United States Department of Agriculture 

Navy Timber Sale 

Record of Decision - Draft 

Forest Service Tongass National Forest 

Alaska Region Wrangell Ranger District R10-MB-632c April 2015 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Key acronyms and other terms used in this Record of Decision: 

ADEC: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 

AFRPA: Alaska Forest Resources and Practices Act 

ANCSA: Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 

ANILCA: Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act 

AYC: Alaska yellow-cedar 

BA: Biological Assessment 

BE: Biological Evaluation 

BLM: Bureau of Land Management 

BMP: Best management practice 

CEQ: Council of Environmental Quality 

CFR: Code of Federal Regulation 

CZMA: Coastal Zone Management Act 

DEIS: Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

DHC: Deer habitat capability 

DWM: Down woody material 

EFH: Essential fish habitat 

EPA: Environmental Protection Agency 

ESA: Endangered Species Act 

FASTR: Financial Analysis Spreadsheet Tool – RV 

FEIS: Final Environmental Impact Statement 

FIA: Forest Inventory and Analysis 

Forest Plan: Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan, 2008 

FSM or FSH: Forest Service Manual or Forest Service Handbook 

GHG: Greenhouse gas 

GIS: Geographic information system 

IRA: Inventoried roadless area 

IDT: Interdisciplinary team 

LTF: Log transfer facility 

LUD: Land use designation 

MBF: Thousand board feet 

MIS: Management indicator species 

MMBF: Million board feet 

NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

NFMA: National Forest Management Act 

NFS: National Forest System 

NHPA: National Historic Preservation Act 

NMFS: National Marine Fisheries Service 

POG: Productive old growth (forest) 

RAW: Reasonable assurance of windfirmness 

ROD: Record of Decision 

SEIS: Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 

SIO: Scenic integrity objectives 

TTPA: Total trees per acre 

TTRA: Tongass Timber Reform Act 

USDA: United States Department of Agriculture 

USFS: United States Forest Service 

USFWS: United States Fish and Wildlife Service 

VCU: Value comparison unit 

WAA: Wildlife analysis area 

Cover photo: View of Navy Peak and Cannery Point 
US DA United States 

7?::7Zii Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest Tongass National Forest 

Service Alaska Region 

Dear Planning Participant, 

648 Mission Street 

Ketchikan, AK 99901 

907-225-3101 

File Code: 1950 

Date: April 21, 2015 

I am pleased to announce that the draft Record of Decision (ROD) for the Navy Timber Sale project on the Wrangell 

Ranger District, Tongass National Forest is available for your review. This project is subject to the Predecisional 

Administrative Review Process (Objection Process) pursuant to 36 CFR 218, subparts A and B. The FEIS and ROD 

are available for review at the Ketchikan Forest Supervisor's Office and Wrangell District Office, and online at 

http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa project exp.php?project=l4556. Hardcopies and CDs of the document are 

available upon request. 

The draft ROD documents my intention to select Alternative F, and the facts considered in reaching my decision. 

The ROD replaces the March 2009 decision which was appealed and subsequently remanded by the Regional 

Forester in July 2009. This decision would make about 13.1 million board feet ofsawlog and utility timber 

available for harvest from about 1,252 acres of commercial forest land on Etolin Island, requiring construction of 

about 0.6 mile and reconstruction of 0.8 mile of National Forest System road, and construction of2.7 miles of 

temporary road. 

The ROD is being made available as a draft for public review prior to the final decision. A pre-decisional objection 

process has replaced the post-decisional appeal process, per the Final Rule published at 36 CFR 218 in March 2013. 

See the section "Administrative Review - Opportunity to Object" for information on filing an objection at the end 

of the ROD. More information on the pre-decisional objection process can also be found at: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/objections/index.php. 

Under the 36 CFR 218 objection process, the public will be notified of the availability of the draft ROD through a 

legal notice published in the newspaper of record, the Ketchikan Daily News, starting the 45-day objection filing 

period. A copy of the legal notice will also be posted on the Forest Service project website at 

http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa project exp.php?project=14556. 

If objections are received during the 45-day objection filing period, a 45-day review period will begin during which 

time the Reviewing Officer, the Responsible Official, and any objectors may attempt to resolve concerns, with the 

goal of achieving a better, more-informed decision. The ROD will be signed after any concerns and instructions 

identified by the Reviewing Officer in the objection response have been addressed. A final decision on projects 

subject to the objection process may occur on, but not before, 5 business days from the close of the objection filing 

period, if no objections are received (36 CFR 218.12(c)(2)). 

Copies of this letter have been directly mailed to those people who have expressed interest in the project through 

scoping, comments, consultation, or requests to be on the mailing list. For additional information, please contact 

Bob Dalrymple, Wrangell District Ranger, at (907)-874-2323. 

As the Forest Supervisor, I am responsible for this decision. Your interest in the Navy project and management of 

the Tongass National Forest is appreciated. 

Sincerely, 

FORREST COLE 

Forrest Cole 

Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper 
This page intentionally left blank 
 

 

 

 

 

Navy Timber Sale 

Record of Decision - DRAFT 

United States Department of Agriculture 

Forest Service Alaska Region 

Lead Agency:	 USDA Forest Service 

Tongass National Forest 

Responsible Official:	 Forrest Cole, Forest Supervisor 

Tongass National Forest 

Federal Building 

Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 

For Further Robert Dalrymple, Wrangell District Ranger 

Information Contact: Tongass National Forest 

P.O. Box 51 

Wrangell, Alaska 99929-0051 

(907) 874-2323 

Abstract: 

The Responsible Official intends to select Alternative F from the Navy Timber Sale Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). This decision will make about 13.1 million board feet 

of sawlog and utility timber available for harvest from about 1,252 acres of commercial forest 

land on Etolin Island to contribute to the Tongass National Forest timber sale program. The 

harvest of this timber will require construction of about 0.6 mile and reconstruction of 0.8 mile 

of National Forest System road, and construction of 2.7 miles of temporary road. 
This page intentionally left blank 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

Draft 

Navy Timber Sale 

USDA Forest Service 

Wrangell Ranger District, Tongass National Forest, Alaska Region 

Introduction 

This draft Record of Decision (ROD) is being made available for review under 

the project-level predecisional administrative review, or “objection process” 

(Title 36 CFR 218, Subparts A and B). The objection process replaces the 

former appeals process and gives eligible individuals and entities the opportunity 

to voice concerns and file objections to the project with the Reviewing Officer 

and Responsible Official prior to the final ROD. 

This draft Record of Decision documents my intention to select Alternative F 

(hereafter called the Selected Alternative) from the Navy Timber Sale FEIS. 

The ROD contains a summary of the environmental analysis completed for this 

project and the rationale for my decision. It also contains findings required by 

law and policy, and information concerning the rights to administrative review 

of this decision. 

The Selected Alternative will make about 13.1 million board feet of sawlog and 

utility timber available for harvest from about 1,252 acres of commercial forest 

land on Etolin Island to contribute to the Tongass National Forest timber sale 

program. The harvest of this timber will require construction of about 0.6 mile 

and reconstruction of 0.8 mile of National Forest System road, and construction 

of 2.7 miles of temporary road. See vicinity map (Figure ROD-1, below), and 

Selected Alternative map (Figure ROD-2 on page R-33). 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-1 
 

Record of Decision
 

Figure R-1
 

Navy Timber Sale Vicinity Map 

R-2  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

Review of New Information 

In preparation of this decision, I asked the interdisciplinary team to identify any 

relevant new information, direction, or scientific findings since the 2009 FEIS 

including information presented in the appeals of the 2009 ROD. The 

assessments of the new information are summarized in Appendix ROD-3. This 

information was analyzed and documented in addendums to the resource reports. 

These reports and any supporting data and information have been added to the 

project record. An updated biological assessment was prepared and submitted to 

the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 

I have determined that the new information and other changes since 2009 do not 

result in significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental 

concerns and bearing on the Selected Alternative or its impacts beyond those 

that were previously evaluated in the FEIS. The new information does not result 

in any new or changed environmental effects from this project that were not 

already evaluated as part of the original project analysis and the 2008 Forest 

Plan Amendment. Therefore, as part of this decision, I have determined that the 

results of the new information assessment do not warrant a supplemental EIS for 

the Navy Timber Sale project. This conclusion is based on the criteria in the 

Forest Service Handbook FSH 1909.15, Section 18 and 40 CFR § 1502.9(c)(1). 

Decision 

I released the Navy Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) with a Record 

of Decision in 2009. That decision was subsequently appealed and remanded. 

This decision replaces my previous decision for this project. 

I postponed the release of this draft ROD until now for several reasons. I 

wanted to know the outcome of the litigation regarding the Tongass National 

Forest exemption to the Roadless Rule. However, resolution of this issue is 

ongoing in the courts, and I believe it is prudent to move ahead with a Record of 

Decision at this time. I also felt that delaying the decision until the new 

objection process was in place would give the interested public an opportunity to 

participate in a collaborative decision-making process before the final ROD is 

signed. The delay also allowed for a careful review of any new information 

since the FEIS was released in 2009. 

Based upon my review of public comments, the analysis contained in the FEIS, 

the project record and the new information documented in Appendix ROD-3, I 

intend to select Alternative F as the Selected Alternative. The Selected 

Alternative is displayed in Figure ROD-2 at the end of this Record of Decision. 

I am incorporating the project design criteria and measures to minimize adverse 

environmental effects of the Selected Alternative as part of my decision. These 

are described in Appendices ROD-1 and ROD-2. I am satisfied that these are 

practicable and effective in avoiding or minimizing environmental effects. I 

have found them to be effective when implemented elsewhere on the Forest. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Features of the Selected Alternative 

The Selected Alternative will harvest timber on approximately 1,252 acres of 

commercial forest land, which is expected to contribute approximately 13.1 

million board feet (MMBF) of sawlog and utility volume to the Tongass 

National Forest timber sale program. 

Timber harvest will occur under even-aged management prescriptions (clearcuts 

or clearcuts with reserves) or uneven-aged management prescriptions (singletree selection) using cable, shovel, or helicopter yarding. Design features for 

timber harvest units in this decision are described in detail on the unit cards in 

Appendix ROD-1. 

The harvest of this timber will require construction of approximately 0.6 mile 

and reconstruction of 0.8 mile of National Forest System road, and construction 

of 2.7 miles of temporary road. The existing road system and the Anita Bay log 

transfer facilities will be used to transport the timber off the island. Design 

features of the National Forest System roads for this decision are described in 

detail on the road cards in Appendix ROD-2. Temporary roads are included on 

the unit cards in Appendix ROD-1. 

All new National Forest System roads will be placed in storage and closed to 

public motorized use after timber sale activities are completed. Temporary 

roads will be decommissioned and allowed to revegetate after harvest. 

All timber harvest and road construction will occur outside of 2001 inventoried 

roadless areas. 

Rationale for the Decision 

Like many other timber harvest projects on the Tongass National Forest, we 

received public comments both in support of and in opposition to this project. 

Therefore, I believe it is important to clearly explain why I intend to select 

Alternative F. 

A combination of different factors led to my intention to select Alternative F for 

implementation: 

•	 I looked at how each alternative responded to the Purpose and Need for 

action of providing timber to meet the needs of industry. 

•	 I considered how each alternative addressed the key issues developed 

from scoping. 

•	 I reviewed the environmental effects of each alternative. 

•	 I reviewed public comments to see how the alternatives responded to 

issues and management concerns raised by the public, other agencies, 

and the interdisciplinary team members. 

R-4  ROD	 [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

•	 I verified that the decision is consistent with Forest Plan Standards and 

Guidelines, goals, and objectives within the project area, as well as 

applicable laws, regulations, and policies. 

A detailed discussion of each of these factors is presented below. 

Purpose and Need 

I looked at how each alternative responded to the Purpose and Need for action 

(fully described in the FEIS Chapter 1) of offering timber for harvest to meet the 

needs of the industry. I have determined that the Selected Alternative best meets 

the Purpose and Need within Forest Plan direction without entering any 2001 

inventoried roadless areas (IRAs). The Purpose and Need is to respond to goals 

and objectives of the Forest Plan, and help move the project area toward the 

desired conditions. The Selected Alternative will: 

•	 Provide a diversity of opportunities for resource uses that contribute to the 

local and regional economies of Southeast Alaska. 

•	 Support a wide range of natural resource employment opportunities 

within Southeast Alaska’s communities. 

•	 Manage the timber resource for production of sawtimber and other timber 

products from suitable forest lands made available for timber harvest, on 

an even-flow, long-term sustained yield basis and in an economically 

efficient manner. 

•	 Contribute an estimated 13.1 MMBF of timber in order to seek to meet 

the annual market demand for Tongass National Forest timber and the 

market demand for the planning cycle. 

Key Issues 

An important consideration in making my decision is how each alternative 

addressed the key issues developed from public scoping. After carefully 

reviewing the issues (FEIS Chapter 1), I find that the Selected Alternative best 

addresses these key issues when considered as a whole. 

Issue 1: Timber Supply and Demand 

I considered the need to manage the timber resource in the Navy analysis area in 

order to produce an even-flow of sawtimber and other wood products on a 

sustained yield and economical basis from the Tongass National Forest. The 

Selected Alternative provides about 13.1 MMBF toward meeting annual market 

demand without entering any 2001 inventoried roadless areas. 

I evaluated the concerns for providing for economical timber sale offerings 

within the context of fluctuating timber markets, the amount of timber volume 

currently available for offer from the Tongass National Forest, and the relative 

effects of the Selected Alternative, and find that the Selected Alternative 

provides the best balance overall. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT]	 ROD  R-5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

The current timber industry in Southeast Alaska is in a state of transition to 

young-growth harvest. The Selected Alternative will contribute timber volume 

to meet industry needs. Although there is currently no young-growth timber 

mature enough for harvest in the Navy project area, the Selected Alternative 

contributes to the supply of timber needed to maintain the timber industry during 

the transition to young-growth management. A reliable supply of economically 

viable timber is critical to maintain the expertise and infrastructure of the 

existing timber industry during the transition to young-growth management. 

The Selected Alternative could support an estimated 52 to 63 annualized jobs, 

including logging, sawmilling, transportation and other services. Although it 

provides the lowest timber volume of the FEIS action alternatives and supports 

the least number of jobs, it is the most economical alternative because it 

primarily uses the existing road system, builds the fewest miles of road, and uses 

the least amount of costly helicopter yarding. 

The financial efficiency analysis used for the Navy project provides only a 

relative comparison of values between the alternatives. The financial efficiency 

analysis at the planning stage relies on past markets and costs and may not 

reflect future market conditions at the time of offer, since timber markets and 

values are extremely volatile. The value of the timber will only be known at the 

time the appraisal is completed and contract offered. 

The results of the financial efficiency modeling using historical timber costs and 

values in the Financial Analysis Spreadsheet Tool – RV (FASTR) model 

indicate a deficit value based on past market performance for all alternatives. 

However, the Selected Alternative is the most economical of the action 

alternatives and it is likely to have a positive value if current market conditions 

continue to improve. 

It is important to have this timber volume available to offer as market conditions 

improve. Navy timber sales will not be advertised until they appraise with 

positive values. 

Issue 2: Wildlife Habitat Fragmentation

I carefully considered the effects to wildlife habitat. Some commenters 

expressed concern that further timber harvest may reduce the large patches of 

old-growth forest in the project area, thereby reducing the preferred habitat for 

old-growth associated species. They also had specific concerns for habitat 

connectivity in the area between Anita Bay and Burnett Inlet. 

I intend to choose Alternative F as the Selected Alternative because it has the 

least effect on interior habitat and coarse canopy, and large patches of oldgrowth habitat of all the FEIS action alternatives, since it harvests the fewest 

acres of habitat. It will result in an estimated 1.4 percent reduction in productive 

old-growth forest (POG) within wildlife analysis area (WAA) 1901. No harvest 

or roads occur within the beach buffer, which will retain its integrity as wildlife 

habitat. 

R-6  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Fifty-five percent of the harvest area (692 of the 1,252 acres) in the Selected 

Alternative will be partially harvested using a single-tree selection prescription 

removing approximately 30 percent of the basal area. This leaves the remaining 

70 percent to continue to provide habitat components and retain old-growth 

characteristics within the stand. 

The Selected Alternative design reduces impacts to wildlife habitat in the area 

between Anita Bay and Burnett Inlet, as compared to Alternatives B, C, and D. 

Alternative E did not propose harvest in this area. This area has experienced 

timber harvest and road construction and use since the early 1980s. While the 

Selected Alternative will harvest some timber in the area, it contains features to 

minimize the negative effects to wildlife. Reserve trees within the harvest units 

will create future multi-layered forest habitat. Tree retention in Unit 67 is 

increased, and a portion of Unit 70 is deleted, in comparison to Alternatives B, 

C, and D, to maintain part of the low-elevation corridor. 

Because of the continuing concerns about additional timber harvest in this area, I 

reviewed the area and found that it consists of a mosaic of vegetation types. 

When the remaining old-growth forest stands, the unmanaged lowerproductivity old-growth forest stands, and the partial-harvest stands in the 

Selected Alternative are all considered together, I find that this area provides 

wildlife habitat connectivity. This area will continue to function as wildlife 

habitat and serve as a travel corridor with implementation of the Selected 

Alternative, as much of the natural habitat remains. 

I have also determined that the Selected Alternative maintains enough oldgrowth forest to provide the full range of matrix functions in order to meet the 

Tongass Conservation Strategy. 

Issue 3: Inventoried Roadless Areas 

I considered the effects to roadless area values, which were analyzed by 

alternative in the FEIS. These included direct effects from proposed units and 

roads within the IRA boundaries, and indirect effects such as temporary sight 

and noise disturbance and the loss of interior habitat values within the IRAs 

from activities occurring outside of but adjacent to the IRAs. 

The FEIS analysis used the Forest Plan 2008 roadless inventory because the 

Tongass exemption from the Roadless Rule was in place during the FEIS 

analysis. In 2011, the Alaska Federal District Court vacated the Tongass 

exemption from the Roadless Rule. In March 2014, that ruling was reversed by 

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, remanding the case back to the District 

Court. In August 2014, however, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted 

another hearing, which was held in December 2014 before an eleven-judge panel 

to rehear the appeal of the 2011 District Court decision. The eleven-judge panel 

has not yet issued a decision. Although resolution of the case is still ongoing, 

the court rulings did not invalidate the analysis or effects disclosed in the FEIS. 

The alternatives were reassessed in the new information analysis using the 2001 

Roadless Rule inventory boundaries. The differences between the 2008 Forest 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-7 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Plan roadless inventory and the 2001 Roadless Rule Inventory are discussed in 

Appendix ROD-3. 

I intend to choose the Selected Alternative because it does not harvest timber or 

build roads within any IRA under either the 2001 or the 2008 inventory. If I 

were to choose another action alternative that proposes some timber harvest and 

road construction within IRAs, I could defer any timber harvest units and road 

construction within an IRA pending resolution of the Tongass exemption in the 

courts. However, for the reasons discussed above, as well as to eliminate further 

uncertainty, I intend to select Alternative F. This alternative does not have any 

direct effects on IRAs as it does not harvest timber or build roads within any 

IRA. Approximately 1 percent of the IRAs could be indirectly affected by sights 

and sounds of activities occurring outside of, but adjacent to, the IRAs, although 

these are expected to be minor and of short duration. 

Environmental Effects 

I considered the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the alternatives in 

making my decision. All alternatives are consistent with the Forest Plan. The 

Selected Alternative has the least overall effect of the action alternatives, since it 

harvests the least timber volume and builds the fewest roads. The FEIS and 

project record display the effects, both positive and negative, resulting from the 

action alternatives. 

While I reviewed all of the resource effects in addition to the key issues, the 

public raised some specific concerns which I will address below. More 

information on these effects is summarized in Appendix ROD-3 and the FEIS. 

Alaska yellow-cedar decline: There is concern for Alaska yellow-cedar decline 

and the regeneration and persistence of Alaska yellow-cedar in stands where it is 

present. I have examined the silvicultural prescriptions and determined that 

appropriate measures are provided by the Selected Alternative to ensure 

establishment of Alaska yellow-cedar in regenerated stands where appropriate. 

These measures include the retention of cedar seed-trees and cedar interplanting. This information has been clarified on the unit cards in Appendix 

ROD-1 and in the addendum to the Silviculture resource report. Recent research 

publications regarding Alaska yellow-cedar decline have been considered and 

are included in the project record. The Alaska yellow-cedar is currently in a 12­

month review period by the USFWS for potential listing under the Endangered 

Species Act. 

Windthrow: There is concern for windthrow following harvest. I have reviewed 

the unit design and silviculture prescriptions and find that the risk of future 

windthrow will be minimized with the use of clearcutting, windfirm buffers, or 

the use of single-tree selection harvest that retains 70 percent of the basal area to 

maintain a wind-resistant canopy. 

R-8  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

Areas with high windthrow concerns are identified on the unit cards. 

Reasonable assurance of windfirmness (RAW) buffers will be designed for 

riparian management areas if needed for protection during implementation. 

Watershed effects: I considered the direct and cumulative effects of the Selected 

Alternative combined with past harvest on watershed resources. The Selected 

Alternative has the fewest acres of harvest and miles of road construction in true 

watersheds (an area that contributes surface and subwater to a single point) of 

the action alternatives. The project design and implementation guidelines will 

limit watershed effects. 

Goshawk nesting habitat: The Selected Alternative has the least effect on highprobability goshawk nesting habitat of any action alternative. The Biological 

Evaluation determination for the goshawk is “may adversely affect individuals 

but not likely to result in a loss of viability in the planning area nor cause a trend 

toward federal listing.” A 230-acre buffer surrounding a group of three goshawk 

nests adjacent to harvest units 67, 72, and 73 exceeds the Forest Plan Standard 

and Guideline of 100 acres, providing additional protection for that nest area. 

The Selected Alternative also avoids harvest near the other known goshawk 

nesting areas in WAA 1901. 

Deer habitat: The Selected Alternative has a minor effect on deer habitat, 

having the least effect of the action alternatives. The 2011 direction for the deer 

model was used to estimate the effects on deer habitat and the results are similar 

to those in the FEIS. The reanalysis using the 2011 direction for the deer model 

estimates that deer habitat capability will be reduced by about 2 percent from the 

existing condition due to activities in the Selected Alternative, with a cumulative 

reduction of 13 percent from historical capability in WAA 1901. Deer deepsnow winter habitat would be reduced directly and indirectly by approximately 2 

percent and cumulatively by 24 percent from historic conditions. 

Wolf population sustainability: In order to assess the effects on wolves, three 

analyses were recalculated: 1) Deer density to estimate the effects on the 

wolves’ primary food source; 2) Road density to evaluate the effect of increased 

roads on the potential hunting/trapping pressure; and 3) Harvest of wolves to 

estimate current hunting/trapping pressure on wolves. Based on the results of 

these analyses (summarized in Appendix ROD-3), the Selected Alternative 

would have the least effect on wolf populations of the action alternatives. Even 

during the life of the sale, road densities in WAA 1901 would meet the Forest 

Plan wolf road density standard and guideline. Wolf populations would remain 

sustainable on Etolin Island with the implementation of the Selected Alternative. 

Soil stability: The Selected Alternative has the least effect on steep slopes of the 

action alternatives, since it has the fewest potentially affected acres. All areas 

with slopes greater than 72 percent will have a site stability analysis prior to 

implementation, and unstable slopes will be avoided to minimize adverse 

impacts to soil and water resources. 

Botany: The Selected Alternative has the least effect on sensitive plants of the 

action alternatives since it affects the fewest acres of habitat. There may be 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

minor effects to rare plants and Alaska Region sensitive plants. The Biological 

Evaluation finding is “May adversely affect individuals but not likely to result in 

a loss of viability in the planning area nor cause a trend toward federal listing” 

for several species. Detailed information is in the Biological Evaluation and 

summarized in the FEIS, Chapter 3. Measures are included in this decision, 

described in Appendix ROD-1, Unit Cards, to reduce the possibility of invasive 

plant species that may compete with native species. 

Recreation: The Selected Alternative would have the least effects to recreation 

and scenery resources of the action alternatives. Implementation of the Selected 

Alternative would not noticeably decrease or change the current recreational 

opportunities or scenery. 

Climate change: Climate change is an important consideration, however, the 

magnitude of this project is so small compared to the factors that contribute to 

climate change that foreseeable effects would be small if measurable at all for all 

alternatives. The Forest Plan FEIS discusses climate change factors (p. 3-11 to 

3-20) and discloses the risk of possible effects. The Tongass National Forest 

will continue to monitor potential effects of climate change through the existing 

Forest Plan monitoring programs, and other studies that are occurring regionally 

and nationally. Appendix ROD-3 describes some of the climate change 

considerations and studies which are ongoing at various levels across the 

nation’s forests, including the Tongass. 

Public Comments 

I want to thank the individuals, organizations and agencies that participated and 

provided comments for this analysis. Their input was valuable to me in 

identifying issues, creating alternatives for this project, and making a moreinformed decision. I have reviewed the many public and agency comments we 

received during this analysis and the responses to those comments, as presented 

in the FEIS Appendix B. These responses were also reassessed in light of any 

new information and documented in Appendix ROD-3. 

I have also carefully considered the additional comments received through the 

administrative appeals process from the four appeals to the 2009 Record of 

Decision. These comments came in through the written appeals and the 

discussions during the informal resolution process. This information is in the 

project record and also discussed as new information in Appendix ROD-3. 

There were four appeals to the 2009 decision on this project, submitted under the 

36 CFR 215 appeal regulations. These raised a variety of appeal points, 

including range of alternatives, habitat connectivity and fragmentation, yellowcedar, highgrading, clearcutting, climate change, deer model and wildlife, 

market demand and financial analysis, Forest Plan, old-growth reserves, roads 

and roadless areas, subsistence, and watershed, among others. I offered to meet 

with the appellants to see if an informal resolution could be reached that would 

resolve their concerns and still meet the objectives of this project. One appellant 

declined to participate. The other appellants and interested parties participated 

R-10  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

in discussions and provided some proposals. However, a mutually agreeable 

resolution was not reached and no appeals were withdrawn. The appeals then 

went to formal resolution. 

I have carefully reviewed the points raised during the 2009 appeal period and 

reviewed the Forest Service responses to the appeals. The project record 

includes all of the 2009 appeals points and responses. Further analysis was 

included to address or clarify issues raised in the 2009 appeal points pertaining 

to activities in this 2015 decision, and resource reports have been updated 

accordingly. This information is summarized in Appendix ROD-3, and updated 

reports have been added to the project record. Information on the unit and road 

cards for the Selected Alternative (Appendices ROD-1 and ROD-2) has been 

clarified as well. 

In making my decision, I considered the proposals presented by some of the 

appellants during the informal appeal resolution discussions in 2009. These 

proposals focused on deleting timber harvest units that 1) were within 

inventoried roadless areas, 2) were within the area between Anita Bay and 

Burnett Inlet, and 3) had an Alaska yellow-cedar component. Also proposed 

was 4) removing all culverts when putting roads into a storage status rather than 

using waterbars for erosion control. I feel that the Selected Alternative best 

responds to these concerns while still providing timber volume. The Selected 

Alternative avoids harvest and roadbuilding within inventoried roadless areas. 

The Selected Alternative partially addresses the Anita Bay/Burnett Inlet concern 

by increasing retention in Unit 67 and dropping a portion of Unit 70 as 

compared to Alternatives B, C, and D. All alternatives, including the Selected 

Alternative, include seed tree retention in some units to help maintain or 

increase the cedar component in regenerating stands, as shown on the unit cards. 

I considered the appellants’ fourth proposal point – the suggestion to remove all 

culverts from roads that will be put into storage. I have decided that the best 

time to determine whether to remove culverts from roads is at the time of road 

storage activity to best address site-specific conditions. In some cases, leaving 

the culvert in place with supplemental erosion control will cause less disturbance 

than pulling culverts from the roadbed. Roads with Objective Maintenance 

Level 1 planned for road storage after timber harvest activities are complete will 

be evaluated for erosion potential, and measures will be implemented to reduce 

sediment delivery and reduce the risk of crossing failure and stream diversion. 

This may include the removal of drainage structures and bridges, or construction 

of water bars, rolling dips or other measures necessary to protect resources. See 

Appendix ROD-2, Road Cards. This method has been successfully employed on 

the Tongass and is consistent with best management practices (BMPs). 

Consistency with the Forest Plan and other Applicable Laws and 

Regulations 

As the Responsible Official, it is my responsibility, prior to making a decision, 

to ensure that this project is consistent with the Tongass National Forest Land 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

and Resource Management Plan, as amended, and other applicable laws and 

regulations. The Forest Plan describes in detail Forest-wide management 

direction, goals, objectives, research needs, desired conditions, and standards. 

I have determined that the Selected Alternative is consistent with the Forest Plan 

and other applicable laws and regulations. The Selected Alternative will meet 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, and will contribute toward reaching 

Forest Plan goals and objectives. The Selected Alternative is consistent with all 

land use designation standards and guidelines. I also find that my decision to 

implement the Selected Alternative is consistent with all applicable laws and 

regulations including NFMA, NEPA, ANILCA, ESA, and the other laws 

presented in more detail in the section “Findings Required by Other Laws and 

Regulations” in this ROD. 

My decision is consistent with Forest Service policy outlined in agency 

directives. By providing timber for offer and supporting jobs, the Selected 

Alternative also contributes to the USDA Investment Strategy for Creating Jobs 

and Healthy Communities in Southeast Alaska. 

Summary of Decision Rationale 

In summary, in making this decision I considered how the alternatives responded 

to the Purpose and Need, key issues, environmental effects, public comments, 

Forest Plan and applicable laws, regulations, and policy. 

I found that the Selected Alternative provides the best mix of beneficial 

resources for the public, within a framework of existing laws, regulations, 

policies, public needs and desires, and the capabilities of the land. None of the 

alternatives can provide benefits for and meet the needs of all members of the 

public. My decision includes the evaluation of the trade-offs between effects to 

resources, desired products, and social values. 

The Selected Alternative meets the stated Purpose and Need for the project. It 

will produce a supply of timber for the timber industry with minimal effects to 

the environment. It addresses the key issues as a whole by providing a supply of 

timber, maintaining old-growth forest habitat, and does not enter any 2001 

inventoried roadless areas. 

The Selected Alternative will meet the Forest Plan direction and conforms to the 

National Forest Management Act. The direct, indirect, and cumulative 

environmental effects from project activities are consistent with the goals, 

objectives, and standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan. I have found that the 

protection and mitigation measures in Appendix ROD-1, Unit Cards, and design 

criteria in Appendix ROD-2, Road Cards, are effective in reducing 

environmental impacts based upon the Forest Plan analysis and experience in 

using these measures. 

R-12  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Alternatives 

Alternatives Considered in Detail 

Five action alternatives and the no-action alternative were considered in detail in 

the FEIS. These alternatives were designed to address key issues developed 

from scoping comments. I found these alternatives provided a reasonable range 

of alternatives for the analysis. 

Each action alternative was designed with different emphases to address the key 

issues, while meeting the Purpose and Need of providing timber volume. 

Alternative F was designed to avoid harvest and road building in inventoried 

roadless areas. Each of the alternatives is summarized below and described in 

detail in the FEIS Chapter 2. Table R-1 provides a summary comparison of the 

alternatives. 

During the analysis of new information since the FEIS was published, each 

action alternative was analyzed with higher-resolution GIS mapping data which 

resulted in minor acreage differences from those published in the FEIS. 

Timber volumes in the FEIS were estimated from stand exam plots, which 

provide a general gross volume estimate. More-intensive timber cruise plots 

were done since the FEIS. These provided more-precise defect information with 

more-accurate net timber volume estimates. This resulted in new net volume 

estimates for the action alternatives. In addition, road reconstruction completed 

since the FEIS has reduced the amount of reconstruction under the alternatives 

(Table R-1). 

Alternative A - No Action, proposed no new timber harvest or road 

construction in the project area. It does not preclude timber harvest from other 

areas or from the project area in the future. This alternative represents the 

existing condition and serves as a baseline for comparing the action alternatives. 

This alternative displays the effects from the current condition of the area. 

Alternative B was the proposed action. Alternative B responded to Issue 1, 

Timber Supply and Economics, by providing logical extensions to the existing 

Anita Bay road system and using uneven-aged management in helicopter units 

to improve economics. This alternative proposed timber harvest on 

approximately 3,212 acres. The use of higher-resolution GIS data resulted in an 

8-acre reduction, for a total harvest area of approximately 3,204 acres. This 

alternative produced 45.5 MMBF of timber volume estimated from stand exam 

data, and 31.4 MMBF of net cruised timber volume. This alternative proposed 

timber harvest and road building within 2001 IRAs. 

Alternative C emphasized Issue 1 by focusing on timber supply, maximizing 

the available amount of timber while meeting Forest Plan Standards and 

Guidelines, and using uneven-aged management in helicopter units. This 

alternative proposed timber harvest on approximately 6,107 acres. The use of 

higher-resolution GIS data resulted in a 13-acre reduction, for a total harvest 

area of approximately 6,094 acres. This alternative produced 87.5 MMBF of 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-13 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

timber volume estimated from stand exam data, and 62.0 MMBF of net graded 

cruised timber volume. This alternative had the most harvest units and roads 

within 2001 IRAs. 

Alternative D, identified as the preferred alternative in the DEIS, also 

emphasized Issue 1, by focusing on economics. This alternative proposed 

timber harvest on approximately 2,369 acres. The use of higher-resolution GIS 

data resulted in an 8-acre reduction for a total harvest area of approximately 

2,361 acres. This alternative produced 37.2 MMBF of timber volume estimated 

from stand exam data, and 26.6 MMBF of net cruised timber volume. This 

alternative proposed more-economical units, with greater use of conventional 

yarding methods, than the proposed action. This alternative proposed timber 

harvest and road building within 2001 IRAs. 

Alternative E responded to Issue 2, Wildlife Habitat Fragmentation. This 

alternative proposed timber harvest on approximately 3,326 acres. The use of 

higher-resolution GIS data resulted in a 2-acre increase for a total harvest area of 

approximately 3,328 acres. This alternative produced 38.4 MMBF timber 

volume estimated from stand exam data, and 24.5 MMBF of net cruised timber 

volume. No harvest was proposed in the area between Anita Bay and Burnett 

Inlet. It proposed only small-sized clearcut units and uneven-aged management 

on most of the units. Road construction was minimized by using a higher 

proportion of helicopter yarding. This alternative proposed timber harvest and 

road building within 2001 IRAs. 

Alternative F is the Selected Alternative as described above. Alternative F was 

designed to avoid harvest and roadbuilding in inventoried roadless areas. It 

proposed timber harvest on 1,251 acres. The use of higher-resolution GIS data 

resulted in a 1-acre increase for a total harvest area of approximately 1,252 

acres. This alternative produced 18.3 MMBF of timber volume estimated from 

stand exam data, and 13.1 MMBF of net cruised timber volume. This alternative 

responded to Issue 3, Inventoried Roadless Areas, by not harvesting timber or 

constructing roads in inventoried roadless areas. 

I considered whether the Navy FEIS still provided me with a reasonable range of 

alternatives to choose from in light of the 2011 Federal District Court ruling 

vacating the Tongass exemption from the Roadless Rule. I concluded that it 

does, for the following reasons: I could select Alternative F or Alternative A (no 

action) because they do not propose any activities in 2001 IRAs. I could also 

choose any action alternative that proposes activities in an IRA and defer any 

timber harvest units and road construction within an IRA pending resolution of 

the Tongass exemption in the courts. By selecting Alternative F at this time, I 

am eliminating the uncertainty of waiting on the outcome of roadless area 

litigation of an unknown duration, and ensuring that no IRA will be entered as a 

result of this decision. 

R-14  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Table R-1
 

Comparison of Alternative Design and Issues by Alternative (updated 2014)
 

Category Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C 

Estimated harvest acreage and volume: 

Total acres of harvest 0 3,204 6,094 

Acres of cable/shovel yarding 0 1,282 2,519 

Acres of helicopter yarding 0 1,922 3,575 

Total net cruise volume (saw/utility, MMBF)1 0 31.4 62.0 

Cable/shovel yarding (sawlog only, MMBF) 0 18.4 36.6 

Helicopter yarding (sawlog only, MMBF) 0 9.6 18.8 

Acres harvested by silvicultural system2 

Even-aged management 0 1,207 2,185 

Two-aged management 0 0 268 

Uneven-aged management 0 2,005 3,654 

Roads and log transfer facilities (LTFs): 

Miles of NFS road construction 0 6.6 12.1 

Miles of temporary road construction 0 5.8 13.6 

Miles of proposed road reconstruction 0 0.8 2.1 

Proposes construction of Mosman Inlet LTF No No Yes 

Issue 1: Timber supply and economics 

Total net cruise volume MMBF) 0 31.4 62.0 

Indicated bid value ($/MBF3) 0 ($75.68) ($56.73) 

Direct employment (job equivalent)4 0 126-151 248-298 

Road costs (construction/reconstruction)/MBF 0 $83 $82 

Logging costs (stump to mill costs) ($/MBF) 0 $574 $563 

Issue 2: Wildlife habitat fragmentation 

Acres of POG habitat in WAA 1901 post harvest 60,750 59,169 57,689 

% reduction in POG habitat for WAA 1901 0 2.6% 5.0% 

Acres of interior POG in WAA 1901 post harvest 24,642 23,051 22,013 

Acres of coarse canopy old growth in WAA 1901 

post harvest 3,654 3,286 3,255 

Issue 3: Inventoried roadless areas (2001 IRAs) 

Acres of timber harvest within the IRAs 0 2,200 4,463 

Total miles of road construction within the IRAs5 0 6.3 16.8 

Acres of IRA affected (direct and indirect effects)

6 0 5,963 12,117 

% Acres of IRA affected 0 11% 22% 

Alt. D 

2,361 

1,255 

1,106 

26.6 

18.2 

5.6 

1,180 

0 

1,189 

4.8 

5.0 

0.4 

No 

26.6 

($51.56) 

107-128 

$77 

$548 

59,263 

2.4% 

23,280 

3,341 

1,094 

4.3 

3,120 

6% 

Alt. E 

3,328 

554 

2,772 

24.5 

8.0 

13.9 

487 

0 

2,839 

2.2 

2.7 

0.8 

No 

24.5 

($42.90) 

98-117 

$42 

$555 

59,889 

2.4% 

23,702 

3,421 

2,219 

1.7 

6,272 

12% 

Sel. Alt. F 

1,252 

643 

609 

13.1 

8.6 

3.1 

559 

0 

692 

0.6 

2.7 

0.8 

No 

13.1 

($14.16) 

52-63 

$59 

$513 

59,906 

1.4% 

24,044 

3,583 

0 

0 

566 

1% 1 MMBF = million board feet; sawlog and utility. 

2 Estimated acres by silvicultural system, as shown in the FEIS. Total acres by silviculture 

system vary slightly from total harvest acres by 1 to 13 acres due to GIS updates. 

Even-aged includes: clearcut; clearcut w/ 15% reserves; clearcut w/ 50% reserves; 

Two-aged includes: clearcut w/ 15% reserves; Uneven-aged includes: single-tree selection. 3 MBF = thousand board feet 

4 Based on a range of volume from all allowable export to markets outside Alaska, to all sawlogs 

(hem/spruce) processed locally. 5 Includes NFS and temporary road construction 6 Acres affected by alternative includes the zone defined as 1,200 feet from existing and 

proposed roads, and 600 feet from all harvest units including the helicopter units. Alt F only has 

indirect effects since no project activities occur within IRAs. 

Source: GIS; FASTR v 10212013 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-15 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis

Nine alternatives were considered but eliminated from detailed analysis in the 

FEIS. These are presented in the FEIS Chapter 2, Alternatives Considered but 

Eliminated from Detailed Analysis. Three additional proposals by appellants 

were considered during the 2009 informal appeal resolution but eliminated from 

detailed analysis. These are described in Appendix ROD-3. 

After the March 4, 2011 Federal District Court, District of Alaska ruling that the 

Tongass is no longer exempt from the 2001 Roadless Rule, I also considered 

modifying Alternatives B through E by dropping proposed units and roads 

within 2001 inventoried roadless areas, but chose to eliminate this from detailed 

analysis. The volume and economic results of modifying Alternatives B through 

D would not address any additional issues not already addressed by Alternative 

F, and modifying Alternative E was most similar to the TWS and SEACC 

proposals, which were considered but eliminated during the informal appeals 

resolution process. 

Environmentally Preferred Alternative 

The Council on Environmental Quality defines the environmentally preferred 

alternative as “the alternative that will promote the national environmental 

policy as expressed in NEPA's Section 101”. Ordinarily, this means the 

alternative that causes the least damage to the biological and physical 

environment; it also means the alternative which best protects, preserves, and 

enhances historic, cultural, and natural resources.” 40 CFR 1505.2(b) requires 

that one or more environmentally preferable alternatives be disclosed. The 

environmentally preferable alternative is not necessarily the alternative that will 

be implemented, and it does not have to meet the underlying need for the 

project. It does, however, have to cause the least damage to the biological and 

physical environment and best protect, preserve, and enhance historical, cultural, 

and natural resources. I have reviewed the direct, indirect, and cumulative 

effects of each alternative. I have determined that Alternative A, the no-action 

alternative, is the environmentally preferable alternative. This alternative is 

environmentally preferable because it would result in no environmental effects 

and thereby best protects, preserves, and enhances historical, cultural, and 

natural resources on the National Forest. Alternative A does not meet the 

Purpose and Need, but it does provide me with a baseline to measure the direct 

and indirect effects of the action alternatives. 

Of the action alternatives, I have identified Alternative F as the environmentally 

preferred alternative because it has the fewest acres of timber harvest, constructs 

the fewest miles of road, and would result in the fewest environmental impacts. 

In addition, it does not enter any 2001 IRAs. 

Public Involvement 

The Navy Timber Sale project included an extensive public involvement 

process, as documented in the FEIS Chapter 1 and in the project record. Public 

comments helped to shape the analysis. The public and agency comments 

R-16  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

received during scoping helped me to define the key issues, which in turn helped 

to develop the alternatives. Public comments on the DEIS were addressed in the 

FEIS and responses to those comments are presented in FEIS Appendix B. 

These responses were also reassessed in light of any new information and 

documented in Appendix ROD-3. Some members of the public also exercised 

their rights to an administrative review of my 2009 Record of Decision through 

the appeal process. 

On January 21, 2014, I sent a letter to the people on the project mailing list 

notifying them that the Navy Timber Sale Decision was now subject to the 

project-level predecisional administrative review process under Title 36 CFR 

Part 218. The project-level predecisional administrative review process gives 

the public an opportunity to object to the proposed decision prior to it being 

finalized. This process replaced the appeals process that was previously in place 

for the 2009 Decision. 

Mitigation 

The analysis documented in the FEIS discloses the possible adverse effects of 

implementing the actions proposed under each alternative. These effects were 

mitigated or reduced through the use of Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Specific mitigation measures are listed on the unit and road cards in Appendix 

ROD-1 and Appendix ROD-2. These are also discussed in FEIS Chapter 2, pp. 

15-17 and Chapter 3, pp. 57-58. 

Monitoring 

Monitoring of the Selected Alternative will be done both during implementation 

(project-specific monitoring) and as part of the Forest Plan monitoring program. 

Project-specific monitoring is identified in Appendix ROD-1, Unit Cards and 

Appendix ROD-2, Road Cards. The Navy FEIS Chapter 2, pp. 16-17 and 

Chapter 3, pp. 58 and 107 also describes project-specific monitoring activities. 

Project Record 

The project record for this project includes the DEIS and FEIS, the Forest Plan, 

reports containing analyses by resource with supporting documentation, public 

communication and comments, all material incorporated by reference and other 

critical materials produced during the environmental analysis of this project. 

The project record is available electronically upon request from the Wrangell 

Ranger District. 

Map Disclaimer 

The USDA Forest Service makes no warranty, expressed or implied, including 

the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, nor 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-17 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, reliability, 

completeness or utility of these geospatial data, or for the improper or incorrect 

use of these geospatial data. These geospatial data and related maps or graphics 

are not legal documents and are not intended to be used as such. The data and 

maps may not be used to determine title, ownership, legal descriptions or 

boundaries, legal jurisdiction, or restrictions that may be in place on either 

public or private land. Natural hazards may or may not be depicted on the data 

and maps, and land users should exercise due caution. The data are dynamic and 

may change over time. The user is responsible to verify the limitations of the 

geospatial data and to use the data accordingly and use constraints information. 

Findings Required By Law and Regulation 

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980; 

Section 810 

Subsistence Evaluation: The decision on the Forest Plan concluded that 

“implementation of the Forest Plan may result in a significant restriction to 

subsistence use of deer due to the potential effects of projects on the abundance 

and distribution of these resources, and on competition for these resources” 

(ROD p. 61). This is based on the Forest Plan’s cumulative effects analysis of 

resource development on subsistence resources under full implementation of the 

Forest Plan, including this project. A subsistence evaluation was conducted for 

the six alternatives in accordance with Alaska National Interest Lands 

Conservation Act (ANILCA) Section 810. An ANILCA 810 subsistence 

hearing was conducted in Wrangell Alaska in June 2008. 

Based on the information in the FEIS and the new information analysis, effects 

within the foreseeable future from this project alone would not result in a 

significant possibility of a significant restriction on any subsistence resources. 

Finding: In accordance with Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act 

(ANILCA) Section 810, I have made a determination for the subsistence 

evaluation that the direct effects of the project will not result in a risk of a 

significant restriction on the subsistence use of any resources, including deer 

(FEIS p. 3-122). Cumulatively, since additional timber harvest may occur at 

some future time in the development LUDs in WAA 1901, there may be a 

significant possibility of a significant restriction on subsistence use of deer in 

WAA 1901 in the future due to additional reductions in habitat capability. This 

is consistent with the Forest Plan finding that full implementation of the Plan 

could lead to a significant possibility of a significant restriction on subsistence 

use of deer. The potential foreseeable effects, directly and cumulatively, from 

the Selected Alternative will not have a significant possibility of a significant 

restriction on subsistence uses for other resources including bears, furbearers, 

marine mammals, waterfowl, salmon, other finfish, shellfish, and other foods 

such as berries and roots. 

The evaluation determined that: 

R-18  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

•	 Necessary and Consistent with Sound Management of Public Lands: 

I have determined that the Selected Alternative is necessary and 

consistent with sound management of public lands. In this regard, I have 

evaluated this project against the National Forest Management Act, the 

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, the Tongass Timber 

Reform Act, the Wilderness Act, the Tongass Land and Resource 

Management Plan, and the Alaska State Forest Resources and Practices 

Act. Based on the analysis presented in the Navy Final EIS, the findings 

I have made in this ROD and the analysis for the Forest Plan, I have 

determined that the Selected Alternative strikes a balance between 

meeting the resource needs of the public and protecting the forest 

resources. 

•	 Amount of Public Land Necessary to Accomplish the Proposed 

Action: I have determined that the amount of land necessary to 

implement the Selected Alternative is, considering sound multiple-use 

management of public lands, the minimum necessary to accomplish the 

purpose of this project. The entire forested portion of the Tongass is 

used by at least one rural community for subsistence purposes for, at a 

minimum, deer hunting. It is not possible to avoid all of these areas in 

implementing resource use activities, such as timber harvesting and road 

construction, and attempting to reduce effects in some areas can mean 

increasing the effects in other areas. The current Forest-wide Standards 

and Guidelines and LUD prescriptions provide for management or limit 

activities in many of the area’s most important for subsistence uses, such 

as beaches and estuaries, and areas with high fish and wildlife habitat 

values. 

•	 Reasonable Steps to Minimize Adverse Impacts to Subsistence Uses 

and Resources: Subsistence use is addressed specifically in a Forestwide Standard and Guideline, and subsistence resources are covered by 

the Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines for wildlife, fish, riparian 

areas, and biological diversity, among others. I have determined that fish 

and wildlife habitat productivity will be maintained at the highest level 

possible for the Selected Alternative, consistent with the overall 

multiple-use goals and improved protection of the Forest Plan. 

Bald Eagle Protection Act

I have determined that the Selected Alternative complies with the most recent 

information for the protection of bald eagle protection requirements in 50 CFR 

Part 22.26. These are described in ROD Appendix ROD-3. 

Clean Air Act of 1970 (as amended)

I have determined that emissions from the implementation of the Selected 

Alternative will be of short duration and are not expected to exceed State of 

Alaska ambient air quality standards (18 AAC 50). This includes any smoke 

associated with biofuels used for heating commercial buildings and residences. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT]	 ROD  R-19 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Clean Water Act (1977, as amended)

I have determined that the project activities meet all applicable State of Alaska 

Water Quality Standards. Section 313 of the Clean Water Act and Executive 

Order 12088 of January 23, 1987 addresses Federal agency compliance and 

consistency with water pollution control mandates. Agencies must be consistent 

with requirements that apply to "any governmental entity" or private person. 

Compliance is to be in line with "all Federal, State, interstate, and local 

requirements, administrative authority, and process and sanctions respecting the 

control and abatement of water pollution." 

Clean Water Act Sections 208 and 319 address nonpoint source pollution caused 

by activities such as timber harvest. Soil and water conservation practices are 

recognized by EPA as the primary control mechanisms for nonpoint source 

pollution on National Forest System lands. The site-specific application of best 

management practices (BMPs), with a monitoring and feedback mechanism, is 

the approved strategy for controlling nonpoint source pollution as defined by 

Alaska’s Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Strategy (ADEC 2007). In 1997, 

the State of Alaska approved the BMPs in the Forest Service’s Soil and Water 

Conservation Handbook (USFS 2006) as consistent with the Alaska Forest 

Resources and Practices Regulations. The BMPs are incorporated into the 

Tongass Land Management Plan. My finding is based in part on the fact that 

annual Tongass National Forest BMP monitoring results consistently report a 

high success rate at applying BMPs (USFS 2005-2012). 

A discharge of dredge or fill material from normal silvicultural activities such as 

harvesting for the production of forest products is exempt from Section 404 

permitting requirements in waters or the United States, including wetlands 

(404(f)(1)(A)). Forest roads, as defined by US Army Corps of Engineers 

guidance, are exempt from Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting if they are 

constructed and maintained in accordance with BMPs to assure that flow and 

circulation patterns and chemical and biological characteristics of the waters are 

not impaired (404(f)(1)(E)). The BMPs that must be followed are specified in 

33 CFR 323.4(a). These specific BMPs are incorporated into the Alaska Region 

BMPs under BMP 12.5. I have determined that all roads approved in this 

project are exempt from Section 404 permitting requirements in waters of the 

United States, including wetlands (404(f)(1)(A)). 

The Forest Service has issued National BMPs (April 2012). Directives for using 

these BMPs are currently in development. Currently, this project cites the 

Alaska Region BMPs, which are fully described in FSH 2509.22. A crosswalk 

between the current Alaska Region BMPs and these National BMPs has been 

placed in the project record for reference. The Navy Timber Sale will 

implement the most up-to-date BMP guidance. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (as amended)

A biological assessment was prepared for this project. I concur with the finding 

of “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” the federally listed species. 

An updated biological assessment was sent to the National Marine Fisheries 

R-20  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

Service as part of the Section 7 consultation under the Endangered Species Act. 

NMFS concurred with the findings on September 7, 2012. 

Two fish species, the lower Columbia River coho salmon and the green 

sturgeon, were added as Threatened to the Alaska list on March 2013. A finding 

of “no effect” was made for these species since no critical habitat occurs in 

Alaska; NMFS concurred that therefore no consultation was required for these 

species. On November 4, 2013, a Final Rule was published in the Federal 

Register, delisting the eastern distinct population segment Steller sea lion, 

effective December 4, 2013 (78 FR 66139). This species will continue to be 

protected under provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. 

Federal Cave Resource Protection Act of 1988 

I have determined that the activities of the Selected Alternative will not have a 

direct, indirect, or cumulative effect on any significant cave resource in the Navy 

project area, since these features do not exist. There are minor occurrences of 

carbonate rock and associated cave resources in the Navy project area, but these 

will not be adversely affected by the Selected Alternative. 

National Forest Transportation System Final Administrative Policy 

and Final Rule 

The Final EIS and this ROD are prepared to be consistent with the National 

Forest System Transportation Final Administrative Policy and Final Rule 

(2001), as well as the Tongass National Forest Level Road Analysis (2003), the 

2005 Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212) (FEIS p. 3-133), the Wrangell 

Ranger District Road Analysis (2006), and the Wrangell Ranger District Access 

and Travel Management Plan (ATM) (2007). I have determined the proposed 

road system is “the minimum road system needed for safe and efficient travel 

and for administration, utilization, and protection of National Forest System 

lands" (36 CFR 212.5). 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act

The Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation Act requires the Forest Service 

to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service on projects that may affect 

essential fish habitat (EFH). The potential effects of the project on EFH are 

discussed in Chapter 3 of the Final EIS. Chapter 3 also includes a description of 

the EFH in the project area, a description of the proposed activities, and a 

description of the measures that will protect these essential habitats (FEIS pp. 3­

154 to 156). I have reviewed the potential effects of the project on EFH 

discussed in the FEIS Chapter 3 and have determined that this project may 

adversely affect EFH (FEIS p. 3-155). 

National Marine Fisheries Service was formally consulted on the project. They 

concurred with my findings that the Navy Timber Sale “may adversely affect 

EFH because of cumulative effects of past harvest” and submitted 

recommendations. These recommendations were considered in evaluating the 

potential effects of all of the alternatives on EFH. Information on applicable 

BMPs, standards and guidelines, and design measures and criteria to minimize 

effects to EFH are presented in Appendices ROD-1 and ROD-2, and in Chapter 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-21 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

3 of the FEIS. I have reviewed the Navy Appendix ROD-3 and there is no new 

information that would prompt a reevaluation of EFH. 

Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 

Actions authorized in the Selected Alternative will not have a direct, indirect, or 

cumulative effect on marine mammals. All marine wildlife guidelines, including 

special prohibitions on approaching humpback whales in Alaska as defined in 50 

CFR 224.103 will be followed during project implementation. These marine 

mammal viewing guidelines are administered by the National Marine Fisheries 

Service and enforced by the Coast Guard, and are deemed sufficient for their 

protection. 

National Forest Management Act of 1976 (as amended)

The National Forest Management Act requires several specific determinations in 

the Record of Decision. These are consistency with the governing Forest Plan, a 

determination of clearcutting as the optimal method of harvesting, if used, and 

specific authorizations to create openings over 100 acres in size. 

Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan (as amended) 

Based on the discussion that follows, I have determined that this decision is 

consistent with the Forest Plan as amended. 

The Forest Plan was completed with the signing of the Record of Decision on 

January 23, 2008 after the issuance of the Navy Draft EIS (November 2, 2007). 

The decision for the Forest Plan contains transition language for the Navy 

Timber Sale project, which was already being planned, referred to as Category 2 

projects. Category 2 projects are projects that the Responsible Official reviewed 

and determined “are consistent with the goals and objectives of the amended 

Plan”. The environmental effects of the Navy project have been disclosed to the 

public through site-specific project-level environmental documents. Navy and 

the other projects in Category 2 were also assumed to be implemented in the 

environmental analysis. 

I have reviewed the Navy project and incorporated the new direction and 

analysis for the amended Forest Plan to the extent this can be done without 

causing major disruptions in the implementation of the project. 

Clearcutting as the Optimal Method of Harvesting 

Based on the information presented in the FEIS and Forest Plan direction, I have 

determined that clearcutting is the optimal method of harvesting where it is 

applied. Site-specific information and rationale where clearcutting is optimal is 

presented in the silvicultural prescriptions. Clearcutting (an even-aged method) 

has been prescribed in this project to preclude or minimize the occurrence of 

potentially adverse impacts from windthrow where the potential is moderate to 

high, to remove or reduce mistletoe infestations, and to reduce wounding due to 

logging damage to adjacent trees. 

Harvest Openings Over 100 Acres in Size 

I have determined that there will be no created openings in excess of 100 acres 

with the harvest of the Selected Alternative units. 

R-22  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (as amended)

Under the provisions of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, I 

have made a determination of “No Historic Properties Affected”. There will be 

no effects to sites listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of 

Historic Places. Heritage resource surveys were conducted in the analysis area 

in accordance with the Regional Inventory Strategy. By following the 

provisions of the Programmatic Agreement between the Forest Service, Alaska 

State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation, this action complies with Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act. No effects on known heritage resources are anticipated. 

The State Historic Preservation Officer was consulted, in accordance with 

Section 106 of the NHPA and 36 CFR Part 800. Therefore, I have complied 

with the consultation process with the State Historic Preservation Officer. 

Native communities have been contacted during this process and reports 

provided for comment. 

Tongass Timber Reform Act (TTRA) of 1990

I have determined this project is in compliance of the relevant provisions of 

TTRA. Any timber harvested under the Selected Alternative will provide part of 

the timber supply to the Tongass National Forest’s timber program as stated in 

Section 101 of TTRA - “... the Secretary shall, to the extent consistent with 

providing for the multiple use and sustained yield of all renewable forest 

resources, seek to provide a supply of timber from the Tongass National Forest 

which (1) meets the annual market demand for timber from such forest and (2) 

meets the annual market demand from such forest for each planning cycle.” 

No commercial timber harvest will occur within 100 feet of any Class I stream 

or any Class II stream flowing directly into a Class I stream, as required in 

Section 103 of the TTRA. 

Applicable Executive Orders 

Executive Order 11988 (Floodplains)

Per Executive Order 11988, I have determined that the Selected Alternative 

avoids all floodplains. 

Executive Order 11990 (Wetlands)

I have determined that the long- and short-term adverse effects associated with 

the destruction or modification of wetlands in the implementation of the Navy 

Timber Sale will be avoided to the extent possible. The techniques and practices 

required by the Forest Service serve to maintain the wetland attributes, including 

values and functions. In some areas, soil moisture regime and vegetation 

composition or structure may be altered; however, these altered acres would still 

be classified as wetlands and would function as wetlands in the ecosystem. 

Where wetlands cannot be avoided, road construction will adhere to BMPs, 

which include at a minimum the Federal baseline provisions in 33 Code of 

Federal Regulation (CFR) 323. There will be approximately 5 acres loss of 

wetlands due to road construction for the Selected Alternative. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice)

The FEIS analyzed environmental justice to determine whether a 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental impact on 

minority populations, low-income populations, or Indian tribes was likely to 

result from the proposed action and any alternatives. The Executive Order 

specifically directs agencies to consider patterns of subsistence hunting and 

fishing when an agency action may affect fish or wildlife. I have determined 

that no communities are identified as being adversely affected in this area and 

that none of the alternatives would have a disproportionately high and adverse 

effect on the health of the environment of the minority, low-income, or Indian 

populations that use the Navy Timber Sale area. 

Executive Order 12962 (Aquatic Systems, Recreational Fisheries)

Per Executive Order 12962, I have determined that the Selected Alternative 

minimizes the effects on aquatic systems through project design, application of 

standards and guidelines, BMPs, and site-specific mitigation measures. In the 

Navy project area, opportunities for recreational fishing are limited. For the 

Selected Alternative, recreational fishing opportunities would remain essentially 

the same as the current condition, because aquatic habitats are protected through 

implementation of BMPs and riparian standards and guidelines. 

Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)

Executive Order 13007 directs Federal agencies to consider the protection of 

American Indian sacred sites and allow access where feasible. In a governmentto-government relationship, the tribal government is responsible for notifying 

the agency of the existence of a sacred site. A sacred site is defined as a site that 

has sacred significance due to established religious beliefs or ceremonial uses, 

and which has a specific, discrete, and delineated location that has been 

identified by the tribe. I have determined that tribal governments or their 

authorized representatives were consulted and they did not identify any specific 

sacred site locations in the project area. 

Executive Order 13112 (Invasive Species)

A risk assessment completed for the FEIS evaluated the status of invasive 

species in the project area and the effects from the proposed activities on them. I 

have included specific measures in Appendix ROD-1, Unit Cards, to minimize 

the introduction and spread of invasive plant species in the Selected Alternative. 

Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian 

Tribal Governments)

Executive Order 13175 directs Federal agencies to respect tribal selfgovernment, sovereignty, and tribal rights, and to engage in regular and 

meaningful government-to-government consultation with tribes on proposed 

actions with tribal implications. I have complied with this Order and have 

consulted with and provided information to the following federally recognized 

tribal governments about this project: 

• Wrangell Cooperative Association 

• Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska 

R-24  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

• Organized Village of Kake 

• Petersburg Indian Association 

In addition, I have consulted with and provided information to the following 

corporations about this project: 

• Sealaska Corporation 

• Kake Tribal Corporation 

A detailed list of this consultation is in Chapter 1 of the FEIS. 

Executive Order 13186 Migratory Birds

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (amended in 1936 and 1972) prohibits 

the taking of migratory birds, unless authorized by the Secretary of Interior. The 

law provides the primary mechanism to regulate waterfowl hunting seasons and 

bag limits, but its scope is not just limited to waterfowl. The migratory species 

that may stay in the area utilize most, if not all, of the habitats described in the 

analysis for breeding, nesting, and raising their young. The effects on these 

habitats were analyzed for this project. I have determined that the decision will 

not have a significant direct, indirect, or cumulative effect on any migratory bird 

species in the project area. There may be moderate direct effects on individuals 

or small groups and their nests from the harvest of timber or the disturbance 

caused by harvest and related activities. 

Executive Order 13443 (Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife 

Conservation)

Executive Order 13443 directs Federal agencies to facilitate the expansion and 

enhancement of hunting opportunities and the management of game species and 

their habitat. The analysis considered and disclosed the effects on hunting 

activities. I have determined that the Selected Alternative will maintain hunting 

opportunities by adhering to the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines that 

maintain habitat for hunted species. 

Federal and State Permits 

Federal and State permits necessary to implement the authorized activities are 

listed at the end of Chapter 1 in the FEIS. 

Process for Implementation 

Appendices ROD-1 and ROD-2 contain the Selected Alternative unit and road 

cards, respectively. These cards are an integral part of this decision because 

they document the specific resource concerns, management objectives, and 

mitigation measures to govern the layout of the harvest units and construction of 

roads. These cards will be used during the implementation process to ensure 

that the project is implemented within applicable standards and guidelines and 

that resource effects will not be greater than those described in the FEIS. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-25 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

Similar cards will document any changes to the planned layout, which may 

occur during implementation. 

Minor changes are expected during implementation to better meet on-site 

resource management and protection objectives. Minor adjustments to unit 

boundaries are also likely during final layout to improve logging system 

efficiency. This usually entails adjusting the boundary to coincide with logical 

logging setting boundaries. Proposed changes to the authorized project actions 

will be subject to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act the 

National Forest Management Act, and other laws concerning such changes. 

This project will be implemented in accordance with Forest Service Manual 

(FSM) 2430 and Forest Service Handbook FSH 2409.18 direction for timber 

sale project implementation. This direction provides a bridge between project 

planning and implementation and will ensure execution of the actions, 

environmental standards, and mitigations approved by this decision, and 

compliance with the Forest Plan and all applicable laws, policy and direction. 

The current applicable BMPs will be applied to the Selected Alternative. 

Changes made during implementation will be reviewed, documented, and 

approved by the Responsible Official through the Tongass Supplement to FSH 

1909.15-2009-1. In determining whether and what kind of NEPA action is 

required for changes during implementation, the Forest Supervisor will consider 

the criteria in the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 1502.9(c)), and Forest 

Service Handbook (FSH) 1909.15, sec. 18 to determine whether to supplement 

or revise an existing environmental impact statement. I will determine whether 

the proposed change is a substantial change to the Selected Alternative as 

planned and already approved, and whether the change is relevant to 

environmental concerns. I will consider connected or interrelated changes to 

particular areas or specific activities in making this determination. The 

cumulative impacts of these changes will also be considered. 

The implementation unit and road cards, as approved by this process, are 

incorporated into the timber sale contract. The sale administrators and road 

inspectors then enforce the contract requirements with the operators. 

The implementation record for this project will display the following: 

•	 Each harvest unit, transportation facility, and other project components as 

actually implemented, 

•	 Any proposed changes to the design, location, standards and guidelines, 

or other mitigation measures for the project, and 

• Authorization of the proposed changes. 

Implementation of all activities authorized by the Record of Decision will be 

monitored to ensure that they are carried out as planned and described in the 

FEIS. 

R-26  ROD	 [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision 

Administrative Review - Opportunity to 

Object

This decision is subject to the project-level predecisional administrative review 

process pursuant to Title 36 CFR Part 218, subparts A and B. Individuals or 

organizations who submitted specific written comments regarding the proposed 

project either during scoping or other designated opportunity for public 

comment in accordance with 36 CFR 218.5(a) may file objections to this draft 

decision. Issues raised in objections must be based on previously submitted, 

timely, specific written comments regarding the proposed project unless based 

on new information arising after previous designated opportunities. 

As the Navy Timber Sale FEIS and 2009 ROD were completed while the Forest 

Service appeal regulations at 36 CFR 215 were still in effect, those who would 

have had standing to appeal under those regulations will have standing to object 

to the draft ROD proposed at this time. 

Individual members of organizations must have submitted their own comments 

to meet the requirements of eligibility as an individual; objections received on 

behalf of an organization are considered as those of the organization only. If an 

objection is submitted on behalf of a number of individuals or organizations, 

each individual or organization listed must meet the eligibility requirement of 

having previously submitted comments on the project (36 CFR 218.7). Names 

and addresses of objectors will become part of the public record. 

Incorporation of documents by reference in the objection is permitted only as 

provided for at 36 CFR 218.8(b). 

The objection must be in writing and meet the objection content requirements at 

36 CFR 218.8(d). 

The objection must be filed with the Reviewing Officer: 

Beth Pendleton, Regional Forester 

USDA Forest Service, Alaska Region 

709 W. 9th Street 

P.O. Box 21628 

Juneau, AK 99802-1628 

Email address: objections-alaska-regional-office@fs.fed.us 

Fax: (907) 586-7840 

Phone: (907-586-8863 

Written objections, including attachments, must be filed (regular mail, fax, 

email, hand delivery, or express delivery) with the Reviewing Officer at the 

correct location within 45 calendar days of the date that the legal notification of 

opportunity to object to this draft decision is published in the Ketchikan Daily 

News, the official newspaper of record. The publication date in the newspaper 

of record is the exclusive means for calculating the time to file an objection. 

Those wishing to submit objections to this draft decision should not rely upon 

dates or timeframe information provided by any other source. The regulations 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-27 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Record of Decision
 

prohibit extending the time to file an objection. A copy of the legal notice will 

also be posted on the Forest Service project website 

at http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=14556. 

Hand-delivered written objections will be accepted at the Regional Office during 

normal business hours (8:00 am through 4:30 pm) Monday through Friday, 

excluding holidays. Electronic objections must be submitted in a format such as 

an email message, portable document format (.pdf), plain text (.txt), rich text 

format (.rtf), and Word (.doc or .docx). It is the responsibility of objectors to 

ensure their objection is received in a timely manner (36 CFR 218.9). All 

objections are available for public inspection during and after the objection 

process. 

If objections are received, there is a 45-day objection review period in which the 

Responsible Official, the Reviewing Officer, and the objectors may meet to 

attempt to resolve issues. At the end of the 45 days, the Reviewing Officer will 

issue a written response detailing how the objections have been addressed, 

which may also include instructions to the Responsible Official (36 CFR 

218.11(b)). 

Implementation Date

A final decision on projects subject to the objection process may occur on, but 

not before, 5 business days from the close of the objection filing period, if no 

objections are received (36 CFR 218.12(c)(2)). 

If objections are received, the final decision will not be signed until all concerns 

and instructions identified by the Reviewing Officer in the objection response 

have been addressed by the Responsible Official (36 CFR 218.12(b)). 

Implementation of decisions subject to the objection process may commence 

immediately after a final decision is signed. There is not a requirement to 

publish notification of the decision. 

Contact Information 

For additional information concerning this draft decision, contact Robert 

Dalrymple, District Ranger, Wrangell Ranger District, P.O. Box 51, Wrangell, 

AK 99929, or call (907) 874-2323. 

Responsible Official

FORREST COLE 

Forest Supervisor 

R-28  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

Record of Decision
 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] ROD  R-29
 
 

Record of Decision
 

R-30  ROD [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unit Card Header 

Information 

Silvicultural 

Narrative 

Appendix ROD-1 

Unit Cards 

Appendix ROD-1, Unit Cards, is used to explain site-specific information about each 

unit and any resource concerns and mitigations. Narrative cards and maps for each 

unit are in numerical order and describe the silvicultural prescription, resource 

concerns, and protection or mitigation measures for each unit. 

The section of this introduction, Harvest Treatments, explains the stand description 

and harvest treatments for this entry. The next section, Resource Concerns and 

Responses, summarizes how protection measures can be used for resource concerns. 

These protection measures can be either from the Forest Plan or project-specific. 

The introduction to Appendix ROD-1 is followed by a map and a narrative card for 

each harvest unit. 

Each unit card has a header block with information used to generally describe the 

stand’s size, location, and volume proposed for harvest. Each header block contains 

the following information: 

Unit Number: This is the number assigned to the unit block during the Logging 

Systems and Transportation Analysis development. Each unit may be comprised of 

one or more settings, identified on the map; each setting has one harvest method and 

one prescription assigned to it. However, when unit’s are referred to in the text, we 

simply refer to the number. Unless otherwise stated, it is to be understood that the unit 

implies all the sections selected for harvest. 

Total Unit Acres: This is an estimate of total acres within the unit using aerial photos 

and GIS information. 

Net Harvest Volume (Saw): This is an estimated volume (in thousand board feet, or 

MBF) to be harvested. This was derived from field estimates and the stand exam 

program. A cruise will be done during implementation to determine an accurate 

volume before the timber is sold. 

Land Use Designation (LUD): This lists which of the following LUDs the unit 

resides in: Modified Landscape (ML), Scenic Viewshed (SV) and Timber Production 

(TM). 

Logging Systems: This lists whether the unit is to be yarded using cable, shovel or 

helicopter system. 

Harvest Treatments 

Existing Stand Condition: This is the developmental stage of the physical and 

temporal distribution of trees and other plants in a forested area. Site Index, listed 

under this section, is a measure of site productivity. This value is the height growth in 

feet that will occur over 50 years, with an indicator species (Sitka spruce). William 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1 

Silvicultural 

Systems 

Farr established plots and developed site index tables. For example, a site index of 90 

(Sitka spruce, Farr 50) means a Sitka spruce is capable of growing 90 feet in 50 years. 

Basal Area (BA) is the cross-sectional area of a tree trunk measured in square inches, 

usually at the DBH. On the unit cards, this measurement is in square feet per acre. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This provides detailed direction about the methods, 

techniques, timing, and monitoring of vegetative treatments. Precommercial 

Thinning (PCT) is the removal of some trees from a stand that are too small to be sold 

for lumber or house logs, to the remaining trees will grow faster. 

Silvicultural systems refer to a complete set of treatments used to manage forest stands 

and forest landscapes over long periods of time. This process includes the harvest or 

regeneration of the stand, intermediate cuttings, and other treatments necessary for the 

development and replacement of the forest stand. 

Silvicultural systems are applied through prescriptions, the written records of the 

examination, diagnosis, and treatment regimes prescribed for the stand. 

A silvicultural prescription has been written for each unit in the Selected Alternative 

when the Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision (ROD) was signed. Silvicultural 

prescriptions include these unit cards plus the sale layout and marking guidelines that 

will be completed for each of the timber harvest unit’s included in the ROD. These 

provide guidance for treatments following this proposed timber harvest, including 

regeneration and thinning through the entire rotation. 

These unit cards and silvicultural prescriptions will be used during the implementation 

process to assure that all aspects of the project are implemented within applicable 

standards and guidelines. Minor changes can be expected during implementation to 

better meet on-site resource management and protection objectives. Minor 

adjustments to unit boundaries are also likely during final layout for the purpose of 

improving logging system efficiency or for site conditions. 

The harvest treatments found on the unit cards are descriptions of what will occur 

under the silvicultural systems. 

Even-aged Systems 

Even-aged systems result in the conversion of mature stands to faster-growing stands 

of a single age by removing most merchantable trees in one entry. Where this 

treatment is recommended, it has been determined that it is optimum for the site. No 

openings in excess of 100 acres will be created. Reserve areas between openings must 

be of sufficient size and composition to be managed as a separate stand, which is a 

minimum of 10 acres. 

The following prescriptions can be used to achieve the desired results. 

Clearcut: Essentially all trees in a harvest unit are removed in a single operation that 

regenerates into a single-aged stand. In the Navy project area, clearcutting is 

prescribed to reduce levels of mistletoe infections, decay fungi, ensure regeneration 

desired tree species, and/or to minimize losses to and risk of windthrow. Natural 

regeneration is expected to fully stock the stand with desirable trees by year 5. 

Regeneration monitoring will be done in the third year following harvest to certify the 

stocking level. 

Seed trees will be left in several units, as specified on the unit cards. In these units, 

one co-dominant or dominant cedar tree will be left as a seed tree for every 5 acres 

A1-2  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Engineering/Roads 

Appendix ROD-1 

harvested to provide a seed source for the future stand. Trees will be distributed 

throughout the unit in areas that have a cedar component in the overstory and will be 

partially girdled to provide a stress crop of cones. Leaving cedar seed trees would 

maintain or increase the cedar component in regenerated stands, thus minimizing 

future porcupine damage as cedar trees are not preferred as a browse species by 

porcupine. Unit 37 may be planted with western red and Alaskan yellow-cedar, if 

necessary, to ensure stocking levels are achieved in the regenerating stand. Plantation 

(survival) surveys will be conducted after the first and third full growing season 

following completion of planting. 

Clearcut with reserves: Even-aged systems of clearcut with reserves results in most of 

the trees removed in a single operation with some trees retained for purposes other 

than regeneration. Reserve trees are scattered or clumped, and are normally retained 

throughout a rotation to serve a purpose. Depending on the individual unit 

prescription, 15 percent or 50 percent of the original stand acres will be retained. In 

the Navy project area, reserve trees would be retained for wildlife habitat, to reduce 

visual impact of timber harvest and/or to further enhance windfirmness of leave areas 

(i.e. RAWs, high-hazard soils, visual retention patches, etc.) Natural regeneration is 

expected to fully stock the stand with desirable trees by year 5. Regeneration 

monitoring will be done in the third year following harvest to certify the stocking 

level. 

All stands that are prescribed under an even-aged system will be evaluated for a 

precommercial thinning treatment at 15-35 years of age to promote stand growth, 

health, and desired species composition. 

Uneven-aged Systems 

An uneven-aged system is implemented to maintain high forest cover, regeneration of 

desirable species, and development of trees through a range of diameter or age classes. 

Prescriptions to obtain this structure include single-tree selection. 

Single-tree Selection (STS): An uneven-aged stand contains trees of three or more 

distinct age classes, intermixed throughout the stand. Uneven-aged stands are created 

through silvicultural pathways that include uneven-aged systems or small-scale 

periodic disturbance (gap phased) that allows for recruitment/release of trees resulting 

in a multi-storied stand structure. Harvest trees are either selected through 

individually tree marking or designated by description. No more than 30 percent of 

the total original stand basal area will be removed and no more that 50 percent of the 

original stand basal area of spruce or cedar will be removed in this entry. No opening 

will be created that is greater than 2 acres. These stands will continue to develop, and 

be available for additional future entries (recommended in 40 years). This system is 

not expected to appreciably increase the likelihood of windthrow in these stands. 

Natural regeneration is expected to fully stock the stand with desirable trees by year 5. 

Regeneration monitoring will be done in the third year following harvest to certify the 

stocking level. 

Temporary roads

Temporary roads are described in the unit cards and maps. These roads are 

decommissioned after harvest. This involves pulling any culverts that were installed, 

and activities result that in the stabilization and restoration of unneeded roads to a 

more natural state. While not drivable by motorized vehicles, they may be accessible 

to non-motorized users. Road drainage structures will been removed and stream 

channels restored to their original contours. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Resource Concerns and Responses 

Riparian Management Areas 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines and BMP 12.6 direct the design of riparian 

management areas (RMAs) associated with each stream in the project area. The 

standards and guidelines prohibit programmed commercial timber harvest in RMAs 

associated with all Class I, Class II, and Class III streams, except for right-of-way 

clearing for road construction. RMAs vary in width from the edge of the stream 

channel according to process group (Table ROD1-2) and stream value class (Table 

ROD1-1). 

Unit card maps show the location of all streams and the associated RMAs. Unit card 

narratives also prescribe the location and width of reasonable assurance of 

windfirmess (RAW) buffers for protecting RMAs, except where windthrow potential 

is low (BMP 12.6a). 

Reasonable Assurance of Windfirmness (RAW) Buffers 

Streams requiring RAW buffers are noted under the Fish/Watershed section of the unit 

cards. The exact marking guide for retention for the RAW buffer will be determine 

during layout. When establishing the RAW buffers, look for evidence of past wind 

events. If trees with windfirm characteristics are present, use a RAW buffer width of 

one site potential tree height. If windfirm trees are not present or there is strong 

evidence of past stand-replacing wind events, then consider two site potential tree 

heights as a maximum width. High-value trees susceptible to windthrow within the 

RAW buffer may be marked for removal if their removal is not expected to 

appreciably increase the windthrow risk of the remaining trees. For Alluvial Fan (AF), 

Floodplain (FP), High Gradient Contained (HC), Large Contained (LC), Moderate 

Gradient Contained (MC), Moderate Gradient/Mixed Control (MM), and Palustrian 

(PA) areas, manage an appropriate distance beyond the no-harvest zone to provide for 

a reasonable assurance of windfirmness of the RMA. Site-potential tree heights vary 

according to the channel type as follows: 

AF – 140 feet 

FP - 130 feet 

HC - 120 feet 

LC - 100 feet 

MC - 100 feet 

MM - 120 feet 

PA - 85 feet or less 

Best Management Practices 

The Forest Service recently issued National Core BMPs (USFS 2012). Directives for 

using these BMPs are currently in development. The Navy Timber Sale will 

implement the most uptodate BMP guidance. Currently, this ROD cites the Alaska 

Region BMPs, which are fully described in FSH 2509.22 (USFS 2006). A crosswalk 

between the Alaska Region BMPs and the national BMPs has been placed in the 

project planning file for reference. 

A1-4  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Process Groups and 

Stream Classes 

Appendix ROD-1 

Some BMPs are implemented through the location and design of harvest units and 

temporary roads; others are translated into timber harvest and road contract provisions 

to ensure implementation. 

Log yarding practices are based on slope stability, soil disturbance, and stream class. 

Additional measures are taken to protect streams from possible disturbance associated 

with tree falling and yarding according to BMP 13.16. Timber contract provisions 

guide tree falling and yarding near stream courses. Trees near Class IV streams are 

felled away from the stream whenever feasible and logging debris introduced into 

Class IV streams is removed. Suspension requirements are used to minimize soil 

erosion, mass movement, and formation of new channels (BMP 13.9) 

Temporary roads and associated erosion control, including decommissioning practices, 

are subject to timber sale contract provisions (BMP 13.14, 13.16, 14.7, 14.18). 

The Tongass National Forest defines stream channel types according to the Channel 

Type User Guide (USDA Forest Service, 1992), the foundation upon which aquatic 

habitat management prescriptions are developed. Table ROD 1-2 shows the Forest 

Plan codes used on the unit card narratives. Only the channel types found in timber 

harvest units are listed. 

Stream classes are also used to define appropriate RMAs and protection measures. 

Stream classes are defined in Table ROD 1-1. 

Table Appendix ROD 1-1 

Stream Value Classes 

Stream Value 

Class Criteria 

Class I 

Streams and lakes with anadromous or adfluvial fish or fish habitat; or high-quality 

resident fish waters, or habitat above fish migration barriers known to be reasonable 

enhancement opportunities for anadromous fish. 

Class II 

Streams and lakes with resident fish or fish habitat and generally steep (6-25 percent 

or higher) gradient (can also include streams with a 0-6 percent gradient) where no 

anadromous fish occur, and otherwise not meeting Class I criteria. 

Class III 

Streams are perennial and intermittent streams that have no fish populations or fish 

habitat, but have sufficient flow or sediment and debris transport to directly influence 

downstream water quality or fish habitat capability. For streams less than 30 percent 

gradient, special care is needed to determine if resident fish are present. 

Class IV 

Other intermittent, ephemeral, and small perennial channels with insufficient flow or 

sediment transport capabilities to have immediate influence on downstream water 

quality or fish habitat capability. Class IV streams do not have the characteristics of 

Class I, II, or III streams and have a bankfull width of at least 0.3 meter (1 foot). 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Table ROD 1-2 

Channel Types In or Adjacent to Harvest Units 

Process Group Channel 

Type Code Channel Type Description 

Alluvial Fan 

AF1 Moderate Gradient Alluvial Fan Channel 

AF2 High Gradient Alluvial Cone Channel 

Floodplain FP4 Low Gradient Flood Plain Channel 

HC1 Shallowly Incised Muskeg Channel 

High Gradient Contained HC3 Deeply Incised Upper Valley Channel 

HC5 Shallowly Incised Very High Gradient Channel 

HC6 Deeply Incised Mountain Slope Channel 

Moderate Gradient Contained MC1 Narrow Shallow Contained Channel 

MC2 Moderate Width and Incision Contained Channel 

Moderate Gradient Mixed Control MM1 Narrow Mixed Control Channel 

Large Contained LC1 Low Gradient Contained Channel 

Palustrine PA1 Narrow Placid Flow Channel 

PA5 Beaver Dam/Pond Channel 

Soils	 Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for Soil and Water (p. 4-65) require that project 

analysis “evaluate soil stability (BMP 13.5) potential soil mass wasting effects, and 

stability of Class IV channels and minor drainageways (“non-streams”).” At the 

Forest Plan level, slopes of 72 percent or more are removed from the tentatively 

suitable timber base. However, at a project level, the Forest Supervisor may approve 

timber harvest on slopes of 72 percent or more on a case-by-case basis, based on the 

results of an on-site analysis of slope and Class IV channel stability, and an assessment 

of potential erosion. 

Road and landing locations will avoid slopes greater than 67 percent, unstable slopes, 

and slide-prone areas, where feasible (BMP 14.7). 

Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9. Slopes over 25 percent gradient 

may not be suitable for shovel yarding depending on soil conditions. Use care when 

approving shovel yarding on slopes over 25 percent gradient; avoid track slippage and 

rutting. Puncheon or a slash mat may be necessary to provide adequate bearing 

strength to prevent rutting. Material should be scattered upon completion of the 

yarding activities. 

Scenery	 The following Scenic Integrity Objectives (SIOs) from the Forest Plan provide 

standards for management based on the landscape’s scenic characteristics and public 

viewing concern. 

High: Changes in the landscape are not visually evident to the average forest visitor. 

Moderate: Changes in the landscape may be evident to the casual observer but appear 

as natural occurrences when contrasted with the appearance of the surrounding 

landscape. 

Low: Changes in the landscape appear very evident but incorporate natural patterns of 

form, line, color, and texture when contrasted with the appearance of the surrounding 

landscape. 

A1-6  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards	 [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heritage Resources 

Botany 

Wildlife 

Appendix ROD-1 

Very Low: Changes in the landscape appear highly evident and may visually 

dominate the surrounding landscape, yet when viewed in the background distance 

these activities appear to be a natural occurrance. 

Visual Absorption Capability1 (VAC) is used to estimate the relative ability of a 

landscape to visually absorb management activities. High, Intermediate, and Low 

VAC ratings are used, and refect the degree of landscape variety in an area, viewing 

distance, and topographic characteristics. A Low VAC setting may be highly visible, 

have steep slopes, or little landscape variety, while a High VAC setting may be 

unseen, relatively flat, or have a high degree of landscape variety. 

All identified heritage resources are not in the vicinity of the timber harvest unit’s and 

proposed roads. If any sites are discovered during implementation, the Forest Service 

will fulfill it’s consultation requirements as described in Chapter 3 of the Final EIS. 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for Plants (p. 4-41) require that project planning 

aviod, minimize, or mitigate adverse affects to rare plants and populations. When rare 

or sensitive plant species are identified in a proposed road corridor or harvest unit, a 

botanist will recommend mitigations. Roads, MAFs, landings, staging yards, sortyards 

and other hardened sites will have more permanent effects than timber harvest. 

Mitigation measures include re-routes of roads to avoid populations, modification of 

unit boundaries, and directional felling and yarding away from populations. In most 

cases, a 100-foot avoidance buffer around the population is required to ensure 

protection. In some cases, such as very small populations, or where other populations 

of the same species exist nearby outside of the influence of the proposed action, no 

action may be necessary. 

To reduce the spread of invasive plants into new areas, the following project-specific 

mitigation measures will apply: 

•	 Off-road equipment will be cleaned to remove seeds, vegetative matter and 

other debris, according to the timber sale contract, to help reduce the spread of 

invasive plant species. 

•	 Use of hay or straw bales for erosion control will not be allowed. Materials 

that comply with Tongass National Forest standard seed mixture (FSM 2080 

TNF supplement R10 2000-2007-1) will be used for erosion control where 

necessary. 

Prior to closing or storing NFS roads that were newly constructed for this project, the 

roads will be surveyed for high-priority invasive plants. If any new infestations are 

detected, a treatment strategy will be developed and implemented. 

Bald eagle nest protection requirements are now found in 50 CFR Part 22.26. They 

have changed slightly from what was in the former Bald Eagle MOU and the Navy 

Final EIS. Variances no long exist; permit’s allowing “take” in accordance with the 

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act would have to be obtained if disturbance to 

nesting bald eagles would occur. The required distances to avoid disturbance to 

nesting eagles (March 1 through August 31) are as follows: 

•	 Avoid clear-cutting or removal of overstory trees within 330 feet (100 meters) 

of both active and alternate nests at any time (same as MOU). 

1 Visual Absorption Capacity is the estimate of the relative ability of a landscape to accept 

management manipulations such as timber harvest, without significantly affection its visual 

character, a measure of the relative capacity of the land to absorb visual change. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision	 [DRAFT] Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-7 
 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

•	 Avoid timber harvesting operations, including road construction and chain saw 

and yarding operations, during the nesting season within 660 feet (200 meters) 

of the nest. 

•	 Avoid construction of log transfer facilities and in-water log storage areas 

within 330 feet (100 meters) of active and alternate nests nest. 

•	 Avoid operating helicopters or fixed-wing aircraft within 1000 feet (305 

meters) of the nest during the breeding season, except where eagles have 

demonstrated tolerance for such activity. 

•	 Avoid blasting and other activities that produce extremely loud noises within 

1/2 mile of nests (or within 1 mile in open areas). 

A1-8  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards	 [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

This page intentionally left blank. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-9 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-10  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM,SV Logging 

Systems: 

Cable & Shovel Total Unit Acres: 45 Unit Number: 37 

Harvest Acres: 41 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 682 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit has old-growth stand structure. The mistletoe, stem decay and windthrow risk 

rating for the stand is moderate. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm, stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides or other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with moderately severe 

mistletoe infections, stem decay and defect resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay and 

mistletoe is affecting stand vigor. Even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow 

post-harvest, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, improve site productivity through increased soil 

temperature and minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to 

unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

Planting of red and yellow cedar may be prescribed to minimize the effects of porcupine damage on the young stand. Treat 

settings M148 and M261 with a clearcut with leave trees (leaving one dominant or co-dominant cedar per 5 acres for future 

seed source), and treat setting M149 with a clearcut with reserves for visuals (15 percent of acres located in upper portion of 

unit). 

TIMBER/LOGGING: Setting M149 is designed for both cable and shovel yarding to the temporary road extension of the 

6546 road. Locate retention in the seen portion of setting M149. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: 0.19 mile of temporary road will be constructed. The road will be decommissioned after the 

timber sale. The most likely material source is located on Road 6558 mp 0.07. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type MM1 stream (Wetbeck Creek) on the north end of unit. No harvest within 120 feet of the 

channel. RMA buffer has been built into unit design (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). Limit harvest below the 6558 road to protect 

the RMA of Wetbeck Creek. 

There is a Class III, channel type HC6 stream on the east side of the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Setting M261is not seen. The other settings are visible from the Mosman Inlet viewshed, where the adopted 

SIOs range from moderate to very low and VAC rating is intermediate. The proposed prescription will meet an SIO of 

moderate to low for setting M149. Setting M148 will meet the prescribed very low SIO. 

SOILS: Unit includes 4 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted during 

project implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes will be avoided. 2 acres of wetlands are included on 

southwest side of the unit. Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; shovel tracks may need to be supported by 

slash (BMP 13.9) to minimize soil disturbance. 

WILDLIFE: The temporary road in this unit is within one half mile of one or more bald eagle nests and may be subject to 

timing restrictions for blasting under 50 CFR Part 22.26. Setting M149 breaks the only old-growth corridor connecting the 

South Mosman Small Old-growth Reserve to the other reserves on the island. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the Mosman Inventoried Roadless Area (#233). 

No resource concerns were identified for Botany, Geology, Heritage and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-11 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-12  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM 

SV 

Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 19 Unit Number: 38 

Harvest Acres: 16 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 272 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit is a wind-generated stand that has old-growth stand structure. The mistletoe 

and stem decay are considered low in this stand but the windthrow risk has been rated as high. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm, stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides or other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it is not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current growth trajectory. Even-aged clearcutting with reserves (15 percent of acres located in 

upper portion of unit for visuals) with natural regeneration is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow 

post-harvest, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, improve site productivity through increased soil 

temperature and minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to 

unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to a temporary road off of the 51581 road. Retention 

will be located during layout in groups or clumps. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.18 mile of temporary road. Road will be decommissioned after the timber sale. The 

material source is located on Road 6568 mp 0.07. No road concerns. 

SCENERY: The top of this unit is visible from the head of the Mosman Inlet viewshed, where the adopted SIO is low, and 

VAC rating ranges from low to high. The proposed prescription will meet an SIO of low. A moderate SIO can be achieved if 

the retention is concentrated in the visible opening. 

SOILS: This unit harvests 2 acres of forested wetlands; cable yarding will mimimize soil disturbance. 

No resource concerns were identified for Fish/Watershed, Geology, Wildlife, Heritage, Recreation, Botany and Soils. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-13 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-14  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 27 Unit Number: 41 

Harvest Acres: 27 Net Harvest Volume (Saw): 

MBF: 133 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand. Unit is productive and 

lies along the backline of a previously harvested unit that was cut in 1993. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings located on temporary extensions off of the 

51401 road. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: 0.36 mile of temporary road will be constructed. The road will be decommissioned after the 

timber sale. The likely material source is located on Road 6548 mp 0.06, Road 6548 mp 0.67, or Road 6540 mp 3.14. The 

temporary road will use an existing prism to limit construction costs and environmental effects. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are four Class III, channel type HC5 streams within or adjacent to the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch (BMP 13.9, 

13.16). 

There is one Class IV, channel type HC5 stream that lie within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: The unit is visible from either the head of the Burnett Inlet or Anita Bay viewsheds, where the adopted SIOs 

range from moderate to very low. The proposed prescription will meet moderate SIO. 

SOILS: The unit includes 4 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted during 

project implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes will be avoided. 

WILDLIFE: The temporary road in this unit is within one half mile of one or more bald eagle nests and is subject to timing 

restrictions for blasting under 50 CFR Part 22.26. Seasonal restrictions on helicopter yarding are also required within 1,000 

feet of the nests in accordance with 50 CFR Part 22.26. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the Mosman Inventoried Roadless Area (#233). 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Botany, Recreation, and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-15 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-16  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM, 

SV 

Logging 

Systems: 

Cable & Shovel Total Unit Acres: 32 Unit Number: 43 

Harvest Acres: 32 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 529 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit is a low-lying, lower productive, unmanaged stand with old-growth stand 

structure. The stem decay and windthrow risk rating for the stand is moderate. Mistletoe infections are light. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm, stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with moderately severe stem 

decay and defect resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Even-aged clearcutting with 

leave trees (leaving one dominant or co-dominant cedar per 5 acres for future seed source) is being prescribed to preclude or 

minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, improve site productivity 

through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer 

to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: Setting M101 is designed for downhill cable yarding to a temporary road located off of the 51401 

road. Setting M96 is designed for shovel yarding to continuous landings on the 51401 road. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.11 mile of temporary road. The road will be decommissioned after the timber sale. 

The material source is located on Road 6548 mp 0.06, Road 6548 mp 0.67, and Road 6540 mp 3.14. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC5 stream adjacent to the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Setting M96 is unseen. Setting M101 is visible from the head of the Burnet Inlet Viewshed, where the adopted 

SIO is low. Only a small portion of the entire unit is evident, so the proposed prescription will meet a low SIO. 

SOILS: This unit includes 4 acres of slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment is included in the project 

record. (BMP 13.5) Based on the field review, harvest on slopes over 72 percent gradient will require full suspension to 

minimize soil disturbance and landslide potential. (BMP 13.9) This unit harvests 2 acres of forested wetlands. Shovel 

yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; shovel tracks may need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9) to minimize soil 

disturbance. 

WILDLIFE: The temporary road in this unit is within one half mile of one or more bald eagle nests and may be subject to 

timing restrictions for blasting under 50 CFR Part 22.26. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the Mosman Inventoried Roadless Area (#233). 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Recreation, Botany, and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-17 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-18  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 19 Unit Number: 44 

Harvest Acres: 19 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 98 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand. The stem decay, 

physical defect and windthrow risk rating for the stand is moderate. Unit is productive and lies along the backline of a 

previously harvested unit that was cut in 1993. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: Unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings on the 51401 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class I/II, channel type MM1 and HC3, stream (Duckbill Creek) adjacent to the west unit boundary. No harvest 

within 120 feet of the channel. RMA buffer has been built into unit design (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is visible from the head of the Anita Bay viewshed, where the adopted SIO is very low. The proposed 

prescription will meet a moderate SIO. 

SOILS: Unit includes 1 acre with slopes over 72 percent gradient. Helicopter harvest with partial cut prescription will 

minimize soil disturbance. 

WILDLIFE: Consider opportunities to allow for the elevational migration of wildlife, by retaining structure along the 

boundary with the managed stand to the northeast. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the Mosman Inventoried Roadless Area (#233). 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Roads, Botany and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-19 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-20  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 20 Unit Number: 45 

Harvest Acres: 20 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 335 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit is an unmanaged stand with old-growth stand structure. The stem decay and 

windthrow risk rating for the stand is moderate. Mistletoe infections are light. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm, 

stand grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with moderately severe stem 

decay and defect resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Even-aged clearcutting 

with leave trees (leaving one dominant or co-dominant cedar per 5 acres for future seed source) is being prescribed to preclude 

or minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, improve site 

productivity through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent 

possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to the 6539 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC6 stream on the southwestern unit boundary. Do not harvest in the v-notch (BMP 13.9, 

13.16). 

There are three Class IV, channel type HC5 streams within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: Unit includes 1 acre with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted during 

project implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes adjacent to the stream will be avoided. This unit includes 1 

acre of forested wetlands; cable yarding will mimimize soil disturbance. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Botany, Wildlife, Geology, Heritage and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-21 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-22  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Shovel Total Unit Acres: 6 Unit Number: 46 

Harvest Acres: 6 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 93 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit is an unmanaged stand with old-growth stand structure. It is a gently rolling, 

low-productivity site that has a fairly large component of cedar, many of which are snags or have defect and small crowns. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with stem decay and defect, 

particularly in the redcedar, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Even-aged 

clearcutting with leave trees (leaving one dominant or co-dominant cedar per 5 acres for future seed source) is being prescribed 

to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, improve 

site productivity through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent 

possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for shovel yarding to the existing 6539 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type HC3 stream (Thrucut Creek) on the eastern unit boundary. No commercial timber harvest 

within 120 feet of the channel. A RMA buffer has been built into unit design (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: The unit is visible from the head of the Anita Bay Inlet Viewshed, where the adopted SIO is very low. Only a 

slight portion of this opening is evident, so proposed prescription will meet a moderate SIO. 

SOILS: This unit harvests 6 acres of forested wetlands. Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; shovel tracks 

may need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9) to minimize soil disturbance. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Recreation, Botany and Wildlife. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-23 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-24  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable & Shovel Total Unit Acres: 41 Unit Number: 48 

Harvest Acres: 41 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 677 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit is an unmanaged stand with old-growth stand structure. It is a gently rolling, 

moderately productivit site that has low wind risk and light mistletoe infections but moderate amounts of decay in the stand. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with moderately severe levels 

of stem decay and defect, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Even-aged 

clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by 

opening up the canopy, improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the 

future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural 

prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable and shovel yarding to the existing 6546 road. A short 

temporary spur road may be necessary to facilitate yarding in setting M249. Shovel yard setting M248. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.09 mile of temporary road if needed to access setting M249. If constructed, the road 

will be decommissioned after the timber sale. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type AF1 stream on the northeast corner of the unit. No harvest within 140 feet of the stream 

channel (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There is a Class II, channel type HC3 stream that bisects unit. No harvest within 100 feet of the stream channel. (BMP 13.9, 

13.16). 

There are three Class III, channel types HC1, HC5, and HC6, within or adjacent to the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch, 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There are five Class IV, channel type HC5, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

The temporary road may have stream crossings depending on final location. Adequate size structures will be necessary and 

will be removed immediately following timber sale activities. (BMP 13.16, 14.20). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SOILS: Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; shovel tracks may need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9) 

to minimize soil disturbance. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Wildlife, Heritage, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-25 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-26  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 10 Unit Number: 49 

Harvest Acres: 10 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 158 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit is an unmanaged stand with old-growth stand structure. It is a moderately 

productive site that has a fairly large amount of snags, and moderately severe levels of stem defect and decay. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with stem decay and defect, 

resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to 

preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, improve site 

productivity through increased soil temperature and remove/minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum 

extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: Unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to landings located on the proposed temporary road. 

Retention will be located in the northern portion as a RAW buffer. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.24 mile of temporary road along the base of a ridge. The road will be located to 

avoid a small section of moderate- and high-vulnerability karst, and crosses a Class III stream. The road will be 

decommisioned after the timber sale. The material source is located on Road 6540 mp 10.3, and Road 51421 mp 0.34. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II/III, channel type MM1, stream (Mirkwood Creek) on the east side of the unit. No harvest within 120 feet 

of the stream channel. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There is one Class III, channel type HC6, within or adjacent to unit. No harvest in v-notch. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There is one Class IV, channel type HC5 streams within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full suspension 

or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris from streams 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

Limit adjacent sedimentation impacts during road construction. The temporary road crosses a very active Class III, channel 

type HC5, stream (mp. 0.60). A log stringer bridge may be necessary. 

Adequate size structures will be necessary for all stream crossings (BMP 14.17) and will be removed immediately following 

timber sale activities (BMP 13.16, 14.20). 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

GEOLOGY/KARST: A well-developed karst area including moderate- and high-vulnerability karst north of the unit was 

excluded from the harvest unit. Road will be located downslope of the karst. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: This unit includes minor inclusions of slopes over 72 percent gradient. Require partial suspension. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the Mosman Inventoried Roadless Area (#233). 

No resource concerns were identified for Wildlife, Heritage, and Botany. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-27 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-28  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM, SV Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 36 Unit Number: 67 

Harvest Acres: 18 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 299 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit has old-growth stand structure. It is a productive unit that lies along the 

backline of an existing young growth unit that was harvested in 1982. The stem decay and windthrow risk rating for the stand 

is high, while mistletoe infections were not recorded. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides or other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with severe levels of stem 

decay and defect resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay and defect. Even-aged 

clearcutting with reserves for visuals and wildlife (50 percent of acres) is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of 

windthrow post harvest in this high risk unit, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, improve site productivity 

through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer 

to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. Treat setting B53 as a 

clearcut and then reserve setting B54 as reserves for wildlife connectivity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: The unit is designed for cable yarding to the existing 51720 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC5, stream that bisects the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There are two Class IV, channel type HC5, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from the streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is seen from the head of the Burnett Inlet viewshed, where the adopted SIOs are moderate to very low. The 

portion of Scenic Viewshed that lies at the bottom of setting B54 is unseen. The proposed prescription will meet moderate to 

very low SIOs. 

SOILS: This unit is not suitable for harvest with ground-based equipment due to slope steepness and soil conditions. 

WILDLIFE: This unit is adjacent to a 230-acre goshawk nesting habitat buffer surrounding several known nests. No 

commercial timber harvest is permitted within the identified buffer. New road construction is permitted if no other reasonable 

roading alternatives outside the mapped nesting habitat exist. Permit no continuous disturbance likely to result in nest 

abandonment within the surrounding 600 feet from March 15 to August 15. Activity restrictions are removed for active nests 

that become inactive or unsuccessful. 

This prescription retains 50% acres adjacent to the existing clearcut for wildlife connectivity which should provide adequate 

cover. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Botany, Geology, Heritage, Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-29 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-30  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML,TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 49 Unit Number: 70 

Harvest Acres: 41 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 694 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit has old-growth stand structure with moderate levels of mistletoe in most 

western hemlock. Stem decay and defect is prevalent throughout the stand and is found in all tree species. Windthrow risk 

rating for the stand is low. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides or other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with moderately severe 

mistletoe infections, stem decay and defect resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay and 

mistletoe is affecting stand vigor. Even-aged clearcutting with reserves for visuals and wildlife (15 percent of acres) is being 

prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, 

improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the 

maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more 

information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for uphill cable yarding to the exisiting 51720 road. Retention will be located 

in groups of clumps during layout in the southern (upper and middle elevational) portion of the unit. In setting B41, 

concentrate retention in western portion above and below the road. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: None 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC5, stream that is adjacent to the unit with a section of AF2 that will affect the northeast 

corner of the unit. No harvest in the v-notch. Provide buffer on active portion of the alluvial fan. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There are at least five Class IV, channel type HC, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit will be seen from nearly the entire length of the Anita Bay viewshed, which has an adopted SIO of low, and 

an intermediate VAC rating. To meet scenic integrity objectives, retention should be divided into groupings or clusters, and 

located near the tops and middle portions of the unit, instead of the bottom portions which are not visible. This will 

effectively break up or reduce the unit’s openings enough to ensure the SIO is met. Additional adjustments to the unit 

boundary layout will further reduce the visual impact of the straight lines for a more natural appearance. 

SOILS: This unit has broken ground with short steep pitches; require at least partial suspension. 

WILDLIFE: Retention should be larger green trees and snags. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Botany, Geology, Heritage, Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-31 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-32  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 39 Unit Number: 72 

Harvest Acres: 20 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 327 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit has old-growth stand structure, west/northwest aspect with moderately severe 

levels of mistletoe in most western hemlock. Stem decay and defect is prevalent throughout the stand and is found in all tree 

species. Windthrow risk rating for the stand is low. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides or other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with moderately severe 

mistletoe infections, stem decay and defect resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay and 

mistletoe is affecting stand vigor. Even-aged clearcutting with reserves for visuals and wildlife (50 percent of acres) is being 

prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, 

improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the 

maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more 

information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for uphill cable yarding to a temporary spur off of the 51720 road. Retention 

will be located in the western portion of the unit. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.13 mile of temporary road. The road will be decommisioned after the timber sale. 

The material source is located on Road 51720, mp 0.74. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type MM1, stream adjacent to the west side of the unit. No harvest within 120 feet of the channel 

(BMP 12.6). 

There is a Class III, channel type HC5, stream in the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). Channel type 

verification may be necessary to determine alluvial characteristics of channel. 

There is a Class IV, channel type HC5, portion of stream. Fall timber away from stream if feasible. Full suspension or split 

yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris from streams (BMP 

13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: The unit is seen from the Anita Bay viewshed, which has an adopted SIO of very low. The proposed 

prescription will meet moderate SIOs. 

SOILS: This unit has 3 acres with slopes steeper than 72 percent; this area is will be included in the 50 percent reserve. 

WILDLIFE: This unit is near a 230-acre goshawk nesting habitat buffer. No commercial timber harvest is permitted within 

the identified buffer. Permit no continuous disturbance that is likely to result in nest abandonment within the surrounding 600 

feet from March 15 to August 15. Noise disturbance (timing) restrictions are removed for active nests that become inactive or 

unsuccessful. Retention in western part of unit will help maintain connectivity. 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Heritage, Recreation, and Botany. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-33 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-34  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable & Shovel Total Unit Acres: 12 Unit Number: 73 

Harvest Acres: 10 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 163 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit has old-growth stand structure, an east/southeast aspect and prevalent stem 

decay and defect throughout the stand. The windthrow risk rating for the stand is moderate. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm, 

stand grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides or other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with moderately severe stem 

decay and defect resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay and the light infections 

mistletoe may be affecting stand vigor. Even-aged clearcutting with reserves (15 percent of the unit for wildlife habitat 

connectivity) is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by 

opening up the canopy, improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the 

future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural 

prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to the existing 6540 road. If landings cannot be 

identified outside of the RMA, then a short temporary road may be required. Retention will be located along the 

west/southwest boundary during layout. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type MM1, stream on the southeast side of the unit. No harvest within 120 feet of the channel 

(BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). No harvest below the road. 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: Mitkof/Nakwasina soils, limit shovel operations to areas with slopes less the 25 percent; shovel yarding will follow 

BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; tracks need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9) to minimize soil disturbance. 

WILDLIFE: 

This unit is near a 230-acre goshawk nesting habitat buffer around several known goshawk nests. No commercial timber 

harvest is permitted within the identified buffer. New road construction is permitted if no other reasonable roading alternatives 

outside the mapped nesting habitat exist. Permit no continuous disturbance likely to result in nest abandonment within the 

surrounding 600 feet from March 15 to August 15. Noise disturbance (timing) restrictions are removed for active nests that 

become inactive or unsuccessful. Retaining a travel corridor along the boundary between Units 73 and 74 will provide 

minimal connectivity. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Recreation, Botany and Soils. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-35 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-36  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable & Shovel Total Unit Acres: 70 Unit Number: 74 

Harvest Acres: 60 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 992 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit has old-growth stand structure and has variable site productivity throughout. 

The unit covers a knob and therefore has varied aspects. The unit contains prevalent stem decay and defect throughout the 

stand. The windthrow and mistletoe rating for the stand is low. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm, 

stand grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides or other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with moderately severe stem 

decay and defect resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay and the light infections 

mistletoe may be affecting stand vigor. Even-aged clearcutting with reserves (15 percent of the unit for wildlife habitat 

connectivity) is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow post harvest, promote natural regeneration by 

opening up the canopy, improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and minimize defect and disease in the 

future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural 

prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: The unit is designed for a combination of shovel and uphill cable yarding. Setting T64 is designed 

for shovel yarding to a proposed temporary road extension of the 6548 road. Setting T65 is designed for both cable and shovel 

yarding. Retention will be located along the eastern boundary during layout. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Three temporary roads are needed to access the entire unit. The primary temporary road is 0.47 

mile in length. The second temporary road intersects the primary temporary road at mp 0.14 and travels north for 0.20 mile. 

The third temporary road intersects the primary temporary road at mp 0.21 and travels south west for 0.10 mile. A total of 

0.77 mile of temporary road will be constructed. The roads will be decommisioned after the timber sale. The material source 

is located on Road 6548 mp 0.06, Road 6548 mp 0.67, and Road 6540 mp 3.14. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are three Class IV, channel type HC5, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from stream if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There is a small portion of a Class II, channel type MM1, stream near the the unit. No harvest within 120 feet of the channel 

(BMP 12.6). 

SCENERY: Setting T64 is not seen. Only T65 is seen from the Anita Bay viewshed, and has an adopted SIO of very low. 

The proposed prescription will meet this SIO. 

SOILS: This unit includes 3 acres of slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessement is included in the project 

record. (BMP 13.5) Based on the field review, slopes over 85 percent gradient are not suitable for timber harvest and harvest 

on slopes over 72 percent gradient will require full suspension to minimize soil disturbance and landslide potential. (BMP 

13.9) Forested wetlands occur in the northern portion of the unit. Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; 

shovel tracks may need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9) to minimize soil disturbance. 

WILDLIFE: 

This unit is adjacent to a 230-acre goshawk nesting habitat buffer containing several known nests. No commercial timber 

harvest is permitted within the identified buffer. New road construction is permitted if no other reasonable roading 

alternatives outside the mapped nesting habitat exist. Permit no continuous disturbance likely to result in nest abandonment 

within the surrounding 600 feet from March 15 to August 15. Noise disturbance (timing) restrictions are removed for active 

nests that become inactive or unsuccessful. Retaining a travel corridor along the boundary between Units 73 and 74 will 

provide minimal connectivity. 

No resource concerns identified for Geology, Heritage, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-37 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-38  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Shovel Total Unit Acres: 15 Unit Number: 75 

Harvest Acres: 15 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 76 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand. The stem decay, 

physical defect and mistletoe infections are low. There is evidence of some cedar decline in patches. The windthrow risk 

rating for the stand is high. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for shovel yarding to a temporary spur off the existing 6540 road. This unit is 

prescribed for a single-tree selection partial harvest. Leave trees will not impair yarding activities or pose a safety risk. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.17 mile of temporary road. The road will be decommisioned after the timber sale. 

The material source is located on Road 6548 mp 0.06, Road 6548 mp 0.67, and Road 6540 mp 3.14. 

Spur road will be located so as to not impact stream flow. The spur road has been relocated to avoid rare plants. 

BOTANY: Ten individuals of lesser round-leaved orchid (Platanthera orbiculata) are located within the RMA buffer on the 

east side of this unit. The proposed spur road was relocated to establish a 100-foot windfirm buffer to avoid impacts. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class I, channel type HC1, stream on the east side of the unit. No harvest within 100 feet of the channel (BMP 

12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). 

The temporary road in the unit crosses a mapped Class IV stream, adequate size structures will be necessary for all stream 

crossings and will be removed immediately following timber sale activities (BMP 13.16, 14.20). 

There are two Class IV, channel type HC, streams in the unit. Fall timber away from stream if feasible. Full suspension or 

split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris from streams 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16) 

WILDLIFE: This unit is an ‘island’ of old growth in the dense scrub timber in this part of the area between Anita Bay and 

Burnett Inlet. Maintaining 70 percent retention would provide a ‘stepping stone’ for old-growth dependent species. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: The unit harvests 15 acres of forested wetlands. Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; shovel tracks 

need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9) to minimize soil disturbance. 

No resource concerns identified for Geology, Heritage, and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-39 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-40  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM,SV Logging 

Systems: 

Shovel Total Unit Acres: 15 Unit Number: 76 

Harvest Acres: 15 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 74 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand with varied site 

productivity. The stem decay, physical defect and mistletoe infections are low. There is evidence of some cedar decline in 

patches. The windthrow risk rating for the stand is low. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: 

This unit is designed for shovel yarding to the existing 6540 road. This unit is prescribed for a single tree selection partial 

harvest. Minimize harvest near the Class I stream to maintain security cover for brown bears. Leave trees will not impair 

yarding activities or pose a safety risk. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class I, channel types MC1, MC2, and FP4 streams (Pump Creek) on the east side of the unit. No harvest within 

130 feet (FP4) or 100 feet (MC) of the channel; partial-harvest prescription should be windfirm (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). 

WILDLIFE: This stand receives a lot of use by black and brown bears attracted to the spawning salmon in Pump Creek. 

Leave trees should be concentrated adjacent to the RMA to help maintain bear security as well as windfirmness of the stream 

buffer. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: The unit includes 15 acres of forested wetlands. Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; shovel tracks 

need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9) to minimize soil disturbance. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Botany, Geology, Heritage, and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-41 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-42  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Shovel Total Unit Acres: 53 Unit Number: 77 

Harvest Acres: 53 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 266 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand. The stem decay is 

moderately severe, physical defect is high, whereas mistletoe infections and windthrow risk are low. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for shovel yarding to the existing 51544 road. This unit is prescribed for a 

single-tree selection partial harvest. Minimize harvest near the Class I stream to maintain security cover for brown bears. 

Leave trees will not impair yarding activities or pose a safety risk. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class I, channel type FP4, stream (Pump Creek) on the east side of the unit. No harvest within 130 feet of the 

channel, individual tree mark prescription should be windfirm (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). 

There is a Class II, channel types MC1 and PA5, stream on the west side of the unit. No harvest within 100 feet of channel; 

individual tree mark prescription should be windfirm (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). 

There are three Class IV, channel type HC5, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from stream if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible; a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: The unit includes 44 acres of forested wetlands. Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; shovel tracks 

need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9) to minimize soil disturbance. 

WILDLIFE: 

This unit is near a 100-acre goshawk nesting habitat buffer. No commercial timber harvest is permitted within the identified 

buffer. Permit no continuous disturbance that is likely to result in nest abandonment within the surrounding 600 feet from 

March 15 to August 15. Noise disturbance (timing) restrictions are removed for active nests that become inactive or 

unsuccessful. 

This stand receives a lot of use by black and brown bears attracted to the spawning salmon in Pump Creek and Class I 

tributaries. Leave trees should be concentrated adjacent to the RMA to help maintain bear security as well as windfirmness of 

the stream buffer. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-43 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-44  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM, ML Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 139 Unit Number: 78 

Harvest Acres: 139 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 695 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand. The stem decay is 

moderately severe, physical defect is high, whereas mistletoe infections and windthrow risk are low. There is evidence of 

porcupine damage in western hemlock and Sitka spruce. Yellow cedar decline was found in moderate severity in scattered 

patches. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings on the existing 51544 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type MC3, portion of mainstem stream (Pump Creek) on the southeast corner of the unit. No 

harvest within 100 feet of the channel, (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). 

There is a Class III, channel type HC6, stream that bisects the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There are at least five Class IV, channel type HC, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

Partial harvest helicopter treatment will reduce impacts associated with windthrow. 

SCENERY: Setting T121 in unseen. Setting T149 is partially visible in the distance from the head of the Burnett Inlet 

viewshed, and setting T148 is partially visible from the heads of the Burnett and Mosman Inlet viewsheds. The adopted SIO 

for these settings is very low. The proposed prescription, along with the great distances from where parts of this unit can be 

seen, will meet a high SIO. 

SOILS: Unit contains areas with slopes >72 percent. Prior to harvest a slope stability analysis will be done and documented 

in the change analysis report; it is anticipated that these areas can be avoided with the STS prescription. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Wildlife, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-45 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-46  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 65 Unit Number: 79 

Harvest Acres: 65 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 326 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand that is fairly high 

elevation and fairly productive. The stem decay and physical defect in moderately severe, whereas mistletoe infections and 

windthrow risk are low. There is evidence of recent, severe porcupine damage in western hemlock and Sitka spruce. Yellow 

cedar decline was found in moderate severity in scattered patches. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings on the existing 6544 and 51441 roads. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are seven Class IV, channel type HC, streams that run through the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

SCENERY: Setting T151 is unseen. Parts of setting T147 are slightly visible from Clarence Strait, and it has an adopted SIO 

of low. Since so little of T147 can be seen from this distance, the proposed prescription will meet a high SIO. 

SOILS: The unit includes 7 acres with slope over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment was conducted and found 

these areas suitable for harvest with proposed prescription. (BMP 13.5). 

WILDLIFE: The 70 percent retention prescription will allow for the elevational migration of wildlife by maintaining an 

elevational travel corridor between the two existing clearcuts. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-47 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-48  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML, SV Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 18 Unit Number: 80 

Harvest Acres: 18 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 92 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a high elevation, productive, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand. The stem 

decay and physical defect in trees is moderately severe, whereas mistletoe infections and windthrow risk are low. No cedar 

decline was recorded. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings located on the existing 6544 road. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: None 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is at least one Class IV, channel type HC, stream within the unit. Fall timber away from stream if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: The unit includes 3 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment was conducted and 

found these areas suitable for harvest with proposed prescription (BMP 13.5). 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the North Etolin Inventoried Roadless Area (#232). 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Wildlife, Botany, Recreation, and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-49 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-50  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 46 Unit Number: 88 

Harvest Acres: 46 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 231 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a high elevation multicanopy, uneven-aged stand with widely variable 

productivity. The stem decay is moderately severe and physical defect in trees was rated as severe. Mistletoe infections and 

windthrow risk are low. No cedar decline was recorded. Some recent porcupine damage was noted. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings on the existing 6543 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC6, stream on the northeast boundary of the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 

13.9, 13.16). 

Partial harvest helicopter treatment will reduce impacts associated with windthrow. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: Unit includes approximately 7 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. These areas will be avoided with the 

partial harvest prescription. 

WILDLIFE: The 70 percent retention prescription will allow for the elevational migration of wildlife between this unit and 

nearby existing clearcuts. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-51 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-52  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML Logging 

Systems: 

Cable & Shovel Total Unit Acres: 9 Unit Number: 90 

Harvest Acres: 9 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 153 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This unit is a low lying, gently sloped unmanaged stand with old-growth stand 

structure. It is a moderately productive site that has moderately severe levels of stem defect, moderate windthrow risk and 

light, but widespread mistletoe infections. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet standards and guides. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with stem decay and 

widespread mistletoe infections, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Even-aged 

clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of windthrow, post harvest, promote natural regeneration by 

opening up the canopy, improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and remove/minimize defect and disease 

in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and 

silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable logging to a landing located on the existing reconstructed 

6543 road. Shovel yarding is planned for the eastern side of the unit. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type PA5/MM1, stream on the eastern boundary of the unit. No harvest within 100 feet (PA5) or 

120 feet (MM1) of the channel. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: The unit harvests 9 acres of forested wetlands. Shovel yarding will follow BMPs 12.5, 13.2 and 13.9; shovel tracks 

need to be supported by slash (BMP 13.9). Special consideration is needed to minimize soil disturbance due to downslope 

stream. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Recreation, Botany and Wildlife. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-53 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-54  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 33 Unit Number: 91 

Harvest Acres: 33 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 168 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is southern exposed, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand that extends from 200 

feet elevation to approximately 1,200 feet elevation. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is moderately severe. 

Mistletoe infections were light but widespread throughout the unit. Windthrow risk was rated as high. No cedar decline was 

recorded. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings on the 6540 road. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: None. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are two Class II, channel type HC1, streams on the southern boundary of the unit. No harvest within 100 feet of 

channel. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There are three Class IV, channel type HC5, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: This unit includes 1 acre with slopes over 72 percent gradient; this area will be avoided with the partial harvest 

prescription. 

WILDLIFE: The 70 percent retention prescription will allow for the elevational migration of wildlife. 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Roads, Heritage, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-55 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-56  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 18 Unit Number: 92 

Harvest Acres: 18 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 92 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a productive, multicanopy, uneven-aged stand with a southwestern 

exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is moderately severe. Mistletoe infections were light but widespread 

throughout the unit. Windthrow risk was rated as high. No cedar decline was recorded. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings on the 6540 road. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: None 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type PA1 and LC1, stream on the southwest side of the unit. No harvest within 100 feet of 

channel. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There is a Class II lake/pond on the west side of the unit. No harvest within 100 feet of shoreline. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

GEOLOGY/KARST: Potential for limestone bedrock in the unit. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: This unit includes 2 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted 

during project implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes will be avoided. 

WILDLIFE: The 70 percent prescription will allow for the elevational migration of wildlife: If possible, leave elevational 

travel corridor within/between Unit’s 91/92. 

No resource concerns were identified for Heritage, Roads, Wildlife, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-57 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-58  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 14 Unit Number: 93 

Harvest Acres: 14 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 70 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand has moderately low site productivity, and is a high elevation, uneven-aged 

stand with a southeastern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is light. Mistletoe infections are severe and 

affecting nearly all western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated as moderately high. No cedar decline was recorded. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to a temporary road in the adjacent managed stand. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: To reduce the helicopter yarding distance, a temporary road (0.44 mile) may be constructed on 

an existing road prism to save costs and reduce environmental effects. 

SCENERY: This unit is partially visible from the Mosman Inlet viewshed, and has an adopted SIO of very low. The 

proposed prescription will meet a high SIO due to the distance the unit can be seen from and the aspect visible. 

SOILS: This unit includes 1 acre with slopes over 72 percent gradient; this area will be avoided with the partial harvest 

prescription. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Fish/Watershed, Heritage, Recreation, Botany and Wildlife. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-59 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-60  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 41 Unit Number: 94 

Harvest Acres: 41 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 204 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: Uneven-aged stand. The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderately 

low site productivity, and is high elevation, uneven-aged, with a northeastern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in 

trees is moderately high. Mistletoe infections are absent. Windthrow risk was rated low. No cedar decline was recorded. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings located on the existing 6542 and 6540 roads. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are two Class III, channel types HC5 and HC6, streams that flow between settings. Do not harvest in the v-notch. 

(BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). 

There are at least four Class IV, channel type HC, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: This unit has 5 acres with slopes >72 percent; a slope stability assessment will be conducted during project 

implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes will be avoided. 

WILDLIFE: The prescription of 70 percent retention would allow for the elevational migration of wildlife. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Botany and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-61 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-62  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML, 

TM 

Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 35 Unit Number: 103 

Harvest Acres: 35 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 582 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This is a wind-generated multicanopy eastern aspect uneven-aged stand of 

moderate/high productivity. Mistletoe infections are light throughout all western hemlocks. Stem decay and physical defect 

are light. Wind hazard is moderately high. Cedar decline is moderate and patchy throughout the stand. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with stem decay and 

widespread mistletoe infections, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the 

moderately high windthrow risk, even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest 

windthrow, to promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil 

temperature and to remove/minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the 

introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to landings located on the proposed extension of the 

6545 road (road 51451). 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Refer to road card 51451. 

BOTANY: One population of broad-lipped twayblade (Listera convallarioides), 16 individuals, is documented in the unit. 

Lay out the unit boundary to exclude this population. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are two Class IV, channel type HC, streams that run through unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full 

suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris 

from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16) 

GEOLOGY/KARST: Mapped moderate-vulnerability karst area in eastern portion of unit was not found to contain any 

features requiring protection within the unit or along the proposed road line accessing the unit. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: This unit harvests 2 acres of forested wetlands; cable yarding will mimimize soil disturbance. 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Wildlife, Recreation, and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-63 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-64  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML, 

TM 

Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 33 Unit Number: 104 

Harvest Acres: 33 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 544 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: This is a wind-generated multicanopy eastern aspect uneven-aged stand of 

moderate/low productivity. Mistletoe infections are light and scattered throughout all western hemlocks. Stem decay and 

physical defect are light. Wind hazard is moderately high. Cedar decline is heavy throughout the stand. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with stem decay and 

widespread mistletoe infections, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the 

moderately high windthrow risk even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest 

windthrow, to promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil 

temperature and to remove/minimize defect and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the 

introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to landings located on the proposed extension of the 

6545 road (road 51451). 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Refer to road card 51451. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are two Class II, channel types AF1 and MM1, adjacent to the unit. No harvest within 140 feet (AF) or 120 feet (MM) 

of the stream channels. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). The stream has sensitive channel types that may need large RAW buffers in this 

high risk windthrow area. 

There is a Class III, channel type HC5, stream on the northern unit boundary. No harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There is a Class IV, channel type HC, stream within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full suspension or 

split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris from streams 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: This unit harvests 1 acre of forested wetlands; cable yarding will mimimize soil disturbance. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the North Etolin Inventoried Roadless Area (#232). 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Heritage, Botany, Recreation, and Wildlife. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-65 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-66  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML, 

TM 

Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 26 Unit Number: 105 

Harvest Acres: 26 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 430 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of high site productivity, and is high 

elevation, uneven-aged, with a southwestern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is low. Mistletoe 

infections are light, distributed in most western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar decline was 

recorded as light and patchy. Porcupine damage was noted as recent and severe. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with stem decay and 

widespread mistletoe infections, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the 

moderately high windthrow risk even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest 

windthrow, to promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil 

temperature and to remove/minimize defect, disease, and porcupine damage in the future stand to the maximum extent 

possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to landings on the existing road and proposed 

extension of the 51009 road. Some shovel yarding may occur in the southwest portion of the unit. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.12 mile of new NFS road. Refer to road card 51009. The material source is located 

on Road 51009, mp 0.86. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are at least two Class IV, channel type HC, streams that run through unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. 

Full suspension or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging 

debris from streams (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

GEOLOGY/KARST: Moderate vulnerability karst west of proposed spur road. Small solution (karst) features found along 

proposed road location contributing water to Class IV stream. Unit needs review prior to approving shovel logging to ensure 

karst protection. Limit soil disturbance to minimize potential sediment delivery to downslope karst area. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: This unit harvests 1 acre of forested wetlands; cable yarding will mimimize soil disturbance. . 

No resource concerns were identified for Botany, Heritage, Recreation, Wildlife. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-67 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-68  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 17 Unit Number: 115 

Harvest Acres: 17 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 289 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of high site productivity, and is high 

elevation, uneven-aged, with a southern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is moderately high. Mistletoe 

infections are light, distributed in most western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar decline was 

recorded as light and patchy. Porcupine damage was noted as recent and severe. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with high levels of stem 

decay and physical defect, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the 

moderately high windthrow risk even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest 

windthrow, to promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil 

temperature and to remove/minimize defect, disease, and porcupine damage in the future stand to the maximum extent 

possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to landings located on the existing 51540 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type MM1, stream adjacent to the southern unit boundary and Road 51540. No harvest within 120 

feet of the channel. (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). No harvest permitted below the 51540 road. 

There are two Class III, channel types HC5 and HC6, streams on both sides of the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 

13.9, 13.16). 

There is a Class IV, channel type HC1, stream within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full suspension or 

split yard away from stream if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris from stream 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: The unit is designed to avoid harvest on unstable soils. It includes 1 acre of slopes over 72 percent gradient midslope; 

full suspension is required . Partial suspension is required on the remainder of the unit. (BMP 13.5, 13.9). 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Botany, Geology, Heritage, Wildlife, and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-69 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-70  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 15 Unit Number: 116 

Harvest Acres: 15 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 254 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate to high site productivity, 

and is high elevation, uneven-aged, with a southern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is moderately high. 

Mistletoe infections are light, distributed in most western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar decline 

was recorded as light and patchy. Porcupine damage was noted as recent and severe. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with high levels of stem 

decay and physical defect, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the 

moderately high windthrow risk even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest 

windthrow, to promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil 

temperature and to remove/minimize defect, disease, and porcupine damage in the future stand to the maximum extent 

possible. Refer to the introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to landings located on the existing 51540 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel type MM1, stream adjacent to the southern unit boundary and Road 51540. No harvest within 120 

feet of the channel. (BMP 12.6, 12.6a, 13.16). No harvest permitted below the 51540 road. 

There are three Class III, channel types HC5 and HC6, streams within or adjacent to the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There is a Class IV, channel type HC5, stream within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full suspension or 

split yard away from stream if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris from stream 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: Unit includes scattered patches of slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessement is included in the 

project record. (BMP 13.5) Based on the field review, slopes over 72 percent gradient will require full suspension to 

minimize soil disturbance and landslide potential. (BMP 13.9) This unit harvests 7 acres of forested wetlands; cable yarding 

will mimimize soil disturbance. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Botany, Heritage, Wildlife and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-71 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-72  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 11 Unit Number: 117 

Harvest Acres: 11 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 181 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate site productivity, and is 

low elevation, uneven-aged, with a southeastern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is moderately high. 

Mistletoe infections are light, distributed in most western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar decline 

was recorded as absent. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with high levels of stem 

decay and physical defect, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the 

moderately high windthrow risk, even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest 

windthrow, to promote natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil 

temperature and to remove/minimize defect, and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the 

introduction to unit cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to a landing located on the existing 51540 road. A 

short temporary spur may be necessary if the 51540 road is not outside of the beach buffer. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC6, stream on the southern boundary of the unit. Do not harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 

13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: The relatively straight backline and squared off western corner of this unit will be seen from the head of Anita 

Bay. The SIO in this area is very low. Small unit size and location low on the slope will enable it to meet the very low SIO. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Recreation, Botany, Wildlife, and Soils. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-73 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-74  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 20 Unit Number: 118 

Harvest Acres: 20 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 334 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate site productivity, and is 

low elevation, uneven-aged, with a northeastern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is moderately high. 

Mistletoe infections are absent. Windthrow risk was rated as low. Cedar decline was recorded as absent. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with high levels of stem 

decay and physical defect, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the risk of 

windthrow, even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest windthrow, to promote 

natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and to 

remove/minimize defect, and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit 

cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to landings located on the existing 51540 road. 

Shovel yarding may occur on the east side of the unit. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class II, channel types HC1 and MM1, stream on the east and north end of the unit. No harvest within 100 feet 

(HC) or 120 feet (MM) of the channel (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

There is a Class III, channel type HC5, section of stream adjacent to the northern unit boundary. No harvest in v-notch. 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers will be necessary for RMA buffers especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and where 

windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: Unit is seen from the head of the Anita Bay viewshed, and has an adopted very low SIO. The unit is barely 

seen, and the proposed prescription will meet a moderate SIO. 

SOILS: Unit includes 0.5 acre on the backline with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessement is included 

in the project record. (BMP 13.5) Based on the field review, over 72 percent gradient will require full suspension to minimize 

soil disturbance and landslide potential. (BMP 13.9) 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Botany, Geology, Heritage, Wildlife and Recreation. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-75 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-76  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 26 Unit Number: 120 

Harvest Acres: 26 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 131 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate site productivity, and is 

high elevation, uneven-aged, with a northeastern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is light. Mistletoe 

infections are light and scattered throughout western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar decline was 

recorded as heavy distributed throughout the stand. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings along the existing 51541 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a portion of one Class III, channel type HC5 stream adjacent to the unit on the southeast side. Do not harvest in the 

v-notch (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

SCENERY: The unit is seen in the background from the head of the Burnett Inlet viewshed. It is not visible from Anita Bay. 

The adopted SIO for the unit is very low. The proposed prescription will meet a moderate SIO. 

SOILS: Unit includes 2 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted during 

project implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes will be avoided. 

WILDLIFE: The 70 percent retention would allow for the elevational migration of wildlife in conjunction with Unit 116. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the North Etolin Inventoried Roadless Area (#232). 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Wildlife, Geology, Botany, Recreation, and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-77 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-78  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 22 Unit Number: 121 

Harvest Acres: 22 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 108 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate site productivity, and is 

high elevation, uneven-aged, with a southeastern exposure. The stem decay in trees is light, while physical defect is moderate. 

Mistletoe infections are light and scattered throughout western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar 

decline was recorded as light and scattered throughout the stand. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings along a temporary road off of the existing 

51540 road. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.15 mile of temporary road that enters an existing managed stand to shorten 

helicopter turn distances. Road will be decommisioned after the timber sale. The material source is located on Road 51540, 

mp 6.3. The temporary road will be constructed on an old road prism to minimize environmental impact. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is one Class III, channel type HC5 stream on the unit boundary. Do not harvest in the v-notch (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

SCENERY: The unit is seen from the head of the Burnett Inlet and Anita Bay viewsheds. The adopted SIO is very low. The 

proposed prescription will meet a moderate SIO. 

SOILS: This unit includes 3 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted 

during project implementation; unit boundary will be adjusted to harvest on unstable slopes adjacent to the stream. (BMP 

13.5) 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the North Etolin Inventoried Roadless Area (#232). 

No resource concerns were identified for Geology, Heritage, Botany and Wildlife. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-79 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-80  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 54 Unit Number: 125 

Harvest Acres: 54 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 271 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate site productivity, and is 

high elevation, uneven-aged, with an eastern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is heavy. Mistletoe 

infections are light and scattered throughout western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar decline was 

recorded as absent. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings along the existing 51540 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There are two Class III, channel type HC5, streams adjacent to or within the unit. No harvest in the v-notch (BMP 13.9, 

13.16). 

SCENERY: The unit is seen in the distance from the head of the Burnett Inlet viewshed, and is not visible from Anita Bay. 

The adopted SIO is very low. The proposed prescription will meet a moderate SIO. 

SOILS: The unit boundary was modified to remove unstable soils. The unit still includes 6 acres with slopes over 72 percent 

gradient; these acres were determined to be suitable for partial harvest based on the slope stability assessment. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the North Etolin Inventoried Roadless Area (#232). 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Wildlife, Geology, Botany, Recreation, and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-81 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-82  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 32 Unit Number: 126 

Harvest Acres: 32 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 162 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate to low site productivity, 

and is high elevation, uneven-aged, with an eastern exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is moderate. 

Mistletoe infections are light and scattered throughout western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar 

decline was recorded as light and scattered throughout the stand in patches. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings along the existing 51540 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC6, stream on the unit boundary. No harvest in the v-notch (BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: Unit includes 3 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted during 

project implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes will be avoided. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the North Etolin Inventoried Roadless Area (#232). 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Wildlife, Geology, Botany, Recreation, and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-83 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-84  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: TM Logging 

Systems: 

Helicopter Total Unit Acres: 55 Unit Number: 128 

Harvest Acres: 55 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 273 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate to low site productivity, 

and is high elevation, uneven-aged, with a western exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is moderate. 

Mistletoe infections are light and scattered throughout western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated moderately high. Cedar 

decline was recorded as light and scattered throughout the stand in patches. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: Uneven-aged prescription using single-tree selection (STS) retaining at least 70 percent of the unit 

pretreatment basal area, based on standing live tree total for the unit, uncut. Individual trees selected for harvest may occur in 

small groups but will generally be evenly distributed across the stand. Any small groups will usually be less than 1 acre but 

may occasionally go up to 2 acres in size where needed to address insect and disease issues or capitalize on existing advanced 

regeneration of desirable tree species. Retain at least 50 percent of the cedar and spruce BA to ensure species diversity. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for helicopter yarding to landings along the existing 51543 road (reconstructed) 

or a temporary extension of this road. 

ENGINEERING/ROADS: Construct 0.31 mile of temporary road. New temporary road construction will take place on an 

old road prism. Road will be decommissioned after the timber sale. The material source is located on Road 51540 mp 6.3. 

SCENERY: Unit is not seen from any visual priority travel route or use area. 

SOILS: Unit includes 3 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted during 

project implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes will be avoided. 

ROADLESS AREAS: Part of this unit is adjacent to the North Etolin Inventoried Roadless Area (#232). 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Fish/Watershed, Wildlife, Geology, Botany, Recreation, and Heritage. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-85 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-86  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 5 Unit Number: 140 

Harvest Acres: 5 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 83 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate site productivity, and is 

low elevation, uneven-aged, with a western exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is light. Mistletoe 

infections are light and distributed throughout most western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated as moderately high. Cedar 

decline was recorded as absent. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with high levels of stem 

decay and physical defect, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the risk of 

windthrow even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest windthrow, to promote 

natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and to 

remove/minimize defect, and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit 

cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to a landing on the existing 51720 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC5, stream adjacent to the southern portion of the unit. No harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 

13.9, 13.16). 

There are two Class IV, channel type HC, streams within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full suspension 

or split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris from streams 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers, especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and 

where windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: This unit will be visible from Anita Bay viewshed where the adopted SIO is low. The small unit size and 

irregular terrain will enable this unit to meet a moderate SIO. 

WILDLIFE: Consider opportunities to allow for connectivity to the beach buffer. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Recreation, Botany and Soils. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-87 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

A1-88  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-1
 

Unit Data Card – Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 

LUD: ML Logging 

Systems: 

Cable Total Unit Acres: 10 Unit Number: 141 

Harvest Acres: 10 Net Harvest Volume (Saw) 

MBF: 158 

SILVICULTURE: 

Existing Stand Condition/Vegetation: The stand is a wind-generated multicanopy stand of moderate site productivity, and is 

high elevation, uneven-aged, with a western exposure. The stem decay and physical defect in trees is light. Mistletoe 

infections are light and distributed throughout most western hemlock. Windthrow risk was rated as moderately high. Cedar 

decline was recorded as absent. 

Silvicultural Objective/Desired Condition: The desired condition for this stand is a highly productive, healthy, windfirm stand 

grown for timber management that retains residual trees as needed to meet that retains residual trees as needed to meet 

standards and guides for scenery as well as other objectives. 

Silvicultural Prescription: This stand is being recommended for harvest at this time because it’s not expected to obtain the 

desired condition given the current stand condition and growth trajectory. Trees are over-mature with high levels of stem 

decay and physical defect, resulting in a situation where stand growth is being offset or exceeded by decay. Due to the risk of 

windthrow even-aged clearcutting is being prescribed to preclude or minimize the risk of post harvest windthrow, to promote 

natural regeneration by opening up the canopy, to improve site productivity through increased soil temperature and to 

remove/minimize defect, and disease in the future stand to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the introduction to unit 

cards, marking guidelines and silvicultural prescription for more information. 

TIMBER/LOGGING: This unit is designed for downhill cable yarding to a landing on the existing 51720 road. 

FISH/WATERSHED: 

There is a Class III, channel type HC5, stream adjacent to the western portion of the unit. No harvest in the v-notch. (BMP 

13.9, 13.16). 

There is a Class IV, channel type HC, stream within the unit. Fall timber away from streams if feasible. Full suspension or 

split yard away from streams if feasible, a minimum of partial suspension is required. Remove logging debris from streams 

(BMP 13.9, 13.16). 

RAW buffers may be necessary for RMA buffers, especially on the windward (southeasterly) edge of stream buffers and 

where windthrow has been historically evident. 

SCENERY: This unit will be visible from the Anita Bay viewshed where the adopted SIO is low. The unit’s small size and 

irregular shape combined with irregular terrain will enable it to meet a moderate to low SIO. 

SOILS: This unit includes 2 acres with slopes over 72 percent gradient. A slope stability assessment will be conducted 

during project implementation. (BMP 13.5) Harvest on unstable slopes will be avoided. The unit harvests 2 acres of 

forested wetlands; cable yarding will mimimize soil disturbance. 

No resource concerns were identified for Roads, Geology, Heritage, Recreation, Botany and Wildlife. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Unit Cards - APPENDIX ROD-1  A1-89 
 

Appendix ROD-1
 

This page left blank 

A1-90  APPENDIX ROD-1 - Unit Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Purpose and Use 

General Design 

Criteria 

Operation Criteria 

Site-specific Design 

Criteria 

Appendix ROD-2 

Road Cards 

Road Management Objectives 

The road management objectives (RMOs) presented in this appendix establish the 

intended purpose and display design maintenance and operation criteria (as per FSH 

7709.55) for each proposed (51451, 51009) and reconstructed (51540, 51543) National 

Forest System (NFS) road in the Navy project area. The information on the RMO 

form will be part of the Forest Transportation Atlas, a permanent database that can be 

updated periodically as access needs, issues, and budgets change (FSM 7711.03). The 

information on the site-specific design criteria form will be used during design, 

construction, and initial monitoring of any road work proposed in this document. 

The general design criteria provide various descriptions of the type of road and the 

intended purpose and future use of the road. From this information, the maintenance 

and operation criteria can be developed. All Navy Timber Sale roads are constructed 

and maintained for silvicultural purposes. Wetlands will be avoided to the extent 

practicable. The practices described in BMP 12.5 will be applied to minimize impacts 

to wetlands where avoidance is not practicable. Therefore, all proposed roads meet the 

criteria for a silvicultural exemption from permitting under the Clean Water Act 

Section 404. 

General Design Criteria and Elements are shown on the RMO portion of the road cards 

and are defined as follows: 

• Functional Class: Local (L), Collector (C), and Arterial (A) classifications 

• Service Life: Long (L) or Short (S), Constant (C) or Intermittent (I) 

The operation criteria section includes a presentation of each of the five traffic 

management strategies identified in FSM 7731 (encourage, accept, discourage, 

prohibit, and eliminate) to be applied to different traffic classes on each road. The 

traffic management narrative describes what actions will be taken in order to apply 

each strategy. For example, if the strategy “eliminate” is prescribed for standard 

passenger and high-clearance vehicles, the narrative describes the method to 

accomplish this, such as removal of stream crossing structures, gating, etc. 

The site-specific design criteria include road location objectives, wetland information, 

erosion control, proposed rock borrow sources, and all streams within the project area 

with proposed construction or rehabilitation of stream crossing structures. 

Best Management Practices

The Forest Service recently issued National Core BMPs (USFS 2012). Directives for 

using these BMPs are currently in development. The Navy Timber Sale will 

implement the most uptodate BMP guidance. Currently, this ROD cites the Alaska 

Region BMPs, which are fully described in FSH 2509.22 (USFS 2006). A crosswalk 

between the Alaska Region BMPs and the national BMPs has been placed in the 

project planning file for reference. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Operational and 

Objective 

Maintenance Levels 

Some BMPs are implemented through the location of roads; others are translated into 

timber harvest and road contract provisions to ensure implementation. 

Operational Maintenance Levels indicate the level of road maintenance, Maintenance 

Level (ML) 2, during sale-related activities. Objective Maintenance Levels indicate 

the long-term maintenance plan for the roads as described in the following definitions. 

Applicable maintenance levels for the project area are: 

Alaska Forest 

Resources and 

Practices Act 

•	 Maintenance Level 1 (ML 1): 

Roads are placed in storage between intermittent uses. Basic custodial 

maintenance is performed to prevent damage to adjacent resources and to 

perpetuate the road for future resource management needs. Emphasis is 

normally given to maintaining drainage facilities and runoff patterns. Planned 

road deterioration may occur at this level. 

After timber harvest is completed, roads would be evaluated for erosion 

potential and measures would be implemented to reduce sediment delivery 

from the road surface and fills and reduce the risk of crossing failure and 

stream diversion. 

Road storage may include the removal of drainage structures and bridges, and 

construction of water bars, rolling dips and other necessary measures to 

protect resources including soils, water quality, fisheries, and wildlife. This is 

typically a long-term condition. The road remains in the NFS and may be 

reopened at a later date. 

•	 Maintenance Level 2 (ML 2): Roads are maintained for high-clearance 

vehicles and monitored for resource protection. Traffic would be minor, 

consisting of logging trucks during sale operations, and administrative uses. 

Under the Alaska Forest Resources and Practices Act (AFRPA) all roads will be 

maintained as "Active" during harvest-related activities. After these activities are 

completed, the roads will be maintained as AFRPA class “Inactive” as shown on the 

road cards. These classes include: 

•	 Active: A forest road being actively used for hauling logs, pulpwood, chips, 

or other major forest products, or rock and other roadbuilding materials. 

•	 Inactive: A forest road on which commercial hauling is discontinued for one 

or more logging seasons, and the forest landowner desires continuation of 

access for fire control, forest management activities, occasional or incidental 

use for forest products harvesting, or similar activities. Not open to motorized 

vehicles, but may be accessible to non-motorized users. Road drainage 

structures may or may not be removed. 

One more AFRPA class, “Closed” is not used in this project: 

•	 Closed: A road is closed when the following activities have been completed: 

a road is outsloped or waterbarred, or is left in a condition suitable to control 

erosion. The ditches are also left in a condition suitable to control erosion, and 

bridges, culverts, and fills are removed from surface waters. 

The road segments are described using mileposts (MP) as beginning and ending points 

(Beginning milepost = Bmp; Ending milepost = Emp). Lengths are given in miles 

(mi). Road width is given in feet. Culverts are identified as cmp. 

A2-2  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT]	 Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Blasting Restrictions 

Erosion Control 

Appendix ROD-2 

Seasonal restrictions on blasting are required within 1⁄2 mile of active bald eagle nests. 

All nests are considered active from March 1-May 31; restrictions continue through 

August 31 unless nests are proven to be inactive. 

During road construction, blasting operations will be designed to reduce the risk of 

mass failure on potentially unstable or saturated soils (BMP 14.6). Blasting and/or 

excavation under saturated soil conditions are restricted. 

All erosion control measures are required to be in place before the end of the normal 

operating season, and maintained during operations outside the normal operating 

season. 

See the project area map (below) showing location of all existing and proposed project 

area roads. 

Temporary Roads 

Temporary roads are decommissioned after harvest activities are completed. 

Decommissioning automatically involves pulling any culverts that were installed. 

Decommissioning activities result in the stabilization and restoration of unneeded 

roads to a more-natural state. They will not be driveable by motorized vehicles, but 

may be accessible to non-motorized users. Road drainage structures are removed and 

stream channels restored to their original contours. These roads are not part of the 

NFS road system. 

Temporary roads are shown on the roadcard location map (below) but do not have 

individual road cards. Temporary roads are shown on and described in the unit cards 

in Appendix ROD-1. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-3 
 

Appendix ROD-2
 

This page intentionally left blank 

A2-4  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

Appendix ROD-2
 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-5 
 

Appendix ROD-2
 

This page intentionally left blank 

A2-6  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

Appendix ROD-2
 

This page intentionally left blank 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-7 
 

Appendix ROD-2
 

A2-8  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Road Management Objectives 

Project/FEIS: Navy System: Anita Bay Land Use Designation: TM, ML 

Route Number: 51451 Route Name: Lunch Time Status: Planned 

Begin M.P.: 0.00 Length (miles): 0.48 Begin Termini: MP 1.18 

of the 6545 Rd. 

End Termini: MP 0.48 

in Unit 104 

General Design Criteria and Elements 

Functional Class: Local Service Life: I Traffic Service Level: D Surface: Shot rock 

Width: 14 feet Critical Vehicle: Yarder Design Vehicle: Log truck Design Speed: 10 mph 

Intended Purpose/Future Use: The intended purpose of this road is for timber management in Units 103 and 

104. The road will be used for future timber management and administration. 

Maintenance Criteria: 

Bmp Emp Operational Maintenance 

Level Existing Condition 

Objective Maintenance 

Level Desired Condition AFRPA Class: 

0.00 0.48 2 Active 

0.00 0.48 1 Inactive 

Operation Criteria 

Highway Safety Act: No Jurisdiction: National Forest System ownership 

Travel Management Strategies: 

Encourage: NA 

Accept: Non-motorized use after timber harvest. 

Discourage: Public use during the timber harvest. 

Prohibit: Motorized vehicles after the timber harvest. 

Eliminate: NA 

Travel Management Narrative: During the period of timber harvest, the road will be managed as closed to 

motorized vehicles unless provided with a written authorization or for administrative activities (Maintenance 

Level 2). The road will be closed to public motorized use. After the timber sale the road will be managed as 

Maintenance Level 1. The road provides opportunity for current and future harvest. It is part of the minimum road 

system necessary for management in the Timber Production and Modified Landscape LUD. 

District Ranger Approval (signature) Date: 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Site-specific Design Criteria
 

Road No. 51451
 

Road Location: The purpose of this road is to access Units 103 and 104. The road travels northwest as it hugs 

the base of a ridge while avoiding the RMA buffer at the lower portion of the valley. Downhill yarding will be 

used for both units. The road maintains a relatively constant elevation along its length. 

Wetlands: The road is located in forested wetlands between MP .20 and MP .45 due to alignment and grade 

constraints. 

Erosion Control: An erosion control plan for construction and maintenance will be developed by the contractor 

and approved by the Contracting Officer (BMP 14.5). All areas of mineral soil exposed during construction shall 

be grass seeded and fertilized (BMPs 12.17, 14.8). 

Rock Pits: Rock pits will require site-specific erosion control plans (BMP 14.18). The rock pit at MP 1.2 of the 

6545 road was noted as a potential initial rock source. After construction of the initial road segment, it is 

expected that another small rock pit will be required, most likely near the end of this road. 

Resource Information (If applicable): 

Timber/Logging: N/A 

Soils/Water: Adequate structures will be necessary for all unmapped crossings (BMP 14.17). After the
 

timber sale, all crossings would be evaluated and treated as needed during road storage to reduce risk of
 

failure.
 

Silviculture: N/A
 

Wildlife/Botany: Off-road equipment will be cleaned to remove seeds, vegetative matter and other debris,
 

according to the timber sale contract, to help reduce the spread of invasive plant species.
 

Lands/Minerals/Geology/Karst: Mapped moderate-vulnerability karst in the eastern portion of the unit was
 

not found to contain any features requiring protection within the unit or along the proposed road line
 

accessing the unit.
 

Scenery/Recreation: N/A
 

Heritage: N/A
 

A2-10  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Stream Crossings 

Road No. 51451 

A.) Mi: 0.22 AHMU: 4 Channel Type: HC5 BF Width: 2-4 feet BF Depth: NA Substrate: Cobble, gravel, 

silt 

Gradient: 18% Structure: 18-24” CMP Passage Req'd: No Timing Dates: None 

Narrative: N/A 

B.) Mi: 0.37 AHMU: 4 Channel Type: HC5 BF Width: 1-3 feet BF Depth: NA Substrate: gravel, cobble 

Gradient: 15% Structure: 18-24” CMP Passage Req'd: No Timing Dates: None 

Narrative: N/A 

C.) Mi: 0.47 AHMU: 4 Channel Type: HC5 BF Width: 1-3 feet BF Depth: NA Substrate: gravel, cobble 

Gradient: 19% Structure: 18-24” CMP Passage Req'd: No Timing Dates: None 

Narrative: N/A 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-11 
 

Appendix ROD-2
 

A2-12  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Road Management Objectives 

Project/FEIS: Navy System: Anita Bay Land Use Designation: ML 

Route Number: 51009 Route Name: Kindergarten Pass Status: Planned 

Begin MP: 0.80 Length (miles): 0.12 Begin Termini: MP 0.67 

of the 6538 Rd. 

End Termini: MP 0.92 in 

Unit 105. 

General Design Criteria and Elements 

Functional Class: Local Service Life: I Traffic Service Level: D Surface: Shot rock 

Width: 14 feet Critical Vehicle: Yarder Design Vehicle: Log truck Design Speed: 10 mph 

Intended Purpose/Future Use: The intended purpose of this road is for timber management in Unit 105. The 

road will be used for future timber management and administration. 

Maintenance Criteria: 

Bmp Emp Operational Maintenance 

Level Current Condition 

Objective Maintenance 

Level Desired Condition AFRPA Class 

0.00 0.80 2 2 Active 

Planned Condition 

0.80 0.92 2 Active 

0.80 0.92 1 Inactive 

Operation Criteria 

Highway Safety Act: No Jurisdiction: National Forest System ownership 

Travel Management Strategies (MP 0.80-0.92): 

Encourage: NA 

Accept: Non-motorized use after timber harvest. 

Discourage: Public use during the timber harvest. 

Prohibit: Motorized vehicles after the timber harvest. 

Eliminate: NA 

Travel Management Narrative: During the period of timber harvest, the road will be managed as closed to 

motorized vehicles unless provided with a written authorization or for administrative activities (Maintenance 

Level 2). The road will be closed to public motorized use. After the timber sale, the road from MP 0.80 to 0.92 

will be managed as Maintenance Level 1. The road provides opportunity for current and future harvest. It is part 

of the minimum road system necessary for management in the Modified Landscape LUD. 

District Ranger Approval (signature) Date: 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-13 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Site-specific Design Criteria
 

Road No. 51009
 

Road Location: The purpose of this road is to access Unit 105. 

Wetlands: The road has been located to avoid as much wetlands as possible. 

Erosion Control: An erosion control plan for construction and maintenance will be developed by the contractor 

and approved by the Contracting Officer (BMP 14.5). All areas of organic or mineral soil exposed during 

construction shall be grass seeded and fertilized (BMPs 12.17, 14.8). 

Rock Pits: Rock pits will require site-specific erosion control plans (BMP 14.18). The rock pit at MP 0.9 of the 

51009 road was noted as a potential rock source. Other potential rock sources are the nearby existing rock pits. 

Resource Information (If applicable): 

Timber/Logging: N/A
 

Soils/Water: Adequate structures will be needed for all unmapped stream crossings (BMP 14.17). After the
 

timber sale, all crossings would be evaluated and treated as needed during road storage to reduce risk of
 

failure.
 

Silviculture: N/A
 

Wildlife/Botany: Off-road equipment will be cleaned to remove seeds, vegetative matter and other debris,
 

according to the timber sale contract, to help reduce the spread of invasive plant species.
 

Lands/Minerals/Geology/Karst: Moderate-vulnerability karst west of proposed road. Small solution 

(karst) features found along proposed road location contributing to Class IV stream. Limit soil disturbance to
 

minimize potential sediment delivery to downslope karst area (BMPs 14.3, 14.5, 14.10, 14.12, 14.19).
 

Scenery/Recreation: N/A
 

Heritage: N/A
 

A2-14  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Stream Crossings 

Road No. 51009 

A.) Mi: 0.918 AHMU: 4 Channel Type: HC1 BF Width: 1-3’ BF Depth: Substrate: bedrock, gravel, 

cobble 

Gradient: 8-10% Structure: 18-24” CMP Passage Req'd: No Timing Dates: None 

Narrative: N/A 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-15 
 

Appendix ROD-2
 

A2-16  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Road Management Objectives 

Project/FEIS: Navy System: Anita Bay Land Use Designation: TM 

Route Number: 51540 Route Name: Fishtrap Status: Existing 

Begin MP: 7.64 Length (miles): 0.42 Begin Termini: MP 6.16 

of 6540 Rd. 

End Termini: MP 8.38 

in Section 11 

General Design Criteria and Elements 

Functional Class: Local Service Life: I Traffic Service Level: D Surface: Shot rock 

Width: 14 feet Critical Vehicle: Yarder Design Vehicle: Log truck Design Speed: 10 mph 

Intended Purpose/Future Use: The intended purpose of this road is for timber management in Unit 126. The 

road will be used for future timber management and administration. 

Maintenance Criteria: 

Bmp Emp Operational Maintenance 

Level Existing Condition 

Objective Maintenance 

Level Desired Condition AFRPA Class 

7.64 8.06 1 Inactive 

Planned Condition 

7.64 8.06 2 Active 

7.64 8.06 1 Inactive 

Operation Criteria 

Highway Safety Act: No Jurisdiction: National Forest System ownership 

Travel Management Strategies (MP 7.64 -8.06): 

Encourage: NA 

Accept: Non-motorized use after timber harvest. 

Discourage: NA 

Prohibit: Public motorized vehicles during and after the timber harvest. 

Eliminate: NA 

Travel Management Narrative: During the period of timber harvest, the road will be managed as closed to 

motorized vehicles unless provided with a written authorization or for administrative activities (Maintenance 

Level 2). The road will be closed to public motorized use. After the timber sale the road will be managed as 

Maintenance Level 1. The road provides opportunity for current and future harvest. It is part of the minimum road 

system necessary for management in the Timber Production LUD. After the timber harvest the road from MP 

7.64 -8.06 will be closed and the structure at MP 7.64 will be removed, which will eliminate motorized access. 

District Ranger Approval (signature) Date: 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-17 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2
 

Site-specific Design Criteria
 

Road No. 51540
 

Road Location: The purpose of this road reconditioning is to access Unit 126. The existing 51540 road should 

be adequate for hauling with minimal maintenance up to MP 7.6. From MP 7.6 to MP 8.1 the road needs a 

couple of stream crossing structures replaced and minor maintenance, including replacing shot rock. 

Wetlands: Wetlands exist along the proposed road reconditioning from MP 7.8 to MP 8.1. Reconditioning will 

avoid placing fill in wetlands. 

Erosion Control: An erosion control plan for construction and maintenance will be developed by the contractor 

and approved by the Contracting Officer (BMP 14.5). All areas of mineral soil exposed during construction shall 

be grass seeded and fertilized (BMPs 12.17, 14.8). 

Rock Pits: Due to the relatively minor nature of the road reconditioning, pit development will not be needed for 

this road. It is likely that rock will be needed to replace shot rock where necessary. The rock will most likely 

come from an existing rock pit. 

Resource Information (If applicable): 

Timber/Logging: N/A
 

Soils/Water: At MP 7.64 , a removed bridge needs to be replaced with a structure. There are several
 

blocked culverts on the existing road; culvert cleaning will be necessary to remove accumulated debris. 

There are also several erosion features that need to be corrected and ditches that need to be cleaned (BMPs
 

14.17, 14.20, and 14.5). After the timber sale, the bridge would be removed and all other crossings would be
 

evaluated and treated as needed during road storage to reduce risk of failure.
 

Silviculture: N/A
 

Wildlife/Botany: Off-road equipment will be cleaned to remove seeds, vegetative matter and other debris,
 

according to the timber sale contract, to help reduce the spread of invasive plant species.
 

Lands/Minerals/Geology/Karst: N/A
 

Scenery/Recreation: N/A
 

Heritage: N/A
 

A2-18  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Stream Crossings 

Road No. 51540 

A.) Mi: 7.64 AHMU: 3 Channel Type: HC6 BF Width: 29 

feet 

BF Depth: Not 

noted 

Substrate: boulder, 

cobble 

Gradient: 23% Structure: Bridge Passage Req'd: No Timing Dates: None 

Narrative: N/A 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-19 
 

Appendix ROD-2
 

A2-20  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Road Management Objectives 

Project/FEIS: Navy System: Anita Bay Land Use Designation: TM 

Route Number: 51543 Route Name: East Fishtrap Status: Existing 

Begin MP: 0.18 Length (miles): 0.35 Begin Termini: MP 6.91 

of the 51540 Rd. 

End Termini: MP 0.53 

in Section 12 

General Design Criteria and Elements 

Functional Class: Local Service Life: I Traffic Service Level: D Surface: Shot rock 

Width: 14 feet Critical Vehicle: Yarder Design Vehicle: Log truck Design Speed: 10 mph 

Intended Purpose/Future Use: The intended purpose of this road is for timber management in Unit 128. The 

road will be used for future timber management and administration. 

Maintenance Criteria: 

Bmp Emp Operational Maintenance 

Level Existing Condition 

Objective Maintenance 

Level Desired Condition AFRPA Class 

0.18 0.53 1 Inactive 

Planned Condition 

0.18 0.53 2 Active 

0.18 0.53 1 Inactive 

Operation Criteria 

Highway Safety Act: No Jurisdiction: National Forest System ownership 

Travel Management Strategies: 

Encourage: NA 

Accept: Non-motorized use after timber harvest. 

Discourage: NA 

Prohibit: Public motorized vehicles during and after the timber harvest. 

Eliminate: NA 

Travel Management Narrative: During the period of timber harvest, the road will be managed as closed to 

motorized vehicles, unless provided with a written authorization or for administrative activities (Maintenance 

Level 2). The road will be closed to public motorized use. After the timber sale the road will be managed as 

Maintenance Level 1. The road provides opportunity for current and future harvest. It is part of the minimum 

road system necessary for management in the Timber Production LUD. After the timber harvest, the road from 

MP 0.18-0.53 will be closed and the bridge at MP 0.18 will be removed, which will eliminate all motorized 

access. 

District Ranger Approval (signature) Date: 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-21 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2
 

Site-specific Design Criteria
 

Road No. 51543
 

Road Location: The purpose of this road reconditioning is to access Unit 128. At MP 0.18, a large bridge has 

been removed. 

Wetlands: Wetlands exist along proposed road reconditioning from MP 0.18 to MP 0.3. No additional fill will 

be placed in the wetlands. These wetlands will not be affected by the proposed road reconditioning. 

Erosion Control: An erosion control plan for construction and maintenance will be developed by the contractor 

and approved by the Contracting Officer (BMP 14.5). All areas of mineral soil exposed during construction shall 

be grass seeded and fertilized (BMPs 12.17, 14.8). 

Rock Pits: Due to the relatively minor nature of the road reconditioning, pit development will not be needed for 

this road. It is likely that rock will be needed to replace shot rock where necessary. The rock will most likely 

come from an existing rock pit. 

Resource Information (If applicable): 

Timber/Logging: N/A
 

Soils/Water/Fish: At MP 0.18, the bridge over Fishtrap Creek will need to be replaced. This is a Class II
 

resident fish stream (Dolly Varden char verified) with a suggested construction timing window of June 1st to 

September 15th (BMP 14.6). At MP 0.22, a Class II stream has an existing 36” culvert. There are several
 

culverts left on the existing road; culvert cleaning will be necessary to remove accumulated debris. The 

ditches will also need to be cleaned where necessary (BMPs 14.17, 14.20, and 14.5). After the timber sale,
 

the bridge would be removed and the culvert at MP 0.22 evaluated and treated as needed to ensure fish
 

passage. All other crossings would be evaluated as well, and treated as needed during road storage to reduce
 

risk of failure.
 

Silviculture: N/A
 

Wildlife/Botany: Off-road equipment will be cleaned to remove seeds, vegetative matter and other debris,
 

according to the timber sale contract, to help reduce the spread of invasive plant species.
 

Lands/Minerals/Geology/Karst: N/A
 

Scenery/Recreation: N/A
 

Heritage: N/A
 

A2-22  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-2 

Stream Crossings 

Road No. 51543 

A.) Mi: 0.18 AHMU: 2 Channel Type: LC1 BF Width: 35 feet BF Depth: Not 

noted 

Substrate: bedrock, boulder 

Gradient: 2% Structure: Bridge Passage Req'd: Yes Timing Dates: June 1st-September 15th 

Narrative: N/A 

B.) Mi: 0.22 AHMU: 2 Channel Type: MM1 BF Width: 3-5 feet BF Depth: Not 

noted 

Substrate: cobble, gravel 

Gradient: 2% Structure: 36” CMP existing Passage Req'd: NA Timing Dates: NA 

Narrative: 36” Pipe is present and will be evaluated at end of timber sale and treated as needed to ensure fish passage and 

reduce risk of failure. If it is removed, timing windows may apply. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision [DRAFT] Road Cards - APPENDIX ROD-2  A2-23 
 

Appendix ROD-2
 

This page left blank 

A2-24  APPENDIX ROD-2 - Road Cards [DRAFT] Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

Additional Information since the Navy 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Introduction 

The 2015 Record of Decision (ROD) replaces the 2009 Record of Decision for 

this project. The 2009 Record of Decision selected a modified Alternative D 

and subsequently was remanded on appeal. The Responsible Official was 

directed to either select an alternative that was analyzed in detail in the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), or supplement the Draft EIS (DEIS) 

to provide detailed analysis for the Selected Alternative. The Responsible 

Official intends to select Alternative F, which was analyzed in detail in the 

FEIS, ensuring that the public has had adequate opportunity to review and 

comment on the alternative, in compliance with the direction in the Regional 

Forester’s letter of remand. 

Before making his decision in the Navy Timber Sale project, the Forest 

Supervisor, the Responsible Official for this decision, directed an 

interdisciplinary team (IDT) to review and analyze any changes in information 

since the 2009 FEIS. The interdisciplinary team identified and analyzed new or 

updated information and compared the effects to the FEIS. 

This report summarizes the analysis of the new and updated information since 

the release of the Navy Timber Sale FEIS in 2009. It was used to inform the 

Responsible Official in making his decision for the Navy Timber Sale project 

on the significance of new information. Further analysis was included to 

address or clarify issues raised in the 2009 appeal points that also pertain to 

activities proposed by the 2015 Decision. The results of this analysis are 

documented in the addendums and updates to the resource reports in the Navy 

project record, and summarized in this appendix by resource. The project 

record also includes all of the 2009 appeal points and responses. 

New Information 

The Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) require Federal agencies to prepare 

supplements to a draft or final EIS if “[t]he agency makes substantial changes 

in the proposed action that are relevant to environmental concerns” or “[t]here 

are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental 

concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts.” 40 CFR § 

1502.9(c)(1). To comply with this requirement, the Forest Service Handbook 

(FSH) 1909.15-2012-3, Chapter 10, 18.1 provides the following direction: 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

If new information or changed circumstances relating to the 

environmental impacts of a proposed action come to the 

attention of the responsible official after a decision has been 

made and prior to completion of the approved program or 

project, the responsible official should review the information 

carefully to determine its importance. Consideration should be 

given to whether or not the new information or changed 

circumstances are within the scope and range of effects 

considered in the original analysis. 

The FSH addresses new information arising after a decision has been made. 

The new and additional information for Navy Timber Sale has undergone 

interdisciplinary review and is available to the Responsible Official prior to the 

2015 Decision, enabling a better-informed decision. 

Appendix ROD-3, “Additional Information since the Navy Final 

Environmental Impact Statement”, summarizes the results of this 

interdisciplinary review. This review of new information and direction did not 

disclose any “significant new circumstances or information relevant to 

environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts” that 

would require a supplemental EIS under NEPA (40 CFR § 1502.9(c)). The 

Navy project has not made substantial changes in the proposed action that are 

relevant to environmental concerns. There are no changes, new information, or 

circumstances that may result in significant environmental impacts in a manner 

not previously evaluated or considered. The new information or changed 

circumstances are within the scope and range of effects considered in the 

original analysis. 

Relationship to the 2008 Forest Plan 

The Navy FEIS and March 2009 Decision incorporated direction from the 

Forest Plan (January 2008). The decision in the Forest Plan contains transition 

language for the Navy Timber Sale project. The direction in the decision for 

the 2008 Forest Plan was “to review these projects, and incorporate the new 

direction in the amended Forest Plan to the extent this can be done without 

causing major disruptions in the implementation of these projects.” This 

project began under the direction of the 1997 Forest Plan in 2006, and the Navy 

DEIS was released November 2, 2007. Direction between the 1997 Forest Plan 

and the 2008 Forest Plan Amendment did not significantly change the 

management direction of the project area for this project. Navy and the other 

projects in Category 2 were also assumed to be implemented in the 

environmental analysis in the 2008 Forest Plan Amendment FEIS. Therefore, 

because the FEIS considered these projects in its effects analysis, their 

implementation is not in conflict with the amended Plan. 

Although there have been non-significant amendments to the Forest Plan since 

it was signed in 2008, none of these amendments would affect the Navy 

project. 

A3-2  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

Amendment to the 2008 Forest Plan 

The 2008 Forest Plan is currently undergoing an amendment, including public 

involvement, and release of the DEIS which is expected to be available for 

public comment around mid-2015. Some of the issues being considered in the 

current amendment include the transition to young-growth management, 

renewable energy opportunities, roadless area considerations, and wildlife 

habitat and the conservation strategy. 

As described above, since Navy and the other projects in Category 2 were 

assumed to be implemented in the environmental analysis in the 2008 Forest 

Plan Amendment FEIS, their implementation is not in conflict with either the 

2008 Plan Amendment or the current Forest Plan Amendment direction. 

Changes in Policy/Agency Direction since 2009 

Project-Level Pre-decisional Administrative Review Process 

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012, Section 428, directed the 

Secretary to establish a project-level pre-decisional administrative review 

process (“objection process”) for projects and activities implementing land 

management plans, in place of the post-decisional appeals process used by the 

agency since 1993. The Navy Timber Sale project will go through the 

objection process (36 CFR 218) which replaced the appeals process (36 CFR 

215) on March 27, 2013. Under the objection process, rather than filing 

appeals after a decision document (Record of Decision, or Decision Notice) is 

signed, individuals and entities may now file objections after the environmental 

analysis and the draft decision are complete, but before the final decision is 

signed. The purpose of the objection process is to encourage collaboration in 

project planning between the Responsible Official and interested publics, with 

the goal of resolving issues and coming to a better-informed decision before a 

final decision is made. 

A 45-day objection filing period begins when a legal notice is published in the 

newspaper of record, and an EA or FEIS is issued, along with a draft decision. 

A letter or email stating that these documents are available (hard copy, DVD, 

and/or on the Forest Service public website) will be sent out to individuals and 

organizations who submitted specific written comments. The Navy FEIS was 

distributed to the mailing list in 2009 and will not be redistributed; however, it 

is available online 

at http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=14556 or available 

for review at Forest Service District offices. Objections must be filed in 

writing with the Reviewing Officer within the objection filing period, as 

specified in the draft Record of Decision (ROD). 

To be eligible to object to a project, individuals and entities need to have 

previously submitted timely, specific written comments during the public 

comment periods, unless the objection concerns an issue that arose after 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

designated opportunities for comment were over. Comments must be within 

the scope of the project, have a direct relationship to the proposed action, and 

include supporting reasons for the Responsible Official to consider. 

After the 45-day objection filing period ends, a 45-day objection review period 

begins. Prior to a written response by the Reviewing Officer, the Reviewing 

Officer or the objector may request to meet, along with the Responsible 

Official, to discuss the issues raised and any possible resolution. At the end of 

the 45-day objection reviewing period, the Reviewing Officer will issue a 

written response detailing how the objections have been addressed, which may 

also include instructions to the Responsible Official (36 CFR 218.11(b)). The 

final decision document will not be signed until all concerns and instructions 

identified by the Reviewing Officer in the objection response have been 

addressed by the Responsible Official (36 CFR 218.12(b)). 

Implementation of decisions subject to the objection process may commence 

immediately after a final decision is signed. There is not a requirement to 

publish notification of the decision. See the Navy ROD “Administrative 

Review-Opportunity to Object” for more discussion of the objection process 

and eligibility to object. 

Inventoried Roadless Areas (2001 Roadless Rule) 

When the project decision was signed in March 2009, the Tongass National 

Forest was exempt from the 2001 Roadless Rule. The effects analysis for the 

Navy FEIS was based on the 2008 Forest Plan roadless inventory. All action 

alternatives in the FEIS, except for Alternative F, proposed activities within 

inventoried roadless areas. These proposed activities were consistent with the 

direction in the 2008 decision of the Forest Plan. 

The March 4, 2011 ruling by the Federal District Court for the District of 

Alaska in Organized Village of Kake v. USDA vacated the Tongass exemption 

from the Roadless Rule. The State of Alaska appealed that decision to the 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which on March 26, 2014 reversed the District 

Court decision concerning the exemption of the Tongass from the Roadless 

Rule. The three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court determined that the 

USDA was reasonable, in 2003, when it exempted the Tongass from the 

Roadless Rule. The Ninth Circuit Court also remanded the case to the District 

Court to decide whether a supplemental EIS is required for the Tongass 

exemption. In August 2014, however, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 

granted another hearing, held in December 2014 before an eleven-judge panel 

to rehear the State of Alaska’s appeal. The eleven-judge panel has not yet 

issued a decision. Currently, the Roadless Rule remains in effect in Alaska, 

pending the outcome of the Court’s decision. The Forest Service will comply 

with all court orders. 

Effects to roadless area values were analyzed by alternative in the Navy Timber 

Sale FEIS using the Forest Plan’s 2008 roadless inventory. However, the 

analysis update for the 2015 ROD is based on the 2001 Roadless Rule 

inventory, which is slightly different than the Forest Plan’s 2008 roadless 

A3-4  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

inventory used in the Navy FEIS. See Figure 2 in this appendix. Alternative F, 

the Selected Alternative, proposes no timber harvest or road building in any 

inventoried roadless area under either the 2001 or 2008 inventory. See also 

“Issue 3 – Inventoried Roadless Areas” in this appendix. The outcome of 

litigation with regard to the Tongass exemption would not alter the effects or 

change the analysis as a result of the project. 

USDA Strategic Plan 2010-2015 

The USDA Strategic Plan 2010-2015 provides the long-term objectives for the 

agency. One of the goals of the USDA Strategic Plan FY2010 – 2015 is to 

“Assist Rural Communities to create Prosperity so they are Self-sustaining, 

Repopulating and Economically Thriving”. To help achieve this goal, the 

Alaska Region’s development of a Transition Framework program is intended 

to build upon current assets and economic sectors and develop other 

opportunities within the communities within the Tongass National Forest. 

As part of this strategy, there is a gradual shift of Tongass forest management 

from primarily old-growth timber harvest to young-growth forest management. 

On May 26, 2010, Tom Vilsack, the USDA Secretary of Agriculture, put out a 

news release (Release No. 0288.10) highlighting the increasing emphasis the 

Forest Service, in cooperation with USDA Rural Development and Department 

of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration, is putting on this 

management shift. The Secretary issued Memorandum 1044-009 on July 2, 

2013, “Addressing Sustainable Forestry in Southeast Alaska” which reaffirms 

the USDA’s high priority for this transition and the goal that in 10-15 years, the 

majority of timber sold by the Tongass will be young growth. 

Although there is currently no young-growth timber of merchantable 

(commercial) value available for harvest in the Navy project area, the Selected 

Alternative contributes to the supply of timber needed to maintain the timber 

industry during the transition to young-growth management, thus helping 

ensure that the infrastructure and job skills will be available when the young 

growth is ready for harvest. 

USDA Investment Strategy for Creating Jobs and Healthy 

Communities in SE Alaska 

A primary goal of the administration is a sustainable, stable economy for 

Southeast Alaska’s communities. To this end, Forest Service officials have 

been working with local communities to encourage a diversity of forest-related 

jobs built around timber, renewable energy, forest restoration, tourism, 

subsistence, recreation, fisheries, and mariculture. Timber harvest remains a 

component of Southeast Alaska’s diversified economy and a stable and 

sustainable timber supply is essential for the continuing existence of the timber 

industry. The Navy Timber Sale project contributes to this goal by sustaining 

timber jobs and related opportunities. More information is available 

at http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/r10/home/?cid=FSBDEV2_038855. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Climate Change Considerations 

The Navy FEIS, pages 3-5 and 6, addresses climate change and the rationale 

for not discussing it in detail at the project level. Climate change is a topic that 

continues to be studied throughout the agency, including the Tongass National 

Forest. 

The Forest Service is concerned with effectively integrating climate change 

issues into land management decisions and NEPA analysis. On January 13, 

2009, the USDA Forest Service, Washington Office released a report called 

“Climate Change Considerations in Project Level NEPA Analysis”. The paper 

addresses how climate change can and shall be discussed in project-level 

analysis, evaluating the cause and effect relationship between a proposed action 

and climate change, and whether a quantitative or qualitative analysis is 

warranted. The report states that “It is not necessary to calculate GHG emissions 

for most projects; however, in situations where the responsible official finds the 

information useful for decisionmaking, such data and conclusions developed 

through quantitative analysis would normally only be used for comparing 

alternatives related to direct effects or addressing any applicable regulatory 

requirements related to GHG emissions. Without enough scientific understanding 

to draw conclusions about the significance of the quantitative results, qualitative 

discussions about the potential for greenhouse gases sequestered and emitted are 

more appropriate for disclosing climate change implications. “ 

More recently, CEQ issued revised draft guidance in December of 2014 to 

“provide Federal agencies direction on when and how to consider the effects of 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change” in NEPA reviews (79 

FR 77802; December 24, 2014). The draft guidance “recommends that 

agencies use a reference point to determine when GHG emissions warrant a 

quantitative analysis taking into account available GHG quantification tools 

and data that are appropriate for proposed agency actions.” The guidance also 

states that “in addressing GHG emissions, agencies should be guided by the 

principle that the extent of the analysis should be commensurate with the 

quantity of the projected GHG emissions. When an agency determines that 

evaluating the effect of GHG emissions could not be useful to distinguish 

between the no-action and proposed alternatives and mitigations, the agency 

should document the rationale for that determination.” 

In 2011 and again in 2014, the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program, a 

subunit of the Pacific Northwest Research Station, made numerous carbon 

storage estimates and prepared the first national assessment of the storage and 

flux of carbon in down woody material (DWM) (Anderson 2011) and for live 

trees, snags and logs (Barrett 2014). The 2014 report indicates that the overall 

carbon mass stored in just aboveground trees, snags and logs in the Tongass is 

quite large: about 650 million tons, which is equivalent to 2.4 billion tons of 

CO2. This above-ground carbon storage does not include belowground pools 

such as carbon in non-forested wetlands, alpine, grass and shrublands, roots, 

soil, litter and other organic materials - which is estimated to be as large as the 

aboveground stores (Barrett 2014). “Although there is substantial amount of 

A3-6  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

recent literature about the effects of forest management on carbon stores, 

different authors have reached widely different conclusions about net 

sequestration because of different assumptions about the timeframe of interest, 

initial volume, post-harvest residuals, decay rates, the amount of energy 

expended in harvest and transport, utilization rates, lifespan of wood products, 

future growth rates of young growth stands, temporal discounting and 

substitution effects” (Barrett 2014). Because of these differing perspectives, 

this information was not deemed essential to make a reasoned decision for this 

project. 

Many proposed projects and programs will emit greenhouse gases (direct 

effect) and, thus, contribute to the global concentration of greenhouse gases 

which affect climate (indirect effect). Because the Navy Timber Sale is 

extremely small in the global atmospheric CO2 context, it is not necessary to 

conduct a quantitative analysis of actual climate change effects. 

For the Navy project, all the action alternatives would result in an initial net 

release of carbon into the atmosphere above that of the No-action Alternative, 

although over time, regenerating young growth could result in greater net 

sequestration of carbon than the No-action Alternative. Alternative C proposes 

the most timber harvest (62.0 million board feet (MMBF)) and roadbuilding 

(25.7 miles National Forest System (NFS) and temporary road) and would thus 

have a greater immediate effect on carbon sequestration than Alternative F, 

which proposes the least harvest (13.1 MMBF) and roadbuilding (3.3 miles 

NFS and temporary road). At the Navy project scale, the magnitude of the 

project is so small compared to the factors that contribute to climate change 

that foreseeable effects would be small, if measurable at all, for all alternatives. 

It is estimated that the forests of the Tongass represent approximately only one 

quarter of one percent of the stored carbon in forests worldwide (Forest Plan 3­

19). Within the Navy project area, this percentage is considerably smaller. 

Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that small, if even measureable, changes 

in carbon sequestration under any of the action alternatives, whether positive or 

negative, would not be a relevant factor for choosing among alternatives. 

Additionally, the task of understanding all the factors that influence climate 

change and how carbon is sequestered continues to be subject to substantial 

uncertainty and for these reasons is not essential to a reasoned choice among 

alternatives. None of the action alternatives are predicted to measurably 

contribute to the cumulative effects on climate change. 

The Tongass National Forest currently monitors climate change in several 

ways, one of which is formally assessed in the annual Forest Plan Monitoring 

and Evaluation Report under the following question: “What are the long-term 

changes to the permanent snowpack and how does it affect the physical and 

biological environment?” The 2013 Tongass National Forest Monitoring and 

Evaluation Report identifies a number of activities in its Action Plan for 2014­

2015 which include continued coordination with other agencies supporting 

climate change research, staff and employee training, completion of 

vulnerability assessments, and continued monitoring of snowpacks, glaciers, 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-7 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

and stream information. In addition, the regeneration of Alaska yellow-cedar is 

being monitored in order to maintain or increase this species in regenerating 

stands on sites judged to be suitable for the species’ long-term persistence. 

The Forest Plan FEIS discusses climate change factors (p. 3-11 to 3-20) and 

discloses the risk of possible effects and the considerable uncertainty 

concerning specific predictions of how the climate may change, and even more 

uncertainty regarding the effects of climate change on the resources of the 

Tongass National Forest. The Tongass National Forest will continue to 

monitor potential effects of climate change through the existing Forest Plan 

monitoring programs, and other studies that are occurring regionally and 

nationally. Any need for a different course of action that might affect this 

decision will be addressed through existing procedures to determine whether 

changes are warranted (Navy FEIS p. 3-5). 

Based on the current understanding of climate change in Southeast Alaska and 

action alternatives associated with the Navy Timber Sale project, specific 

adaptation actions are not necessary to meet Forest Plan objectives at this time. 

Forest Service National Core Best Management Practices 

In April 2012, the Forest Service issued a memo initiating implementation of 

the National Core Best Management Practices (BMP) program, which 

integrates water resource protection into management activities conducted 

across the landscape. Directives for using these BMPs are currently in 

development. The National BMP Program will enable the agency to readily 

document compliance with the management of nonpoint source pollution at 

local, regional, and national scales and address the new planning rule 

requirement for national BMPs (36 CFR 219.8(a)(4)). The Navy project will 

implement the most up-to-date BMP guidance. 

Forest Service National Core Best Management Practices 

Monitoring Program 

The Forest Service is developing a National Core BMP Monitoring Program 

that addresses implementation and effectiveness of BMPs. The draft National 

Core BMP Monitoring Technical Guide is currently in review. The Tongass 

National Forest has tested the national protocols for timber harvest and road 

activities and has adopted them as part of Forest Plan Monitoring. Results will 

be reported in the Annual Tongass National Forest Monitoring and Evaluation 

Report. 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 

On March 20, 2013, in Decker v. NEDC, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth 

Circuit Court’s decision in NEDC v. Brown and held that the Clean Water Act 

and its implementing regulations do not require the NPDES permits for 

stormwater discharges from logging roads into the navigable waters of the 

United States. However, should it be determined that an NPDES permit is 

required for this project, the Forest Service will comply with any applicable 

A3-8  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

permitting requirements prior to project implementation. 

Updates to the Analysis and Information in 

the Navy Timber Sale FEIS 

Chapter 1 

The issues were reviewed and no additional issues were identified. No public 

involvement has occurred specifically for the Navy project since 2009; 

however, comments on other timber harvest projects were considered at the 

time of the review. 

No changes have been made to the proposed action, Alternative B (FEIS p. 1­

2), and there are no changes that are relevant to environmental concerns. 

However, as described below under Issue 1: Timber Supply/Sale Economics, 

updated timber volume estimates based on timber cruise plot data resulted in 

lower net volume estimates than the volume estimates in the FEIS which were 

based on stand exam data. This has resulted in lower net volume estimates in 

the updated analysis for the proposed action, as well as the other action 

alternatives. 

Chapter 2 

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed 

Analysis 

Refer to Chapter 2, pages 2-17 and 2-18 of the FEIS which discusses the action 

alternatives which were considered but eliminated during the planning process. 

During the informal resolution meetings for the appeal on the 2009 Decision, 

three proposals were received from the appellants and are discussed below. 

Four appeals to the 2009 Navy ROD, under the 36 CFR 215 appeal regulations, 

were submitted by several organizations, including The Wilderness Society 

(TWS), SEACC et al., Greenpeace et al., and Juneau Sierra Club. Forest 

Service personnel and appellants met to discuss possible appeal resolutions. 

Three of the appellants presented proposals, all subsets of the 2009 Selected 

Alternative, which only included the units in the roaded area. The Wilderness 

Society (TWS) and SEACC et al. both submitted a proposal that avoided 

inventoried roadless areas, omitted the units in the area between Anita Bay and 

Burnett Inlet and units with an Alaska yellow-cedar component, and stipulated 

removal of culverts rather than installation of waterbars from National Forest 

System (NFS) roads that would be put into storage upon sale completion. The 

Sierra Club submitted a proposal that included all the aspects of the TWS and 

SEACC proposals, plus deleting Units 114-120 along the 51540 road, and Unit 

94. Like the TWS/SEACC proposal, it also stipulated removal of culverts, 

rather than installation of waterbars for NFS roads associated with the timber 

sale. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

The Navy IDT considered these proposals and compared potential effects by 

resource to the other alternatives in the FEIS. The IDT found that the issues 

addressed by the appellants’ proposals are already addressed in other 

alternatives considered in detail, primarily Alternatives E and F. Alternative E 

addressed the wildlife habitat concern with harvest in the area between Anita 

Bay and Burnett Inlet by avoiding harvest in that area, and Alternative F 

partially addresses this concern by reducing harvest in the area. Alternative F 

addresses effects to inventoried roadless areas by avoiding all harvest and road 

construction in inventoried roadless areas. All alternatives include seed tree 

retention in some units to help maintain or increase the cedar component in 

regenerating stands. 

The appellants’ suggestion during the informal resolution meetings to remove 

culverts from roads which will be put into storage was also considered. The 

disposition of the roads after harvest activities are complete is determined by 

the Objective Maintenance Level and the Alaska Forest Resources and 

Practices Act (AFRPA) Class, shown on the road cards, and the site-specific 

needs of the road, consistent with the Wrangell Access and Travel Management 

Plan (ATMP). The decision whether or not to remove culverts from NFS roads 

will be made at the time of road storage. The roads will be evaluated for 

erosion potential, and measures will be implemented to reduce sediment 

delivery and reduce the risk of crossing failure and stream diversion. This may 

include the removal of drainage structures and bridges, or construction of water 

bars, rolling dips or other measures necessary to protect resources. The 

language of “Where feasible, culverts will be left in place with adequate 

protection, typically waterbars” has been removed from the road cards. 

After the March 4, 2011 Federal District Court, District of Alaska ruling in 

Organized Village of Kake, et al. v. US Department of Agriculture (D.C. No. 

1:09-cv-00023 JWS) that the Tongass is no longer exempt from the 2001 

Roadless Rule, the IDT also considered a modification of Alternatives B 

through E that dropped proposed units and roads within 2001 IRAs. 

FASTR was run to assess the effects on financial efficiency of this possible 

modification to Alternatives B through E. Alternatives B, C, and D, originally 

designed to respond to Issue 1: Timber Supply and Economics (including 

varying emphases), have cruised volume ranging from 26.6 MMBF sawlog and 

utility (Alternative D) to 62.0 MMBF (Alternative C) (see Table 2). 

Alternative E’s volume is 24.5 MMBF. When only the units within the roaded 

portion of Alternatives B through E were considered, the range in volumes was 

considerably narrowed, with reduced volumes ranging from 8.4 MMBF 

(Alternative E) to 16.6 MMBF (Alternative C). Alternative F’s volume (13.1 

MMBF) falls within the middle of the range of volumes of the roaded portion 

of the alternatives. 

While all alternatives are currently showing as deficit, Alternative F’s indicated 

bid value is about $28.74/MBF to $61.49/MBF more economical than the other 

FEIS action alternatives (see Table 2). Although considering only roaded units 

improved the indicated bid value per MBF for Alternatives B though E, 

A3-10  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

FASTR still indicates that they may appraise deficit. An economic comparison 

showed Alternative F’s indicated bid value/MBF about $5.55 to $8.46 more 

economical than Alternatives B, C, or E if modified, and about $9.46 less 

economical than Alternative D if modified. As explained in the FEIS, 

alternatives which show as deficit in current FASTR runs may become more 

economical in future markets or a portion of the units may become economical. 

Timber sales on the Tongass are not advertised until they appraise with positive 

values. 

Alternative E, which included harvest in inventoried roadless areas, was 

designed to respond to Issue 2: Wildlife Habitat Fragmentation by not 

harvesting timber in the area between Anita Bay and the head of Burnett Inlet. 

Modifying Alternatives B through E to exclude harvest activities in inventoried 

roadless areas would result in less effect on interior habitat, coarse canopy, and 

patches of old-growth habitat than these alternatives in the FEIS, due to fewer 

acres of harvest and roadbuilding. However, Alternatives B, C, and D still 

harvest units within the roaded portion of the Anita Bay area. Alternative F still 

has less harvest in the Anita area than would Alternative B, C, or D if modified, 

retaining part of the low-elevation POG corridor due to greater retention (50 

percent) in Unit 67, and deleting a portion of Unit 70. 

The volume and economic results of modifying Alternatives B through D were 

similar to Alternative F, and they would not address any issues not already 

addressed by Alternative F. Modifying Alternative E was most similar to the 

TWS and SEACC proposals, which were considered but eliminated during the 

informal appeals resolution process. Therefore, this modification was not 

analyzed in further detail. 

Alternatives Considered in Detail 

Alternatives considered in detail are described in the FEIS, pp. 2-9 to 2-15. 

Four of the five action alternatives considered in detail include timber harvest 

in inventoried roadless areas, while one action alternative (Alternative F) and 

the no-action Alternative A do not. Resolution of the Tongass exemption from 

the Roadless Rule is ongoing in the courts; at the present time the Roadless 

Rule remains in effect in Alaska. 

Although the Tongass at this time can only implement timber harvest and road 

construction activities within the roaded area, the Responsible Official could 

select Alternative F or Alternative A, or choose an action alternative that 

proposes activities in an IRA and then defer any timber harvest units and road 

construction within an IRA pending resolution of the Tongass exemption in the 

courts. Deferring timber harvest and road construction in IRAs in Alternative 

B, C, D, or E differs from modifying these alternatives, since deferred activities 

could still be implemented in IRAs should the Tongass exemption be 

reinstated. Selecting Alternative F at this time eliminates the uncertainty of 

waiting on the outcome of roadless area litigation of an unknown duration, and 

ensures that no IRA will be entered as a result of this decision. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Chapter 3 

Land Divisions 

The FEIS, pp. 3-1 to 3-2, lists the land divisions used in the FEIS as well as in 

the updated resource analyses. However, when the additional analyses were 

done on the new information as described in this appendix, additional levels of 

land divisions were sometimes used for analysis areas, and are described in this 

appendix. 

Cumulative Effects - Past, Present, and Reasonably 

Foreseeable Projects 

The IDT reviewed the status of other projects within the project area since 

2009. These projects were considered in the section “Cumulative Effects” on 

pages 3-2 to 3-4 of the Navy FEIS, and are updated here. 

Fishtrap Salvage Timber Sale authorized the harvest of approximately 208 

MBF of cedar decline and blown down sawtimber and utility volume from 240 

acres adjacent to existing roads. This sale was sold in 2007 and harvested in 

2011. 

North Etolin Salvage Timber Sale authorizes the harvest of approximately 

200 thousand board feet (MBF) of cedar decline, blown down sawtimber and 

utility volume along the existing road system. This sale, which had a decision 

in August 2008, is located to the north on the Honeymoon road system (Road 

6549), outside the project area but is within the wildlife analysis area. This sale 

has not been offered for purchase at this time of the analysis. 

The decision on Wrangell District Roadside Timber Sales (March 2011) 

authorizes salvage harvest of dead, dying, and blown down timber, and green 

sawtimber sales of less than 50 MBF each and green fuelwood sales within 

1,200 feet of the existing road systems of Wrangell, Zarembo, and Etolin 

Islands. There may be multiple small sales whose total combined volume 

would not exceed 500 MBF on an annual basis from the three islands 

combined. No sales have been identified on the Anita Bay road system that 

accesses the Navy project area at this time. 

Road reconditioning on Road 6539 was completed and addressed the 

sediment concerns in the Thrucut/Goose Lakes Creek watershed. Periodic 

maintenance including brushing, ditch clearing, and some resurfacing where 

needed has been completed for Road 6543. 

The resurfacing of Burnett Inlet Portage Trail at the head of Burnett Inlet 

was completed in the summer of 2013. As stated in the FEIS (page 3-3), this 

project is not expected to contribute to cumulative effects to any resource. 

In 2014, the Sealaska land bill land legislation was passed by Congress as a 

rider to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2015 (PL 113-291, Sec. 

3002). Previous versions of the Sealaska bill had been introduced but not 

passed for the past several years, and the proposed acquisition was not 

A3-12  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

considered as a “reasonably foreseeable future action” in the FEIS. This bill 

allowed Sealaska Corporation to acquire 70,075 acres of roaded, managed 

National Forest System (NFS) timberlands, and “futures sites” including bays, 

shorelines, and other areas for economic development on the Tongass, in place 

of their final Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) entitlements 

which they filed for conveyance in June 2008 with the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM). There are no acquisition areas in the vicinity of the Navy 

project area that are anticipated to affect or be affected by timber harvest 

operations on the Navy Timber Sale. 

The deer model reanalysis analyzed effects to wolves by considering deer 

density at the Etolin Island and Vicinity biogeographic province level. Projects 

considered at the biogeographic province level analysis included Baht, 

Backline, and Wrangell Island projects. 

Issue 1 - Timber Supply/Sale Economics 

This section updates the Timber Supply and Economics section in Chapter 3 of 

the FEIS (pgs. 3-7 to 3-18). 

Since 2009, there have been changes regarding direction on the Regional 

export policy, changes in mill infrastructure affecting the projected costs and 

revenues of the project alternatives, and the development of a new financial 

efficiency model, among other changes, as described below. 

Region 10 Limited Export Policy 

Direction in export of timber sale volume has changed since the FEIS has been 

completed. 

The Navy FEIS financial efficiency analysis included adjustments for the 

limited interstate shipping policy at that time. Since then, the Regional 

Forester approved time-limited shipment of unprocessed hemlock and Sitka 

spruce logs and provided additional options for purchasers. Export increases 

timber sale value due primarily to lower manufacturing costs. On February 28, 

2014, the Regional Forester reaffirmed the 2012 memo approving increased 

export for timber purchasers supplying Alaska yellow-cedar for domestic 

processing. Purchasers who provide Alaska yellow-cedar to small business 

operators who will process the timber locally may be approved, on a case-bycase basis, to increase export of an equivalent amount of hemlock and spruce 

volume from the sale(s) involved, over and above existing policy limits. This 

approval will support businesses by improving access to timber and promoting 

the manufacture of products in the State of Alaska. 

Changes to Southeast Alaska’s Mill Infrastructure 

Since the publication of the FEIS, there have been changes to the Southeast 

Alaska mill infrastructure, as mentioned above. The original Navy financial 

efficiency analysis appraisal point destination was the Silver Bay Mill on 

Wrangell Island. However, Silver Bay Logging dismantled their mill in 2010. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-13 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Another potential destination, the Pacific Log and Lumber Company’s mill in 

Ketchikan, closed in 2011. The financial efficiency analysis was recalculated 

to the Viking Mill in Klawock on Prince of Wales Island. As a result, the 

round-trip tow distance increased, increasing the stump-to-mill cost for all 

alternatives. On average, the barging costs were estimated to be $99/MBF, a 

$19/MBF increase over previous analysis. 

Timber Volume Estimates 

The volumes in the following Comparison of Alternatives in Table 1, below, 

have been updated with more-precise estimates based on cruised net timber 

volume, as compared to the volume estimates in Table 3-6 in the FEIS, even 

though the total harvest acres by alternative are unchanged, except as noted 

below under “Harvest Acres Totals”. Timber volume estimates in the FEIS 

were based on stand exam data. Stand exams are measured on a one plot to 10 

acre intensity, with at least three plots per unit being installed. Stand exam 

plots are useful for stand characteristics, including species composition and 

forest health, and estimating volumes for comparison between alternatives at 

the EIS stage. Timber volume for the 2015 ROD uses updated volumes based 

on a more-intensive inventory - a timber cruise - of a subset of the units. In a 

timber cruise, more measurement plots per acre are installed (in this case one 

plot per 7 acres). In addition, individual (32-foot logs) logs are graded and 

defects removed from each, which further refines the volume estimates, 

resulting in a more-accurate portrayal of timber found in each of the units and 

hence a better comparison of the alternatives. The relative ranking by volume 

of the alternatives has changed very slightly – in the FEIS, Alternative E was 

higher than Alternative D by 1.2 MMBF, and in the update Alternative D is 2.1 

MMBF higher than Alternative E. During implementation, minor adjustments 

may be made to the number of acres, and between acres of conventional and 

helicopter yarding. Reduction of the volume estimates in the FEIS to the cruise 

data is not a change relevant to environmental concerns or on-the-ground 

implementation. 

Harvest Acres Totals 

Minor adjustments in the acres by harvest system, as well as refinements in the 

geographic information system (GIS) information used, resulted in very slight 

changes in the overall number of harvest acres by alternative when they were 

rerun for the updated analysis. Alternatives B, C, and D were reduced by 9, 13, 

and 8 acres respectively, and Alternatives E and F showed an increase of 2 and 

1 acres, respectively, as compared to the harvest system acres in Table 3-6 of 

the FEIS. See Table 1, below. 

Acres by silvicultural system shown in the FEIS Table 3-24 reflect a difference 

of 1 to 13 acres (depending on alternative) as compared to the updated harvest 

system acres, due to mapping precision in GIS as explained above. This does 

not affect the effects analysis or conclusions. 

A3-14  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Table 1 (updates p. 3-17 of Navy FEIS) 

Comparison of Alternatives – Harvest System, Harvest Volume and 

Roads 

Harvest System Unit of 

Measure 

Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Alt F 

(Sel. Alt.) 

Conventional 1 Acre 0 1,282 2,519 1,255 554 643 

Net Saw 

MMBF 

0 18.4 36.6 18.2 8.0 8.6 

Helicopter Acre 0 1,922 3,575 1,106 2,772 609 

Net Saw 

MMBF 

0 9.6 18.8 5.6 13.9 3.1 

Harvest Volume2 

Net Sawlog MMBF 0 28.1 55.4 23.8 21.9 11.7 

Utility MMBF 0 3.3 6.6 2.8 2.6 1.4 

Total MMBF 0 31.4 62.0 26.6 24.5 13.1 

Roads 

New System Mile 0 6.6 12.1 4.8 2.2 0.6 

New Temporary3 Mile 0 5.8 13.6 5.0 2.7 2.7 

Reconstruction4 Mile 0 0.8 2.1 0.4 0.8 0.8 

LTF5 Construction # 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Includes cable and shovel yarding systems 

2 Some volume totals may not exactly match their sums due to rounding. 

3 In some cases, old temporary roads that have been decommissioned still have a discernable 

road prism. These road beds will be reused to minimize environmental effects. 4 Reconstruction (periodic maintenance) has occurred on some roads since the FEIS, resulting 

in fewer road miles planned for reconstruction.

5 Log transfer facility 

Financial Efficiency Analysis 

The NEPA Economic Analysis Tool Residual value (NEATR) program was 

used for financial analysis in the FEIS. On March 28, 2011, the Financial 

Analysis Spreadsheet Tool – RV (FASTR) was approved by the Regional 

Forester to replace the NEATR as a financial efficiency analysis tool for use in 

timber planning. The model version October 21, 2013 was used to compare 

alternatives for the Navy project. See Table 2, below. 

The FASTR model is designed from the R10 RV-FM appraisal program using 

readily available or regional averages for data. FASTR outputs are useful to 

gauge current economic conditions for a timber sale and provide a relative 

comparison between alternatives. These results are not meant to serve as an 

actual appraisal or provide actual costs and values at the time of offering since 

these will fluctuate with timber markets. The FASTR tool should not be 

viewed as a complete answer but as one tool that can be used for information 

about timber resources, alternatives and trade-offs between costs and benefits. 

Actual salability is determined at Gate 4 (advertisement) using the Official R10 

RV-FM Appraisal and statistically sound cruise data. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-15 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

The FASTR model uses the same logging costs and manufacturing costs per 

thousand board feet (MBF) developed for the Alaska Region timber sale 

appraisal program. Costs reflect production studies and data collected from 

timber sale purchasers in Southeast Alaska. 

Table 2 (updates p. 3-11 of Navy FEIS)
 

Financial Efficiency Analysis –Volumes, Costs, and Values1
 

Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Alt F 

(Sel. Alt.) 

Volume – Sawlog (MBF) 

Sitka Spruce 0 6,997 13,885 5,876 5,715 2,916 

Hemlock 0 15,393 29,416 13,166 11,557 6,416 

Western Red Cedar 0 2,851 6,061 2,394 2,223 1,188 

Alaska Yellow Cedar 0 2,810 6,083 2,360 2,390 1,171 

Total Sawlog Volume (MBF) 0 28,051 55,445 23,796 21,885 11,691 

Utility Volume (MBF) 0 3,324 6,597 2,793 2,588 1,386 

Total (Sawlog and Utility) 0 31,375 62,042 26,589 24,473 13,077 

Pond Log Value $/MBF $0 $629 $637 $626 $645 $629 

Stump to Mill Cost $/MBF $0 $574 $563 $548 $555 $513 

Indicated Bid Value2 $0 ($2,122,721) ($3,145,327) ($1,226,945) ($938,925) ($165,567) 

Indicated Bid Value $/MBF3 $0.00 ($75.68) ($56.73) ($51.56) ($42.90) ($14.16) 

Source: FASTR version October 21, 2013 

1 ( ) Indicates negative value 2 Indicated bid value 

3 Indicated bid value/MBF 

Changes in the overall costs and values by alternative since the FEIS are due to 

various factors such as reductions in the estimated volume for all alternatives, 

changes in selling values by species, updates in the average Forest Service 

costs per MBF for sale preparation, administration, and engineering support, 

and updates in production costs and revenues. The cost of environmental 

analysis and documentation (NEPA) is no longer factored into the total project 

costs used to calculate indicated bid value, since that cost has already occurred. 

In addition, market fluctuations reflect an improvement in the current pond log 

value. Some costs, such as log haul, increased when the log destination was 

reappraised to Viking Mill in Klawock. 

As in the FEIS (FEIS p. 3-11), all alternatives are shown to be deficit. The 

indicated bid value of the alternatives in the FEIS ranged from -$88.47/MBF 

(Alternative F) to -$163.65/MBF (Alternative C) (FEIS Table 3-2). The 

updated indicated bid values per MBF show an improvement for all 

alternatives, and now range from -$14.16 (Alternative F) to -$75.68/MBF 

(Alternative B). Alternative F is still the most economical alternative. The 

FEIS explains (FEIS p. 3-11) that alternatives which show as deficit may 

become more economical in future markets or a portion of the units may 

become economical in current markets, as markets fluctuate. For instance, in a 

recovering U.S. economy, widespread new home construction raises the 

A3-16  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

demand (and price) for sawn wood products. In Alaska, the species most 

sensitive to booms in housing construction is Western redcedar. When the 

range of alternatives includes differing amounts of Western redcedar, the 

ranking of alternatives can quickly change in 2 years due to the widely 

fluctuating Western redcedar market. A complete timber sale appraisal is 

needed to determine the actual economics of the timber offered for sale. As 

stated in the FEIS (p. 3-11), no timber sale would be offered if it appraises 

deficit. 

Forest Products Employment 

Data in the FEIS showed employment figures for years 2002 through 2006 

(Table 3-1 FEIS p. 3-9) in the number of logging, sawmill, and related industry 

jobs across Southeast Alaska. This information has been updated to include 

data from 2007 through 2011 (see Table 3, below). Since 2006, forest products 

employment data show a downward trend until 2010 when it appears to have 

stabilized. 

Table 3 (updates Table 3-1, p. 3-9 of Navy FEIS)
 

Forest Products Industry Employment in Southeast Alaska 2002-2011
 

Year1 Tongass

Logging2 Tongass

Sawmill2 

Total Tongassrelated 

Employment 

Other 

Sawmill 

Other 

Logging 

Total Other 

Timber 

Employment 

Total Industry

Employment 

2002 63 110 173 40 299 339 512 

2003 108 91 199 64 298 362 561 

2004 82 95 177 53 220 273 450 

2005 88 96 184 52 263 315 499 

2006 81 77 158 46 217 263 421 

2007 44 70 114 63 225 288 402 

2008 52 70 122 24 118 142 265 

2009 48 39 87 19 110 129 216 

2010 61 46 107 7 133 140 247 

2011 62 47 109 3 150 153 262 1

Calendar years

2

Estimated based on the ratio of Tongass timber harvest to total timber harvest in SE Alaska.
 

Source: Alaska Department of Labor, Kilbourn et al. 2014, Brackley et al. 2006b, Brackley and 

Crone 2009, Alexander and Parrent 2010, Alexander 2011, Alexander 2012, Alexander and 

Parrent 2012, and Parrent 2012. Data on file with: Regional Economist, Ecosystems Planning,
 

USDA Forest Service, PO Box 21628, Juneau, AK 99802-1628.
 

The number of timber-related jobs and income is related to the net harvest 

volume as well as how much timber is processed locally and how much the 

timber purchaser exports, under the terms of the Tongass Export Policy. More 

local sawmilling jobs are supported if a purchaser chooses to process logs 

locally, while more transportation/other services jobs are supported if a 

purchaser exports timber. The number of jobs and related income shown in the 

table below are based on assumptions that all units and volume will be 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-17 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

harvested across each action alternative. These estimates will likely change as 

actual timber offerings are packaged that would include some or all of the 

units. The jobs per MBF used for this estimate are based on an average from 

operators and may vary depending on who buys the sale and how much volume 

is processed locally and how much is exported. 

Table 4 below displays estimated direct logging, sawmilling, and 

transportation/other services-related employment and income for the 

alternatives, generated with FASTR Version October 21, 2013. Due to a lower 

estimated harvest volume, calculated using cruise runs for the project units, the 

number of potential jobs is lower than those estimated in the FEIS. 

The first number in the range of Total Jobs in the table assumes that all Alaska 

yellow-cedar (AYC), plus hemlock-spruce export (50 percent total sale net 

sawlog volume) is exported (all allowable export). The second number in the 

range of Total Jobs assumes domestic processing of all the volume. Exporting 

all the timber allowable results in fewer domestic sawmilling jobs, but more 

transportation service jobs such as stevedoring. 

The ranking of alternatives, in terms of potential jobs, has changed slightly 

since the FEIS. In the FEIS, Alternative C supported the greatest number of 

jobs, followed by Alternatives B, E, D, and F (in that order). The updated 

information shows Alternative D supports slightly more jobs than Alternative 

E, due to slightly greater volume. Alternative F supports the fewest potential 

jobs, the same ranking as in the FEIS. 

Table 4 (updates p. 3-14 of Navy FEIS)
 

Estimated Project Employment and Income in Alaska
 

Projected Alaskan 

Employment and Income1 Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Alt F 

(Sel. Alt.) 

Logging 0 63 125 54 49 26 

Sawmilling 0 30-68 57-133 25-57 23-52 12-28 

Transportation/Services 0 33-20 65-40 28-17 26-16 14-8 

Total Jobs2 0 126-151 248-298 107-128 98-117 52-63 

Direct Income ($ Millions)3 $0 $6,676,937 $13,171,248 $5,661,694 $5,200,980 $2,780,997 

Direct Income ($ Millions)4 $0 $7,152,369 $14,119,764 $6,068,408 $5,573,655 $2,981,335 

Source: FASTR Version October 21, 2013)
 1 Memo Employment Coefficients and Indirect Effects, for NEPA planning: 2012 Update.
 

(Source: Susan Alexander, Alaska Region Economist) 2 Number of jobs first number lists number of jobs with all allowable export, then number of
 

jobs with 100 percent hem/spruce domestic processing. Total jobs, when summing logging and
 

sawmill export manufacturing, may not add up exactly due to rounding. 3 With Allowable Export, current export policy
 4.With 100% hem/spruce domestic processing
 

Forest Service Costs 

The Forest Service costs estimates are averages from the Alaska Region’s 

budget allocation process. The totals of the average costs (which are based on 

alternative volume) are subtracted from indicated bid values to estimate net 

A3-18  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

present value of each alternative. 

The Forest Service cost averages per MBF have changed slightly since the 

FEIS. Sale preparation cost has gone from $23/MBF in the FEIS to 

$20.78/MBF; sale administration cost has gone from $9/MBF in the FEIS to 

$12.18/MBF; and engineering support cost has gone from $28/MBF in the 

FEIS to $22.67/MBF. 

In the FEIS, the analysis and documentation costs ($1,634,753) were included 

in the total project costs for each alternative. However, in this updated 

analysis, FASTR assumes that the cost of environmental analysis, at 

$47.97/MBF, has already incurred at Gate 2, and this figure is no longer 

factored into the present value of cost for the alternatives. The costs of 

processing the appeals received in 2009 and this supplemental analysis are also 

not factored into the cost of this project. 

Table 5 (updates p. 3-13 of Navy FEIS)
 

Estimated Forest Service Financial Costs and Revenues
 

Forest Service Costs1 Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Alt F 

(Sel. Alt.) 

Sale Preparation $0 $582,879 $1,152,144 $494,471 $454,767 $242,964 

Sale Administration $0 $341,649 $675,318 $289,829 $266,558 $142,411 

Engineering Support $0 $635,893 $1,256,935 $539,444 $496,130 $265,062 

Total Project Costs $0 $1,560,421 $3,084,397 $1,323,745 $1,217,455 $650,437 

Indicated Bid Value2 $0 ($2,122,721) ($3,145,327) ($1,226,945) ($938,925) ($165,567) 

Net Present Value3 $0 ($3,683,142) ($6,229,724) ($2,550,690) ($2,156,380) ($816,004) 

1 Based on Alaska Region’s average budget allocation for cost centers.
 

2 ( ) indicates negative value.
 

3 Indicated bid value minus total project costs, ( ) indicates negative value.
 

Source: N Stearns, FASTR version October 21, 2013.
 

Payments to the State of Alaska

On October 2, 2013, Congress passed a one-year reauthorization of the Secure 

Rural Schools (SRS) and Community Self Determination Act, as part of Public 

Law 113-40. The one-year reauthorization provided for payments to states, 

which are distributed to counties in which national forests are situated. SRS 

expired at the end of FY2013. More information is available 

at http://www.fs.usda.gov/pts/. As of April 16, 2015, a two-year 

reauthorization was passed by Congress and if signed into law, would provide 

about $12 million to communities in Southeast Alaska over 2015 and 2016. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-19 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Issue 2 – Wildlife Habitat Fragmentation 

There is no new information for the Wildlife Habitat Fragmentation section in 

Chapter 3 of the FEIS (pp. 3-19 to 3-33). The FEIS included analysis on 

fragmentation, corridors and the area between Anita Bay and Burnett Inlet 

(FEIS pp. 2-3 and 3-20 thru 3-33). The FEIS analysis for patch sizes and 

fragmentation was reviewed and no new information was found that would 

further affect the fragmentation in the areas or the analysis of patch size or 

fragmentation. 

Figure 3-5 on page 3-29 of the FEIS displays existing POG corridors with the 

locations of the units for all alternatives. The existing POG corridor map 

(Figure 1, following page) was rerun to display the location of only the 

Selected Alternative, Alternative F, units. The bold red letters A through E on 

the map refer to the discussion of corridors on page 3-28 in the FEIS. 

The FEIS, p. 3-33 discloses that Alternative F proposes the least harvest of the 

action alternatives of interior habitat and coarse canopy, and has the least effect 

on large patches of old-growth habitat. It has less harvest in the Anita area than 

Alternatives B, C, and D, with 50 percent retention in Unit 67 to retain part of 

the low-elevation POG corridor which would be completely severed in 

Alternatives B, C, or D, and deleting a portion of Unit 70. 

A3-20  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Figure 1. Existing Landscape-level POG Corridors on Etolin Island 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-21 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Issue 3 – Inventoried Roadless Areas 

This section updates the Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) section in Chapter 3 

of the FEIS (pgs. 3-34 to 3-44). On March 4, 2011, the Federal District Court, 

District of Alaska ruled in Organized Village of Kake, et al. v. US Department 

of Agriculture (D.C. No. 1:09-cv-00023 JWS), that the Tongass is no longer 

exempt from the 2001 Roadless Rule. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals reversed that decision on March 26, 2014, finding that the USDA was 

reasonable, in 2003, when it exempted the Tongass from the Roadless Rule. In 

August 2014, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted another hearing, held 

in December 2014, before an eleven-judge panel to rehear the appeal. The 

eleven-judge panel has not yet issued a decision. Currently, the Roadless Rule 

remains in effect in Alaska, pending the outcome of the Court’s decision. 

The current analysis considers effects to 2001 Roadless Rule inventory areas, 

rather than the 2008 Forest Plan inventory which was used in the 2009 FEIS 

analysis. The size and characteristics of the 2001 Roadless Rule roadless 

inventory (120,367 acres) and the 2008 Forest Plan roadless inventory on 

Etolin Island (127,176 acres) are similar (see Figure 2). A main difference is 

that the 2008 Forest Plan roadless inventory included many of the shoreline 

units harvested during the beach logging era (pre-1960s) since they had 

regained their roadless characteristics. Alternative F does not propose any 

timber harvest or road construction within either the 2008 Forest Plan roadless 

inventory areas or the 2001 Roadless Rule inventoried roadless areas. 

The FEIS only considered the cable- and shovel-yarded units, but did not apply 

a buffer to helicopter units, consistent with the inventory done for the Forest 

Plan SEIS. This updated analysis includes the helicopter-yarded units as well, 

reflecting a more-conservative analysis that includes indirect effects such as 

noise or visual disturbance from helicopters. In addition to proposed roads and 

units themselves, an area within 1,200 feet of existing and proposed roads and 

600 feet of proposed units was considered to assess indirect effects such as 

temporary disturbance from the sights and sounds of harvest-related activities, 

and the loss of interior habitat. Although there is no change to the activities 

proposed or to the effects from any alternative, including the helicopter units in 

the updated analysis increased the number of acres affected due to indirect 

effects for all action alternatives. 

Alternative F indirectly affects about 1 percent of the zone inside of the IRA 

boundary, as a result of proposed units and roads adjacent to or nearby (but not 

within) the IRA boundary, even though there are no direct effects from harvest 

activities. The 566 “Total Acres Affected” for Alternative F (Table 6) reflects 

only indirect effects and reside solely in the zone of influence. The “Total 

Acres Affected” for the other action alternatives includes both direct effects 

(from units and roads themselves) and indirect effects (from the zone 

surrounding the units and roads). No unique features of the roadless areas 

would be affected under any alternative, and the areas would remain eligible 

for potential wilderness consideration. 

A3-22  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

Table 6 updates the information in Table 3-8 on page 3-39 of the Navy FEIS. 

The number of actual harvest acres in the FEIS’s 2008 Forest Plan roadless 

inventory, used in the FEIS Table 3-8, appears larger than the 2001 Roadless 

Rule inventory acres below. This is because some units fall in areas that are 

designated as roadless under the 2008 Forest Plan roadless inventory, but not 

designated as roadless under the 2001 Roadless Rule inventory. Conversely, 

the number of affected acres appears larger under the 2001 Roadless Rule 

inventory than the 2008 Forest Plan roadless inventory, because the updated 

analysis included the 600-foot zone around helicopter units as “affected” while 

the FEIS analysis did not include the zone around helicopter units. 

When the March 2011 court ruling vacated the Tongass exemption from the 

Roadless Rule, the portions of Alternatives B through E that proposed activities 

in inventoried roadless areas were no longer viable to implement. However, 

the issue of the Tongass exemption from the Roadless Rule is at this time still 

awaiting resolution in the courts. If the Responsible Official were to select 

Alternative B, C, D, or E, he could choose to defer all activities in inventoried 

roadless areas pending final resolution of the Tongass exemption in the courts. 

Table 6 

Effects to the 2001 Roadless Rule Inventory Acres by Alternative 

Roadless 

Acres 

2001 Roadless Rule 

inventory 

Percent of Roadless 

Acres in the Project 

Area Affected: 

2001 Roadless Rule 

inventory 

Total Roadless Acres

1 120,367 

Roadless Acres within project area 53,848 

Acres Affected by Alternative Total Acres Affected2 

Alt A 0 0 

Alt B 5,963 11 

Alt C 12,117 22 

Alt D 3,120 6 

Alt E 6,272 12 

Alt F 566 1 

Proposed Timber Harvest 

within 2001 Roadless Areas 

Proposed Total Miles in 

2001 Roadless Areas3 

Alt A 0 0 

Alt B 2,200 6.3 

Alt C 4,463 16.8 

Alt D 1,094 4.3 

Alt E 2,219 1.7 

Alt F 0 0 1

Mosman Roadless Area, North Etolin Roadless Area, and South Etolin Roadless Area. 2 Acres affected by alternative includes the zone of influence defined as 1,200 feet from 

existing and proposed roads, and 600 feet from all harvest units including the helicopter units.

3 Miles of new road proposed includes NFS roads and temporary roads. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-23 
 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Figure 2. 2001 and 2008 Roadless Areas with Alternative F 

A3-24  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Other Resources 

Botany 

An updated biological evaluation (BE) for plants was prepared to more clearly 

disclose the effects by alternative for plants on the 2009 sensitive species list. 

There are no new effects disclosed. 

The determination, for some sensitive plants, remains “May adversely impact 

individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability in the planning area, nor 

cause a trend toward federal listing” has not changed. Other plants will not be 

affected at all. 

A resource report was prepared that focused on rare plants, and whether the 

project actions could result in the loss of viability for rare plants known to 

occur in the project area. Two plants which were analyzed as sensitive plants 

in the 2008 report are analyzed as rare in the 2013 updated report. There has 

been no new information to analyze and no other changes since the 2009 FEIS. 

The updated BE and resource report are in the project record. 

No federally-listed threatened, endangered or proposed plants are known to 

occur in the project area. 

Heritage 

There have been no changes to the heritage resource since the 2009 FEIS. In 

2004, 2005 and 2006 Forest Service archaeologists conducted a cultural 

resource survey of the project area and determined a finding of No Historic 

Properties Affected. The State Historic Preservation Officer concurred with 

our recommendation. 

Recreation 

There has been no new information to the recreation resource since the 2009 

FEIS that would warrant reconsideration of the conclusions in that analysis. 

While current outfitter guide use information and reported use changes 

annually since the recreation resource report was written, this does not change 

any of the conclusions in the analysis. The Burnett Inlet Portage Trail at the 

head of Burnett Inlet (inventoried recreation place 62.01) had surfacing work 

completed in the summer of 2013. 

Scenery 

Additional activities completed since 2009 include the Fishtrap Salvage Sale 

and road closures; neither adds significantly to the cumulative visual effects of 

Navy. The salvage sale is either not seen from any visual priority routes, or 

only seen at an angle in the background distance zone. 

A map showing the project area’s scenic integrity objectives (SIO) adopted by 

the decision on the 2008 Forest Plan has been added to the project record to 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-25 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

illustrate the previous report’s discussion of SIOs within the project area. This 

map presents no additional information that would change the conclusions in 

the FEIS regarding scenery. 

A review determined that the conclusions drawn for the 2009 Navy Timber 

Sale FEIS (see pages 3-90 to 3-97) are accurate and remain relevant to current 

issues. Additional analysis was done for Unit 70, which can be seen from 

Anita Bay and lies within the Modified Landscape LUD. Unit 70, which is 49 

acres, meets the 40-60 acre opening Scenery Standard and Guideline for High 

Visual Absorption Capacity (Forest Plan p. 4-58), particularly as it is divided 

into two smaller settings and will have 15 percent of the stand retained. While 

the Forest Plan allows for harvest to dominate the characteristic landscape, it 

also states that units will be designed to borrow from naturally existing form 

and line. To achieve Forest Plan direction, the reserve trees will be grouped 

and located to reduce the straight borders of the settings. This will give the unit 

a more natural appearance. 

The 1,157-foot Burnett Inlet Portage Trail runs from the head of Burnett Inlet 

to Road 51401. This portage route is not identified in the Forest Plan as a 

Visual Priority Route, and the Forest Plans Standards and Guidelines do not 

apply. While management activities proposed in the Selected Alternative could 

increase the degree of visual disturbance along this route, this increase is 

considered minimal because portage users are accustomed to seeing the effects 

of harvest activities and road-based motorized recreation use. 

Other foreseeable future activities do not have viewpoints or viewsheds in 

common with Navy, have been considered in previous analysis, or will not 

increase the visual impact. 

Silviculture 

There is no new information which would affect the silviculture analysis for the 

2009 FEIS. The silviculture resource report was reviewed and included the 

following clarifications: 

•	 The King George and Honey George sales, listed as previous timber 

sale acres harvested, are north of and outside the Navy project area so 

reference to these projects has been removed. 

•	 The Etolin Porcupine precommercial thinning project in 2010 and 2011 

resulted in 573 acres of thinned stands on the island, 

•	 A thinning project done in the 1980s has been identified and 

information added to the report.
 

•	 A previous planting of Alaska yellow-cedar has been identified in the 

project area. 

Also, more information on Alaska yellow-cedar harvest, regeneration, and 

post-thinning composition has been added to the resource report. Alaska 

yellow-cedar conservation and promotion strategies include retaining seed 

A3-26  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS	 Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

trees, single-tree selection, favoring cedar during thinning, and inter-planting of 

cedar. Natural regeneration is prolific on the Tongass as average stocking 

conditions show all species regenerate 2,000 total trees per acre (TTPA) in the 

Central Zone (Draft Report Exploring the Sustainable Yield Capacity of the 

Young Growth Lands on the Tongass National Forest while Evaluating the 

Impact of Acreage Reductions and Rotation Age, prepared for USDA Forest 

Service and Juneau Economic Development Council, 2011). The Navy project 

area is located in the Central Zone, where regeneration survey data show 

Alaska yellow-cedar comprises 7 percent of the total TTPA. It is fully 

expected that all species, including Alaska yellow-cedar, will naturally 

regenerate following timber harvest in the Navy project area. 

Soils, Karst, and Wetlands 

There are no changes to the soil, karst and wetland analysis for the 2009 FEIS. 

There have been minor changes in on-the-ground conditions, with the addition 

of three new landslides. However, all of these occurred in natural setting areas 

not associated with management activities and do not change the results of the 

landslide analysis, nor do they affect the proposed roads or units in the Selected 

Alternative. 

The cumulative impact to wetlands in the project area will be very slightly 

higher due to the recent surfacing of the Burnett Inlet Trail, near the head of 

Burnett Inlet, completed in summer 2013. Trail improvements included fill on 

approximately 0.5 acre of wetlands. 

Subsistence 

A subsistence evaluation was conducted for the six alternatives in accordance 

with Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANLICA) Section 810. 

An ANILCA 810 subsistence hearing was conducted in Wrangell, Alaska in 

June 2008. Based on that evaluation, in the FEIS it was determined that in 

combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, 

all of the action alternatives could result in a slight increase in the possibility of 

a significant restriction on subsistence use of deer. This is consistent with the 

Forest Plan’s determination based on the cumulative effects of full 

implementation of the Forest Plan (FEIS, p. 3-122). 

The wildlife and subsistence addendum (2012) updated deer model capability 

information and incorporated more-recent hunter harvest data (2005-2010) 

from Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) (Table 21, Wildlife and 

Subsistence ROD Addendum). Deer model results for all alternatives are 

shown in Tables 7 and 8 in the Wildlife: Sitka Blacktailed Deer section, below. 

For Alternative F, in wildlife analysis area (WAA) 1901, neither the direct 4 

percent decline in deer habitat capability (DHC) from current condition at 

stem-exclusion phase, nor the 14 percent cumulative change in DHC from 

historic condition at stem-exclusion phase would constitute “a substantial 

reduction” or “large reductions in abundance or major redistribution”. 

Current deer density of just under 16.0 would be reduced to 15.4 at stemNavy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-27 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

exclusion phase. 

Hunter demand at 0-25 years post-harvest (stand initiation phase) which was 

estimated to be 2.4 percent of DHC for WAA 1901 (FEIS, Table 3-29) has 

been updated to an estimated 7.0 percent of DHC for Alternative F. At stemexclusion phase (after 25 years post-harvest), it is estimated at 7.2 percent of 

DHC. These figures are based on the updated assumption of 144 deer 

harvested per year (the FEIS assumption was 78 deer per year). Although the 

2008 Forest Plan did not include a 36 percent reduction factor for predation at 

the request of the State of Alaska, these figures include this reduction factor, 

since it was used in the Navy DEIS and FEIS and produces a moreconservative result. Even with the 36 percent reduction for predation, hunter 

demand is below the 10 percent of winter carrying capacity that is considered 

sustainable and provides a reasonably high level of hunter success. 

Based on the information in the FEIS and the new information analysis, at a 

project level, direct effects within the foreseeable future from the Navy Timber 

Sale project alone would not result in a significant possibility of a significant 

restriction on any subsistence resources, including deer. 

However, since additional timber harvest may occur at some future time in the 

development LUDs in WAA 1901, cumulatively there may be a significant 

possibility of a significant restriction on subsistence use of deer in WAA 1901 

in the future due to additional reductions in habitat capability. This is 

consistent with the Forest Plan finding that full implementation of the Plan 

could lead to a significant possibility of a significant restriction on subsistence 

use of deer. The potential foreseeable effects, directly and cumulatively, from 

the project alternatives will not have a significant possibility of a significant 

restriction on subsistence uses for other resources including bears, furbearers, 

marine mammals, waterfowl, salmon, other finfish, shellfish, and other foods 

such as berries and roots. 

Transportation 

There is no new information regarding transportation policy since the FEIS was 

published; however, there are some minor updates and changes documented in 

the addendum to the transportation report in the project record. 

Implementation of the 2008 Etolin Island Road Closure contract work included 

closing 1.5 miles (roads 6560 and 51011) and decommissioning 0.4 mile (road 

51000) of road. Roads 6539 and 6543, identified for reconstruction in the 

FEIS, have since had this work completed, which consisted of 

reconditioning/periodic maintenance including resurfacing, compaction, and 

seeding. 

Watershed 

In April 2012, the Forest Service issued National Core BMPs. Directives for 

using these BMPs are currently in development. The Navy Timber Sale will 

implement the most current BMP guidance at the time of implementation. 

A3-28  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

Currently, this project cites the Alaska Region BMPs, which are fully described 

in FSH 2509.22. A crosswalk between the current Alaska Region BMPs and 

these National BMPs has been placed in the project record for reference. 

The addendum for the watershed resource report identified several items of 

updated or clarified information including: 

•	 Road reconditioning on Road 6539 that addressed some sediment 

concerns in the Thrucut/Goose Lakes Creek watershed was completed 

in 2011. The condition of this road was identified in the resource report 

as a contributor to sediment risk in the Thrucut/ Goose Lakes Creek 

Watershed. Removal of landslide material, ditch-cleaning, and 

installation of a new culvert resolved these concerns. 

•	 Updates identifying road storage, closure, and stormproofing work 

completed through implementation of the Wrangell Ranger District 

ATMP. 

•	 Clarification of effects of road reconditioning in Fishtrap Creek 

watershed: Alternative F would recondition 0.35 mile of existing 

system road on Road 51543, including re-installation of one bridge at a 

Class II stream in the upper Fishtrap Creek watershed. Reconditioning 

would also occur on 0.42 mile of existing Road 51540. Road 

reconditioning would result in short-term increases in sediment. The 

temporary increase would not degrade water quality or fish habitat. 

Implementation of BMPs described in the road cards is expected to 

maintain water quality and minimize impacts to fish habitat. This 

correction would not change the relative ranking of alternatives. 

•	 Clarification, FEIS page 3-153, Environmental Effects: Two of the 

eleven red pipes in the project area are located on Maintenance Level 1 

roads that are used to access Alternative F units: Road 6544 MP 2.569 

and Road 51544 MP 0.226. When these roads are stored, the removal of 

these red pipes would restore an estimated 4000 feet of mostly 

anadromous fish habitat access in Pump Creek and 4400 feet of resident 

fish habitat in Upper Big Bend watershed. The removal of these two 

pipes would substantially reduce the habitat affected by red pipes in the 

project area. An additional gray pipe at MP 0.586 (potentially affecting 

over 3,000 feet of anadromous fish habitat) could also be removed 

during storage of Road 6544. These roads would be high priority for 

storage and red pipe removal during implementation of the Access and 

Travel Management Plan (ATMP). 

•	 Fish passage at road/stream crossings and removal or replacement of 

red pipes: In the Navy project area, eleven (not ten as stated in the 

FEIS) culverts did not meet current fish passage standards in 2009. One 

of the eleven culverts is mainly affected by beaver debris and may only 

be temporarily red (personal communication Dennis Reed, Wrangell 

RD Fish Biologist). Since 2009, an additional culvert was determined 

to be red and was replaced by a bridge in 2011. In addition, review of 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision	 New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-29 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

FEIS Table 40 determined that the column “Feet of Fish Habitat 

Affected” was displaying units in meters, not feet. New information 

from recently completed stream edits has also been added to update 

FEIS Table 3-40, shown here: 

Watershed Name # of Red Culverts Feet of Fish Habitat 

Affected 

Kindergarten Lake 2 Class II - 2,650 

Pump 5 Class I ­ 6,195 

Class II – 6,565 

South Anita Bay Frontal 1 Class II - 650 

Duckbill Creek 1 Class II – 2,385 

Upper Big Bend Frontal 1 Class II – 4,410 

West Burnett Frontal 1 Class II - 590 

Total 11 Class I – 6,195 

Class II – 17,255 

Wildlife 

The wildlife and subsistence resource report has been reviewed and updated. 

The Navy biological assessment/biological evaluation (BA/BE) was also 

updated. Updated analysis is based on the Selected Alternative (Alternative F) 

unless otherwise noted. 

No information that would affect the decision was revealed in these analyses. 

The FEIS states that the Alternative F would have the least effect on wildlife 

habitat of any action alternative, due to having the least acres of harvest and 

miles of roadbuilding. A summary of the updated analyses is included below. 

Sitka Black-tailed Deer 

The deer model was designed for use at the Forest Plan level and has 

undergone changes in the settings used as more information is known. These 

changes are described in the paper “Tongass Interagency Deer Winter Habitat 

Suitability Index Model” located in the project record. 

Direction as to how the deer model is to be used for analysis was updated in 

2011. This direction was used to reanalyze the effects for Navy FEIS, and the 

reanalysis is detailed in the Wildlife and Subsistence Addendum 2012 in the 

project record. 

Deer habitat capability: Deer habitat capability was reanalyzed for all 

alternatives using the October 2011 direction for the deer model which was 

developed jointly by the interagency wildlife biologists. The differences 

between FEIS model run and the 2011-direction model run deer habitat 

capability (DHC) results are largely due to how partial harvest was treated in 

the analysis. In the FEIS, if volume removal was less than or equal to 30 

percent, the stand was considered to have some remaining volume and an 

A3-30  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

adjustment was made to the results of the deer model. The reanalysis models 

all harvest, including partial cuts, as clearcut, to provide a more-conservative 

scenario. Also, in the FEIS, non-federal ownerships were included in the 

analyses for both direct and cumulative effects; the 2011 model runs used NFSonly lands in WAA 1901 for direct effects, and all lands on Etolin Island for 

cumulative effects analysis. 

Table 7, below, updates Table 3-48 in the FEIS (p. 3-170) for deer habitat 

capability, including some minor formatting changes. In Table 3-48, the 26­

150 year figures show the decline from 1900 (cumulative), but in updated 

Table 7, the figures for all years (0-25 and 26-150) show the decline from 

existing condition. 

The reanalysis shows a greater percentage of decline than the FEIS. As in the 

FEIS, Alternative F has the least effect of the action alternatives, and 

Alternative C the greatest effect. Alternative F shows a 2 percent decline in 

deer habitat capability from existing condition at 0-25 years post harvest (the 

FEIS showed a 1 percent decline), and 4 percent decline from existing 

condition at 26-150 years. 

Table 7
 

2012 Direct Effects on Sitka Black-tailed Deer Habitat Capability (DHC)
 

by Alternative for WAA 19011 (updates Table 3-48 in the FEIS)
 

Time frame Deer Habitat Capability2 (and percent change) by Alternative 

Existing Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C Alt. D Alt. E Alt. F 

0-25 years 

(% change )3 

3,271 

(N/A) 

3,253 

(-<1%) 

3,105 

(-5%) 

2,991 

(-9%) 

3,146 

(-4%) 

3,087 

(-6%) 

3,199 

(-2%) 

26-150 years 

(% change)

4 

3,271 

(N/A) 

3,200 

(-2%) 

3,052 

(-7%) 

2,937 

(-10%) 

3,093 

(-5%) 

3,034 

(-7%) 

3,145 

(-4%) 1 National Forest System (NFS) lands only in WAA 1901 with partial harvest modeled as
 

clearcut. Includes existing managed stands.
 2 Deer habitat capability expressed as number of deer
 3 0 – 25 years represents the immediate effect of project implementation.
 4 26 – 150 years represents the effects of the project once harvested areas are regenerated and
 

the canopy closes, reducing the amount of understory forage for deer.
 

The cumulative effects were also reanalyzed to show the reduction in DHC 

from historic (1954) conditions on all lands (Table 8, below). 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-31 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Table 8 

2012 Cumulative Effect on Sitka Black-tailed Deer Habitat Capability 

(DHC) by Alternative for WAA 1901 and Etolin Island1 

Scale / 

Time Frame 

Deer Habitat Capability2 (DHC) by Alternative 

Historic 

(1954) 

Existing Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C Alt. D Alt. E Alt. F 

WAA 1901 

0-25 years 

(% change)

3 3,675 

3,271 

(-11%) 

3,253 

(-11%) 

3,105 

(-16%) 

2,991 

(-19%) 

3,146 

(-14%) 

3,087 

(-16%) 

3,199 

(-13%) 

WAA 1901 

26-150 years 

(% change)

4 3,675 

3,271 

(-11%) 

3,200 

(-13%) 

3,052 

(-17%) 

2,937 

(-20%) 

3,093 

(-16%) 

3,034 

(-17%) 

3,145 

(-14%) 

Etolin Island 

0-25 years 

(% change)

3 6,557 

6,024 

(-8%) 

6,006 

(-8%) 

5,859 

(-11%) 

5,744 

(-12%) 

5,899 

(-10%) 

5,840 

(-11%) 

5,952 

(-9%) 

Etolin Island 

26-150 years 

(% change)

4 6,557 

6,024 

(-8%) 

5,953 

(-9%) 

5,805 

(-11%) 

5,690 

(-13%) 

5,846 

(-11%) 

5,787 

(-12%) 

5,899 

(-10%) 1 Includes both NFS and non-NFS lands with non-NFS land assigned zero habitat capability 

and partial harvest modeled as clearcut (most conservative scenario). Includes existing 

managed stands, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions.

2 Deer habitat capability expressed as number of deer 3 0 – 25 years represents the immediate effect of project implementation 4 26 – 150 years represents the effect of the project once harvested areas areas are regenerated 

and the canopy closes, reducing the amount of understory forage for deer. 

Similar to direct effects, the results for cumulative effects show a greater 

percentage of decline than does the FEIS; however, the relative ranking of the 

alternatives is almost the same as in the FEIS. Alternative F has the least effect 

of the action alternatives. At the WAA level, Alternative F shows a 13 percent 

decline in deer habitat capability from historic (1954) condition at 0-25 years 

post harvest, and 14 percent decline at 26-150 years (the FEIS showed a 8.7 

percent decline from historic (1900) condition) at 26-150 years. 

Deep snow habitat: Although winter habitat was considered by the project 

biologist during the analysis for the FEIS, the deer model was not designed to 

model deep snow winters (severe winters). Therefore, additional analysis was 

done for the Alternative F at both the WAA 1901 and also the all-Etolin Island 

scale to predict the results of the potential effects on deer for deep snow habitat. 

Deep snow habitat is classified as productive old-growth (high-POG) less than 

800 feet in elevation on south aspects for this analysis. There would be a direct 

effect of 2 percent reduction of deep snow habitat in WAA 1901 from the 

current levels for Alternative F, which is proportional to the overall habitat 

capability reduction, and a cumulative effect of 24 percent reduction from 

historic conditions. At the Etolin Island scale, the current condition shows a 14 

percent reduction from historic levels, with no measurable change resulting 

from Alternative F. 

A3-32  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Wolves 

Deer density and road density were analyzed in the FEIS, with wolves 

considered in relation to road density. To more-thoroughly assess project 

effects on wolves, three analyses were recalculated, for: 1) Deer density to 

estimate the effects on the wolves’ primary food source, including analysis at 

the biogeographic province scale for Alternative F, 2) Road density to evaluate 

the effect of increased roads on the potential hunting/trapping pressure, 

including recent road closures and removing non-NFS lands from direct effects, 

and 3) Consideration of wolf harvest data for a more-detailed analysis of 

potential effects to wolves. 

Theoretical deer density (deer/mi2) was recalculated based on the deer habitat 

capability derived from the model using the 2011 direction for all alternatives 

(see discussion under Sitka black-tailed deer). This is an indicator to assess the 

ability of an area to support theoretical deer populations capable of maintaining 

sustainable wolf populations and meeting human harvest demands. 

All deer densities for WAA 1901 are less than 18 deer/mi2 (see Tables 9 and 

10, below). Historically, neither WAA 1901 nor Etolin Island supported a very 

high deer density, approximately 18 deer/mi2

, according to this analysis. As a 

result, the area may be at higher risk of not supporting deer populations capable 

of maintaining both wolf populations and meeting human harvest demands, 

where deer are the primary prey of wolves. Elk on Etolin Island may be 

fulfilling part of the role as prey for wolves. WAA 1910 on the south end of 

Etolin Island is dominated by the South Etolin Wilderness, which will maintain 

habitat into the future. 

Results of the deer density by alternative reanalysis were somewhat lower (0.4 

to 0.9 deer/mi2 for direct effects at WAA 1901) than those shown in the FEIS; 

however, the ranking was the same, with Alternative F having the least effect 

of the action alternatives. 

Table 9
 

2012 Direct Effect on Sitka Black-tailed Deer Density (deer/square mile)
 

WAA 19011 (updates portions of Table 3-51 in the FEIS)
 

0-25 years 

(% change)

2 

26-150 years 

(% change)

3 

Existing 

16.0 

(N/A) 

16.0 

(N/A) 

Alt. A 

16.0 

(0%) 

16.0 

(0%) 

Alt. B 

15.2 

(-5%) 

14.9 

(-7%) 

Alt. C 

14.6 

(-9%) 

14.3 

(-10%) 

Alt. D 

15.4 

(-4%) 

15.1 

(-5%) 

Alt. E 

15.1 

(-6%) 

14.8 

(-7%) 

Alt. F 

15.6 

(-2%) 

15.4 

(-4%) 1 Deer density based upon DHC / NFS land acres at all elevations; does not include
 

freshwater. They do not reflect actual, known densities of deer.

2 0 – 25 years represents the immediate effect of project implementation
 3 26 – 150 years represents the effect of the project once harvested areas go into stem exclusion.
 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-33 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Table 10
 

2012 Cumulative Effect on Sitka Black-tailed Deer Density (deer/square 

mile) WAA 1901 and Etolin Island1 (updates Tables 3-51 and 3-54 on p. 

3-177 and 3-179 of Navy FEIS)
 

Scale / 

Time frame 

Deer Density by Alternative 

Historic 

(1954) 

Existing Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C Alt. D 

WAA 1901 

0-25 years 

(% change)

2 

17.9 

(N/A) 

15.9 

(-11%) 

15.8 

(-11%) 

15.1 

(-16%) 

14.6 

(-19%) 

15.3 

(-15%) 

WAA 1901 

26-150 years 

(% change)

3 

17.9 

(N/A) 

15.9 

(-11%) 

15.6 

(-13%) 

14.8 

(-17%) 

14.3 

(-20%) 

15.0 

(-16%) 

Etolin Island 

0-25 years 

(% change)

2 

18.1 

(N/A) 

16.6 

(-8%) 

16.6 

(-8%) 

16.2 

(-11%) 

15.8 

(-12%) 

16.3 

(-10%) 

Etolin Island 

26-150 years 

(% change)

3 

18.1 

(N/A) 

16.6 

(-8%) 

16.4 

(-9%) 

16.0 

(-11%) 

15.7 

(-13%) 

16.1 

(-11%) 

Alt. E 

15.0 

(-16%) 

14.8 

(-17%) 

16.1 

(-11%) 

16.0 

(-12%) 

Alt. F 

15.6 

(-13%) 

15.3 

(-15%) 

16.4 

(-9%) 

16.3 

(-10%) 1 Deer density based upon DHC / total NFS and State land acres at all elevations; does not 

include freshwater. They do not reflect actual, known numbers of deer.

2 0 – 25 years represents the immediate effect of project implementation
 3 26 – 150 years represents the effect of the project once harvested areas go into stem exclusion.
 

Further analysis, based on Alternative F, was used to examine the effects on the 

availability of deer for both wolf and human harvest by considering deer 

density at the Etolin Island and Vicinity biogeographic province level in 

accordance with the Forest Plan guideline. In 1954, there were four WAAs 

(1904, 1905, 1906, and 1910) in this biogeographic province where deer 

density was 18 deer/mi2 or greater, with WAA 1901 just slightly below, at 17.9 

deer/mi2

. Currently there is one WAA (1906) with at least 18 deer/mi2; it 

would remain so into the foreseeable future. These results are similar to those 

predicted in the Forest Plan. While subsistence hunting could be affected 

sometime in the future, all WAAs in the Etolin biogeographic province are 

projected to remain above five deer/mi2

, the level thought needed to sustain a 

viable wolf population. Therefore, deer densities on Etolin are expected to 

contribute to maintaining viable wolf populations on the Tongass (Suring et al. 

1993 VPOP Strategy). Shown below are the deer densities for cumulative 

effects, based on Alternative F, on the WAAs in the Etolin Island and Vicinity 

biogeographic province. The Navy project is within WAA 1901; Etolin Island 

includes WAAs 1901 and 1910. 

A3-34  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Table 11 

Cumulative Effects of Alternative F Timber Harvest on Deer Habitat1 

WAA Historic Existing 

Implementation 

0-25 years 

Stem Exclusion 

26-150 years 

1901 17.9 15.9 15.6 15.3 

1903 12.0 10.3 9.5 9.4 

1904 25.6 16.7 16.7 16.5 

1905 18.5 14.4 14.1 13.9 

1906 41.1 26.3 26.1 24.5 

1910 18.4 17.5 17.5 17.5 1. Includes other projects within the biogeographic province. 

Source: DMRerunBioprovince13ResultsUpdate20120530.xlsx 

Roads and Wolf Harvest 

To determine the effects of roads for the potential of increased hunting/trapping 

pressure on wolves, road densities were recalculated, based on Alternative F, 

to remove State and other non-NFS lands from direct effects and to reflect 

recent road closures. Results changed slightly from those shown in the FEIS, 

Table 3-52. Cumulative effects were analyzed for all ownerships on Etolin 

Island. 

Except for the life of the sale, open road density below 1,200 feet elevation for 

WAA 1901 for Alternative F would remain the same as existing condition, at 

0.39 mi/mi2

. Total road density would increase, from 0.64 to 0.67 

mi/mi2 below 1,200 feet elevation for WAA 1901 with the implementation of 

Alternative F. Therefore, even during the life of the sale, road densities would 

continue to be below the Forest Plan wolf road density standard and guideline 

of 0.7 to 1.0 mi/mi2

, recommended for “areas where road access and associated 

human-caused mortality has been determined...to be a significant contributing 

factor to locally unsustainable wolf mortality” (Forest Plan p. 4-95). 

The open and total road densities were also recalculated for Etolin Island. The 

open road density would be 0.22 mi/mi2 during the life of the sale and 0.21 

mi/mi2 after the roads are closed, same as the existing condition. The total road 

density for Etolin Island would be 0.41 mi/mi

2 with the implementation of 

Alternative F. 

Harvest Rate of Wolves 

The methodology developed jointly by the Forest Service and ADFG was used 

to analyze mortality for individual wolf packs (Person and Logan 2012). This 

analysis estimated the following harvest rate of wolves: 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-35 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Table 12 

Estimated average harvest rate of wolves for years 1986 through 2013 

Harvest rate of individual wolf packs 

WAA 1901 2.2 individuals 

WAA 1910 2.0 individuals 

Etolin Island 2.1 individuals 

Harvest (hunting and trapping) of ≥7 wolves in a pack in 1 year is considered 

“pack depletion” and “high risk of depletion” if this persists for 2 or more 

years. Harvest of ≥3 wolves per year (estimated to be about a third of the 

population) within an average pack home range (about 116 mi2

) is considered 

unsustainable and “chronic unsustainable harvest” if this persists for 5 or more 

years. For the years between 1986 and 2013, WAA 1910, on the south end of 

Etolin Island, dominated by the South Etolin Wilderness and outside the project 

area, had unsustainable annual harvests of wolves 31 percent of the time during 

this time period (8 out of 26 years). WAA 1910 also had annual harvest rates 

of ≥7 wolves (pack depletion) three times or 12 percent of the time during the 

reporting period, probably since much trapping (over 75 percent) occurs on the 

shoreline from boats. 

WAA 1901 has had an unsustainable annual harvest of wolves at least 27 

percent of the time during this period (7 out of 26 years). WAA 1901 also had 

annual harvest rates of ≥7 wolves (pack depletion), only once, in 2010. This 

supports the concept that the Anita Bay road system is not used as much for 

trapping, since it is not connected to a community and is not snow-plowed. 

Neither WAA 1901 nor Etolin Island as a whole has met or exceeded the 

parameters for chronic unsustainable harvest or pack depletion. 

Average wolf harvest has remained within sustainable levels (ADFG Navy 

DEIS comment letter 2008). This is attributed to the relatively low 

accessibility of this area by nearby communities; however, there may be a 

concern for potential overharvest during the active portion of the timber sale. 

Marten 

In the FEIS, marten were analyzed as an MIS species at the WAA scale (WAA 

1901). Additional habitat analysis, based on Alternative F, has been conducted 

at the value comparison unit (VCU) scale since marten have smaller home 

ranges in this area, generally a third-order watershed or a 10,000-acre 

landscape approximately the size of an average VCU. For this additional 

analysis, all timber harvest was considered as clearcut, even though partially 

cut stands may provide habitat during some years since the stands would retain 

about 70 percent of the stand structure. 

Two measures were used to analyze the effects to marten: high-value habitat at 

the VCU level, and road density using NFS-only lands less than 1,500 feet in 

elevation. 

A3-36  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

High-value marten habitat includes low-elevation (below 1,500 feet) highvolume old-growth stands. Direct impacts to high-value marten habitat for 

Alternative F would result in a decrease of 0 to 9 percent for all VCUs in the 

project area, and WAA 1901 would experience a 2 percent decrease. 

Cumulative effects with past harvest are more substantial, with a decrease of 4 

percent to 36 percent within the project area VCUs, with VCUs 4640 and 4670 

showing a 35 and 36 percent decrease, respectively, and VCU 4650 showing a 

25 percent decrease. VCUs where timber harvest has reduced high-value 

habitat by 25 percent or more are less capable of supporting marten during 

deep-snow winters and could lead to larger home ranges and higher rates of 

predation. Cumulative decrease is 19 percent for WAA 1901 (calculated as 17 

percent in the FEIS) and 14 percent for Etolin Island. 

Cumulative reduction in POG would range from 1 percent to 22 percent for 

project area VCUs under Alternative F. Total POG would continue to decline 

from historic habitat, but none of the individual VCUs or WAA 1901 would 

exceed the 25-30 percent of reduction in POG which research has determined 

to be a threshold in other areas of the country. Therefore, there may be affected 

individuals, but overall populations appear, and should remain, stable. 

Road density effects were considered, since roads provide access to marten 

trapping. Road density for marten has been updated using NFS-only lands less 

than 1,500 feet in elevation. As stated in the FEIS, p. 3-180, marten densities 

begin to decline in areas where road density exceeds 0.2 mile of road per 

square mile (mi/mi2

) of land and may be reduced as much as 90 percent when 

road density approaches 0.6 mile/mi2 (Suring, et al 1992). Two of the five 

VCUs in the project area (4640 and 4670) exceed 0.6 mi/mi2 for open road 

density, and three VCUs (4640, 4650, and 4670) exceed 0.6 mi/mi2 for total 

road density, both for existing condition and under Alternative F. For WAA 

1901, open road density under Alternative F would be 0.4 mi/mi2 during the 

life of the sale, then revert back to 0.3 mi/mi2 (existing condition). Both 

existing and Alternative F total road density is 0.6 mi/mi2 (estimated at 0.4 

mi/mi2 in the FEIS, p. 3-183). However, roads on Etolin Island are not 

connected to a community and are not generally plowed during the winter 

trapping season. This may partially reduce the effects of road density on the 

Etolin Island marten population. Full implementation of the Wrangell ATM 

Plan will lower the open road density in WAA 1901 by roughly 50 percent; it 

would not change the total road density. 

Cumulative impacts for road density are roughly the same for project area 

VCUs and for WAA 1901 as the direct effects, but lower for Etolin Island at 

0.2 mi/mi2

. While there may be localized effects, overall populations are less 

susceptible to overharvest from road density. Unroaded State parcels and 

National Forest System lands, plus the South Etolin wilderness augment marten 

chance of survival on Etolin Island. 

Seasons and bag limits (unlimited) have remained unchanged in the past years 

and no closures of the marten trapping season have occurred within the last 90 

years in GMU 3, except for Kuiu Island where marten trapping was closed in 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-37 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

2008. ADFG has expressed concern that increasing road access on several 

islands in GMU 3 may necessitate future restrictions. No specific islands were 

mentioned and concerns most likely apply to areas accessible from 

communities. 

Bald Eagle 

Bald eagle protection requirements (50 CFR Part 22.26) have changed from 

what was in the former Bald Eagle MOU and analyzed in the FEIS. Variances 

no longer exist; “take” permits in accordance with the Bald and Golden Eagle 

Protection Act would be required if disturbance to nesting bald eagles would 

occur. Listed below are the required distances to avoid disturbance to nesting 

eagles. All nests are considered active March 1 through May 31; protections 

extend until August 31 unless nests are proven to be inactive. 

•	 Avoid clear-cutting or removal of overstory trees within 330 feet (100 

meters) of both active and alternate nests at any time (same as MOU). 

•	 Avoid timber harvesting operations, including road construction and 

chain saw and yarding operations, during the nesting season within 660 

feet (200 meters) of the nest. 

•	 Avoid construction of log transfer facilities and in-water log storage 

areas within 330 feet (100 meters) of active and alternate nests. 

•	 Avoid operating helicopters or fixed-wing aircraft within 1,000 feet 

(305 meters) of the nest during the breeding season, except where 

eagles have demonstrated tolerance for such activity. 

•	 Avoid blasting and other activities that produce extremely loud noises 

within 1/2 mile of active nests (or within 1 mile in open areas). 

Bald eagle protection requirements have been updated in the unit cards. 

Additional MIS 

As explained in the FEIS p. 3-165, other MIS (black and brown bears, brown 

creepers, red squirrels, hairy woodpeckers, red-breasted sapsuckers, river 

otters, Vancouver Canada goose, and mountain goats) were not analyzed in 

detail in the 2008 wildlife report or FEIS, mainly because much of their 

habitats are protected by Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. However, 

some of the preferred habitat outside old-growth reserves and areas protected 

by Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines would be affected by the action 

alternatives. At an appellant’s request, analysis was expanded to include the 

MIS listed above, with the exception of mountain goats, which do not occur in 

the project area. All results are based on Alternative F, unless otherwise 

specified. 

Black and brown bears: Black bears occur in the project area, and brown 

bears typically occur on the south end of Etolin outside the project area. Both 

bears use a variety of habitats from sea level to alpine. Estuaries, riparian 

areas, and forested coastal areas have the highest value; young clearcuts, 

A3-38  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS	 Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

muskegs, small openings, and subalpine meadows provide high levels of 

forage. Riparian areas and salmon-bearing streams are important during the 

spring and late summer. 

Direct effects (reduction of existing habitat) were calculated for WAA 1901 

(NFS lands only), with POG representing black bear denning habitat, and all 

habitats except older young growth in stem exclusion as foraging habitat. 

Cumulative effects (reductions to historic 1954 condition) were calculated for 

both WAA 1901 and Etolin Island (NFS and non-NFS land). See table below. 

This level of change is not expected to limit overall bear populations. 

Table 13 

Black and brown bear habitat direct (existing) and cumulative (historic) 

effects 

Analysis Area Habitat type Percent reduction from 

existing/historic acres 

Existing Historic 

WAA 1901 POG (denning) 2% 11% 

WAA 1901 All habitat (forage) 1% 4% 

Etolin Island POG (denning) - 7% 

Etolin Island All habitat (forage) - 3% 

Brown creepers: Brown creepers nest and forage in old growth. They are 

negatively affected by edge resulting from fragmentation from logging, and 

densities are consistently lower in edge habitat. Effects to brown creepers were 

analyzed using changes in interior POG habitat and patch size to represent 

changes in brown creeper habitat. 

Alternative F would reduce current interior habitat by 2 percent. The 2 percent 

reduction in habitat could have localized impacts on nesting and dispersal, but 

is not likely to limit brown creepers at the WAA scale. The Navy DEIS 

(Chapter 3, pp. 16, 25-26) contained additional information on fragmentation 

effects. 

Red squirrels: Red squirrels rely on mature conifer forests with large coneproducing trees and cavities for nest sites. Spruce trees in mature to old-growth 

forest provide the highest value, but red squirrels can survive fairly well in 

older cone-producing young growth. They are considered a “species of least 

concern” and there is no trapping or shooting harvest limit or closed season for 

squirrels in GMU3. 

Direct effects (reduction of existing habitat) to red squirrels were calculated 

using changes to POG and older young-growth habitat both by VCU and 

overall to WAA 1901. Cumulative effects were calculated using changes to 

POG and older young-growth habitat by VCU, for WAA 1901, and for Etolin 

Island, from historic (1954) condition. See table below. While there may be 

localized changes in squirrel home ranges and /or density, minimal effects have 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-39 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

occurred at the island scale, and habitat for red squirrels will improve as 

younger stands reach cone-producing age. 

Table 14 

Red squirrel habitat direct (existing) and cumulative (historic) effects 

Analysis Area Habitat type Percent reduction from 

existing/historic acres 

Existing Historic 

VCUs (WAA 1901) POG/older young growth 0 - 7% 0 - 21% 

WAA 1901 POG/older young growth 2% 10% 

Etolin Island POG/older young growth - 6% 

Hairy woodpeckers: Hairy woodpeckers are uncommon on the Tongass, 

preferring high-volume POG stands with patches greater than 500 acres 

considered optimal habitat. Both hairy woodpeckers and red-breasted 

sapsuckers are cavity nesters preferring large trees for nesting. Effects to both 

species are similar except for the type of POG affected. 

Direct effects (reduction of existing habitat) were analyzed for the percent 

reduction in high-POG by VCUs in the project area and also for WAA 1901. 

Cumulative effects (reductions to historic 1954 condition) were also analyzed 

for the percent reduction in high-POG by project area VCUs and for WAA 

1901. See table below. Cumulative effects on preferred hairy woodpecker 

habitat may represent localized gaps in distribution. 

Table 15 

Hairy woodpecker habitat direct (existing) and cumulative (historic) 

effects 

Analysis Area Habitat type Percent reduction from 

existing/historic acres 

Existing Historic 

VCUs (WAA 1901) High-volume POG 0 - 8% 0 - 35% 

WAA 1901 High-volume POG 2% 18% 

Red-breasted sapsuckers: Red-breasted sapsuckers are common on the 

Tongass. This cavity excavator uses snags and partly dead trees in coniferous, 

deciduous, or mixed forests for nesting and forage. It prefers low-and-medium 

volume POG and can be found along clearcut edges as well. 

Direct effects (reduction of existing habitat) were analyzed using the percent 

reduction for low and medium-POG by VCUs in the project area and overall 

for WAA 1901. Cumulative effects (reductions to historic 1954 condition) 

were also analyzed for low and medium-POG by project area VCUs and 

overall for WAA 1901. See table below. Impacts to red-breasted sapsucker 

A3-40  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

habitat are less than those to hairy woodpecker habitat, due to limited past 

logging in lower volume classes. 

Table 16 

Red breasted sapsucker habitat direct (existing) and cumulative 

(historic) effects 

Analysis Area Habitat type Percent reduction from 

existing/historic acres 

Existing Historic 

VCUs (WAA 1901) Low/med-volume POG 0 – 7% 0 – 11% 

WAA 1901 Low/med-volume POG 2% 4% 

River otters: In Southeast Alaska, river otters are associated with coastal and 

fresh water aquatic environments and the old-growth forest immediately 

adjacent (within 100-500 feet). Their primary habitat is protected by Forest 

Plan Standards and Guidelines, including Beach and Estuary Standards and 

Guidelines, and Riparian Standards and Guidelines. No harvest is scheduled in 

these habitats. All habitat within a minimum of 100 feet of Class I and II 

streams is protected by standards and guidelines and Tongass Timber Reform 

Act (TTRA). 

For this analysis, effects to security and denning habitat were calculated based 

on the effects to POG within 100 to 500 feet of fish-bearing streams (Class I 

and II) for all ownerships and elevations. Since protected coastal areas provide 

the highest-quality habitat, direct project effects (reduction of existing habitat) 

are expected to be minimal. 

Cumulative effects (reduction to historic 1954 condition) to otters are more 

substantial than direct effects. See table below. Freshwater riparian denning 

and foraging security cover has been previously reduced from historic 

condition. Past harvest has also occurred in beach habitat, and these older 

clearcuts may receive some use by otters, but are not considered optimal 

habitat. No formal population surveys have been conducted, but according to 

Lowell 2010, river otter trends appear stable. 

Table 17 

River otter habitat direct (existing) and cumulative (historic) effects 

Analysis Area Habitat type Percent reduction 

from existing/ 

historic acres 

Existing Historic 

VCUs (WAA 1901) POG 100’-500’ from fish streams 0 - 6% 2 - 23% 

WAA 1901 POG 100’-500’ from fish streams 2% 14% 

Etolin Island POG 100’-500’ from fish streams - 10% 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-41 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

Vancouver Canada goose: Vancouver Canada goose habitat on the Tongass 

includes low-productivity forest and wetlands in estuary, river, and upland 

areas (FEIS p. 3-165). They also use overstory canopy for cover. No harvest is 

scheduled in the majority of these habitats (FEIS p. 3-165) which are protected 

by Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

However, for this analysis, effects were calculated based on the reduction to 

forested muskeg, non-POG, SD5H, and SD4H lands. Direct effects (reduction 

of existing habitat) to these lands were calculated by VCU and overall for 

WAA 1901. Cumulative effects (reductions to historic 1954 condition) were 

calculated by VCU, overall for WAA 1901, and at the Etolin Island scale. See 

table below. 

Table 18 

Vancouver Canada goose habitat direct (existing) and cumulative 

(historic) effects 

Analysis Area Habitat type Percent reduction from 

existing/historic acres 

Existing Historic 

VCUs (WAA 1901) Forested muskeg, non­ 0 - 2% 1 - 4% 

POG, SD5H and SD4H 

WAA 1901 Forested muskeg, non­ 1% 2% 

POG, SD5H and SD4H 

Etolin Island Forested muskeg, non­ - 1% 

POG, SD5H and SD4H 

Federally-listed Threatened, Endangered and Candidate 

species (TES) and Alaska Sensitive Species 

A Biological Assessment (BA) was completed in 2009 and concurrence was 

obtained. The list for Threatened, Candidate and Endangered species was 

reexamined on the NMFS and USFWS Alaska websites on December 28, 2011, 

and includes both species managed by USFWS and those managed by NMFS. 

Species not occurring within Southeast Alaska inside waters and/or the 

southern portion of the Tongass National Forest were dropped from further 

analysis. Species occurring within the action area were analyzed further. 

Three candidate species not previously analyzed in 2009 were considered in the 

2012 Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation. These species are Pacific 

herring, yellow-billed loon, and Kittletz’s murrelet. 

•	 Pacific herring (Clupea pallasii) within the Southeast Alaska DPS were 

designated a candidate species in April 2008 (Federal Register 2008a). 

A determination of “not likely to jeopardize candidate species, or 

adversely modify proposed critical habitat” was made for Pacific 

herring. Disturbance at Anita Bay LTFs and offshore barge locations 

would be unmeasurable compared to the range of the population. The 

A3-42  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS	 Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

project may adversely affect individuals but is not likely to result in a 

loss of viability in the planning area nor cause a trend toward federal 

listing. Since that time, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) Fisheries concluded on April 2, 2014 that 

listing of the Pacific herring is not warranted at this time. 

•	 Yellow-billed loon (Gavia adamsii) was added as a candidate species 

(March 2009). A determination of “no effect” was made for yellowbilled loons due to incidental occurrence and lack of its habitat 

disturbance. Since that time, on October 1, 2014, the USFWS issued a 

12-month finding on the petition to list the yellow-billed loon, and 

determined that listing as a threatened or endangered species is not 

warranted (79 FR 59195-59204). 

•	 Kittlitz’s murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris), was proposed as a 

candidate species in May 2004. Found in glacial habitats, it has only 

incidental occurrence south of LeConte Bay, about 50 miles north of the 

project area. A determination of “no effect” was made for Kittlitz’s 

murrelet. Since that time, on October 3, 2013 the USFWS issued a 12­

month finding on the petition to list the Kittlitz’s murrelet and 

determined that listing as a threatened or endangered species is not 

warranted (78 FR 61764-61801). 

The updated BA was submitted to NMFS for review on August 29, 2012. The 

Forest Service is not required to consult with USFWS on the no effect 

determination for the candidate species, yellow-billed loon and Kittlitz’s 

murrelet. Concurrence was received on September 7, 2012. The 2009 

determination that the Navy Timber Sale “may affect, but not likely to 

adversely affect” federally listed species (humpback whale and Steller sea lion) 

remains unchanged per that concurrence letter. Since that time, the eastern 

distinct population segment Steller sea lion was delisted per a Final Rule 

published in the Federal Register November 4, 2013 and effective December 4, 

2013 (78 FR 66139), but will continue to be protected under provisions of the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act. 

The Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species under NMFS authority in 

Alaska list was updated in March 2013, and includes two fish species not 

previously on the list: the Lower Columbia River coho salmon (Oncorhynchus 

kisutch) and the green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris). The Navy BA 

addresses the coho among the “Fourteen stocks of salmon [that] have been 

identified as potentially migrating into the marine waters of the Tongass (Forest 

Plan FEIS Appendix F)”, with a “low probability that some may occasionally 

be present in inside waters”. The BA concludes there will be “no effect to 

listed salmon and trout species.” Critical habitat for the green sturgeon does 

not occur in Alaska and the species’ northernmost known range is British 

Columbia, although incidental marine presence could occur in the project area. 

A determination of “no effect” has been made for the green sturgeon, as well as 

the Lower Columbia River coho salmon. NMFS concurred on March 15, 2014 

that due to the no-effect determination, no consultation was required. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision	 New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-43 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

The Sensitive Species list for the Alaska Region was revised in February 2009 

and the updated list was incorporated in the Navy FEIS. No updates have 

occurred since then. 

On March 31, 2014 the USFWS published a Notice of Petition Finding and 

Initiation of Status Review in the Federal Register (79 CFR 17993) for the 

Alexander Archipelago wolf. Pursuant to a 2011 petition by Greenpeace to list 

the Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis lupus ligoni) as a threatened or 

endangered species and to designate critical habitat under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), the USFWS 90-day review found that 

the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating 

that listing the wolf may be warranted. As a result of a positive 90-day finding, 

the USFWS initiates a 12-month status review. Pursuant to an Agreement in 

Center for Biological Diversity et al. v Jewell et al. filed September 22, 2014, 

the USFWS will issue a decision by the end of 2015 on whether listing the wolf 

is warranted. 

On April 10, 2015 the USFWS published a Notice of Petition Finding and 

Initiation of Status Review in the Federal Register (80 CFR 19263) for the 

Alaska yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis). Pursuant to a 2014 petition by 

Center for Biological Diversity, The Boat Company, GSACC, and Greenpeace 

to list the Callitropsis nootkatensis as a threatened or endangered species under 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), the USFWS 90-day 

review found that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that listing the yellow-cedar may be warranted. As a 

result of a positive 90-day finding, the USFWS initiates a status review. At the 

conclusion of the status review, the USFWS will issue a 12-month finding as to 

whether the Service believes that listing is warranted. 

Appendix A 

Reasons for Scheduling the Environmental 

Analysis of the Navy Timber Sale 

Portions of Appendix A have been deleted, updated, or added since 2009 to 

include current agency direction and information. Figures and tables have been 

updated with the most current Forest-wide timber program information. A 

complete, updated Appendix A is in the project record and online on the project 

website at http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=14556. 

A3-44  APPENDIX ROD-3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix B - Updated Response to Comments 

Introduction 

Appendix B of the FEIS includes responses to comments received for the Navy Timber 

Sale Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). As part of the interdisciplinary team 

review for the 2015 Decision for the Navy project, these responses were reviewed and 

updated as necessary. Only the portions of the comments which were updated are included 

in this appendix. The original response is included in Appendix B of the FEIS. 

Comment letters are included in Appendix B of the FEIS and are annotated with an 

associated commenter acronym and a number. Responses to these comments are identified 

with a corresponding acronym and number in the Forest Service Response following each 

letter. Annotations (ie, “ACMP-7”) precede each response and correspond to the 

annotations on the original letters of comment to the Draft EIS in Appendix B of the Navy 

FEIS. 

Appendix B of the FEIS includes the annotated original letters and response to those
 

comments.
 

Forest Service Response to Alaska State Department of Natural 

Resources Division of Coastal and Ocean Management (ACMP) 

Comments:
 

ACMP-7 

Updated Response: The response states “At this time, the Forest Service plans to replace 

one red culvert in the Pump Creek watershed during implementation of the Navy Timber 

Sale.” This statement is an error. No red culverts will be replaced as part of the Navy 

Timber Sale. A ‘red’ culvert is a road crossing structure for a stream that does not allow 

juvenile fish passage during the full range of water flows. These culverts would be 

replaced through other funding mechanisms. 

ACMP-30 

Updated Response: Since 2009, roads 51011 and 51000 within the project area have been 

stored and road 6560 within the project area has been stormproofed. These roads are not 

planned for use in the Navy project. 

Forest Service Response to AK State Dept. of Fish and Game (ADFG) 

Comments: 

ADFG-11
 

Updated Response: Limitations of the model were disclosed in the FEIS (pp. 3-168-169);
 

discussions with ADFG on the deer model resulted in updated direction in 2011.
 

ADFG-12
 

Updated Response: Based upon 2011 direction, the deer model was re-run for the ROD
 

with all units modeled as clearcut to model the most-conservative scenario. You are
 

correct - since there are no agreed-upon coefficients for the other silvicultural prescriptions
 

used from the Navy project. The 2011 direction was updated to be more in line with the
 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-45 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

how the deer model was run for the 2008 Forest Plan Amendment analysis and was done
 

with input from USFWS and ADFG. The 2012 addendum to the wildlife and subsistence 

report for this ROD explains how the model was used for the updated analysis. 

ADFG-13 

Updated Response: Discussions with ADFG on the model resulted in updated direction in 

2011. A separate analysis of deep snow winter habitat during severe winters was added in 

the 2012 addendum to the wildlife and subsistence report for this ROD.
 

ADFG-14
 

Updated Response: The wolf section was updated in the 2012 addendum to the wildlife
 

and subsistence report for this ROD. The Forest Service acknowledges that current deer
 

density of 16 deer/square mile is below the Forest Plan guideline of 18 deer/mi2
 

recommended to sustain both wolves and meet estimated human deer harvest demands
 

(where deer are the primary prey of wolves) and may be theoretically reduced by another 2
 

percent under the Selected Alternative. It is not known to what extent elk are being killed
 

by wolves, but predation of elk by wolves is documented in the ADFG elk management
 

report for GMU 3.
 

ADFG-17 

Updated Response: Theoretical deer density was updated in the 2012 addendum to the
 

wildlife and subsistence report for this ROD using the information of the updated deer
 

model information.
 

ADFG-18 

Updated Response: The 2012 addendum to the wildlife and subsistence report for this
 

ROD includes additional risk analysis of wolf mortality based upon methodology in Person 

and Logan 2012.
 

ADFG-27 

Updated Response: The Selected Alternative does not harvest timber in roadless areas;
 

therefore no directly affected acres would be within an inventoried roadless area. 

Additional marten analysis was included in the 2012 addendum to the wildlife and
 

subsistence report for this ROD, and includes analysis by VCU, WAA, and Etolin Island as
 

a whole.
 

Forest Service Response to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Comments: 

EPA-2 

Updated Response: The new NPDES permit was received, with an authorization effective 

date of April 15, 2009. 

Forest Service Response to Glen Ith (GI) Comments: 

GI-4 

Updated Response: The quartile method is no longer used to display the results of the 

deer model. Additional discussion is under ADFG 12 and 13. 

A3-46  APPENDIX ROD- 3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

GI-4c 

Updated Response: The deer model was run again using the 2011 direction, and the
 

results are in the 2012 addendum to the wildlife and subsistence report in the project
 

record. Also discussed in response to comments ADFG-12 and 13.
 

GI-4f 

Updated Response: Also discussed in response to comments ADFG-12 and 13.
 

GI-5 

Updated Response: Although effects to individual patch size were not displayed in detail
 

in the FEIS, the 2008 Old Growth resource report included changes to the number of
 

blocks and average block size by category from historic to resulting condition (Table OG6).
 

Forest Service Response to SE Alaska Conservation Council (SEACC) 

Comments: 

SEACC-1 

Updated Response: Updated market demand is calculated annually, with the estimate 

used as a guideline in setting annual timber sale goals. Predicting likely timber purchases 

and offer levels on the Tongass for Fiscal Year 2014 can be referenced 

at http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5447816.pdf (Feb 3, 

2014). 

SEACC-3 

Updated Response: The 5-year timber sale plan has information on when and how much 

estimated volume is planned from the Navy project; however, the preliminary timber cruise 

volume data for the Navy alternatives show a lower available volume. The information in 

Appendix A has been updated from FY 2009 to FY 2014 based on the estimated amount of 

market demand for FY 2014. See response to comments SEACC-1, and SEACC- 9 to 

SEACC-13. The market demand is updated annually. 

SEACC-11 

Updated Response: Brackley et al. was estimating timber demand and not the timber to 

be offered since the availability of timber to be offered is dependent on various factors. The 

FY 2013 timber demand was estimated at 143 MMBF. The volume that was offered was 

115 MMBF. 

SEACC-12 

Updated Response: Although in 2009, Silver Bay Logging, Inc. had been in negotiations 

to sell the Wrangell mill; prospective purchasers had voiced reluctance due to lack of a 

steady timber supply, which is one of the reasons that this is a significant issue for this 

project. In 2010, Silver Bay Logging dismantled their mill. The indicated bid value was 

recalculated to the Viking Mill in Klawock on Prince of Wales Island in the updated 

FASTR analysis. 

SEACC-13 

Updated Response: Appendix A of the Navy FEIS has been updated with current 

information. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-47 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

Forest Service Response to Sealaska Corporation (SC) Comments: 

SC-2 

Updated Response: The NEPA Economic Analysis Tool-Residual Value, or NEATR 

program, used for modeling financial analysis in the FEIS, has been superseded by the 

Financial Analysis Spreadsheet Tool – RV, (FASTR). Like NEATR, FASTR provides a 

relative comparison of anticipated project costs and revenues for a range of project 

alternatives. The FASTR model uses the same logging costs and manufacturing costs 

developed for the Alaska Region timber sale appraisal program. FASTR was used during 

the updated FEIS analysis to analyze and compare the alternatives. At this time, the action 

alternatives still show deficit returns. Inputs into the FASTR program are rough estimates 

and the output is not intended to be used as a timber sale appraisal. 

SC-3 

Updated Response: With the decision of the Organized Village of Kake, et al. vs. US 

Department of Agriculture (1:09-cv-00023 JWS), the Tongass exemption for the Roadless 

Rule was vacated and the Roadless Rule’s application to the Tongass was reinstated on 

March 4, 2011. A subsequent ruling on March 26, 2014 by the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals reversed that District Court decision concerning the exemption of the Tongass 

from the Roadless Rule. The Ninth Circuit Court also remanded the case to the District 

Court to decide whether a supplemental EIS is required for the Tongass exemption. In 

August 2014, however, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted another hearing, held in 

December 2014, before an eleven-judge panel to rehear the appeal of the March 2011 

decision. The eleven-judge panel has not yet issued a decision. At this writing, the Court’s 

decision is still pending. 

Forest Service Response to Sitka Conservation Society et al (SCS) 

Comments: 

SCS-2 

Updated Response: See updated response to SC-3.
 

SCS-3 

Updated Response: The Navy project presents a range of alternatives, including a noaction alternative, that responds to the issues identified. The range of volume among the 

action alternatives has been recalculated to be estimated at 13.1 MMBF (Alternative F) to 

62.0 MMBF (Alternative C), with the other action alternatives falling in this range. 

SCS-8
 

Updated Response: The referenced link has been updated
 

to http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/brackley/index.shtml.
 

SCS-9 

Updated Response: Appendix A has been updated for FY 2014. The updated market 

demand estimate calculations for FY 2014 can be referenced 

at http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5447816.pdf. 

SCS-16 

Updated Response: On March 28, 2011, Financial Analysis Spreadsheet Tool – RV 

(FASTR) was approved by the Regional Forester to replace the NEPA Economic Analysis 

A3-48  APPENDIX ROD- 3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Tool Residual Value (NEAT_R) version 2.16 as the Forest Service, Alaska Region, 

financial efficiency and economic analysis tool for use in modeling timber volume during
 

planning. The Financial Efficiency Table (FEIS Table 3-5 TM-5) has been updated using
 

the FASTR analysis modeling tool and is documented in the addendum to the timber
 

economics report.
 

Forest Services cost averages per MBF have been updated as discussed under Issue 1, 

Timber Supply and Economics (see subsections Financial Efficiency Analysis and Forest
 

Service Costs) in this appendix.
 

SCS-18 

Updated Response: In November 2009, the Regional Forester approved time-limited
 

shipment of unprocessed hemlock and Sitka spruce logs and provided additional options
 

for purchasers. The export policy is reviewed annually by the Regional Forester. An 

updated (February 2014) letter regarding the current export policy is in the project record.
 

SCS-19 

Updated Response: See also the updated response to comment SCS-18 regarding limited
 

interstate shipment policy.
 

SCS-20 

Updated Response: FASTR, used in the updated analysis, reflects Alaska yellow-cedar
 

export rates. Species selling values are incorporated from the most recent quarterly
 

appraisal bulletin used for the residual value appraisal method. The Navy FEIS used the
 

Residual Value 3rd Qtr., 2007 appraisal bulletin and the updated analysis used the 

FASTR version October 21, 2013 using the Residual Value 4th Qtr, 2012 to compare 

alternatives.
 

SCS-21 

Updated Response: Table 3-2 has been updated in the timber report addendum (Table 1), 

using data generated by FASTR and updated employment coefficients for logging and 

sawmilling.
 

Timber cruise data collected since the 2009 FEIS showed less volume than the stand exam
 

volume estimates in the FEIS, with employment figure estimates decreased accordingly
 

(Table 3 in the timber report addendum, in the project record). 

SCS-34
 

Updated Response: See updated response to SC-3.
 

SCS-35c
 

Updated Response: Regarding the roadless component of the Navy project area, almost
 

54,000 acres are roadless (2001 Roadless Rule inventory) - about 80 percent of the total
 

project area. Alternative C would directly affect the most vegetation by harvesting timber
 

in cable-harvest units and clearing roads within the roadless acres, about 1,572 acres and 17 

miles of new NFS and temporary roads within the inventoried roadless areas. To reflect a 

more conservative, complete analysis of direct and indirect effects to inventoried roadless
 

areas, helicopter units were included in the updated analysis. Alternative C would harvest
 

about 2,891 acres with helicopter yarding; however, these units leave 70 percent of the 

timber stand intact and do not require any roadbuilding. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-49 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

Alternative B would remove timber from over 583 acres with cable yarding and 7 miles of
 

roads, and 1,617 acres by helicopters. Alternative D has a similar amount of cable yarding
 

units, about 487 acres and 5 miles of road, but less than 607 acres of helicopter harvest.
 

Alternative E has 0 acres of cable unit harvest with just under 2 miles of road, but 2,219 

acres of helicopter harvest within the Navy project area (2012 roadless area analysis
 

addendum). Alternative F, the Selected Alternative, does not harvest any timber or build
 

any roads in IRAs.
 

With the decision of the Organized Village of Kake, et al. vs. US Department of
 

Agriculture (1:09-cv-00023 JWS), the Tongass exemption for the Roadless Rule was
 

vacated and the Roadless Rule’s application to the Tongass was reinstated on March 4, 

2011. A subsequent ruling on March 26, 2014 by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
 

reversed that District Court decision concerning the exemption of the Tongass from the
 

Roadless Rule. The Ninth Circuit Court also remanded the case to the District Court to
 

decide whether a supplemental EIS is required for the Tongass exemption. In August 2014, 

however, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted another hearing, held in December
 

2014, before an eleven-judge panel to rehear the appeal of the March 2011 decision. The 

eleven-judge panel has not yet issued a decision. At this writing, the Court’s decision is
 

still pending.
 

SCS-37 

Updated Response: Appendix A to the FEIS annually updates the timber demand figure. 

Due to the export policy and good overseas markets, in addition to recovering domestic
 

markets, in 2014 this is based on the “Expanded Lumber, Scenario 2”, with the goal for
 

volume of timber to be offered at 142 MMBF.
 

SCS-41 

Updated Response: The Navy project is fully compliant with the requirements of NFMA. 

The silvicultural prescriptions are designed to:
 

•	 The even-aged management prescriptions will regenerate cedar, and precommercial thinning will give preference to cedar young growth to maintain or 

increase the cedar composition. 

•	 For the uneven-aged prescriptions, where 70 percent of the original basal area will 

be left, no more than 50 percent of the cedar and spruce basal area will be 

harvested. Species diversity and the cedar component will be maintained. Alaska 

yellow-cedar and western redcedar regeneration is considerable in many of the 

stands previously harvested. A summary of pre- and projected post-harvest 

conditions shows quantitative effects of single-tree selection for trees over 9” DBH 

for helicopter units in the Navy project area, found in the silviculture resource 

report, Table 6. Monitoring after harvest will be done via stocking surveys on all 

harvest units to verify the effectiveness of recruiting and retaining desired species in 

the managed stand. 

•	 Several of the even-aged stands will have western redcedar and Alaska yellowcedar retained as seed trees to provide a seed source for the future stand. This will 

minimize the effects of porcupine damage on the regenerated stands, as porcupines 

do not prefer these species as a source of food. This also will help establish and 

maintain a cedar component in the newly regenerated stand. 

A3-50  APPENDIX ROD- 3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS	 Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

•	 The planting of Alaska yellow-cedar is an option that is in the silvicultural 

prescriptions and can be implemented if Alaska yellow-cedar is not regenerating in 

the stand. This is costly and usually not necessary with the prolific natural 

regeneration that occurs in Southeast Alaska. It is fully expected that all species, 

including Alaska yellow-cedar, will naturally regenerate following timber harvest in 

the Navy project area. 

•	 At the time of precommercial thinning for even-aged stands, Alaska yellow-cedar 

and western redcedar are the first-priority species to be favored and selected as 

leave trees. This is both an effective and economical way to increase the percent of 

cedar within a managed stand. 

The Navy project is not proposing any vegetation type conversion requiring justification by 

an analysis showing biological, economic, social, and environmental design consequences, 

and the relation of such conversions to the process of natural change. 

SCS-42 

Updated Response: Alaska yellow-cedar (AYC) decline is recognized and discussed in 

the silviculture section of the FEIS on pages 3-99 to 104 and in the 2012 updated 

silviculture resource report. The silviculture report identifies the units where yellow-cedar 

decline was found to occur. As described in SCS-41, above, several measures can be taken 

to ensure that species mix, including Alaska yellow-cedar and western redcedar, is 

maintained, and these are specified on the unit cards where prescribed. 

Paul Hennon et al.’s Dynamic Conservation Strategy discusses the complex causes of AYC 

decline and reduces it to two factors for landscape modeling: snow cover and drainage. 

AYC had reached its greatest competitive advantage in poorly and moderately drained soils 

but is now only healthy at these sites where snow-cover levels are adequate to offer 

protection. Within zones in which the snow cover is sufficient, AYC’s niche has been 

limited to better-drained soils where its roots can penetrate deeper. Hennon et al identified 

dynamic maladapted, persistent, and migration zones for AYC. There is guidance and 

options for conservation and management in the paper, Shifting Climate, Altered Niche, 

and a Dynamic Conservation Strategy for Yellow-Cedar in the North Pacific Coastal 

Rainforest (Hennon et al 2012). 

Ongoing efforts to develop a comprehensive conservation and management strategy for 

AYC in Southeast Alaska are nearly complete. This strategy provides: 

•	 a thorough review of the knowledge on the extensive mortality to AYC, including 

the role of climate, 

•	 options for the conservation and active management of AYC on lands that are 

considered either suitable or unsuitable for AYC, 

•	 the use of risk models and yellow-cedar distribution to evaluate, quantify, and map 

areas of habitat suitability for AYC, both now and in the future century. 

Risk of decline to AYC by the year 2080 varies considerably by geography in coastal 

Alaska. Some areas are already heavily impacted by decline and risk is not expected to 

increase appreciably; other areas are currently unimpacted, but are expected to develop 

decline; still other areas are expected to remain healthy. 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision	 New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-51 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

The coastal rainforest environment around the range of AYC in Alaska is divided into 33 

geographic zones to produce a more fine-scale view of AYC’s current and expected future 

health status and associated prospects for conservation and management. Within the Etolin 

Island Management Zone, where the Navy project is located, the percentage of AYC 

forests expected to be at high risk doubles from 11 to 23 percent between 2020 and 2080. 

High-risk areas are initially concentrated on southern, western, and eastern portions of this 

management area and then encroach to higher elevations and more-northerly latitudes. 

Several areas known to have AYC decline now do not show high risk until 2080 (e.g., the 

valley between Alice Peak and Helen Peak). AYC forests rated at low risk decrease from 

67 percent in 2020 to 34 percent in 2080. Low-risk forests in 2080 are well distributed, but 

are mainly found at high elevations and interior areas of Etolin Island. 

Conservation goals for AYC can be met in the large South Etolin wilderness area in the 

southern portion of the island. There, extensive AYC decline occurs now and is expected 

to progress upslope, but extensive areas of low to medium risk persist at higher elevations 

through 2080. Some areas that are currently impacted by decline are not projected to be at 

high risk to decline until 2080; therefore, relative risk may be underestimated somewhat for 

other parts of this management zone. Succession to other species, including western 

redcedar, is expected in these impacted forests. Within the Navy project area, there are 

good opportunities for active management, given road systems and land-use status. 

Additional AYC could be planted on well-drained soils, as was done in 1986 at Anita Bay 

(Hennon Et.al [n.d]). This is included as an option in the silvicultural prescriptions for the 

Navy project. 

SCS-58 

Updated Response: Open and total road density calculations were updated in the 2012 

addendum to the wildlife and subsistence report for this ROD. 

SCS-60 

Updated Response: Since 2009, road maintenance work has been accomplished within 

the project area. In 2008, a road maintenance contract closed 1.5 miles of Roads 6560 and 

51011 and decommissioned 0.4 mile of Road 51000. Sections of the 6539 and 6543 roads 

which were identified for reconditioning in the FEIS have had periodic maintenance work 

completed. 

SCS-62 

Updated Response: See updated response to SCS-60.
 

SCS-85 

Updated Response: Although not required, additional MIS analysis was included in the 

2012 addendum to the wildlife and subsistence report for this ROD. Information on TES 

species was updated in BA/BE for this ROD. 

SCS-89 

Updated Response: The single-tree selection prescriptions will not eliminate spruce from 

the stand. No more than 50 percent of the basal area of the spruce in the stand will be 

removed. Deal, et al (2001) found that partial cutting maintained stand structures similar to 

uncut old-growth stands, and the cutting had no significant effect on tree species 

composition (FEIS p. 4-27). 

A3-52  APPENDIX ROD- 3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

Deer modeling assumptions used for the FEIS are found in the Wildlife section in Chapter 

3. The 2012 addendum to the wildlife and subsistence report outlines the assumptions used 

for the deer model as rerun using 2011 direction. See also updated response to ADFG-12 

and 13. 

SCS-113
 

Updated Response: See updated response ADFG 11-13.
 

The deer model was rerun using 2011 direction, as described in the 2012 addendum to the
 

wildlife and subsistence report in the Navy project record.
 

SCS-115a and 115b
 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG-12 and 13.
 

SCS-116
 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG-12 and 13.
 

SCS-118
 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG& 12 and 13.
 

SCS-120 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG-12.
 

SCS-121 

Updated Response: See also updated response to ADFG-12.
 

SCS-122 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG-12.
 

Uneven-aged stands are created through uneven-aged systems or small-scale natural
 

periodic disturbances that allow for recruitment/release of understory trees resulting in a
 

multi-storied stand structure.
 

SCS-123 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG-12.
 

SCS-124
 

Updated Response: The silviculture resource report defines an uneven-aged stand and the
 

objectives of uneven-aged management, the silviculture system implemented with the
 

single-tree selection partial harvest prescription. See also updated response to ADFG-12.
 

SCS-126 

Updated Response: See also updated response to ADFG 11 and the Forest Plan (pp. 3­

231 to 232 and 3-265 through 3-268). 

SCS-127 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG 11-13 and SCS 126.
 

SCS-128 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG 11-13 and SCS 126.
 

SCS-129 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG-13.
 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-53 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

SCS-130 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG 11-13 and SCS 126.
 

SCS-131 

Updated Response: Since the 2009 FEIS, the quartile method is no longer in use. See 

additional discussion under ADFG-12 and 13. 

SCS-132 

Updated Response: See updated response to ADFG-14 and 18.
 

SCS-134 

Updated Response: See also updated response to ADFG-14 and 18.
 

SCS-135 

Updated Response: Total and open road densities were updated in the 2012 wildlife and 

subsistence report for the ROD. 

Forest Service Response to The Wilderness Society (TWS) Comments: 

TWS-1 

Updated Response: 

See updated response to SC-3. 

TWS-4 

Updated Response: In November 2009, the Regional Forester approved time-limited 

shipment of unprocessed hemlock and Sitka spruce logs and provided additional options 

for purchasers. The February 2014 letter from the Regional Forester for the annual review 

of the export policy is in the project record. Timber markets are subject to the global 

marketplace and are very dynamic. 

TWS-6 

Updated Response: 

See updated response to SC-3. 

Forest Service Response to George Woodbury (GW) Comments: 

GW-1 

Updated Response: While market fluctuations show an improvement in the economics of 

all alternatives, as compared to the FEIS, the modeled indicated bid value for all 

alternatives including the Selected Alternative is currently deficit, based on the historic 

market conditions and current cost collection numbers. However, these values may not 

reflect the future market conditions at the time of the contract offering. An alternative may 

or may not become more economical in future markets, or a portion of the units may be 

economical in current markets. If the contract appraises deficit at the future time of 

offering, it will not be advertised until market conditions improve. 

A3-54  APPENDIX ROD- 3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3
 

References: 

2011 Draft Report. Exploring the Sustainable Yield Capacity of the Young Growth Lands 

on the Tongass National Forest while Evaluating the Impact of Acreage Reductions and 

Rotation Age. Prepared for USDA Forest Service and Juneau Economic Development 

Council, 2011. 

Anderson, H.E. 2011. Biomass and carbon. In: Barrett, T.M.; Christensen, G.A., tech eds., 

Forests of southeast and south central Alaska, 2004-2008. Gen Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-835. 

Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station: 13-22. 

Barrett, T.M. 2014. Storage and flux of carbon in live trees, snags, and logs in the Chugach 

and Tongass National Forests. Gen Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-889. Portland, OR: US 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 44 p. 

Deal, Robert L. 2001. The effects of partial cutting on forest plant communities of western 

hemlock-Sitka spruce stands in southeast Alaska. Canadian Journal of Forestry Resources. 

31:2067-2079 

Federal District Court, District of Alaska ruling in Organized Village of Kake, et al. v. US 

Department of Agriculture (D.C. No. 1:09-cv-00023 JWS) March 4, 2011. 

Hennon, Paul, E. et al 2012. Shifting Climate, Altered Niche, and a Dynamic Conservation 

Strategy for Yellow-Cedar in the North Pacific Coastal Rainforest. In: BioScience 62: 147– 

158. 

Hennon, P., McKenzie, C., D’Amore, D., Wittwer, D., Mulvey R., Lamb, M., Biles, F., 

Cronn, R., [n.d.] A climate Adaptation Strategy for Conservation and Management of 

Yellow-cedar in Alaska. Manuscript in review. On file with P. Hennon, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station, 11175 Auke Lake Way, Juneau, AK 99835 

Lowell, R. E.. 2010b. Unit 3. Pages 59-75 in P. Harper, editor. Furbearer management 

report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 2006-30 June 2009. Alaska Department of 

Fish and Game. Project 7.0 Juneau, Alaska. 

Person, D. K. and B. D. Logan. 2012. A spatial analysis of wolf harvest and harvest risk on 

Prince of Wales and associated islands, Southeast Alaska. Final wildlife research report. 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, AK. USA. 

Suring, L.H., R.W. Flynn, and E.J. DeGayner. 1992. Habitat capability model for marten in 

Southeast Alaska: winter habitat, in L.H. Suring, 1993, Habitat capability models for 

wildlife in Southeast Alaska. USDA Forest Service, Juneau, AK. 

Suring, L. H., D. C. Crocker-Bedford, R. W. Flynn, C. S. Hale, G. C. Iverson, M. D, 

Kerchoff, T. E. Schenck, L.C. Shea, and K. Titus. 1993. A Proposed Strategy for 

Maintaining Well-Distributed, Viable Populations of Wildlife Associated With OldGrowth Forests in Southeast Alaska. Report to an Interagency Committee. Juneau, Alaska: 

USDA, Forest Service, Alaska Region. 

USDA Office of the Secretary of Agriculture. 2010. News Release No. 0288.10. May 26, 

Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision New Information since the 2009 FEIS – APPENDIX ROD-3  A3-55 
 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ROD-3 

2010. 

USDA Office of the Secretary of Agriculture. 2013. Memorandum 1044-009 “Addressing 

Sustainable Forestry in Southeast Alaska” July 2, 2013 

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Tongass National Forest Land and Resource Management 

Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, and Record of Decision. R10-MB-603a-d 

(all volumes). USDA Forest Service, Alaska Region. 

USDA Forest Service. 2007. Navy Timber Sale Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 

R10-MB-572a and b. Wrangell Ranger District, Wrangell, AK. 

USDA Forest Service. 2007. Navy Timber Sale Final Environmental Impact Statement. 

R10-MB-632. Wrangell Ranger District, Wrangell, AK. 

A3-56  APPENDIX ROD- 3 - New Information since the 2009 FEIS Navy Timber Sale Record of Decision 
 

 

 

 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for
 

employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable,
 

political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is derived from
 

any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by 

the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.)
 

To File an Employment Complaint:
 

If you wish to file an employment complaint, you must contact your agency's EEO Counselor (PDF) within 45 days of the date of the
 

alleged discriminatory act, event, or in the case of a personnel action. Additional information can be found online 

at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_file.html.
 

To File a Program Complaint:
 

If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form
 

(PDF), found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request
 

the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or
 

letter to us by mail at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.,
 

Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, by fax (202) 690-7442 or email at program.intake@usda.gov.
 

Persons with Disabilities:
 

Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and who wish to file either an EEO or program complaint, 

please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 or (800) 845-6136 (in Spanish).
 

Persons with disabilities who wish to file a program complaint, please see information above on how to contact us by mail directly or
 

by email. If you require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please 

contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
 

Federal Recycling Program
 

Printed on Recycled Paper