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 60 Existing 0.59 Closed Temporary Road

Temp 61 New 0.18 Closed Temporary Road

TR62328 Existing 0.29 Closed Temporary Road

TR62331 Existing 0.15 Closed Temporary Road

4WD=4 Wheel Drive; ALL=All Vehicles; HLO=Highway Legal Only MVUM=Motor Vehicle 

Use Map; Temp=Temporary. Blank entries indicate the item does not apply.

74