USDA Forest Service 

Black Hills National Forest 

Mystic Ranger District 

Rapid City, South Dakota 

CALUMET PROJECT AREA 

DRAFT 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 
Commonly Used Acronyms and Abbreviations 

ARC At-Risk-Community 

BA Basal Area 

BF Board Foot 

BHNF Black Hills National Forest 

BMP Best Management Practices 

CCF Cubic Hundred Feet 

CDA Connected Disturbed Area 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CF Cubic Feet 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CMAI Culmination of Mean Annual 

Increment 

CPUA Concentrated Public Use Area 

CWD Coarse Woody Debris 

CWPP Community Wildfire Protection 

Plan 

DBH Diameter Breast Height 

DEIS Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement 

EA Environmental Analysis 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

EPA Environmental Protection 

Agency 

FEIS Final Environmental Impact 

Statement 

FLMPA Federal Land Management 

Policy Act 

FP Forest Plan 

FRCC Fire Regime Condition Class 

FRTA National Forest Roads and 

Trails Act 

FS Forest Service 

FSH Forest Service Handbook 

FSM Forest Service Manual 

GIS Geographic Information System 

GPS Global Positioning System 

HFRA Healthy Forests Restoration Act 

ID Team Interdisciplinary Team 

MA Management Area 

MBF Thousand Board Feet 

MIS Management Indicator Species 

MMBF Million Board Feet 

MPB Mountain Pine Beetle 

MVUM Motorized Vehicle Use Map 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NFMA National Forest Management Act 

NFS National Forest System 

NFSR National Forest System Road 

OHV Off Highway Vehicle 

ROD Record of Decision 

S&G Standard(s) and Guideline(s) 

SDGF&P South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer 

SOLC Species of Local Concern 

SS Structural Stage 

T&E Threatened and Endangered 

TMP Travel Management Plan 

TSI Timber Stand Improvement 

USDA United States Department of 

Agriculture 

USFWS United States Fish and 

Wildlife Service 

WUI Wildland-Urban Interface 

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

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

orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any 

public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative 

means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center 

at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 

Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is 

an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page i 

Calumet Project Area 

Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement 

Pennington County, South Dakota

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service 

Cooperating Agencies: None 

Responsible Official: Robert J. Thompson, District Ranger 

8221 South Highway 16 

Rapid City, South Dakota 57702 

For Information Contact: Lou Conroy, Team Leader 

8221 South Highway 16 

Rapid City, South Dakota 57702 

(605) 343-1567 

Abstract: The Mystic Ranger District of the Black Hills National Forest has prepared a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. The Mystic Ranger District 

proposes to implement multiple resource management actions within the Calumet Project Area as 

guided by the Black Hills National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) as 

amended, by the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) and supported by the National Fire Plan, 

the President’s Healthy Forest Initiative, and by other National level policy. The focus of the 

actions proposed is to manage the vegetation to reduce the threat to ecosystem components, 

including forest resources, from the existing insect and disease (mountain pine beetle) epidemic 

and to reduce hazardous fuels in order to minimize the potential for large-scale severe wildfires. 

Two alternatives are considered in detail. Alternative A is the No Action Alternative. Alternative 

B is the proposed action. Alternative B uses landscape level thinning and pine harvest to break up 

the large area of continuous, dense forest and lower the mountain pine beetle (MPB) and wildfire 

hazard. This Draft EIS discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts 

resulting from the No Action and the proposed action alternative. At this time, the Forest Service 

has identified Alternative B as the preferred alternative. 

Reviewers should provide the Forest Service with their comments during the review period of 

the draft environmental impact statement. This will enable the Forest Service to analyze and 

respond to the comments at one time and to use information acquired in the preparation of the 

final environmental impact statement, thus avoiding undue delay in the decision making process. 

Reviewers have an obligation to structure their participation in the National Environmental 

Policy Act process so that it is meaningful and alerts the agency to the reviewers’ position and 

contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). 

Environmental objections that could have been raised at the draft stage may be waived if not 

raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement. City of Angoon v. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page ii 

Hodel (9th Circuit, l986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. 

Wis. 1980). Comments on the draft environmental impact statement should be specific and 

should address the adequacy of the statement and the merits of the alternatives discussed (40 

CFR 1503.3). 

Send Comments To: Robert J. Thompson, District Ranger 

Calumet Project 

 8221 South Highway 16 

 Rapid City, South Dakota 57702 

 email: comments-rocky-mountain-black-hills-mystic@fs.fed.us
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page iii 

SUMMARY 

The Black Hills National Forest, Mystic Ranger District proposes to implement multiple resource 

management actions within the Calumet Project Area. This proposal is guided by the Black Hills 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan as amended by the Phase II Amendment; the 

statutory authority and direction provided by the Healthy Forests Restoration Act; and supported by 

the National Fire Plan; The 10 Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan agreed to by the 

Western Governor’s Association; and The President’s Healthy Forest Initiative. 

The project area lies approximately six miles west of Rapid City, SD. The project area encompasses 

approximately 31,772 acres, consisting of 27,617 acres of National Forest System lands and 4,155 

acres of interspersed private lands. The forest condition is representative of a ponderosa pine fire 

adapted ecosystem that has been managed for multiple-use objectives for decades. 

The focus of the actions proposed are designed to treat vegetation on a broad landscape scale to 

reduce the threat to ecosystem components, including forest resources, from the existing insect and 

disease (mountain pine beetle) epidemic and reduce the potential for severe large-scale wildfire. 

There is a need to slow or appreciably halt the ongoing development and spread of mountain pine 

beetle (MPB) in the project area. The implications of continued spread of this epidemic include: 

increased tree mortality across the landscape; further accumulation of hazardous fuels and increased 

potential for severe large-scale wildfires threatening the values of the Wildland-Urban Interface 

(WUI) within the area and beyond; major changes in the scenery; and alteration of wildlife habitat. 

According to Schmid et al. (2007), the most important aspect of managing mature ponderosa pine 

stands in the Black Hills National Forest is minimizing the MPB-caused mortality. The only 

effective long-term strategy to minimize MPB-cause mortality is controlling stand conditions 

through silvicultural means over large landscapes and monitoring areas of beetle buildup (USDA 

Forest Service 2012a). 

The ongoing MPB epidemic is of foremost concern in the project area. This epidemic is killing 

mature pine trees, resulting in stand replacement on a landscape scale. Locally (and nationally), the 

public is demanding action to reduce the risk of MPB affecting their lands, as well as, reducing 

potential for large-scale wildfires on public lands. The Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) of 

2003, represents the culmination of a number of National level policy documents and efforts

developed to address this issue. Guided by the Forest Plan and the HFRA, the Calumet Project 

proposed action has been developed to treat vegetation on a broad landscape scale to reduce the 

threat to ecosystem components from the existing insect and disease (MPB) epidemic and reduce the 

potential for large-scale severe wildfires. Ultimately, the intent is to limit effects to the environment 

from MPB and reduce the potential for loss of property or life due to large-scale wildfire. 

Through varied public involvement and collaboration efforts, comments on the proposed action, 

potential concerns, and opportunities for managing the Calumet Project Area were solicited from 

Forest Service resource specialists, tribal representatives, members of the public, other public 

agencies, adjacent property owners, and organizations. Methods used to request comments 

included: Publishing the Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare and EIS in the Federal Register on 

October 24, 2011; mailing a scoping letter that solicited comments to approximately 542 

interested parties; conducted public meetings; and meeting with interested individuals and parties. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page iv 

Comments received during the scoping process were used to help in defining issues, develop 

alternatives and mitigation measures, and analyze effects. Through review and analysis of the 

scoping comments and input, the Calumet Interdisciplinary Team (ID Team) identified three (3) 

prevailing or key issues related to the proposed activities. The three key issues include: 

mountain pine beetle, wildfire and fuels hazard, and vegetation and wildlife habitat diversity. 

These issues allowed the ID Team to clarify components of the proposed action that were not 

made explicit during the scoping phase of the project. No concerns raised merited the 

development of additional action alternatives. The alternatives analyzed in detail in this EIS are 

briefly described as follows: 

Alternative A (No Action) – The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the study of 

the no action alternative, and to use it as a basis for comparing the effects of the proposed action and 

other alternatives. This alternative assumes no implementation of any elements of the proposed 

action. However, such things as ongoing fire suppression efforts, noxious weed treatments, and 

recurring road maintenance on Forest roads would continue as directed by the Forest Plan. 

The no action alternative represents no attempt to actively respond to the purpose and need for 

action. For example, there would be no effort to modify existing vegetation or related fuels 

conditions in the project area. The effort to reduce the widespread MPB epidemic and associated 

fuel loads would not be implemented. 

Alternative B (Proposed Action) – Alternative B is the modified proposed action and was 

developed in response to the purpose and need. Alternative B is designed to treat the vegetation to 

reduce the potential for mountain pine beetle (MPB) infestations. It also provides for landscape 

level and some private property boundary fuel breaks, thereby lowering the potential for largescale wildfires. Alternative B proposes to expand hardwoods and reduce pine encroachment in 

historic meadows, thereby expanding natural fuel breaks and increasing biodiversity within the 

Calumet Project Area. 

Vegetative management in this alternative is characterized by a number of specific treatments. 

There would be commercial timber harvest and non-commercial thinning (estimated 19,304 acres), 

which opens up forest stands with the objective of reducing the potential for MPB infestations and 

large-scale wildfire. Sanitation harvest to remove infested trees may be conducted in areas near or 

adjacent to identified stands in order to limit the expansion of MPB populations. Most harvest 

would be conducted using whole tree logging methods in order to reduce after-harvest fuel loading. 

Natural fuel breaks such as meadows and hardwoods would be treated to expand and enhance their 

ability to moderate wildfire and provide for wildlife habitat. Prescribed burning (approximately 

15,990 acres) to reduce fuels and enhance natural fuel breaks is planned in this alternative. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page v 

Table 0-1 Effects to Key Issues by Alternative on NFS lands using Measurement Indicators

1. Mountain Pine Beetle Existing 

Condition Alt A Alt B 

MPB Risk Rating – Low (acres) 10,516 21,225 21,242 

MPB Risk Rating – High (acres) 14,045 3,336 2,114 

2. Wildfire and Fuels Hazard Existing 

Condition Alt A Alt B 

Fire Hazard Rating (Very High/High) 13,957 13,957 3,382 

Total Mechanical Treatments (acres) 0 14,597 

Roadside Treatments (acres) 0 381 

Shaded Fuel Breaks (acres) 0 375 

Prescribed Broadcast Burning (acres) 0 15,990 

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity Alt A Alt B 

Hardwood Retention (acres) 0 1,254 

Hardwood Restoration (acres) 0 1,054 

Meadows/Grasslands Retention/Restoration (acres) 0 1,293 

Projected Habitat Structural Stages for the Project MA 5.1 and 5.4 in acres: 

Structural 

Stage 

Existing Condition Alternative A Alternative B 

MA 5.1 MA 5.4 MA 5.1 MA 5.4 MA 5.1 MA 5.4 

1 221 591 221 591 221 524 

2 18 186 645 4,547 605 1,888 

3A 154 875 1,816 3,305 1,289 5,195 

3B 245 1,689 95 559 88 637 

3C 138 547 0 0 0 0 

4A 1,119 4,421 1,280 5,719 1,936 6,632 

4B 2,262 5,486 722 2,140 376 771 

4C 622 2,841 0 0 31 95 

5 0 225 0 0 0 185 

*Existing Condition column represents current conditions. Alt A column represents projected conditions 3-5 years in 

the future due to MPB-caused mortality (USDA Forest Service 2012a). The Alt B column represents conditions 3-5 

years in the future due to mechanical treatments and MPB-caused mortality. 

The Calumet Project purpose and need (see Chapter 1) provides the focus and scope of the proposal 

as related to National and Forest level policy and direction, plus the statutory mandate provided by 

the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. Given this purpose and need, the Deciding Official (District 

Ranger) reviews the proposed action, the issues identified during scoping, the alternatives, and the 

environmental consequences of implementing the proposal and alternatives disclosed in this EIS. 

This forms the basis for the Deciding Official to make the following determinations: 

• Whether or not the proposed activities and alternatives address the issues, are responsive to 

National policy/guidance/law and Forest Plan direction, and meet the purpose of and need for 

action in the Calumet Project Area. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page vi 

• Whether or not the information in this analysis is sufficient to implement proposed activities. 

• Which actions, if any, to approve (decide which alternative or mix of activities to implement). 

• Whether there is a need for site-specific amendments to existing Forest Plan direction. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page vii 

Table of Contents 

SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................... iii

CHAPTER 1 PROPOSED ACTION and PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ..................11

DOCUMENT STRUCTURE........................................................................................................11

BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................12

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ...................................................................................................14

Forest Plan Direction ................................................................................................................14

Management Areas ...................................................................................................................15

Forest Plan Goals and Objectives .............................................................................................15

Management Area Specific Goals and Objectives....................................................................18

Other Direction .........................................................................................................................19

PURPOSE OF and NEED for ACTION .......................................................................................21

PROPOSED ACTION ..................................................................................................................21

DECISION FRAMEWORK .........................................................................................................22

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT and COLLABORATION ................................................................22

ISSUES .........................................................................................................................................23

1. Mountain Pine Beetle ...........................................................................................................24

2. Wildfire and Fuels Hazard ....................................................................................................24

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity ...........................................................................25

CHAPTER 2 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION ................................27

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................27

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL..........................................................................27

Alternative A – No Action ........................................................................................................28

Alternative B – Proposed Action ..............................................................................................28

DESIGN CRITERIA ....................................................................................................................31

MONITORING .............................................................................................................................31

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED but ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED STUDY ...............31

COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................................33

1. Mountain Pine Beetle Issue ..................................................................................................33

2. Wildfire and Fuel Hazard Issue ...........................................................................................34

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity Issue .................................................................35

CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT and ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .......39

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................39

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .....................................................................................................40

WATERSHED, GEOLOGY, and SOILS .................................................................................40

Geologic Resources ..............................................................................................................43

Ground Water........................................................................................................................47

Soil Resources .......................................................................................................................52

Water Resources ...................................................................................................................85

TRANSPORTATION .............................................................................................................117

MINERALS ............................................................................................................................125

BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT ..............................................................................................127

VEGETATION .......................................................................................................................127

FIRE and FUELS ....................................................................................................................147

RANGE ...................................................................................................................................164
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page viii 

NOXIOUS and INVASIVE WEEDS .....................................................................................172

WILDLIFE ..............................................................................................................................175

Habitat Communities and Habitat Features ........................................................................176

Special Status Species .........................................................................................................181

Management Indicator Species ...........................................................................................184

Species of Local Concern ...................................................................................................194

Migratory Birds ...................................................................................................................211

FISHERIES .............................................................................................................................215

BOTANY ................................................................................................................................218

SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................................227

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................................227

SCENIC QUALITY................................................................................................................230

RECREATION USE ...............................................................................................................238

LANDS and SPECIAL USES ................................................................................................240

HERITAGE.............................................................................................................................242

SOCIAL ..................................................................................................................................245

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES .................249

SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY ...............................................250

UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS ..................................................................................250

CHAPTER 4 BIBLIOGRAPY/REFERENCES .............................................................................251

CHAPTER 5 GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................275

CHAPTER 6 LIST OF PREPARERS ............................................................................................297

CHAPTER 7 INDEX ......................................................................................................................301

List of Tables 

Table 0-1 Effects to Key Issues by Alternative on NFS lands using Measurement Indicators ...... v

Table 1-1 Management Area Designations and Acreage in the Project Area .............................. 15

Table 2-1 Effects to Key Issues by Alternative ............................................................................ 37

Table 2-2 Treatment Outputs by Alternative ................................................................................ 38

Table 3-1 Average Monthly and Annual Precipitation (inches) for Climate Stations Near the 

Calumet Project Area ............................................................................................................ 42

Table 3-2 Dominant Soil Map Units in the Calumet Project and Their Respective Percentage of 

the Project Area..................................................................................................................... 53

Table 3-3 Soil Map Units in the Calumet Project Area with Elevated Risk of Erosion ............... 62

Table 3-4 Past Wildfires within the Calumet Project Area ........................................................... 72

Table 3-5 Proposed Activity Acres on Sensitive Soils for Each Alternative Compared with 

Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................... 82

Table 3-6 Miles of New Construction (New), Including Cable Roads, Temporary Road 

Construction (Temp), and Reconstruction and Maintenance (Recon/Mntc) Affecting 

Various Soil Properties for Each Alternative........................................................................ 83

Table 3-7 Sixth Level Watersheds (HUC12) That Contain Portions of the Calumet Project Area

............................................................................................................................................... 87

Table 3-8 Miles of Perennial, Intermittent, and Ephemeral Streams in the Calumet Project Area

............................................................................................................................................... 91
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page ix 

Table 3-9 Beneficial Uses for Streams and Water Bodies in the Calumet Project Area (SD DENR 

1999) ................................................................................................................................... 100

Table 3-10 Mapped Wetlands in the Calumet Project Area ....................................................... 109

Table 3-11 Comparison of Potential for Adverse Impacts to Water Resources or Improvements 

to Existing Water-Related Problems for Each Alternative ................................................. 115

Table 3-12 Existing Transportation System ............................................................................... 117

Table 3-13 Travel Management Plan Designated Routes/Trail Miles That are Open ................ 118

Table 3-14 Road Density ............................................................................................................ 118

Table 3-15 Annually Maintained Routes .................................................................................... 119

Table 3-16 Action Alternatives – Activity in Miles and Estimated Cost* ................................. 123

Table 3-17 Active Mining Claims within the Calumet Project Area.......................................... 126

Table 3-18 Calumet Project Mountain Pine Beetle Hazard Rating – Ponderosa Pine ............... 129

Table 3-19 Forest-wide Conditions by Management Area Ponderosa Pine Stands – Structural 

Distribution ......................................................................................................................... 130

Table 3-20 Forest-Wide Conditions by Management Area ........................................................ 131

Table 3-21 Existing Condition Cover Types of National Forest System Lands......................... 131

Table 3-22 Calumet Ponderosa Pine Structural Stage Distribution: Existing vs. Alternative A 135

Table 3-23 Forest-Wide Ponderosa Pine Structural Stage Distribution: Existing vs. Post 

Treatment ............................................................................................................................ 144

Table 3-24 Forest-wide Conditions by Management Area and Alternative. Ponderosa Pine 

Structural Stage 4 with Tree Size Class of Very Large ...................................................... 145

Table 3-25 Calumet Project Area Cover Type Composition ...................................................... 146

Table 3-26 Crown Fire Hazard with Structural Stages ............................................................... 149

Table 3-27 Calumet Project Area (NFS lands) Fire Hazard Ratings .......................................... 150

Table 3-28 Alternative B Fire Hazard Rating (acres) for Calumet Project Area Using Structural 

Stage Data ........................................................................................................................... 157

Table 3-29 Example of Silviculturalist’s Prescription for Horse Nugget Prescribed Burn Plan 161

Table 3-30 Range Program within the Calumet Project Area .................................................... 164

Table 3-31 Identification of Special Status Species and Rationale for Project Level Analysis. 

Species Listed in Alphabetical Order within Major Life Form Groups. ............................ 181

Table 3-32 Region 2 Sensitive Plant Species with Suitable Habitat in Calumet Project Area ... 220

Table 3-33 Plant Species of Local Concern with Suitable Habitat in Calumet Project Area ..... 221

Table 3-34 Other Plant Species of Interest Known to Occur in the Calumet Project Area ........ 222

Table 3-35 Habitat Types for Region 2 Sensitive Species Analyzed in Effects Analysis .......... 223

Table 3-36 Miles of Routes in the Calumet Project Area Designated for Motorized Vehicle Use 

By the Black Hills National Forest Travel Management Plan Record of Decision, and the 

2011 Motor Vehicle Use Map............................................................................................. 228

List of Figures 

Figure 1-1 Calumet Project Area Vicinity Map ............................................................................ 12

Figure 3-1 Five-Year Running Average of Precipitation in the Black Hills Region Between April 

and October, For the Period of Record From 1925 to 2010 (modified from Bunkers 2011) 43

Figure 3-2 Simplified Cross-Section Schematic of Ground Water in the Black Hills (Carter et al., 

2003) ..................................................................................................................................... 49

Figure 3-3Existing Mountain Pine Beetle Hazard Rating in Calumet Project Area................... 129
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page x 

Figure 3-4 No Action MPB Hazard Rating ................................................................................ 136

Figure 3-5 Alternative B MPB Hazard Rating ........................................................................... 143

Figure 3-6 Calumet Project Area (NFS lands) Existing Fire Hazard ......................................... 150

Figure 3-7 Existing Fire Hazard in the WUI .............................................................................. 151

Figure 3-8 Calumet Project Area Existing Fire Hazard .............................................................. 154

Figure 3-9 Alternative B Fire Hazard Rating (%) for Calumet Project Area Using Structural 

Stage Data ........................................................................................................................... 157

Figure 3-10 Alternative B Fire Hazard Rating Map for Calumet Project Area .......................... 158

Figure 3-11 Alternative B Prescribed Fire Treatments for the Calumet Project Area ................ 159

Figure 3-12 Horse Nugget Prescribed Fire ................................................................................. 160

Figure 3-13 Fire Hazard Comparison of Alternatives ................................................................ 162

Figure 3-14 February, 2009 – US Hwy. 16/385 Looking North (approximately 1,500 ft. North of 

the Entrance into Crazy Horse Memorial) .......................................................................... 234

Figure 3-15 September, 2011 – US Hwy. 16/385 Looking North (From Approximately the Same 

Location as the Previous Photo) ......................................................................................... 234

Appendices 

Appendix A - Public Involvement and Collaboration........................................... A-1 

Appendix B - Design Criteria, Mitigation, and Monitoring................................... B-1 

Appendix C - Past, Present, Foreseeable Activities.............................................. C-1 

Appendix D - Summary BA/BE Wildlife/Fisheries and Botany.............................. D-1 

Appendix E - Maps........................................................................... ......... E-1 

Map 1 – Vicinity 

Map 2 – Watersheds 

Map 3 – Management Areas 

Map 4 – Alternative B Treatments 

Map 5 – Alternatives B Prescribed Burn 

Map 6 – Alternative A Travel Management 

Map 7 – Alternative B Transportation 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 11 

CHAPTER 1 PROPOSED ACTION and PURPOSE OF 

AND NEED FOR ACTION 

DOCUMENT STRUCTURE 

The Mystic Ranger District of the Black Hills National Forest has prepared this Environmental 

Impact Statement in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the 

Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA), and other relevant Federal and State laws and 

regulations. This Environmental Impact Statement discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative 

environmental impacts that would result from both the Action and No Action alternatives. The 

document is organized into seven chapters followed by Appendices A – E. 

Chapter 1. Proposed Action and Purpose of and Need for Action: The chapter includes 

information related to background of the project proposal, issues, the purpose of and need for the

project, and a description of the agency’s proposal for addressing that purpose and need. This 

section also details how the Forest Service involved the public, how the public responded and what 

issues were generated regarding the proposal. 

Chapter 2. Alternatives, including the Proposed Action: This chapter provides a more detailed 

description of the proposed action. The proposed action (Alternative B) was developed based on 

addressing the purpose and need. This chapter also provides a discussion of design criteria and 

monitoring required. Finally, this section includes summary tables of the environmental 

consequences and a comparison of effects associated with each alternative. 

Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences: This chapter describes the 

environmental effects of implementing the Action and No Action alternatives. This analysis 

documentation is organized by resource area, e.g., Fire and Fuels, Wildlife Habitat, Vegetation, etc. 

Chapter 4. Bibliography/References: The bibliography provides a list of references supporting 

the documentation in the EIS. 

Chapter 5. Glossary: The glossary provides a list and explanation of key words, acronyms, and 

terminology used throughout the EIS. 

Chapter 6. List of Preparers: This chapter provides a list of preparers involved during the 

development of the environmental impact statement.

Chapter 7. Index: The index references page numbers for many key document topics and words. 

Appendices: The appendices provide more detailed information to support the documentation and 

analysis presented in the EIS. 

Additional documentation, including more detailed analyses of project area resources, may be found 

in the Project File located at Mystic Ranger District office in Rapid City, South Dakota. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 12 

BACKGROUND 

The Black Hills of South Dakota is a heavily settled area. There are numerous communities 

scattered throughout the Black Hills, along with a complex pattern of private land interspersed 

with National Forest System land. Many of these private lands have housing developments or 

isolated houses or structures. Others are rapidly becoming residential developments. This poses 

unique challenges to the management of National Forest System lands, as the effects of such 

management greatly affect our neighbors, and vice versa. Figure 1-1 displays the location of the 

Calumet Project Area. 

Figure 1-1 Calumet Project Area Vicinity Map
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 13 

The composition of today’s vegetation is more the result of a combination of aggressive fire 

suppression and past management activities than from natural events. Photographs and records 

from the late 1800’s and early 1900’s indicate that today’s forest is more continuous, uniform and 

dense than what has historically occurred. There are more pine trees in this area than existed under 

natural conditions, and less meadows/grasslands and hardwoods due to pine tree encroachment. 

A MPB epidemic is rapidly expanding within and adjacent to the Calumet Project Area. This 

epidemic is killing large numbers of mature pine trees. This epidemic is changing vegetation 

structure and wildlife habitat on a landscape scale. As trees are killed they fall to the ground adding 

dead, dry fuels within an area already rated as having high wildfire hazard. The rate of infestation is 

increasing and the epidemic is likely to spread over a large area over the next three to five years. 

MPB prefer stands of dense, mature pine trees, which is abundant and continuous throughout the 

area. Approximately 57 percent of the project area pine stands are at high risk for MPB infestation. 

The primary management tool for reducing MPB-caused mortality is to remove the infested trees 

and to reduce the density of the remaining trees through mechanical thinning. 

Historically, insects and fire were a major force in shaping and contributing to the structure and 

composition of the ponderosa pine forests of the western United States, including the Black Hills. 

Insect infestations, especially mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae), have played a role in 

thinning dense stands. 

Since 1970, over 200 ignitions have been recorded within the Calumet Project Area, burning 

approximately 117 acres. The project area has also seen some relatively large fires burn within 

its boundaries, though the ignitions were outside the boundaries. The most recent was the Battle 

Creek fire of 2002 (13,495 total acres) which burned 1,492 acres within the project boundary. 

The Horse Creek fire of 1991, an escaped prescribed fire, burned 1,968 acres. And of historical

note, the McVey Fire of 1939 (20,758 total acres) burned approximately 4,592 acres within the 

project boundary. Nearly 14,916 acres of prescribed fire has been implemented since 1984. 

Between the years 1991 and 2011, 10,955 acres were burned under prescription. However, the 

bulk of these acres burned in the first ten years of this period and were burned again in the 

second half. Consequently, approximately 10,221 acres or 62% of the project area has not been 

significantly affected by fire within the past 100+ years. 

Large wildfires (fires greater than 300 acres) burned about 147,900 acres during the period from 

1900 to 1980 in the Black Hills. Since 1980, a dramatic increase in acreage burned has occurred. 

Recent large wildfires across the Black Hills National Forest include the Jasper Fire, Roger’s Shack, 

Elk Mountain II, Battle Creek, Grizzly Gulch, Red Point, Ricco, Cement, East Ridge, and Alabaugh 

Fires have burned over approximately 296,000 acres. These intense fires covered large areas, 

moving as far as eleven miles in one day and as fast as five miles in three hours. 

Although wildland fires are natural occurrences, they can conflict with land management objectives 

by impacting soil productivity, increasing conditions for soil erosion, expanding noxious weeds, 

harming some plant and animal species, reducing visual quality and recreation values, and 

destroying valuable timber resources. In addition, large wildfires threaten the lives of residents and 

firefighters, destroy houses and other private property, and contribute to substantial impact to the 

local economy and private landowners. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 14 

The Pennington County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) designates most of the 

project area as wildland-urban interface. Private property is scattered throughout the Calumet 

Project Area with greatest density on the east side towards Rapid City. The latest numbers from 

Pennington county show 379 address points within the project boundary. Including addresses 

outside of the boundary, within one half mile, the number nearly doubles to 724 address points 

(Madden 2011). Private property accounts for 4,155 acres of the total project area. Rockerville 

is the only At Risk Community located within the project boundaries, however, Rapid City

(adjacent to the east), Keystone (two miles south), and Hill City (three miles southwest) are also 

listed in the National Register of At Risk Communities (Federal Register 2001). Development of 

private property ranges from single family home sites to housing subdivisions. New homes and 

the subsequent infrastructure are continually being constructed within and adjacent to the project 

boundary resulting in increased values at risk. Recreation plays a major role in management of 

the Calumet area. Sheridan Lake concentrated public use area (CPUA) is within the project 

boundary and is a focal point for summertime recreation. Two campgrounds, a marina, three 

picnic areas, two trailheads, one scenic overlook (accessible by non-motorized travel), a summer 

home group with nine cabins, and an un-official shooting area are also present. Barretta Road 

shooting area receives heavy use year round and sometimes can result in multiple human caused 

fire starts every year. US Highway 16, a major tourist route, makes up a major portion of the 

southern boundary and Sheridan Lake road cuts through the project area, as well. 

Approximately 50 percent of the Calumet Project Area is rated as having a high to very high 

wildfire hazard. This rating is based mainly on crown fire hazard. The ongoing MPB epidemic is 

making this situation worse by replacing live, green standing fuels with large amounts of dead and 

dry fuels. These dead fuels are slow to decompose in this dry area and would be a fire hazard for 

the next several decades. Fires burning in these heavy fuels would be difficult and dangerous to 

suppress. The primary management tools to reduce fuel loads and wildfire hazards are to 

mechanically thin dense stands with high wildfire hazard, remove MPB infested trees, remove 

activity fuels from the forest floor, retain and expand hardwoods and meadows/grasslands, and 

conduct prescribed burning to eliminate ground and surface fuels. 

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION 

The following sections provide an overview of the management direction applicable to the 

Calumet Project. 

Forest Plan Direction 

The Black Hills National Forest programmatic management direction is the 1997 Revised Land 

and Resource Management Plan (LRMP or Forest Plan), as amended by the Phase II Amendment 

(October 2005), and supported by the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Phase 

II Amendment to the 1997 LRMP. The Forest Plan is required by the rules implementing the 

Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Act of 1974 (RPA), as amended by the National 

Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA). 

The Forest Plan as amended, provides revised and new goals, objectives, and standards and guidelines 

focused on protecting communities, property, and forest values by reducing severe insect infestations 

and fire hazards; conserving viable plant and animal species and habitats for the long term supported 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 15 

by the best available science; designating research natural areas; and providing for the continuing 

viability of the existing forest products industry and infrastructure essential to cost effectively 

managing vegetation on the Black Hills National Forest. 

The purpose of the Forest Plan (FP) is to provide management direction for multiple use and sustained 

yield of goods and services from National Forest System lands in an environmentally sound manner. 

Moreover, the Forest Plan provides overall management allocations, goals and objectives (FP Chapter 

I), as well as associated standard and guidelines (FP Chapter II) for management. 

Management Areas 

The Forest Plan sets management allocations for specific uses of land (Management Areas) within 

the Forest to meet multiple use objectives (FP Chapter III). The Calumet Project Interdisciplinary 

(ID) Team reviewed Management Area (MA) direction and confirmed that no new information 

existed that would require reconsideration of Forest Plan resource allocations. The MAs designated 

in the Forest Plan for the Calumet Project Area are listed in Table 1-1. 

Table 1-1 Management Area Designations and Acreage in the Project Area 

MANAGEMENT AREA ACRES NFS % 

3.7 - Late Successional Forest Landscape 780 2.8% 

5.1 - Resource Production Emphasis 5,621 20.4% 

5.4 - Big Game Winter Range Emphasis 18,259 66.1% 

8.2 - Developed Recreation Complexes 2,686 9.7% 

Total NFS 27,617 100.00% 

Private 4,155 

Total Gross 31,772 

Forest Plan Goals and Objectives 

The Forest Plan establishes eleven multiple use goals and associated objectives for management of 

the Forest. Goals 1-4, 10 and 11 are directed toward natural resource objectives for multiple use 

management of the Forest. Goal 3 and 5-9 provide socio-economic emphasis for management of 

the Forest. The goals and objectives, applicable to specific resource management issues needing 

resolution, provide the basic direction for defining the purpose and need and subsequently 

developing the project proposal. The eleven Forest Plan goals are discussed in Chapter I of the 

Forest Plan. The Responsible Official for the Calumet Project has chosen to propose resource 

management actions that respond to Forest Plan Goals 2, 3, 7, and 10. 

 Goal 2. Provide for a variety of life through management of biologically diverse ecosystems. 

 Goal 3. Provide for sustained commodity uses in an environmentally acceptable manner. 

 Goal 7. Emphasize cooperation with individuals, organizations and other agencies while 

coordinating planning and project implementation. 

 Goal 10. Establish and maintain a mosaic of vegetation conditions to reduce occurrences 

of catastrophic fire, insect, and disease events, and facilitate insect and disease 

management and firefighting capability. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 16 

Associated with these goals are specific resource objectives. Comparing objectives to current 

conditions is integral to defining the purpose and need and developing the proposed action. 

Objectives providing management emphasis for this project are summarized below. Note that 

other Forest Plan goals and numerous objectives not mentioned in detail also provide guidance and 

are achieved to varying degrees as a function of project implementation and effect. 

Goal 2 - Provide for a variety of life through management of biologically diverse ecosystems. 

Objective 201. “Manage for a minimum of 92,000 acres of aspen (double current aspen acres)... 

The highest priority for hardwood restoration is where conifers (e.g., spruce and pine) have outcompeted aspen adjacent to riparian systems that once supported beaver...” 

• There is an opportunity to increase/maintain hardwood communities by reducing pine 

competition within these stands. In addition, opportunities exist to enhance and expand 

hardwood inclusions by opening canopies and removing conifers. 

Objective 205. “Manage for 122,000 acres of prairie grassland and 3,600 acres of meadow 

during the life of the Plan. Restored acres will not be considered suitable for timber production.” 

• There is an opportunity to increase the acres of interior grassland communities by 

removing pine encroachment, and also to enhance isolated grasslands by opening 

canopies through mechanical thinning and prescribed burning. 

Objective 221. “Conserve or enhance habitat for R2 sensitive species and species of local 

concern (SOLC)...” 

• There is an opportunity to conserve R2 sensitive species and SOLC habitat by removing 

MPB infested trees and thinning stands to reduce insect damage and wildfire hazard. 

Objective 234. “Create or maintain a moderate-to-low crown-fire hazard adjacent to occurrences 

of R2 sensitive and species of local concern...where long-term persistence is at risk from a single 

high-intensity fire.” 

• There is an opportunity to reduce wildfire hazard on NFS lands in the project area 

currently estimated at 50% high to very high. 

Objective 238. “...objectives for management indicator species (MIS) ...” 

• There is an opportunity to increase Aspen communities and increase the number of acres 

of stands with a very large tree size rating. 

Goal 3 - Provide for sustained commodity uses in an environmentally acceptable manner. 

Objective 302. “Maintain rangelands in satisfactory range condition.” 

• There is an opportunity to utilize prescribed broadcast burning to increase grasses and forbs. 

Objective 304. “On lands not identified as suitable and available for timber harvest, timber 

volume may be offered as a by-product of other vegetation management objectives. This volume 

would be offered in addition to the ASQ.” 

• There is an opportunity to do noncommercial thinning (less than 9 inch diameter trees) to 

reduce MPB hazard.
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 17 

Goal 7 - Emphasize cooperation with individuals, organizations and other agencies while 

coordinating planning and project implementation. 

Objective 701. “Continue to cooperate with interested parties and organizations in the 

development of plans and projects.” 

• There is an opportunity to work with the Counties, State, and private landowners to 

generate a broad base of support and/or a well informed public regarding project 

plan/design and project actions proposed and taken.

Objective 702. “Encourage cost sharing as part of cooperative efforts.” 

• There is an opportunity to work with the Counties, State, and private landowners on cost 

sharing in an "All Lands" approach to MPB in the Project Area. 

Objective 703. “Seek partnerships with other service providers – federal, state, county, local and 

private sector – to define complementary roles that best meet customer needs.” 

• There is an opportunity to coordinate with the Counties, State, and private landowners to 

partner and possibly cost-share in vegetation treatment and fuel reduction actions 

adjacent to and/or across mutual boundaries. 

Objective 704. “Consult with tribal governments, traditional practitioners, and other 

knowledgeable individuals to identify important areas of American Indian religious significance.” 

• There is an opportunity to utilize the ongoing BHNF process and project-specific 

consultation to provide mutually beneficial information exchange, cooperative and open 

relations, and maintains trust and credibility between the agency and tribal representatives. 

Goal 10 - Establish and maintain a mosaic of vegetative conditions to reduce the occurrences of 

catastrophic fire, insect, and disease events, and facilitate insect and disease management and 

firefighting capability. 

Objective 10-01. “Manage for 50 to 75 percent moderate-to-low fire hazard in the wildlandurban interface and reduce fire hazard within proximity of structures... Manage the remainder of 

the Forest for 50 percent moderate-to-low fire hazard...” 

• There is an opportunity to reduce existing fire hazard that currently exceeds objectives 

on NFS lands in the project area. 

Objective 10-04. “Reduce or otherwise treat fuels commensurate with risks (fire occurrence), 

hazard (fuel flammability), and land and resource values common to the area, using the criteria 

in Forest-wide Guideline 4110.”

• There is an opportunity to treat fuels and reduce hazards in the area. 

Objective 10-05. “Manage wildfires using the appropriate response based management area 

emphasis, existing values, risk of ignition, and fuel hazards within a given area.” 

• There is an opportunity to reduce existing and activity fuels to a manageable level 

thereby facilitating a proactive and effective response to wildfire. 

Objective 10-06. “Develop fuel management and protection strategies for intermixed land 

ownerships in partnership with private, state, and other federal agencies.” 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 18 

• There is an opportunity to coordinate with the State and Counties based on goals 

established in the Pennington County CWPP to reduce fuels on both public and private 

lands in order to reduce the potential for large wildfires that could affect homes, 

infrastructure, visual quality, timber and forest ecosystem values, and wildlife (including 

sensitive species) habitat in the area. 

Objective 10-07. “Where outbreaks of mountain pine beetle could present risks to management 

objectives for ponderosa pine, reduce acreage of ponderosa-pine stands that are in medium or 

high risk for infestation.” 

• There is an opportunity to respond to MPB infestations by removing infested trees and 

thinning pine trees to reduce the amount of high risk stands.

Management Area Specific Goals and Objectives 

Management 3.7 - Late Successional Forest Landscape 

Objective 3.7-201. “Manage each contiguous unit within this management area as late-successional 

landscape, so that late-successional structure is always present within some portion of each unit.” 

• An opportunity exists to enhance the late-successional character by thinning and treating 

stands infested with MPB. 

Guideline 3.7-2103. “Timber harvest may be used if necessary to move stands toward latesuccessional conditions.” 

• The opportunity exists in the Project Area to promote MA 3.7 characteristics by removing 

trees infested with MPB and promoting growth through silvicultural treatments. 

Management Area 5.1 - Resource Production Emphasis. 

Goal 5.1-201. “Manage tree stands to emphasize timber products, forage production, and water yield.” 

• There is an opportunity to manage vegetation for insect, fuels and fire hazard reduction 

while concurrently providing timber products, forage production, and contributing to 

increased water yield.

Objective 5.1-202. “While meeting other objectives for this management area, provide variety in 

stand sizes, shape, crown closure, age structure and interspersion.” 

• There is an opportunity to manage vegetation focused on reducing insect, fire and fuels hazards 

designed to be fully compatible with the objective of providing variety in the forested setting.

Objective 5.1-203. “Maintain or enhance hardwood shrub communities where biologically 

feasible, and within management objectives.” 

• There is an opportunity to manage vegetation geared to improve hardwoods and also 

contribute to the fuel break benefits that hardwoods naturally provide.

Objective 5.1-204. “Manage for the following percentages of structural stages in ponderosa pine 

across the management area in a variety of sizes and shapes.” (Reference structural stage table, 

LRMP, Phase II Amendment, Page III-67) 

• See opportunity statement (italics) under Objective 5.1-202 above. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 19 

Guideline 5.1-4101. “Utilize appropriate fuel treatment practices, including prescribed fire, to 

meet management objectives.” 

• There is an opportunity to utilize a full complement of fuel treatment tools (including 

prescribed fire) in accomplishing insect, fuels and fire hazard reduction objectives.

Management Area 5.4 - Big Game Winter Range Emphasis. 

Goal 5.4-201. “Manage tree stands for wildlife habitat and vegetative diversity.” 

• There is an opportunity to manage vegetation for insect, fuels and fire hazard reduction 

while concurrently benefiting wildlife habitat and vegetative diversity.

Objective 5.4-206. “Manage for the following percentages of structural stages in ponderosa pine 

across the management area in a variety of sizes and shapes.” (Reference structural stage table, 

LRMP, Phase II Amendment, Page III-92) 

• There is an opportunity to manage vegetation focused on reducing insect, fire and fuels 

hazard to be compatible with structural stage objectives.

Guideline 5.4-4101. “Utilize appropriate fuel treatment practices, including prescribed fire, to 

achieve resource management objectives.” 

• There is an opportunity to utilize a full complement of fuel treatment tools (including 

prescribed fire) in accomplishing wildlife habitat improvement objectives while 

concurrently contributing to fuel and fire hazard reduction objectives. 

Management 8.2 - Developed Recreation Complexes. 

Goal 8.2-201. “Manage vegetation in high-use recreation areas to provide for public safety, to 

improve forest condition...” 

• There is an opportunity to reduce existing and activity fuels to a reasonable and 

manageable level for effective response to visuals and public safety concerns.

Goal 8.2-204. “Manage fuels to retain a natural forest appearance and to reduce the threat of 

wildfire damage to forest resources.” 

• There is an opportunity to reduce the threat of wildfire damage to the infrastructure and 

natural setting of the Sheridan Lake Developed Recreation Complex. 

Goal 8.2-206. “Control insect-and-disease pest populations in and adjacent to the area through 

active monitoring while reducing pest-population potential through vegetative management...” 

• There is an opportunity to manage vegetation by reducing mountain pine beetle 

infestations and lower the risk/hazard in the project area.

Other Direction 

While fires have always helped shape the landscape, today’s fires are not simply those of the 

past; they are often hotter, more destructive, and more dangerous to suppress. The increase in 

catastrophic wildfire nation-wide has led to considerable new and/or revised National level 

initiatives, policy, and law regarding fire and fuels management. These initiatives, policy, and 

law also apply to insects and disease. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 20 

The Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) of 2003 (H.R. 1904) provides improved statutory 

processes for hazardous fuel (including insect/disease) reduction projects and healthy forest 

restoration on National Forest System lands. Other supporting policy includes the Healthy Forest 

Initiative, intended to reduce administrative process delays related to implementation of fuels (and 

insect/disease) reduction projects; National Fire Plan, and The Federal Wildland Fire Management 

Policy. The main focus of this National guidance is an emphasis on reducing the probability and 

occurrence of large-scale wildfire in fire adapted ecosystems, especially near at-risk communities 

and the wildland-urban interface (WUI); and to reduce the levels of insect infestations and disease. 

HFRA contains a variety of provisions to expedite hazardous fuel reductions on specific types of 

National Forest land. The Calumet Project is an authorized hazardous fuel reduction project 

under Section 102(a)(4) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. The area qualifies under 

section 102(a)(4) because there is an existing mountain pine beetle epidemic occurring within 

and adjacent to the project area which poses a significant risk to resource values on National 

Forest and private lands (see Determination of Insect Epidemic letter held in the Project File). 

The HFRA provides expedited procedures for complying with National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) requirements. Section 104 of HFRA provides guidance on the range of alternatives studied 

and disclosed in the NEPA document. All authorized hazardous fuel reduction projects must be

consistent with applicable Forest Plan direction or, if not, it includes an amendment to the Forest Plan. 

Another provision of the HFRA regards the encouragement of communities to prepare a

Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), which identifies areas of wildland-urban interface 

(WUI) and recommends the types and methods of treatments on Federal and non-Federal land. 

Pennington County has completed a CWPP. The Pennington County Community Wildfire 

Protection Plan (CWPP) designates most of the project area as wildland-urban interface. Private 

property is scattered throughout the Calumet Project Area with greatest density on the east side 

towards Rapid City. The latest numbers from Pennington county show 379 address points within 

the project boundary. Including addresses outside of the boundary, within one half mile, the 

number nearly doubles to 724 address points (Madden 2011). Private property accounts for 

4,155 acres of the total project area. Rockerville is the only At Risk Community located within 

the project boundaries, however, Rapid City (adjacent to the east), Keystone (two miles south), 

and Hill City (three miles southwest) are also listed in the National Register of At Risk 

Communities (Federal Register 2001). Development of private property ranges from single 

family home sites to housing subdivisions. New homes and the subsequent infrastructure are 

continually being constructed within and adjacent to the project boundary resulting in increased 

values at risk. Recreation plays a major role in management of the Calumet area. Sheridan Lake 

concentrated public use area (CPUA) is within the project boundary and is a focal point for 

summertime recreation. Two campgrounds, a marina, three picnic areas, two trailheads, one 

scenic overlook (accessible by non-motorized travel), a summer home group with nine cabins, 

and an un-official shooting area are also present. Barretta Road shooting area receives heavy use 

year round and sometimes can result in multiple human caused fire starts every year. US 

Highway 16, a major tourist route, makes up a major portion of the southern boundary and 

Sheridan Lake road cuts through the project area, as well. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 21 

PURPOSE OF and NEED for ACTION 

The Purpose and Need provides the basis for development of the Proposed Action and any 

alternatives generated. The Purpose and Need is based on direction provided by the Black Hills 

National Forest, Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) and National level policy and 

law. The Purpose and Need provides fundamental rationale for the project and it provides guidance 

to the Calumet Interdisciplinary Team during environmental analysis for the Calumet Project Area. 

Purpose and Need. The primary management emphasis in the Calumet Project Area is to: 

• Move existing land and resource conditions toward desired conditions as specified in the 

Forest Plan. 

• Reduce the threat to ecosystem components, including forest resources, from the existing 

mountain pine beetle epidemic. 

• Help protect local communities and resources from large-scale wildfire by reducing 

hazardous fuels. 

There is a need to maintain or improve forest health and vigor on a landscape scale with the 

objective of maintaining a healthy forest that is less susceptible to forest insects and diseases, and 

can better withstand events such as wildfire, wind, snow, drought, or other weather related impacts. 

There is a need to appreciably slow or halt the ongoing development and spread of mountain 

pine beetle (MPB) in the project area. The implications of continued spread of this epidemic 

include: increased tree mortality across the landscape; further accumulation of hazardous fuels 

and increased potential for severe large-scale wildfires threatening forest resources and values of 

the WUI within the area and beyond; major changes in the scenery; alteration of wildlife habitat; 

and impacts to soil and water resources. 

Associated with the need to address the MPB epidemic is the need to reduce the potential for 

severe large-scale wildfire. This can be accomplished by breaking up the continuity of fuels, and 

implementing a variety of vegetation management treatments to thin and reinvigorate pine 

stands, reduce forest fuels, and to facilitate effective wildfire suppression/protection in the area – 

much of which is WUI. 

In association with the focus on improving forest health in the project area, stemming the advance of 

MPB, and reducing fuels/fire hazard, there is an opportunity to address other Forest Plan objectives. 

These include maintaining or improving wildlife/plant habitat, providing forest products to local 

industry, and providing for other resource amenities and uses. The current Forest Plan management 

area emphasis for the Calumet Project is MA 3.7 Late Successional Forest Landscape (780 acres), 

MA 5.1 Resource Production Emphasis (5,621 acres), MA 5.4 Big Game Winter Range Emphasis 

(18,259 acres), and MA 8.2 Developed Recreation Complexes (2,686 acres). 

PROPOSED ACTION 

The proposed action was introduced to the public during the scoping period (see Public 

Involvement and Collaboration section discussed later in Chapter 1). This proposal was based 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 22 

on addressing the purpose and need described in the previous section. Comments received 

during the scoping period, as well as subsequent field verification of forest conditions were used 

to refine and clarify components of the proposed action. 

The proposed action is presented in detail in Chapter 2 of this EIS. It includes removal of MPB 

infested trees, thinning and harvesting pine across the landscape, as well as in right-of-ways. It also 

includes removal of encroaching conifers within and adjacent to hardwood stands and historic 

meadows/grasslands, and overstory removals. In total, approximately 19,304 acres of the Calumet 

Project Area would receive mechanical treatments of one kind or another. This would be followed by 

prescribed burning on up to approximately 15,990 acres. 

The removal of MPB infested trees and thinning of dense stands is designed to reduce the levels of 

MPB mortality and resultant high fuel loads and wildfire hazard. Removal of encroaching conifers 

in and surrounding hardwood stands and within historic meadows/grasslands is intended to increase 

habitat diversity and to act as natural fuel breaks. Prescribed burning is intended to remove ground 

and surface fuels and increase habitat diversity. 

DECISION FRAMEWORK 

The Calumet Project purpose and need provides the focus and scope for the proposal as related to the 

programmatic goals of the Forest Plan and the Phase II Amendment. Given the purpose and need, 

the Deciding Official (District Ranger) reviews the proposed action, the issues identified during 

scoping, the alternatives, the environmental consequences of implementing the proposal and 

alternatives, and public comments on the Draft EIS. This forms the basis for the Deciding Official 

to make the following determinations: 

• Whether or not the proposed activities and alternatives address the issues, are responsive to 

Forest Plan direction, and meet the purpose of and need for action in the Calumet Project Area. 

• Whether or not the information in this analysis is sufficient to make a reasoned decision. 

• Which action, if any, to approve (decide which alternative or combination of alternatives 

to implement). 

If the action alternative is selected, project implementation could begin in the Fall 2012. The initial 

focus would be to remove MPB infested trees and thin stands in the areas of highest infestation. 

Certain actions (such as fuel break maintenance) could last for a longer term. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT and COLLABORATION 

During the project development and analysis period, collaborative efforts were made to involve, 

interact, and cooperate with individuals and groups interested in the Calumet Project. Part of this 

effort included public scoping as discussed below (see Appendix A). 

The project was entered into the Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) in September 2011. 

SOPA contains a list of Forest Service proposed actions that will soon begin or are undergoing 

environmental analysis and documentation. It provides information so the public can become

aware of and indicate interest on specific proposals (located on-line at www.fs.fed.us/sopa). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 23 

Scoping is the process of obtaining public comments about proposed federal actions to determine 

the breadth of issues to be addressed. Comments on the proposed action, potential concerns, and 

opportunities for managing the Calumet Project Area were solicited from members of the public, 

American Indian Tribes, other public agencies, adjacent property owners, organizations, and 

Forest Service specialists. 

A scoping letter was mailed to approximately 542 interested parties, including adjacent landowners 

on October 17, 2011. This letter included a description of the project area, and overview of the 

NEPA process, a general explanation of the actions proposed, and an invitation to comment. 

The Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS was published in the Federal Register on Monday, 

October 24, 2011. This provided official notification that the public comment period for the Calumet 

Project Area would last for 30-days concluding November 23, 2011. During the scoping period, the

Forest Service received considerable public response supporting the proposal and rationale for action. 

During the public scoping period and throughout the project development and analysis period, a

collaborative effort was made to involve and interact with individuals and groups interested in the 

Calumet Project. A public meeting was held at the Mystic Ranger District Office in Rapid City, 

SD on Thursday, November 03, 2011. At the meeting, key members of the ID Team presented the 

project proposal to the public, questions were answered, concerns and issues were solicited and 

documented for consideration. Members of the Whispering Pines Volunteer Fire Department 

attended the public meeting and participated in discussion with ID Team members.

A concerted effort was made to engage in consultation regarding the project with Tribal contacts 

known to have interest in management of the National Forest. 

ISSUES 

This section provides a summary of issues identified during the public and internal scoping period 

for the Calumet Project. Comments received during scoping were used to help in defining issues, 

develop alternatives and mitigation measures, and analyze effects. A total of 154 comments were 

received via letters, faxes, public meeting transcripts, personal-delivery, or email during the formal 

scoping process. The majority of responses were supportive of the overall project, a few were not. 

Through review and analysis of scoping comments and input, the Calumet Project Core ID Team 

identified three prevailing or key issues related to the proposed activities. Comments received and 

the agency ‘response to comments’ are summarized in the Calumet Project File located at the 

Mystic Ranger District, Rapid City office. 

The ID Team reviewed input submitted during the scoping period and separated the issues into 

significant [as directed by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 

1500.4(g) and 1501.7)] and non-significant issues. Significant issues are defined as those directly or 

indirectly caused by implementing the proposed action. Non-significant issues were identified as 

those: 1) outside the scope of the proposed action; 2) already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, 

or other higher level decision; 3) irrelevant to the decision to be made; or 4) conjectural and not 

supported by scientific or factual evidence; and 5) could be addressed with design criteria or 

mitigation measures. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations explain this 

delineation in Sec. 1501.7, “...identify and eliminate from detailed study the issues which are not 

significant or which have been covered by prior environmental review (Sec. 1506.3)....” Non-
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 24 

significant issues and rationale regarding their categorization as non-significant may be found in the 

project record. A brief description of the three key issues and measurement indicators follows below: 

1. Mountain Pine Beetle 

The ongoing MPB epidemic is of foremost concern in the project area. The epidemic is killing 

mature pine trees, resulting in stand replacement on a landscape scale. The majority of the project 

area includes relatively dense stands of mature pine trees, consisting mostly of even size and age 

trees. This is the preferred food source of MPB. Approximately 57 percent of the project area 

pine stands are rated at high risk for MPB infestation. A high level of mortality is expected 

throughout the area as a result of the ongoing epidemic. This would increase fuel loads and 

wildfire hazard, and poses a significant threat to ecosystem components and forest resources. 

According to Schmid et al. (2007), the most important aspect of managing mature ponderosa 

pine stands in the Black Hills National Forest is minimizing MPB-caused mortality. The only 

effective long-term strategy to minimize beetle-cause mortality is controlling stand conditions 

through silvicultural means over large landscape and monitoring areas of beetle buildup (USDA 

Forest Service 2012a). The proposed action includes immediate removal of infested pine trees to 

limit MPB spread locally, and thinning of denser pine stands throughout the landscape to reduce 

their susceptibility to attack both now and into the future. 

Comments and feedback during scoping indicates strong support for management action and a 

sense of urgency in getting these actions completed. This is especially true of those who live in 

or near the area. Some have experienced MPB infestations on their own private property and are 

taking actions to treat these stands. The dilemma they face is that large expanse of infested and 

high hazard National Forest System lands adjacent to or surrounding their property. 

The parameters presented below are the measurement indicators for the mountain pine beetle 

issue. The focuses on the MPB hazard levels for pine stands within the project area – the larger 

number of acres at high hazard, the greater the potential for infestation. A comparison between 

alternatives is displayed in table format at the end of Chapter 2. Also, a narrative description of 

the comparative differences in effects is presented briefly in the Comparison of Alternatives 

section in Chapter 2 and in more detail under the Vegetation section in Chapter 3 of this EIS. 

Measurement Indicator for Mountain Pine Beetle: 

• MPB Hazard Rating – Low (acres)

• MPB Hazard Rating – High (acres)

2. Wildfire and Fuels Hazard 

The Forest Service, State of South Dakota, local governments, and area residents take the need to 

reduce fuels and the potential for large-scale wildfires very seriously. Large wildfires (fires greater 

than 300 acres) burned about 147,900 acres during the period from 1900 to 1980 in the Black Hills. 

Since 1980, a dramatic increase in acreage burned has occurred. Recent wildfires, including but not 

limited to the Jasper Fire, Roger’s Shack, Elk Mountain II, Battle Creek, Grizzly Gulch, Red Point, 

Ricco, Cement, East Ridge and Alabaugh Fires have burned over 296,000 acres. These intense
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 25 

fires covered large areas, moving as far as eleven miles in one day and as fast as five miles in three 

hours. Area fires have significantly impacted natural resources, public and private lands, threatened 

the safety of and injured firefighters, and resulted in civilian death. 

The Pennington County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) designates most of the 

project area as wildland-urban interface. It includes the ‘at-risk’-community of Rockerville, 4,155 

acres of private lands, subdivisions, businesses, and a major recreational complex within the 

project area. The project area is rated as a fire regime condition class of 3 (FRCC3). This means it 

has been significantly altered from the historical range and there is a high risk of significantly 

altering or losing key components of the forest ecosystem. Currently, 50 percent of the project has 

a high to very high fire hazard rating. This hazard is associated with the potential for large-scale 

wildfires. The ongoing MPB epidemic is increasing the wildfire hazard by adding large amounts 

of dead fuels to the mix. 

The proposed action includes removing MPB infested trees, thinning stands with moderate and 

high wildfire hazard, constructing fuel breaks, removing activity fuels from the forest floor, 

retaining and restoring hardwoods and meadows/grasslands, and prescribed burning. Many of 

the stands with moderate/high/very high wildfire hazard also have high risk for MPB. The 

proposed action recognizes that wildfire in this setting cannot be eliminated. But by deliberately 

managing vegetation and fuels, reduced potential for large and severe wildfires can be realized. 

Comments and feedback during scoping indicate that there is broad public support for fuel hazard 

reduction using mechanical means. There was support for using prescribed fire as a tool for 

reducing fuels and . Concerns regarding prescribed fire include the protection of private property 

and burning in areas that have not been mechanically treated. 

The parameters listed below are measurement indicators for the multiple aspects of the wildfire and 

fuel hazard reduction issue in the Calumet Project Area. These indicators represent a number of 

variables associated with the threat of wildfire and fuels hazard reduction. Public concern about 

risk, health, and safety relative to large-scale wildfire are of paramount importance and implicitly 

considered and represented in these measurement indicators. A comparison between alternatives is 

displayed in table format at the end of Chapter 2. Also, a narrative description of the comparative 

differences in effects is presented briefly in the Comparison of Alternatives section in Chapter 2 and 

in more detail under the Fire and Fuels section in Chapter 3 of this EIS. 

Measurement Indicators of Wildfire and Fuel Hazard Issue: 

• Fire Hazard Rating (existing acres/post treatment) 

• Mechanical Treatments (acres) 

• Fuel Break Corridors (acres) 

• Natural Fuel Break Enhancement – Hardwood and Meadows/Grasslands (acres)

• Prescribed Burning (acres) 

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity 

The Forest Plan provides desired future conditions for the five management areas involved – MA 

3.7, MA 5.1, MA 5.4, and MA 8.2. Included in the desired future conditions for all MA’s is to 

have a mosaic of vegetation, with openings and diverse sizes and ages of tree stands, and a 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 26 

diversity of plant and animal species. Both large-scale MPB and wildfire are major threats to 

achieving these desired conditions within the Calumet Project Area. 

The proposed action seeks to achieve vegetation and wildlife diversity for this area. Removal of 

MPB infested trees and thinning dense stands would reduce the amount of MPB-caused 

mortality and maintain mature pine trees within the stands; mechanical thinning, activity fuel 

removal, and prescribed burning would limit the potential for wildfire that could impact large 

areas of the forested ecosystem. Removal of encroaching conifers within and adjacent to 

hardwoods and meadows/grasslands would contribute to maintaining these habitats. Removing 

overstory trees in areas with advanced regeneration provides for younger structural stages that 

are important for many species. 

Most respondents commented on their support to limit the spread of MPB and reduce wildfire 

hazard. A few respondents commented directly on vegetation. Generally, the emphasis of these 

comments was to treat additional acres utilizing a variety of even and uneven age management 

prescriptions. Comments also suggested no new, or less road construction, and the obliteration 

of roads at the end of project implementation. 

Measurement indicators are listed below for the varied aspects of the vegetation and wildlife 

habitat diversity issue. These indicators are represented by habitat components applicable to the 

Black Hills NF as specified in the Forest Plan or other direction. A comparison between 

alternatives is displayed in table format at the end of Chapter 2. Also, a written description of 

the comparative differences in effects is presented in the Comparison of Alternatives section in 

Chapter 2 and in the Vegetation and Wildlife section in Chapter 3 of this EIS. 

Measurement Indicators for Vegetative and Wildlife Habitat Diversity: 

• Structural Stages for the Project Area (acres) 

• Retention and Restoration of Hardwoods and Meadows/Grasslands (acres) 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 27 

CHAPTER 2 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE 

PROPOSED ACTION 

INTRODUCTION 

This Chapter provides a detailed description of the proposed action (Alternative B), as well as a No 

Action alternative (Alternative A) for the Calumet Project Area. Maps of the proposed action are 

located in Appendix E of this EIS. The Agency has identified Alternative B as the preferred 

alternative at this time. 

This chapter presents the alternatives comparatively by both describing and displaying the quantitative 

and qualitative differences between each alternative. The intent is to provide the public and decision 

maker a basis for choice among management options when considering the environmental 

consequences (effects) of implementing each alternative as disclosed in Chapter 3 of this EIS. 

A brief overview is presented toward the end of this chapter regarding those alternatives that were 

considered by the Core ID Team, but eliminated from detailed development and study. The last 

section of the chapter contains two comparative tabular summaries that describe each alternative and 

display the quantitative effects of implementing each alternative relative to the three key issues 

presented in Chapter 1. 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL 

This section provides a summary of activities that are planned to occur during implementation of 

any alternative. It is important to note that the amount (e.g. acres, miles, etc.) of a certain activity 

in Alternative B is approximate (based on inventory and survey estimates). Actual figures may 

increase or decrease somewhat during “on-the-ground” preparation of the project actions based on 

such things as non-uniform fuels regime or stand structure, small inclusions of inoperable terrain, 

refinement of length or standard of road needed or eliminated, etc. 

The Calumet Project qualifies as an “authorized fuel hazard reduction project” pursuant to HFRA 

Sec. 102(a)(4). This determination is set forth in a project memo entitled “Authorized Hazardous 

Fuel Reduction Projects per HFRA” held in the Calumet Project file. 

Pursuant to HFRA, authorized projects cannot take place in wilderness areas, wilderness study 

areas or areas where removal of vegetation is prohibited by an act of Congress or Presidential 

proclamation. None of these restrictions apply to the Calumet Project (Sec. 102 (d)). Also, HFRA 

requires that projects, such as the Calumet Project, be consistent with the LRMP (Sec. 102 (b)). 

The Calumet Project Core ID Team recommended (with Deciding Official concurrence) that the No 

Action, and the Proposed Action, would be considered in detail. Section 104 of HFRA provides 

guidance on the range of alternatives studied in detail and disclosed in the NEPA document. 

Alternative A would take no action to address the purpose and need. Alternative B is the proposed 

action and includes commercial and non-commercial thinning, overstory pine removals, conifer 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 28 

removal within and surrounding hardwoods and meadows, and prescribed broadcast burning. 

Alternative B focuses, on meeting the purpose and need. 

The HFRA (Sec. 101(3)) also encourages the development of Community Wildfire Protection Plans 

(CWPP), which identify areas of WUI and recommends the types and methods of treatments on 

Federal and non-Federal land. Pennington County has completed a CWPP. The plan designates 

most of the Calumet Project Area as WUI for the purposes “covered” by HFRA (Sec. 102(a)(1)). 

Alternative A – No Action 

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the study of the No Action Alternative and 

to use it as a basis for comparing the effects of the Proposed Action and any other action alternatives. 

The No Action Alternative assumes that no implementation of any elements of the Proposed Action 

would take place within the Calumet Project Area within the next 10 to 15 years. This alternative 

represents no attempt to actively respond to the purpose and need for action. There would be no 

effort to modify existing vegetation and related fuels conditions in the project area. However, 

ongoing fire suppression efforts, noxious weed treatment, and recurring road maintenance on 

system roads would continue as directed by the Forest Plan, as amended. 

It is important to note that the absence of management actions does not mean that conditions in the 

area would remain static over time. In fact, there would likely be dramatic changes. This is related 

to the actions of nature and to the actions of people. Natural processes are likely to result in the 

large-scale mortality of mature pine trees due to the ongoing mountain pine beetle epidemic, and the 

continuing encroachment of conifers into hardwoods and meadows. Dead pine trees would add to 

the accumulation of ground and ladder fuels and increase the potential for large-scale wildfires with 

associated negative effects on the land, values, wildlife, and people. Human caused changes include 

a further increase in development on private land, expanded dispersed recreation use, and increased 

traffic on the newly designated road and trail system in the project area. 

This alternative: 

• Does not include management actions intended to move resource conditions toward 

achieving certain Goals and Objectives of the Forest Plan (e.g., related to 

insect/disease and fire/fuels hazard reduction); and 

• Does not respond to the Forest Plan and guidance provided by HFRA to deal with an 

epidemic of insects and fuel and fire hazard reduction needs. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

The proposed action identified during scoping was updated to incorporate changes in response to 

comments received during the scoping period. The Deciding Official decided to modify, or refine, 

the proposed action to address public comments. Modifications/refinements made to the proposed 

action include: 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 29 

• Approximately 841 additional acres were identified in which commercial and noncommercial treatments could be applied to reduce the risk of mountain pine beetle 

infestation and wildfire hazard. 

• Prescribed fire acres were reduced to 15,990 acres. The scoping letter stated that prescribed 

fire could be implemented anywhere strategically practical within the project area, up to 

27,000 acres. The Deciding Official determined that the proposed action needed to be refined 

for prescribed fire. The modified 15,990 acres of prescribed fire reflects that decision. 

• Refining the treatment description to indicated that uneven-aged management (silvicultural) 

prescriptions, i.e., individual and group selection, group retention, may be utilized on a unit 

by unit basis as part of thinning in order to meet the purpose and need. Forest thinning 

prescriptions, such as variable density thinning will allow some stands to be left with a 

residual stocking level of 60-70 basal area. 

Alternative B is designed to treat vegetation on a broad landscape scale to reduce the threat to 

ecosystem components, including forest resources, from the existing insect and disease 

(mountain pine beetle) epidemic and reduce the potential for large-scale wildfire. The alternative 

was developed as a proactive response to the purpose and need for action and it represents the 

Forest Service proposed action (see description of the purpose and need plus the proposed action 

in Chapter 1 of this EIS). 

Alternative B proposes approximately 19,304 acres of commercial and non-commercial thinning 

to open up forest stands by removing MPB infested trees and reduce stand densities to lower 

mountain pine beetle and wildfire hazard. Most non-commercial thinning overlaps commercial 

thinning acres. This broad forest thinning serves to reduce MPB habitat, reduce fuel loads, 

increase tree growth, and create landscape-scale fuel breaks to reduce the potential for largescale high intensity wildfire. Most forest thinning would be conducted using whole tree yarding 

methods or methods achieving a similar result in order to reduce fuel loading. Sanitation harvest 

to remove infested pine trees may be conducted in areas near or adjacent to identified stands for 

treatment in order to limit the expansion of MPB population. Commercial thinning activities 

would emphasize thinning from below and retaining the larger diameter trees while meeting the 

insect and fire hazard reduction objectives. Thinning prescriptions would utilize varying 

stocking levels (basal areas); as well as even and uneven aged management techniques to achieve 

Forest Plan goals and objectives. Alternative B also includes treatments of fuel break adjacent to 

some private property boundaries, along primary roads, and utility corridors where 

commercial/non-commercial units overlap. 

Scattered overstory removals are also planned in this alternative. They provide a break in the 

continuous overstory canopy that can further reduce potential for fire spread, create early seral 

stage habitat and a mosaic landscape, also help meet Forest Plan structural stage objectives. 

Alternative B proposes conifer removal (retention and restoration) from within and surrounding 

hardwood stands, and reduces pine encroachment into historic meadows. Removing pine from 

these areas improves their capability to function as a natural fuel breaks and provides habitat 

diversity over the long-term. 

Alternative B proposes prescribed burning on approximately 15,990 acres to reduce fuels and 

enhance natural fuel breaks. This prescribed burning is intended to provide multiple benefits: 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 30 

limit fuel loads and reduce wildfire hazards; re-establish fire and its natural role in the 

environment; and provide for habitat diversity. 

See Table 2-1 and Table 2-2 at the end of this chapter for a comparison of alternatives. Appendix E 

contains maps that display vegetation treatments, fuel reduction and prescribed fire activity. Design 

criteria, mitigation, and monitoring specific to this alternative are described in Appendix B. 

Specific action planned and treatment activities in proposed action (Alternative B) include: 

Commercial and Non-Commercial Treatments* 

• Thinning – 9,195 acres 

• Removal Cuts – 686 acres 

• Hardwood Retention – 1,254 acres 

• Hardwood Restoration – 1,054 acres 

• Meadows/Grasslands Retention – 1,162 acres 

• Meadows/Grasslands Restoration – 131 acres 

• Cable Logging –735 acres 

• Fuel Break Thinning (along primary roads) – 381 acres 

• Fuel Break Thinning (adjacent to private property) – 375 acres 

*Non-commercial treatments may overlap in commercial units 

Non-Commercial Treatments 

• Thinning – 4,331 acres 

Total Estimated Area of Mechanical Treatments 19,304 acres 

Other Treatments 

• Prescribed Broadcast Burning – 15,990 acres 

Total Estimated Volume of Timber and Other Products Removed 

• Volume of Saw Timber Removed – 43,650 MBF (87,300 CCF) 

• Volume of Products (pole timber) Removed – 5,870 CCF 

Road Work 

• New Road Construction – 5 miles (4.8 miles associated with Cable Logging) 

• Road Reconstruction – 27 miles 

• Maintenance – 79 miles 

Also under Alternative B, collaborative efforts would continue with the State Wildland Fire and 

Forestry Divisions, Volunteer Fire Departments, Pennington County, landowners, and others 

regarding insect and fuels hazard reduction and management concerns including: 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 31 

• Implementing the management recommendations and guidance set forth in the 

Pennington County Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP); 

• Working collaboratively with State, local jurisdictions, and private landowners to treat 

hazardous fuels in a coordinated effort along adjoining NFS/private land boundaries;

• Advocating the use of appropriate building materials, landscaping techniques, 

appropriate fuel break construction methods like those recommended by the “Firewise” 

program on adjoining lands; and 

• Coordinating access needs for ingress/egress and fire suppression with local VFDs, the 

appropriate State and County authorities and private landowners. 

DESIGN CRITERIA 

Design criteria include standard practices such as Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines (S&Gs), 

Best Management Practices, and others. They are actions that are applicable and expected to be 

implemented as a matter of standard operating procedures consistent with the theme of a given 

alternative. Design criteria are applied in order to protect resources and forest users, as well as 

minimize impacts resulting from implementing the action alternative (see Appendix B). 

MONITORING 

The Mystic Ranger District is responsible for monitoring results and effects of the selected actions. The 

District would ensure that EIS and Record of Decision (ROD) direction including design criteria and 

any necessary mitigation measures are applied and carried out appropriately. 

Project and contract administrators would perform much of the project monitoring during project 

implementation. Other resource specialists would monitor specific progress including application of 

design criteria and mitigation measures related to their resource of concern (see Appendix B). 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED but ELIMINATED FROM 

DETAILED STUDY 

Additional alternatives to the Proposed Action were considered based on issues and concerns

expressed during the scoping period. Most scoping comments were supportive of the Proposed 

Action. A few comments opposed using any timber harvest or other means to address the

purpose and need, and a few had recommendations to consider alterative actions as part of the

NEPA analysis. Comments objecting to any management actions are responded to by the No 

Action alternative. 

As discussed previously, this project is being conducted under the Healthy Forest Restoration Act 

(HFRA). The intent of HFRA is to help streamline the NEPA process, limit the number of 

alternatives analyzed (see HFRA Section 104(c)(1) and (2)), and focus meeting the purpose and 

need for this project (HFRA Section 104(c)(1)(C)(i)(ii). Some of the comments recommended 

actions that were outside the scope of the purpose and need, some were used to help modify/refine 

the proposed action, and some were actions that could be incorporated into design criteria and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 32 

mitigation measures included in the proposed action. The following provides an overview of 

alternatives that were considered, but eliminated from detailed study. 

One comment recommended using less or no new roads, and the obliteration of roads at the 

end of the project instead of just closing them, while meeting the overall objective of using 

harvest and prescribed burning to treat the landscape. Nearly all of the new roads are associated 

with cable logging on steeper ground within the project area (4.8 miles of the 5 miles of new roads 

proposed for cable logging on approximately 735 acres). Cable roads tend to be more expensive to 

construct because they access steeper terrain. Current economics are not favorable for cable logging 

due to the depressed value of wood products; cable logging is unlikely to occur unless a substantial 

change in market prices occurs. Cable logging was included in the Proposed Action (Alternative B) 

as a possibility in case market conditions change. 

An alternative that constructs less or no new roads was considered, but eliminated from detailed 

study for two reasons. First, the total amount of new roads in Alternative B represents a small 

fraction (3%) of the total system and non-system roads in the project area, and affects an area less 

than 3% of the total area proposed for treatment. Developing a separate alternative that results in 

such a small change from the Proposed Action runs counter to the HFRA direction, which seeks to 

limit the number of action alternatives. Second, an alternative that constructs no new roads is 

essentially one that would not do cable logging, for which no concern was expressed during scoping. 

The Transportation section in Chapter 3 of the DEIS is very specific that almost all of the newly 

proposed roads are associated with cable logging. 

The second part of the comment addresses removal/obliteration of roads from the landscape once the 

project is completed. All non-system roads (except 0.2 miles that would be converted to system 

roads) that are used for access in Alternative B would be removed/obliterated from the landscape. 

Alternative B would reduce the total miles of road on the landscape compared to the current amount. 

This addresses the concern about reducing the total amount of roads in the area. 

An alternative was suggested, limiting the use of whole-tree yarding within the project area. 

Whole tree yarding is a method where trees are severed at the stump using mechanized equipment. 

Trees are laid in bunches in order to be transported to a log landing. Once the trees are transported to 

a landing, they can be processed by removing branches, tree tops, and bucked into logs. This method 

is utilized to reduce the fuel loading and continuity of hazard fuels within the area. All residual 

material is concentrated within the landing area. While the majority of the proposed vegetation 

treatments would be conducted using whole tree yarding, it is not a method that would be utilized 

across the entire project area. Alternate techniques (e.g. pullback/line construction, cut-to length, 

etc.) may be initiated on a unit by unit basis, taking factors such as terrain, time of year, landing 

availability, fuel loading, private property, and other resource objectives into consideration. 

For the reasons cited above, a separate alternative designed to address whole tree yarding methods 

was considered, but dismissed from detail study. 

One comment expressed concern about water and flora/fauna diversity in an area adjacent 

to their property in the Deadman Creek area. Design criteria and mitigation measures in 

Alternative B include provisions to protect the water and biological resources both in this 

particular area, as well as other areas within the project area (see Appendix B). All protected 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 33 

stream courses in the project area require a 100-foot buffer, referred to as the Water Influence 

Zone (WIZ). Limited activity is allowed in these areas, any activity must be approved by a 

hydrologist, botanist, and/or wildlife biologist. Project Design Criteria and Mitigation Measures, 

Best Management Practices (BMP), Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, as well as Timber 

Sale Contract provisions, all provide direction regarding stream and riparian health. The Mystic 

Ranger District will work with any landowner that may have concerns regarding treatments 

adjacent to their property. 

For the reasons cited above, a separate alternative designed to address water quality in this specific 

area was considered, but dismissed from detail study. 

Several comments expressed concern about prescribed burning. This included concerns 

about controlling prescribed fire, utilizing fire only after harvest/thinning of stands in areas 

where mechanical thinning can be accomplished, and limiting the amount of tree mortality 

from prescribed fire. Controlling both the area and effects related to prescribed burning is a 

major consideration in both planning and implementing prescribed fire operations. Due care is 

taken to ensure that burns stay within prescribed boundaries, and that tree mortalities also remain 

within the fire prescription. Prescribed burning would generally be conducted in areas after they 

have been mechanically thinned, or in areas too steep to conduct thinning operations. 

Considerations for achieving safe burns with limited tree mortality, after first mechanically 

thinning, are included in the Proposed Action. The Forest Service plans to work with adjacent 

land owners to address any specific concerns that they may have prior to burning. Therefore, a 

separate alternative that addressed these comments was not included for detailed study. 

One comment suggested patch cuts or clear cuts be included as part of any management 

action. Mountain pine beetle activity within the area would result in patches that resemble clear 

cuts across the landscape. Also, prescribed burning would also result in patches of high mortality 

that provide habitat similar to clear cuts, especially on some of the steeper slopes where heavy fuel 

concentrations are known to occur. Further, areas included in the Proposed Action for meadow

and hardwood restoration would function as patch and clear cuts surrounding these habitats. 

Therefore, patch and clear cuts are included in the Proposed Action, and a separate alternative to 

create this structural stage was eliminated from detailed study. 

COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES 

This section presents a brief comparative discussion of the two alternatives given detailed study in 

this EIS. The alternatives are described and compared in terms of the effects each alternative has on 

the key issues described in Chapter 1. A comparative overview of vegetation treatment activities is 

also provided. Table 2-1 and 2-2, display comparative summaries of the effects of each alternative 

and their respective treatment activities. The environmental consequences of the alternatives to the 

resources affected in the Calumet Project Area are more completely described in Chapter 3 of this 

EIS and information contained in the Project File. 

1. Mountain Pine Beetle Issue 

The ongoing MPB epidemic is of foremost concern in the project area. This epidemic is killing 

mature pine trees, resulting in stand replacement on a landscape scale. According to Schmid et al. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 34 

(2007), the most important aspect of managing mature ponderosa pine stands in the Black Hills 

National Forest is minimizing MPB-caused mortality. The only effective long-term strategy to 

minimize beetle-cause mortality is controlling stand conditions through silvicultural means over 

large landscape and monitoring areas of beetle buildup (USDA Forest Service 2012a). 

Stand conditions in large parts of this area remain conductive to sustaining high levels of beetlecaused mortality allowing the outbreak to expand further – 57% of the project area is rated as high 

MPB hazard. Alternative A would allow the epidemic to expand. The western end of the project 

area has the most beetle activity, the central part is starting to pick up groups of infested trees, and 

the eastern edge currently has low levels of tree mortality (USDA Forest Service 2012a). In the 

hardest hit areas, near complete mortality of the larger trees would occur on up to 75% of structural 

stages 4B, 4C, and 5 (dense stands with larger trees). Significant but lesser amounts of mortality 

would be expected in structural stage 3B, 3C, and 4A – 3B and 3C because of the tree density and in 

SS 4A because of the larger tree size. 

Thinning stands to achieve lower basal areas and removal of infested pine trees under Alternative 

B would reduce the MPB hazard. The protection provided for the area would extend into the next 

decade and remain low in areas treated for much of that time. Alternative B would reduce the 

existing MPB hazard within the project area from 57% high hazard rating to 9%. 

2. Wildfire and Fuel Hazard Issue 

Most of the Calumet Project Area is outside of its historical range of variability and can be classified 

as Fire Regime I, Condition Class 3 (FRCC). As discussed in other parts of this EIS, FRCC is a 

classification system for the amount of departure from the natural (historical) fire regime of 

vegetation and fuels conditions in a given area (see Chapter 6 Glossary for full definition of FRCC). 

The Pennington County Community Wildfire Protection Plan designates most of the project area as 

wildland-urban interface (WUI). The project area includes the ‘at-risk’ community of Rockerville, 

4,155 acres of private lands, subdivisions, businesses, and a major recreational complex. 

The project area ranges from rolling hills to steep ridges and canyons ranging from 3,820 feet to 

5,856 feet in elevation. The highest point, located in the southwestern corner, is Samelias Peak a 

steep rocky highpoint. The lowest point is on the east side where Spring Creek flows out of the 

Forest. These two extremes also represent two extremes in topography on the Mystic District. 

Samelias Peak is as steep and rocky of country the District has to offer. Spring Creek Canyon is 

steep and sinuous along nearly its’ entire length. The Calumet Project Area has 379 identified 

address points and an additional 345 within one half mile of its boundaries. Private property 

accounts 4,155 acres of the total project area. Rockerville is the only At Risk Community located 

within the project boundaries, however, Rapid City (adjacent to the east), Keystone (two miles 

south), and Hill City (three miles southwest) are also listed in the National Register of At Risk 

Communities (Federal Register 2001). Development of private property ranges from single family 

home sites to housing subdivisions. New homes and the subsequent infrastructure are continually 

being constructed within and adjacent to the project boundary resulting in increased values at risk. 

It is not possible to eliminate fire from a short interval fire regime based on past history of fire 

events in the Black Hills. Wildfires would continue to occur within or adjacent to the project 

area. Most of these fires are of low intensity and are too small to have a significant effect upon 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 35 

the environment. It is the large, severe wildfires that have the most impact upon the ecosystem, 

the public, and private lands conditions and values. The alternatives for the Calumet Project 

have been evaluated on their effectiveness in reducing the potential for large, severe wildfires. 

Forest vegetation and fuels conditions in the Calumet Project Area would continue to deviate 

from its historical range under Alternative A (No Action). With the expanding MPB epidemic, 

large amounts of dead, dry fuels would be added to an already serious wildfire hazard. 

Approximately 50% of the project area is rated at a high to very high wildfire hazard and this 

hazard would continue to increase if no action is taken to modify or treat the fuels. The end 

result could be high intensity wildfire over much of the project area that would remove much of 

the existing forest cover. This would cause significant negative effects to the ecosystem, area 

infrastructure, public and private lands, and threaten the lives of residents and firefighters. 

Treatments planned in Alternative B would help reduce the potential for a severe wildfire by moving 

the forest closer to a Condition Class 1 or 2 – e.g., conditions more closely approaching the natural 

(historical) range of variability of vegetation characteristics; fuel composition; wildfire frequency, 

severity and pattern; and other associated disturbances. This would be accomplished by thinning the 

ponderosa pine forest, removing or treating some of the surface fuels and by use of prescriptive fire. 

Alternative B would have an effect on reducing fire hazards. It would treat the forest and 

manage the forest to a lower stand density. Treatments would be implemented on a landscape 

basis and designed so that it would complement existing or natural fuel break features such as 

hardwood stands, meadows, private land pastures, and moister habitats. 

Fire Hazard is expected to be reduced with Alternative B, but conditions change quickly in a Fire 

Regime I forest, and fire hazard would eventually escalate post-treatment as the vegetation grows and 

the detritus once again accumulates. However, the fire hazard in twenty years is expected to be much 

lower with Alternative B than the No Action Alternative. 

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity Issue

Vegetation and wildlife habitat are not static properties. Changes in vegetation and associated wildlife 

habitat would occur in the Calumet Project Area regardless of which alternative is selected, including 

the No Action Alternative. The ongoing MPB epidemic would continue to greatly affect the 

vegetation and wildlife habitats in the project area. In the hardest hit areas, near complete mortality of 

the larger trees would occur on up to 75% of the structural stages 4B, 4C, and 5 (dense stands with 

larger trees). Significant but lesser amounts of mortality would be expected in structural stage 3B, 3C 

and 4A – 3B and 3C because of the tree density and 4A because of the larger tree size. Increased fuel 

loading caused by dead and dying pine trees would increase the potential for even more dramatic 

changes from wildfire, up to the complete removal of the existing forest over large portions of area. 

In the short-term, Alternative A would favor wildlife species that prefer dense mature pine stands 

with large amounts of standing dead trees (snags). Many of these habitats would change with the 

ongoing MPB epidemic and greater potential for large-scale wildfire, so Alternative A might not 

provide for these habitats on a long-term basis. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 36 

Alternative B would directly reduce, but not eliminate the amount of dense pine habitat, and would 

tend to favor wildlife species that thrive in more open and varied stands. Lower basal areas would 

improve growth and vigor and increase the size of the remaining trees. Alternative B also would have 

a lower, but sufficient amount of snags as compared to Alternative A. Alternative B would reduce 

mountain pine beetle hazard and tree mortality. Fuel loading would be managed and overall wildfire 

hazard reduced. 

The removal of the pine overstory in Alternative B would release the established understory from 

competition for light, water, and nutrients. The effect would be an increase in early successional, 

younger structural stage pine directed at meeting Forest structural stage objectives. Species 

associated with early seral pine habitats would benefit from treatments proposed in Alternative B. 

Non-commercial treatments and prescribed broadcast burning included in Alternative B would 

remove the smaller diameter pine understory. That component of stand structure would be reduced, 

in individual stands and across the landscape, but such treatments would have little effect on the 

overall structural and seral stage of the pine community. 

Alternative B would restore hardwoods (aspen and birch) by removing conifers from around the 

edges of the typed hardwood stands. This would give the hardwoods an opportunity to expand in 

size and limit the amount of pine encroachment in these areas. Alternative B would also retain 

existing hardwoods by removing conifers that are growing within the within the hardwood stands. 

Alternative B would remove pine from meadows/grasslands where trees have encroached. 

Alternative B would benefit wildlife species associated with important hardwood and 

meadow/grasslands communities. Alternative B would do the most benefit hardwood dependent 

species. Alternative A would do nothing to slow the loss of these communities. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 37 

Table 2-1 Effects to Key Issues by Alternative 

1. Mountain Pine Beetle Existing 

Condition Alt A Alt B 

MPB Risk Rating – Low (acres) 10,516 21,225 21,242 

MPB Risk Rating – High (acres) 14,045 3,336 2,114 

2. Wildfire and Fuels Hazard Existing 

Condition Alt A Alt B 

Fire Hazard Rating (High/Very High) 13,957 13,957 3,382 

Total Mechanical Treatments (acres) 0 14,597 

Roadside Treatments (acres) 0 381 

Shaded Fuel Breaks (acres) 0 375 

Prescribed Broadcast Burning (acres) 0 15,990 

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity Alt A Alt B 

Hardwood Retention (acres) 0 1,254 

Hardwood Restoration (acres) 0 1,054 

Meadows/Grasslands Retention/Restoration (acres) 0 1,293 

Projected Habitat Structural Stages for the Project MA 5.1 and 5.4 in acres: 

Structural 

Stage 

Existing Condition Alternative A Alternative B 

MA 5.1 MA 5.4 MA 5.1 MA 5.4 MA 5.1 MA 5.4 

1 221 591 221 591 221 524 

2 18 186 645 4,547 605 1,888 

3A 154 875 1,816 3,305 1,289 5,195 

3B 245 1,689 95 559 88 637 

3C 138 547 0 0 0 0 

4A 1,119 4,421 1,280 5,719 1,936 6,632 

4B 2,262 5,486 722 2,140 376 771 

4C 622 2,841 0 0 31 95 

5 0 225 0 0 0 185 

*Existing Condition column represents current conditions. Alt A column represents projected conditions 3-5 years in 

the future due to MPB-caused mortality (USDA Forest Service 2012a). Alt B column represents projected conditions 

3-5 years in the future due to mechanical treatments and MPB caused mortality. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 38 

Table 2-2 Treatment Outputs by Alternative 

Commercial/Non-Commercial 

Treatments* Alternative A Alternative B

Thinning 0 9,195

Removal Cuts 0 686

Hardwood Retention 0 1,254

Hardwood Restoration 0 1,054

Meadow Retention 0 1,162

Meadow Restoration 0 131 

Roadside Treatments 0 381

Cable Logging 0 735

 

Total Commercial/NonCommercial Treatment Acres 0 14,598

 

Non-Commercial Treatments 

Thinning 0 4331

Shaded Fuel Breaks 0 375

 

Total Mechanical Treatments 0 19,304

 

Other Treatments 

Prescribed Fire 0 15,990

 

Volume Removal 

Sawtimber MBF 0 43,650

Sawtimber CCF 0 87,300

Products CCF 0 5,870

*May include both commercial and non-commercial treatment 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 39 

CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT and 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter describes the affected environment for each resource analyzed. Subsequently, the 

environmental consequences of the alternatives on the resource components of the physical, 

biological, and social environment in the Calumet Project Area are disclosed. Environmental 

consequences are described in terms of the beneficial/adverse, short and long-term direct/indirect 

and cumulative effects. Effects are quantified where possible, although qualitative discussion is 

often necessary. Elements that are not affected or minimally affected by the alternatives such as 

climate, noise, and topography are not discussed. This chapter provides the scientific and analytical 

basis for the comparison of alternatives presented in Chapter 2. 

Direct and indirect effects of the proposed action and its alternatives were analyzed over the 

planning period (10-15 years). Cumulative effects take into account past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable activities from actions other than the Calumet Project, in addition to direct and indirect 

effects of the Calumet Project. The area analyzed for cumulative effects is the project area for all 

resources unless otherwise noted. Cumulative effects are disclosed under each resource topic. 

In order to understand the contribution of past actions to the cumulative effects of the proposed 

action and alternatives, this analysis relies on current environmental conditions as a proxy for the 

impacts of the past action. This is because existing conditions reflect the aggregate impact of all 

prior human actions and natural events that have affected the environment and might contribute 

to cumulative effects. 

This cumulative effects analysis does not attempt to quantify the effects of past human actions by 

adding up all prior actions on an action-by-action basis. There are several reasons for taking this 

approach. First, a catalog and analysis of all past actions would be impractical to compile and 

unduly costly to obtain. Current conditions have been impacted by innumerable actions over the

last century (and beyond), and trying to isolate the individual actions that continue to have residual 

impacts would be nearly impossible. Second, providing the details of past actions on an individual 

basis would not be useful to predict the cumulative effects of the proposed action or alternatives. In 

fact, focusing on individual actions would be less accurate than looking at existing conditions, 

because there is limited information on the environmental impacts of individual past actions, and 

one cannot reasonably identify each and every action over the last century that has contributed to 

current conditions. Additionally, focusing on the impacts of past human actions risks ignoring the 

important residual effects of past natural events, which may contribute to cumulative effects just as 

much as human actions. By looking at current conditions, we are sure to capture all the residual 

effects of past human actions and natural events, regardless of which particular action or event 

contributed to those effects. Finally, the Council of Environmental Quality issued an interpretive 

memorandum on June 24, 2005, regarding analysis of past actions. The memorandum states, 

“agencies can conduct an adequate cumulative effects analysis by focusing on the current aggregate 

effects of past actions without delving into the historical details of individual past actions.” 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 40 

The cumulative effects analysis in this EIS is also consistent with Forest Service National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Regulations (36 CFR 220.4 (f)) (July 24, 2008), which 

state, in part: 

CEQ regulations do not require the consideration of the individual effects of all past actions 

to determine the present effects of past actions. Once the agency has identified those present 

effects of past actions that warrant consideration, the agency assesses the extent that the 

effects of the proposal for agency action or its alternatives would add to, modify, or mitigate 

those effects. The final analysis documents an agency assessment of the cumulative effects 

of the actions considered (including past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions) 

on the affected environment. With respect to past actions, during the scoping process and 

subsequent preparation of the analysis, the agency must determine what information 

regarding past actions is useful and relevant to the required analysis of cumulative effects. 

Cataloging past actions and specific information about the direct and indirect effects of their 

design and implementation could in some contexts be useful to predict the cumulative effects 

of the proposal. The CEQ regulations, however, do not require agencies to catalogue or 

exhaustively list and analyze all individual past actions. Simply because information about 

past actions may be available or obtained with reasonable effort does not mean that it is 

relevant and necessary to inform decision making (40 CFR 1508.7). 

For these reasons, the analysis of past actions in this section is based on current environmental 

conditions. 

The resource components described in this chapter are arranged in three sections: 

• Physical Environment 

• Biological Environment 

• Social Environment 

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 

This section will describe the affected environment and environmental consequences for each resource 

of the Physical Environment (Watershed, Geology, and Soils; Transportation; and Minerals). 

WATERSHED, GEOLOGY, and SOILS 

Affected Environment 

Geographic Setting and Topography 

The Calumet Project Area is situated in the central portion of the Black Hills National Forest, on 

the Mystic Ranger District. The project area lies approximately six miles southwest of Rapid City, 

four miles northeast of Hill City, and contains Sheridan Lake. The area is characterized by the 

undulating, densely-forested terrain typical of the Black Hills region. The landscape is dominated 

by broad ridge tops and narrow valleys. The steep-walled canyon associated with Spring Creek is 

oriented generally west to east and splits the project area almost in half (north and south). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 41 

Elevation generally increases as one travels west, ranging from approximately 3,800 feet at the 

Spring Creek canyon bottom on the eastern boundary, to nearly 6,100 feet in the vicinity of the 

Edelweiss Mountain at the northwest corner. Slopes are typically less than 40% for most of the 

project area (90%), but increase sharply in areas around Spring Creek and Sheridan Lake, in 

which many hill slopes are 40% or even steeper. A map of land slope for the Calumet Project 

Area is located in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as 

well as the project file. Local relief ranges from less than 200 feet from drainage to ridge-top in 

the rolling foothills, up to 500 feet in the Spring Creek Canyon and Edelweiss Mountain. 

Historical Use and Natural Disturbances 

Past and ongoing human activities in both the project area and water resources analysis area 

include timber harvest; road construction and maintenance; range management activities such as 

livestock grazing, spring developments, stream diversions and impoundments, fence building 

and maintenance; weed spraying; firewood cutting; mineral exploration and mining; and 

recreational uses such as dispersed camping, hiking, gathering forest products, and hunting. 

Natural disturbances include wildfires, insect and disease outbreaks, flooding, and storm damage 

cause by wind and snow. Past wildfires include the 284 acre Spring Creek Fire (1926); the 

20,759 acre McVey Fire (1939); the 2,673 acre Horse Creek Fire (1991); the 73 acre Bitter Creek 

Fire (1992); the 13,495 acre Battle Creek Fire (2002); and the recent 21 acre Beretta II Fire that 

occurred in March 2012. Flooding has occurred throughout the decades, resulting from intense 

precipitation events. The 1972 Flood event is the most notable flood. 

Weather and Climatic Patterns 

The weather and climate of the Calumet Project Area mimics that of the overall Black Hills region. 

It is considered a continental climate, with hot summers, cold winters, and extreme variability in 

both precipitation and temperature. Precipitation and temperature are greatly influenced by 

topography and elevation, with more precipitation and cooler temperatures in the higher elevation 

areas associated with the Limestone Plateau and Crystalline Core. Temperatures range from near 

100oF during the summer months to well below 0oF in winter. Summer days are usually quite 

warm, but nights are typically cool. This summertime temperature pattern and the predominant 

regional updraft often cause convective storms to form, starting in late spring and continuing 

throughout the summer. 

Average annual precipitation ranges from 18 to 20 inches for the project area, increasing from 

southeast to northwest (Driscoll et al. 2000; Driscoll et al. 2002). Approximately 50% of the 

annual precipitation occurs during May, June, and July, and almost 75% during the 5-month 

period between April and August, in the form of rain associated with high-intensity, shortduration thunderstorms. The smallest amounts of precipitation typically occur during the winter 

months, November through February, as snow. Most of the total annual snow fall occurs in the

late spring months of April and March, in which heavy and wet snowfall often causes tree 

damage. Over 92% of the total annual precipitation is lost to evapo-transpiration associated with 

the vast forests of the area (Driscoll et al. 2002). 

The Calumet Project Area has several weather stations monitored through the High Plains 

Regional Climate Center (HPRCC) within or nearby the area. These stations include Pactola 

Ranger Station, Hill City, Mt. Rushmore National Monument, and Rapid City (HPRCC 2012). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 42 

Table 3-1 displays a summary of average monthly and annual precipitation amounts for these 

climate stations. The average annual snowfall for Pactola Ranger Station is 49 inches; 59 inches 

for Hill City; 56 inches for Mt. Rushmore, and 36 inches for Rapid City (HPRCC 2012). 

Individual climate station data and station locations are included in Appendix E of the Geology, 

Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

 

Table 3-1 Average Monthly and Annual Precipitation (inches) for Climate Stations Near the Calumet Project Area

Climate Station Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

Pactola Ranger 

Station 

1951-2010 

Elevation 4,720 ft 

0.30 0.45 0.96 2.32 3.75 3.83 2.95 2.17 1.47 1.17 0.55 0.34 20.27 

Hill City 

1909-2010 

Elevation 5,020 ft 

0.32 0.53 0.97 2.21 3.57 3.57 3.28 2.07 1.45 1.15 0.59 0.43 20.14 

Mt. Rushmore 

1962-2010 

Elevation 5,170 ft 

0.40 0.58 1.10 2.36 4.03 3.91 3.23 1.99 1.66 1.36 0.58 0.47 21.68 

Rapid City 

1916-2010 

Elevation 3,370 ft 

0.35 0.46 0.96 2.11 3.44 3.17 2.43 1.92 1.28 1.12 0.49 0.33 18.05 

Extremely wet climatic conditions were experienced throughout the Black Hills region during the 

1990s, which is the wettest period since 1931 (Carter et al. 2002; Bunkers 2011). Extended drought 

conditions occurred earlier in the century, during the 1930s and 1950s, whereas relatively short-term 

drought conditions occurred of late in the 1980s and since 2000 (Carter et al. 2002; Bunkers 2011). 

Figure 1 depicts both wet and drought periods, as well as the cyclic nature of these events for the 

Black Hills region. Currently, the Black Hills region is in a wet period that started in 2007. 

Although it is difficult to predict what climate changes may result from climate change, researchers 

expect much of the western U.S. to experience earlier melting of mountain snowpacks in the spring 

with extended, warmer, and drier summer months (Westerling et al. 2006; Running 2006; USDA 

Forest Service 2004a), much like what was experienced during 2000 through 2007 in the region. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 43 

Figure 3-1 Five-Year Running Average of Precipitation in the Black Hills Region Between April and October, 

For the Period of Record From 1925 to 2010 (modified from Bunkers 2011) 

Geologic Resources 

Geologic Analysis Area and Time Period 

The analysis area for geologic resources coincides with the Calumet Project Area boundary 

because any impacts would not accumulate outside of the activity area due to the inherent nature 

of the geology found in the area and the type of activities proposed. Geologic characteristics 

were considered for the entire Calumet Project Area, regardless of ownership, to assess existing 

resource conditions and analyze potential effects associated with each of the alternatives. 

Effects to geologic resources were analyzed for the time period beginning in the fall of 2012 and 

extending through 2037. Fall 2012 was chosen as a starting point for analysis because it is the 

soonest that activities related to the Calumet Project could be implemented. The year 2037 was 

chosen as an ending point in time because project activities would not begin to be implemented 

until 2012 with proposed prescribed burning and harvest activities taking place over the course 

of the next 20 years through the year 2032. Scientific research has found that most burned areas 

tend to recover within 3-5 years following a fire (Neary et al. 2005), so a buffer of 5 additional 

years was added to allow for recovery of the landscape following any prescribed burning 

activities that would be implemented as late as the year 2032. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 44 

Geologic Resources and Hazards 

The Black Hills region is a dome-shaped, elliptical uplift approximately 175 miles long and 90 

miles wide. This geologic uplift is one of the many reasons the Black Hills are referred to as the 

“Island in the Plains.” The Black Hills uplift consists of a stretched, “bull’s eye”-like pattern of 

geologic units that was created as igneous bodies of rock rose towards the surface, forcing the 

overlying sedimentary rocks to buckle and bend. Metamorphosed sedimentary rocks surround 

the igneous intrusive body associated with the Harney Peak batholith. This area is often referred 

to as the “Precambrian Crystalline Core.” Surrounding the core are various sedimentary rock 

layers, including limestone, sandstone, and shale. A geologic map of the Black Hills uplift is 

located in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as 

the project file. Map data correlates with the “Geologic Map of South Dakota” published by 

Martin et al. (2004). Associated GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 

The Calumet Project Area is situated on the eastern flank of the Black Hills uplift, among the 

“Crystalline Core” and the outer sedimentary rings that encircle the Black Hills region. The 

project consists of three primary geologic settings: Precambrian igneous and metamorphic rocks 

in the western portions and Paleozoic sedimentary layers in the east. Major igneous and 

metamorphic rock forms include greywacke, slate, schist, scattered pegmatites, and quartzite; 

while limestone, sandstone, dolomite, and shale rocks are associated with the eastern 

sedimentary strata. A detailed geology map for the Calumet Project Area is located in Appendix 

A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. Map 

data correlates with the “Geologic Map of South Dakota” published by Martin et al (2004). 

The Paleozoic sedimentary strata present on the eastern edge of the Calumet Project Area are 

comprised of the Deadwood Formation, the Madison Limestone-Englewood Formation, and the 

Minnelusa Formation. The Minnelusa Formation is the upper most unit and lies on top of the 

Madison Limestone formation. A portion of the Minnelusa outcrop is present in the northeastern 

portion of the project area, primarily on non-Federal lands. The Minnelusa Formation is composed 

of alternating layers of sandstone, limestone, and dolomite, with lesser amounts of shale and chert 

(Strobel et al. 1999). It ranges in thickness from approximately 400 to 1,200 feet (Strobel et al. 

1999). Anhydrite is common within the upper 200 feet of this unit and where it has dissolved, 

sinkholes and other collapse features are common (Strobel et al. 1999). Interbedded limestone and 

shale present in the lower portion of this unit forms a confining layer at the base. The presence of 

collapses, fractures, and conduits associated with dissolved anhydrite and the confining layer at the 

base makes the Minnelusa Formation a major ground water aquifer locally and regionally (refer to 

the Ground Water Resources section for more discussion on ground water). 

The Madison Limestone-Englewood Formation is found along the eastern edge of the project 

area, outcropping in the vicinity of the Stratobowl. The Madison Limestone-Englewood unit is 

also known locally as the Pahasapa Formation and is an important, major ground water aquifer, 

both locally and regionally (refer to the Ground Water Resources section for more discussion on 

ground water). The Madison geologic unit is situated on top of the Englewood unit, and is a 

massive, gray to buff colored limestone with some dolomite. It ranges from less than 200 feet to 

1,000 feet in thickness (Strobel et al. 1999). The Madison Limestone is the cave bearing

geologic unit in the Black Hills and is also known for its conspicuous cliffs and canyon walls. 

The top portion of the Madison is specifically known for its karst features, including caves, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 45 

sinkholes, and other collapse structures. Where the Minnelusa Formation still overlies the 

Madison Limestone, many of these sinkholes and karst collapse features have been filled. The 

underlying Englewood Formation consists of pink to buff colored limestone, 30-60 feet in 

thickness, with localized shale at the base (Strobel et al. 1999). This shale forms a lower 

confining zone for the Madison aquifer. The Englewood Formation lies on top of the Deadwood 

Formation. It is the oldest sedimentary unit in the Black Hills region and is composed primarily 

of brown to light-gray sandstone, shale, limestone, dolomite, and localized conglomerate at the 

base (Strobel et al. 1999) and can be up to 500 feet thick. 

Quaternary- aged alluvium and gravel deposits are also found along the Spring Creek valley 

bottom through the project area. Tertiary aged gravel deposits are also present along Spring 

Creek at the eastern edge of the project. Alluvium is generally less than 50 feet thick, consisting 

of unconsolidated sand, gravel, boulders, and clay that were deposited by flowing water. 

Forest Service Manual 2880 – Geologic Resources, Hazards, and Services (USDA Forest Service 

2008a) requires facilities (such as roads, trails, bridges, etc.) and other management activities be 

located, designed, and maintained to avoid or minimize effects on geologic hazards. It also directs 

the USFS to manage existing geologic hazards on NFS lands to ensure the protection of public 

safety, health, property, and the environment. 

Federal land managers are also responsible for inventorying all caves and evaluating each in 

accordance with the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988 and Title 36, Code of Federal 

Regulations, part 290 (36 CFR 290). This act requires that Federal lands be managed to protect 

and maintain significant caves. Until a determination of significance is made, all caves are treated 

as significant caves. This also includes sinkholes and other karst features that may be cave 

openings or connected to significant cave systems. 

Cave and karst resources have not been inventoried for the entire Calumet Project Area. 

Geologic mapping at the 1:24,000-scale (7.5 minute quadrangle) in the Black Hills is currently 

ongoing. Portions of the Calumet Project Area within the Silver City, Pactola Dam, Rapid City 

West and Rockerville quadrangles are complete, while mapping efforts in the Hill City and 

Mount Rushmore quadrangles is still ongoing (SD DENR 2012). Furthermore, these resources 

can be difficult to locate and identify due to forest vegetation canopy and ground cover. 

Small cave-like features, such as alcoves and overhangs, do exist along the canyon walls of 

Spring Creek on private lands just downstream of the eastern project boundary (Harden et al. 

2011). Similar features may also be present along a half-mile stretch of the Spring Creek canyon 

on Federal land in this vicinity, but have not been specifically identified or mapped. At this time, 

there are no known caves or sinkholes on Federal lands in the project area, but other karst 

features do exist (Lester and Rahn 2001; SD DENR 2012). Dissolution features are present 

along the ridgeline east of the Stratobowl and two stream loss zones are located on Spring Creek 

approximately 0.3 mile and one mile respectively, downstream of the eastern project boundary. 

These stream loss zones are ground water recharge areas and thus are a location of direct 

connection between surface waters and underground aquifers. The type of karst present in the 

Black Hills is mature and has a well developed network of openings, fractures, and conduits that 

increase in size with increasing depth. Based on the inherent nature of this karst landscape, it is 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 46 

also highly likely that underground conduit networks and cavern systems may exist in the eastern 

portion of the project. In fact, one such conduit connecting ground water from Spring Creek to 

Rapid Creek does exist, despite the two streams being separate surface watersheds from each 

other (Putnam and Long 2007). 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Geologic Resources and Hazards 

Alternative A does not have any proposed activities and thus would have no direct or indirect

effects on geologic resources, including any surface or underground caves or cave systems. 

Natural geologic weathering and adjustment would continue at current rates until a significant 

natural geologic disturbance occurs (i.e., landslide, earthquake, etc.). 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Geologic Resources and Hazards 

Direct and indirect effects to geologic resources may result from the implementation of Alternative 

B. Although no geologic resources would be extracted (i.e., mining activities), cable road 

construction and associated alteration of hill slopes is proposed. Forest Service Manual 2880 – 

Geologic Resources, Hazards, and Services (USDA Forest Service 2008a) requires facilities (such 

as roads, trails, bridges, etc.) and other management activities be located, designed, and maintained 

to avoid or minimize effects on geologic hazards. It also directs the USFS to manage existing 

geologic hazards on NFS lands to ensure the protection of public safety, health, property, and the 

environment. Refer to the Slope Stability and Unstable Soils discussion for an analysis of effects 

related to cable road construction and slope stability. 

No caves are known to exist on Federal lands in the project area, but if any are discovered 

appropriate actions would be taken to protect them in accordance with the Federal Cave Resources 

Protection Act and all Forest Service regulations and policies outlined in FSM 2880, Forest Plan 

Standards 1401 and 3207 (USDA Forest Service 2008a; 2006a). Project design criteria, which 

includes Watershed Conservation Practices (WCPs) and SD Forestry Best Management Practices 

(BMPs), and Karst and Cave Management BMPs (BC MOF 2003) have been included to protect

caves, sinkholes, and other karst features; soils; and both surface and below ground water in this 

karst landscape. Natural geologic weathering and adjustment would continue at current rates for 

all other un-altered areas until a significant natural geologic disturbance occurs. Refer also to the 

Slope Stability and Unstable Soils section for a discussion of slope stability. 

Cumulative Effects – Geologic Resources and Hazards 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to geologic resources. There would be no cumulative impacts 

associated with Alternative A because there are no overlapping direct or indirect effects. 

However there may be cumulative impacts to geologic resources associated with Alternative B 

due to cable road construction and the associated alteration of the landscape and geology. Refer 

to the Slope Stability and Unstable Soils discussion for an analysis of cumulative effects related 

to cable road construction and slope stability. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 47 

Ground Water 

Ground water is the Nation's principal reserve of fresh water and represents much of the potential 

future water supply. Forest Service lands contains substantial ground water resources, for which 

stewardship and protection are mandated by several Congressional Acts including, but not 

limited to the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 

1976, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 

1980, also known as CERCLA or “Superfund” (USDA Forest Service 2007a). 

“Many other natural resources on National Forest System (NFS) land rely, directly or indirectly, 

on ground water and would be damaged or destroyed if ground water were depleted or 

contaminated. Ground water on the NFS is a major contributor to flow in many streams and 

rivers and has a strong influence on the health and diversity of plant and animal species in 

forests, grasslands, riparian areas, wetlands, and cave systems. Ground water and surface water 

are interconnected and interdependent in almost all ecosystems. Ground water plays significant 

roles in sustaining the flow, chemistry, and temperature of streams, lakes, springs, and cave 

systems. Ground water has a major influence on rock weathering, stream bank erosion, and the 

head-ward progression of stream channels. In steep terrain, it governs slope stability; in flat 

terrain, it limits soil compaction and land subsidence” (USDA Forest Service 2007a). 

Concerns about ground water resources on or adjacent to public land involve questions about 

depletion of ground water storage and the associated effects on other water resources and 

associated animal or human uses. Pumping of ground water can reduce river and stream flows, 

lower lake levels, and reduce discharges to wetlands, springs, and ground water dependent 

ecosystems. Pumping of ground water can also lower local water tables and impact vegetation in 

meadows, grasslands, and forest stands. Increased drawdown can impact ecological resources by 

depleting ground water that supports riparian vegetation, wetlands, or sensitive flora and fauna. 

Livestock and wildlife water holes may have reduced overall volumes of water, shorter duration 

when available, or may dry up entirely. Over pumping of ground water can cause well water 

levels or pressures to drop or shallow wells to go dry entirely, requiring deepening of the well or 

replacement. Excessive well withdrawals can also affect water quality in the aquifer. Poorquality or contaminated water may migrate from adjoining water-bearing units or from surface 

soil and water bodies. 

Ground Water Analysis Area and Time Period 

The analysis area for hydrogeologic (ground water) resources includes two different spatial 

boundaries – one for surface ground water dependent resources, and the second for deeper, 

underground aquifers. A detailed hydrogeologic map of the Calumet Project Area is included in 

Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

This map is produced from data published for the Black Hills Hydrology Study (Williamson et al. 

2000). A map of regional ground water aquifers in relation to the project area is also included in 

Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Potential effects to ground water dependent ecosystems at the land surface such as springs, 

wetlands, and gaining and losing streams were considered for those resources that exist within 

the Calumet Project Area. This analysis area coincides with the Calumet Project Area boundary 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 48 

because any impacts would not accumulate outside of the activity area due to the majority of the 

project area being comprised of Precambrian igneous and metamorphic rock units; the types of 

activities proposed; and the limited amount of sedimentary strata exposed on the eastern edge of 

the project. These surface resources are discussed in the Water Resources section under 

Wetlands, Riparian Areas, and Ground Water Dependent Ecosystems. 

Underground hydrogeologic resources were considered for a larger area, outside the Calumet Project 

boundary due to the presence of recharge outcrops for major regional ground water aquifers. This 

latter analysis area corresponds to the Madison, Minnelusa, and Deadwood ground water aquifers. 

Hydrogeologic characteristics were considered for the entire Calumet Project Area, regardless of 

ownership, to assess existing ground water aquifer conditions and analyze potential effects 

associated with each of the three alternatives. Effects to hydrogeologic resources were analyzed 

for the same time period as geologic resources, for the same reasons previously discussed. 

Ground Water Aquifer Setting 

The underlying geology of the Black Hills largely influences the hydrogeology (ground water) and 

surface water characteristics of the area, both in quantity and quality. For example, the Limestone 

Plateau is known for its general lack of surface water, but abundant number of springs, many of 

which are the headwaters for major streams in the Black Hills. Spring waters have been in contact 

with calcium carbonate and thus tend to precipitate out these minerals on the stream bottoms. In 

contrast, the Crystalline Core is much less permeable than the limestone, and thus has abundant 

surface flow with minimal stream losses to aquifer recharge. Rainfall runoff is higher in the 

Crystalline Core, as well. 

The Calumet Project Area is situated on the eastern slope of the Black Hills uplift, primarily on 

the Precambrian Crystalline Core. However, outcrops for three of the four major regional 

ground water aquifers are present at the eastern edge of the project. These include the Madison, 

Minnelusa, and Deadwood aquifers. These three regional aquifers provide ground water for the 

Montana, North Dakota, Wyoming, and South Dakota region. All three of these are also local 

aquifers for the Black Hills area, and thus used extensively for commercial and residential water 

purposes throughout the Black Hills region. A detailed hydrogeologic map of the project area is 

located in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as 

the project file. This map is produced from data published for the Black Hills Hydrology Study 

(Williamson et al. 2000). Associated GIS data are also located in the electronic project file. A 

generalized schematic of ground water aquifers in the Black Hills is depicted in Figure 2. 

The Calumet Project Area takes place within the Crystalline Core, Loss Zone, and Artesian 

Spring hydrogeologic settings, as identified by the USGS (Driscoll et al. 2002). The Crystalline 

Core hydrogeologic setting consists of igneous and metamorphic rocks within the central part of 

the Black Hills, but also includes unconsolidated Quaternary and Tertiary deposits. Ground 

water discharge contributes to base flow for many streams within this setting, but can diminish 

quickly during drought periods (Driscoll et al. 2002). This is often why some streams in this 

setting appear to “dry up” during dry periods. The Loss Zone setting consists of areas heavily 

influenced by stream flow losses that occur as streams flow across outcrops of the Madison and 

Minnelusa Formations. This same area also represents the Artesian Spring setting. The Loss 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 49 

Zone and Artesian Spring settings have very distinct differences in streamflow characteristics, 

but are mapped together as a common area, because many artesian springs occur adjacent to 

streams that are influenced by loss zones (Driscoll et al. 2002). Very complex interactions 

between surface and ground water, as well as between bedrock and alluvial aquifers occur within 

this area (Driscoll et al. 2002). 

Figure 3-2 Simplified Cross-Section Schematic of Ground Water in the Black Hills (Carter et al., 2003)

The Madison aquifer is contained within the limestone, siltstone, sandstone, and dolomite of the 

Madison Limestone-Englewood Formation. This aquifer is generally confined except in outcrop 

areas like those found in the project area, which are source areas for ground water recharge. The 

Minnelusa aquifer is associated with the sandstone, dolomite, and anhydrite of the Minnelusa 

Formation. The major source of recharge for both aquifers is from precipitation and streamflow 

losses across outcrop areas (Driscoll et al. 2002). The Deadwood Formation and Deadwood aquifer 

are one and the same. Some hydraulic connection may exist between the Deadwood aquifer and the 

underlying Precambrian rocks in localized areas, but generally these igneous and metamorphic rocks 

are considered to be the lower confining layer of the Deadwood aquifer (Driscoll et al. 2002). Its 

major source of ground water recharge is from precipitation on its outcrops (Driscoll et al. 2002). 

Ground water is also present within the project area in unconfined, non-artesian aquifers, also known 

as water-table aquifers. Water-table aquifers include unconsolidated alluvium and colluvium where 

saturated (Carter et al. 2002). Alluvial material has been transported and deposited by streams or 

moving water, while colluvial material is transported and deposited through gravitational, down 

slope movements. Alluvial deposits along streams are commonly used as local aquifers where 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 50 

saturated. Topography can be a major influence on the direction of ground water flow in these 

water-table aquifers (Carter et al. 2003). 

Private landowners have drilled shallow ground water wells into alluvial valleys, as well as deeper 

wells into the Madison, Minnelusa, and Deadwood aquifers within the project area (SD DENR 

2012a). Ground water wells have also been completed in the Precambrian igneous and 

metamorphic units in the western portion of the project area (SD DENR 2012a). The Precambrian 

core is generally considered a confining layer below all other aquifers, but can yield water when 

wells are drilled into localized, fractured zones that are saturated. Many residents obtain their 

water from shallow wells constructed in stream alluvium, particularly the alluvium associated with 

Spring Creek and Horse Creek (SD DENR 2012a). The Sheridan Lake Recreation Complex also 

obtains its water from six ground water wells (Beam, 2012). Additionally, many private 

landowners and recreation residences have drilled shallow ground water wells into other alluvial 

valleys, as well as deeper wells into the fractured Precambrian rocks. Ground water quality is 

discussed in more detail in the Water Resources, Water Quality section of this report. 

The eastern portion of the Calumet Project Area is considered a karst landscape due to the presence 

of the Madison, Minnelusa, and Deadwood sedimentary units. Karst landscapes consist of a network 

of interconnected openings such as fissures, fractures and conduits that transport and store ground 

water (USGS 2011). Most of the ground water flow occurs through the network of openings, while 

most of the ground water storage occurs in the rock matrix or underground reservoirs. Ground water 

flow rates can be as rapid as hundreds of feet per hour (KWI 2010). Both surface and ground water 

flow systems may rapidly recharge karst aquifers. Karst aquifers can provide tremendous quantities 

of fresh water, but the water is not uniformly distributed throughout the aquifer due to the network of 

conduits and openings (KWI 2010). Ground water may return to the surface in gaining stream 

segments or springs miles from the sink locations (i.e., sinkholes, disappearing streams). 

Ground water within and originating from karst areas is particularly vulnerable to pollution due to 

the porous nature of both the surface and underground geology, and the rapid movement of water 

over great distances, often many miles from the original contaminant source. Ground water 

contamination in karst areas is very difficult to successfully clean up. Ground water can often 

travel long distances very rapidly through the underground network of conduits and fractures, 

without being filtered through soil or rock. Contaminants can remain in the water supply for 

distances far removed from the originally contaminant site or can be stored indefinitely in 

underground ground water “traps.” 

Despite the lack of a major ground water source for most of the western portion of the project area, 

ground water dependent ecosystems (GDEs) such as springs, peat forming wetlands (i.e., fens), 

and disappearing streams (also known as losing streams) are common in the project area due to 

geologic faulting and folding associated with the Black Hills Uplift and the karst landscape 

associated with the limestone geology. Several potential fens have been identified throughout the 

project area, particularly at some of the spring locations. Ground water dependent ecosystems are 

discussed in more detail in the Wetlands, Riparian Areas, and Ground Water Dependent 

Ecosystems section of this report. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 51 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Ground Water Resources 

Alternative A does not have any proposed activities and thus would have no direct effects on 

ground water aquifer yields. Continued expansion of mountain pine beetle (MPB) and a

potential wildfire resulting from it are not expected to indirectly affect ground water aquifers 

because of the nature of the geology in the project area. The metamorphic and igneous rocks 

associated with the “Crystalline Core” are not as permeable as the limestone and sandstone units 

that surround the Black Hills. Therefore this area tends to produce more surface runoff versus 

deeper percolation into ground water aquifers. 

Continued expansion of mountain pine beetle (MPB) and a potential wildfire are not expected to 

indirectly affect ground water aquifers because of previously observed results from the 2000 

Jasper Fire, from which no change was recorded in ground water observation wells. Although 

limited ground water monitoring is done in the southern Black Hills where the Jasper Fire 

occurred, no fire related impacts to ground water have yet to be documented by the USGS. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Ground Water Resources 

No direct or indirect effects to ground water aquifer yields are expected to result from the 

implementation of Alternative B for the same reasons described under Alternative A. 

Furthermore, ground water would not be extracted and aquifers would generally not be affected 

by activities occurring on the land surface. A very limited area of karst terrain exists on the 

eastern edge of the Calumet Project Area, over half of which is privately owned land. The 

remaining karst area on Federal land has had vegetation management in the recent past to thin 

forest stands. Additional vegetation management of this area proposed by the Calumet Project 

would be limited in scope and intensity, thus minimizing the risk to ground water resources in 

this more sensitive area. A wildfire could also occur under this alternative, but is not likely to 

affect ground water aquifers for the same reasons described under Alternative A. 

Forest Service Manual 2880 – Geologic Resources, Hazards, and Services (USDA Forest Service 

2008a) requires inclusion of measures to manage and protect ground-water quality and quantity, 

as well as ground-water dependent ecosystems. Refer to the Water Quality and Wetlands, 

Riparian Areas, and Ground Water-Dependent Ecosystems sections for more discussion 

pertaining to ground water quality and ground water dependent wetlands, springs, and fens. 

Cumulative Effects – Ground Water Resources 

Past, currently ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet 

EIS were considered along with proposed activities for cumulative effects to (ground water) 

resources. There would be no cumulative impacts to ground water aquifer yields or quality 

associated with any of the project alternatives because there are no overlapping direct or indirect 

effects. Pumping from existing wells would continue and new wells may be completed 

according to South Dakota state permitting regulations. Refer to the Water Quality and 

Wetlands, Riparian Areas, and Ground Water Dependent Ecosystems sections for more 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 52 

discussion on cumulative impacts pertaining to ground water quality and ground water dependent 

wetlands, springs, and fens. 

Soil Resources 

Soil Analysis Area and Time Period 

The analysis area for soils includes all Federal lands within the Calumet Project Area to account 

for potential effects resulting from proposed activity areas. The USDA Forest Soil Disturbance 

Monitoring Protocol (USDA Forest Service 2009f) defines an activity area as “a harvest unit, 

excluding system roads, as well as landings and temporary roads, outside the harvest unit 

boundary. An activity area may also be a prescribed burn unit or any area delineated on the 

ground for a specific treatment.” 

This area was analyzed for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to soil resources because 

impacts to soils occur on the site and do not accumulate outside of the activity area. Therefore, 

effects to soil resources in units outside of the proposed Calumet Project Area are outside the 

scope of this project and as such, these areas will not be further analyzed or discussed in this 

document. Tree harvest, grazing, and other various activities on non-Federal lands are also 

outside of the soil analysis area. Effects to soils were analyzed for the same time period as 

geologic and hydrogeologic resources for the same reasons stated previously. Effects to soil 

resources are summarized in the context of short-term effects (5 years or less), as well as longterm effects (longer than 5 years). 

Effects from known past actions were included in the analysis of existing resource conditions. 

Generally this includes activities that have occurred since the 1874 Custer Expedition to the Black 

Hills region. Proposed activities associated with each alternative were considered in the Analysis 

of Direct and Indirect Effects section. Past and present land use and activities within the Calumet 

Project boundary include timber harvest, wild and prescribed fire, livestock grazing, private land 

ownership, roads and off road vehicles, mines and quarries, various types of recreation, and forest 

product gathering. All of these activities or events individually have some level of impact on the 

landscape which results in cumulative effects to soil conditions and processes. 

Soil Descriptions 

Soils in the project area are relatively young and weakly developed, having formed from material 

weathered from underlying bedrock, alluvial and colluvial deposits, or various combinations of 

these materials. Parent materials are primarily metamorphic and igneous rocks such as slates, 

phyllites, schists, and greywackes (an impure sandstone) from the bedrock formations exposed in 

the immediate vicinity. However, soils formed from limestone, sandstone, and shale are present 

on the eastern edge of the project area. Soil map units are dominated by channery loam soil 

textures and unweathered bedrock. Channery soils contain thin, flat rock fragments of 

sandstone, shale, slate, limestone, or schist up to six inches in length. Stringers of loam, cobbley 

loam, gravelly loam, silty loam, and clay loam-textured soils are found along drainage bottoms 

associated with major streams and tributaries and on flat terraces located at the eastern edge of 

the project. Soils are thin to absent on rock outcroppings; generally shallow on steep hill slopes; 

and relatively deep on the gentler hill slopes and in alluvial valleys. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 53 

Twenty different soil map units are present within the Calumet Project Area (Table 3-2), three of 

which are water associated with Sheridan Lake, the Sheridan Lake Dam, and pits or quarries. 

Soil map units are a grouping of different soil types that may be individually too small to map 

separately or differentiate from other surrounding soils. Soils in the Calumet Project Area are 

dominated by the Pactola and Virkula soils, and rock outcrop. Two soil maps units (PaE and 

RlG) comprise 85% of the project area. The remaining eighteen soil map units individually 

occupy 3% or less of the overall project area. Table 3-2 displays a summary of these dominant 

soil map units and the individual percentage of the overall project area that each unit comprises. 

Table 3-2 Dominant Soil Map Units in the Calumet Project and Their Respective Percentage of the Project Area 

Map Unit 

Symbol(s) Map Unit Name 

Acres 

in 

Project 

Percent 

of 

Project 

PaE Pactola-Virkula-Rock outcrop complex, 10 to 40 percent slopes 16,785 53% 

RlG Rock outcrop-Pactola complex, 40 to 80 percent slopes 10,117 32% 

CvB Cordeston loam, 2 to 10 percent slopes 1,003 3% 

VpC Virkula-Pactola complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes 996 3% 

SrE Sawdust-Vanocker-Paunsaugunt complex, 10 to 40 percent slopes 455 1% 

W Water (Sheridan Lake) 375 1% 

BsB Bullflat-Cordeston silt loams, 2 to 9 percent slopes 346 1% 

HoD Hilger-Virkula complex, 2 to 30 percent slopes 300 1% 

HfC Heely-Cordeston complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes 270 1% 

HeE Heely channery loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes 247 1% 

HgB Hilger cobbly loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes 226 1% 

RnG Rock outcrop-Sawdust complex, 40 to 80 percent slopes 178 0.6% 

HgD Hilger-Virkula complex, 2 to 30 percent slopes 143 0.4% 

VoG Vanocker-Sawdust-Rock outcrop complex, 40 to 80 percent slope 124 0.4% 

PbD Paunsaugunt-Gurney complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes 69 0.2% 

VkE Vanocker-Lakoa complex, 10 to 40 percent slopes 55 0.2% 

VnC Vanocker-Paunsaugunt complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes 48 0.2% 

CwB Cordeston-Marshbrook loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes 23 0.1% 

Pt Pits and Quarries 8 0.02% 

Or Orthents (loamy) – Sheridan Lake Dam 3 0.01% 

Most soils in the project area developed under a ponderosa-pine forest. However, soils within 

meadows are unique and different from soils that support timber stands. Eight soil map units 

developed in grassland conditions and cover approximately 2,326 acres (7%). These include 

Bullflat-Cordeston silt loams (BsB), Cordeston loam (CvB), Cordeston-Marshbrook loams 

(CwB), Heeley channery loams (HeE), Heeley-Cordeston loams (HfC), Hilger cobbly loam 

(HgB), Hilger-Virkula complex (HgD), and the Paunsaugunt-Gurney complex (PbD) soil map 

units. These soil map units are found in stringer meadows, stream floodplains, and drainage 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 54 

bottoms. These soil units generally represent historic or currently existing meadows within the 

project area and can be used to evaluate conifer encroachment into meadows. The remainder of 

the project area (93%) contains soils that developed under forested environments. A map 

delineating soils formed under historic grassland conditions versus forested environments is 

located in the project file. 

Slope Stability and Unstable Soils 

Slope stability is a product of natural physical characteristics such as geologic, topographic, and 

hydrologic conditions, as well as modifications to these conditions caused by natural geologic 

processes, vegetation, land use practices, and human activities (Turner and Schuster 1996). 

Unstable slopes can have several causes but only one trigger (Turner and Schuster 1996). Triggers 

are external events such as intense rainfall, rapid snowmelt, water level changes, earthquake 

shaking, volcanic eruption, storm waves, rapid stream erosion, and human modifications that cause 

an almost immediate response in the form of a landslide (Turner and Schuster 1996). 

The generic term “landslide” is used to describe “the movement of a mass of rock, debris, or 

earth down a slope” (Turner and Schuster 1996). Landslides are classified based on the type of 

material (rock, debris or earth) and the type of movement which include falls, topples, slides, 

spreads, or flows (Turner and Schuster 1996). These mass movements of material include the 

more familiar terms of rock falls and slides, soil creep, slumps, debris avalanches and flows, 

debris torrents, earth flows, and others (Chatwin et al 1994). Mass movement can occur on 

unstable slopes if roads overload or undercut them, vegetation is removed from them, or 

additional runoff is emptied onto them. The overall hazard depends on the type of disturbance, 

slope steepness, the nature of earth material (e.g., parent rock, bedding planes, soil, etc.), and 

water content. The hazard can be natural, human-caused, or a combination of both. 

Unstable soils can cause landslides as well. According to FSH 2509.25, unstable soils are those 

soils that have properties that make them susceptible to dislodgement and down slope transport 

of soil and rock material under direct gravitational stress; the process includes slow displacement 

such as creep and rapid movements such as landslides (USDA Forest Service 2006c). Soil 

failures also include land subsidence, shrinking and swelling soils, and collapsing soils. 

Removal of subsurface fluids or materials, or changes to hydrology on certain soil types, can 

induce soil failures (USDA Forest Service 1996a). 

Once a failure has occurred, the landscape continues to adjust (i.e., fail) without warning in 

response to more runoff, gravitational shearing, minor earth tremors and even minor hill slope 

disturbances. This process continues until a stable slope angle is reached or intensive 

geotechnical engineering methods are employed. Rehabilitation and restoration of slope failures 

can be extremely challenging, problematic, and costly. Small slope failures generally have the 

greatest chance of successful stabilization, but would remain a “weak spot” on the landscape in 

the long-term. Larger slope failures present more difficulty of successful stabilization and can 

remain a permanent “scar” on the landscape. 

The major concern with these areas is associated with road or trail construction, and groundbased harvest equipment operations on steep slopes. For the Black Hills, an increased risk of 

road failure exists where roads are located on soils with mass movement potential and slopes are 

steeper than 40%, especially if road drainage problems are present or roads cuts through bedrock 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 55 

layers that parallel the hill slope. Similarly, an increased risk of mass movement exists when 

ground-based equipment operates on these same slopes. 

Most of the Calumet Project Area has slopes that are moderately rolling, ranging from 0 to 40% 

slope. These areas are generally well suited for ground-based, mechanical operations. However, 

approximately 3,300 acres or 10% of the project area has slopes steeper than 40%. These areas 

coincide with Edelweiss Mountain, Spring Creek canyon, Blue Lead Mountain/Calumet Ridge 

area, the Sheridan Lake vicinity, and other scattered hill tops across the project area. These 

steeper areas are better suited for aerial operations such as cable logging rather than traditional 

ground-based, mechanical operations. The project area is considered to be moderately stable, 

although road cuts in the micaceous-schists tend to slump when roads cut bedrock layers that 

parallel hill slopes. Rock talus slopes within the crystalline canyons can also move en-masse if 

significantly disturbed (i.e., earthquake or removal of the slope toe by road cuts or rock mining). 

Five soil map units, including both of the dominant soil map units in the project area, are rated as 

having an elevated risk of mass-movement (USDA SCS 1990). These include the PaE, RlG, 

RnG, VkE, and VoG soil map units. However, mass movement of these soils is really only a 

concern where slopes exceed 40%. Taking this into consideration, only 3,230 acres scattered 

throughout the project area truly have an elevated risk of mass-movement. No major slope 

failures were identified during field reviews, with the exception of talus rock slopes found in the 

Spring Creek canyon, on Blue Lead Mountain, and on rocky ridge tops in the Horse Creek 

drainage and Calumet Ridge areas. 

Approximately 3.3 miles of existing roads and trails are currently located on hill slopes with 

slope or soil stability concerns within the Calumet Project Area, regardless of ownership. Of this 

total, approximately 1.7 miles are existing Forest Service road and trail segments. Each segment 

is relatively short, totaling less than 0.1 mile or approximately 450 feet in length. The remaining 

1.3 miles of roads and trails on hill slopes with slope or soil stability concerns are non-USFS 

roads (state, county, and/or private road segments). 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Slope Stability and Unstable Soils 

Alternative A would not involve implementation of any proposed actions on or near steep slopes 

or soils with mass movement potential. Therefore, there would be no direct effects to slope 

stability or unstable soils associated with the implementation of Alternative A. 

Hill slopes would continue to adjust in response to natural weathering processes such as freezing 

and thawing. These hill slope adjustments are expected to be isolated individually and small 

(less than 1,000 sq. feet) unless a significant natural disturbance occurs (i.e., excessive rainfall 

causing flash flooding or a wildfire). The risk of severely burned soils is greatest with this 

alternative should a wildfire occur, particularly in the steep and not very accessible Spring Creek 

canyon and Blue Lead Mountain/Calumet Ridge area (refer to Silviculture and Fire/Fuels report 

for more information on fire hazard in the project area). Thus, the risk of post-fire slope 

instability is also greatest with this alternative. 

A wildfire under Alternative A has the greatest potential of exposing and altering soils and thus, 

the greatest risk of indirectly contributing to conditions that may result in an increase in slope 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 56 

failure. Ponderosa pine killed by the continued expansion of MPB infestations would fall, 

accumulating on the forest floor, thereby potentially increasing the amount of dead and downed 

wood levels above current levels. With increased amounts of downed wood, there is likely a 

greater risk of longer fire residence times and potential for higher temperatures should a wildfire 

occur. This in turn can result in moderate to high soil burn severity, which is exhibited by more 

exposed mineral soil and changes in physical, chemical, biological, and/or hydrologic soil 

properties. Hill slope adjustments would continue to occur until vegetation is sufficiently dense 

enough to stabilize slopes and slopes have reached equilibrium. This generally occurs within three 

to five years following a wildfire for areas that experience low to moderate soil burn severity, but 

can take 15 years or more for areas that experience high soil burn severity (Neary et al. 2005). 

Roads: Existing open road segments on slopes with stability concerns pose a greater risk of 

failure due to increased soil and slope disturbances from vehicle use, road maintenance, and 

storm related runoff and erosion. Although closed road segments receive only administrative use 

traffic, they can pose a high risk of slope failures due to the increased length of time between 

scheduled road maintenance. Seasonally open road segments located on slopes with stability 

concerns pose the same risks associated with both open and closed roads as discussed previously. 

Stability problems related to road segments would be corrected through maintenance or 

reconstruction over time, as appropriated funds are available. Without road maintenance and 

improvement work, existing road-related instabilities would continue to worsen, thereby 

increasing the risk of failure. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Slope Stability and Unstable Soils 

Vegetation Management Activities: Alternative B proposes thinning ponderosa pine forest stands 

through various commercial and non-commercial methods and thus has the potential to disturb 

soils directly. Both ground-based equipment and aerial methods, such as cable logging, would 

be used. Approximately 885 acres out of all the proposed vegetation management activities – 

both ground-based and aerial methods – have areas where slopes are greater than 40% with 

potentially unstable soils. Most of the larger, contiguous areas are located in the Spring Creek 

drainage and Sheridan Lake area, and are included in units proposed for aerial logging methods. 

About 258 acres are specifically identified for cable logging units. The remaining acreage is 

comprised of small, isolated areas scattered throughout the project area. These isolated slopes 

exist within larger treatment units and are often associated with steep, rocky outcrops and canyon 

walls. These steep areas are avoided during ground-based operations as discussed in more detail 

under Ground-Based Systems. A map of these locations can be found in Appendix A of the 

Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Outside of the areas mentioned above, the remainder of the project contains slopes that are gentle 

to moderate and thus the proposed activities are not expected to produce ground disturbance that 

would cause future slope instabilities. Commercial and non-commercial removal of trees is not 

anticipated to de-stabilize hill slopes or initiate future slope instabilities because forest stands are 

not being clear cut. Root systems of remaining live trees would continue to stabilize soils on 

steep hill slopes in the long-term. Additionally, the root systems of harvested trees generally 

remain on site after thinning, providing some level of soil and slope stabilization for the next 10 

to 20 years until natural decay processes have broken down the stump and root structures. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 57 

Ground-Based Logging Systems: The project has been designed so that all proposed groundbased mechanical treatments under Alternative B would generally avoid slopes exceeding 40%. 

Therefore, any soils prone to movement on these slopes would therefore also be avoided. 

Ground-based equipment operations are excluded from these areas, except to cross short, isolated 

segments, as part of project Design Criteria that includes Watershed Conservation Practices 

(WCPs) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) in order to minimize the risk of initiating a 

slope failure during or following harvest activities in these areas. The applicable Watershed 

Conservation Practices (USDA Forest Service 2006c) and Best Management Practices (SDSU et 

al. 2003) for this project are listed in Appendix B. Isolated sections of high-risk slopes within 

commercial activity areas are typically avoided during project implementation. Larger 

contiguous areas of steep slopes would be removed from ground-based mechanical treatment 

units during field layout in accordance with required Design Criteria and WCP/BMP measures. 

Aerial Logging Systems (Cable Logging): The large, contiguous areas of steep slopes found in 

the southwestern portion of the project area are well suited for the aerial logging methods 

proposed by this alternative. Proposed cable logging units would take place on steep slopes in 

the Calumet Ridge area south of Sheridan Lake. Commercial removal of trees through aerial 

logging methods is not anticipated to de-stabilize hill slopes or initiate future slope instabilities 

because mechanized ground-operations would not occur on these slopes and forest stands in 

these treatment units would not be clear cut. Therefore, the root systems of remaining live trees 

would continue to stabilize soils on steep hill slopes in the long-term. Additionally, the root 

systems of harvested trees generally remain on site after thinning, providing some level of soil 

and slope stabilization for the next 10 to 20 years until natural decay processes have broken 

down the stump and root structures. However, due to the inherently steep, rocky nature and 

limited soil depth in these areas, tree root systems do not have the same depth as other more 

gently sloped areas with deeper soils. 

Pine regeneration can be hindered on steep, rocky slopes due to thinner soils, so water uptake by 

existing saplings and establishing seedlings may not exceed the available moisture stores 

following harvest in the short-term. If this is the case, excess moisture would be present causing 

saturated soils and “loading” of steep hill slopes with excess weight. Although local soil 

moisture levels usually increase following even partial removal of forest cover, no studies have 

been documented for the Black Hills as to what threshold might exist related to excess moisture 

levels and initiation of slope failure. 

Non-Commercial Vegetation Management: Non-commercial thinning and stand improvement 

activities would also adhere to project Design Criteria and thus avoid ground-based equipment 

operations on unstable slopes. Hand crews would be used to accomplish thinning work in noncommercial units where large contiguous blocks of steep slopes exist. 

Non-commercial thinning, fuel breaks, and roadside treatments are also not expected to have any 

measureable effects on slope stability, directly or indirectly. These activities are not anticipated 

to de-stabilize hill slopes or initiate future slope instabilities because most non-commercial 

treatments would be accomplished with hand crews and forest stands would not be clear cut. 

Therefore the root systems of remaining live trees would continue to stabilize soils on steep hill 

slopes in the long-term, as discussed previously. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 58 

Approximately 375 acres of fuel break treatments around private parcels and 381 acres of 

roadside treatments are also proposed along primary roads in the Calumet Project Area. Many of 

these treatment areas contain small, isolated slopes with mass movement potential and slopes 

exceeding 40%. Ground-based equipment operations are excluded from these areas as part of 

project Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs (Appendix B), so conventional logging (i.e., hand 

crews) would be required in these areas. Furthermore, fuel breaks would be thinned only, 

leaving live trees and their root systems to provide for soil and slope stabilization. 

Road Work: Other than cable access roads (discussed separately), no new road construction or 

temporary roads are proposed to take place on areas with potentially unstable slopes. Road 

maintenance and reconstruction activities would take place on 0.7 miles of road that are currently 

located on potentially unstable slopes. This road work would correct existing road issues and 

minimize the risk of road or slope failure due to excess road runoff. However, the increased soil 

and slope disturbances from vehicle use and road work also poses a slight risk of indirectly 

causing increased road runoff, erosion, and minor slope failures. A map of these road locations 

can be found in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as

well as the project file. 

Existing open road segments on slopes with stability concerns pose a greater risk of failure due 

to increased soil and slope disturbances from vehicle use, road maintenance, and storm related 

runoff and erosion. Although closed road segments receive only administrative use traffic, they 

can pose a high risk of slope failures due to the increased length of time between scheduled road 

maintenance. Seasonally open road segments located on slopes with stability concerns pose the 

same risks associated with both open and closed roads as discussed previously. Stability 

problems would be corrected through maintenance or reconstruction over time, as appropriated 

funds are available. Without road maintenance and improvement work, existing road-related 

instabilities would continue to worsen, thereby increasing the risk of slope failure. 

The Calumet Project has been designed such that all new road construction under Alternative B 

would generally avoid slopes exceeding 40%. Any soils prone to movement on these slopes 

would also be avoided. All ground-based equipment operations, including road building, are 

excluded from these areas, except to cross short, isolated segments, as part of project Design 

Criteria and WCP/BMP measures in order to minimize the risk of initiating a slope failure during 

or following harvest activities in these areas (Appendix B). Road maintenance and 

reconstruction activities would correct existing problems and reinforce road segments existing on 

potentially unstable slopes, thereby minimizing the risk of road-related slope failure. 

Cable Roads: The risk of potential slope failure is highest with this alternative due to cable road 

construction and presence on the landscape. In order to complete cable logging operations, 

approximately 4.8 miles of newly constructed cable roads would also be required. Cable road 

construction would disturb both soils and slopes and thus poses the greatest risk of initiating a slope 

failure directly or indirectly following initial construction. Cable roads would require full bench 

design and construction methods, as well as blasting in steep, rocky terrain. Blasting would disturb 

soils and slopes and may initiate localized slope failures during actual road construction. Refer to 

the Transportation and Engineering Section for more information on cable road construction. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 59 

Approximately one mile of this total would cross areas with slope stability concerns in the 

Calumet-Blue Lead Ridge area. However, the proposed cable roads would be built at the ridgetop, so no cable road construction would occur in mid-slope locations. Mid-slope road locations 

tend to cause more slope adjustments than roads on ridge tops or valley bottoms. All other cable 

road locations avoid mid-slope positions and paths that traverse back and forth across steep hill 

slopes. Therefore, these routes would not cut into already steep slopes, expose soils, and intercept 

and collect water. The longer the cable roads remain on the landscape, the higher the probability 

of failure, especially in response to higher than average precipitation events. However, if such an 

event occurred, actions would be implemented to stabilize road and resource problems and reduce 

impacts to soil. Overall, if such an event occurred, stabilization and rehabilitation measures would 

trend toward returning the detrimental soil disturbance levels below this threshold. 

Road-related Design Criteria and engineering controls have been included to minimize negative 

impacts to soil and water resources and to mitigate the risk of slope failure from all road activities 

as much as possible (Design Criteria, Appendix B). All cable roads would be closed to traffic 

following harvest activities as part of project Design Criteria. Depending upon site-specific 

conditions and post-activity stabilization needs, these roads would generally be out-sloped to 

disperse road runoff and mimic natural hill slope runoff process. Structures and fill material 

installed at stream and drainage crossings would also be removed to prevent plugging and failure. 

Prescribed Broadcast Burning: Alternative B proposes the implementation of approximately 

15,990 acres of prescribed broadcast burning that would take place throughout the Calumet

Project area. All prescribed burn blocks were used for soil analysis rather than just the targeted 

south aspect hill slopes to account for any additional burning that may occur during 

implementation. Approximately 1,740 acres of prescribed burning would occur on areas with 

slope stability concerns. A map of these soil locations can be found in Appendix A of the 

Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. However, 

prescribed burning activities associated with the Action Alternative are not expected to have any 

measureable effects on slope stability, directly or indirectly. 

Although prescribed burning is to take place across the landscape, including areas where slopes 

exceed 40% (i.e., canyon areas), this type of activity does not normally disturb soils to a degree 

that triggers slope failures or increase the risk of mass failure for several reasons. First, the 

project has been designed to use existing roads and trails as fire containment lines where 

possible. Using existing roads and trails limits the need for constructing both dozer and handdug fire lines. Secondly, project Design Criteria generally prevents fire containment lines from 

being constructed across these soils with the potential for movement on slopes exceeding 40%. 

These in turn minimize the amount of ground disturbance and the risk of initiating any localized 

slope failures. Additionally, while surface vegetation and downed wood may be consumed in 

prescribed fire, the below-ground root systems are generally left intact. Although some mortality 

may occur, most root systems are expected to remain intact and provide for both short and longterm stabilization. This has been directly observed in low-intensity areas of past wildfires 

including the Jasper, Grizzly, Battle Creek, Rogers Shack, and Elk Mountain II Fires; in 

prescribed fires conducted locally on the Black Hills National Forest; and has been quantified 

during research in the Jasper Fire area (Gould 2003). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 60 

Wildfire Effects: The Action Alternative is generally expected to indirectly reduce the risk of

slope failures associated with wildfire and post-fire rain events through the treatment of 

hazardous fuels. In contrast to Alternative A, Alternative B would directly decrease existing 

levels of dead, downed wood through fuels treatment and prescribed burning. This in turn 

influences how a wildfire might behave in the project area (refer to the Fire and Fuels section). 

If a wildfire were to occur in the area following implementation of Alternative B, fire residence 

times are expected to be shorter and fire temperatures would be cooler because less dead, 

downed wood is present to burn. Therefore, while effects from a future wildfire are unknown, 

effects on soils would likely be less severe and better mimic the historic burning characteristics 

associated with more frequent, but less intense wildfires. Although hill slopes can be expected to 

continue to adjust in response to natural weathering processes such as freezing and thawing, a 

wildfire under either Action Alternative would generally be expected to result in less exposed 

mineral soil and fewer changes to soil characteristics as compared to the Alternative A. 

Cumulative Impacts – Slope Stability and Unstable Soils 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to slope stability and unstable soils. Any failures that may 

occur are expected to be isolated, localized, and minor in both severity and extent. There is little 

risk that material from slope failures would be transported to the stream network or other water 

resources, unless the failure occurred immediately adjacent to these water resources. Design 

Criteria and appropriate WCP/BMP measures apply to all forest management activities and uses. 

These measures are designed to control runoff and erosion for a 10 year storm event (USDA 

Forest Service 2006c). Therefore the risk of slope failure is mitigated for typical storm events 

observed in the Black Hills. 

Grazing management throughout the project area is not expected to cause slope stability issues 

because cows generally avoid steep slopes to begin with. Dispersed recreation activities also do not 

cause slope stability issues due to the lack of concentrated use or avoidance of steep areas. 

Concentrated recreation sites are purposely located in flatter terrain and therefore avoid steep slopes. 

Mining activities can take place on steep slopes but project-specific design criteria apply to these 

activities as well, and mitigate the risk of slope failures associated with mining-related activities. 

Public use of roads and trails is managed under the Forest Travel Management Plan and road 

maintenance work on these roads and trails occurs as necessary and appropriated funds are available. 

Soil Erosion and Displacement 

Soil erosion is defined as the movement of individual soil particles by a force, and is initiated by 

the planar removal of material from the soil surface (sheet erosion) or by concentrated removal 

of material in a down slope direction (rill erosion). Surface erosion is a function of four factors: 

(1) susceptibility of the soil to detachment; (2) magnitude of external forces (raindrop impact or 

overland flow); (3) the amount of protection available by material that reduces the magnitude of 

the external force (soil cover); and (4) the management of the soil that makes it less susceptible 

to erosion (Foster 1982; Megahan 1986). 

Although erosion is a natural process occurring on the landscape, management activities can increase 

the amount of material transported offsite, as well as accelerate the rate at which it is removed. 

Severe erosion can impair long-term soil productivity if soils are heavily disturbed on shallow or 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 61 

highly erodible soils. Erosion potential is the relative susceptibility to sheet and rill erosion when 

surface cover is completely removed from the site. Ground vegetation, downed debris, root masses, 

and duff help stabilize soil. When soil is disturbed by management practices, it can be exposed to 

runoff. When this happens, sheet and rill erosion occur. Erosion hazard is therefore an indication of 

the risk of soil loss associated with disturbance. Soil erosion is discussed in terms: 

• Soil rutting and displacement, 

• Soil erosion hazard for activities occurring off roads and trails, 

• Soil suitability for natural surface roads and trails, 

• Erosion hazard associated with natural surface roads and trails, and 

• Windthrow potential. 

Soils within the project area have moderate infiltration rates due to the moderately fine to coarse 

textured loamy soils. However, the extensive rock outcrops found throughout the area prevent the 

downward movement of water within the soil profile or quickly shed water as overland runoff. 

This equates to a moderate to high rate of runoff during wet periods and correlates to a higher 

potential for soil erosion. These both indicate that substantial erosion can occur from off-road 

disturbances if bare soil is exposed. A map displaying hydrologic soil group classifications within 

the project area is included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist 

Report, as well as the project file. Associated GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 

Soil Rutting Hazard and Displacement 

Concentration of runoff, accelerated erosion, sediment delivery to surface waters, and damage to 

roads and trails can result from soil rutting. Soil rutting hazard ratings are an indication of how 

easily surface ruts can form through the operation of forestland equipment (USDA NRCS 2009). 

Soils within the Calumet Project Area are a mosaic of the two ends of this rating spectrum. Soils 

located on ridge tops and steep slopes throughout the project area are rated as “slight” rutting 

hazard due to the large amount of rock fragments in these soils that prevent rutting. However, 

the mid-slope and lower elevations are rated primarily as “severe” meaning soils are easily 

rutted. A few scattered areas of “moderate” associated with soils derived from sedimentary 

rocks on the eastern project boundary. These latter areas coincide with areas that are suited for 

ground-based operations based on the gentler slopes. A map of the soil rutting hazard is

included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as 

the project file. Associated GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 

Soil displacement and puddling (i.e., soil deformation and compaction) may occur 

simultaneously with rutting. Displacement can occur when the productive, upper layer of soil is 

removed or mixed with underlying, less productive layers during harvest or site preparation. The 

most common causes of displacement are side-casting of soils during road or fire-line 

construction, skidding logs, and landing construction and rehabilitation. Wind-thrown trees are 

also a form of soil displacement. 

Soil Erosion Hazard (Off-Road, Off-Trail) 

Erosion hazard is an indication of the risk of soil loss in a managed forest stand. The ratings in 

this interpretation indicate the hazard of soil loss from off-road and off-trail disturbance activities 

that remove most or all of the protective ground cover and expose the soil surface (USDA NRCS 

2009). Soil loss is caused by sheet or rill erosion in off-road or off-trail areas where 50 to 75 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 62 

percent of the surface has been exposed by logging, grazing, mining, or other kinds of 

disturbance (USDA NRCS 2009). Erosion hazard ratings for off-road and off-trail ground 

disturbances within the project area are presented in Table 3. Nearly all of the soils in the 

Calumet Project Area are rated as “moderate” (57%) or “severe” (33%), with the exception of a 

few soils associated with stringer drainage bottoms, which are rated as “slight.” A map of soil 

erosion potential for off-road and off-trail operations is located in Appendix A of the Geology, 

Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. Associated GIS data are 

located in the project file. 

• Approximately 10,400 acres (33%) have soils rated as “severe” for erosion potential from 

off-road and off-trail disturbances. Intensive management or special equipment and 

methods are needed to prevent excessive soil loss for these soils. These areas correspond 

to the ridge tops and upper portions of hill slopes throughout the project area. 

• Approximately 18,000 acres (57%) are rated as “moderate” for erosion potential from 

off-road and off-trail disturbances. Expected soil loss is small and generally, no special 

measures are needed for these soils. These areas correspond to the mid- and lower-slope 

positions on hill sides throughout the project area. 

• The remaining area (approximately 3,000 acres or 9%) is rated as “slight”, corresponding 

to stringer drainage bottoms and broad, flat ridge tops. Soils inundated by Sheridan Lake

are not rated. 

Table 3-3 Soil Map Units in the Calumet Project Area with Elevated Risk of Erosion 

Erosion 

Rating Soil Map Units included in rating Acres in Project 

Percent of 

Project 

Very 

Severe None None None 

Severe 

RlG – Rock outcrop-Pactola complex 

RnG – Rock outcrop-Sawdust complex 

VoG – Vanocker-Sawdust-Rock outcrop 

10,420 33% 

Moderate 

HeE – Heely channery loam 

HgD – Hilger-Virkula complex 

HoD – Hilger-Virkula complex 

PaE – Pactola-Virkula-Rock outcrop complex 

SrE – Sawdust-Vanocker-Paunsaugunt complex 

VkE – Vanocker-Lakoa complex 

Pt, Or – Pits, quarries, Sheridan Lake dam 

17,996 57% 

Slight 

BsB – Bullflat-Cordeston 

CvB – Cordeston loam 

CwB – Cordeston-Marshbrook loams 

HfC – Heely-Cordeston complex 

HgB – Hilger cobbly loam 

PbD – Paunsaugunt-Gurney complex 

VnC – Vanocker-Paunsaugunt complex 

VpC – Virkula-Pactola complex 

2,981 9% 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 63 

Soil Suitability for Roads (Natural Surface) and Erosion Hazard (Roads and Trails) 

The soil suitability for natural surface road rating indicates the suitability for using the natural 

surface of the soil for roads (USDA NRCS 2009). The erosion hazard rating for roads and trails 

is an indicator of the hazard of soil loss from un-surfaced roads and trails (USDA NRCS 2009). 

Soils across the entire Calumet Project Area are rated as “poorly suited” for natural surface 

roads, with the exception of a few, scattered stringers rated as “moderately suited.” Furthermore, 

the project area is dominated (91% of the project area) by soils rated as having a “severe” 

erosion hazard. This indicates that substantial erosion can occur from natural surface roads 

without adequate vegetation and/or erosion control measures. Maps of soil suitability for natural 

surface roads and erosion hazard for natural surface roads and trails are included in the Appendix 

A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Associated GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 

Both of these ratings indicate that the area is largely not well suited for natural surface roads and 

additional runoff and erosion control measures are required for these types of roads. Water-road 

interaction surveys completed during the fall of 2011, also indicated that existing roads required 

more drainage structures to control runoff and erosion. Examples of these improvements include 

but are not limited to more closely-spaced drainage features, more frequent maintenance, use of 

reinforcing geo-textiles, and aggregate surfacing. 

Windthrow Potential 

Wind damage to forest stands is a natural and common occurrence in the Black Hills, and can 

range from a single tree to thousands of acres (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). Wind storms in 

the Black Hills are often associated with heavy precipitation events that saturate soils and 

decrease the inherent soil and root system holding strength, thus making trees even more 

susceptible to wind throw. Windthrow is a type of soil displacement that occurs when strong 

winds cause trees to fall, uprooting them from the soil. Windthrow is a complex function of soil 

depth, soil moisture, tree health, root system development, forest density, slope position, and 

slope alignment with prevailing wind directions, among other environmental variables. 

Tree mortality caused by windthrow is not generally desired, but each fallen tree plays an 

important role in the ecosystem. The pit and mound that result from an uprooted tree can persist 

for several decades, providing micro-habitats for both flora and fauna species. Thin or 

discontinuous mineral soil horizons generally occur on the mounds, whereas the pits tend to 

accumulate organic matter. The pits also provide micro-storage of water during precipitation and 

runoff events. Fallen trees create coarse woody debris, which provides habitat for plants, 

wildlife, and insects; creates forage for animals, particularly birds; and is necessary for soil 

nutrient cycling and long-term productivity. 

Ponderosa pine is generally considered a wind firm tree species, but is prone to windthrow on 

exposed ridges of micaceous schist or limestone formations, particularly in higher elevation areas that 

have less topography and forest stands to offer wind shelter (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). Wind 

damage most often occurs on hillsides directly exposed to westerly winds or at the edges of high 

clearings such as outcrops, ridge saddles, large fire areas, or meadows (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 64 

Windthrow is a natural process in forest stands, but can be increased if forest stands are thinned or 

killed by natural disturbances (i.e., wildfire or MPB) such that individual trees are isolated and 

vulnerable to strong winds toppling them over, uprooting the tree from the soil. A dramatic 

change in forest stand density can result in increased windthrow (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). 

Dense forest stands typically contain trees that are tall and thin due to tight tree spacing and 

competition that prevents trees from developing wider diameters and root systems. Consequently, 

these trees do not have the bole and root systems necessary to withstand strong winds when the 

stand is opened up (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). 

Five soil map units within the Calumet Project Area are prone to wind throw. These include the 

two dominant soil groups Pactola-Virkula-Rock outcrop complex (PaE) and Rock outcrop-Pactola 

complex (RlG), as well as the Sawdust-Vanocker-Paunsaugunt complex (SrE), VanockerPaunsaugunt complex (VnC), and Virkula-Pactola complex (VpC) soil map units. Altogether 

these total 28,400 acres or 89% of the project area. These units are located throughout the project 

area, especially on exposed ridgelines. A map depicting soil map units with windthrow hazard is 

located in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as 

the project file. Associated GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Erosion and Displacement 

Alternative A would not involve any additional management activities. Thus, this alternative 

would not have any proposed actions on or near soils with high erosion risk. Therefore, there 

would be no direct effects to soil erosion rates with the implementation of the Alternative A. 

Soil disturbances and erosion would be expected to continue at current rates until a natural 

disturbance occurs. A wildfire that may be experienced under Alternative A is expected to have 

the greatest potential of exposing and altering soil conditions and thus the greatest risk of 

indirectly contributing to increases in soil erosion for the same reasons discussed previously 

under the Slope Stability and Unstable Soils section. Since hill slopes in the project area are 

gently undulating, with the exception of rocky canyon walls, any soil erosion that may be 

generated is likely to travel only short distances. However, if an intense rainfall event occurs, 

soil erosion may increase greatly and mimic conditions observed during post-fire precipitation 

events in the Jasper Fire area, in which eroded sediment was carried in flood waters all the way 

to Angostura Reservoir. In the case of the Calumet Project, sediment, ash, and debris could be 

carried through the stream network into Sheridan Lake or into Spring Creek and transported 

downstream through southern Rapid City. 

Wildfire effects to soils have been well documented and are thoroughly presented in “Wildland 

Fire in Ecosystems: Effects of Fire on Soil and Water” (Neary et al. 2005). Fires increase the 

potential for both wind and water erosion of soil. Fire consumes most of the shielding plant and 

litter cover, which provides protection from wind and raindrop splash, as well as soil stability 

(Neary et al. 2005). Ultimately, erosion rates would depend on the timing, duration, and 

intensity of rainfall following the fire, as well as the recovery of plant communities. 

Past monitoring and field investigations within the project area found that most existing erosion 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 65 

problems are related to roads and their effects on streams (USDA Forest Service 2010a). 

Without road maintenance and improvement work, as well as stream restoration efforts, these 

sites would continue to degrade, eroding soil and transporting the resulting sediment through the 

stream network. Correcting problem areas would occur more slowly compared to both action 

alternatives, depending on when and how much appropriated funding is made available. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Erosion and Displacement 

Vegetation Management Activities: Alternative B proposes thinning ponderosa pine forest stands 

through various commercial and non-commercial methods. These activities would include various 

commercial and non-commercial methods utilizing both ground-based equipment and aerial 

methods, such as cable logging. Aerial logging units were excluded from analysis of effects to soils 

for erosion and displacement since these methods have limited ground activities that would cause 

erosion or additional disturbance to soils. Ground-based equipment operations have a greater 

potential to expose bare soil to runoff caused by rainfall and snowmelt and create conditions with a 

greater likelihood of soil erosion and subsequent sediment transport to water bodies (Refer to the 

Water Quality section of the effects analysis for more discussion on this topic). 

Ground-Based Logging Systems: Approximately 3,850 acres out of the total vegetation 

management activities proposed by Alternative B have soils with elevated erosion risk. This 

equates to 12% of the project area. A map of these locations can be found in Appendix A of the 

Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

However, ground-based logging activities are not expected to result in detrimental levels of soil 

erosion, directly or indirectly based on the inclusion of project Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs 

that prevent or minimize erosion. Examples of such practices include use of existing and 

designated trails; operating season and moisture limitations; operating on a slash mat where 

possible; installation and maintenance of drainage structures; seeding of disturbed areas; and 

rehabilitating skid roads and trails. The proven effectiveness of WCPs and BMPs used on the 

BHNF as well as ground cover following harvest treatments has been monitored and meets or 

exceeds recommended levels found in the Forest Plan (Thomas 2008; USDA Forest Service

2010a). Full implementation of the practices is expected to meet compliance with Forest Plan 

Standards and Guidelines 1103, 1104, 1105, 1106, 1108, 1109, 1110, and 1111 to minimize 

detrimental soil disturbance, take steps to protect soils from runoff and erosion, and rehabilitate 

disturbed sites (USDA Forest Service 2006a). 

Aerial Logging Systems (Cable Logging): Aerial logging systems are not expected to result in 

soil erosion, directly or indirectly. Aerial logging systems would minimize soil erosion due to 

the fact that logs are suspended off the ground by cables and ground equipment is not needed to 

fell or yard trees to landings. 

Non-Commercial Vegetation Management: Non-commercial thinning, fuel breaks, and roadside 

treatments are not expected to result in detrimental levels of soil erosion, directly or indirectly. 

Erosion is expected to be minimal in these areas due to the required implementation of project 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 66 

Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs, and the fact that these activities would primarily be 

accomplished with hand crews. 

Road Work: Alternative B poses the greatest risk of both short and long-term road erosion 

problems, as well as increased soil erosion rates and volumes from roads. Approximately 0.4 

miles of new road construction (excluding cable roads which are discussed separately); 13.5 miles 

of temporary roads out of the total proposed 15 miles; and 92 miles of reconstruction or 

maintenance out of the total proposed 106 miles combined would occur on soils highly susceptible

to erosion under this alternative. The remainder of the proposed road work would not occur on 

soils highly susceptible to erosion. A map of these road locations can be found in Appendix A of 

the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

New road construction poses the greatest risk of elevated erosion, particularly in the abovementioned areas, because these new roads would be native surface roads. However, all new 

roads are required to implement standard WCP/BMP measures to control runoff and erosion as 

part of project Design Criteria (Appendix B). WCPs are designed to control runoff and erosion 

from a 10 year storm event (USDA Forest Service 2006c). New roads on areas with the potential 

for severe erosion may also be closed to traffic following harvest activities to protect soil and 

water resources as part of project Design Criteria. 

Road maintenance and reconstruction activities would correct existing runoff and erosion issues 

on some roads in the project area (i.e., roads used for harvest activities). This would reduce 

sediment transport to streams and water bodies resulting from these road problems. However, 

problems related to roads that would not be used during harvest activities would continue to exist 

until corrected. On-going use of native surface roads in areas where soils are especially prone to 

erosion would continue to result in rutting, collection and concentration of road runoff, and 

associated soil erosion from these road templates. Project Design Criteria to address this issue 

includes seasonal or year-long road closure to protect soil and water resources; seeding the road 

template to establish stabilizing vegetation; installation of additional road surface drainage 

structures; or placement of aggregate. 

Cable Roads: Erosion rates and volumes would be highest with this alternative due to the 

inclusion of proposed cable access roads that would be required to complete cable operations. In 

order to complete cable logging operations, approximately 4.8 miles of newly constructed cable 

roads would also be required – all of which would occur on soils with severe erosion concerns. 

As discussed previously, none of the cable road construction is proposed to take place in midslope locations. Therefore, most routes would not cut into already steep slopes, expose soils, and 

intercept and collect water that would substantially increase soil erosion rates and volumes. 

However, cable road segments may cause some localized increases in soil erosion, which in turn 

could lead to localized slope stability issues. 

However, road-related Design Criteria and engineering controls have been included to prevent 

negative impacts to soil and water resources and to mitigate the risk of increased soil erosion from 

all road activities as much as possible (Appendix B). All cable roads would be closed to traffic 

following harvest activities as part of project Design Criteria. Depending upon site-specific 

conditions and post-activity stabilization needs, these roads would generally be out-sloped to 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 67 

disperse road runoff and mimic natural hill slope runoff process; and structures and fill material 

installed at stream and drainage crossings would be removed to prevent plugging and failure. 

The risk of observing measureable soil erosion is greatest for cable roads that would remain on 

the landscape long-term for reasons discussed previously under slope stability. Depending on 

the severity and size of the slope failure, soil erosion could be localized and short-term or 

chronic and long-lasting. Most slope failures in the Black Hills are localized in extent and do not 

deliver material to streams and water bodies, unless the slope failure occurs immediately 

adjacent to these areas (i.e., stream channel undercuts a slope causing it to fail). If such an event 

occurred, immediate actions would be implemented to stabilize road and resource problems and 

reduce impacts to soils. Furthermore, WCPs are designed to control runoff damage from at least 

a 10-year storm of any duration (USDA Forest Service 2006c). Therefore, for typical 

precipitation events observed in the Black Hills area, soil erosion is not expected to approach 

levels that would be deemed as detrimental. 

Off-Road Public Use: The removal of trees through harvest activities under the Action 

Alternative may make it easier for public users to access hill slopes and trails associated with 

activities in the project area. However, the Forest Travel Management Plan allows OHV use in 

designated areas only. Refer to the Travel Section for more discussion pertaining to Travel 

Management on the Black Hills. Therefore, increased erosion as a result of off-road use of trails 

and hill slopes should be minimized. The potential for damage caused by off-road vehicles can 

be further reduced by retaining slash and tree tops on site to function as a natural obstacle to 

deter unauthorized off-road travel. Additionally, roads and trails would be rehabilitated where 

needed to discourage unauthorized use. Road rehabilitation techniques may include surface

ripping to alleviate compaction, partial or full restoration of original slope contour, slash 

placement, and entrance barricades. 

Prescribed Broadcast Burning: Alternative B proposes the implementation of approximately 

15,990 acres of prescribed broadcast burning throughout the Calumet Project area. All 

prescribed burn blocks were used for soil analysis rather than just the targeted south aspect hill 

slopes to account for any additional burning that may occur during implementation. 

Approximately 6,580 acres of soils with erosion concerns are contained within these prescribed 

broadcast burn units. A map of these soil locations can be found in Appendix A of the Geology, 

Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file.

Prescribed burning activities associated with Alternative B are not expected to result in 

detrimental levels of soil erosion, directly or indirectly. This type of activity does not normally 

disturb soils to a degree that results in detrimental levels of soil erosion based on past 

observations of prescribed burn areas. Prescribed burning is intended to decrease the negative 

effects to soils, should a wildfire occur. Furthermore, prescribed burning is not proposed in the 

steep portions associated with the Spring Creek drainage and Blue Lead Mountain/Calumet 

Ridge area, where soils are more susceptible to erosion. Prescribed burning associated with the 

Calumet Project was designed to use existing roads and trails as fire containment lines when 

possible, thus limiting the need for both dozer and hand-dug fire lines. This in turn minimizes 

the amount of ground disturbance and exposed bare soil. 

Additionally, while surface vegetation and downed wood may be consumed in prescribed fire, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 68 

the below-ground root systems are generally left intact. Although some mortality may occur, 

most root systems remain intact and provide for adequate ground cover to limit erosion. Some 

areas may have higher intensity burning and thus may result in moderate to high soil burn 

severity. Examples include dead tree stumps and roots that tend to burn completely and where 

downed wood has accumulated naturally or been purposely piled. Since these areas are isolated, 

small in size (less than 1,000 sq. feet), and located within a mosaic of lower intensity burn, soil 

erosion is expected to remain below detrimental levels. 

It is reasonable to expect that low to moderate severity fire resulting from prescribed fire would 

not increase soil erosion to levels considered detrimental to soil productivity. Gould (2003) 

found that runoff and erosion were generated in the Jasper Fire area during summer 

thunderstorms when less than 60% effective ground cover was on-site. Prescribed fires are 

generally conducted during conditions which result in shorter flame lengths, shorter fire 

residence times, and when soil heating is expected to be lower as compared to when wildfires 

occur. Thus, the effects to soils are generally limited in severity and spatial extent. Gould 

(2003) also found the percentage of exposed mineral soil following low severity fire in the Jasper 

Fire area ranged between 0 and 30%. 

Wildfire Effects: Alternative B is generally expected to indirectly reduce the risk of detrimental 

soil erosion associated with wildfire and post-fire rain events through the treatment of hazardous 

fuels. A wildfire under Alternative B would be expected to result in less exposed mineral soil 

and thus less soil erosion would occur for the reasons discussed previously. 

Cumulative Impacts – Soil Erosion and Displacement 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to soil erosion and displacement. Any soil erosion that may 

occur related to implementation of the Calumet Project is expected to be localized, minor in both 

severity and extent, and thus well below levels that would be considered detrimental. This 

expectation also applies to other forest management activities and uses. Design Criteria and 

appropriate WCP/BMP measures apply to all forest management activities and uses. These 

measures are designed to control runoff and erosion for a 10 year storm event (USDA Forest 

Service 2006c). Therefore the risk of cumulative detrimental soil erosion is mitigated for typical 

storm events observed in the Black Hills for all forest management activities. 

Grazing management throughout the project area is not expected to extensive soil erosion. 

Dispersed recreation activities generally do not cause excessive soil erosion issues due to the lack 

of concentrated use. Concentrated recreation sites are purposely located in flatter terrain which 

minimizes the potential for soil erosion and employs management strategies to guide concentrated 

uses where measures are in place (i.e., WCPs/BMPs) to minimize soil erosion. Mining activities 

can take place on but Design Criteria apply to these activities as well to mitigate risk of soil 

erosion associated with mining-related activities. Public use of roads and trails is managed under 

the Forest Travel Management Plan and road maintenance work on these roads and trails would 

occur as necessary and appropriated funds are available to correct any soil erosion issues. 

Soil Compaction 

Compaction can occur on all soils, particularly if soil moisture conditions are too wet; if 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 69 

excessive equipment passes are made; or exceptionally heavy equipment is used (i.e., pressure 

applied per unit area). Soil compaction results from a packing together of soil particles due to 

increased pressure on the soil surface, as by equipment or large animals. Compaction is 

predominantly influenced by moisture content; depth to saturation; percent of sand, silt, and clay; 

soil structure; organic matter content; and content of coarse fragments. Susceptibility to 

compaction is generally increased during wetter periods. Compaction associated with equipment 

and vehicles is often accompanied by the formation of ruts as discussed previously. Compaction 

impairs water infiltration, root growth, and soil biota, all of which contribute to increased runoff 

and erosion. Compaction also affects plant production and composition and affects organisms 

living within the soil, which contributes to overall site productivity. 

Five soil map units within the Calumet Project Area are rated as being especially susceptible to 

compaction, but can usually be operated on by controlling the season, location, or intensity of

equipment operations. These include the CwB, HoD, PaE, VkE, and VpC soil map units. 

Altogether, these five soil map units equate to approximately 18,160 acres or 57% of the Calumet 

Project Area. The Cordeston-Marshbrook loam (CwB) is found in meadows, whereas the 

remaining soil units are scattered across the project area. Both the Pactola and Virkula soils found 

in these remaining soil map units are susceptible to developing compacted soil layers where soils 

have lower rock content. The PaE soil map unit is one of two that dominates the Calumet Project 

Area and corresponds to mid- and lower slope positions throughout the project area that have slopes 

conducive to ground-based operations. A map of the soil compaction risk is included in Appendix 

A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Compaction 

Alternative A does not have any proposed activities and thus no direct effect on soils that are 

highly susceptible to compaction. This alternative would not have any new activities occur 

within the project area so soil compaction would generally not be affected and remain unchanged 

from existing conditions. 

However, this alternative does not address the increasing level of hazardous fuels already 

downed or continuing to accumulate on the ground surface due to MPB activity. Thus, the 

wildfire hazard and potential severity of effects would continue to increase. Soils can be made 

more susceptible to compaction if fire conditions are severe enough to alter soil structure, thus 

breaking down soil aggregates (Neary et al. 2005). Although fire does not directly cause 

compaction, by consuming organic material on top of and within the mineral soil, soils in burned 

areas are made more susceptible to compaction from other management activities, as well as 

natural processes (Neary et al. 2005). Organic material is no longer present in the top layers or 

interstitial spaces between soil particles to help absorb applied pressure 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Compaction 

Vegetation Management Activities: Alternative B contains approximately 12,600 acres of groundbased logging activities that would take place on soils highly susceptible to compaction. This 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 70 

equates to 40% of the total project area. A map of these soil locations can be found in Appendix A 

of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Thinning, mechanical fuels treatment, and prescribed burning activities associated with Alternative 

B are not expected to directly or indirectly result in detrimental levels of soil compaction. Much of 

the project area contains rock outcroppings and extensive surface rock within the soil which protect 

soils in these areas from compaction. By controlling the season, location, and intensity of equipment 

operations, harvest activities can take place on soils with a higher susceptibility to compaction, 

without causing significant detrimental disturbance. Management activities have been designed to 

minimize soil compaction through the use of Design Criteria, including designated and existing skid 

trails in sensitive areas, soil moisture limitations, and seasonal restrictions. 

Skid trails, and temporary roads utilized during harvest activities are to be rehabilitated postactivity as necessary, as part of Design Criteria measures to stabilize soils following management 

activities. Full implementation of Design Criteria measures is expected to comply with Forest 

Plan Standards and Guidelines 1103, 1104, 1105, 1106, 1109, 1110, and 1111 to minimize or 

rehabilitate soil compaction (USDA Forest Service 2006a). According to research conducted by 

Luce and Black (1997), it is reasonable to expect that skid trail rehabilitation treatments would 

decrease soil compaction and improve water infiltration on roads and trails. 

Alternative B proposes both treatment within and immediately surrounding aspen stands. By 

their very nature these soils tend to be moist year round, making it difficult to operate equipment 

without damaging soils. Ground-based treatment, particularly within the aspen stands, has the 

potential to damage the moist soils found there through compaction and rutting. Treatment 

methods that avoid ground-based equipment operations within aspen stands such as hand felling, 

yarding from outside the aspen clone, or leaving felled pine in place, would protect these moist 

soils and conserve soil characteristics. Equipment operations over snow and/or frozen soil 

conditions in these areas surrounding the aspen should provide adequate soil protection, as well 

as meet operational needs. 

Prescribed Broadcast Burning: Any prescribed broadcast burning would not directly or indirectly 

cause soil compaction because burning is conducted under conditions which minimize the fire 

intensity and thus the consumption of organic layers and level of soil heating. 

Cumulative Impacts – Soil Compaction 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to soil compaction. Any soil compaction that may occur 

related to implementation of the Calumet Project is expected to be localized and well below 

levels that would be considered detrimental. This expectation also applies to other forest 

management activities and uses. Design Criteria and appropriate WCP/BMP measures apply to 

all forest management activities and uses. Therefore the risk of cumulative detrimental soil 

compaction is mitigated for all forest management activities. 

Grazing management throughout the project area is not expected to cause detrimental levels of 

soil compaction due to where livestock naturally tend to roam and the presence of rock 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 71 

fragments in most of the soils within the project area. Compaction from grazing is generally 

more prevalent in wet soils associated with wetlands and riparian areas (refer to the Wetlands, 

Riparian Areas, and Ground Water Dependent Ecosystems section for more discussion). 

Dispersed recreation activities also do not tend to cause detrimental soil compaction due to the 

lack of concentrated use for this type of recreation. Concentrated recreation sites are purposely 

located in flatter terrain and therefore avoid steep slopes. Mining activities can cause 

compaction if ground-based equipment is used, but Design Criteria apply to these activities as 

well to mitigate this risk. 

Soil Heating and Damage by Fire 

Damage to soils caused by burning is often discussed in terms of “severely burned” soils. The 

National Soil Management Handbook (FSH 2509.18) defines “severely burned” soil as: “...a 

condition where most woody debris and the entire forest floor are consumed down to bare mineral 

soil. Soil may have turned red due to extreme heat. Also, fine roots and organic matter are 

charred in the upper one-half inch of mineral soil.” In general, for a soil to be considered severely 

burned the heat needs to be so intense and the residence time of the fire long enough such that the 

soil structure and color may be visibly changed. A circumstance where this is most likely to occur 

is under a burning slash pile, where the fire sits on the top of the soil for a sufficient time to 

literally cook the soil. In the case of a wind driven wildfire, the heat and residence time of the fire, 

though enough to severely burn the vegetation and perhaps the litter and duff layers, are not likely 

to cook the soil to the extent where soil structure and color are visibly changed over broad areas. 

There may be small isolated locations in the burned area where the fire persisted long enough to 

severely burn the soil, such as around stump holes or downed logs. 

Severely burned soils are considered to have experienced physical, chemical, and biological 

changes resulting from high-intensity burns of long duration. Areas classified as high soil burn 

severity according to Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) techniques (USDA Forest 

Service 1995; Parsons et al 2010) are considered a detrimental disturbance (USDA Forest Service 

1992) Areas of high soil burn severity retain very little, if any, duff and litter due to the complete 

consumption of the forest floor during a wildfire event. Soils often exhibit some level of water 

repellency caused by the intense heating of wildfires. Therefore, these sites are more susceptible 

to soil erosion and compaction because they no longer have the protection of the litter and duff

layer to absorb water and reduce runoff, or to support equipment pressure (Neary et al 2005). 

Frequent fires are a natural disturbance process and ponderosa pine and grasslands have 

developed over time in response to these processes. Five large wildfires have occurred within 

the Calumet Project Area since the 1920s (Table 3-4). Most of the 1926 Spring Creek Fire 

occurred along the north-eastern project boundary. The north-western portion of the Calumet 

Project Area overlaps part of the area burned by the 1939 McVey Fire and the 1991 Horse Creek 

Fire. The 1992 Bitter Creek Fire and portions of the 2002 Battle Creek Fire occurred in the 

south-eastern part of the Calumet Project Area, in the vicinity of Silver Mountain. Most 

recently, the Beretta II fire occurred in March 2012, in the vicinity of the Beretta Road shooting 

area. Portions of the Bullock II prescribed burn are also located in the same general area as the 

McVey and Horse Creek fires; and have already been burned in the fall of 2007, and/or are 

planned for spring 2012. A map of past wildfires and prescribed burns is included in Appendix 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 72 

A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Outside of these areas, much of the project area has not experienced fire for 100 years or more. 

Table 3-4 Past Wildfires within the Calumet Project Area 

Name Year Total Fire 

Acres 

Acres of 

Fire in 

Project 

Percent of 

in Project 

Spring Creek Fire 1926 284 251 88% 

McVey Fire 1939 20,759 4,592 22% 

Horse Creek Fire 1991 2,673 1,968 74% 

Bitter Creek Fire 1992 73 73 100% 

Battle Creek Fire 2002 13,495 1,492 11% 

Beretta II Fire 2012 21 21 100% 

Soils in this area have a relatively low degree of natural water repellency prior to fire 

disturbance, based on the loamy soil textures. Current fire research points to the fact that soils 

tend to begin the recovery process within 3-5 years following wildfires as vegetation is 

established (Neary et al. 2005). Only the Battle Creek Fire had soil burn severity mapped 

because the other fires occurred long before Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) 

mapping and assessment techniques were developed. Soils within the McVey and Spring Creek 

fires have had 70-85 years of recovery. Other wildfire areas have had 10-20 years to recover. 

Any fire-induced water repellency associated with these fires has long-since dissipated with the 

annual freeze-thaw cycles. 

Soil burn severity is generally not mapped for prescribed fires, due to the lower intensity fire 

behavior that is employed. However, two of the more recent prescribed fire areas do contain 

areas with moderate and isolated high soil burn severity. These include the Bullock II and Bitter 

prescribed fire areas. Some rocky areas within the completed portions of the Bullock II 

prescribed burn experienced moderate soil burn severity, but otherwise the fire intensity was 

generally low. Higher fire intensities were purposely used in these areas in order to create open 

patches for wildlife, much like a natural fire would. Soil burn severity in the Bitter prescribed 

burn area is higher than the Bullock II, with more moderate soil burn severity. 

An estimated total of approximately 100 acres of moderate soil burn severity was found in Bitter 

burn blocks D, E, and F during field surveys. Moderate soil burn severity by definition can 

include a mosaic of unburned, low, moderate, and high soil burn severities (Parsons et al. 2010). 

High soil burn severity was observed in small patches within this overall mosaic and estimate to 

comprise about one-third of the area or about 33 acres. High soil burn severity areas exhibited 

less litter, duff, and vegetation cover than other areas, along with a higher percentage of rock. 

This is largely due to higher fire intensities that were used compared to other prescribed burns, 

steeper slopes, and the large amount of rock present in the area that retained and transferred heat 

to soil layers. These areas were also sources of sheet and rill runoff and erosion during the 

spring 2011, rain season, largely due to the lack of protective litter and duff remaining that 

ordinarily would store precipitation, slowing and dispersing runoff. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 73 

Severely burned soils were also found within a hardwood treatment area in the headwaters of 

Horse Creek, along NFSR 243. Pine slash generated during harvest was inadvertently placed on, 

in, and across the stream, as well as on rocky, south facing slopes with very thin soils. These 

piles were then burned during the winter of 2010-2011, when snow obscured the stream and 

riparian area. These piles total approximately 0.6 acres of severely burned soils. 

The recent Beretta II wildfire (March 2012) also resulted in more severe burning to soils due to 

the uncommonly dry fuel conditions associated with record high temperatures, record low 

relative humidity, and strong winds. It is estimated that approximately as much as 15 acres out 

of the total 21 acres resulted in severely burned soils based on initial field observations and 

interviews with fire personnel. 

The NRCS has developed management interpretations which indicate the potential for damage to 

soil nutrients, as well as physical and biotic characteristics caused by fire. All soils within the 

Calumet Project Area are rated low for potential for damage by fire with the exception of the 

soils derived from sedimentary rock units on the eastern edge of the project area, which are rated 

moderate. Much of these limestone and sandstone influenced soils are on private lands. A map 

of the potential for fire damage to soils is included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and 

Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Heating and Damage by Fire 

Alternative A does not have any proposed activities and thus has no direct effect on severely 

burned soils resulting from past wildfires. This alternative would not directly create conditions 

where adverse soil heating and associated effects would occur because no prescribed fire or pile 

burning is proposed. 

However, this alternative has the greatest potential for indirectly resulting in severely burned 

soils as a result of a wildfire, because the biomass and fuels would not be treated and are 

expected to continue to accumulate. Ponderosa pine trees killed by the continued expansion of 

MPB infestations would fall, accumulating on the forest floor, thereby increasing the existing 

levels of dead and downed wood. High levels of downed wood is associated with longer fire 

residence times and high temperatures should a wildfire occur. Large accumulations of dead 

material on the forest floor supports more intense (hotter) and longer duration fires, which can 

substantially heat the soil profile and alter physical, chemical, biological, and hydrologic 

functions (Neary et al. 2005). This in turn can result in moderate to high soil burn severity 

conditions, which is indicated by more exposed mineral soil and changes to physical, chemical, 

biological, and/or hydrological soil properties. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Heating and Damage by Fire 

Some of the proposed vegetation management and prescribed fire activities overlap areas with 

soils that are still recovering from previous burning of slash piles and/or broadcast burning. 

Project specific Design Criteria and WCP/BMP measures related to both activity types have been 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 74 

included to minimize additional disturbance to these recovering soils (Appendix B).

Alternative B has more potential to directly impact soils through soil heating than Alterative A 

because of the proposed use of prescribed fire and the uncertainty of a wildfire occurrence. 

However, proposed prescribed burning is not expected to result in severely burned soils within 

proposed activity areas because burn prescriptions are designed to provide only the fire intensity 

needed to achieve vegetation and fuel management objectives. Design Criteria based on research 

conducted by Busse (2005; 2006) for optimum soil and duff/litter moisture is included to 

minimize fire damage to soils and thus minimize severely burned soils. Soil heating and 

associated effects to physical, chemical, biological, and hydrologic soil functions are expected to 

be minimal because fire intensities are expected to be primarily low to moderate. Both the 

degree and extent of soil heating resulting from prescribed burning are expected to be much less 

than that associated with wildfire burn intensities. While uncertainties exist on timeframes for 

the Black Hills, research conducted throughout the western United States on fires varying in size, 

intensity, vegetation, and climate, has shown that soil conditions tend to recover three to five 

years post-fire (Neary et al. 2005). 

Cumulative Impacts – Soil Heating and Damage by Fire 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to soils from fire. No negative cumulative effects to soils are 

anticipated to occur with the implementation of any of the project alternatives because none of 

the activities proposed by the Calumet Project or those listed in Appendix C are expected to 

result in severely burned soils. Furthermore, project specific Design Criteria and WCP/BMP 

measures related to both vegetation management and prescribed burning activities are included 

to minimize the cumulative disturbance to soils still recovering from previous burning. 

Organic Soils 

Organic soils are also present within the Calumet Project Area. Organic soils have not been 

specifically mapped by the NRCS for the Calumet Project to date. However, these soils are 

located within some wetland and potential fen locations (refer to the Ground Water Dependent 

Ecosystems for a discussion on fens). Since each of these sites is less than one acre in size, it is 

estimated that no more than nine acres of organic soils are present in the project area. Despite 

their very small extent, organic soils are extremely fragile and sensitive to disturbance. 

Organic soils, known as histosols, are defined as an accumulation of un-decomposed and partially 

decomposed plant material. Organic soils differ from mineral soils with organic layers due to the 

type of parent material that forms the soil. Mineral soils develop overtime as parent rock is 

weathered, off-site material is deposited, and water moves through the soil profile. Overtime, 

organic matter accumulates in the upper portions of the mineral soil profile, but it is altered by 

decomposition such that the original source of the organic material cannot be identified. In 

organic soils, the decomposition of plant materials is slowed due to anaerobic conditions 

associated with wetlands. Saturated conditions result from extended periods of standing water 

and/or poorly drained soils, limiting the amount of oxygen present to aid the decomposition 

process. Organic soils are further classified as types of peat, mucky peat, or muck depending on 

the plant life present and the degree of decay of the material (Mitsch and Gosselink 2007; Evans 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 75 

and Warburton 2007). The origin and type of organic material can often be easily identified – for 

example peat formed from sedges or peat formed from mosses, also known as “peat moss.” 

Organic soils are extremely fragile and difficult to rehabilitate or restore following disturbances. 

These soils are highly susceptible to compaction and deep rutting because they have no or very 

little mineral soil and rock fragments to provide structural support. They are also more 

susceptible to erosion by water flows if a disturbance reduces stabilizing surface vegetation or 

channelizes water through these areas. In these events, large chunks of organic peat are washed 

from the site. Hungerford et al. (1992) found that organic soils can be extremely combustible 

despite the presence of water, igniting with moisture levels as high as 90%. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Organic Soils 

Alternative A does not have any proposed activities and thus has no direct or indirect effects on 

organic soils. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Organic Soils 

No direct or indirect effects to organic soils are expected to result from the implementation of 

Alternative B. The organic soils present in wetland/fen locations would be protected as part of 

project Design Criteria and WCPs requirements. 100-foot buffers are required around these areas 

and thus restrict ground-based operations within these buffers. All organic soils would also be 

protected from damage by prescribed fire through the inclusion of project Design Criteria (Appendix 

B). These measures do not allow prescribed burning within the buffers associated with fens or other 

areas with organic soils in order to protect these highly-combustible soils from burning. 

Cumulative Impacts – Organic Soils 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to organic soils. Even though there are no effects to organic 

soils associated with any of the alternatives under the Calumet Project due to the lack of proposed 

activities and/or exclusion of ground-disturbing activities in these areas, there would continue to be 

cumulative impacts to these delicate areas from livestock concentration in these areas. These 

grazing-related impacts are outside the scope and authority of the Calumet Project, but can be 

addressed through adjustments in grazing management. Impacts to organic soils would continue 

until livestock are excluded from these areas. Additional cumulative impacts to these soils may 

also occur from activities occurring on adjacent non-federal lands that would cause negative 

effects to migrate upstream and downstream through organic soils on federally managed lands. 

These impacts could be addressed through watershed partnerships with adjacent landowners. 

Soil Organic Matter and Nutrient Cycling 

Topsoil Organic Matter 

Only one soil map unit in the Calumet Project Area, VkE, has components with low topsoil 

organic matter (less than 2% per BHNF Forest Plan, Standard 1102). Soil groups contain two to 

three different soils that are lumped into one overall unit and it is usually only one soil that 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 76 

exhibits low organic matter. Within the VkE unit, the Lakoa component is limiting with 1-3% 

organic matter. The Lakoa soil comprises 25-35% of the overall VkE soil complex. This soil 

map unit covers only 55 acres (0.2%) and occurs in two small locations, both of which are on 

privately owned land located on the eastern edge of the project. A map of these areas is included 

in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the 

project file. Associated GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 

None of the remaining soils on Federal lands within the Calumet Project Area are limited by 

topsoil organic matter (less than 2% per BHNF Forest Plan, Standard 1102). Therefore, this 

Standard does not apply and no special design measures are required for management activities 

occurring in the Calumet Project Area. 

Fine and Coarse Woody Debris and Overall Nutrient Cycling 

Forest ecosystems have evolved with a continual flux of both fine and coarse woody debris 

(CWD). Fine woody debris or “fines” consist of leaves, needles, branches, and limbs that are 

less than 3 inches in diameter. Fines can be especially important in soils with limited organic 

matter present in the topsoil because they decompose faster than CWD to create soil organic 

matter. Fines also provide surface stability and protection from raindrop splash and erosion. 

Coarse woody debris, the larger component of forest nutrient cycling, is defined as woody 

material greater than 3 inches in diameter, excluding stumps, and is derived from tree limbs, 

boles, and roots in various stages of decay (Graham et al. 1994). CWD performs many physical, 

chemical, and biological functions in forest ecosystems. Physically, it protects the forest floor 

and mineral soil from erosion and mechanical disturbances. CWD disrupts airflow and provides 

shade, which insulates and protects new forest growth. In moist forest types, it can be a seedbed 

and nursery area for new conifer seedlings. CWD also has significant water holding capacity, 

making it an important source of moisture for vegetation during dry periods. This decaying 

woody debris provides nutrients, especially sulfur, phosphorous, and nitrogen, necessary for new 

plant growth. CWD also hosts ecto-mycorrhizae, micro-organisms which play an important role 

in the uptake of nutrients and water by woody plants (Graham et al. 1994). 

Too much CWD can also be a problem. An overabundance of CWD can result in an overloading 

of organics above the soil surface, causing migration of biological decomposition processes from 

within the upper soil horizons to the litter and CWD layer. If decomposition rates are 

substantially higher above the soil surface than within the upper soil horizons, critical nutrients 

can be volatilized to the atmosphere, reducing soil productivity. An overabundance of CWD 

also poses a greater risk of severely burned areas resulting from fire. 

Graham (1994) recommends an average of 7-13 tons per acre of CWD for ponderosa pine-fescue 

stands. Recommendations for CWD in spruce stands have yet to be examined. Forest Plan

Objective 212 prescribes an average of 5-10 tons per acre of CWD for conifer stands, to be 

provided at least once during stand rotation (approximately 100 years), and provided that a 

conflict with fire or pest management objectives does not exist (USDA Forest Service 2006a). 

This should be accomplished no later than the removal cut (overstory removal), or following precommercial thinning that would take place within 10 years after a removal cut. A range of 

diameters, lengths, and decay states is preferred. Distribution of CWD throughout a treated area 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 77 

is also more desirable than isolated concentrations. Forest Plan Guideline 2307 and Standard 

2308 also provide direction for coarse woody debris requirements: 

• Forest Plan Guideline 2307: Leave large woody debris on harvested or thinned sites to 

help retain moisture; trap soil movement; provide micro-sites for establishment of forbs, 

grasses, shrubs, and trees; and to provide habitat for wildlife. 

• Forest Plan Standard 2308: During vegetation management activities on ponderosa pine 

forest sites, retain an average of at least 50 linear feet per acre of coarse woody debris with a 

minimum diameter of 10 inches. On white spruce forested sites, retain an average of at least 

100 linear feet per acre of coarse woody debris with a minimum diameter of 10 inches.

Stand exam data collected up through 2009, indicates sufficient amounts of coarse woody debris 

are present throughout the Calumet Project Area that either meets or exceeds Forest Plan Standard 

2308. A 50 foot log with a ten inch diameter equates to approximately nine tons/acre for a solid 

log or seven tons/acre for a rotten log (Graham 2003; Brown 1974). Both of these minimum 

amounts meet or exceed the 5-10 tons/acre of CWD specified by Forest Plan Objective 212. 

 

CWD levels were also estimated using the “Photo Series for Quantifying Forest Residues in the 

Black Hills” for Ponderosa Pine and Spruce Types (USDA Forest Service 1982) during field 

investigations conducted in 2009 and 2011. CWD levels of sites surveyed during field 

investigations also appear to meet or exceed 5-10 tons per acre based on photo-estimation. Areas 

already impacted by mountain pine beetle greatly exceed recommended CWD levels currently and 

would continue to accumulate as dead trees fall to the ground. The excess CWD poses a higher risk 

of severely burned soils and associated effects should a ground fire sweep through this area. Areas 

that have continuous grass cover in addition to dead and downed trees pose an even greater risk of 

soil damage resulting from sustained burning associated with a ground fire. Refer to the Fire and 

Fuels section for more discussion on fire hazard as it relates to current fuel load conditions. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Organic Matter and Nutrient Cycling 

Topsoil Organic Matter 

Alternative A does not have any proposed activities and thus would have no direct effect on soils 

that are low in topsoil organic matter. However, the potential for more severe fire effects to soils 

is generally highest with this alternative, which can directly affect the amount of topsoil organic 

material and overall nutrient cycling in an area. Indirect effects to topsoil organic matter related 

to the accumulation of fine and coarse woody debris over time, natural disturbances, and nutrient 

cycling are discussed below.

Fine and Coarse Woody Debris and Overall Nutrient Cycling 

Alternative A does not have any proposed activities and thus has no direct effect on fine and 

coarse woody debris on the forest floor and overall nutrient cycling. However, the potential for 

more severe fire effects to soils is generally higher with this alternative, which can directly affect 

the amount of organic material and nutrient cycling in an area. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 78 

Fire can alter nutrient availability and cycling processes dramatically, depending on the severity 

of the fire. Whether nutrient concentrations increase, decrease, or remain the same is highly 

dependent on fire behavior, severity, nutrient response to fire, post-fire recovery and erosion 

processes, and even post-fire management activities. Fire volatilizes nutrients present in both 

vegetation and soil organic matter. Although some volatized nutrients are lost during the fire, 

through gases and particulates carried by smoke, other nutrients are mobilized and made more 

readily available. For example, fire acts as a rapid mobilizing agent that instantaneously releases 

phosphorus bound in organic matter, as compared to the much slower, natural decomposition 

processes (DeBano et al. 1998). Nutrients can be re-deposited or remain on site in ash on the soil 

surface. These highly available nutrients can then be leached out of the ash and into the soil. In 

contrast, these same highly available forms can be transformed from organic to inorganic 

compounds during combustion or when immobilized by other chemical compounds. 

Additionally, nutrients present in ash can be lost from the system through wind and water 

erosion. In contrast, some nutrients would remain available in partially combusted and unburned 

vegetation and soil organic matter. 

Natural tree mortality levels would be higher with this alternative. Forest stands would continue 

to grow and become denser with time. Fine litter would continue to accumulate as pine trees 

shed needles and branches and understory vegetation grows and dies each year. Overtime, this 

litter would gradually decompose and add to the thickness of duff layers (i.e., topsoil organic 

matter). Competition for water and nutrients would stress trees, making them more susceptible 

to insect and disease agents. Dense forest stands are also more likely to experience high 

intensity, stand-replacing fire behavior if a wildfire occurred. Trees killed by natural 

disturbances such as wind events, snow damage, fire, or insects and disease would fall to the 

ground, increasing CWD levels. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Organic Matter and Nutrient Cycling 

Topsoil Organic Matter 

There will be no direct or indirect effects to soils limited in topsoil organic matter because these soils 

are found only on private lands and therefore will not be affected by proposed Federal activities. 

Fine and Coarse Woody Debris and Overall Nutrient Cycling 

Proposed thinning and fuel treatment activities associated with the Action Alternative includes 

mechanical thinning, broadcast burning, and downed fuels treatments, all of which have the

potential to destroy CWD and snags, which are replacement CWD. However, these management 

activities have been designed to thin forest stands and reduce hazardous fuel levels, while 

maintaining desired CWD levels necessary for both short and long-term nutrient recycling, wildlife 

needs, and overall site productivity. Spot piling, mechanical fuels treatment, and broadcast 

burning of dead and downed trees would move areas with excess CWD currently (i.e., previous 

wildfire and MPB infestation areas) towards desired CWD levels outlined in the Forest Plan. 

Alternative B also proposes prescribed broadcast-burning. Overall, prescribed burning associated 

is not expected to detrimentally affect soil productivity within the activity areas. The effects of 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 79 

fire on litter and duff are well documented (DeBano et al. 1998; Neary et al. 2005). Prescribed 

burning directly affects the surface litter layer by partially or entirely consuming organic material 

that has accumulated overtime (i.e., limbs, pine needles, leaves, etc.) on the soil surface. It also 

directly affects the duff layer where topsoil organic matter resides. The degree of impact 

depends on the fire intensity and burning duration, as well as the moisture content of the duff 

layer. Generally, moist/wet duff will insulate the soil from heat. In contrast, dry duff conducts 

heat to the soil. Dry duff is also easily combustible – literally adding fuel to the fire – and can be 

partially or entirely consumed by fire, leaving mineral soil exposed and unprotected against 

erosion forces. Busse (2006) recommends minimum soil moisture contents of 20% or greater 

(by volume) and minimum duff moisture contents of 55% or greater. 

The proposed prescribed burning is designed to result in low-to-moderate fire intensity. This fire 

intensity is expected to result in light-to-moderate soil heating, and therefore is not expected to 

reach the temperatures necessary to cause large nutrient losses through volatilization. Nutrients 

locked up in the surface duff layer would be expected to be released into the soil and likely 

become available for uptake by regenerating vegetation. An increase in short-term nutrient 

availability may occur and contribute to maintaining long-term soil productivity. Some portion of 

the mobilized nutrients may be lost through leaching, but most nutrients would remain in the soil 

profile or utilized by vegetation. No change in soil structure or infiltration is expected. 

Temperatures are not expected to reach those necessary to alter physical characteristics of the soil. 

Design Criteria has been included to limit fire intensity through the above soil and duff moisture 

requirements, seasonal timing of burning, slash pre-treatment where necessary, and ignition 

techniques. The effects of prescribed burning on topsoil organic matter are expected to be 

minimal due to the inclusion of Design Criteria and the inherent nature of lower-intensity 

prescribed burning, as discussed throughout the soils analysis section. 

Long-term soil productivity associated with organic matter and nutrient cycling is not expected 

to be negatively affected directly or indirectly by management activities proposed under 

Alternative B, but rather to trend towards a net improvement following project implementation, 

for the reasons described. Proposed thinning and fuel treatment activities have been designed to 

reduce hazardous fuel levels, while maintaining desired CWD levels necessary for both short and 

long-term nutrient recycling. Current CWD levels greatly exceed desired levels suggested by 

Graham (1994) and the Black Hills National Forest Plan (USDA Forest Service 2006a). 

 

Cumulative Impacts – Soil Organic Matter and Nutrient Cycling 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to soil organic matter and nutrient cycling. No negative 

cumulative impacts to soil organic matter or nutrient recycling are anticipated for any of the 

project alternatives. Rather a net benefit is expected due to the combined efforts to treat the 

expanding MPB epidemic and reduce levels of CWD across the project area. These activities 

would move current CWD levels towards more natural and desired levels. 

Past firewood cutting, timber harvest, and fuels management activities have contributed to the 

loss of CWD and/or snags that would add to or replace CWD over time. Natural disturbances
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 80 

such as wildfire, MPB outbreaks, snow damage, wind events, and other causes of tree mortality 

would continue to create CWD. It is expected that by the time project activities associated with 

Alternative B would be implemented, CWD levels would be even higher than current levels due 

to MPB “pockets” that have already or continue to kill trees in the area. 

Soil Productivity and Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

Soil productivity is the inherent capacity of a soil to support the growth of vegetation. The most 

productive part of the soil occurs near the surface, at the contact between the forest litter and the 

mineral soil. Here the litter has been decomposed into an organic rich layer containing most of 

the soil nitrogen, potassium, and mycorrhizae that must be present for a site to be productive. 

However, this is also the part of the soil that is easiest to disturb by management activities. Soil 

quality refers to the capacity of a soil to function within ecosystem and land use boundaries, to 

sustain biological productivity, maintain environmental quality, and promote plant and animal 

health (Doran and Parkin 1996). According to FSH 2509.25, “Soil quality depends on soil 

structure, organic matter, nutrient pools, and biotic processes; soil quality is impaired when these 

qualities are markedly degraded for a period of years; severe disturbances can impair soil quality 

by heating, displacing, compacting, or eroding the soil” (USDA Forest Service 2006c). Various 

factors influence soil quality. Although management activities do not affect factors such as 

climate and soil parent material, they can affect physical, chemical, biologic, and hydrologic soil 

properties. Soil erosion, soil compaction, nutrient removal, soil heating and regeneration hazards 

can limit the long-term productivity of forested sites. 

Detrimental Soil Disturbance is defined as the condition where established thresholds for soil 

properties are exceeded and result in a significant change in overall productivity of the land due 

to impairment to long-term soil functions. Detrimental soil disturbance can result from 

management activities including road construction, timber harvest, mechanical fuels treatment, 

prescribed burning, grazing, and fire suppression, as well as natural causes, such as mass 

movement or wildfire. Detrimental soil disturbance can result from compaction, rutting (in wet 

soils), displacement, severely burned soil, loss of organic matter, and erosion, including mass 

movement. Soil quality is maintained when these disturbances are minimized or prevented. 

The NRCS (2009) provides management interpretations based on soil properties pertaining to the 

overall susceptibility to soil degradation, as well as the recovery potential following 

disturbances. The resistance to degradation of a rangeland or woodland site is a measure of its 

ability to function without change throughout a disturbance (USDA NRCS 2009). Resistance to 

degradation can also be described as an area's buffering capacity. This depends upon soil type, 

vegetation, climate, land use, disturbance regime, temporal and spatial scales (USDA NRCS 

2009). Soils within the Calumet Project Area are predominantly rated as “slightly susceptible to 

degradation,” with the exception of the limestone outcrops at the eastern edge of the project area, 

which are rated moderate to severe. Areas rated moderate correspond to the broad, relatively flat 

ridge tops found there. Areas rated severe correspond to the steep, in-operable canyon walls 

associated with Spring Creek canyon. Rocky outcrops or soils that are fairly resistant to 

degradation due to very high rock content are found in the remainder of the project area. A map 

depicting the potential for soil degradation is included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and 

Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 81 

Even though some soils are rated with a moderate to severe potential for site degradation based on 

inherent soil properties, nearly all soils within the Calumet Project Area are rated as having a “high 

potential for favorable soil recovery” should unforeseen degradation occur. The only exceptions to 

this are two very small and isolated areas found on the limestone outcrop on Federal lands. 

Together they total about 69 acres. Soil restoration potential is a rating based on the inherent 

ability of a soil to recover from degradation, which is often referred to as soil resilience (USDA 

NRCS 2009). Soil resilience is dependent upon adequate stores of organic matter, good soil

structure, low salt and sodium levels, adequate nutrient levels, microbial biomass and diversity, 

adequate precipitation for recovery, and other soil properties (USDA NRCS 2009). 

For most of the Calumet Project Area, previously disturbed sites were found to be stable or 

recovering and existing soil conditions indicate overall soil health, productivity, and function. 

Results from WCP/BMP monitoring of previously logged areas associated with the Bitter 

Timber Sale within the project area (Appendix C) indicates that although there are some residual 

impacts from past logging activities, site degradation is not present in these areas (Thomas 

2008). Existing soil disturbances include soil mixing and heating in burned pile locations; 

compression tracks associated with skid trails; and some compaction in highly-traveled areas 

such as skid trails and landing areas. Displacement and mixing of soil layers is limited to 

landing areas that have been scarified following burning, livestock concentration areas, and 

connected disturbed areas. These were generally associated with more recent management 

activities, while sites with management that occurred some time ago exhibited few if any 

residual impacts. Over 90% effective ground cover was observed throughout the overall project 

area, with the exception of recovering log landings/burn piles; areas where livestock tend to 

concentrate; and areas where thin soils overlay rock outcrops. 

However, a few areas exist where substantial soil impairment has occurred. Substantial soil 

impairment is defined by FSM 2550 as “detrimental changes in soil properties (physical, 

chemical, or biological) that result in the loss of the inherent ecological capacity or hydrologic 

function of the soil resource that lasts beyond the scope, scale, or duration of the project causing 

the change” (USDA Forest Service 2010b). Areas where this has occurred include Johnson 

Gulch along NFSR 366 and 674; and the headwaters of Horse Creek along NFSR 243. Johnson 

Gulch is used extensively by the public for target shooting and off-road vehicle travel which has 

resulted in extensive rutting, expansion of road templates in “mud-bogging” areas, and creation 

of new un-authorized trails. Portions of the Bitter Prescribed Burn along Johnson Gulch also 

burned with higher intensities, largely due to fuel loadings and the high amount of rock in the 

area. This resulted in longer fire residence times and more intense heating of soils in some areas. 

Overall, the burn exhibits moderate soil burn severity, which includes isolate patches of high soil 

burn severity within the overall mosaic. The headwaters of Horse Creek exhibit extensive 

crossings within wet soils associated with the spring, wetland, and riparian corridor; and high 

soil burn severity where logging slash piles were placed across the stream and then burned 

during the winter of 2010-2011. 

A summary of the acres of potentially ground disturbing activities taking place on sensitive soils is 

presented for each alternative in Table 3-5. Where existing disturbances exist, they are also 

included in the tally. The term “sensitive soil” as used in this analysis includes soils with mass 

movement potential and slopes exceeding 40%; high erosion potential; elevated compaction 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 82 

potential; severely burned soils; soils with low levels of topsoil organic matter; meadow soils; and 

organic (peat) soils. These areas represent soils that are more prone to detrimental disturbance. 

However, this does not mean that detrimental soil disturbance would result from project activities 

on these soils. It is provided as a means of comparing alternatives and evaluating the risk to soil 

resources associated with each. Design Criteria has been included to minimize overall soil 

disturbance, as well as any detrimental soil disturbance, as part of the project proposal, regardless 

of which alternative is chosen. Design Criteria includes applicable measures from both Forest 

Service WCPs (USDA Forest Service 2006c) and SD State Forestry BMPs (SDSU et al. 2003). 

For Alternative B, non-commercial thinning could be accomplished with mechanized equipment or 

manual labor. If manual labor is used, the acres of harvest activities on sensitive soils shown in the 

table, particularly soils susceptible to compaction, would decrease. 

Table 3-5 Proposed Activity Acres on Sensitive Soils for Each Alternative Compared with Existing Conditions 

Soil Characteristic 

or Condition 

Existing 

Conditions 

(Acres) 

Alternative A 

No Action 

(Activity Acres) 

Alternative B 

Silviculture

(Acres) 

Burning**

(Acres) 

Mass movement risk and slope 

exceeding 40% 3,232 0 885 1,737 

Elevated Erosion risk * 10,420 0 3,846 6,580 

Elevated Compaction risk * 18,159 0 12,600 N/A 

Severely burned soils * 49 0 49 49 

Low topsoil organic matter with 

Shelterwood Harvest System 

55 

(private lands) 0 0 0 

Windthrow 28,402 0 16,890 17,558 

Meadow Soils 2,326 0 1,020 763 

Organic Soils (Peat) < 9 0 0 0 

* Excluding aerial logging units (cable logging) since these methods have limited ground activities that would cause 

erosion, compaction, or additional disturbance to severely burned soils. 

** All prescribed burn blocks were used for soil analysis rather than just the targeted south aspect hill slopes to 

account for any additional burning that may occur during implementation. 

A summary of the road related activities that would take place on soils with mass movement 

potential and slopes exceeding 40%; high erosion potential; meadow soils; and organic (peat) 

soils is also presented for each alternative in Table 3-6. Design Criteria pertaining to roads are 

also included for the action alternative to minimize impacts to the soil resource (Appendix B). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 83 

Table 3-6 Miles of New Construction (New), Including Cable Roads, Temporary Road Construction (Temp), 

and Reconstruction and Maintenance (Recon/Mntc) Affecting Various Soil Properties for Each Alternative

Soil Characteristic Existing 

Conditions 

Alternative A 

No Action 

(Miles) 

Alternative B 

Proposed Action 

(Miles) 

Mass movement risk and slope 

exceeding 40% 3.3 miles 0 

New/Cable = less than 1 mile 

Temp = none 

Recon/Mntc = 0.7 mile 

Elevated Erosion risk 203 miles 

(all jurisdictions) 0 

New/Cable = 5 miles 

Temp = 13.5 miles 

Recon/Mntc = 92 miles 

Meadow soils 32 miles 0 

New/Cable = none 

Temp = 2.4 miles 

Recon/Mntc = 14 miles 

Organic Soils (Peat) 0.3 mile 

(1500 feet) 0 

New/Cable = none 

Temp = none 

Recon/Mntc = 150 feet 

 (on existing road locations) 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Productivity and Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

Alternative A does not propose any management activities. Therefore, there would be no direct 

detrimental soil disturbance of any type associated with the implementation alternative. No new 

roads would be built under this alternative. Thus, no additional acreage would be removed from 

the productive soil/timber base. However, unneeded and user-created trails would also remain 

on the landscape, thus preventing these areas from being part of the productive soil base. The 

risk of experiencing severe wildfire effects is expected to be greatest with this alternative for the 

reasons discussed previously. Therefore, Alternative A may indirectly lead to detrimental soil 

disturbance in the short-term. 

However, long-term soil productivity is expected to be maintained for two reasons. First, fire 

effects research conducted by Neary et al. (2005) has shown that forest soil conditions typically 

recover within 3-5 years following wildfire. While uncertainties exist on the actual timeframes 

for Black Hills soils, it is reasonable to expect that timeframes would be similar based on the 

cross-section of forest ecosystems studied. Secondly, the ponderosa pine ecosystem of the Black 

Hills region historically evolved under more frequent fires of varying intensities. The soils have 

continued to maintain support of vegetative communities to the present time, and can be 

expected to continue to do so despite exposure to wildfires. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Soil Productivity and Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

Management activities associated with Alternative B are not expected to result in detrimental soil 

disturbance that would adversely affect soil productivity for the combined reasons explained for 

each of the previous soil characteristics. 

 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 84 

Much of the project area has had ground based logging activity in the past, so existing landing 

locations, roads, and trails would be utilized as much as possible, thereby minimizing the need for 

disturbed new areas. Potential timber sale purchasers would have the option to use tractor or 

forwarder operations, except where designated otherwise. Whole tree yarding with tractors has the 

potential for more ground disturbance of the two methods. If a cut-to-length system is used, soil 

disturbance is generally minimized due to equipment operating on slash, and since organic matter 

is left on site, nutrient cycling is ensured and large, burned landings are avoided. Non-commercial 

thinning and post-and-pole treatments would be accomplished with either mechanized equipment, 

manual labor, or a combination of both. Generally, if manual labor is used, less mechanized 

logging equipment is needed and thus less overall ground disturbance can be expected. 

Alternative B proposes thinning, fuels treatments, and prescribed burning activities that have the 

potential to directly and indirectly disturb soils and disrupt soil productivity. All prescribed burn 

blocks were used for soil analysis rather than just the targeted south aspect hill slopes to account 

for any additional burning that may occur during implementation. However, through careful 

design of project activities and adherence to project Design Criteria (which include WCPs and 

BMPs), the actual likelihood of directly or indirectly disturbing soils to the extent that 

detrimental disturbance is caused and soil productivity is affected is low. 

To minimize or eliminate potential negative effects from harvest activities and prescribed burning 

on sensitive soils, Design Criteria include one or more of the following measures: use of 

designated skid trails; winter harvest; partial or full suspension (i.e., forwarder) yarding; equipment 

exclusion; suspension cable yarding; processing at the stump; and/or higher coarse woody debris 

requirements. These Design Criteria are fully expected to minimize soil disturbance and maintain 

site productivity in and around those sensitive areas, and to meet the 15% standard for detrimental 

soil disturbance. Therefore, no short or long-term effects to overall soil productivity are expected. 

Furthermore, this project would comply with Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines 1101, 1102, 

1103, 1104, 1105, 1106, 1108, 1109, 1110, and 1111 pertaining to protection of soil resources and 

overall soil productivity (USDA Forest Service 2006a). 

Cable roads pose a high risk of exceeding detrimental soil disturbance thresholds should the right 

environmental conditions occur (i.e., saturated soil conditions, excess precipitation, etc.) as 

described previously. The longer the cable roads remain on the landscape, the higher the probability 

of failure and the higher the probability of impacts to soil resources. Depending on the severity and 

size of the slope failure, impacts would be localized and short-term or chronic and long-lasting. 

However, if such an event occurred, immediate actions would be implemented to stabilize failures 

and trend toward returning detrimentally disturbed soils to proper function and health. 

Cumulative Impacts – Soil Productivity and Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to soil productivity and detrimental soil disturbance. 

Under both Alternatives A and B, soil disturbance associated with livestock grazing, OHV 

activity, recreation, mining, and other forest activities authorized under other planning 

documents or authorities in the project area (Appendix C) also have the potential to disturb soils. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 85 

However, Design Criteria and WCP/BMP measures also apply to these other activities and thus 

minimize their impacts to soils. Monitoring of soil disturbance has also been included as part of 

the project proposal and would take place regardless of which alternative is chosen. If 

Alternative A is chosen, soil monitoring would take place at the Forest level and soils within the 

Calumet Project Area may or may not be randomly chosen as part of this sampling. 

Cumulative detrimental soil disturbance related to the Federal actions under Alternative B is 

expected to remain below the 15% detrimental disturbance threshold due to the inclusion of 

project Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs, which apply regardless of which alternative is chosen 

(Appendix B). Design Criteria were developed specifically for the Calumet Project to minimize 

potential cumulative, negative effects from vegetation management, prescribed broadcastburning, and road related activities occurring on sensitive soils. Design Criteria may include one 

or more of the following measures: use of designated skid trails; winter harvest; partial or full 

suspension (i.e., forwarder) yarding; equipment exclusion; suspension cable yarding; processing 

at the stump; and other proven measures. These Design Criteria are expected to minimize soil 

disturbance in general, prevent detrimental disturbance, and maintain long-term soil productivity. 

The action alternative would have areas that overlap these other activities and thus would have a 

greater potential for additive soil disturbance. However, strict adherence to WCP/BMP 

measures, including proper implementation and maintenance of runoff and erosion control 

structures would ensure compliance with this soil standard. Therefore, long-term soil 

productivity in the project area is expected to be maintained or improved. 

If Alternative B is chosen, soil monitoring would take place both during and immediately 

following project implementation. If monitoring identifies detrimental soil disturbance has 

occurred, rehabilitation actions would be taken to improve soil conditions with a net 

improvement in soil quality, as directed in FSM 2550. Such rehabilitation actions may include, 

but are not limited to: scarifying skid trails and/or landings to de-compact soils, adding slash to 

inhibit and slow runoff, and seeding and fertilizing the site to aid in establishment of vegetation. 

According to research conducted by Luce and Black (1997), it is reasonable to expect that skid 

trail rehabilitation treatments would decrease soil compaction and improve water infiltration. 

Trail rehabilitation activities would meet soil quality standards by trending toward a net soil 

improvement, and would further protect soils within the project area through the elimination of 

potential OHV access and travel routes. 

Water Resources 

Water Resources Analysis Area and Time Period 

Since the project area does not coincide exactly with watershed boundaries, the water resources 

analysis area differs from the project area boundary. The watershed analysis area encompasses: 

The entire headwaters of Spring Creek (previously analyzed under the Upper Spring Creek 

FEIS), that ultimately flow into Sheridan Lake; 

• The entire Spring Creek-Sheridan Lake watershed; 

• The entire Spring Creek-Johnson Gulch 6th-level watershed; 

• The headwater 8th-level sub-basin to Rockerville Gulch, tributary to Spring Creek;
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 86 

• The headwater 8th-level sub-basin to Foster Gulch, tributary to Battle Creek; and 

• The headwaters to the 7th-level Teepee Gulch sub-watershed, also tributary to Battle Creek. 

This area corresponds to two 8th-level sub-basins within the Teepee Gulch sub-watershed. 

This subset of the Spring Creek watershed was selected for the cumulative effects analysis area 

because activities are proposed within portions of each 6th level sub-watershed; only a small 

portion of the Rockerville, Foster Gulch, and Teepee Gulch watersheds include project activities; 

land use and management upstream of the Calumet Project within the Upper Spring Creek 

watershed contribute to conditions in Spring Creek and Sheridan Lake, with Sheridan Lake 

serving as a “storage and assimilation” point for any upstream effects that occur; and beyond this 

level, it is difficult to link any cumulative impacts to water resources to activities associated with 

the Calumet Project. 

This same analysis area was used in determining direct and indirect effects to larger streams and 

river systems, such as Spring Creek, that flow through a project area yet have multiple segments 

outside a project area – both upstream and downstream. This is done because watershed 

conditions upstream and downstream of a project area can cause adjustments to larger streams 

and rivers that propagate throughout the stream network - both upstream and downstream. 

Isolated water resources that are not interconnected are analyzed within the project boundary. 

These typically include springs, wetlands, and ponds. 

A second, smaller scale was used to evaluate direct and indirect effects at the 8th level watershed 

scale. This scale was chosen in order to assess points adjacent to and directly downstream from 

contributing activities because any impacts that may occur can be readily observed and 

quantified and linked to activities associated with the project. Effects that are observable at this 

scale are referred to as localized in their extent. 

Effects to water resources were analyzed for the same time period as geologic, hydrogeologic, 

and soil resources for the same reasons stated previously. Effects to water resources are also 

summarized in the context of short-term effects (5 years or less), as well as long-term effects 

(longer than 5 years). 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to water resources. Effects from known past actions were 

included in the analysis of existing resource conditions. Generally this includes activities that 

have occurred since the 1874 Custer Expedition to the Black Hills region. Proposed activities 

associated with each alternative were considered in the Analysis of Direct and Indirect Effects 

section. Past and present land use and activities within the analysis watersheds, which 

encompasses both the soil analysis area and Calumet Project boundary, include timber harvest, 

wild and prescribed fire, livestock grazing, private land ownership, roads and off road vehicles, 

mines and quarries, various types of recreation, and forest product gathering. All of these 

activities or events individually have some level of impact on the watershed, which results in 

cumulative effects to watershed and water resources conditions and processes.
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 87 

Watersheds 

A watershed is defined as an area of land where all of the water that drains from it goes into a 

common waterway, such as a stream, lake, estuary, wetland, ground water aquifer, or even the 

ocean (US EPA 2009; US EPA 2011a). The water moves through a network of drainage 

pathways, both underground and on the land surface. Watershed boundaries are also known as 

drainage divides, the boundary between one drainage area and another (USGS 1995). 

The Calumet Project Area is located within five 6th-level watersheds within the middle Spring 

Creek watershed and the upper Battle Creek watershed (Table 3-7). All five watersheds are 

within the Cheyenne River Basin. Watershed boundaries and HUC codes were obtained from the 

National Hydrography Dataset developed and maintained by the USDA Service Center and 

USGS (USGS 2008). 

Table 3-7 Sixth Level Watersheds (HUC12) That Contain Portions of the Calumet Project Area

6th Level 

(HUC 12) 

Watershed 

6th Level (HUC 12) 

Watershed Name 

Total 

Watershed 

Acres 

Acres of 

Watershed 

in Project 

Percent of 

Watershed 

in Project 

Watershed 

Condition 

Class 

101201090801 Grizzly Bear Creek 

(Battle Creek) 25,256 1,728 7% 2-FAR 

101201090803 Deadman Gulch 

(Battle Creek) 29,601 471 2% 1-PFC 

101201090904 Sheridan Lake 

(Spring Creek) 25,048 14,577 58% 2-FAR 

101201090905 Johnson Gulch 

(Spring Creek) 19,555 13,761 70% 2-FAR 

101201090906 Rockerville Gulch 

(Spring Creek) 15,960 1,147 7% 1-PFC 

“A healthy watershed operates in dynamic equilibrium. Soil and water quality, flow regimes, and 

aquatic and riparian habitats vary within a certain range of conditions. Large natural disturbance 

events shift a watershed out of equilibrium. Recovery then begins. Poor land management 

practices can also shift a watershed out of equilibrium. Laws and common sense direct us to 

maintain equilibrium conditions between large natural disturbance events, avoid actions that may 

shift a watershed out of equilibrium or worsen major events, and assist watershed recovery. The 

natural resilience of the system must be conserved in order to sustain ecosystem health. Some 

disturbance can occur and still sustain watershed health. If runoff and sediment regimes, soil and 

channel conditions, water quality, and aquatic and riparian habitats are maintained between large 

natural disturbance events, watershed health is conserved” (USDA Forest Service 2006c). 

Watershed Condition 

Watershed Condition Assessments (WCA) were completed for each sixth level watershed in the 

process of developing the 1997 Black Hills National Forest Land and Resource Management 

Plan (LRMP). The WCA were based on watershed sensitivity, known impacts, and available 

monitoring data. Since the LRMP was completed, a new standardized and seamless watershed 

layer was completed as part of the National Hydrography Dataset. The WCA that were done 

previously do not always match up with this new, standardized watershed layer. In addition, a 

new comprehensive assessment of watershed conditions was undertaken by the Forest Service in 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 88 

2011. The USFS Watershed Condition Framework is a comprehensive approach for pro-actively 

implementing integrated restoration on focus watersheds across National Forests and Grasslands. 

This endeavor established a nationally consistent approach for classifying watershed condition 

through a set of 12 comprehensive indicators that are surrogate variables representing the 

underlying ecological, hydrological, and geomorphic functions and processes that affect 

watershed condition. Three watershed condition classes are used to show the level of watershed 

function or integrity (USDA Forest Service 2011c): 

• Class 1 watersheds exhibit high geomorphic, hydrologic, and biotic integrity and are

considered to be functioning properly; 

• Class 2 watersheds are functioning at risk due to some moderate impacts to geomorphic, 

hydrologic, and/or biotic characteristics; 

• Class 3 watersheds exhibit low integrity for geomorphic, hydrologic and biotic

characteristics and thus considered to have impaired function. 

Three of the five watersheds are listed as a condition Class 2 – Functioning-At-Risk (FAR) as 

shown in Table 7. These include the Grizzly Bear Creek watershed in the Battle Creek basin; and 

Johnson Gulch and Sheridan Lake watersheds within the Spring Creek basin. The remaining 

watersheds are listed as condition Class 1 or properly functioning condition (PFC). Watershed 

Condition was used to make general assessments of the watershed conditions and sensitivity, as 

well as identify priority watersheds for protection and/or improvement projects. A map showing 

the currently used watershed boundaries and the watershed condition class is included in Appendix 

A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Water Rights 

Management activities would not alter the status of water rights claims or uses, directly or 

indirectly. Thus, water rights will not be analyzed further in this document. Potential impacts to 

water quantity and quality are discussed for each alternative and considered in cumulative 

watershed effects within the respectively titled sections. 

Annual Water Yield 

Forested landscapes intercept rain and snow, evapo-transpiring the moisture back to the 

atmosphere. As a result, forests can lower the quantity of water that reaches the ground surface 

to then trickle through soil and ground water systems, and eventually emerge in streams. 

However, forests also help conserve moisture by providing shade and cooler temperatures which 

provide for less overall evaporation. The transpiration of moisture back to the atmosphere 

contributes to rain and snow development in the area. Thus, the annual water yield depends 

upon the density or coverage of the forest, the type of forest vegetation, as well as many other 

factors including climate, weather patterns, geology, slope, soils, stream channel conditions, and 

riparian area conditions. 

Water yield is a concern for communities in and around the Black Hills (USDA Forest Service 

1996a). The water provided by streams that flow from the Black Hills is an important resource 

utilized for drinking water supplies, irrigation, stock watering, fisheries, and recreation in the 

surrounding area. The influence of forested landscapes on water yield has been investigated in 

the Black Hills in several studies (Anderson 1980; Orr 1968, 1972, 1975; Orr and VanderHeide 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 89 

1973; Smith 1983). In general, water discharge increases after timber harvest or wildfire due to 

the decreased interception by the vegetation and a decrease in the evapotranspiration rate (Gary 

1975; Leaf 1975; Shepperd et al. 1992). Anderson (1980) reported an average increase in the 

annual water yield of 2.24 inches (5.7 cm) after 25% of the timber volume was cut. However, as 

regeneration occurs after timber harvest or wildfire, water yield declines. The rate of this decline, 

or recovery, depends on habitat type and the rate and density of vegetative growth. 

Since the creation of the Black Hills National Forest and implementation of fire suppression in 

the early 1900s, annual water yields throughout the Black Hills region have decreased, primarily 

due to aggressive fire suppression tactics that have encouraged the growth and expansion of 

dense forest stands (Parrish et al. 1996; Grafe and Horsted 2002; Horsted 2006). As forests 

become denser, more precipitation (both rain and snow) is intercepted or trapped in the canopy; 

evapo-transpiration of precipitation is increased. Water budget calculations performed by the 

USGS for the Black Hills Hydrology Study (BHHS) concluded that 92% of the annual 

precipitation is evapo-transpired by these dense forest stands (Driscoll et al. 2002). 

The overall result is less water infiltrating through soils and deeper into ground water aquifers, 

reduced water tables in wetlands, and reduced volume of base flow in springs and stream channels, 

as well as shorter durations of flow throughout summer months. When persistent drought conditions 

are added to the over-growth of woody biomass, some wetlands and springs, as well as perennial and 

intermittent streams, may “dry up” completely due to the lack of enough base flow to saturate the 

alluvium and appear as surface water. However, water is still present just below the surface. 

Once precipitation returns to near normal for a period of years, ground water aquifers and 

alluvial water tables are recharged. During these wetter periods, wetlands, springs, and stream 

channels sustain more surface water and for a longer period throughout the summer months. 

This has recently been observed in 2010 and 2011, following over four successive years of 

normal or above normal precipitation in the overall Black Hills Region. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Water Yield 

Alternative A reflects the existing watershed conditions. This alternative would not directly 

contribute to changes in water yield in the short-term. Indirectly, the existing MPB infestation 

would continue to expand and kill forest stands. With less live, healthy trees to take up soil

moisture and intercept and evapo-transpire precipitation, more water would be available for 

runoff and ground water aquifer recharge in the short-term. However, over the long-term the 

available water would decrease again as new trees establish themselves in these areas. Areas not 

affected by MPB currently would continue to increase in biomass and water consumption until a 

natural disturbance such as a wildfire or MPB outbreak occurs. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Water Yield 

Any silvicultural activity or natural disturbance that removes ponderosa pine trees from a forest 

has the potential to increase water yield. However, the growth of new seedlings and remaining 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 90 

trees would potentially offset this and decrease water yield. The overall increase or decrease in 

water yield depends on the amount of forest removed. Studies conducted on the Black Hills and 

in similar ecosystems in Colorado indicate that 25 to 30 percent of the growing stock in a 

forested watershed must be removed before there is a measurable increase in water yield from 

that watershed (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). 

None of the proposed treatment methods, individually or combined, are expected to significantly 

affect water yields. Alternative B proposes prescribed burning, which does not involve enough 

crown removal to have a measurable effect on water yield. However, the annual water yield may 

increase with the removal of trees associated with the action alternative, especially in the 

Precambrian Crystalline geologies. Whether the increase in water yield is measurable depends 

on how much forest canopy is removed on a watershed basis, as well as when harvest occurs 

within the watershed over the life of the project. 

Cumulative Effects – Water Yield 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to water yield. Livestock grazing, routine maintenance of 

trails, developed recreation facilities, and dispersed campsites, public use, and the operations of 

outfitters/guides would not involve activities which could remove trees to an extent that would 

affect annual water yield. These activities are generally dispersed across the landscape and the 

amount of vegetation removal, if any, as a result of these activities, is inconsequential in relation 

to the amount of yearly vegetative recovery within the analysis watersheds. Timber harvest and 

road construction activities are expected to continue to occur on private lands, but occur less 

often and scattered across the landscape, such that water yield increases would not be discernible 

in comparison with harvest on the surrounding Federal lands. 

Under Alternative A, current water yield will likely persist until the mountain pine beetles kill 

enough trees across watersheds, or a wildfire occurs. Timber management activities associated 

with Alternative B would cumulatively make more soil moisture available throughout the 

watersheds, especially in the Precambrian Crystalline geologies. This would cumulatively provide 

slightly more annual water yield from the project watersheds which could supply Sheridan Lake. 

Stream Flow Regime 

The Calumet Project Area contains approximately 47 miles of perennial streams, 43 miles of 

intermittent streams, and 34 miles of ephemeral streams (Table 3-8). Approximately 4.5 miles 

out of the 47 miles of perennial streams are normally inundated by Sheridan Lake. A map of 

streams and the field-determined flow regime is included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, 

and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Due to the highly dissected nature of the Black Hills, numerous ephemeral streams and drainages 

are also present. Ephemeral streams have a defined channel, whereas ephemeral drainages do 

not and are often swales. Both carry water only in response to larger storm events or snowmelt. 

Ephemeral drainages and swales carry water in dispersed, shallow, sheet-like flows versus a 

concentrated streamflow path as found in ephemeral stream channels. Ephemeral 

drainages/swales are not specifically mapped. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 91 

Table 3-8 Miles of Perennial, Intermittent, and Ephemeral Streams in the Calumet Project Area 

Stream Flow Regime Stream Miles 

Acres Associated 

with Protected 

Streams (WIZ) 

Perennial – defined channel and generally flows year-round. 47 miles* 1,140 acres 

Intermittent – defined channel but flows for only part of the 

year; includes loss zones where streamflow goes underground 

into aquifers. 

43 miles 1,040 acres 

Ephemeral – defined channel or flow path, but carries water 

only in response to larger storm events or snowmelt. 34 miles N/A 

*Approximately 4.5 miles are normally inundated by Sheridan Lake. 

Stream flow in the Black Hills is influenced by the amount and timing of precipitation. Snow 

thaw is common from the middle to the end of March. By the end of March, flows start to 

increase in the streams. In April, a sharp increase in flow is attributed to the combination of 

precipitation and melting of accumulated snow. Flows reach their maximum during May or June. 

Although precipitation is highest in June, streamflow does not increase proportionally due to the 

increased evapotranspiration of the forested stands. 

The drainages in the Calumet watershed analysis area are in a stream flow regime dominated by 

runoff resulting from both snowmelt and intense summer thunderstorms (Sando 1998). Runoff 

from rapid snowmelt or rain-on-snowmelt can occasionally occur in the late spring months. 

Peak flows result from both rainfall and snowmelt, but no studies have been conducted to 

determine the proportion or relative magnitude of peak flows resulting from snowmelt (Sando 

1998). Peak stream flows resulting from rainfall runoff account for roughly 90% of the annual 

peaks observed in the Black Hills (Sando 1998). Peak flows generally occur during the months 

of April, May, or June, but can occur any month from March to September if significant 

thunderstorm activity occurs (Carter et al. 2002). Since these thunderstorms generally occur 

between May and September, flash floods can and do often occur during these months as well. 

In fact two such large flood events have been recorded on Spring Creek since the 1940s. The 

most recent occurred in the spring of 1996 and the previous was in June of 1972 (Harden et al. 

2011). 1,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) was recorded by the USGS in 1996, whereas the 1972 

Flood event exceeded all recorded peaks, estimated at over 20,000 cfs. The 1972 Flood caused 

extensive damages and channel changes to Spring Creek, as well as many other streams 

throughout the Black Hills area. It is important to note that for typical flood events, damages 

generally occur only where streams are already impacted and unstable due to problem road 

crossings, road encroachment, and floodplain isolation; past in-stream mining; stream 

channelization; floodplain development; and other anthropogenic causes. 

Stream flow within the crystalline core is also highly variable due to the relative impermeable 

igneous and metamorphic rocks that shed runoff rather than infiltrate it into underground 

aquifers (Carter et al. 2002). Within this hydrogeologic setting, ground-water discharge 

contributes to the base flow of many streams; however, stream base flows can diminish rather 

quickly during periods of drought (Driscoll et al. 2002). At the eastern edge and downstream of 

the project area, Spring Creek crosses the Loss Zone hydrogeologic setting, and losses surface 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 92 

stream flow to ground water recharge. Downstream of these loss zones, Spring Creek flows 

intermittently, with surface water present only when the flow rate exceeds the recharge rate. 

Stream flows have been altered from historic conditions by various human-related disturbances. 

Historic accounts by the Custer and Dodge Expeditions in 1874 and 1875, noted more 

perennially-flowing streams, more abundant and lush riparian zones, and more wetlands in lowgradient valley bottoms than conditions today (Grafe and Horsted 2002; Horsted 2006; Shepperd 

and Battaglia 2002). Subsequent post-settlement timber harvesting, mining, livestock grazing, 

and beaver trapping changed the water yield as described previously and thus also affected 

streamflow (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). These changes damaged the riparian zones and led to 

an increase in peak flows and the intensity of flash floods, and a decrease in the perennial flow of 

some streams (Parrish et al. 1996). 

More recently, the construction of the Sheridan Lake dam in 1938-1940 by the Civilian 

Conservation Corps significantly altered the natural flow regime of Spring Creek, both upstream 

and downstream of the dam. Sheridan Lake now stores and dampens the natural effect of pulsetype runoff events (i.e., floods) that occur in the upper Spring Creek watershed. Thus, Spring 

Creek downstream of the reservoir now receives regulated flow releases. The dam was 

constructed for recreational purposes, which remains the primary use today. Sheridan Lake has a 

surface area of approximately 383 acres and a maximum depth of about 96 feet near the dam 

(Driscoll and Norton 2009). Historically, the dam has been operated as a flow-through system, 

in which un-regulated outflow passes over the spillway structure. During drought periods, water 

levels in the lake often were not high enough to provide sustained outflows over the spillway in 

sufficient quantities to support the downstream fisheries. To address this, the dam was recently 

retrofitted with a control valve system to allow for controlled releases up to 7 cfs from a depth of 

about 60 feet (Driscoll and Norton 2009). 

The primary watershed concern with vegetation removal is the potential for increased stream 

flows, which can degrade unstable stream channels. Streams in watersheds of the same size can 

have different levels of response, due to natural factors such as soils, topography, and geology. 

Changes in stream flow can be described in terms of changes in runoff magnitudes (increases or 

decreases). Annual water yield is also fundamental in stream channel formation, maintenance, 

and/or destabilization. Stream flow regimes can be altered by major changes in cover type or 

ground cover, dense road networks, or engineering projects such as reservoir storage and 

releases. If vegetation and/or organic ground cover in a watershed is reduced enough to 

markedly increase the magnitude or duration of peak stream flows, stream channels may erode 

their banks, causing channel instability and damage to aquatic habitat. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Stream Flow Regime 

Alternative A reflects the existing watershed conditions. This alternative would not directly 

contribute to changes in stream flow in the short-term. Indirectly, as more forest stands are 

affected by the spread of MPB, more water would be made available for streamflow in the shortterm for the reasons discussed previously under Annual Water Yield. However, over the longterm the stream flows would decrease again, returning to current levels as new trees grow and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 93 

the forest stand regenerates. These flow conditions would continue until a large disturbance 

occurred, such as a wildfire. 

If wildfire were to occur, fire residence times would be longer and fire temperatures higher due 

to the amount of large tree boles on the soil surface. This would result in more complete 

consumption of vegetation, litter, and duff and soil alterations. This in turn would lead to 

another short (less than 5 years) post-fire period of accelerated runoff in response to summer 

thunderstorms and rapid snowmelt. Many residences located adjacent to streams within 

floodplains would be threatened by post-fire flooding. Thus, the threat to downstream life and 

property following a fire is greatest with this alternative. 

If a large enough wildfire were to occur, snowmelt and runoff characteristics may be altered in the 

long-term due to the loss of a large amount of forest canopy. An increased amount of runoff (more 

volume of water), as well as a decreased time to peak (runoff is concentrated in less time) often 

leads to hill slope erosion, channel scouring, channel instability, and increased sediment loads. 

Similar post-fire watershed responses have been observed and documented for large fires 

throughout the Black Hills, including the 1988 Galena Fire (Driscoll et al. 2004), the 2000 Jasper 

Fire (Gould 2003), the 2001 Elk Mountain Fire (USDI Interagency BAER Team 2001) and the 

2002 Grizzly Gulch Fire (USDI Interagency BAER Team 2002). However, unlike the Jasper Fire 

area, a large fire in the Calumet Project Area may affect snowmelt and runoff characteristics in the 

long-term (15 years or longer) due to the less permeable, metamorphic geology present. Once 

forest stands began to re-establish, this response would diminish and return to background levels. 

Indirectly, in the long-term wildfire and runoff responses would mimic natural cycles in which a 

disturbance would cause a “pulse” of water and sediment to be flushed through the stream

network followed by a period of recovery. This cycle would repeat based on natural disturbance 

cycles (i.e., fire frequency intervals). 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Stream Flow Regime 

Stream flow is not anticipated to be negatively affected by implementation of project activities 

associated with Alternative B. Stream base flows may be sustained for a longer period in the late 

summer and early fall due to the reduction in overall forest canopy throughout the project area. 

A slight increase in flow magnitude may be seen but may not be measurable for the reasons 

discussed previously under Annual Water Yield. Ephemeral streams and drainages occasionally 

flow in response to very intense summer thunderstorms currently and would continue to do so. 

In these events, the amount and rate of rainfall is the driving force behind streamflow being 

produced and carried throughout the drainage network. Therefore, proposed treatments are not

expected to measurably alter this current response. Furthermore, WCPs are included in the 

project design. These measures are designed to control runoff damage from at least a 10-year 

storm of any duration (USDA Forest Service 2006c). Therefore, for typical precipitation events 

observed in the Black Hills area, storm runoff is not expected to cause damages to soil or water 

resources, so long as WCP/BMP measures are implemented properly. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 94 

A wildfire may still occur within the project area under this alternative. However, vegetative and 

fuel treatments are expected to reduce the intensity and the size of a fire (see the Vegetation and 

Fire/Fuels sections for further discussion). Watershed effects as described for Alternative A may 

also still occur following a wildfire, although it is expected to a lesser degree and in localized areas. 

Cumulative Effects – Stream Flow Regime 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to stream flow regime. Livestock grazing, routine maintenance 

of trails, developed recreation facilities, and dispersed campsites, public use, and the operations 

of outfitters/guides would not involve activities which could alter stream flow regimes. These 

activities are generally dispersed across the landscape and do not involve alterations to stream 

flows through major diversions, storage, or releases of water from or back into streams. 

Under Alternative A, current stream flow conditions will likely persist until the mountain pine 

beetles kill enough trees across watersheds, or a wildfire occurs, both of which could cumulatively 

result in increased stream flows in the short-term. Timber management activities associated with 

Alternative B would cumulatively make more soil moisture available throughout the watersheds to 

sustain higher stream base flows, especially in the Precambrian Crystalline geologies. This would 

cumulative provide slightly more streamflow within the project watersheds. 

Stream Channel Stability and Floodplains 

Stream channel conditions are a function of the upland watershed’s natural characteristics, 

changes related to land management activities, the inherent stream channel sensitivity, and the 

recent stream channel disturbance history. Alterations in the watershed’s hydrologic processes 

can change the duration, magnitude, and timing of stream flows as compared to natural flow 

regimes. Increases (flooding) or decreases (drought) in magnitude or duration of peak stream 

flows can change stream channel conditions. Typical adjustments to increased peak flows are 

increased channel scour in the steeper reaches and increased deposition of the scoured sediment 

in the flatter reaches. Typical adjustments to decreased stream flows include deposition of 

sediment and bed load, filling of pools and stream habitat features, shifts in vegetation type, and 

loss of channel definition. Adjustments in stream channels can in turn result in decreased water 

quality due to the additional sediments and any other pollutants present in the eroded soils. 

The ability of increased stream flow to cause channel erosion depends on the stream channel 

type and condition. The relative sensitivity of a channel to disturbance depends on a number of 

factors including stream gradient, size and shape of substrate, bank stability, and access to 

floodplain and overflow channels. Sensitivity to erosion varies naturally among stream reaches. 

Stable channel segments can withstand sizable flood events without a major departure from its 

dimension, pattern, and profile, whereas channels that are in an unstable condition may be

measurably degraded by relatively small runoff events. 

The greatest risk of stream channel degradation in the Black Hills occurs during periods of highflow, usually resulting from intense summer thunderstorms and particularly thunderstorms 

occurring in burned watersheds (Gould 2003) and direct bank damage associated with forest use 

and management. Effects to stream channels from an increase in runoff magnitude can include 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 95 

accelerated streambed erosion and stream channel destabilization. However, silvicultural 

prescriptions used on the Black Hills and specifically in the project area, do not remove most or 

all of the forest canopy in one cutting (i.e., clear cutting) and thus do not result in significant 

increases in flood magnitudes. Direct bank damage can occur from forest use and management 

activities such as road construction, stream crossings, livestock concentration along streams, and 

other activities that take place along streams. Damage to stream banks through either natural or 

human causes may add large amounts of sediment directly into streams. 

Streams within the watershed analysis area have not yet been quantitatively surveyed and 

evaluated for stream stability (i.e., Rosgen methods utilizing surveyor’s transit, level, etc.). 

However, general stream health assessments were completed during 2009 and 2011, for the 

perennial streams and many of the intermittent streams in the Calumet Project in accordance with 

Region 2 and Forest Plan guidance. The Region 2 Watershed Conservation Practices Handbook 

(FSH 2509.25) provides both quantitative and qualitative definitions for stream health based on 

departure from natural, potential condition. Although these stream assessments are qualitative in 

nature, they incorporated the complex geomorphic, hydrologic, hydraulic, and biologic principles 

associated with overall stream stability and stream health as presented by Rosgen (1996). 

Most streams were rated “At-risk” for moderate departures in geomorphic, hydrologic and/or 

biotic integrity relative to their natural, potential condition, due largely in part to past mining 

activities, road-related problems, and livestock concentration and associated damages. However, 

Horse Creek; Johnson Gulch; the Gordon Gulch tributary along NFSR 669.1B; the un-named 

tributary to Horse Creek along US Highway 385 and NFSR 243.1F; the un-named stream that

follows Calumet Road to Blue Wing; the un-named tributary to Spring Creek that originates near 

Twin Sisters peaks; and the un-named stream along NFSR 551 were rated as “Diminished” for 

multiple segments according to Region 2 protocols. 

These stream segments exhibit low geomorphic, hydrologic and/or biotic integrity relative to 

their natural, potential condition and are experiencing major departures from the stable 

dimension, pattern, and profile appropriate for their individual stream types. These streams are 

rated as such due to extensive alteration associated with roads encroaching on the floodplain, rerouting or channelizing of the stream, and multiple stream crossings; and heavy livestock 

concentration and trampling of stream banks and adjacent riparian and wetlands. A rating of 

“Diminished” stream conditions is an indicator that State assigned beneficial uses and water 

quality criteria may not be adequately supported. None of these three streams are currently listed 

on the 2010 or Draft 2012 South Dakota Integrated Report for Surface Water Quality 

Assessment (SD DENR 2010; 2012). More detailed field investigations should be completed, in 

addition to some basic water quality monitoring in order to quantitatively validate or revise the 

general stream health assessments. 

Executive Order 11988 on Floodplain Management gives responsibility to all federal agencies to 

provide leadership and take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to minimize the impact of 

floods on human safety, health, and welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and 

beneficial values served by floodplains (Carter 1977a). A floodplain is the flat area on either 

side of a stream or river that is susceptible to inundation by floodwaters. Floodplains provide for 

flood moderation, water quality protection, ground water recharge, wildlife habitat, among other 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 96 

benefits. Floodplains slow flood velocities and decrease erosion because they are by nature wide 

and flat, thus allowing for shallower and slower water. E.O. 11988 is directly tied to the 

National Flood Insurance Act and Flood Disaster Protection Act. To meet the requirements of 

these acts, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has mapped 100-year 

floodplains across much of the nation, including Pennington County (FEMA 1998). There are 

approximately 967 acres of 100-year floodplains within the project area. The 100-year flood is a 

flood having a 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded in magnitude in any given year. It is not 

a flood occurring once every 100 years. Mapped 100-year floodplains are located along the 

following major streams: Spring Creek, Horse Creek, and the un-named stream originating in the 

Twin Sisters peaks area that is tributary to Spring Creek (aka Twin Sisters Creek). A map 

depicting the mapped 100-year floodplains is included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and 

Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Stream Channel Stability and Floodplains 

Alternative A does not propose any management actions and thus would not directly contribute

to changes in stream channel stability or floodplains in the short-term or long-term. However, 

indirectly, if the spread of MPB continues and a wildfire should occur, post-fire flooding can be 

expected to cause significant changes to stream channels and banks through excess channel 

scour, bank erosion, channel abandonment, and excess deposition in low gradient reaches. 

However, as stated previously, recovery would be expected to occur in three to five years, so 

stream flow would also return to background levels. Stream channels and floodplains would 

stabilize naturally until the next “pulse” disturbance and response cycle. 

However, stream channel stability is dependent on “channel maintenance” flows occurring 

periodically. As biomass continues to increase, less water would be available for maintaining 

stream beds and banks and natural transport processes of nutrient, sediment, and woody debris. 

The extended drought conditions and dense forest in the project area are currently affecting 

streams in this way. On the other extreme, if a wildfire should occur, post-fire flooding can be 

expected to cause significant changes to stream channels and banks through excess channel 

scour, bank erosion, channel abandonment, and excess deposition in low gradient reaches. 

Recovery of already unstable streams would be very slow, so the accelerated timing of runoff, 

increased water volume, accelerated erosion and sediment delivery may persist for several years. 

Furthermore, road improvements would occur as appropriated funding is available, thus current 

impacts to streams and floodplains at road crossings, CDAs, and areas where roads closely 

parallel streams would persist. 

Alternative B – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Stream Channel Stability and Floodplains 

No measureable, negative direct or indirect effects to stream channels and floodplains in the 

project area are expected as a result of changes in annual water yield or runoff magnitudes 

resulting from Alternative B for the reasons stated previously. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 97 

Short-term impacts may occur to stream channels and floodplains under Alternative B in areas 

where vegetative treatment and road work is proposed within riparian corridors and adjacent to 

streams. However, Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs (Appendix B) are included to protect 

stream courses and minimize floodplain and riparian impacts during management activities. All 

perennial and intermittent streams and other water bodies have 100-foot vegetative buffers, as 

required by the agreement between the USFS and the State of South Dakota (USDA Forest 

Service 2009e) stipulating that USFS Region 2 WCPs would be used above and beyond South 

Dakota BMPs to comply with State and Federal water quality regulations related to the Clean 

Water Act (US EPA 2011b). Forest Plan Standards 1301, 1302, 1306 and Guideline 1115 also 

stipulate the use of buffers for streams and riparian areas (USDA Forest Service 2006a). 

This 100-foot buffer is referred to as the Watershed Influence Zone (WIZ) buffer and applies to 

both sides of each perennial and intermittent stream, as well as other water bodies (lakes, 

wetlands, etc.). The WIZ buffer is more protective than the 50-foot buffers, known as 

Streamside Management Zones or SMZ buffers, required by the South Dakota State Forestry 

BMPs (SDSU et al. 2003). Vegetation within streamside buffers provides physical stream bank 

stability and serves to slow water velocities during flood events. For most stream sections, this 

100-foot buffer also includes the 100-year floodplain. For stream sections located in wide valley 

bottoms that also have a floodplain zone that is wider than the 100-ft buffer, Design Criteria has 

been included specifying the types of activities that may occur in these areas. 

Forest management activities such as tree harvest and prescribed fire can take place within the 

100-ft WIZ buffer if desired for silvicultural reasons and done so cautiously, with a “tread 

lightly” approach. In general, WIZ buffers would be avoided by ground-based equipment except 

at designated crossing points, to perform road work, to end-yard any cut trees out of the WIZ, or 

where site-specifically approved. Design Criteria has been included to protect streamside 

vegetation within the WIZ, including willows, aspen, spruce, or other trees or shrubs providing 

physical bank stabilization, and thus would not be removed unless site specifically approved 

otherwise by the hydrologist and the appropriate resource professional for any other resource 

concerns that may exist within that stream-side buffer. This could include the wildlife biologist, 

fisheries biologist, botanist, or other disciplines based on the inter-relation of resources 

associated with each stream segment. 

Implementing project Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs also ensures compliance with Forest 

Plan Standards and Guidelines 1115, 1301, 1302, and 1306 through the use of buffers for streams 

and riparian areas (USDA Forest Service 2006a). In addition, road improvements associated 

with timber sales would provide for improvements to stream channels and floodplains that are 

currently problematic. 

Cable Roads: The risk of direct negative impacts to streams and floodplains from cable roads is 

very low because proposed cable road construction would occur on ridge tops well away from

streams. However, the risk of indirect, negative impacts to stream channel stability and 

floodplains resulting from a slope failure is greatest with this alternative for the reasons 

described previously throughout the soils discussion. Impacts to streams and floodplains may be 

localized and short-term, or chronic and extensive, depending on the severity and size of the 

slope failure and its location relative to stream channels. This could be accompanied by a loss of 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 98 

streamside wetlands and riparian ecosystems; floodplain deposition, scouring, and/or blockage; a 

decrease in channel stability; and increased scouring of stream channels should slope failures and 

debris transport to streams and floodplains occur. 

Cumulative Effects – Stream Channel Stability and Floodplains 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to stream channel stability and floodplains. Past mining, 

livestock grazing, and road construction are the primary contributors to stream instability. Roads 

are also the primarily source of impact on floodplains. The environmental impacts of roads have 

been described previously. Grazing impacts on stream bank stability has not been specifically 

analyzed since changes in grazing management are beyond the scope of this project. However, 

changes in grazing management will be pursued to achieve more stable stream banks. Design 

Criteria and WCPs/BMPs have been included to protect streams and floodplains during harvest 

activities. Road improvements associated with the action alternative would lead to improved 

floodplain access and channel stability at some stream crossings. 

Cumulatively, stable stream channels throughout the area are expected to remain in their current 

conditions until a natural disturbance such as wildfire occurs, which would likely cause instability 

as discussed previously, or improvements are brought about through changes in grazing 

management and road alignment. Conversely, already unstable stream channels would continue to 

degrade, causing impacts to ripple throughout their tributary networks. This would continue until 

management activities are implemented to arrest head-cutting and channel incision, and restore the 

necessary stream channel dimensions, pattern, and profile to achieve system stability again. 

Detailed stream stability surveys and assessments are recommended to design a solution for road 

alignment that improves stream stability in streams identified as unstable. 

Water Quality 

Black Hills ground water and surface water are highly interconnected, and thus the quality of 

ground water can affect the quality of surface water, and vice versa. The quality of water can 

change as it flows over the land surface into streams and lakes, as wells as through underground 

aquifers. Water quality standards for both ground water and surface water have been established 

by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of South Dakota, Department 

of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR) depending on the identified beneficial uses 

(SD DENR 1999; US EPA 2011b). The Administrative Rules of South Dakota (ARSD 

74:51:01, :02, and :03) contain South Dakota's surface water quality standards. Chapter 

74:51:01 contains both the numeric and narrative criteria to protect the uses of the state's water 

bodies. Chapters 74:51:02 and 74:51:03 designate the beneficial uses assigned to each specific

water body in the state. 

Ground Water Quality 

The quality of ground water is important for the Black Hills region because of the aquifers 

present and recent increase in development of the aquifers to provide water for uses such as 

residential and municipal water supplies, commercial and industrial uses, livestock water, and 

irrigation. As ground water comes in contact with soil and rock materials, some of the minerals, 

chemicals, and nutrients dissolve and become part of the ground water chemistry. Chemicals 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 99 

and nutrients in ground water can result from both natural and human influences. The potential

for ground water contamination in the Black Hills can be high, especially where aquifer recharge 

zones (outcrops) occur. 

Naturally high concentrations of iron and manganese are associated with ground water 

originating in the Precambrian aquifers present in the project area (Carter et al. 2003). Water 

hardness is determined by the amount of dissolved calcium and magnesium in the water. 

Precambrian rocks have few carbonate rocks and thus water from this aquifer is much lower in 

hardness. Throughout the Black Hills, water from the major aquifers is generally fresh and low 

in dissolved solids within and near outcrop areas (Carter et al. 2003). 

Many activities have the potential to contribute contamination to soils and ground water simply 

through the presence of fuels, oils, solvents, paints and detergents, and by the generation of solid 

or liquid wastes. Typical contamination sources include mines, oil and gas wells, landfills, and 

septic systems (USDA Forest Service 2007a). Contamination of soils and ground water can be 

difficult, time-consuming, and expensive to clean up. Since the release of even small amounts of 

stored chemicals or fuels may substantially damage ground water resources, efforts must be 

made to ensure that all Forest Service activities and facilities comply with regulations for 

preventing ground water contamination (USDA Forest Service 2007a). Forest Service lands also 

contain the headwaters for many streams that flow off-forest and recharge zones for ground 

water aquifers from which water is used for human consumption. Therefore, the protection of 

ground water from contamination is also covered by the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. 

Ground water pollution is most often associated with sanitary sewer systems and chemical spills. 

The USFS has several vault toilet installations within the Calumet Project Area. These include 

16 vault toilets associated with the Sheridan Lake Developed Recreation Complex, including the 

South and North Swimming Beaches, South Campground, North Picnic Area, and the North 

Cove Campground (Beam 2012). The North Marina had a new septic system installed in 2010, 

including a 1,000 gallon septic tank and drain field (Beam 2012). Vault toilets are also located at 

the Spring Creek Picnic Area and Dakota Point Day Use area. All USFS vault toilets are 

regularly maintained and inspected and are not currently known to be leaking (Beam 2012). 

Numerous residential septic systems also exist on privately owned lands throughout the project 

and watershed analysis areas. No sewer system problems have been reported to the SD DENR in 

this area, although some small petroleum product spills have occurred along Highway 385 (SD 

DENR 2012b). 

Surface Water Quality 

According to the SD DENR (2010), “The Black Hills region traditionally has some of the best 

surface water quality in the state. This is due in a large part to a cooler climate and higher rainfall 

than the surrounding plains as a result of greater elevation and forest cover. Also contributing to 

the water quality in this region is the nature of local bedrock formations which are much less 

erodible than the highly erodible and leachable marine shales and badlands on the surrounding

plains. However, the Black Hills streams are vulnerable to losses of flow exacerbated by periodic 

droughts. Grazing of streamside vegetation, which increases stream bank erosion, water 

temperature and nutrient loading, also continues to be a problem in some streams in this area” (SD 

DENR 2010). Establishing consistent long-term trends in water quality for Black Hills streams 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 100 

can be difficult, especially for smaller streams, due to water quality fluctuations that naturally 

result from climatic and hydrologic factors in the region (SD DENR 2004). 

The SD DENR assigns water quality standards based on the beneficial uses of each water body. 

All streams in South Dakota are assigned the beneficial uses of irrigation, fish and wildlife 

propagation, recreation, and stock watering (SD DENR 1999). Table 3-9 displays the assigned 

beneficial uses for stream segments and water bodies within the Calumet Project Area. None of 

the water bodies in the Calumet Project Area serve as domestic water supplies. Most streams 

and water bodies in the project area are also classified as supporting coldwater fisheries and 

limited-contact recreation waters. Spring Creek and Sheridan Lake are also both classified as 

immersion-contact recreation waters. Detailed information pertaining to the State assigned 

beneficial uses for each stream and waterbody with the Calumet Project Area, along with water 

quality criteria for each beneficial use is included in the project file. 

Table 3-9 Beneficial Uses for Streams and Water Bodies in the Calumet Project Area (SD DENR 1999)

Water Body From To Beneficial 

Uses* 

Spring Creek S.D. Highway 79 Sheridan Lake 3, 7, 8, 9 

Spring Creek Sheridan Lake S5, T2S, R3E of the 

Black Hills meridian 

2, 7, 8, 9 

Horse Creek Spring Creek S30, T1N, R5E 3, 8, 9 

Sheridan Lake --- --- 2, 7, 8, 9 

* Beneficial Use Categories: 1-Domestic water supply waters; 2-Coldwater permanent fish life propagation waters; 

3- Coldwater marginal fish life propagation waters; 7-Immersion recreation waters; 8-Limited contact recreation 

waters; 9- Fish and wildlife propagation, recreation, and stock watering waters; 10-Irrigation waters.

 

No formally identified Municipal Watersheds are located in the Calumet Project Area. Residents 

within the project area obtain water from individual or sub-division wells that do not meet the 

definition of a Public Water Supply. A public water supply is defined as having at least 15 

service connections or regularly serving at least 25 individuals daily for at least 60 days out of 

the year. The Sheridan Lake North Marina was considered a Public Water Supply in the past, 

but as of 2010 the SD DENR decided that it does not meet the definition (Beam 2012). 

However, the Sheridan Lake Developed Recreation Complex is considered a Public Water 

Supply and has six wells that are used to supply domestic water (Beam 2012). Private ground 

water wells, both shallow alluvial wells and deeper aquifer wells, are located throughout the area 

on privately-owned land parcels (SD DENR 2012a). 

Due to the remote nature of the project area, few stream monitoring stations exist. The USGS 

maintains a stream discharge gage on Spring Creek, just above the Sheridan Lake inlet (Station 

06406920). Water temperature; pH; specific conductance; suspended and dissolved solids 

(turbidity); hardness and alkalinity; metal ions; nitrate, nitrites, and phosphorus (nutrients); 

organics including herbicides, pesticides, and other organic chemicals; fecal coliform, fecal 

streptococci, Escherichia coli (e. coli), and clostridium perfringens; cyanide and arsenic are 

among the parameters monitored at this site, in addition to stream discharge (USGS 2012). The 

USGS also has monitored water quality stations on Horse Creek at U.S. Highway 385 (Station 

06406950) and on the Sheridan Lake tributary near Calumet Ridge (Station 06406960). Horse 

Creek was monitoring briefly during 1991-1992 only (USGS 2012). The Calumet station was 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 101 

also monitored briefly during 1991-1992, as well as a few additional samples collected in 2006-

2007 (USGS 2012). 

There are three water bodies within the Calumet Project Area that are currently listed as impaired 

– Spring Creek above Sheridan Lake; Spring Creek downstream of Sheridan Lake; and Sheridan 

Lake itself (SD DENR 2010; 2012). Spring Creek, from its headwaters to Sheridan Lake, is 

listed as a Category 5 impaired stream segment, meaning that “water is impaired or threatened, 

and a TMDL is needed” (SD DENR 2010; 2012). Spring Creek is listed as impaired for not 

meeting water quality standards for Immersion Recreation Waters due to fecal coliform 

concentrations; as well as for Coldwater Permanent Fish Life due to high temperatures from 

natural sources. The South Dakota DENR recently released a Draft Total Maximum Daily Load 

(TMDL) Assessment for fecal coliform in Spring Creek (SD DENR 2007). Urban runoff/storm 

sewers, septic systems, and streamside livestock grazing are the primary non-point sources of 

fecal coliform that led to the listing (SD DENR 2007; 2008; 2010; 2012). 

Spring Creek downstream of Sheridan Lake was first listed in 2008 as a Category 5 stream segment 

in need of TMDL development (SD DENR 2008; 2010). It was identified as having impairment to 

the Coldwater Permanent Fish Life beneficial use due to high temperatures from natural sources. 

The draft 2012 Impaired Water Bodies list is proposing to delist this stream segment and change its 

classification to fully supporting all of its beneficial uses (SD DENR 2012). 

Sheridan Lake is currently listed as not meeting water quality standards for Coldwater Permanent 

Fish Life due to dissolved oxygen, water temperature, pH, and a high Trophic State Index (TSI) 

(SD DENR 2006; 2008; 2010; 2012). As of September 2006, a TMDL addressing phosphorus 

loading in Sheridan Lake was finalized by the SD DENR and EPA Region 8. This TMDL states 

“The major inlet stream, Spring Creek, carries excessive sediment and nutrient loads, which 

degrade water quality in the lake and have caused eutrophication in Sheridan Lake” (SD DENR 

2006). This TMDL directs the implementation of management activities to reduce phosphorus 

loads “in four main areas: (1) areas with large amounts of impervious surface; (2) areas along the 

creeks used for grazing; (3) unstable stream banks; and (4) dwellings located near streams.” 

USFS management activities can address items (2) and (3) from the above list. Grant or 

partnership funds may be available from the SD DENR to implement projects that protect and 

improve water quality in Spring Creek through three programs: Consolidated Water Facilities 

Construction program, Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) program, and the Section 319 

Nonpoint Source Program. 

Non-point sources of pollution are the primary potential causes of degraded water quality within 

the project area. Non-point source pollution is water pollution that has sources that cannot be 

isolated to a single source, but can best be controlled by proper soil, water, and land management 

practices, such as WCPs (USDA Forest Service 2006c) and SD BMPs (SDSU et al. 2003). Fine 

sediment is perhaps the most important potential non-point pollutant. Although a natural level of 

sediment exists in all streams, a substantial change in sediment delivery to the streams can lead 

to adverse geomorphic channel adjustments and impacts to aquatic species. Depending on the

composition of sediment, nutrients and other contaminants may be adsorbed to particles and 

carried throughout a stream network and into water bodies (Waters 1995). Road use, road 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 102 

construction, and road maintenance are considered the principle sources of sediment from many 

upland watersheds (Brooks et al. 1997; Waters 1995; Meehan 1991). A number of studies 

indicate that as much as 90% of the sediment associated from timber harvesting operations in the 

United States originates from roads (Brooks et al. 1997). 

Considerable sediment can be generated during and immediately following new road construction. 

Sediment delivery usually declines substantially over time as vegetation re-establishes on cut and 

fill slopes, in road ditches, and as stream channels adjust to culverts. Road/stream crossings can 

continue to be a chronic source of sediment to streams because sediment from the road surface or 

ditch water is delivered directly to the stream at these sites. Sediment usually originates from 

erosion on the cut slopes, scour in the ditch line, or washing of surface fines from the road surface. 

Unnatural channel widths, gradient, and streambed form occur upstream and downstream of 

stream crossings. Often scour occurs at the outlet of culverts causing channel instability 

downstream. The frequency and amount of sediment delivery to the streams is highly variable, 

and is largely influenced by road segment length, slope, and location within the watershed, as well 

as precipitation type, amount, and timing (Luce and Black 1999; King and Tennyson 1984). 

Excess sediment deposits in stream beds can harm insect populations and fish reproduction 

(Waters 1995). Refer to the Wildlife and Fisheries sections for more discussion. 

Changes in water temperature and dissolved oxygen can also affect overall water quality and 

stream health. Water temperatures can be increased through the removal of streamside vegetation 

that provides shade and thus cooler stream temperatures. Water temperatures can also increase 

when streams are widened, and thus get shallower, or during periods of reduced stream flow. The 

temperature of the water controls how much dissolved oxygen is present. As water temperatures 

get warmer, less dissolved oxygen is available for use by aquatic organisms such as fish. 

Connected Disturbed Areas 

Connected Disturbed Areas (CDAs) are disturbed sites that have a continuous surface flow path 

into streams and other water bodies (USDA Forest Service 1999a). Hydrologic connection exists 

where overland flow, sediment, or pollutants have a direct route to the stream network, lake, 

pond, wetland, etc. (USDA Forest Service 2006c). Sediment delivery to and transport in streams 

is a natural process, but roads and other disturbed sites can act as channels that multiply sediment 

loads to the stream network during runoff events. Most material that enters streams comes from 

an adjacent source zone and will eventually reach an aquatic ecosystem (USDA Forest Service 

2006c). Such "connected disturbed areas" can be a major source of damage to aquatic 

ecosystems. CDAs can lead to decreased physical habitat, impaired water quality, and increased 

risk of flood damage. CDAs include roads, ditches, compacted soils, bare soils, mine spoils, and 

areas of severely burned soils that are directly connected to the stream network. Ground 

disturbing activities located within the water influence zone are also considered connected unless 

site-specific actions are taken to disconnect them from streams (USDA Forest Service 2006c). 

CDAs in the Calumet Project Area are primarily associated with roads, past mining activities, 

and livestock concentration in wet areas. However, CDAs also exist in the headwaters of Horse 

Creek along NFSR 243 and Johnson Gulch as described previously in the soils section. Multiple 

other CDAs are associated with springs and wetlands throughout the project area, particularly 

where roads are immediately adjacent to these habitats and/or where livestock have access to 

congregate due to the sites not being fenced. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 103 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Water Quality 

Alternative A would not involve any additional management activities or road improvements. 

Rates and volumes of sediment delivered to streams and other water bodies are expected to 

continue at current rates for most of the project area. However, rates and volumes may possibly 

increase in problem areas and as faulty stream crossings continue to degrade, or in response to a 

natural disturbance, such as a wildfire, occurs. Rates and volumes of sediment delivered to 

streams and other water may increase if problem road crossings and unstable streams are not 

fixed. Stream temperatures and dissolved oxygen would generally remain unchanged from 

current conditions. Alternative A would not involve road improvements, so sediment delivery to 

streams would continue to occur. 

Alternative A would not involve any additional management activities or resource 

improvements. Therefore existing CDAs would remain as problem areas until road maintenance, 

grazing allotment improvements, or wetland and stream restoration projects occurred. These 

activities would take place as funding and current project authorities allowed. 

A wildfire that may be experienced under Alternative A is expected to have the greatest potential 

of exposing and altering soil conditions and thus the greatest risk of indirectly contributing to 

increases in soil erosion and off-site sediment transport to water bodies. If a wildfire occurs, and 

intense rainfall events follow it, soil erosion and the resulting sediment transport would likely 

mimic conditions previously observed during post-fire precipitation events in the Jasper Fire 

area, in which sediment was carried in flood waters all the way to Angostura Reservoir. Post-fire 

flooding may impact water quality in a significant and negative way for several years following 

the fire, leading to impairment of beneficial uses within and downstream of the project during 

and immediately following any post-fire flooding events. This would continue until watershed 

conditions have recovered. Flash floods have and would still occur in the project area in 

response to intense summer thunderstorms. Should a wildfire occur, these flash floods may be 

intensified in both magnitude and frequency. 

Recovery of the watershed following a wildfire could be very slow based inherent characteristics 

such as slope, soils, geology, vegetation, etc. So the accelerated timing of runoff, increased 

water volume, accelerated erosion and sediment delivery may persist for several years. If an 

intense rainfall event occurs, soil erosion and the resulting sediment transport to Spring Creek 

and/or Sheridan Lake would likely mimic conditions previously observed during post-fire 

precipitation events in the Jasper Fire area, in which sediment was carried in flood waters all the 

way to Angostura Reservoir in 2001 (Gould 2003). Post-fire flooding may lead to degraded 

water quality and impairment of beneficial uses, both within and downstream of the project area. 

Similar post-fire watershed responses have been observed and documented for large fires 

throughout the Black Hills, including the 1988 Galena Fire (Driscoll et al. 2004), the 2001 Elk 

Mountain Fire (USDI Interagency BAER Team 2001) and the 2002 Grizzly Gulch Fire (USDI 

Interagency BAER Team 2002). 

The threat to life and property within and downstream of the project area following a fire is 

greatest with this Alternative. Several residences located adjacent to Horse Creek and Spring 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 104 

Creek within the Calumet Project Area would be threatened by post-fire flooding. Residences 

and commercial buildings located in the lower Horse Creek valley; along Spring Creek between 

the Flume Trailhead and Spring Creek Picnic Area; and along Spring Creek at the Stratobowl are 

at greatest risk if post-fire flooding were to occur. Access roads, including segments of Sheridan 

Lake Road, and the Spring Creek Picnic Area would also be threatened. Furthermore, large 

ponds would pose an additional threat to life and property if post-fire flooding exceeded the

storage capacity of the impoundments, causing dams to be breached and to send a large “pulsetype” flood wave down Horse Creek and eventually Spring Creek. Five large ponds exist on 

Horse Creek on non-Federal lands within the project area. Other ponds also exist on Spring

Creek downstream of the Calumet Project on non-Federal lands, particularly in the vicinity of 

Reptile Gardens and Hart Ranch. Other areas could also be at risk depending upon the location, 

size, and wildfire characteristics, as well as rainfall characteristics following any such event. 

Post-fire watershed effects would be assessed during Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) 

efforts and more specific post-fire flood risk mapping would take place at that time. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Water Quality 

The Calumet Project does not propose stream stabilization or restoration activities and thus 

potential effects associated with advancing stream channel incision or “head cutting” may still 

occur. However, Alternative B includes Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs to minimize further 

negative effects to these already impaired and unstable systems. Some existing stream problems 

may be fixed through road maintenance and improvement work associated with timber haul 

routes. Other restoration activities would be pursued through separate NEPA authorities. 

Vegetation Management and Prescribed Broadcast Burning: Proposed timber and fuels 

management, and prescribed burning activities is not expected to degrade water quality or exceed 

State specified thresholds for the various water quality parameters associated with each 

beneficial use. Commercial and non-commercial thinning and prescribed burning activities 

associated with Alternative B are not expected to result in detrimental levels of soil erosion as 

explained previously in the soil erosion discussion, and therefore no substantial increase in 

sediment transport to streams and water bodies is anticipated. Measures have been included in 

the project to protect the quality of ground water as required by Forest Service Manual 2880 – 

Geologic Resources, Hazards, and Services (USDA Forest Service 2008a). Applicable WCPs 

found in FSH 2509.25 (USDA Forest Service 2006c), along with SD BMPs (SDSU et al. 2003), 

are used to prevent degradation of both surface and ground water quality. These measures apply 

to all proposed activities and are listed in Appendix B. These measures include stream and 

riparian buffers, avoidance of sensitive areas, seasonal operations, drainage features, and 

restrictions on harvest, road activities, and fire ignition in and immediately adjacent to water 

resources. Measures are also included to prevent the use and storage of concentrated pollutant 

sources near water bodies or applying harmful chemicals near water bodies, including fuels, oils, 

and lubricants used in equipment operations as required by the WCP Handbook (USDA Forest

Service 2006c) and Forest Plan Standard 1107 (USDA Forest Service 2006a). 

These practices have been proven effective in preventing runoff, erosion, sediment delivery, and 

chemical pollution of water resources when implemented properly (Lee 2001; Lee and Everett 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 105 

2001; Everett 2004; Thomas 2008; Hoxie and Engelskirger 2009; USDA Forest Service 2003, 

2006c, 2010). All management activities have been designed to meet Forest Plan Standards and 

Guidelines through the inclusion of project Design Criteria and specified WCP/BMP measures. 

These measures also help to ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act (US EPA 2011b) and 

all State and National water quality regulations. So long as project Design Criteria are properly 

implemented and adhered to, no substantial or long-lasting effects to surface or ground water 

quality are expected. 

Furthermore, vegetative buffers would remain in place to filter any incoming sediment or 

chemical pollutants, provide stream bank stability and minimize bank erosion, and provide 

necessary shading to maintain cooler water temperatures necessary for coldwater fisheries. All 

water bodies including but not limited to lakes, ponds, wetlands, springs, and perennial and 

intermittent streams, have 100-foot WIZ vegetative buffers as required by agreement with the SD 

DENR (USDA Forest Service 2006c; 2009e) and Forest Plan Standards 1301, 1302, 1306 and 

Guideline 1115 (USDA Forest Service 2006a). These buffers protect streams and other water 

resources from increased sediment delivery or chemical pollutants by filtering runoff prior to 

entry into streams and wetlands. Vegetation within streamside buffers provides physical stream 

bank stability and thus minimizes bank erosion and associated suspended sediment transport in 

streams. Streamside vegetation also provides necessary shade to maintain cooler stream 

temperatures essential for coldwater fisheries. 

Forest management activities such as tree harvest and prescribed fire can take place within the 100-ft 

WIZ buffer if desired for silvicultural reasons and done so cautiously, with a “tread lightly” 

approach. In general, WIZ buffers would be avoided by ground-based equipment except at 

designated crossing points, to perform road work, to end-yard any cut trees out of the WIZ, or where 

site-specifically approved. Design Criteria has been included to protect vegetation within the WIZ 

associated with streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and other water bodies. Within this buffer, willows, 

aspen, spruce, or other trees and shrubs providing physical bank stabilization or shade to the stream 

or water body would not be removed unless site specifically approved otherwise by the hydrologist 

and the appropriate resource professional for any other resource concerns that may exist within that 

buffer. This could include the wildlife biologist, fisheries biologist, botanist, or other disciplines 

based on the inter-relation of resources at each stream or water body. 

Road Activities: The Calumet Project is being proposed under the HFRA authority, which limits 

road improvements to only those roads used during vegetation treatments. The HFRA authority 

cannot authorize project-wide road management. With this in mind, the project was designed to 

reduce the impacts of existing roads on watersheds to the extent possible under the HFRA 

authority. Other problem areas can still be addressed through existing authorities (i.e., road 

maintenance) or brought forth for analysis under other NEPA projects. 

Approximately 79 miles of road maintenance activities are proposed under Alternative B. Road 

maintenance activities under this alternative would focus on reducing the distance water flows in 

ditches, reducing road surface erosion, filtering ditch water before entering streams, and reducing the 

probability of stream-crossing failures. Research has demonstrated that improved road design, 

construction, and maintenance can reduce road-related erosion (Gucinski et al. 2000). In addition, 

adding aggregate to road surfaces can greatly reduce erosion and sediment delivery (Kennedy 1997). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 106 

Road construction, reconstruction, maintenance and temporary use of roads within riparian areas 

and at stream crossings have the greatest potential to increase sediment. However, through the 

use of Design Criteria and BMPs, sediment delivery to water resources should be minimized. 

Furthermore, road problems and CDAs would be corrected as part of the commercial timber 

harvest and road package, thus reducing sediment to the streams. CDAs associated with roads 

that would be used to complete commercial vegetation management activities (i.e., timber sales) 

can be corrected under the HFRA authority. Fixing other CDAs is generally beyond the scope of 

the Calumet Project, but can be accomplished under other projects as funding allows. 

Reducing stand density in upland areas, and thus potentially increasing stream base flows would 

have a positive effect on stream temperature. Streamside vegetation would be protected through 

required buffers, and thus would not be removed. Design Criteria and BMPs are included to prevent 

use and storage of concentrated pollutant sources near water bodies or applying harmful chemicals 

near water bodies, including fuels, oils, and lubricants used in road-related equipment operations. 

Alternative B could result in localized, short-term sediment delivery to water resources from 

road-related activities adjacent to streams or at stream crossings. Although very minor, this 

would add to sediment from existing road conditions and on-going road maintenance activities. 

However, these road-related activities are designed to improve existing stream channel 

conditions or water quality issues at individual sites (i.e., culverts, low water crossings, etc.). In 

the long-term, roads would produce less sediment as a result of the implementation of the 

committed road work (i.e., road work associated with timber sale areas). Other road 

improvement work is planned, but not guaranteed. The committed road work would trend 

toward improvement in sediment delivery and overall water quality. 

Implementation of project Design Criteria including WCP/BMP measures is expected to protect 

soil and water resources, and thus minimize any adverse impacts to the downstream water 

quality that may result from road work. If an extreme event were to occur, sediment and 

nutrients would be stored by the various impoundments within the Horse Creek drainage, 

Sheridan Lake, and ponds downstream of the project. Such an event might be severe 

thunderstorms or extremely wet periods, similar to those that occurred in 1972 and 1996 that 

caused flooding of Spring Creek (Harden et al. 2011) or rain events following a large wildfire. If 

a significant amount of precipitation occurred with such an event, some sediment and nutrients 

could be carried through the stream network all the way to Spring Creek, Sheridan Lake, and 

further downstream. However, this type of event cannot be predicted and is independent of 

proposed actions associated with the project. 

Cable Roads: The risk of direct negative impacts to water quality from cable roads is very low 

because proposed cable road construction would occur on ridge tops well away from streams. 

However, the risk of observing indirect, negative impacts to water quality associated with cable 

road construction and potential failure is highest with this alternative for the reasons described 

throughout the soil and water discussion. A measurable, negative change in water quality may 

result from cable road construction and long-term presence on the landscape if environmental 

conditions (i.e., saturated soils, excess precipitation, etc.) were to occur. The longer the cable 

roads remained on the landscape, the higher the probability of failure and the higher the 

probability of impacts to water quality. Depending on the severity and size of the slope failure, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 107 

impacts to water quality may be localized and short-term or chronic and long-lasting. However, 

if such an event occurred, immediate actions would be implemented to stabilize road and 

resource problems and reduce impacts to soil and water resources. Therefore, long-lasting water 

quality effects to Spring Creek or Sheridan Lake, or their tributaries are not anticipated. 

Cumulative Effects – Water Quality 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to ground water and surface water quality. Cumulatively, all 

activities are expected to maintain current water quality levels with the implementation of 

Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs (Appendix B). No measurable change in overall water quality 

is expected in any of the streams from activities associated with the project other than decreased 

sediment delivery where problem road crossings and other road-related CDAs are corrected, as 

discussed above. Other federal ongoing and foreseeable activities would also adhere to 

applicable Forest Service policy and Federal and State regulations regarding water resources. 

Grazing management strategies are employed to prevent water quality impairment associated 

with livestock concentration in or near water bodies. Routine maintenance of trails, developed 

recreation facilities, and dispersed campsites or the operations of outfitters and guides would not 

involve activities which would increase sedimentation or affect water quality. Public 

Recreational uses would have no measurable effect on sediment yields in the project area, due to 

the fact that disturbance created by these activities would be small, if any and dispersed across 

the landscape. Routine road maintenance is likely to occur as needed on existing roads in the 

project area. The roads most likely to receive maintenance are those open to vehicle traffic. 

Roads with restricted vehicle access would receive maintenance as needed to correct problems as 

they occur. Although minor sediment inputs into streams are possible, the long-term benefit of 

road maintenance is a reduction in routed sediment and water. Short-term sediment input to 

streams is expected to be minimized or eliminated by using WCP/BMP measures. 

Wetlands, Riparian Areas, and Ground Water Dependent Ecosystems 

Wetlands, riparian areas, and ground water dependent ecosystems (GDEs) are susceptible to 

degradation from land use activities such as livestock grazing, roads, land development, and 

recreation activities that inherently tend to be concentrated along streams and other water bodies. 

Livestock concentration and road-related problems are the primary impact sources to these 

resources within the Calumet Project Area. Nearly all wetlands, riparian areas, and ground water 

dependent ecosystems – particularly springs – in the project area exhibit signs of livestock 

concentration. These impacts include trampled and hoof-sheared banks; hummocky ground; 

over-utilization of willows, sedge, and rush species; excess sediment deposition; and extensive 

manure within and immediately adjacent to stream channels, springs, and other wet areas. A 

map depicting known wetlands, springs, and riparian areas is included in Appendix A of the 

Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. Associated 

GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 

Wetlands 

Executive Order 11990 on Protection of Wetlands gives responsibility to all federal agencies to 

provide leadership and take action to prevent the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 108 

and to preserve and enhance natural and beneficial values of wetlands (Carter 1997a). Wetlands 

and the activities that occur in wetlands are regulated by the EPA and the US Army Corps of 

Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. “Wetlands control runoff and water

quality; recharge ground water; and provide special habitats. Actions that may alter their ground 

cover, soil structure, water budgets, drainage patterns, and long-term plant composition can 

impair these values” (USDA Forest Service 1996c). Wetlands have been mapped for the Black 

Hills region as part of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) program undertaken by the U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI FWS). Wetlands are classified as 

Lacustrine, Palustrine and Riverine according to the NWI classification system (USDI FWS 

1995). Field investigations were conducted during 2009 and 2011 to verify the NWI wetland 

mapping and identify any additional un-mapped wetlands. A map depicting the known wetlands 

is included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well 

as the project file. Associated GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 

There are approximately 404 acres of wetlands mapped by the NWI within the Calumet Project 

Area (Table 3-10). These are associated with 34 different wetland areas, many of which are 

associated with man-made impoundments used primarily for stock watering. Sheridan Lake 

comprises most of this acreage, totaling approximately 383 acres. The remaining wetlands range 

from 0.1 acre to 6 acres in size, but most are less than half an acre. Sheridan Lake and the 

associated wetlands where Spring Creek enters the reservoir are classified as Lacustrine wetlands; 

a small Riverine wetland is mapped along Spring Creek just downstream of Three Forks; and the 

remaining wetlands are classified as Palustrine, most of which are impounded by man-made dams. 

All lakes and ponds in the Black Hills are man-made and thus have impoundment structures. 

Many of these are included in the NWI wetland mapping with codes indicating the presence of 

the man-made impoundments. The largest of these is Sheridan Lake, which has nearly 8 miles of 

shoreline associated with the 383 acres of surface water (when at full pool). Other man-made 

impoundments are found on Horse Creek, Bitter Creek, and several un-named tributaries to 

Spring Creek at the eastern edge of the project area. 

There are also over 38 miles of NWI-mapped linear wetlands within the project boundary (Table 

3-10). About 14 miles are classified as Riverine and the remaining 24 miles are classified as 

Palustrine. Other linear wetlands are present in the project area, but were not specifically 

mapped during field investigations since these areas coincide with intermittent and perennial 

streams, and thus are considered Protected Stream Courses. All Riverine linear wetlands are 

associated with Spring Creek. Palustrine linear wetlands can be found along streams and 

drainage ways associated with Bitter Creek, Dutch Creek, Gordon Gulch, Horse Creek, Joe 

Dollar Gulch, Johnson Gulch, an un-named tributary to Deadman Gulch, an un-named tributary 

to Teepee Gulch, an un-named tributary to Sheridan Lake hereafter referred to as Calumet Creek, 

and an un-named tributary to Spring Creek, hereafter referred to as Twin Sisters Creek. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 109 

Table 3-10 Mapped Wetlands in the Calumet Project Area

Wetland 

Classification Wetland Type(s) 

Wetland 

Areas 

(Acres) 

Linear 

Wetlands 

(miles) 

Lacustrine Lakes 383 None 

Palustrine Marshes, swamps, floodplains, fens, bogs, wet 

meadows, etc. 21 24 

Riverine Adjacent to rivers and streams; includes ox bows, 

freshwater marshes, etc. 0.3 14 

Total 404 38 

A determination has not been made as to whether any of the wetlands within the project area are 

“jurisdictional wetlands” according to U.S. Army Corp of Engineers wetland definitions and 

classifications (US Army Corps of Engineers 1987). Design Criteria has been included to 

protect all wetlands in the Calumet Project (Appendix B). These measures apply to all wetlands 

in the Calumet Project Area, regardless of whether each individual wetland meets the regulatory 

definition of “jurisdictional wetland.” No alteration of any wetland would take place, thus no 

dredging or placement of fill material would occur within any wetland. Therefore, no 

consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is necessary, and no permitting under 

Section 404 of the CWA is necessary. Appropriate permits will be obtained from the State of 

South Dakota and/or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should there be any change in proposed 

activities that would affect known wetlands or those discovered during project implementation. 

Riparian Areas 

Riparian areas are a transition zone between permanently saturated aquatic ecosystems such as 

wetlands and stream channels, and that of drier upland areas. These areas exhibit vegetation or 

physical characteristics reflective of permanent surface or subsurface water influence (USDI 

Bureau of Land Management 1998). Riparian ecosystems provide shade; root strength for bank 

stability; organic matter and woody debris for fish habitat and cover; sediment storage and 

release; pollutant filtering; flood and moisture storage; and interaction between surface and 

ground water supplies (USDA Forest Service 1996c). 

The health of riparian systems is largely dependent on the condition of the vegetative

community. Healthy riparian vegetation provides overhead cover and temperature moderation, 

as well as habitat for aquatic and terrestrial insects – two critical components for fish habitat and 

fisheries condition. Riparian vegetation also filters sediment, stores water, and dissipates 

floodwater energy. Riparian areas can also provide critical habitat for many unique plant species 

and many wildlife species. Refer to the Botany, Fisheries, and Wildlife Reports for more 

discussion on plants, fish, and wildlife with respect to riparian areas. Depending on the stream 

channel type and volume or rate of flow, the relative magnitude of these functions can vary 

widely. Where disturbance occurs in riparian areas there is an increased risk of erosion and 

reduced productivity, thereby reducing the buffering effect that the riparian area has on streams 

and the protection of beneficial uses. 

Riparian areas within the Black Hills generally coincide with perennial and intermittent streams, 

but can also be found in transition zones surrounding wetlands and springs, as well as in wet 

drainage ways. There are approximately 47 miles of perennially flowing streams and 43 miles of 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 110 

intermittently flowing streams in the project area, for a total of 90 miles and approximately 2,200 

acres of riparian areas associated with streams. These areas are in addition to those associated 

with wetlands discussed previously. 

Nearly all riparian areas in the project area exhibit signs of livestock concentration including 

trampled and hoof-sheared banks; hummocky ground; over-utilization of willows, sedge, and 

rush species; excess sediment deposition; and extensive manure within and immediately adjacent 

to stream channels, springs, and wetlands. Past mining activities and road building have further 

impacted and impaired many of these same areas. 

Ground Water-Dependent Ecosystems 

Ground water dependent ecosystems (GDEs) are communities of plants, animals, and other 

organisms whose extent and life processes depend on ground water (USDA Forest Service 

2007a). GDEs vary dramatically in how much they depend on ground water, from being entirely 

dependent to having occasional or partial dependence. Some examples of GDEs that depend 

almost entirely on ground water include springs, aquifer systems, cave and karst ecosystems, and 

rare peat-forming wetlands such as fens and bogs. These special ecosystems rely on the nearly 

constant supply of ground water to sustain their unique hydrologic and ecologic characteristics. 

Some examples of GDEs that depend partially on ground water include streams and lakes fed by 

ground water, and many types of wetlands. 

GDE wetlands also fall under the authority of Executive Order 11990 (Carter 1977b) and 

regulating agencies such as the EPA, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and Army Corps of Engineers. 

Forest Service land managers are directed by the USFS national ground water policy to “protect 

the ecological processes and biodiversity of ground water dependent ecosystems; and minimize 

adverse impacts on ground water dependent ecosystems by: (1) maintaining natural patterns of 

recharge and discharge, and minimizing disruption to ground-water levels that are critical for 

ecosystems; (2) not polluting or causing changes in ground water quality; and (3) rehabilitating 

degraded ground water systems where possible” (USDA Forest Service 2007a). This national 

policy also stipulates that preferential consideration be given to ground water dependent resources 

when conflicts among land use activities occur (USDA Forest Service 2007a). 

There are currently 49 known seeps and springs located within the Calumet Project Area. A 

spring is defined as “any natural discharge of water from rock or soil onto the land surface or 

into a surface waterbody” (Carter et al. 2002). Major springs are those that discharge greater 

than 1 cfs; whereas seeps are smaller springs, with generally less than 1 cfs average discharge 

(Rahn and Gries 1973). Twenty-four sites were recorded previously on USGS topographic maps 

or in the USFS range inventory database. An additional 25 seeps and springs were found in the 

project area during field surveys conducted in 2009 and 2011. Springs located on Forest Service

lands include the following named springs: East Bald Horse, West Bald Horse, Bitter, Burnt 

Ranch #1, Burnt Ranch #2, Burnt Ranch #3, Coon Hollow, Horse Creek headwater, Joe Dollar 

Mine, Long Draw #1, Long Draw #2, Lower Gordon, Middle Pond #1, Middle Pond #2, Mule, 

Silver Mountain #1, Silver Mountain #2, Twin Sisters, and Upper Horse springs. The remaining 

springs are yet to be officially named. Other springs exist on privately-owned lands, but were 

not inventoried or assessed. A map depicting known springs is included in Appendix A of the 

Geology, Soils, and Water Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. Associated 

GIS data are located in the electronic project file. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 111 

Most of these springs also have associated wetlands surrounding the spring source, some of which 

may potentially be peat-forming wetlands. If sufficient peat depths are present, they may indeed 

contain fens as part of the spring and wetland complex. Many of these springs and their associated 

wetlands have been developed in the past for use as livestock watering facilities. All springs and 

potential fens in the project area exhibit signs of livestock concentration as described previously. 

Some of these springs also have fens associated with them based on initial field investigations. 

Additional field investigations are necessary to determine peat depths at each site and confirm 

whether or not each is indeed a fen. Nine potential fen locations were identified within the 

Calumet Project Area, each of which was less than 1 acre in size. A map depicting known and 

potential fen locations is included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water Resources 

Specialist Report, as well as the project file. These sites include: 

• Three separate sites along an un-named tributary to Horse Creek adjacent to Highway 385 

and NFSR 243.1F; 

• One site at the headwaters of an un-named tributary to Gordon Gulch adjacent to NFSR 669.1B; 

• Two separate sites along NFSR 551; 

• One site near the intersection of NFSR 392 (Calumet Road) and 392.2E; 

• One site along NFSR 366 (Beretta Road) at the headwaters of Johnson Gulch; and 

• One site on an un-named tributary to Deadman Creek. 

Fens are defined in the Region 2 WCP Handbook as “Geographically restricted wetlands where 

perennial ground water discharge occurs on the time scale of millennia and where little erosion or 

mineral sediment deposition occurs. Fens are generally characterized by their stable presence on the 

landscape for thousands of years and associated plant and animal communities that may be relics 

from historic glaciation periods” (USDA Forest Service 2006c). Fens differ from bogs in that they 

are sustained primarily by ground water, whereas bogs are primarily maintained by surface and 

atmospheric waters. Fens are peat-forming wetlands usually vegetated with mosses and sedges, but 

shrub and tree species may also be present. Tree species when present are typically stunted. 

Black Hills fens are relatively rare and unique from other fens worldwide. Fens are typically formed 

in basins with impeded drainage or where springs have been present on the landscape for millennia. 

Peat develops due to the incomplete decomposition of dead plant material in saturated soils. 

Because of their water-holding capability, fens provide very stable habitats for plants and wildlife 

species in the long-term. For example, many of the fens of Colorado are over 10,000 years old, with 

organic soil accumulation rates ranging from about 4 to 16 inches per thousand years (USDA Forest 

Service 2002). It can take up to 10,000 years to form a fen naturally (USDA Forest Service 2007a). 

Fens in the Black Hills are currently undergoing research, so little is known regarding ages and peat 

accumulation rates. However, preliminary carbon dating of samples in the Rochford area indicate 

that Black Hills fens are at least 3,000 years old (Grimm 2000). Because the rate of peat 

accumulation is so slow in fens, these ecosystems are essentially irreplaceable 

Peat-forming wetlands, including fens and bogs, are recognized by wetland regulating agencies 

(EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) as rare wetlands that cannot be replaced in-kind (U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers and EPA 2008). Mitigation for loss of fens is problematic, as there are 

no known methods to create new functional fens. Thus avoidance and preservation of these rare 

wetlands is emphasized by these regulatory authorities as documented in 33 CFR Parts 325 and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 112 

332 and 40 CFR Part 230 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and EPA 2008). The U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Mountain-Prairie Region, has made conservation and protection of fens one of 

their wetland priorities (USDA Forest Service 2002; USDI FWS 1999a and 1999b). Furthermore, 

the Mountain-Prairie Region has determined that all functioning fens fall within their Resource 

Category 1. This means that the goal is no loss of existing habitat value, and that every reasonable 

effort should be made to avoid impacting these habitats. The Forest Service also recognizes the 

rarity and importance of such peat-forming wetlands and the unique plant and animal habitats they 

support and requires that land managers “avoid any loss of rare wetlands such as fens and springs” 

(USDA Forest Service 2002; 2006c; 2007a). 

Roads have impacted many of the wetland, riparian, and GDEs present in the Calumet Project Area. 

Road-related problems exist where roads are located immediately adjacent to these streams and 

wetlands and in the vicinity of stream crossings. Stream channel adjustments continue to occur both 

upstream and downstream of problem road crossing, some migrating through wetland features, 

including fens (i.e., channel incision or “head cutting” and draining of GDE features). Road-related 

impacts were observed at seven of the nine fens within the project area. The two exceptions are the 

fens located at the headwaters to Johnson Gulch and on the tributary to Deadman Creek. 

Additionally, the fen located in the headwaters of Johnson Gulch was located within the recent 

Beretta II wildfire that occurred in March 2012. Fire intensity through the fen and wetland area 

was lower than the adjacent hill slopes. This resulted in low mortality to riparian and wetland 

herbaceous plant species such as sedges (carex sp.) and rushes (juncus sp.). However, willows in 

the wetland were burned enough to cause mortality of the above-ground plant parts. Limited 

research has been done on willow regeneration following fire, but it is possible that suckering 

and/or sprouting of new willows may occur with the increased nutrients made available by the 

fire. Overall effective ground cover of the fen and wetland after the fire is approximately 95%, 

with the remainder being open water or rock. 

All fens in the project area exhibit signs of livestock concentration including trampled and hoofsheared banks; hummocky ground; over-utilization of willows and grasses and forbs; excess 

sediment deposition; and extensive manure within and immediately adjacent to seeps, springs, 

and fens. Livestock impacts to wetland and riparian areas is outside the scope and authority of 

the Calumet Project, but can be addressed through allotment management and/or water resource 

improvement projects. 

A map depicting known wetlands, riparian areas, springs, fens, and other ground water 

dependent ecosystems is also included in Appendix A of the Geology, Soils, and Water 

Resources Specialist Report, as well as the project file. More detailed information for each site 

is also included in the Watershed section of the project file. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Wetland, Riparian, and Ground Water Dependent Ecosystems 

This alternative would not have any new activities within the project area so there would be no 

direct impact or effect on wetland and riparian ecosystems. As described previously, the risk of 

negative impacts to both soil and water resources is greatest with this alternative. Therefore, the 

risk of degradation of wetlands, riparian areas, seeps, springs, and fens is also greatest with this 

alternative. These ecosystems can be filled with sediment, ash, and debris entirely or they can be 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 113 

scoured by high-energy flood waters. These processes were also observed following post-fire 

flood events within and downstream of the Jasper Fire. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Wetland, Riparian, and Ground Water Dependent Ecosystems 

Wetlands, riparian areas, and ground water dependent ecosystems (springs and fens) have been 

identified in or adjacent to proposed treatment units throughout the Calumet Project Area. 

Design Criteria have been included to protect these areas during management activities and are 

found in Appendix B. Since buffers provide protection for these areas, no effects to wetland and 

riparian areas are anticipated for proposed activities so long as WCP/BMP measures are properly 

implemented and adhered to. Therefore, this project would comply with all water-quality related 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines and all State and National water quality regulations. 

Forest Service Manual 2880 – Geologic Resources, Hazards, and Services (USDA Forest Service 

2008a) requires inclusion of measures to manage and protect ground water quality and quantity, 

as well as ground water dependent ecosystems. Measures used to do this come from WCPs and 

SD BMPs. Although springs and fens require special Design Criteria to prevent any loss of these 

rare ground water dependent ecosystems from occurring, it would not be necessary to eliminate 

entire stand polygons from treatment due to the presence of a spring or fen within an individual 

stand. Rather, avoidance of spring and fen areas, as well as the small contributing areas to these 

ecosystems, along with Design Criteria addressing harvest and hauling operations, should be 

sufficient to preserve these fragile ecosystems. 

Wetlands, riparian areas, seeps and springs, and fens are all buffered in a “bulls-eye” manner, in 

which ground based activities can take place within the 100-foot buffer in order to accomplish 

project objectives so long as resources are protected, but no equipment is allowed within the 50-foot 

buffer. The hydrologist would be consulted prior to initiating management activities within these 

buffers in order to make a site specific determination of what kinds of activities are acceptable and 

the specific locations they can be implemented while protecting wetland and riparian resources. The 

botanist and wildlife biologist may also be involved depending on the resource concerns associated 

with each individual wetland, riparian area, or GDE. A typical example of this situation is the need 

for a short segment of skid trail within the outer buffer due to restrictive topography. Site specific 

needs of this type arise as thinning units are laid out, marked, and logging plans developed, as well 

as during timber sale administration. Any additional wetlands and riparian areas discovered during 

project layout and implementation would also be protected. 

Timber harvest, road construction, construction of fire line (hand or dozer), operation of heavy 

equipment, or ignition of prescribed fire is generally not allowed within these buffers due to 

project Design Criteria and WCP/BMP requirements. However, it is possible that prescribed fire 

may enter wetlands and riparian ecosystems, but due to the naturally moist conditions of these 

areas only low intensity fire is anticipated. This should closely mimic natural fire conditions, 

and no long-term adverse effects are expected. However, prescribed fire is not allowed in fens 

and springs because of the presence of organic soils that are highly combustible as discussed 

previously in the Organic Soils section. Existing roads that cross wetlands would be relocated 

out of wetlands where feasible, or improved to minimize further loss of wetland function or

extent, as part of required wetland mitigation associated with E.O. 11990, Section 404 of the
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 114 

Clean Water Act, and other wetland regulations. Design Criteria and WCPs/BMPs also apply to 

existing roads that cross riparian areas (Appendix B). These roads would also be improved or 

relocated where feasible. The net result is expected to be an overall improvement in wetland and 

riparian conditions once protective measures around these areas are installed (i.e., fencing or 

natural barriers) and road improvements are made. 

The Calumet Project does not propose wetland stabilization or restoration activities and thus 

potential effects associated with advancing headcuts through iron-rich fens and wetlands would 

continue to occur at unstable sites. However, Design Criteria and WCP/BMP measures have 

been included to minimize further effects to these already impaired and unstable systems. 

Additionally, some existing impacts may be addressed through road maintenance and 

improvements associated with timber haul routes. Other restoration activities would be pursued 

through separate NEPA authorities. 

Cable Roads: The risk of direct negative impacts to wetlands and riparian areas from cable roads 

is very low because proposed cable road construction would occur on ridge tops well away from 

these areas. However, the risk of indirect, negative impacts to wetlands, riparian areas, and 

ground water dependent ecosystems resulting from a cable road slope failure is greatest with this 

alternative for the reasons described previously throughout the soil and water discussion. 

Impacts may be localized and short-term, or chronic and extensive, depending on the severity 

and size of the slope failure and its location relative to these water resources. If such an event 

were to occur, these areas would be very difficult to stabilize and rehabilitate. Thus, the risk of 

losing wetlands, especially the irreplaceable springs and fens, is greatest with this alternative. 

Cumulative Effects – Wetlands, Riparian Areas, and Ground Water Dependent Ecosystems 

Current and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Appendix C of the Calumet EIS were 

considered for cumulative effects to wetlands, riparian areas, and ground water dependent 

ecosystems such as springs and fens. 

Existing problems at wetlands, riparian areas, seeps, springs, and fens are associated primarily 

with livestock grazing and roads. Changes in grazing management are beyond the scope and 

authority of the Calumet Project, but some road improvements may occur if Alternative B is 

selected. These areas are expected to remain in their current condition until grazing management 

changes are implemented to repair fences and prevent concentrated use in these areas and road 

problems are addressed. Although grazing management is beyond the scope and authorization of 

the Calumet Project, protective and restoration measures for problem areas identified during field 

investigations would be pursued through adaptive management under the grazing allotment 

management plans and grazing permits. 

The creation of new openings resulting from timber harvest may lead to increased livestock use 

over a larger area, which could reduce grazing pressure on existing high-use areas, which tend to 

be wetlands, springs, fens, streams, and other riparian areas. However, opening up areas around 

already existing problem areas could make those areas even more accessible to livestock, thus 

exacerbating existing problems. Livestock grazing can disturb soils in localized areas of 

concentrated use such as watering areas, salt block locations, and easily accessible stream banks 

or meadows. Bank shearing and compaction are the two most common soil disturbances 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 115 

resulting from grazing. Stream bank shearing occurs when livestock cross a stream or wetland 

and collapse the bank. This can lead to an increase in bank scour during high flows. 

Compaction by livestock occurs in areas of concentrated use, usually when soils are moist and 

more prone to compaction. Impacts to soil and water resources as a result of livestock 

management are beyond the scope of this project. Although grazing management is beyond the 

scope and authorization of the project, protective and restoration measures for problem areas 

identified during field investigations will be pursued through adaptive management under the 

grazing allotment management plans and grazing permits. 

Overall Watershed Condition and Processes 

A comparative summary of the potential for adverse impacts or improvements to water resources 

is presented for each alternative associated with the Calumet Project in Table 3-11. It is 

provided as a means of comparing alternatives and evaluating the risk to water resources 

associated with each. Design Criteria has been included with the Action Alternative to minimize 

overall soil disturbance and impacts to water resources. Design Criteria includes applicable 

measures from both Forest Service WCPs (USDA Forest Service 2006a) and BMPs (USDA 

Forest Service 2012), as well as applicable South Dakota Forestry BMPs (SDSU et al. 2003). 

Ratings shown in Table 3-11 are based on the inclusion, adherence, and proper implementation 

and maintenance of project design criteria and WCP/BMP measures. 

Table 3-11 Comparison of Potential for Adverse Impacts to Water Resources or Improvements to Existing 

Water-Related Problems for Each Alternative

Water Resource Concern Alternative A - No Action Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Water Rights No Effect No Effect 

Annual Water Yield 

Localized increases in water 

table as MPB causes trees to 

die; may increase stream base 

flows or prolong flow period. 

Localized increases in water table 

as MPB causes trees to die and/or 

forest stands are thinned; may 

increase stream base flows or 

prolong flow period. 

Stream Flow Regime Localized increases in flow 

length and/or duration 

Localized increases in flow length 

and/or duration 

Stream Channel Stability and 

Floodplains 

Essentially no change over 

current conditions; areas of 

instability may increase if a 

large wildfire occurred. 

Localized improvements as 

rehabilitation measures are 

implemented (i.e., road work) 

Water Quality 

(Surface and Ground Water, 

Connected Disturbed Areas) 

No change over current 

conditions 

No change over current conditions, 

except for some individual 

improvements at select sites (i.e., 

road work) 

Wetlands, Riparian Areas, and 

Ground Water Dependent 

Ecosystems (GDEs) 

No change over current 

conditions, except for some 

individual improvements at 

select sites (i.e., road work) 

No change over current conditions, 

except for some individual 

improvements at select sites (i.e., 

road work) 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 116 

Alternative A – No Action 

Cumulative Effects – Overall Watershed Condition and Processes 

No cumulative, measurable change in water yield, flow regime, stream channel stability, 

floodplains, water quality, or wetland and riparian conditions is expected, unless a wildfire occurs, 

followed by intense summer thunderstorms. As discussed throughout the soil and water resources 

sections, Alternative A poses the greatest risk of severe fire effects resulting from a wildfire and 

multiple degraded resources resulting from post-fire runoff and flooding. If this happens, then 

adverse impacts to water quality would be expected to mimic those observed following the Jasper 

Fire and Grizzly Fire, as well as other large wildfires in the Black Hills. These post-fire floods 

would transport ash, sediment, and debris through the stream networks and into lakes, clogging 

culverts, washing out roadways, eroding stream banks, scouring channels, filling ponds and 

reservoirs, and clogging or damaging irrigation points. Wetlands would be scoured or filled with 

ash and debris depending on their position in relation to flood waters. Infrastructure located within 

streams and floodplains would be at risk of damage, clogging, or complete removal (i.e., washout) 

by these debris-laden floodwaters. Thus downstream water uses, water rights, and water quality 

would be at risk. The risk of downstream impairment of water quality in Spring Creek and 

Sheridan Lake following a post-fire flood is greatest with this alternative. 

Disturbances associated with livestock grazing, wildlife high-use areas, OHV activity, recreation, 

mining, and other forest activities authorized under other planning documents or authorities in 

the project area (refer to Appendix C - Current and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities) have the 

potential to disturb watershed processes as discussed throughout the soil and water resources 

section, and thus can also affect overall watershed condition. However, Design Criteria and 

WCP/BMP measures also apply to these other activities and thus minimize their impacts as well. 

Strict adherence to WCP/BMP measures, including proper implementation and maintenance of 

runoff and erosion control structures would ensure protection of water resources. 

Alternative B – No Action 

Cumulative Effects – Overall Watershed Condition and Processes 

No measurable, negative change in water yield, flow regime, stream channel stability, 

floodplains, water quality, or wetland and riparian conditions is expected to result from the 

implementation of Alternative B, when cumulatively combined with other activities. This project 

and all other Forest Service activities use applicable WCP and BMP measures to prevent or 

minimize effects to water resources. Additionally, private lands are limited within the watershed 

analysis area and activities occurring on them must still comply with State water quality laws 

and standards, SD State Forestry BMPs (SDSU et al. 2003) for harvest and road building, and 

permitting for construction sites or alteration of wetlands. 

Overall, the risk of severe post-fire watershed conditions would be reduced and the future health 

and function of the watershed improved. Vegetation management and fuels treatment provides 

an opportunity to cumulative improve watershed conditions, as well as prevent adverse effects 

should a wildfire occur for the reasons discussed previously. With improved watershed 

conditions, it would take a much larger storm event to produce runoff and erosion and thus flood 

damage is limited and localized. This means that the risk of cumulative impairments to 

downstream water quality and beneficial uses (i.e., Spring Creek and Sheridan Lake) would also 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 117 

be minimized. If drought conditions persist, the risk of watershed impairment caused by highseverity wildfire would be decreased. If climatic conditions return to normal or cycle towards 

colder and wetter conditions, the risk of watershed impairment caused by high-severity wildfire 

would be lower, and thus management activities would have less effect. Over the long-term 

climate cycling between hot and dry, and cool and wet periods, the action alternatives would 

decrease the long-term risk of watershed impairment resulting from a high-severity wildfire. 

Effects associated with other Forest uses and activities (Appendix C) would be the same as 

described for Alternative A. 

TRANSPORTATION 

Primary access into the Calumet Project Area, from the city of Rapid City, is provided by SD 

Highway 16 and SD Highway 228. US Highway 385 (Forest Highway-1) provides access to the 

area from the communities of Lead and Deadwood and US Highway 16/385 and SD Highway 16 

provides access to the area from the cities of Custer and Hill City. 

Unique characteristics and transportation challenges of the Calumet Project Area are the 

presence of Spring Creek, Horse Creek and other stream courses; Sheridan Lake and associated 

recreational facilities; steep, rugged terrain; the Centennial, Victoria, Horse Creek, Clark 

Mountain, Flume, Boulder Hill and Summit Hiking Trails; and the implementation of the Black 

Hills National Forest Travel Management Plan. 

Affected Environment 

Existing Transportation System 

The existing transportation system was inventoried in 2010 and 2011, and reviewed by Engineering 

in 2011. Global positioning systems, aerial photos, completed past projects and the forest road data 

base were used for the inventory. Road condition surveys were conducted during the 2011 review. 

The transportation system within the Calumet Project Area, identified at the time during road 

inventories, is comprised of approximately 230 miles of existing roads. Of this total, U.S. and 

state highways account for 21 miles and county/local jurisdiction roads account for 13 miles. 

There are approximately 116 miles of NFSRs (National Forest System Roads), 71 miles of 

unauthorized roads and over nine miles of roads on private property (road miles on private 

property were taken from the Global Information System Roads Coverage but not all were 

captured). Table 3-12 below displays the information 

Table 3-12 Existing Transportation System

Road Jurisdiction Length in Miles 

US/State Highway 21 

County Roads 13 

Forest Service System 116 

Unauthorized Roads 71 

Roads on Private 9+ 

Total 230 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 118 

Existing Travel Management

The Record of Decision (ROD) for the Black Hills National Forest Travel Management Plan was 

signed on May 7, 2010. Implementation began with publication of the Motorized Vehicle Use Map

(MVUM) effective December 1, 2010. The ROD designates certain roads and trails as open to 

motorized vehicle traffic on lands administered by the Forest and also assigns a class of vehicle and 

season of use to these designated roads or trails. Trail designations in the ROD were the result of 

either changing an existing National Forest System Road (NFSR) to a Forest System Trail, or 

converting an unauthorized route to a system trail. Some NFSR’s were also changed from the status 

of “highway legal only” to “mixed use” (also referred to as roads open to all motorized uses). 

Most but not all of the designated roads and trails included in the Travel Management ROD have 

been implemented on the ground. Implementation of the full Travel Management ROD is ongoing 

and expected to be completed in the near future. Full implementation of the Travel Management 

ROD is used as the baseline or existing condition for the Calumet Project transportation analysis. 

This baseline is presented in Table 3-13. 

Table 3-13 Travel Management Plan Designated Routes/Trail Miles That are Open

Designation 

Length in Miles 

Open Yearlong Open Seasonal 

(May 15 to Dec 15) Total 

Roads Open to All 11 0.4 11.4 

Roads Open to Highway Legal 38 13 51 

Trails Open to All 1.5 1.3 2.8 

Trails Open to Vehicles <62” 3.4 0 3.4 

Trails Open to Motorcycles 4.0 1.3 5.3 

Totals 58 16 74 

Closed NFSRs are approximately 42 miles. (roads not shown on the ROD) 

The following table displays road densities within the Calumet Project Area. This does not include 

State, County, Unauthorized or Private Roads, nor does it include Private land. 

Table 3-14 Road Density

Road/Density Length (Miles) Miles/Square Mile 

Open (May 15 to Dec 15) 74 1.7 

Open (Dec 15 to May 15) 58 1.3 

Total NFSR Density open and closed 116 2.7 

The average road density for the Black Hills National Forest, including system and unauthorized 

road miles, is 4.4 miles per square mile as shown in the Forest Plan (Phase II Amendment). Road 

density in Calumet Project Area, including NFSR and unauthorized is 4.4 miles per square mile. 

Within the Calumet Project Area, 21 miles of road are maintained by the South Dakota 

Department of Transportation, 13 miles are maintained by Pennington County, and 23.5 miles 

are maintained annually by the Forest Service (Maintenance Level 3, 4, and 5). The remaining 

system roads are reviewed for maintenance needs every five years or sooner if identified for 

other management needs or if they are causing resource damage (Maintenance Level 1 and 2). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 119 

The unauthorized roads are not maintained unless identified for project needs, in which case they 

are either converted to NFSR, trail or utilized as temporary roads and decommissioned after use. 

The following table shows National Forest System Roads within the Calumet Project Area that 

are maintained annually by the Forest Service. These roads are Maintenance Level 3, 4, or 5. 

Table 3-15 Annually Maintained Routes

Road No. Road Name Length in 

Miles 

Maintenance 

Level 

Surface 

243 Horse Creek 1.5 3 Aggregate 

358 Boulder Hill 4.3 3 Aggregate 

366.3 Beretta Road 2.2 3 Aggregate

392 Calumet 0.6 4 Asphalt

392 Calumet 4.1 3 Aggregate/ 

404 Spring Creek PG 0.2 3 Aggregate 

434 Dakota Point 1.2 3 Aggregate

438 Sheridan South Shore 1.7 4 Asphalt 

438.1A Rocky Loop 0.5 4 Asphalt

438.1B Thumper Loop 1B 0.2 4 Asphalt 

438.1C1 Chipper Loop 1 0.3 4 Asphalt 

438.1C2 Chipper Loop 2 0.2 4 Asphalt 

438.1E1 Woodsey Loop 1 0.4 4 Asphalt 

438.1E2 Woodsey Loop 2 0.1 4 Asphalt 

438.1E3 Woodsey Loop 3 0.2 4 Asphalt 

438.1E4 Woodsey Loop 4 0.1 4 Asphalt 

438.1E5 Woodsey Loop 5 0.2 4 Asphalt 

438.1F Host Station 0.1 4 Aggregate 

438.1G1 Smokey Loop 1G1 0.2 4 Aggregate 

438.1G2 Smokey Loop 1G2 0.2 4 Aggregate 

438.1G3 Smokey Loop 1G3 0.3 4 Aggregate 

438.1H Fisherman Parking 0.2 4 Asphalt 

439 South Beach PG 0.3 4 Asphalt 

440 South Beach 0.3 4 Asphalt 

605 North Beach 1.5 4 Asphalt 

605.1A Sheridan North Beach 0.2 4 Asphalt 

605.1B Sheridan North Beach 0.1 4 Asphalt 

605.1C Sheridan North Beach 0.1 4 Asphalt 

605.1D Sheridan North Beach 0.1 4 Asphalt 

605.1E Sheridan North Beach 0.1 4 Asphalt 

605.1F Sheridan North Beach 0.1 4 Asphalt 

605.2B Fisherman Parking 0.1 4 Asphalt 

676 Storm Mountain 1.6 3 Aggregate 

Road conditions vary throughout the area. In areas of active and recent timber sales, the roads 

meet maintenance standards due to the ongoing or recent maintenance activities by the timber 

purchaser. Other maintenance level 1 and 2 roads, which have not had grid maintenance 

recently, do not meet maintenance standards. Segments of the roads are located in or cross 

drainage bottoms, meadows or other wet areas. These road segments do not drain properly and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 120 

are contributing to sediment movement. Some road sections that cross drainages do not have a 

hardened surface or a proper design through the crossing and portions have steep grades, which 

show evidence of road rutting and surface material loss. Numerous roads have small diameter 

trees growing within the roadway limits, restricting sight distance and road width. 

During road inventory activities, approximately 71 miles of “unauthorized” roads were 

identified. The majority of these roads is “user defined”, poorly located and has no drainage 

structures resulting in sediment movement, rutting and vegetation compaction or loss. Some of 

these roads have been converted to motorized trails and would be improved with the 

implementation of the travel management plan. 

Road access is limited by private property and/or steep terrain. The eastern portion of the project 

area is one example of this restricted access. The landscape is too steep for road access on forest 

land and would require access (easement) through private property. Past access was gained 

through a section line ROW and a temporary road use permit through private property. Since then, 

a subdivision was developed and an asphalt road was built on a portion of the section line. 

Temporary road use permits are not guaranteed for future access. Similar situations exist with the 

presence of Spring Creek, steep terrain and private property creating additional access challenges. 

 

The presence of the Centennial, Horse Creek, Victoria, Clark Mountain, Flume, Boulder Hill, 

and Summit Hiking Trails add additional challenges. The Centennial Trail traverses through the 

center portion of the project area. Some roads and skid trails may need to cross these trails. 

Newly designated motorized trail system routes are located in the northeast section of the project 

area. Some of these trails would be utilized as log haul routes and would create mixed use traffic. 

Road condition surveys identified existing closures that are not effective. There is evidence of 

motorized traffic gaining access behind gate and closure barriers. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Under Alternative A, there would be no direct effects to the existing transportation system. There 

would be no change in the transportation system or in the travel management due to a proposed action. 

Scheduled annual and grid maintenance would continue as it has in the past. Implementation of the 

Travel Management ROD would continue and road densities would not change under this alternative. 

The beneficial effects of taking no action are that there would be no ground disturbing activities, 

no increased dust and noise, no tree removal, etc. as which would occur with Alternative B. 

 

The adverse indirect effects of taking no action are that we would forego the opportunity to 

provide additional maintenance, reconstruction, reclassification of unauthorized roads, and road 

closings associated with and funded by timber harvesting. Annual maintenance would continue on 

approximately 23.5 miles and grid maintenance would continue on a five-year rotation on the 

remaining forest system roads. With budgets continuing to decline, fewer miles of roads within 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 121 

the area may be maintained to the current standard in the future. Since the system roads within the 

Calumet Project Area are on different grid maintenance schedules, some of the roads would not 

receive grid maintenance for up to five years. 

Roads located through meadows and in flatter terrains could create changes to the topography. 

These roads are difficult to maintain. The location of these roads does not provide for surface 

water relief or drainage structure effectiveness. Continued use, especially during wet periods, 

result in the roadbed being lower than the surrounding ground elevation. This would increase

maintenance costs and effectiveness. 

Roads located on steeper grades and roads without an adequate number of drainage structures would 

continue to lose roadbed surface material. Ruts would deepen as material washes off the road. More 

substantial maintenance would be required as road conditions deteriorate. Positive driving 

experiences for some users would be affected as these roads become more difficult to navigate. 

Unauthorized roads would remain on the landscape until future projects and funding is secured. 

Unauthorized roads, in most cases, have no drainage structures, have poor alignment and are located 

in drainage bottoms, on steep slopes and in meadows, resulting in vegetation compaction and loss. 

Current road closures in the project area range from effective to ineffective. The ineffective 

closures would not be secured to prevent motor vehicle travel. Additional funding would be 

needed to reinforce these existing closures. This would have the effect of continued use in areas 

that are meant to be closed to motorized travel to protect the roads and other resources. 

Forest lands that are not easily accessed due to steep terrain or land-locked by surrounding 

private property would continue to be difficult to access for future management activities and 

would slow wildfire suppression activities. 

Cumulative Effects 

Although Alternative A proposes no action, there are cumulative effects in the area that would 

result from past, present and reasonably foreseeable activities. There are plans for the 

reconstruction of Fisherman’s Parking. Sheridan Lake Road Reconstruction is being planned by 

Pennington County Highway Department. There would be an increase in mixed traffic from log 

haul on Rockerville Bug Timber Sale and close proximity of communities and subdivisions. 

Additional roads could be expected due to private easement requests, subdivision access needs and 

transmission line construction. The ongoing Black Hills National Forest Travel Management 

would continue to be implemented. There would continue to be recreational traffic from 

campgrounds and day use areas along Sheridan Lake and off-road trails. Unchecked mountain 

pine beetle infestation and wildfire could cause the death of trees which would increase water 

runoff onto the roads and cause surface erosion. Tree mortality due to mountain pine beetles and 

the consequence of trees falling on road travel way, posing a potential safety hazard. Roads may 

require more frequently placed drainage structures, larger culverts, surface material replacement 

and more frequent maintenance as a result of increased mixed traffic. All of the above would 

increase the cost of road repair and maintenance needs in the future. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 122 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The action alternatives propose additional maintenance, reconstruction, new construction and 

road closure activities. Direct adverse effects from these proposed activities are short-term 

vegetation loss, vegetation removal, soil disturbance and compaction, an increase of mixed 

traffic and traffic delays during project implementation. Short-term increases of noise and dust 

would occur. Based on past experience proposed new construction miles and reconstruction 

miles may be reduced during implementation as these routes are located on-the-ground. 

Recreational road and trail use associated with the Travel Management ROD could be negatively 

affected by transportation needs associated with timber hauling, equipment access, and 

harvesting activities. Recreational users might not be able to use some of the roads and trails at 

times during implementation of this action alternative. 

Direct and indirect beneficial effects include improvements to existing roads and trails that 

would comply with Best Management Practices and road design criteria. Safety issues would be 

addressed in the road design. Existing roads located in meadows would be relocated and/or 

armored with aggregate material to prevent road indentation, rutting and sediment movement. 

Existing roads would be realigned and relocated to reduce grades if needed. 

 

Once road improvements are completed, long-term maintenance and deferred maintenance costs 

would decrease. As vegetation is reestablished, the effects on soil erosion would be reduced. 

The vegetation would aid in stabilizing the roadway and the cut and fill slopes. Positive driving 

experiences would improve from proper road design and repair of the travel way. The road use 

pattern in the area would change as unauthorized roads, used as temporary roads, are closed and 

closure devices are secured. Open road densities and total road densities would decrease with 

the decommissioning of unauthorized roads and the closing of new constructed roads. 

The proposed transportation system would meet existing and anticipated future transportation 

needs. It would address the existing resource concerns. Access for resource management must 

take into consideration soil and water resources, public safety, economics of access, wildlife, 

visual aesthetics and other resource needs. The implementation of the BHNF Travel

Management Plan may identify additional transportation needs of both system and trail routes. 

The proposed transportation system would be accomplished by utilizing existing National Forest 

System Roads (NFSRs), reconstructing existing NFSRs, reclassifying unauthorized routes, 

utilizing/reconstructing trails, and constructing additional system roads. Road reconstruction 

could include betterments, restoration, or realignment. Select system roads would be closed to 

protect and prevent damage to resources. Some existing unauthorized routes would be 

reconstructed and converted to NFSRs, and some trails would be temporarily changed to roads 

and then returned to trails after vegetation management activities are completed. Some existing 

unauthorized routes would be used as temporary roads and then reclaimed and closed when 

vegetation management activities are completed. Remaining unauthorized roads not used for the 

proposed activities and not identified as a route in the travel management plan need to be 

addressed in future decisions or decommissioned in the future when funds become available. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 123 

Construction of new roads (NFSR and temporary roads) would provide access to areas not 

previously accessed due to private land ownership patterns and/or steep terrain. 

Unauthorized roads need to be classified as National Forest System Roads, trails, other uses, or 

decommissioned. For disclosure purposes, unauthorized roads that are to be reclassified as 

system roads are termed “constructed” and are considered as new miles being added to the 

transportation system, even though these roads exist on the ground and may require only 

maintenance or reconstruction. For clarification in this analysis, the roads that would be 

reclassified to system are shown separately as “reconstruct/convert.” 

The proposed transportation system would bring road standards up to the minimum necessary to 

accommodate commercial timber haul while protecting soil and water resources. Reconstruction 

of existing unauthorized roads (NFSR conversion) and a temporary change from trails to roads 

would also bring roads up to minimum road standards necessary for commercial haul while 

protecting soil and water resources. New road construction would be needed to access presently 

inaccessible commercial treatment areas in Alternatives B, including access to cable logging 

units. New road construction would be closed following timber management activity unless 

documented and approved Road Management Objective states otherwise. Temporary roads may 

also be used to access portions of proposed units. These roads would be closed or 

decommissioned after activities. Temporary roads utilize existing unauthorized roads or are 

constructed in locations approved by the Forest Service. If temporary roads are used on 

designated trails; these trails would be temporarily changed to roads and then returned to trails 

after vegetation management activities are completed. 

Nine miles of “Roads Open to All Vehicles” would be utilized as haul routes under the action 

alternative. Approximately three miles of designated trails under Alternative B would be 

temporarily changed to roads and utilized as haul routes. These trails would be reconstructed to 

support commercial haul and to protect soil and water resources. The following table

summarizes mileages and costs contained within the action alternative. 

Table 3-16 Action Alternatives – Activity in Miles and Estimated Cost*

Activity Alternative B** Estimated Cost 

Maintenance 79 (1.0) $23,700 

Reconstruction 27 (2.0) $216,000 

Reconstruct/Convert Unauthorized Road to NFSR 0.2 $1,600 

Temporary Change from Trail to NFSR 3.0 Included above 

New Construction 0.2 $3,000 

New Construction (Cable Logging) 4.8 $240,000 

Total Estimated Cost*** $484,300 

*Proposed new construction miles and reconstruction miles may be reduced during implementation as these routes 

are located on-the-ground. 

**Miles of designated trails included in total miles. These trails are designated and managed as trails under the 

travel management but would be classified as NFSRs during treatment activities. These roads would be returned to 

trails when operations are completed. 

***For the estimate above, the following average cost per mile was used. Maintenance $300/mi, Reconstruction = 

$8,000/mi, Reconstruct/Convert = $8,000/mi, New Construction = $15,000/mi, and New Construction (Cable

Logging) = $50,000/mi. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 124 

Miles of road work shown are approximate lengths. A significant storm event or the extent of 

time between project planning and project implementation could trigger changes in road 

conditions. If road conditions worsen before project implementation, additional reconstruction 

may be necessary. 

Crushed aggregate needed to stabilize the roadbed or to plate drainage dips would come from a 

commercial source unless the quantity needed is large enough to justify the cost of crushing in a 

Forest Service quarry. Taylor Quarry located is the closest Forest Service rock source. 

The average road density for the Black Hills National Forest, including system and unauthorized road 

miles, is 4.4 miles per square mile as shown in the Forest Plan (Phase II Amendment). The current 

open road density for the Calumet Project Area is 1.7 miles/square mile from May 15 through 

December 15 and 1.3 miles/square mile from December 15 through May 15. Total road densities 

would increase under Alternatives B because of new road construction and converting unauthorized 

roads to system roads. These roads would be closed following harvest operations, therefore open 

road densities would not change. 

There may be further change in the travel management of roads in the next few years as the 

Forest implements the Travel Management Plan for the Black Hills National Forest. 

Open system roads would include traffic management strategies such as Encourage, Accept and 

Discourage. Closed system roads would include strategies such as Prohibit, Eliminate and 

Decommission. Unauthorized roads are not managed and are considered closed under the travel 

management plan. 

Maintenance on system roads used for timber harvest is the responsibility of the 

Purchaser/Contractor for the life of the Timber Sale Contract. Maintenance includes cleaning 

out silt from sediment collecting ponds and depositing it in upland locations, keeping silt fence 

upright and functioning by cleaning out any sediment collected in front of the silt fence and 

depositing it in upland locations, keeping all drainage structures and ditches clear and functional, 

eliminating erosion of cut and fill slope and roadway soils, removing roadway vegetation and 

blading road surfaces. 

Maintenance of the roads after the proposed activity would be the responsibility of the Forest 

Service and would be performed when needed or with grid maintenance every five years, 

whichever comes first. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities would be the same as those discussed in 

Alternative A. These activities along with the proposed action activities would have cumulative 

effects on the transportation system. Log hauling with Rockerville Timber Sale combined with the 

proposed road reconstruction/construction activities and log haul would increase mixed traffic, dust, 

noise, and loss of fines on surfaced roads during project implementation. The Calumet Project 

implementation is proposed to begin in 2012, with road reconstruction and new construction 

activities lasting until scheduled work is completed. The normal operating season for road work is 

from June 1 through November 1, which is extended if weather and ground conditions are favorable. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 125 

Road maintenance activities would continue for the duration of any timber harvest activities. Shared 

maintenance responsibilities would have to be coordinated. Road maintenance, reconstruction, and 

new construction with the Calumet Project combined with subdivision access private road easements 

and transmission line road construction would have cumulative effects on ground disturbance, 

vegetation loss, dust/noise increases and sediment movement. There would be a change in the travel 

management of roads over the next few years as the Forest implements the Travel Management Plan 

for the Black Hills. The change has the potential to effect travel patterns and could increase mixed 

traffic on the Forest System roads and trails. In the event of catastrophic fire, increased runoff onto 

roads would cause excessive erosion, loss of surface material and culvert and drainage failures. 

MINERALS 

Affected Environment 

Geology 

The Black Hills Uplift is a 175 by 90 mile elongated domal feature, or doubly plunging anticline 

that was created 60 to 70 million years ago during Paleocene (65.5 to 55.8 million years old) time. 

The uplift is composed of Paleozoic (542 to 251 million years old) sediments which encircle the 

Precambrian core that was uplifted and subjected to erosion to form the present day topography 

(DeWitt et al., 1986). The core of the uplift consists of Proterozoic (2.5 billion to 542 million 

years old) metamorphosed shale (slate/phyllite), greywacke (mica schist) and quartzite units. The 

sedimentary rocks which drape the core include shale, sandstone, and limestone. Various 

Quaternary (2.6 million years old to the present) deposits can also be found around the Black Hills. 

The Calumet Project area is located mainly within the Proterozoic core. The main rock types in 

the project area are mica schist, quartzite, and phyllite. Along the eastern edge of the project there 

is an area of Paleozoic sedimentary rocks which are composed of limestone, sandstone and shale. 

There are also small deposits of quaternary alluvium (sand and gravel) present along Spring Creek 

upstream and downstream of Sheridan Lake.

Minerals can be divided into three categories on National Forest System lands. This includes 

locatable, leasable, and saleable minerals. 

Locatable Minerals 

Locatable minerals are minerals such as gold, copper, silver, and other metals subject to claim 

and development under the General Mining Law of 1872, as amended. As set forth in this law, 

all locatable minerals on public domain lands such as the Calumet Project Area are open to 

location, discovery and mining. The Forest Service has only limited authority to restrict and 

regulate locatable mineral activities on public domain lands (USDA Forest Service 2006b). A 

person or company can file a mining claim with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) when 

they have something of value, and must get approval from the Forest Service before conducting 

any significant surface disturbing activities. The project area has a high potential to contain 

gold. Based on the October 12, 2011, search of BLM’s Geographic Claim Index (LR2000), 

there are at least twelve (12) active mining claims located within the Calumet Project Area 

(Table 3-18). The active claims in the project area are mainly placer type pick and shovel 

operations. There are also eighteen (18) additional active claims that lie just outside of the 

project area. One claim is located in T1N, R6E, Section 34, five (5) are located in T1S, R6E, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 126 

Section 31 and twelve (12) are located in T1S, R6E, Section 32. The name and location of active 

claims within the project area are as follows: 

Table 3-17 Active Mining Claims within the Calumet Project Area

Claim Name Location BLM Claim No. 

Six Bit T1S, R6E, Sec. 1, NW 1⁄4 MMC209112 

Hard Dollar T1S, R6E, Sec. 1, SW 1⁄4 & Sec. 12, NW 1⁄4 MMC220078 

Cougars Pass T1S, R6E, Sec. 1, NW 1⁄4 & Sec. 2, NE 1⁄4 MMC220079 

Lost Dollar T1S, R6E, Sec. 1, NW 1⁄4 & Sec. 12, SW 1⁄4 MMC222580 

Sub Zero T1SN, R6E, Sec. 3, SW 1⁄4 & Sec. 10, NW 1⁄4 MMC215818 

Gold-Mt. Rushmore (Sunset) T1S, R6E, Sec. 4, NW 1⁄4 & Sec. 5., SE 1⁄4 MMC223044 

Gold-Mt. Rushmore (Sunset) T1S, R6E, Sec. 4, NW 1⁄4 MMC223931 

Gold-Mt. Rushmore (Phelps) T1S, R6E, Sec. 4, NW 1⁄4 MMC223457 

Gold-Mt. Rushmore (Phelps) T1S, R6E, Sec. 4, NW 1⁄4 MMC223912 

Maggie G T1S, R6E, Sec. 7, NE 1⁄4 MMC220160 

Rockerville Mining Co. 1 T1S, R6E, Sec. 11, SW 1⁄4 & Sec., 14, NW 1⁄4 MMC223305 

KM 6 T1S, R6E, Sec. 30, SE 1⁄4 & Sec. 31, NE 1⁄4 MMC96593 

Leasable Minerals 

Oil, gas, and coal are leasable minerals under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. This act provides 

authority to the Bureau of Land Management to lease oil and gas deposits on public domain National 

Forest System lands. Significant oil and gas production is occurring along the western and 

southwestern margins of the Black Hills. Leases are awarded at the discretion of the government for 

these types of minerals. There are no leasable minerals within the project area. Based on the 

geology in the project area the potential for these types of minerals is low (DeWitt et al. 1986). 

Salable Minerals 

Salable minerals are a group of mineral commodities such as common variety sand, gravel, slate, 

and building stone that are salable under the Materials Act of 1947. The Forest Service has 

discretionary authority over production of these commodities from National Forest System lands 

(USDA Forest Service 2006b). The project area contains deposits of saleable type minerals such 

as sand, gravel and slate. Sand and gravel is present in alluvium along a portion of Spring Creek 

above and below Sheridan Lake. The limited size of this alluvial deposit would make its

development unlikely. Slate is also present in the project area and has been quarried in several 

locations just outside the project area to the west (T1N, R4E, Sections 15 and 22) and south 

(T1N, R5E, Sections 7, 8, 17, 18 and 20). However, there are currently no projects of this type 

within the project area. 

Abandoned Mines 

There are numerous known abandoned mines in the project area (Davis et al. 1998, and Dewitt et 

al. 1986). This concurs with the description of potential for mineral resource development as 

discussed above. The abandoned mines in the project area can range from underground 

workings that contain shafts and adits to small exploration pits and trenches. There is the 

potential for some of these abandoned mines to pose a safety hazard. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 127 

Cave Resources 

No cave or karst resources have been identified within the project area, although these resources 

are often very hard to identify so it is possible that they occur within the project area. If there are 

caves they would occur at the eastern most boundary of the project area where the Pahasapa 

Limestone is present. There is one privately owned cave (Sitting Bull Crystal Cavern) located 

2.4 miles east of the project area in T1S, R7E, SW1/4 of the NE1/4 of Section 17. 

Environmental Consequences 

All Alternatives 

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects 

Effects to travel management would occur as the owners of the active claims discussed above 

need access to their areas of operation. Future road access needs are unknown. However, once 

an operating plan is submitted to develop a mining claim, access must be provided. This 

requirement for road access is stipulated under 36 CFR 228.1 subpart A and United States

Mining Laws 30 U.S.C. 21-54, which confers a statutory right to enter upon public lands to 

search for minerals. If road access becomes a necessity, then the category of road use and 

maintenance level of the road would be determined. Roads currently in place may be suitable for 

access thus reducing the need to open decommissioned or construct additional new roads. 

Roads used and maintained to support the action alternative could potentially provide improved 

travel access to mining claims. There could be positive direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to 

the mineral resource or to mining claimants from any of the alternatives that would reconstruct 

or construct roads available for miners to access their claims. 

Although there is a small potential for cave resources in the project area, no caves have been 

identified to date which require management as set forth in the Forest Plan. In the event that 

cave resources are identified during the course of the Calumet Project, mitigation according to 

the Forest Plan must occur. 

BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT 

This section will describe the affected environment and environmental consequences for each 

alternative to the Biological Environment (Vegetation, Fire and Fuels, Range, Noxious and Invasive 

Weeds, Wildlife Habitat, Fisheries, and Botany). 

VEGETATION 

The overall goal of silviculture is to manage the forest environment to achieve desired 

management goals and objectives. This involves not only the timber resource, but also all of the 

resources that can be found in a forested ecosystem, as well as the needs of the forest users. This 

input is designed to only address the timber resource however, and does so realizing that all of 

the resources in the entire forested ecosystem are interrelated and interactive. It is the intent of 

this input to add only information, issues and concerns with regards to the timber resource using 

the Black Hills National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan standards, guidelines and 

Phase II Amendment as a desired future condition. In addition, this report is intended to 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 128 

supplement the analysis in the Black Hills LRMP and Phase II Amendment and not duplicate it. 

This is tiered to the aforementioned documents and applicable silviculture sections. Each site 

was analyzed to determine if it met forest plan condition and/or the purpose and need both on a 

site specific basis and its contribution to the landscape. Treatments were formulated to move the 

project area towards the desired condition. 

Affected Environment

Records indicate that harvesting within the project area has occurred as far back as the turn of the 

century. Since that time, additional harvesting has occurred on a periodic basis. Much of the 

area has had vegetative treatments within the past 30 years. District records show commercial 

harvests and non-commercial thinnings from the early 1980’s to the present have taken place on 

approximately 50% of the project area. Many treatments were designed to lower the basal area 

to promote increased growth and vigor and regenerate the stands of timber. Much of the activity 

that has occurred within the project area has been timber sales and related activities, which 

include the sales listed in Appendix C, Table 1. 

The following discussion summarizes existing conditions in terms of topography, roads, fuel 

loading, plant species composition, age class distribution, stocking levels, regeneration, insects 

and disease, and structural stage distribution. 

Topography: The topography is dominated by Spring Creek and its tributaries with many small 

drainages leading into the larger and more developed drainages and into Sheridan Lake. 

Elevations run from a low of 3,875 feet on the eastern edge of the project area to almost 5,900 

feet on some of the ridge tops in the west. Slopes are moderate over most of the area with an 

average slope of 25%. There are steep rocky outcroppings above Spring Creek and steep 

rimrock running below some ridges scattered throughout the project area. There are 

approximately 4,500 acres or 17% of the national forest lands within the project area that are 

inoperable or inaccessible due to steep slopes or soils characteristics. Sheridan Lake covers 391 

acres within the project area. 

Insects and Disease: Mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) is the number one killer 

of pines throughout the western United States. The mountain pine beetle is a native species to 

the West and attacks most pine species including ponderosa pine in the Black Hills. Mountain 

pine beetles (MPB) have always been a part of the Black Hills Forest ecosystem, with outbreaks 

occurring periodically. The largest recorded outbreak occurred from the late 1890’s through the 

early 1900’s, and killed an estimated 1-2 billion board feet of timber (USDA Forest Service 

2012a). Mountain pine beetles prefer dense stands of mature pine trees greater than seven inches 

in diameter. Adult flight typically occurs in July and August, with the peak flight around the 

first week of August. During this flight, adult MPB leave previously infested trees and attack 

and kill new host trees. The adults attack green trees, chew through the bark and construct 

galleries along which eggs are laid. Larvae hatch from the eggs and begin feeding on the phloem 

of the tree in late summer to early fall. Larvae, pupae or callow adults over-winter under the 

bark of the infested tree. 

Currently, in the Calumet Project, MPB activity is characterized as an epidemic (USDA Forest 

Service 2012a). Generally speaking, the western parts of the project area in the Horse Creek area 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 129 

and the area south of Sheridan Lake are where the most intense MPB activity is occurring. Of 

particular interest is a large and growing epidemic south of Sheridan Lake that could 

significantly impact the character of the campgrounds. Across the project area, 70% of the dead 

trees encountered in the fall of 2011, were infested, but still green. The combination of the high 

percentage of green infested trees compared to those killed in 2010, and the widespread 

movement of new infestations, indicate a rapidly growing MPB infestation. Stand conditions 

throughout the area are conducive to sustaining high levels of MPB-caused mortality and 

allowing the outbreak to expand. 

Stands were rated for mountain pine beetle hazard using the Insect Rating Guide based on 

structural stage from the Forest Plan Amendment (FEIS Phase II Amendment, III-385). The 

hazard rating is summarized in Table 3-18 as follows: 

Table 3-18 Calumet Project Mountain Pine Beetle Hazard Rating – Ponderosa Pine

RATING SUM AREA PERCENT \1 

Low 10,516 43% 

High 14,045 57% 

\1 Percent based on National Forest System lands 

The overall hazard of MPB infestation can be considered high in the project area. The hazard 

rating refers to the potential for losses within a stand if an infestation occurs and not the 

probability of an infestation. If an infestation occurs within stands with a high hazard rating, 

then one can expect higher overall losses than those stands with lower hazard ratings. 

Approximately 57% of the area is rated at high hazard for MPB, with an overall infestation 

hazard rating of high. The probability—or risk—of infestation is also high due to the ongoing 

epidemic in the area. 

Figure 3-3Existing Mountain Pine Beetle Hazard Rating in Calumet Project Area

Western gall rust (Peridermium harknessii) has been observed in the project area. Most of the 

galls have been observed to be occurring on the limbs and not on the boles of the ponderosa pine. 

This would reduce growth of the pine stands to a certain extent, but should not be considered a 

major threat to the merchantability of the stands in the area. Other diseases that occur in the tree 

species are either occurring infrequently or have not been observed. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 130 

Roads: Roads are abundant in the project area from past mining, harvesting, and recreation. Many 

of the roads are National Forest System Roads (NFSR) and are maintained by the Forest Service. 

Other roads and trails are not maintained and provide access for recreational users and hunters. 

Fuel-loading: Most of the slash from past harvesting and non-commercial thinning has been 

treated to a point where existing fuels are at levels below existing forest plan standards. 

Approximately 10% of the area has had treatments that, at the time of treatment may have 

reduced the crown cover to a level that would reduce the hazard of a crown fire. Residual 

densities however were designed for timber vigor and growth and not fire hazard reduction and 

many stands have grown into high fire hazard conditions. 

Stand Structure: The Black Hills Land and Management Plan Phase II Amendment specifies that 

certain management areas (MA’s) should be managed to provide a distribution of structural stages 

in a variety of sizes and shapes. It further specifies the structural stage objectives (percentage) for 

each MA. Within the Calumet Project Area, there are two such MA’s: MA 5.1, Resource 

Production Emphasis; and MA 5.4, Big Game Winter Range Emphasis. Both of the MA’s have 

the same structural stage objectives. Table 3-19 displays the distribution of structural stages within 

each management area across the Black Hills National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2010c). 

Table 3-19 Forest-wide Conditions by Management Area Ponderosa Pine Stands – Structural Distribution 

Objective MA 5.1 Existing MA 5.4 Existing 

SS % Acres % Acres % 

1 5% 26,760 6% 45,616 13%

2 5% 16,673 4% 10,152 3%

3A 10% 24,236 5% 17,454 5%

3B 15% 17,047 4% 22,227 7%

3C 5% 10,269 2% 15,763 5%

4A 25% 185,062 39% 86,487 25%

4B 25% 142,228 30% 87,864 26%

4C 5% 50,437 11% 52,865 16%

5 5% 1,227 0% 1,066 0%

Total 100% 473,939 100% 339,494 100%

Additional Forest-wide objectives in Phase II include providing 10% of the 4 structural stage 

with an average tree size of “very large” where the average size pine is greater than 16 inches 

diameter at four and one-half feet above ground level (dbh); seek opportunities to increase 

understory shrubs in open-canopy structural stages; and actively manage stands to provide 5% in 

desired late successional characteristics. Table 3-20 displays the acres of Structural Stage 4 (SS 

4) with a tree size of very large within each management area across the Black Hills National 

Forest (USDA Forest Service 2010c). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 131 

Table 3-20 Forest-Wide Conditions by Management Area

Objective MA 5.1 – Existing MA 5.4 – Existing 

% of SS 4 Acres % of SS 4 Acres % of SS 4 

 10.0% 48,756 13% 19,761 9% 

Plant Species Composition: Within the project area the vast majority of the cover type on 

National Forest System lands are ponderosa pine (24,561 acres). Other cover types include 24 

acres of white spruce, 881 acres of aspen, and 513 acres of bur oak. There are numerous small 

inclusions (10 acres or less in size) of hardwoods located in pine sites. These are usually very 

productive sites where conifers would eventually take over the site if no treatment is done. In 

addition, there are 1,180 acres of grasslands which may have conifers encroaching on them. 

Table 3-21 Existing Condition Cover Types of National Forest System Lands

 Calumet Project Area Existing Species Composition 

Cover Type Acres Percent 

Grass 1180 4.3%

Shrubs 15 0.0%

Aspen 881 3.2%

Bur Oak 513 1.9%

Ponderosa Pine 24,561 88.9%

White Spruce 24 0.1%

Water 391 1.4%

Non-Vegetated 52 0.2%

TOTALS 27,617 100.00%

Age Class Distribution: Approximately 1,543 acres (10%) of the suitable pine acres inventoried 

within the project area are greater than 120 years of age. 11,736 acres (75%) of the suitable pine 

acres are between 66 and 120 years old, with 2,315 acres (15%) being 65 years or less. 

The distribution of age classes ranges from 0 to 270 years with the majority of stands (78%) in 

the 60 to 100 year age classes. The age class curve is a bell shaped curve with a pronounced 

spike in the 80-year class. The width of the bell curve where the majority of acres occur is 

between 60 and 100 years which indicate that many of the stands were regenerated over a 50 

year period from the early 1900s through the mid 1950s. There is a period from the 1950s 

through the 1990s where the amount of new stand regeneration declines rapidly indicating that 

harvesting activities to regenerate stands and natural stand level disturbances were not as 

prevalent. Within the past 10 years, an increase in the amount of regeneration harvesting has 

occurred as can be seen by the slight upward trend in acres in the 0 year age class. Not 

unexpectedly, a much larger percentage of pine stands are in the 160 year age class or older 

(16%) in unsuitable stands than the more actively managed suitable stands (2%). Topography 

and management direction in these areas limit our management options. To develop an even 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 132 

distribution of age classes across the landscape over a 120-year period, approximately 1,300 

acres of suitable pine stands would have to be regenerated each decade. While in theory this 

could occur, management objectives, accessibility and natural stand replacement events make the 

probability of this unlikely. 

Stocking Levels: The majority of suitable ponderosa pine acres in the project area are within the 

timber management zone as identified in Appendix H-3 of the LMRP. Although they are within 

the zone, many of these stands are at a high hazard rating for MPB infestation. Considering the 

existing ongoing epidemic within the project area, and that Forest Plan Goal 10, Objective 10-07 

states “where outbreaks of MPB could present risks to management objectives, reduce acreage of 

ponderosa pine stands that are in high risk for infestation,” management activities would move 

many of these stands to the lower range within the management zone. Although basal areas are 

generally a good indication of stocking in most sawtimber and pole timber stands, it does not 

represent smaller diameter stands (<6 inches dbh) nor large diameter stands (>16 inches dbh) well. 

Late Successional Stands: There are currently five stands totaling 225 acres within the project 

area classified as late successional, Structural Stage 5 (SS 5). We have identified nine additional 

sites totaling 550 acres within the project area that have the age and stand structure characteristics 

for SS 5. These stands would be designated as SS 5 for this analysis. Five additional stands 

totaling 143 acres would be thinned from below to create late successional conditions by increasing 

stand diameter and age. Another six stands totaling 198 acres would be managed to move towards 

late successional conditions. There are currently approximately 8,575 acres of SS 4B stands within 

the project area that would be available to grow into older, denser late successional stands. But it is 

estimated that approximately 75% of these acres would be affected by MPB mortality and would no 

longer be SS 4B stands. These stands would be needed to increase the amount of old growth and 

replace existing old growth as they deteriorate or are lost through fire, insects, or other natural 

events. An additional 2,154 acres of 3B structural stage stands would also be available to grow into 

SS 5 stands in the future as additional replacement stands. 

Regeneration: Pine regeneration is occurring in the project area where the crown canopy is

open and where competition from grasses and forbs is low. In areas where grasses have invaded 

the site, regeneration is at moderate to low levels. Where pine regeneration is desired such as in 

regeneration harvests, activities within the project area should be designed to reduce ground 

cover competition and expose mineral soil, increasing natural regeneration potential. Past 

regeneration harvests in adjacent areas have resulted in fully stocked stands of pine when the soil 

was disturbed or in conjunction with site preparation. In stands that are scheduled for

regeneration harvests, prescribed burning should generally be excluded unless needed to retard 

regeneration for other resource needs (e.g., fire, range, or wildlife) since burning would 

encourage grass establishment and discourage pine regeneration. Experience shows that even 

with competition from grass, pine sites in the project area generally regenerate to full stocking 

levels without site preparation within five years. 

Desired Future Condition (DFC)

Insect and Disease: The Forest Plan direction is to “consider preventive vegetation 

management practices, including silvicultural treatments, to protect forest stands from insect and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 133 

disease epidemics” (Phase II Amendment, Page II-47). Also, Phase II Goal 10, Objective 10-07 

states “Where outbreaks of mountain pine beetle could present risks to management objectives 

for ponderosa pine, reduce acreage of ponderosa pine stands that are in medium or high risk for 

infestation” (Phase II, I-36). 

Silvicultural Prescriptions: Silvicultural systems used would be dependent on the structure 

desired to meet the purpose and need of this project. Even-aged systems would result in evenaged stands and would include the Shelterwood method in the pine forest type. Uneven-aged 

systems that would result in uneven-aged stands would include group selection and single tree 

selection methods. Hardwoods would be managed using either coppice for even-aged stands or 

group selection for uneven-aged stands. 

Guidelines for commercial and non-commercial thinning would be followed as specified in 

Chapter II of the Phase II Amendment to the Forest Plan and stocking charts in Appendix H of the 

Forest Plan. Generally, stands would be treated to achieve lower stocking levels for a reduction 

of crown fire hazard and mountain pine beetle hazard. For further detailed discussion of these 

methods refer to Chapter II-24 of the Phase II Amendment and Appendix H of the Forest Plan. 

Stand Structure: The desired stand structure for the ponderosa pine type would be even-aged 

with the majority of the trees in a stand having an age within a range of 20 years of one another. 

Most of the pine would be either dominant or co-dominant. The exception to this would be 

stands regenerating after shelterwood treatments and uneven-aged stands managed for wildlife, 

recreation and visual objectives. 

Very Large Tree Size: Objectives 4.1-203, 5.1-204, and 5.4-206 in the Phase II Amendment 

call for 10% of the 4 ponderosa pine structural stage (sawtimber nine inches and larger) have an 

average tree size of “very large,” where the average size pine is greater than 16 inches dbh. 

 

Age Class Distribution: Ideally, there should be a mosaic of pine stands with varying ages, well 

distributed across the landscape with approximately 8% of the acreage in each ten-year class 

based on a 120 year rotation. This would provide horizontal diversity for wildlife, an opportunity 

to create an even flow of products over time, and reduces the area’s hazard to fire and insects. 

Stocking Levels: The Forest Plan direction (page II-31) is to “use thinning practices which 

consider genetic diversity and competition among trees for water, nutrients and light.” This 

direction specifies “use the stocking charts contained in Appendix H to implement intermediate 

cuttings in even-aged, suitable timberland stands...” 

Within Management Area 5.4 - Big Game Winter Range Emphasis, commercial thinning should 

be heavy, leaving stands with lighter stocking yet still within management zone limits. This 

would provide healthy plant communities with a variety of species for forage as specified in the 

Forest Plan (page III-98). 

Most stands scheduled for treatments would have basal areas reduced to 60 BA or less in pine 

stands to minimize susceptibility to mountain pine beetle and reduce the hazard of high intensity 

fires. Exceptions may occur for other resource management objectives. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 134 

Plant Species Composition: Forest Plan direction is to manage for “double current aspen acres” 

(Phase II, Page I-7). 

Wildfire: Phase II Goal 10: Establish and maintain a mosaic of vegetation conditions to reduce 

occurrences of high intensity fire, insect, and disease events, and facilitate insect and disease 

management and firefighting capability. Objective 10-01 states that stands will be managed for 50% 

to 75% moderate-to-low fire hazard in the wildland-urban interface and reduce fire hazard within 

proximity of structures to current NFPA standards. Additional guidance has also been provided 

from the Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003 and other National level policy and directives. 

Environmental Consequences 

Most of the treatments and cutting methods discussed below are described and illustrated in 

section II-31 “Methods to Achieve or Influence Vegetative Diversity” of the Black Hills 

National Forest Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Revised Forest Plan for the 

Black Hills National Forest (1996). 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Under this alternative, no timber management activities would occur, other than on-going activities 

such as firewood gathering, right-of-way clearing, Christmas tree cutting, and some minor 

vegetation treatments for other resource purposes. There are state and county rights-of-way 

throughout the project area. Many of these rights-of-way have both commercial and noncommercial timber in them. Hazard trees and timber within these rights-of-way would be removed 

to reduce the risk to motorists and “daylight” the roads to reduce icing. Timber may be removed 

with small sales, or in the case of very small quantities or unmerchantable timber, the timber may be 

removed as administrative free use. The effects of removing this timber would be minimal. Public 

safety would be increased by the removal of hazard trees that could fall on the roads; removing 

shade in some areas would reduce winter icing or allow quicker melting of ice and snow pack; and 

visibility around curves would be improved. The amount of volume removed would be insignificant 

and the impacts to the timber resource almost non-measurable when compared to the project area. 

Insects and Disease: The overstocked stands of pine pose a high hazard to attack by mountain 

pine beetle. This hazard would increase over time, with growth, due to increasing stocking 

levels, until natural disturbances act to reduce stand densities. There are 14,045 acres (58%) of 

National Forest conifer stands in the project area that currently have a high hazard rating. When 

this fact is added to the fact of high MPB populations in the area, the likelihood of a continuing

widespread epidemic-level infestation of mountain pine beetle is high. There would soon be 

some areas experiencing almost complete overstory mortality leading to significant changes in 

the forest landscape across the area (USDA Forest Service 2012a). If no action is taken, many 

currently forested areas could lose most or all of their mature pine overstory. This loss of mature 

pine trees would add greatly to fuel loads and wildfire hazard on a long-term basis (see Fire and 

Fuels Report), and cause substantial changes to wildlife habitat (see Wildlife Report). 

If not treated, the hazard should remain high until stocking levels decrease due to mortality from 

MPB activity or wildfire. It is not possible to determine exactly which stands would become 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 135 

infested and the precise level of MPB-caused mortality, but reasonable estimates can be made 

based on the current extent of the epidemic, the expanding MPB brood populations available to 

infest new trees, and the large volume and wide distribution of high hazard stands in the project 

area. What is apparent is that there would be considerable changes in the landscape in the 

Calumet Project Area (USDA Forest Service 2012a). 

Stands in high mortality areas would revert to younger age structural stages over time. The 

highest levels of pine tree mortality are expected in the western portion of the project area, with 

significant mortality moving to the east over the next five years. Projections by Kurt Allen, 

Forest Service Entomologist, for this project estimate that most of the closed canopy stands, 

structural stages 3B, 3C, 4B, 4C, and 5, would be converted to more open structural stages 2, 3A, 

and 4A (USDA Forest Service 2012a)(See Table 3-22 below). In the hardest hit areas, near 

complete mortality of the larger trees would occur on up to 75% of structural stages 4B, 4C, and 

5 (dense stands with larger trees). Approximately one half of the dense sawtimber stands would 

be converted to seedling, sapling and pole stands, SS 2, 3A and 3B, while another 25% would 

become SS 4A open sawtimber stands. The remaining 25% would be moderately dense 

sawtimber stands, 4B. Significant, but lesser amounts of mortality would be expected in 

structural stage 3B, 3C, and 4A stands. One half of the SS 4A stands would be converted to SS 2 

and 3A stands, while the other half would retain enough live large trees to remain as open 

sawtimber stands, SS 4A. It is estimated that one half of the SS 3B and 3C stands have average 

diameters large enough to be susceptible to MPB infestation. These would be converted to SS 2 

and 3A. Adding younger structural stage stands helps to increase vegetation diversity in the 

area, which is dominated by mature pines. However, the large volume of dead and down trees

significantly increases fuel loads and wildfire hazard in this wildland-urban interface (See Fire 

and Fuels Report). This increases the probability for large, intense wildfires resistant to control 

that threaten natural resources, private property, and human life. 

Table 3-22 Calumet Ponderosa Pine Structural Stage Distribution: Existing vs. Alternative A

Project Existing Alternative A 

Structural Stage Acres Acres Change 

1 812 812 0

2 217 5,953 5,736

3A 1,103 5,204 4,101

3B 2,154 1,078 -1,076

3C 723 362 -361

4A 6,180 7,816 1,636

4B 8,625 3,336 -5,289

4C 4,522 0 -4,522

5 225 0 -225

TOTAL 24,561 24,561 0

The charts below displaying current conditions and conditions projected five years into the future 

show the effects of the current MPB epidemic continuing and spreading throughout the project 

area. The hazard ratings for the future condition were based on projections from RCSC-7-12, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 136 

Mountain Pine Beetle Activity in the Calumet Project Area. The MPB hazard decreases due to 

the MPB-caused mortality reducing stocking levels in stands currently rated as high hazard 

stands. Even though the MPB hazard would decrease, the fire hazard would increase due to the 

number of dead trees that would be present. The amount of heavy continuous fuels on the 

ground as the dead trees fall would create especially dangerous conditions. 

Figure 3-4 No Action MPB Hazard Rating

The pine engraver beetles (Ips pini) are non-aggressive and breed in damaged ponderosa pine 

trees and slash greater than two inches in diameter. Unless severe drought, weather damage or 

fire damage occurs, the probability of a major buildup of these insects is very unlikely. 

Plant Species Composition: Plant species composition and diversity would decrease. Pine is 

encroaching into hardwood and meadow areas and filling in small openings in the forest canopy. 

As the canopy closes, aspen and other hardwoods would diminish in numbers until natural 

disturbances once again open up the canopy. Within many sites, forbs and grasses in the under 

story would be shaded out reducing benefits to other resources such as wildlife, range, 

recreation, and scenic quality. It is expected that hardwoods and meadows would benefit as a 

result of continued pine mortality caused by the mountain pine beetle, although the amount of 

that increase is unknown. 

Other Effects: The effects of deferring treatment in the project area would be increased mortality 

and the resulting decrease in growth and yield due to the continuation of the MPB epidemic; 

reduction of diameter growth due to age and overstocking in stands not impacted by MPB 

activity; and an increase in the hazard for high intensity wildfire. With no treatments, the 9,887 

acres of pine type that have a basal area greater than 100 square feet per acre would experience 

reduced growth due to overcrowding and competition for nutrients, water and light. Age class 

distribution would not change except for changes created through unpredictable natural processes 

such as insect infestations and wildfire. Structural stage imbalances would persist and be 

exacerbated by the lack of regenerated stands. Long-term effects in stands not heavily impacted 

by MPB infestation would be an increase in mortality due to competition between pine and an 

increase in merchantable defect due to disease. Long-term sustainability of the timber resource 

would be in jeopardy since much of the mature forest would be killed by the MPB and relatively 

few acres are currently young and available to grow into the next generation of mature forest. 

Periodic annual increment (annual growth) is declining in some of the stands and is less than 

desired due to overstocking and age. Deferring treatment would cause a further drop in the 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 137 

periodic annual increment. The NFMA law requires that even-aged stands scheduled to be 

harvested during the planning period will generally have reached the culmination of mean annual 

increment (CMAI) of growth. During the diagnosis phase of the analysis, stands were identified 

totaling more than 5,000 acres that had reached CMAI. Net growth would remain positive, but it 

would be below its potential. Overall, quality of the pine would decline due to MPB activity, and 

remain below its potential due to suppression, mortality, damage, disease and poorly formed trees. 

As the stands of pine become dense, they would become susceptible to snow damage. Dense 

stands of pine with interlocking crowns cannot shed snow as well as open stands. During times of 

heavy snowfall and wind, snow can build up on the crowns of dense stands and cause heavy 

breakage. Stands with open canopies shed their snow as wind shakes them and are less 

susceptible to snow buildup. Under this alternative, more snow damage would most likely occur. 

The hazard of a stand replacing wildfire would be higher without treatment. Crown fires, such as 

the Battle Creek fire of 2002, which burned part of the project area, would cause many of the 

stands to be completely killed. The effect of such a high intensity fire to the timber resource 

would be a loss of timber value, a large reduction of age class distribution, a disruption of an 

even flow of timber to local mills, an increase in insects, and a disruption of the natural 

regeneration process. Solarization would reduce the success of both natural and artificial 

regeneration. Soil sterilization would reduce productivity for many years, as the process of 

rebuilding soil horizons in this relatively dry climate is slow. 

Cumulative Effects 

Much of the area has had vegetative treatments within the past 30 years. Commercial harvests 

and non-commercial thinning from the late 1970’s through the early 2000’s have taken place on 

approximately 50% of the project area. Many treatments were designed to lower the basal area 

to promote increased growth and vigor, as well as regenerate the stands. 

The effect of past treatments has been an increase of merchantable volume growth, increase in 

the quality of timber and until recently, a minimal amount of insect and disease infestations. The 

commercial thinning has reduced the stocking levels in overstocked stands. The effect has been 

an increase in the quality of the timber through the removal of damaged, diseased, and poorly 

formed trees. There has been increase in individual tree growth by releasing the remaining trees 

from competition for light, water, and nutrients. Trees have developed larger diameters due to a 

reduction of competition. A reduction of the MPB hazard to the pine stands due to the reduction 

of basal area to lower the level of susceptibility to pine beetle attack has also occurred for stands 

which have recently been treated. 

Some timber harvesting is occurring on private land within the project area, mostly in 

conjunction with mountain pine beetles, fuels reduction and development. Since private land 

comprises approximately 13% of the project area (4,155 acres) and approximately 25% of that is 

timberland, the effects of timber harvesting practices could affect the project area. The amount 

of timber harvesting during any one decade however has been small and its effects on National 

Forest timberland should be minimal. 

Anticipated future silviculture activities, not connected to this analysis, that would occur within 

the area are as follows: 1) Fuel breaks adjacent to developed private land may be created for 

protection of those improvements. 2) Firewood gathering and Christmas tree cutting by permit 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 138 

would continue to occur within the area. 3) Other silvicultural treatments such as small salvage 

sales for the removal of storm damaged or beetle infested timber, road right-of-way clearing, 

pine encroachment removal, hardwood regeneration, and hardwood release may occur within the 

project area. The size of these projects would generally be small (less than ten acres) and the 

cumulative effects of these projects should not be of any measurable significance 

With an increasing interest from landowners to manage their forested land, protect their property 

from fire and mountain pine beetle infestation, and clear land for home sites, an additional 400 

acres may be treated within the next decade. Since the amount of silvicultural activities not 

connected to this analysis would be minimal, the cumulative effects of these activities under any 

of the alternatives would also be minimal. Treatments on private land for fire hazard reduction 

or mountain pine beetles would contribute to both a reduction of hazard from high intensity 

wildfire and mountain pine beetle. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Silviculture/Timber: Under this alternative, approximately 19,300 acres of National Forest 

would be mechanically treated. Treatments specified generally apply to 80% or more of the 

stand. Many of the stands in the project area have inclusions of less than 10 acres in size that 

may have basal areas, age classes, size classes and tree species that differ from the majority of 

the stand. As these stands are laid out and marked these inclusions may not be prescribed and 

marked as specified in the stand treatment table, but rather prescribed using criteria developed 

for other stands with similar characteristics, e.g., an inclusion of pole-size pine may be thinned if 

located within a stand scheduled for a removal cut.

The law generally prohibits the harvest of stands before they reach their maximum growth rate 

(National Forest Management Act (NFMA), 16 U.S.C. 1604(m)). Exceptions in the law allow the 

harvest of individual trees, or even parts or whole stands of trees, before this time to thin and 

improve timber stands, and salvage damaged stands of trees (part m1 of the law). Further 

exceptions are allowed in order to achieve multiple-use objectives other than timber harvest (part 

m2). This alternative would harvest some trees before the maximum potential growth rate of some 

stands in the project area has been reached. These harvest treatments are consistent with the 

exceptions provided in part m2 of the law, and include the following: Commercial Thinning, NonCommercial Thinning, Meadow Retention and Restoration Treatments, and Hardwood Restoration 

and Retention Harvests which are designed to meet other than timber objectives. These treatments 

are proposed to move towards meeting Forest Plan direction and respond to HFRA guidance. 

Rights-of-Way: There are state and county rights-of-way throughout the project area. Many of 

these have both commercial and non-commercial timber in them. Hazard trees and timber within 

these rights-of-way would be removed to reduce the risk to motorists and “daylight” the roads to 

reduce icing. Where timber harvest units are adjacent to these areas the rights-of-way would be 

included in the timber sale. The effects of removing this timber would be minimal to the timber 

resource. Public safety would be increased by the removal of hazard trees that could fall on the 

roads. Removing trees in some areas would increase melting of ice and snowpack and speed the 

drying of roads. Visibility around curves would be improved. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 139 

Commercial Thinning: Commercial thinning would occur on approximately 9,195 acres of the 

area with many of those acres also having non-commercial thinning done. Commercial thinning 

would generally consist of thinning from below, removing suppressed and intermediate pine 

from the stand, and the overmature pine from the overstory, leaving the larger mature pine of 

good form. Some areas have been identified to thin from above, removing the older, larger trees 

to create a younger stand of smaller trees. Densities would generally be 50 square feet of basal 

area (BA) with some stands treated to lower or higher BA’s based on proximity to structures on 

private land, communities, and the need to achieve the structural stage goals for the management 

emphasis areas. This alternative calls for a lower basal area than is normally prescribed for 

under the Forest Plan, but still within management parameters. In areas where there are ongoing 

MPB outbreaks, lowering stand densities even further, such as to 40 BA would be advised. 

(USDA Forest Service 2004, Forest Health Evaluation R2-04-02). Fire managers have 

determined a lower basal area and associated reduced bulk density of crown fuels reduce the 

potential for high severity wildfires. Generally, the range of BA’s for commercial thinning 

would be from 40 to 60 BA, while some stands would be thinned to a 70 - 80 BA to manage at 

higher densities for other resource objectives. Leave trees in commercial harvest units would 

generally not be uniformly spaced to create a more natural appearing stand. Treatments in some 

stands would utilize thinning from below to enhance late successional characteristics leaving 

larger and older trees. We would also utilize uneven-aged management techniques such as group 

selection and individual tree selection to create more within-stand diversity in some stands. 

Whole tree skidding would be the preferred logging method to remove as much slash as possible 

during harvest activities. Sanitation harvest to remove mountain pine beetle infested pine trees 

may be conducted in areas near or adjacent to stands identified for treatment in order to limit the 

expansion of MPB populations. Large trees would generally be retained and removed only 

where infested with MPB or necessary to meet density objectives, other resource needs, and for 

landings and other clearings to facilitate timber harvesting activities.

 

The thinning would reduce the stocking levels in overstocked stands. The effect would be an 

increase in the quality of the timber through the removal of damaged, diseased, and poorly formed 

trees and an increase in individual tree growth by releasing the remaining trees from competition 

for light, water, and nutrients. Trees would develop larger diameters due to a reduction of

competition which concentrates the stand growth on fewer stems and a reduction of MPB rating 

would occur due to the reduction of basal area to lessen the level of susceptibility to MPB attack. 

Total yield would not be maximized because the trees would not fully occupy the stand. 

Non-Commercial Thinning: Non-commercial thinning would occur on 4,706 acres within the 

project area outside of commercial timber sale cutting units. Non-commercial thinning would 

occur in pine stands and consists of the removal of pine one foot in height up to 8.9 inches in 

diameter leaving the largest pine of good form at a rate of approximately 130 - 300 trees per acre 

depending on size of trees and management objectives. Spacing of leave trees may vary from 12 

to 24 feet to create a more natural appearing stand. A reduction of MPB hazard would occur due 

to the reduction of stocking to lower the level of susceptibility to MPB attack. Slash buildup from 

non-commercial thinning, if not treated properly, could encourage Ips beetle (Ips pini) buildup 

and mortality in residual stands of pine. Past practices of lopping, scattering, and burning of slash 

piles within a year of treatment has reduced Ips beetle infestation to less than a few trees per acre. 

Additional fuel treatments for fire hazard reduction would also reduce the probability of insect 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 140 

infestations. Scattering slash facilitates the rapid drying of fuels, which reduces conditions 

favorable for Ips beetle buildup. No major adverse effects are anticipated to the timber resource. 

Shelterwood Removal Cuts: Removal cuts would occur on approximately 686 acres and would 

generally be followed with non-commercial thinning. Most of these overstory stands have 

reached CMAI and are no longer needed for seed production and shade. The removal of the pine 

overstory would release the established understory from competition for light, water and 

nutrients. Generally, all overstory pine eight inches dbh and greater would be removed, retaining 

only pine necessary for other resource needs. The effect would be an increase of approximately 

900 acres of early successional, younger structural stage pine towards meeting Forest structural 

stage objectives; an increase in growth of the remaining pine; the establishment and production 

of forage for both livestock and wildlife; and a reduction of aerial fuels, reducing potential for 

fire spread from individual tree torching and associated spotting. 

Hardwood Retention and Restoration: The retention and restoration of approximately 2,308 acres 

of hardwoods (aspen and oak) from conifer competition would occur in this alternative. Commercial 

treatments and non-commercial treatments removing all of the pine from hardwoods would occur. 

Hardwood stands would be enlarged to include parts of adjacent pine stands that have encroached 

upon them. Treating a 35 foot buffer around existing hardwood sites would increase the aspen and 

oak components by 244 acres and 158 acres respectively. Pine would be removed from the area 

within 35 feet of the edge of the inclusion or, in the case of draws where there are remnants of past 

hardwood occupation, the pine would be removed to the boundary of the original stand which would 

normally be 35 feet to 100 feet. Since these buffers are within sites identified for other commercial 

treatments listed above, and would be identified during the sale preparation process, these inclusions 

have already been accounted for in the total area treated in Table 2-2 (treatment summary table). 

Small inclusions of established hardwoods that are scattered throughout the stands scheduled for 

treatment in the project area would be restored by removing pine from within and adjacent to these 

hardwood inclusions. Most of these areas would be small, less than five acres in size, and would not 

be delineated as hardwood sites. Currently there are 881 acres of the aspen cover type within the 

project area. We have also identified mixed conifer-aspen sites totaling 750 acres in Alternative B to 

be converted to aspen through conifer removal. Adding the 244 acres of type conversion in buffers 

around existing aspen stands to the 750 acres of type conversion of mixed stands, there would be a 

994 acre increase (113%) in aspen communities. Currently, there are 513 acres of the oak cover type 

within the project area. We have also identified mixed conifer-oak sites totaling 325 acres in 

Alternative B to be converted to oak through conifer removal. Adding the 158 acres of type 

conversion in buffers around existing oak stands to the 325 acres of type conversion of mixed stands, 

there would be a 483 acre increase (94%) in oak communities. Upon completion of these treatments, 

hardwood acreage would be increased to approximately 2,871 acres in this alternative, almost 

doubling the oak component to 3.7% of vegetated National Forest System lands within the project 

area, and aspen would more than double to 6.9% of vegetated NFS lands. Additionally, small areas 

within mixed pine-hardwood stands would become pure hardwood inclusions through conifer 

removal. Although they would not be typed as hardwood stands and are not included in the acres of 

aspen and oak listed above, these treatments would contribute to the Forest Plan goal of conserving 

existing hardwood communities and restoring historic hardwood communities (LRMP I-10 - 201). 

The effects of these treatments would be an increase in vegetative diversity and increased vigor of 

hardwood communities by release from the competition of conifers, increasing and improving the 

habitat of the hardwood dependent wildlife species. An additional indirect benefit would be the 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 141 

value of hardwood stands as natural fuel breaks. It is also expected that aspen and oak would benefit 

as a result of continued pine mortality caused by the mountain pine beetle, although the amount of 

that increase is unknown. 

Meadow Retention and Restoration: Pine encroaching in meadows and draw bottoms would be 

removed on approximately 1,500 acres. Currently, there are 1,180 acres of the grass cover type in 

the project area and an additional 812 acres of structural stage 1, grass-forbs, with a ponderosa pine 

cover type. Commercial and non-commercial treatments would cut all of the pine greater than one 

foot in height from meadows. Most of these grass sites have only scattered individuals or small 

groups of conifers so the commercial volume removed from these sites would be low. These grass 

sites would be enlarged to include portions of adjacent pine stands that have encroached upon them. 

Assuming a 35 foot treatment buffer around these grass sites would increase the grass sites by 

approximately 204 acres. Since these acres are within sites scheduled for other commercial 

treatments listed above, and would be identified during the sale layout process, the treatment of these 

inclusions has already been accounted for in the total area treated in treatment summary table. 

Seven pine sites, totaling 131 acres, would be converted to a grass cover type through pine removal 

treatments. Small openings that are within some of the stands in the project area would be enlarged 

by removing pine from within and adjacent to the openings. Pine would be removed from the area 

within up to 66 feet of the edge of the opening or, in the case of historic meadows, especially in draw 

bottoms, the pine would be removed to its original boundary as defined by soil type, slope, and 

moisture regime, which typically is less than 100 feet. The amount of increase in acreage is 

estimated to be 1% of the treated acres or approximately 150 acres in Alternative B, but since most 

of these inclusions would be small (less than five acres in size), they would likely not be converted 

to a grass cover type site so are not included in the statistics below. Upon completion of these 

treatments, the grass cover type would increase by 335 acres (28%) to approximately 1,515 acres in 

this alternative, which is approximately 5.6% of vegetated NFS lands within the project area. This 

increase would move the area toward the Forest Plan goal of conserving existing meadow acreage 

and restoration of some historic meadows. The effects of this treatment would be an increase in 

vegetative diversity and an increase in grass and forb production in the meadow communities by 

release from the competition of pine, improving and increasing the habitat of meadow dependent 

wildlife species. An additional indirect benefit would be the value of meadows as fuel breaks. It is 

also expected that openings would increase within forested sites as a result of continued pine 

mortality caused by the mountain pine beetle, although the amount of that increase is unknown. 

Roadside Treatments: Primary ingress/egress roads associated with the Wildland Urban 

Interface (WUI) access in Pennington County have been identified in the Pennington County 

Community Wildfire Protection Plan (PCCWPP) and should be treated to provide for safe access 

during a fire event. The Pennington County CWPP has recommended a buffer on either side of 

these roads be managed to minimize a high intensity crown fire from threatening the use of these 

travel routes. Specific treatments would include thinning from below to approximately 60 square 

feet of basal area to raise crown base height and increase crown separation of the overstory, and 

thinning the understory and treating the slash to reduce ladder fuels within a corridor 200 feet 

wide on both sides of identified roads. Leaving small groups of two to three trees and variable 

spacing may be desirable to create a more diverse appearance to these treatments. Whole tree 

harvesting would be used in these areas where possible, and all slash would be removed or piled 

and burned. Also, conifers would be removed from hardwood stands and inclusions along these 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 142 

routes to reduce the fire hazard. The area of these roadside treatments would be approximately 

381 acres outside of units identified for other treatment in this alternative.

Cable Logging: Cable logging systems would be used to harvest approximately 735 acres of 

ground not conducive to harvest by ground-based systems due to steep ground. This treatment 

would generally thin from above, removing the larger overstory trees and leaving a more open 

stand that is less susceptible to MPB infestation. Following the commercial harvest the 

understory may be thinned non-commercially to reduce stocking levels for improved growth, 

vigor and to reduce the fire hazard. Additional new road construction would be necessary to 

access the cable units. See the Transportation Plan for specific information.

Fuel Breaks: Fuel breaks would be constructed adjacent to private property in identified areas

where other treatments are not already planned. A 200 foot buffer would be thinned from below 

along the property boundary to remove ladder fuels and increase the spacing between trees. 

Commercial sized materials may be removed where equipment is not limited. Whole tree 

logging is preferred where possible, but piling and burning of slash may be necessary where 

access is limited. Three hundred and seventy five acres of fuel breaks are planned that are 

located outside of commercial treatment units.

Prescribed Burning: Moderate intensity broadcast prescribed burning would occur on up to 

15,990 acres in the project area, reducing ground fuels and increasing vegetative diversity in the 

understory. In some of the stands, the understory vegetation is lacking due to needle cast and a 

closed canopy cover. A moderate intensity prescribed fire would reduce inhibiting duff and 

stimulate residual grasses and forbs. Broadcast prescribed burning would be designed to limit 

mortality in the pole-size and sawtimber size pine stands within the suitable land base to 10% or 

less with seedling/sapling mortality less than 75%. Burning in stands to be regenerated would 

favor grass establishment and reduce regeneration. The effects of prescribed burning on the 

timber resource would be a short-term increase in growth from the nutrients released into the 

soil. Total yield in the project area would be reduced by the burn-related mortality. The 

reduction in yield should be minimal for the project area using the low levels of mortality which 

have occurred on recent prescribed burns. 

Insects and Disease: Current losses from insect and disease are at an epidemic level in the 

western part of the project area. According to Schmid et al, 2007, the most important aspect of 

managing mature ponderosa pine stands in the Black Hills is minimizing MPB-caused mortality. 

The only effective long-range strategy to minimize MPB-caused mortality is controlling stand 

conditions through silvicultural means over large landscapes and monitoring for areas of MPB 

buildup (USDA Forest Service.2007a). These are forest management actions that increase tree 

vigor and reduce stand susceptibility to MPB attack through reducing stocking levels. They are 

preventive treatments that should be completed prior to stands experiencing beetle outbreaks. 

Sanitation harvest (removal of infested trees) can also provide protection to surrounding 

uninfested trees and stands by removing a large source of attacking MPB. Creating diverse stand 

conditions across the landscape would result in an overall forest that is less susceptible long term 

to MPB (Fettig et al. 2007). 

Alternative B would substantially reduce the existing MPB hazard within the Calumet Project 

Area. To achieve a MPB hazard rating of low, most of the project area would have to consist of 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 143 

grass/forb, seedling, open sapling/pole or open sawtimber stands. All pine stands identified with 

a SS 4B, 4C, or 5, mature with moderate to high stocking levels, have a MPB hazard rating of

high. Only stands with a structural stage of 1, 2, 3A, 3B, or 4A are categorized as a MPB hazard 

rating of low according to Forest Plan Amendment guidance (Forest Plan Amendment FEIS 

ch.III-385 and Appendix B-14 Table 5, FEIS ch.II-3). There are currently 14,045 acres (57%) of 

the ponderosa pine stands in the high hazard rating. Insect hazard ratings for all untreated stands 

in Alternative B are based on structural stages five years from present using mortality estimates 

developed by Kurt Allen (USDA Forest Service 2012a). There would be an 85% reduction 

(11,931 acres) of stands from a hazard rating of high to a low rating. The lower mountain pine 

beetle hazard is a result of reducing stocking levels below the levels most susceptible to MPB. 

The protection provided for the area would extend into the next two decades and would remain 

low for much of that time. Upon completion of the treatments, there would be 2,114 acres (9%) 

of the area with the high hazard rating. Ninety-one percent (21,242 acres) of conifer stands 

would have a low hazard rating. Not included in Figure 3-5 below are the 335 acres of pine 

converted to grass and the 1,477 acres of pine converted to hardwoods. These acres have no 

mountain pine beetle rating since they are no longer typed as conifer stands. 

Figure 3-5 Alternative B MPB Hazard Rating

Slash buildup from treatments, if not treated properly, could encourage Ips beetle (Ips pini) 

buildup and mortality in residual stands of pine. Past practices of lopping, scattering, and 

burning of slash piles within a year of treatment has reduced Ips beetle infestation to less than a 

few trees per acre. Whole tree skidding, which would significantly reduce the amount of slash 

and need for additional fuel treatments for fire hazard reduction, would also reduce the 

probability of insect infestations. Scattering slash facilitates the rapid drying of fuels, which 

reduces conditions favorable for Ips beetle buildup. Other insects and diseases affecting both 

pine and other species of trees in the project area that are present are having minimal impact on 

the area and would probably continue to have a low impact under this alternative. 

Stand Structure: Stand structure within the project area generally would be even-aged with the 

majority of the trees within a stand having an age within a range of 20 years of one another. 

Most of the pine would be either dominant or co-dominant. Most of the intermediate and 

suppressed pine would be removed in treatment areas to raise crown heights and reduce ladder 

fuels for crown fire hazard reduction. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 144 

Within the project area, stand structure generally would change from a more closed canopy 

structure to an open canopy structure. Almost 10,000 acres would move from the more closed 

SS 3B, 3C, 4B and 4C structures to the open structure of Structural Stages 2, 3A and 4A. This 

change results from the combination of treatments and the application of MPB mortality 

estimates for the untreated stands. Of this total, approximately 75% of the 4,636 untreated pine 

acres (3,477 acres) are a consequence of MPB activity and would still have high or very high fire 

hazard ratings. Treatments are designed to reduce mountain pine beetle hazard, increase acres of 

younger structural stages, and to accomplish the fire hazard reduction over the landscape within 

the wildland-urban interface (WUI). This would be done also to achieve the Forest Plan

Objective 10-01 to manage for 50% to 75% moderate-to-low fire hazard in the WUI and reduce 

fire hazard within proximity of structures (Phase II amendment I-35). 

Forest-wide management area stand structure changes occur in the structural stages as displayed 

in the table below (USDA Forest Service 2010c). Generally, structural stages change only 

slightly, less than 1%, except as follows. For Management Area 5.1, there would be no changes 

in the percentage of any structural stages. In Management Area 5.4, there would be a 1% 

increase towards the Forest Plan objective for SS 2 and 3A. Both Structural Stages 4B and 4C 

would decrease in Management Area 5.4 by 1%, towards Forest Plan objectives, while Structural 

Stage 4A would increase 1%, away from Forest Plan objectives, and SS 3B and 3C would 

decrease 1%, away from Forest Plan objectives. These changes from denser stands to more open 

stand conditions would be necessary to lower the MPB hazard and to accomplish fire hazard 

reduction over the landscape within the WUI. 

Table 3-23 Forest-Wide Ponderosa Pine Structural Stage Distribution: Existing vs. Post Treatment 

Objective Management Area 5.1 Management Area 5.4 

SS % Existing Alternative B % Existing Alternative B % 

1 5% 26,760 26,760 6% 45,616 45,549 13%

2 5% 16,673 17,260 4% 10,152 11,854 4%

3A 10% 24,236 25,371 5% 17,454 21,774 6%

3B 15% 17,047 16,890 4% 22,227 21,175 6%

3C 5% 10,269 10,131 2% 15,763 15,216 4%

4A 25% 185,062 185,879 39% 86,487 88,698 26%

4B 25% 142,228 140,342 30% 87,864 83,149 25%

4C 5% 50,437 49,846 11% 52,865 50,119 15%

5 5% 1,227 1,227 0% 1,066 1,026 0%

TOTAL 100% 473,939 473,706 100% 339,494 338,560 100%

Very Large Tree Size: Objective 204 in the Phase II Amendment calls for 10% of the four 

ponderosa pine structural stages to have an average tree size of “very large,” where the average 

size pine is greater than 16 inches dbh. There would be a slight decrease in the number of acres 

of stands with a very large size class rating in Alternative B for Management Area 5.1, but it 

would not change the percentage Forest-wide, which currently exceeds Forest Plan objectives of 

10%. In Management Area 5.4, there would be a slight increase towards the objective of 10% 

due to treatments designed to increase average tree diameter by removing smaller trees in stands 

to be managed for late successional characteristics. Also, to meet the objective of reducing fire 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 145 

hazard, it would be necessary to thin the intermediate and suppressed pine to raise the crown 

base height. This retains the larger pine and thus moves some stands into the very large size 

class. Some stands that are categorized as very large would no longer have that characteristic 

due to MPB-caused mortality. The table below displays the existing acreage of stands with a 

tree size of “very large” and the acreage of “very large” upon completion of planned activities. 

Table 3-24 Forest-wide Conditions by Management Area and Alternative. Ponderosa Pine Structural Stage 4 

with Tree Size Class of Very Large 

Management Area 5.1 Management Area 5.4 

Existing Alternative B Existing Alternative B 

Acres % Acres % Acres % Acres % 

48,756 13% 48,709 13% 19,761 9% 19,797 9% 

Age Class Distribution: Age class distribution would improve in this alternative, with an 

increase in the younger, early seral stages towards Forest Plan objectives. There would also be 

an increase in the older age classes due to removal of smaller and younger pine and retention of 

large, older trees where thinning from below occurs. However, in the 6 inches or greater 

diameter classes in many even-aged stands, age would change little due to the removal of pine 

due to the similar age of trees within the stand. 

Stocking Levels: The purpose of this alternative is to reduce mountain pine beetle hazard and 

fire hazard by decreasing tree stocking within large portions of the project area. The only longrange strategy to minimize MPB-caused mortality is controlling stand conditions through 

silvicultural means over large landscapes and monitoring for areas of MPB buildup (USDA 

Forest Service 2007a). Fire managers have determined lower basal areas and associated reduced 

bulk density of crown fuels reduce the potential for high intensity wildfires. The effect would be 

an increase in the quality of the timber through the removal of damaged, diseased, and poorly 

formed trees and an increase in individual tree growth by releasing the remaining trees from 

competition for light, water and nutrients. Trees would develop larger diameters due to a 

reduction of competition, which concentrates the stand growth on the fewer stems. This

alternative would contribute to the Forest Plan goal of providing for sustained commodity uses 

while using acceptable silvicultural systems. This alternative would also provide adequately 

stocked pine stands for future management. 

Plant Species Composition: The amount of hardwood and meadow acreage would increase in 

this alternative. The extent and effects are described in the meadow and hardwood restoration 

sections previously discussed above. Opening of the stands would allow other grasses and forbs 

to become established in the understory. Pine regeneration in the understory after harvest would 

become abundant and may be a limiting factor in their establishment. Understory species 

establishment and diversity would be much greater than the No Action Alternative because 

mechanical treatments and prescribed burning would limit pine regeneration and encourage 

grass, shrub and forbs establishment. It is also expected that hardwoods and meadows would 

benefit as a result of continued pine mortality caused by the mountain pine beetle, although the 

amount of that increase is unknown. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 146 

Table 3-25 Calumet Project Area Cover Type Composition

Existing Alternative B Post Treatment 

Cover Acres Percent Acres Percent 

Grass 1,180 4.3% 1,515 5.5%

Shrubs 15 0.1% 15 0.1%

Aspen 881 3.2% 1,875 6.8%

Oak 513 1.9% 996 3.6%

Ponderosa Pine 24,561 88.9% 22,749 82.4%

White Spruce 24 0.1% 24 0.1%

Water 391 1.4% 391 1.4%

Non-Vegetated 52 0.2% 52 0.2%

TOTAL 27,617 100.0% 27,617 100.0%

Late Successional Stands: There are currently five stands totaling 225 acres within the project area 

classified as late successional, SS 5. We have identified nine additional sites totaling 550 acres 

within the project area that have the age and stand structure characteristics for SS 5. These stands 

would be designated as SS 5 for this analysis. Five additional stands totaling 143 acres would be 

thinned from below to create late successional conditions by increasing stand diameter and age. 

Another six stands totaling 198 acres would be managed to move towards late successional 

conditions. There are currently approximately 8,600 acres of SS 4B stands within the project area 

that would be available to grow into older, denser late successional stands. These stands would be 

needed to increase the amount of old growth and replace existing old growth as they deteriorate or 

are lost through fire, MPB mortality or other natural events. An additional 2,154 acres of 3B 

structural stage stands would also be available to grow into SS 5 stands in the future as additional 

replacement stands. It is estimated that approximately 75% of the untreated closed canopy stands 

would be converted to open canopy stands by MPB activity. Due to commercial thinning, 

Alternative B leaves almost 1,000 acres more of sawtimber stands than the No Action Alternative. 

These larger and older stands would grow into late successional stands much earlier than the 

younger stands created by MPB activity in Alternative A. These stands would be needed to increase 

the amount of late successional stands and replace existing old growth as they deteriorate or are lost 

through fire, insects or other natural events. Any treatments in Management Area 3.7, Late 

Successional Forest Landscape, would be to manage for late successional characteristics. This may 

include thinning from below and removing MPB-infested green trees. 

Regeneration: The natural regeneration of pine and other native species of trees within the 

project should be good with the treatments in this alternative. Whole tree skidding would have 

the effect of site preparation by scarification of the forest floor, which favors regeneration 

establishment and has a positive effect in discouraging competition from grasses and forbs 

during seed germination and early seedling establishment. This abundance of regeneration 

would, however, create dense sapling size pine within the next 20 to 40 years, posing an 

increased fire hazard as these pine become ladder fuels which would necessitate the need for 

non-commercial thinning in the future. Where prescribed burning occurs, regeneration would be

reduced due to fire-related mortality and the establishment of competitive grasses and forbs. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 147 

Growth and Yield: The thinning would reduce the stocking levels in overstocked stands and 

bring those stands into forest plan condition. The effect would be an increase in the quality of the 

timber through the removal of damaged, diseased, and poorly formed trees and an increase in 

individual tree growth by releasing the remaining trees from competition for light, water and 

nutrients. Trees would develop larger diameters due to a reduction of competition which 

concentrates the stand growth on fewer stems and a reduction of hazard to the pine stands would 

occur due to the reduction of basal area to lower the level of susceptibility to mountain pine beetle 

attack. Total yield would be lower over time than if the stand were fully stocked because the trees 

would not fully occupy the stand. But higher density stands are much more susceptible to MPB 

infestations and high intensity fires, and with the proximity of large populations of MPB, this 

decrease in yield should be weighed against the benefits of reductions in MPB and fire hazard. 

Snags: Currently, for the Calumet Project Area, there is an average of approximately 4.0 hard 

snags per acre on forested NFS lands. We would not be cutting snags in Alternative B except for 

safety reasons. For this reason we would meet Forest Plan Standards 2301, 2304, and 2305. For 

additional information on snags, refer to the Black Hills National Forest Monitoring Plan. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past activities are listed under in the Alternative A Cumulative Effects section above. Cumulative 

effects of past treatments and treatments proposed in this alternative generally would be positive. 

Thinning of stands created with regeneration harvests would bring those stands into desired 

condition. Fire hazard reduction and MPB hazard that was lowered with past treatments would be 

improved or maintained where treatment occurs in these alternatives. Plant species diversity was 

increased with past treatments and would be increased in these alternatives where treatment occurs. 

 

Present activities are minimal and their effects are listed in the Alternative A Cumulative Effects 

section above. Alternative B treatments would have a minimal effect over those discussed under 

direct and indirect effects for these alternatives. 

Anticipated future silviculture activities, not connected to this analysis, that would occur within the 

area are as follows: Future silvicultural activities would be minimal and their effects are listed in the 

Alternative A Cumulative Effects section above. Alternative B treatments would have a minimal 

cumulative effect over those discussed under direct and indirect effects for these alternatives. 

Silvicultural activities on other than National Forest System lands would be minimal and their effects 

are listed under in the Alternative A Cumulative Effects section above. Alternative B treatments 

would have a minimal cumulative effect over those discussed under direct and indirect effects for this 

alternative. Treatments on private land for fire hazard reduction or mountain pine beetle would 

contribute to both a reduction of hazard from high intensity wildfire and mountain pine beetle. 

FIRE and FUELS 

Affected Environment 

Black Hills forest structure is based on disturbance with fire being a prime and frequent force 

affecting change. (Sheppard and Battaglia 2002, Brown 2006) Historically, fire return intervals 

in the Black Hills were relatively frequent (0-35 years) and fire intensities were low (surface 

fires most common) to mixed severity (partial overstory mortality)(Brown and Seig 1999, Brown 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 148 

et al. 2008, ). Fire return intervals combined with fire severity defines a Fire Regime. Much of 

the Black Hills, including the Calumet Project Area is classified as a Fire Regime I. Burn 

severity is the degree fire affects vegetation and soils over the landscape; the fire return interval 

is the amount of time between consecutive fires to burn in a given area. Fuel loadings, both live 

and dead, topographic influences, and weather are all directly related to fire severity. Fast 

moving crown fire is most often associated with severe fire effects, though surface fire can often 

cause severe effects as well (Lentile et al. 2006). 

Condition Class defines a landscape’s departure from its historic fire regime. Every fire regime 

has three condition classes (FRCC1, 2, and 3). They describe the extent that a landscape has 

departed from its historic vegetative cover and fire cycle: low (FRCC1), moderate (FRCC2), and 

high (FRCC3). Over 15,200 acres have been affected by fire within Calumet Project Area; 

however, fire has in effect been removed from much of the Black Hills ecosystem for more than 

100 years. Using a coarse scale, the Black Hills National Forest is in the high category or FRCC3 

(Schmidt et al. 2002). Elements of FRCC3 that apply to the Calumet Project Area include: 

• The fire regime has been significantly altered from its historical range. 

• The risk of losing key ecosystem components is high. 

• Vegetation attributes have been significantly altered from the historical range. 

• Fire frequencies have departed from the historical frequencies by multiple return intervals 

resulting in dramatic changes in fire size, intensity, severity, and landscape patterns. 

Mixed severity fire regimes are complex and difficult to characterize. Fuels, weather, and 

topography all take on important roles affecting fire behavior. Variable fuel conditions 

(arrangement, continuity, and quantity) exist across the landscape. These differing conditions 

can and do result in highly variable fire effects. Low, moderate, and high severity fire occurs 

with some frequency on nearly any sized fire. Past fires and resulting fuel conditions have a 

definite impact on future fires (Agee 2005). The Black Hills are a prime example of a mixed 

severity fire regime with wildfires commonly burning at all levels of fire severity resulting in a 

myriad of fire effects on the ground. 

Fire History: Since 1970, over 200 ignitions have been recorded within the Calumet Project 

Area, totaling approximately 117 acres. The project area has also seen some relatively large fires 

burn within its’ boundaries, though the ignitions were outside the boundaries. The most recent 

was the Battle Creek fire of 2002 (13,495 total acres) which burned 1,492 acres within the 

project boundary. The Horse Creek fire of 1991, an escaped prescribed fire, burned 1,968 acres. 

And of historical note, the McVey Fire of 1939 (20,758 total acres) burned approximately 4,592 

acres within the project boundary. Nearly 14,916 acres of prescribed fire has been implemented 

since 1984. Between the years 1991 and 2011, 10,955 acres were burned under prescription. 

However, the bulk of these acres burned in the first ten years of this period and were burned 

again in the second half. Consequently, approximately 10,221 acres or 62% of the project area 

has not been significantly affected by fire within the past 100+ years. 

Topography: The project area ranges from rolling hills to steep ridges and canyons ranging 

from 3,820 feet to 5,856 feet in elevation. The highest point, located in the southwestern corner, 

is Samelias Peak a steep rocky highpoint. The lowest point is on the east side where Spring 

Creek flows out of the Forest. These two extremes also represent two extremes in topography on 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 149 

the Mystic District. Samelias Peak is as steep and rocky of country the District has to offer. 

Spring Creek Canyon is steep and sinuous along nearly its’ entire length. 

Vegetation: Ponderosa pine, 94% of the cover type, is the dominant species in the Calumet 

Project Area. The area is interspersed with pockets of aspen, birch, and burr oak. A few larger 

meadows exist within the area including Baker Park. 

Mountain Pine Beetle: The ongoing mountain pine beetle (MPB) epidemic is beginning to 

show itself in the project area. Approximately 65% of the area (spread throughout the project 

area) is in stands that will provide favorable habitat for the beetles (USDA, Forest Service 2012). 

Black Hills Land and Resource Management (LRMP) Goal 10-07 addresses the issue of MPB, 

“Where outbreaks of mountain pine beetle could present risks to management objectives for 

ponderosa pine, reduce acreage of ponderosa-pine stands that are in medium or high risk for 

infestation.” Though this report only speaks specifically to the Calumet Project Area, adjacent 

stands and planning areas are also susceptible to MPB outbreaks. An expanding outbreak within 

the Calumet Project Area would surely have an impact on those adjacent areas. 

Fire Hazard: Fire Hazard can be defined as a combination of fire risk, fuel condition, weather, 

and topography. Fire risk is based on the potential for a fire to start in a given area. Fuel 

conditions are based on quantity, arrangement, and sometimes live to dead ratios. There are two 

types of ignitions that occur: natural (lightning) and human caused (arson, carelessness, 

powerlines, etc.) An estimated 515 lighting strikes occurred within the project area last year. 

Fires are an annual occurrence and average about seven fires a year within the project boundary 

as a result of natural and human causes. 

The Forest Plan, as amended speaks directly to the fire and insect hazard in the forest. Fire 

hazard ratings for the Black Hills are based on ponderosa pine forest structural stages. The 

structural stage provides a description of the continuity of aerial fuels within a given stand. The 

denser the stand, the more likely a crown fire could be sustained. The Forest Plan, as amended 

correlates crown fire hazard with structural stages. As shown in Table 3-26. 

Table 3-26 Crown Fire Hazard with Structural Stages

Structural Stage Fire Hazard Rating 

1 – Grass/Forb Low 

2 – Shrub/Seedling Moderate 

3A – Sapling-pole, <40% crown cover Moderate 

3B – Sapling-pole, 40-70% crown cover High 

3C – Sapling-pole, >70% crown cover Very High 

4A – Mature, >40% crown cover, >9” avg. diameter Moderate 

4A – Mature, >40% crown cover, <9” avg. diameter Very High 

4B – Mature, 40-70% crown cover, >9” avg. diameter High 

4B – Mature, 40-70% crown cover, <9” avg. diameter Very High 

4C – Mature, >70% crown cover, all diameters Very High 

5 – Late Successional Very High 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 150 

Using structural stage data from individual stands within the Calumet Project Area (NFS lands) 

fire hazard ratings correlate as follows: 

Table 3-27 Calumet Project Area (NFS lands) Fire Hazard Ratings 

Figure 3-6 Calumet Project Area (NFS lands) Existing Fire Hazard 

Wildland Urban Interface: Private property is scattered throughout the Calumet Project Area 

with greatest density on the east side towards Rapid City. The latest numbers from Pennington 

county show 379 address points within the project boundary. Including addresses outside of the 

boundary, within one half mile, the number nearly doubles to 724 address points. (Madden 

2011) Private property accounts for 4,155 acres of the total project area. Rockerville is the only 

At Risk Community located within the project boundaries, however, Rapid City (adjacent to the 

east), Keystone (two miles south), and Hill City (three miles southwest) are also listed in the 

National Register of At Risk Communities (Federal Register 2001). Development of private 

property ranges from single family home sites to housing subdivisions. New homes and the 

subsequent infrastructure are continually being constructed within and adjacent to the project 

boundary resulting in increased values at risk. 

The Pennington County Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)(Pennington County 2006) identifies three 

buffer distances: one half, one and one half, and three miles around private property. The three mile 

buffer guideline effectively places the entire project area within the WUI. The CWPP states, “The 

Fire Hazard Rating Acres 

Low 9,309 

Moderate 4,320 

High 8,265 

Very High 5,332 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 151 

goal of fuels reduction projects will be to reduce the risk from fire by lowering fire intensities and 

reducing crowning and torching activities that threaten values in the WUI.” In essence, the CWPP 

call for lowering the fire hazard in and around the WUI allowing for a safer firefighting effort. 

Recreation plays a role in management of the Calumet area. Sheridan Lake concentrated public 

use area (CPUA) is within the project boundary and is a focal point for summertime recreation. 

Two campgrounds, three picnic areas, two trailheads, one scenic overlook (accessible by nonmotorized travel), a summer home group with nine cabins, and an un-official shooting area are also 

present. Barretta Road shooting area receives heavy use year round and generally results in 

multiple human caused fire starts a year. US Highway 16, a major tourist route, makes up a major 

portion of the southern boundary and Sheridan Lake road cuts through the project area as well. 

Forest Plan direction pertaining to the WUI include the following: 

• Goal 10 of the Forest Plan provides direction for management of vegetation in and 

around the wildland urban interface (WUI). 

• Objective 10-01: “Manage for 50 to 75 percent moderate-to-low fire hazard in the 

wildland-urban interface and reduce fire hazard within proximity of structures to current 

NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) standards...” 

• Objective 10-04: “Reduce or otherwise treat fuels commensurate with risks (fire 

occurrence), hazard (fuel flammability), and land and resource values common to the

area, using the criteria in Forest-wide Guideline 4110.” 

Figure 3-7 Existing Fire Hazard in the WUI 

Numbers reflect the one half mile buffer 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 152 

Air Quality: Air quality within the Black Hills National Forest is addressed in the Final

Environmental Impact Statement for the 1997 Revised Forest Plan. Overall, air quality with the 

Black Hills National Forest is very good. Air quality is better than National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) for all pollutants. 

The project area is within the vicinity of two Class I Airsheds within South Dakota: Wind Cave 

National Park (approximately 25 air miles south) and Badlands National Park (approximately 35 

air miles east southeast). Class I Airsheds are considered pristine. Air quality in most parts of 

the country has to be at or slightly above NAAQS; Class I areas can tolerate little if any 

degradation in air quality – primarily from a visual standpoint. In 1997, The Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) issued PM2.5 standards to protect health and the environment. PM2.5

standards are levels allowed in the outdoor air for particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or 

smaller—a better measure of air quality degradation from forest fire emissions than the previous 

standard of PM10 (10 microns in diameter or smaller). EPA has issued two standards for PM2.5: 

an annual standard, at 15 micrograms per cubic meter; and a 24 hour standard at 35 micrograms

per cubic meter. This means that the 3-year average of the weighted annual mean concentration 

measured at established monitoring stations must not exceed this level. EPA established the 

secondary standard as equal to the primary standard. 

Data from four monitoring stations in the South Dakota portion of the Black Hills are reported for 

PM2.5 on EPA’s Airtrends website (http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/). One of these sites meets 

minimum trends completeness criteria. This site is located in Jackson County, near Badlands 

National Park, approximately 90 miles east of the town of Custer. The other three sites record data, 

but do not meet the minimum trends completeness criteria. 

Between 2000 and 2009, monitoring stations in Custer, Jackson, and Meade Counties in South 

Dakota showed PM2.5 concentrations at or slightly above 5 μg/m3, based on seasonally-weighted 

annual averages. Measurements in 2001 and 2003, at the Rapid City monitoring station showed 

levels of about 8 μg/m3. No other measurements were recorded for that site, and no 

measurements after 2009, were recorded for any of the four sites. These measurements are well 

below the national average for PM2.5 concentrations, and are also well below the primary and 

secondary standards for this criteria pollutant. 

The Clean Air Act requires state and local governments to take steps to reduce fine particle 

pollution in nonattainment areas. The term “nonattainment” means that an area violates the fine 

particle standard or that it contributes to violations of the standard in a nearby area. PM10 has 

been an issue in the Rapid City, SD area. The 1996 Forest Plan EIS notes that the Rapid City 

area had been classified as an area that is not attaining the NAAQS for PM10 particulates. In 

September 2005, the State of South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 

petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requesting that the Rapid City area 

be re-designated from unclassifiable to attainment for the PM10 national ambient air quality 

standard. EPA published a proposed rule in the Federal Register on December 9, 2005, soliciting 

public comment on the proposal (70FR73183). On March 6, 2006, the EPA published a final 

rule approving the request from the State of South Dakota (71FR11162). The approval was 

based on the State’s demonstration that the Rapid City area was in attainment of the PM10

NAAQS and commitment to continuation of fugitive dust controls. The Rapid City area was 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 153 

officially re-designated from unclassified to attainment for PM10 effective April 5, 2006. The 

entire state of South Dakota is in attainment status; so far, there is no history of air quality 

violations from prescribed broadcast burning in the Black Hills or surrounding areas. 

A solid working relationship exists between the Black Hills National Forest and the South 

Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources. There have been few if any 

problems identified and communicated to the Black Hills National Forest regarding negative 

impacts to air quality relating to prescribed fire activity that has occurred on the Black Hills 

National Forest in the last ten years. The only case of known impacts was short term event that 

lasted less than two hours. 

“Smoke management” is an essential element of the prescribed broadcast burn planning process, 

and a legal requirement during the implementation phase. Prior to ignition, the “Burn Boss” 

must demonstrate through weather forecasts and test fire observations that the smoke emissions 

would be in full compliance of NAAQS. 

An Increasing Hazard: Over the entire project area, 50% of the NFS lands receive a high or very 

high fire hazard rating as define by structural stage (see Figure 3-8). Continuous aerial fuels, 

combined with steep and broken terrain, create the environment for a potential fast moving stand 

replacing fire. Direct experience has shown that continuous stands of ponderosa pine can easily 

support sustained runs of crown fire, either day or night, given the correct weather conditions. High 

fire severity is a real danger to the existing forest resources, private property, and human safety. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 154 

Figure 3-8 Calumet Project Area Existing Fire Hazard 

Few studies have been done on MPB, ponderosa pine, tree mortality, and fire. Moreover, there

is no consensus on a relationship between MPB and fire risk (Wells 2012). Without a firm 

research basis on which to draw conclusions, anecdotal evidence and field experience is 

currently the best way to draw conclusions. 

Insect Hazard closely correlates with Fire Hazard Ratings and structural stages previously 

mentioned. One year post infestation, a ponderosa pine’s needles will begin to fade and 

ultimately turn rust red by season’s end (Hopkins 1905). A fading (dying) or “red top” (dead) 

ponderosa pine might more easily support the transition from a surface fire to the crowns due to 

the lack of foliar moisture present within the needles (given the correct weather conditions). The 

potential for active crown fire may increase for this relatively short time while the needles are 

still attached to the tree. Needles fall from the dead tree in as little as six months or as long as 

two years depending on weather factors. The fire hazard, as defined by structural stage, would 

reduce dramatically due to the lack of crowns. With less vegetative cover, sites would become 

dryer due to increased solar insulation and surface winds. Grasses and forbs would soon begin to 

be the dominant vegetation. These fine fuels could become the carrier of fire depending on live 

fuel moisture and weather conditions, potentially increasing rates of spread. Within five years, 

70-95% of the dead trees would fall to the ground (Schmid et al. 2009). The fuel profile has now 

changed dramatically. The potential for active crown fire would disappear in areas severely 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 155 

affected by the MPB though the threat of passive crown fire would potentially remain. Fuel 

continuity would remain, albeit different. 

Surface fuel loadings would go from a fuel model TL8 (long-needle Litter) to fuel model SB3 

(Moderate Load Blowdown)(Scott & Burgen 2005) with herbaceous fuels mixed in. A fire passing 

through this fuel model could be resistant to control due to higher fireline intensities, flame lengths 

exceeding four feet (flame lengths greater than four feet require mechanized equipment) and 

prolific spotting from fire brands. Resulting damage to residual trees, regeneration, and soils 

would most likely be severe. Direct experience with prescribed fire in moderate to heavy surface 

fuel loads has shown that even under moderate conditions, care must be taken to prevent tree 

torching (fire transitioning from the surface to the crowns of individual or small groups of trees) 

and crown scorch (tree crowns being damaged from convective heat release), both of which can 

result in mortality of young and mature trees. With increased sunlight and less competition, 

natural pine regeneration will again to take hold and changing the fuel model once again. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Under the No Action alternative, no vegetative management would take place. Change towards 

desired conditions as outlined in the Forest Plan would not occur. Objectives presented by the 

Healthy Forests Restoration Act, National Fire Plan, and the Pennington County Wildfire 

Protection Plan would not be met. 

Fire exclusion would continue, furthering the departure from historic fire return intervals. 

Currently, 13,597 acres or 50% of the total acreage within the Calumet Project Area are rated as 

high or very high. Fire risk would also increase with more people and resulting infrastructure 

moving in the WUI. As fire hazard and risk increase, the potential for a large stand replacing fire 

event would become more likely. Continuous stands of ponderosa pine would become denser 

and opportunity for human caused wildfires would increase. Damage to forest resources would 

correspond with fire size, intensity, and severity. Values-at-Risk in the WUI would also be 

threatened to a higher degree. The threat to life safety of the public and emergency services 

would also become more of an issue. The ability to safely engage a fire during high fire danger 

would become more difficult as time passes. 

The continuing MPB epidemic would expand in the project area. Crown fire potential could 

increase in the short-term with dry red needles versus green. A more likely scenario would be 

large areas of living trees transitioning to areas of significant down woody debris over a three to 

five year period. Though the fuel profile and composition would change, the condition class of

FRCC3 would not. This material would add to an already existing available fuel bed. Fire in this 

type of fuel model can result in severe fire effects, as well as being highly resistant to control due 

increased receptive fuel beds increasing spotting potential. Residual trees, regeneration, and soils 

could be greatly impacted. 

Regenerating ponderosa pine would most likely be prolific. Areas with thick growth of pine 

regeneration would undergo yet another fuel type change. The areas of down woody debris, Fuel 

Model SB3, could transition to areas that would burn more a like a shrub fuel model. When 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 156 

ponderosa pine regenerates itself in the Black Hills, it often grow like “dog hair” (overstocked with 

saplings) and can burn like a shrub (see Silviculturalist’s report). Fire intensity and rate of spread in 

this model are potentially very high and resistant to control. The ultimate result in many areas would 

most likely be of even-aged, dense stands of ponderosa pine creating the environment prime for 

large severe fires and MPB outbreaks. 

Air quality would not be directly affected by Alternative A. The potential for a large stand 

replacing fire is greater with this alternative. A large wildfire within the project area would 

likely create unhealthy levels of smoke into the surrounding communities, but natural events are 

exempt from National Air Quality Standards. 

The No Action Alternative would not be consistent with Forest Plan Goal 10, Objectives 10-1, 

10-4, and 10-7. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Under Alternative B, proposed activities would mechanically modify the fuel profile of 14,598 

acres across the project area. This would include commercial and non-commercial treatments 

breaking up the continuity of the stands. Approximately 375 acres of non-commercial fuel breaks 

along private property could also occur potentially lowering fire intensities along private and 

Forest boundaries. Many primary ingress/egress routes would be treated, but only where they 

correspond with planned logging activities. Primarily, treatments are to be “whole tree skidded” as 

opposed to “lop and scatter.” Whole tree skidding reduces overall fuel loads by removing the 

entire tree versus just the bole of the tree and leaving the remaining slash on the ground. Trees are 

skidded to pre-designated areas known as landings. The tops of the trees are piled in the landing 

and are left to be burned during the winter months by U.S. Forest Service fire crews. On average, 

approximately 800 machine piles are burned every winter on the Mystic District. When weather 

and environmental prescriptions are met, a few, to more than 100 machine piles could be ignited in 

a day. Fire intensities are high and smoke production from each individual pile can be heavy until 

the piles burn down relatively quickly, usually within a few hours. Utilizing the online “Piled 

Fuels Biomass and Emissions Calculator” an average of 0.27 tons/ PM2.5 would be released by an 

average sized machine pile (30 feet tall x 20 feet deep x 100 feet long). The potential does exist 

for a burning pile to “escape” and burn freely. Fire beyond the pile perimeter would generally be 

low in intensity and have little to no negative impacts. Escaped piles are usually easily suppressed 

by on-duty Forest Service fire crews. LRMP Guideline 4106b encourages scarification of burn 

pile footprints if ash piles are deeper than three inches. 

Seven hundred thirty five acres of cable treatments are also included within the mechanical 

treatments. Cable logging allows for steeper terrain to be treated as compared to traditional ground 

based logging methods used in the Black Hills. Slope can be a key factor in initiating and sustaining 

crown fire. Large fire events spread, to a great extent, by spotting; firebrands can be lofted into the 

air and land downwind often times from ridge top to ridge top. By treating steeper terrain, the ability 

for surface fire to transition to crown fire might be reduced, lowering the fire hazard as determined 

by structural stage. Residual slash from cable logging can be problematic for fire suppression under 

normal situations. Without this treatment, though, most of the mature trees on the steep slopes are 

likely to succumb to the MPB. The result would be steeper hillsides transitioning from the existing 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 157 

fuel model TL8 to fuel model SB3. Mechanically treating this steeper country would, over the long 

term, lower potential surface fire intensities and severe fire effects by removing the boles of the 

trees, therefore reducing the potential tons per acre. However, a different hazard could emerge. 

Cable logging generally requires ridge top road construction which could allow for greater access for 

fire suppression resources. When emergency resources are dispatched to a wildland incident, 

engines (Federal, State, or VFD) will generally attempt to gain easiest access to the incident. Ridge 

top roads could allow for firefighting resources to gain access to fires from above as opposed to from 

below. Easier access does not necessarily mean safer access. 

In addition to mechanical treatments, up to 15,990 acres could be treated with prescribed 

broadcast burning. Combining mechanical and prescribed fire treatments would reduce fuel 

loading and continuity across the landscape, therefore reducing the overall fire hazard. 

Treatments would also help bring the area back towards its historic fire regime reducing the 

threat of losing key ecosystem components and values. 

Alternative B treatments would have the following effect on fire hazard as defined by structural 

stage within the Calumet Project Area: 

Table 3-28 Alternative B Fire Hazard Rating (acres) for Calumet Project Area Using Structural Stage Data 

Fire Hazard Rating Acres 

Low 15,261 

Moderate 6,723 

High 2,197 

Very High 3,046 

Figure 3-9 Alternative B Fire Hazard Rating (%) for Calumet Project Area Using Structural Stage Data 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 158 

Alternative B would be consistent with Forest Plan Goal 10, Objectives 10-01, 10-04, 10-06, 10-

07, and Guideline 4110. Alternative B would also meet the recommendations of the Pennington 

CWPP. Alternative B would reduce the high/very high fire hazard rating from 55% to 19% in 

the project area. In addition to reducing fire hazard, Alternative B would lower risk from the 

MPB. By reducing the acreage at high risk to the MPB, potentially large areas of fuel model 10 

would be avoided reducing fire severity and intensity, therefore firefighting safety and 

effectiveness would increase. Areas not directly treated by mechanical thinning or prescribed 

broadcast burning would indirectly benefit, as well. By breaking up continuity of ponderosa pine 

stands, the potential for a running crown fire is reduced. 

Figure 3-10 Alternative B Fire Hazard Rating Map for Calumet Project Area 

Alternative B would also meet the intent of Standard 4103 and Guideline 4105 by allowing up to 

15,990 acres of prescribed broad cast burning. A different approach would be taken in the north 

central portion of the planning area. Igniting south slopes during the winter months would be the

technique for implementation. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) utilizing the digital elevation 

model for the Black Hills, south slopes were highlighted by placing the Sun’s location and angle in the 

sky for February 1st at 1:00 pm. South slopes can be identified and mapped by “placing” the sun’s 

location in the sky for this date and time. Utilizing this technique allows for identification of slopes 

that would be dry and warm enough to be receptive to fire during later winter months. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 159 

Figure 3-11 Alternative B Prescribed Fire Treatments for the Calumet Project Area 

Often during the winter months, conditions in the Black Hills allow for southern slopes to 

become open and dry. These conditions are often exceptional for prescribed fire with cool 

temperatures with low relative humidities. Fuel conditions are also prime for prescribed fire; 

low fuel moistures in coarse woody debris encourages good consumption and herbaceous fuels 

that are fully cured help carry fire. Northern aspects are often frozen to snow covered limiting 

fire spread and effects to the southern aspects. Management ignited fire would be expected to 

creep and smolder for several days to weeks following completion of ignition depending on 

weather conditions. A “Maximum Allowable Area” (MAA) boundary would be necessary to 

allow for this low intensity fire to move about freely within project boundaries. Control lines 

would be identified and established as the perimeter of the MAA. Northern aspects could have 

the potential to lose snow cover over this time period allowing for fire to burn on the northern 

aspects as well. The ability to burn the entire MMA might be necessary. The intention, though, 

would be to limit fire to southern slopes. 

A reduction of surface fuels would be the most noticeable effect of broadcast burning. There is a 

direct relationship between surface fuel loading and high severity fire. Crown fire is initiated, 

and generally sustained, by energy released by combusting surface fuels. The greater the surface 

fuel load the greater the potential for intense surface fire. Another direct effect would be raising 

the canopy base height. Fire “prunes” ponderosa pine by scorching the lower branches, thus 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 160 

raising the height of the crowns or canopy. Reducing ponderosa pine seedling and sapling 

densities is also an expected outcome. All of these effects have a positive impact on potential 

fire severity. Less noticeable effects would include returned nutrients to the soil and improved 

wildlife habitat by stimulating herbaceous plants and browse for large game animals. 

Figure 3-12 Horse Nugget Prescribed Fire 

Alternative B would also allow for maintenance burning on over 6,838 acres which have 

previously been burned under prescription. Within these past burn projects, tree mortality 

occurred and by returning fire to these areas, the down trees would be consumed. With each 

repeated burn, fewer trees would be expected to succumb to the fire. As many as seven 

treatments might be necessary to return an area to its’ historical range (Reinhardt et al. 2008). 

Approximately 18% of the prescribed fire acres would be burned under prescription for the third 

time significantly steering them towards their historic fire regime. Prior to ignition, an agency 

required “Burn Plan” would be written utilizing the Interagency Prescribed Fire Planning and 

Implementation Procedures Guide (July 2008). This document, as it is stated in the title, is a 

comprehensive guide to planning and implementing prescribed fire and serves as a template for 

the burn planner to prepare and the burn boss to follow. The actual burn plan includes 21 critical 

elements that must be addressed, some of these include: objectives, prescriptions, organization 

and equipment, safety, contingency, ignition and holding plans. Tree mortality parameters (part 

of the objectives and prescription) are written into individual Burn Plans by the District 

Silviculturalist. Generally, as the tree size class increases, the corresponding allowance for 

mortality decreases. A good example of a Silviculturalist’s prescription is from the Horse 

Nugget Prescribed Burn Plan: 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 161 

Table 3-29 Example of Silviculturalist’s Prescription for Horse Nugget Prescribed Burn Plan

Mature Pine

16”+ dbh 

Large Pine

9”-16” dbh

Pole Size Pine

5”- 9” dbh 

Sapling Pine

3”-5” 

Seedling Pine

0-3” 

<2% <5% <20% <30% <60% 

Percent of allowable tree mortality by size class in the Horse Nugget prescribed broadcast burn (“dbh” equals 

diameter at breast height, four feet off the ground). 

Recent studies have concluded that following mechanical treatments with prescribed broadcast 

burning is the best way to ultimately reduce fire hazard and severity well into the future (Omi et 

al. 2007; Stephens et al. 2009). Allowing thinning without follow-up broadcast burning can 

actually increase wildfire severity. Experience on numerous broadcast burns on the Mystic 

District has shown that it is difficult to burn residual slash, even under moderate conditions, 

without resulting group tree torching or a high degree of crown scorch. The balance of acres not 

treated with prescribed fire should be whole tree skidded versus allowing lop and scatter. This 

would be critical in lowering surface fire hazard and severity over the greatest area. 

Seventy six percent of the prescribed fire acres for the Calumet Project are within Management 

Area (MA) 5.4, Big Game Winter Range Emphasis. Management is to emphasize a vegetative 

mosaic with natural and created openings. Stand diversity of age, density, and species with ample 

browse for large game are all aspects of the desired future condition (USDA Forest Service 

2005a). Fourteen percent of the prescribe fire acres fall into MA 5.1, Resource Production 

Emphasis. Management emphasizes timber products, forage production, and water yield. 

Prescribed fire is considered an appropriate fuel treatment and would be used to maintain areas 

recently burned by prescribed fire or wild fire (Battle Creek Fire). Eight percent of the prescribed 

fire acres fall into MA 8.2, Developed Recreation Complexes (Sheridan Lake Recreation Area). 

One percent falls within Management Area 3.7, Late Successional Forest Landscape (Lower 

Spring Creek). All of these management areas specifically allow for prescribed fire as a 

management tool except MA 8.2 which allows consideration of fire as a management tool. 

Combining these mechanical and prescribed fire treatments would reduce fuel loading and 

continuity across the landscape, therefore reducing the overall fire hazard. Treatments would 

also guide the area towards its historic fire regime, reducing the threat of losing key ecosystem 

components and values. 

Air Quality during prescribed burning would be affected. Pollutants released during prescribed 

burning primarily include: particulate matter (including PM10 and PM2.5), carbon monoxide, and 

volatile organic compounds that may impair human health, welfare, and visibility. The pollutant of 

greatest concern released during prescribed fire is PM2.5, most of the mass wildfire smoke (80-90%) 

falls into this classification (PMS 420-2). During prescribed fire operations, pollutants are usually 

quick to dilute and are generally low in concentration, and therefore public health hazards are 

negligible. Due to the generally lower fire intensities during prescribed fire, fuel consumption would 

be expected to be lower compared to higher intensities of wildland fire. Fuels can vary greatly 

across the landscape depending on specific management techniques, tons per acre can range from 4 

to 50/tons to the acre. Resulting emissions can also vary greatly depending on fuel quantity 

(tons/acre) and consumption. Weather prescriptions are defined in the approved burn plan and may

include: mixing height, transport windspeed and direction, and smoke dispersion. Weather forecasts 

are produced by the National Weather Service and are generally requested the day prior to and the 

day of ignition. These forecasts are one of the primary factors included in the decision making 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 162 

process to proceed with ignition. Notification of the general public living in the area should be given 

a reasonable time prior to the day of ignition through a number of possible outlets including the 

Forest Public Information Officer. Night time hours are generally when smoke would have the 

greatest negative impacts. Residual smoke generally settles to the ground with cooler temperatures 

and often flows down drainages potentially affecting local residences or communities. The Mystic 

Ranger District generally tries to complete ignition operations as early in the day as possible to allow 

for more combustion time before night time temperature inversions set up. Prescribed fire generally 

occurs in the fall and spring in the Black Hills and surrounding areas. Certain weather conditions 

allow for prescribed broadcast burning to occur, and only a limited number of days are considered to 

be a “good weather window.” Alternative B proposes approximately 15,990 acres of prescribed fire 

to be conducted within the project boundary. This area would be broken into individual burn units 

of generally 100 to 500 acres in size and would take multiple years to complete. The Mystic District 

accomplishes an average of approximately 1,000 to 3,000 acres of prescribed fire a year spread 

across the district over a potential seven month weather window. Coordination between Forest 

Districts and other agencies helps mitigate negative impacts on air quality by preventing all units 

from burning simultaneously. No air quality violations have been recorded to date by the South 

Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources due to prescribed fire, however, a 

growing concern about particulate concentrations have been noted (Schultz 2011). 

Cumulative Effects 

Fire hazard would be expected to be significantly lowered with Alternative B depending on the 

actual number of acres treated across the landscape. Variables exist to landscape treatments 

including actual conditions on the ground, economy, and budget. 

Figure 3-13 Fire Hazard Comparison of Alternatives 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 163 

However, conditions in a Fire Regime I forest are continually changing. Residual trees, post 

treatment, would respond to less competition by adding to their crown bulk densities closing the 

canopy once again. Pine regeneration can and is usually prolific, often exceeding 1,000 stems 

per acre in the Black Hills, favoring disturbed soils resulting from timber sales or fire (Battaglia 

et al. 2008). Fuller canopies and pine regeneration would ultimately increase fire hazard over 

time, however, at a lower rate than if no treatment were to take place. 

The caveat in using structural stage to describe fire hazard during this period of MPB epidemic is 

explained as follows: Fire hazard as defined by structural stage (crown density/closure), whether 

we manage or not, would go down. The resulting tree mortality due to the MPB would break up 

the continuity of the stands reducing the “fire hazard.” The difference would be the shift from a 

dense, high fire hazard stand, potentially supporting a crown fire to a high fire hazard surface 

fuel load. Either option has potentially negative effects on public and firefighter safety. Fire 

suppression efforts would also be negatively impacted. The unknown is the potential magnitude 

and impact of the MPB on the Calumet Project Area. Without treatment, large areas would 

likely be affected by the MPB (see Silviculturalist’s Report). 

Fire risk would continue to increase as more and more people move into, and around, the 

Calumet Project Area. Corresponding amounts of infrastructure and values-at-risk will increase 

as well. As a result, the cost and complexity of fire suppression efforts will also increase. 

Reducing Fire and MPB Hazard in the Calumet Project Area should have a positive impact on 

fire size, severity, and magnitude of expected wildfire incidents whether natural or human 

caused. Potential impacts to forest resources and private property should be reduced.

Air quality would be affected due to prescribed fire operations during broadcast and pile burning. 

Smoke impacts could contribute to local and regional air pollutant loading. However, these 

impacts would be short lived once firing operations cease and the smoke dissipates. Areas closer 

to firing operations could result in a higher negative impact than those farther downwind. 

Emissions from prescribed fire operations on other Districts and other agencies could potentially 

occur simultaneously. These separate projects would generally be separated by substantial 

geography and most likely would not impact the same areas. As a result, planned prescribed fire 

emissions are not expected have long term or significant impacts to National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards and should not have significant future impairments of visibility in Class 1 Airsheds. 

The Calumet Project is bordered by four previous planning areas: Prairie (2003), Mitchell 

(2007), Upper Spring Creek (2008), and Pactola (2011). All of these projects either have active 

or completed timber sales within their boundaries. Some prescribed fire has been and will 

continue to be implemented in the surrounding planning areas as well. As implementation 

continues, fuels will be modified breaking up the continuity of aerial and surface fuels. In 

addition to these planning areas, the Forest is currently analyzing the Mountain Pine Beetle 

Response Project, which encompasses approximately 250,000 acres of National Forest System 

lands in South Dakota and Wyoming. The Proposed Action would treat recently infested MPB

areas within 242,000 acres of ‘High Risk’ stands on National Forest System lands to reduce and 

slow the spread of MPB, and reduce wildfire hazard on the Forest. Integrated Pest Management 

techniques are proposed for areas that are at high risk and most susceptible to MPB infestation, 

with the objective of treating and removing infested trees before MPBs can disperse. None of 

these proposed treatments associated with the Mountain Pine Beetle Response Project would 

occur within the Calumet Project Area 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 164 

Significant reductions in Fire Hazard from Alternative B should have a positive effect on 

reducing fire severity and magnitude of subsequent wildfires. The possibility of losing key 

ecosystem components would be minimized and would provide for a safer environment for 

emergency services to engage wildland fires. The reduction in fire hazard should also mitigate 

the potential for a large fire event to release massive amounts of smoke into the air. Reducing 

possible fire severity should also protect forest resources by reducing tree mortality. However, it 

is critical to understand that a continuing commitment to fuels management within this project 

area is required to realize the benefits of this project into the future. 

RANGE 

Affected Environment 

The Calumet Project Area overlaps four livestock grazing allotments on the Mystic (MY) Ranger 

District. The Bitter Creek Allotment is essentially entirely within the area, while only portions of 

the other three allotments are affected. Permitted livestock grazing has been a recurring use in the 

project area since the time the US Forest Service was created in 1905. The initial numbers of 

permitted livestock have been progressively reduced from historic, elevated levels. These 

adjustments were made so annual livestock use was within carrying capacity and to meet various 

resource objectives. Concurrently, the number of permit holders has declined as smaller operators 

left the industry and permits were consolidated. Management has moved from single pasture, 

season-long use to multiple pastures with deferred grazing use to promote healthy forage and 

address riparian development. Annual grazing use is authorized by a Bill for Collection for 

grazing fees. Livestock may not be placed on the allotment until grazing fees payment is accepted. 

Table 3-30 Range Program within the Calumet Project Area 

Allotment 

Name & 

Ranger District 

Grazing 

System 

Pastures 

Affected 

Number of 

Permitted 

Livestock 

Period of 

Use 

Total 

Allotment 

AUMs* 

Bald Horse 9 pasture 

deferred rotation 

West Horse 

Middle Horse 

Burnt Ranch 

Middle Bald 

South Bald 

Middle Victoria 

Lower Victoria 

299 cow/calf 

1 permittee 06/01-10/26 1,921 

Bitter Creek 5 pasture 

deferred rotation 

Boulder 

Middle 

North 

South 

Deadman/Reder 

(not planned for 

use at this time) 

50 cow/calf 

1 permittee 06/01-10/31 332 

Gordon Points 6 pasture 

deferred rotation 

Lower Gordon 

Middle Gordon 

Upper China 

Upper Gordon 

150 cow/calf 

1 permittee 06/01-09/30 794 

Palmer Gulch 

(north half) 

5 pasture 

deferred rotation Samalias 74 cow/calf 1 permittee 06/01-10/10 424 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 165 

Suitable rangelands are appropriate for grazing with consideration of environmental and 

economic consequences, and alternative uses. The majority of NFS lands within the project 

boundary are currently under management for livestock grazing; an area around Sheridan Lake is 

managed for recreational uses. The Deadman/Reder Pasture is not grazed at South Dakota 

Game, Fish, and Parks (SDGF&P) request; this pasture includes area used by Bighorn Sheep. 

Forest Plan standards and guidelines for all resources affected by grazing are followed. 

There are 573 cow/calf pairs permitted to graze these allotments. Livestock numbers may vary if 

a permittee elects to take non-use or substitutes some yearlings for the cow/calf pairs. At any 

given time during the grazing season (period of use), there may be cattle within and confined by 

range improvements (fencing, cattleguards) to pastures in the project area. Pasture rotation 

schedules and instructions (including rest of some pastures) are revised on an annual basis during 

winter meetings with the term grazing permit holders. 

The fences on these allotments have been constructed to create pasture and allotment division 

boundaries, and thus control the movement of livestock from pasture to pasture. Often these 

boundaries are linked to topographic features such as steep forested slopes or rocky ridgelines. 

Dense timber vegetation may also serve as a control feature. 

Fencing is also used along road right of ways to restrict livestock access and for exclosures to 

protect spring sources. The Mystic Range Project Record of Decision calls for restricting 

livestock from Sheridan Lake Road for that portion within the Bald Horse Allotment. Further 

restrictions for livestock grazing the Bitter Creek Allotment’s portion of Sheridan Lake Road 

may be considered in future allotment planning. 

Range improvements are designed to manage grazing in a manner that sustains the vegetative 

and watershed resources, provides for a variety of biologically diverse ecosystems, moves range 

conditions towards or maintain at a desired status, and provides for sustained commodity uses in 

an environmentally acceptable manner. Improvements within the Calumet Project Area include 

structures such as exterior and interior pasture barbed wire fences, water developments (stock 

tanks, ponds, and dugouts), spring exclosures, corrals, and cattleguards. Range improvements

such as fences and water developments are used with salting to control and gain distribution of 

livestock. Permittees are responsible for maintenance of designated improvements, cost share in 

construction of new or rebuilt structures. 

The timing of grazing use such as moving on to the forest, or to and from a pasture may vary 

from season to season. Additionally, livestock numbers and length of grazing season can be 

adjusted on an annual basis to adapt to availability of forage and drinking water. 

Forage utilization monitoring is done periodically throughout the permitted grazing season to 

ensure Forest Plan standards and guidelines are met. Permittees are responsible for moving 

livestock when allowable proper use standards and/or riparian stubble heights would be 

exceeded. Additionally, some permittees have submitted monitoring data in written or verbal 

form on occasion. Study transects exist for some upland and riparian areas to improve 

monitoring efforts and determine trends in rangeland condition, and more are planned. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 166 

Allotment Management Plans (AMPs) with environmental assessment work that fulfill direction 

from the 1995 Range Rescission Act are completed for two of the four allotments. The Bald 

Horse and Palmer Gulch Allotments are covered by the Mystic Range Project’s Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) signed October 22, 

2010, and is approved for implementation. New AMPs are planned for these two allotments.

The affected pastures within the Calumet Project boundary provide forage opportunities for 

livestock and also use by a variety of wildlife including big game such as elk and whitetail deer. 

There are many meadows of varying sizes and shapes found in both uplands and valley bottoms. 

Most meadows are being invaded by small pine. In this project area, most meadows are confined 

to narrow drainages surrounded by ponderosa pine or in some instances spruce. Other woody 

vegetation such as aspen, birch, bur oak, and willows are generally linear-shaped stands and also 

show active pine encroachment. The hardwood stands also provide some forage for livestock; 

livestock interest this understory vegetation may vary depending on the time of use.

These meadow areas are designated as primary range because they are accessible to livestock, 

produce good quality grass forage, and often have dependable water – either spring fed water 

tanks, flowing seeps in drainages, or catchment basins for run-off. In dry years, there are 

inconsistent water sources in some pastures within all allotments which can limit livestock grazing 

use and distribution. From the late 1990s through the mid 2000s, seven years of drought depleted 

forage plant root reserves and ground water storage. Abundant moisture in 2009 - 2011 has 

restored much of the depleted ground water storage as evidenced by visible surface water flows. 

Water developments aid by increasing livestock distribution and providing more dependable 

watering sources for livestock and wildlife. These structures (spring developments, headboxes, 

water tanks, storage tanks, wells, ponds) are constructed to maximize water use while reducing 

resource effects from excessive trailing, trampling of spring sources, and congregating actions by 

livestock. The goal is to provide livestock and wildlife with suitable drinking water in addition 

to and away from riparian areas such as creek channels and protected spring sources. 

Supplemental dispersed watering locations help to conserve riparian habitat from excessive 

livestock and wildlife use. 

Often existing water developments need renovation and new ones need to be constructed when 

natural vegetation barriers are altered thru vegetative management (tree removal and/or 

prescribed fire use). The livestock may respond by changing grazing patterns, and often travel 

into new places previously inaccessible prior to tree removal. 

During the drought, a lack of widespread, dependable watering sources in some pastures has 

increased livestock trailing to remaining water sources, and increased congregation of livestock 

in some upland and riparian areas. Length of use adjustments and resting of pastures has helped 

alleviate these effects, but continued vigilance is necessary to deal with drought. Term grazing 

permittees, in coordination with the Forest Service, responded to these effects with a variety of 

tactics including annual reductions of herd size, adjusting on/off dates, and developing or 

renovating existing water sources. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 167 

Overall, upland rangelands within this project area are generally in stable, satisfactory condition with 

some locations appearing to show increasing numbers of plant species after previous vegetative 

treatments (Ursek and Severson 1998). There are some primary range areas where forage and soil 

conditions show heavier use; causal factors may include periods of drought, ineffective livestock 

distribution efforts by a permittee, pine encroachment reducing available grazing acreage, and the 

duration of permitted use. Seasonal reductions in permitted use have been completed on some 

pastures to address past drought affects. Moderate to heavy use of some riparian areas has occurred 

during the drought, and stream channels show the effects of such livestock use. Riparian stubble 

height requirements are now in place for some pastures with more anticipated in the future. The 

protection of select, small riparian areas by livestock exclosures are also planned. 

In recent years portions of range allotments within the Calumet Project area have been subject to 

timber sales. Generally these sales reduced mature pine stands down to a basal area (BA) of 

around 80 square feet/acre (with some areas reduced to even less BA) using commercial thins and 

overstory removals. These sales have reduced the density of ponderosa pine, creating some 

transitional (secondary) range grazing opportunities for livestock and use by big game (Sieg 

1996)(Ursek and Severson 1989). This level of timber harvest does create additional shortduration forage opportunities but growth from residual trees rapidly shades out understory 

vegetation. These opportunities seem to last no more than ten to fifteen years based on local range 

personnel observations, as remaining pine trees grow and pine regeneration occurs to shade out 

forage growth. Areas cut to less than 80 BA tend to remain open longer for livestock use.

Noxious weed and invasive species control is an on-going cooperative effort (see Noxious and 

Invasive Weeds section). Treatments after past timber harvests have been completed or are on-going; 

these include chemical and biological tactics designed to control, reduce, or eliminate infestations. 

Light livestock use of these secondary areas has been observed by district staff and some permittees. 

Some forage within opened up forested areas tends to be less preferred by grazing. It has been observed 

and suggested that these grasses are less palatable to cattle when found in close proximity to residual 

pine trees and needle cast (Beckner 2007). Ursek and Severson (1988) found that total nutrients can be 

altered by reducing the forest overstory, but this result is from increased plant production, not from 

changes in forage quality. They reasoned that increased opportunities for ungulates to exercise selective 

feeding resulted from increased forage diversity and total plant production. 

Even with past timber harvests to 80 BA, there still are progressive, increasing reductions in 

forage production occurring from the development and encroachment of woody vegetation into 

primary rangelands. As the pine moves into the meadows, the net result is reduced forage 

available, and further confinement of livestock and big game competition into smaller areas. 

Natural vegetation barriers can be altered thru vegetative treatments, and additional fencing may 

be needed to keep livestock in the correct pasture. Treatments may include timber sales, POL 

(Products other than Logs) sales, thinning, and prescribed burning. These vegetative actions can 

be beneficial by creating new grazing opportunities, or detrimental if livestock move into the 

wrong pasture or allotment, or onto private property or roadways. 

Some exterior boundaries of pastures or allotments adjoin private lands. Construction, 

installation, and maintenance of private land line fences and cattleguards are the responsibility of 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 168 

the private landowner under existing federal laws. In the past, many of these private properties 

were owned by ranchers or private individuals with livestock, and they generally kept their 

fences maintained. The trend has been for these lands to be sold off, sometimes subdivided, and 

the new landowner(s) often have no interest in fence maintenance or cattleguards, and may 

create livestock control issues for the term grazing permittee. 

Often private landowners do not understand the Forest Service’s position on boundary fences 

between private and NFS lands, and refuse to cooperate with the permittees, despite the District’s 

attempts to explain the US Government’s long-standing position and US Supreme Court support 

for such laws. While permittees are encouraged to work with the private landowners on fence 

maintenance, they are under no legal obligation to do so. 

One positive aspect of the transition from adjacent private ranches to home sites is there are 

fewer incidents of privately owned livestock (not permitted and authorized) intruding onto the 

National Forest System Lands. 

Currently, the lack of private land boundary fences or maintenance of said fences often hinders 

livestock management in some pastures within the Calumet Project Area. Livestock retention on 

NFS lands may be more difficult for permittees to achieve when private landline fencing is not 

properly maintained. One result is incomplete livestock grazing next to interface locations. This 

can result in increases in fine fuel accumulation and subsequent elevated fire hazard. 

Development of the transportation system for these past timber sales has improved the access of 

permittees to manage their livestock and maintain or construct range improvements such as 

fences or water developments. Where pasture fences cross roads or trails and no cattleguard 

exists, wire gates are used. These gates are used to move livestock from one pasture to another 

or perhaps on or off the NFS lands. Where heavy traffic exists from motorized vehicles, there is 

a tendency for wire gates to be left open. Open gates usually result in livestock entry into the 

wrong pasture, or an area previously grazed or not yet intended for use. Cattleguards are used in 

these locations to allow traffic to pass unimpeded, including logging equipment and haul trucks, 

while restricting livestock movement to specified pastures. 

Slight increases in water yield from reducing numbers of pine trees may occur with sale activity, 

but these gains are gradually reduced as remaining trees grow and regeneration of pine seedlings 

occurs. Any possible changes in water yield are discussed in the hydrologist’s specialist report. 

Whole tree skid is much preferred by the permittees and Forest Service range managers as 

lop/scatter of slash residues impede livestock and wildlife access to range, forage, and browse. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Fence lines would need encroaching pine and brush cut back with chainsaws to remain open and 

accessible for repairs and maintenance, since no vegetative treatments from harvest activity is 

planned under Alternative A. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 169 

Water yields for stock ponds and springs may decline as developing and encroaching woody 

vegetation draws ever-increasing amounts of surface and ground water for plant processes (see 

Watershed report). Meadows and hardwood stands would continue to be subject to conifer 

encroachment, and their individual size and landscape spread reduced in acreage and location. 

These reductions would continue unless some type of mechanical treatment action or wildfire of 

sufficient magnitude occurred. 

Tree breakage and windthrow has historically been shown to impede livestock access to primary 

and secondary rangelands. Ponderosa pine trees would continue to be infected and die from the 

mountain pine beetle infestation. Most of these dead trees eventually break up or fall over the next 

five to ten years, often at accelerated rates with high winds (reference the Battle Creek Fire area 

2002-2010). Large areas of previously stocked pine trees are opened up to sunlight, and a variety 

of plants appear including forbs, grasses, and shrubs. Tree downfall has blocked livestock access 

and the increased amounts of fine fuel growth are not grazed by domestic livestock.

Cumulative Effects 

Term permitted grazing use would continue as authorized. No new vegetative or prescribed fire 

treatments are planned for range management purposes except for those projects derived from 

previously approved environmental analysis. There would be no immediate change in carrying 

capacity (Animal Unit Months (AUMs)) as from Alternative A’s implementation. Permittees 

would continue to be provided administrative access to conduct range management activities 

within closed areas per District Ranger approval. Range structures would be maintained and 

improved as necessary to continue livestock management at its current scope and intensity, 

subject to forest-wide standards and guidelines. Current levels of fine fuel removal (grass) 

accomplished by livestock grazing would continue to reduce ground fire hazards. 

There are no anticipated cumulative effects that would impair or unduly influence short-term range 

management of the allotments within the Calumet Project Area if Alternative A was selected. 

Both existing and future AMPs would indicate direction to be followed to improve or sustain 

desired range conditions and capacity. However, there are several emerging threats to sustainable 

livestock grazing: 1) diminished water yields may result from expanding and growing woody 

vegetation and may reduce watering supplies (this may be offset by the forecasted large scale dieoff of ponderosa pine from the mountain pine beetle); 2) encroachment of woody vegetation on 

grazeable areas reduces available forage and potentially cuts back carrying capacity over time; 3) 

the risk of large-scale wildfire is increased with this alternative, and any ignition may disrupt 

grazing use for a period of time to allow for resource recovery; and 4) experience with large scale 

wildfires on the Black Hills have demonstrated that remaining black stems of trees that are not 

harvested would decay, fall over, and block access to vegetation by livestock and wildlife. 

Where opportunities exist to improve existing range management, they would be identified and 

subject to scoping, a new environmental analysis and decision document may be necessary, and 

subsequent updates or changes to existing approved AMPs may be required. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 170 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Fence lines would still need cleared of encroaching vegetation to remain open and accessible for 

repairs and maintenance, but not to the level as in Alternative A since commercial and noncommercial treatments are planned with Alternative B which would clear some fence lines to 

varying degrees.

Additional construction of more barbed wire fences may be needed as natural barriers to 

livestock distribution are opened by new roads, mechanical treatments and/or prescribed burning. 

Fencing and water developments do exist throughout the Calumet Project Area that would need 

protection from commercial and non-commercial treatment activities such as road construction, 

road closure, harvest machinery, and skidding. The same improvements would need protection 

from prescribed fire implementation. 

There are 14,598 acres of vegetative commercial and non-commercial treatments planned with 

this alternative as well as 15,990 acres of prescribed fire use. Alternative B’s treatments would 

effect and increase herbaceous and shrub production over Alternative A since they create canopy 

openings. Vegetation is either mechanically removed or in some cases consumed with 

prescribed fires, or in some cases both actions proposed sequentially. These treatments would 

allow more sunlight to reach the ground underneath the remaining ponderosa pine trees, and 

increase production of grasses and browse for livestock and wildlife use. The initial quantity of 

this vegetation usually increases distribution of livestock throughout the project area (Ursek and 

Severson 1988), into primary and secondary rangelands. 

Proposed vegetative treatments may congregate livestock near private land line fences in need of 

maintenance or reconstruction, aggravating working relationships with nearby neighbors. In 

contrast, there would be ample adjacent areas with enhanced forage (after thinning and tree 

removal) to draw livestock away from private property. 

There would be substantial reductions in conifer encroachment into meadows and hardwood 

stands (retention and restoration) as approximately 3,601 acres of these vegetative types are 

planned for treatment, in addition to about 4,331 acres of POL thinning and non-commercial 

work. These treatments would initially increase the amount of available forage and browse 

found within these vegetative types, based on past range personnel local observations. 

 

Current levels of fine fuel removal (grass) accomplished by livestock grazing would continue to 

reduce ground fuel hazards. The initial response of existing grass plants to a more open growing 

environment may produce higher levels of grass production than current permitted numbers of 

livestock can harvest each season. Follow-up prescribed fire after vegetative treatments have 

been demonstrated on the Black Hills NF to produce even higher levels of forage and browse 

production. This is also true with applied fire in areas where no vegetative treatment has 

occurred, although plant response is generally not as great compared to commercial and noncommercial treated areas with follow-up fire application. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 171 

By temporarily increasing the number of livestock or the number of days the permitted livestock 

are kept in a pasture where vegetative treatments, prescribed fire treatments, or both have 

occurred and stimulated higher levels of grass production, the increase in fine fuels (biomass) 

can be annually removed by grazing. This process may be annually repeated to effect an 

immediate change in fire behavior by reducing the rate of spread and fire intensity. The result 

would be to annually crop the new grass growth (fine fuels) to maintain conditions that support 

desirable fire behavior. This temporary, permitted activity has been accomplished on another 

allotment by following standards and guidelines to protect other resource values. Such permitted 

action may be useful in wildland/urban interface settings within the Calumet Project Area. 

Given the proposed size and scope of prescribed burning, it may be difficult to not displace some 

permittees from their respective allotments for a period of time. Prescribed burning may have 

positive or negative effects on livestock operations, hence coordination is critical between the 

fuels management specialist and the range management specialist to: 1) plan the projected dates 

of the burn; 2) to relocate livestock within the allotment and allocate forage in advance to assist 

in prescribed fire execution and accomplishment of objectives; 3) adjust grazing seasons; and 4) 

relocate permittee’s livestock or administer non-use for resource protection during the planned 

ignition, if necessary. This may include construction of additional range improvements to defer 

or rest pastures after treatment in accordance with forest plan standards and guidelines. Advance 

notice needs to be given to term grazing permittee(s) to minimize, where possible, disruptions to 

their operation. 

The projected declines in water yields for stock ponds and springs from expanding woody 

vegetation’s demand on surface and ground water may be slowed or slightly reversed by 

implementing Alternative B. A slight increase in water yield (and resultant additional water for 

livestock and wildlife) may occur with Alternative B, perhaps more so than experienced with 

Alternative A due to the landscape nature of MPB mortality acres, and all vegetative 

commercial, non-commercial, prescribed fire treatments. (see Watershed, Geology, and Soils 

Section for more information.) 

Permittees would continue to be provided administrative access to conduct range management 

activities within closed areas per District Ranger authorization, but methods of access may vary 

from past approaches due to the new Travel Management Plan. Total forest road miles are 

minimally increased in this alternative compared to Alternative A. New paths from skidding 

activities or temporary roads with Alternative B may allow livestock trailing access into 

previously ungrazed areas. 

Tree breakage and windthrow has historically been shown to impede livestock access to primary 

and secondary rangelands. Under Alternative B, large areas are opened up to sunlight, and a 

variety of plants generally appear including forbs, grasses, and shrubs. Livestock are more likely 

in Alternative B to access more area, and therefore reduce more fine fuels than in Alternative A. 

Cumulative Effects 

Under this alternative, term permitted grazing use would continue as authorized. There would be 

no change in carrying capacity (Animal Unit Months (AUMs) as currently allocated since 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 172 

vegetative openings from treatments would increase available forage for livestock. Range 

structures would be maintained and improved as necessary to continue livestock management at 

its current scope and intensity, subject to forest-wide standards and guidelines. 

There are no anticipated cumulative effects that would impair or unduly influence short-term 

range management of the allotments within the Calumet Project Area if Alternative B was 

selected. Increased forage production would promote wider distribution of livestock and may 

improve riparian conditions. Eventually temporary increases in forage production would subside 

as confer regeneration and growth shades out understory vegetation. Both existing and future 

AMPs would indicate direction to be followed to improve or sustain range condition and 

capacity. However, there are still the emerging threats to sustainable livestock grazing such as 

the risk of large-scale wildfire. Any large acreage ignition may disrupt grazing use and damage 

or destroy range improvements. A large scale wildfire can also cause dead trees which would 

decay, fall over, and restrict access to vegetation by livestock and wildlife. 

Where opportunities exist to improve existing range management, they would be identified and 

subject to scoping, a new environmental analysis and decision document may be necessary, and 

subsequent updates or changes to existing approved AMPs may be required. 

NOXIOUS and INVASIVE WEEDS 

Affected Environment 

Known noxious weed and invasive plant sites (known collectively as “noxious weeds” for this 

report) within the perimeter of the Calumet Project Area are found over approximately 634 acres. 

National Forest System lands (NFS) and private property within and adjacent to the project area 

have established noxious weed populations including, but not limited to: Canada thistle, leafy 

spurge, houndstongue, yellow toadflax, musk thistle, bull thistle, scotch thistle, whitetop, 

chicory, St. Johnswort, common tansy, burdock, common mullein, spotted knapweed, and 

perennial sow thistle. Past treatments within this area have been done on a yearly basis in some 

locations due to the Canada thistle and leafy spurge infestations. 

Noxious weeds may be spread by a variety of agents. Tires on mechanized vehicles may trap 

weed seed or plant parts within treads. Logging equipment and service vehicles may contain 

viable seed within their machinery, only to have the material loosen and fall out in a new location. 

Forest visitors may entrap weed seed within their clothing, gear, or shoes and similarly lose the 

seeds in other locations. Use of uncertified noxious weed free hay and feed may also bring in new 

seed stock. Livestock, big game, and birds may disperse seed after ingestion. The list of agents is 

vast and only limited by lack of weed seed within an area and its availability for dispersal. 

In the past five years, about 850 acres of noxious and invasive weeds have been treated in the 

project area. These treatments were completed using a variety of chemical and biological 

methods. Actions taken were approved integrated weed management practices (BHNF EA 

2003), and mostly financed by KV dollars from previous timber sales. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 173 

Biological control sites were established on 45 new sites in 2009 and 2010, within the project area 

with Aphthona flea beetles for leafy spurge control and Canada thistle Urophora gall flies. Aggressive 

biological control methods help establish insect colonies to control the spread of leafy spurge and 

Canada thistle. Monitoring of sites occurs and depleted insect colonies may be re-stocked. 

Field evaluations are conducted in the project area to assess effectiveness of chemical and 

biological control measures, determine and document losses of productive vegetation, and locate 

areas of new infestations of noxious and invasive weeds. Established noxious weed populations

within the project area have been mapped using GPS units. County and private lands within and 

adjacent of the project area have established noxious weed populations that have been identified 

through mapping and coordination with the Pennington County Weed and Pest Supervisor. 

Almost all efforts are being recorded with GPS units to monitor for new weed invasions. NFS 

roads and trails, and county roads within the project perimeter have been GPS’d to facilitate 

monitoring of noxious weed spread into and within the project area. Projected rate of spread per 

year for noxious weeds could be as high as 10 to 20 percent of the known acres with any ground 

disturbance. New weed areas are likely to be established with any additional ground disturbance 

because of the viability and distribution of weed seed in the project area. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Under existing conditions, continued designated motorized route travel may increase the spread of 

noxious weeds and invasive plants. Even with normal road/trail use and maintenance of NFS and 

county roads within the project area, the projected rate of the spread of noxious weeds under no 

action may be as high as 10% per year, with the 634 acres of known noxious weed sites potentially 

serving as seed sources. Any activity off designated routes may also increase the percentage of 

noxious weed infestations and the possibility of new exotics being introduced into previously uninfested locations. The noxious weed infestations generally increase with the event of a wildfire, 

based on experience from Jasper (2000) and Battle Creek (2002) fires. It is believed this occurs 

due to the abundance of weed seed throughout the Black Hills area. Noxious weeds may have a 

high spread rate even when left alone without any treatment. For example, noxious weeds such as 

leafy spurge can increase in area by typical seed spread methods and by rhizomes; seeds may be 

expelled up to 15 feet in any direction. A wildfire area generally shows increases in noxious 

weeds if left alone without an integrated weed management treatment approach. Known noxious 

weed sites and new infestations would be managed as funds become available. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

With the addition of 19,304 acres of commercial and non-commercial treatment, the associated 

ground disturbance would potentially increase the presence of noxious weeds to a greater degree 

than Alternative A. This is because there are more acres of ground disturbance from logging 

activities. Mitigation efforts generally reduce the amount and rate of increase of noxious weeds. 

In addition, 27 miles of road reconstruction (648 acres), 79 miles of pre-use maintenance (1,896 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 174 

acres) and five miles of new construction (120 acres) would have to be monitored and possibly 

treated for noxious weeds. Additionally, roads going into and out of the project area would have 

to be monitoring and probably treated for noxious weeds dispersed by hauling traffic. 

Noxious weed seed stock is in all areas of the Forest, and most weeds have a seed viability rate 

much more than a native plant. For example, Canada thistle seeds may be viable as long as 30 

years. Most other noxious weeds are viable from seven to ten years. Any ground disturbance 

creates a favorable seedbed to establish noxious weed populations, especially in and around 

skidder areas. Noxious weeds would establish quickly in these areas since they are geared to 

rapid growth in vacant sites. Native vegetation may take longer to re-establish in comparison to 

noxious weeds. Weeds take rapid advantage of the available local resources (e.g., soil nutrients 

and soil moisture), since little vegetative competition is present or newly established. 

During the timber harvest efforts, vehicles and heavy equipment would move throughout the sale 

area(s) and through the weed infested lands. Many vehicles and heavy equipment used in and 

around the sale area have the potential to carry noxious weed seeds and increase the potential for 

noxious weed infestations. This potential is estimated at 10-20% of the known 634 acres with 

ground disturbance. 

Logging trucks are hauling the logs out using existing or newly built roads. Some of these roads 

are to be closed after the sale has ended. These roads would also need to be treated for noxious 

weeds due to disturbed ground and debris coming off the equipment and logs. Avoidance of 

noxious weed areas is almost impossible during a timber sale since almost all areas in the Forest 

have an established noxious weed seed stock. Ground disturbance from skidder trails and 

operations on landings created during the timber harvesting efforts are expected to further 

increase noxious and invasive weed infestations. 

Use of NFS roads, county roads, and the NFS trails are expected to continue to contribute to the 

spread of noxious weeds. 

Wildfires would also increase the spread of noxious weeds. Potential for large wildfires would 

be less than Alternative A since fuels are treated by harvest activity (see Fire and Fuels Section). 

Wildfire areas may need to be managed for noxious weed infestation since disturbed soils from 

fire line activities and/or high intensity burn areas may create suitable seedbeds. 

The 15,990 acres of prescribed fire may also increase the chances of noxious weed spread on up 

to 20% of burned acres. This estimate is based on past experiences with prescribed burning on 

the Mystic Ranger District. These prescribed fire acres need to be monitored, and treated if 

necessary as soon as the weather permits and funding becomes available. 

Cumulative Effects 

Since weed seed appears to be present in many areas throughout the Black Hills, any ground 

disturbance may create a favorable seedbed for noxious weed establishment, especially around 

areas of high use. Such areas may include NFS roads, county roads, NFS trails, locations where 

livestock or big game congregate, large events on the Forest under special use permit, plus 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 175 

wildfire impacts and prescribed fire activities. Up to an estimated 10-20% of each ground 

disturbance may be added to the known 634 acres of noxious weeds and would need prompt 

treatment to avoid yearly increases in infested acres. Past experience with wildfires and 

prescribed fires indicates noxious weed infestations from these two disturbances have the 

potential to increase at similar rates found with logging activities. The new Travel Management 

Plan would continue recreation activities in the project area because of the routes designated 

open for road and trail use by the public, and the Black Hills in general being a destination area 

for Forest visitors with motorized vehicles. Additionally, the project area would still need to be 

monitored for new species and new infestations in areas of previous soil disturbance from past 

timber sales (e.g., Bullock Timber Sale). 

WILDLIFE 

Affected Environment 

This section documents the potential effects to wildlife resources associated with the Calumet 

Project Area (CPA). It also addresses pertinent Forest Plan direction (e.g., Objectives, 

Standards, and Guidelines). The species included belong to a subset of the special status 

categories designated through various laws, policies, and directives. The report also provides 

information and analyses for a few special habitats and features that are necessary for accurate 

species analyses, and that are not fully addressed in the other specialist’s reports. The habitats, 

features, and species status categories are as follows: 

• Aspen 

• Bur Oak 

• Meadow 

• Riparian 

• Snags (standing dead trees) 

• Very Large Trees 

• Management Indicator Species (MIS) 

• Species of Local Concern (SOLC) 

• Migratory Birds 

Species listed as Endangered, Threatened or Proposed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service 

(USFWS), or as Sensitive by the US Forest Service (USFS) are not included in this report, but 

instead can be found in the CPA Biological Assessment / Biological Evaluation (BA/BE). Fish 

and rare plant species are not included because they are found in separate specialist’s reports 

(Fisheries and Botany, respectively). 

Ponderosa pine is not considered a special habitat in this report because it dominates the project 

area. Various structural stages of pine may be of pronounced importance to some MIS or SOLC 

wildlife; please see the CPA Silviculturist Report for a more detailed analyses of structural 

stages, and individual species analyses later in this report for implications to wildlife. 

This report relies upon information originally presented in other project- and Forest-level 

documents. Most notable among them are the Silviculturist Report for the CPA, the FY 2009 Forest 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 176 

Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report (FPMER; USDA Forest Service 2010a), and the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement for the Phase II Forest Plan Amendment (Phase II FEIS; USDA 

Forest Service 2005a). Location data (e.g., species occurrences) were obtained from several sources, 

including corporate databases, district files, and personal observations during field visits. 

Habitat Communities and Habitat Features 

Aspen (Populus Tremloides)

Forest Plan Objective 201 encourages a Forest-wide increase in aspen to 92,000 acres. 

According to FPMER, approximately half of that exists currently (45,805 acres). 

Approximately 881 acres are typed as aspen in the CPA, which is approximately 3% of the total 

project acreage, and nearly 2% of the Forest-wide Aspen total. Additional acres (750) of aspen 

are present, but are dominated by (and classified as) ponderosa pine. Although these acres are 

not currently identified as aspen in the database, they could be converted if enough pine is 

removed to shift stand dominance to aspen. 

Aspen is an early seral species that requires significant sunlight. Historically, recurrent fire 

helped perpetuate aspen. Fire stimulates new growth from root “suckers.” Fire also kills 

conifers, which compete with aspen for valuable sunlight and water. Fire suppression during the 

past century has affected aspen by limiting new growth and allowing conifer encroachment. 

Refer to the CPA silviculturist report for additional discussion on aspen. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Aspen 

Alternative A would not implement any hardwood restoration treatments. Mountain pine beetle 

(MPB) related mortality would increase in existing pine stands, which could be a benefit for 

aspen. However, this would be difficult to quantify. In areas where MPB related mortality is not 

an issue; pine encroachment would continue in the existing acres of aspen stands. Therefore, this 

alternative would not have a direct influence on meeting aspen Objective 201. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Aspen 

The proposed action would result in pine removal within and adjacent to aspen stands (881 

acres)(hardwood restoration). In addition, 750 acres of mixed pine and aspen stands that are 

currently classified as pine cover type would receive hardwood restoration treatments, and would 

be reclassified to aspen after treatment. Approximately 244 acres of pine would be removed 

adjacent to existing stands. Aspen acreage could potentially increase by approximately 994 

acres. This would boost the total CPA acreage to roughly 1,875 acres, which would have a direct 

influence on meeting aspen Objective 201. 

Bur Oak (Quercus Macrocarpa)

Forest Plan Objective 201 encourages a Forest-wide increase in bur oak to 16,000 acres. 

According to FPMER, approximately 13,556 acres of bur oak currently exist. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 177 

Approximately 513 acres are typed as bur oak in the CPA, which is approximately 2% of the 

total project acreage, and nearly 4% of the Forest-wide Bur Oak total. Additional acres (325) of 

bur oak are present, but are dominated by (and classified as) ponderosa pine. Although these 

acres are not currently identified as bur oak in the database, they could be converted if enough 

pine is removed to shift stand dominance to oak. 

On the Black Hills National Forest, bur oak grows at low elevations at the ponderosa pine forest 

and grassland ecotone. It can range in size from a shrub under a pine canopy at higher elevations 

to a tree up to 21 m (69 ft) tall along stream bottoms at lower elevations (Severson and Kranz 

1978). Fire suppression during the past century has affected bur oak by limiting new growth and 

allowing conifer encroachment. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Bur Oak 

Alternative A would implement no hardwood restoration treatments. MPB mortality would 

increase in existing pine stands, which could be a benefit for bur oak. However, this would be 

difficult to quantify. In areas where MPB related mortality is not an issue; pine encroachment 

would continue in the existing acres of aspen stands. Therefore, this alternative would not have a 

direct influence on meeting bur oak Objective 201. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Bur Oak 

The proposed action would result in pine removal within and adjacent to bur oak stands (513 

acres) (hardwood retention/restoration). In addition, 325 acres of mixed pine and bur oak stands 

that are currently classified as pine cover type would receive hardwood retention/restoration 

treatments, and would be reclassified to bur oak after treatment. Approximately 158 acres of pine 

would be removed adjacent to existing stands. Bur oak acreage could potentially increase by 

approximately 483 acres. This would boost the total CPA acreage to roughly 996 acres, which 

would have a direct influence on meeting bur oak Objective 201. 

Meadow

Forest Plan Objective 205 encourages the Forest to manage for 3,600 acres of meadows. 

According to the Silviculturist Report, approximately 1,180 acres of grass sites occur in the 

CPA, with an additional 812 acres of grassland with a ponderosa pine cover type. In other

words, there are more acres that currently or potentially function as meadows than are reflected 

in the database. Nineteen hundred and ninety two acres represents approximately 7% of the 

Calumet Project Area (CPA). 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Meadows 

Alternative A would have no meadow restoration treatments. Meadows may continue to increase 

through MPB related mortality and wildfires. This increase could prove to be detrimental in areas 

where the fuel load may be high. Soil sterilization can occur if a wildfire burns very hot, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 178 

ultimately affecting grassland establishment in the short-term. Conversely, in areas where MPB 

infestation is not as big an issue, conifers would continue to encroach into meadows. This would 

ultimately reduce the quality and amount of meadows across the project area. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Meadows 

The proposed action proposes meadow enhancement treatments. See the Silviculturist Report 

for specific details. In summary, pine would be removed from nearly 1,500 acres of meadows 

and draw bottoms, and from many additional, small openings that occur within pine dominated 

forests. The Silviculturist Report estimates that meadows would be increased by 335 acres with 

full implementation. Therefore, Alternative B would be consistent with Objective 205. 

Riparian Habitat

Forest Plan Objective 213 encourages management that maintains riparian area diversity, physical 

structure and size. There are also riparian area objectives (i.e., 214, 215) that promote active 

restoration of riparian habitats; however, riparian restoration falls outside the scope of this HFRA 

project, and there are no expectations to influence those objectives. 

Riparian habitats are typically very narrow, and are not well sampled during the Forest’s 

corporate vegetation inventory process. Consequently, the CPA vegetation database contains no 

acres typed as riparian. However, small inclusions of riparian vegetation do exist along some of 

the drainage bottoms within stands typed as ponderosa pine or some other cover type. Plants

found in these drainages may include river birch, paper birch, aspen, hazelnut, bur oak, white 

spruce, sedges, and rushes. Not all of these are riparian obligates, but they are usually species 

with higher moisture requirements than are found on most adjacent uplands. Pine may also be 

present, although it is not considered a riparian species. Because riparian areas are not quantified 

in the CPA vegetation dataset, they will be discussed in qualitative terms only. See the CPA 

botany and hydrology report for more information. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Riparian Habitat 

Alternative A would have no direct effects to riparian areas, and would fully maintain existing riparian 

characteristics in the short term. In the long-term MPB mortality would increase, amplifying the risk 

of wildfire. Riparian areas and associated plant species are typically fire resistant, but could be 

indirectly affected by an increased sediment load, if the area were to flood post wildfire. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Riparian Habitat 

Riparian areas are not the focus of any treatments in the action alternative. It is possible that pine 

could occasionally be removed from riparian habitats. However, limited pine removal could 

reduce competition and potentially result in increased riparian plant growth. 

Standards 1301 through 1306 reduce the potential of riparian degradation by dictating that 

riparian areas be managed for long-term health and sustainability. More specifically, Standard 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 179 

1306 prohibit log landings, decks, and mechanical slash piling within riparian areas unless 

riparian integrity can be protected. Guidelines 9107 and 9108 prohibit vehicles from entering 

perennial streams where resource damage would occur, and restrict vehicular traffic in riparian 

areas to established roads and trails. Furthermore, Guidelines 3211 and 3212 provide for 

vegetation management design to maintain or improve wildlife habitat and stream stability. It is 

understood that these standards would be equally met in Alternative B, and that any residual 

effects will be inconsequential to riparian diversity, physical structure and size. Therefore, 

Alternative B would meet the intent of Objective 213. 

Snags 

The Forest Plan sets an objective (211) to provide an average of three hard snags per acre in each 

Management Area (MA), well-dispersed across the Forest. These snags should be greater than 9” 

dbh and at least 25’ tall; one-quarter of the total should be greater than 14”dbh. This objective 

applies to the Forest-wide scale. According to the Phase II FEIS, snag densities vary by structural 

stage, fire history, and several other factors. Therefore, it is not reasonable to expect a uniform 

density across the Forest. However, by following the MA structural stage objectives, the Phase II 

FEIS asserts that an average of three snags per acre would be provided. The Forest is currently 

meeting or exceeding the Forest-wide snag density objective (USDA Forest Service 2010a). 

There are no Land Resource Management Plan (LRMP) objectives that define desired snag 

densities within a project area. However, Standard 2301 states if snag densities within a project 

area are below the Forest-wide objective, then all snags must be retained unless they are a safety 

hazard. If the project area meets the Forest-wide objective, then only snags greater than 20” dbh 

must be retained. The snag density within the CPA is estimated at four hard snags per acre. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Snags 

Both alternatives are consistent with Standard 2301, because snag harvest is not part of any alternative. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Snags 

In Alternative A, snag densities would increase due to MPB related mortality. However, MPB 

created snags are short-lived on the landscape, with fall rates between 5-10 years (Schmid et 

al.2009). Coincidently, this could also increase the wildfire hazard due to the increased fuel load. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Snags 

In the proposed action, silvicultural treatments in the CPA are specifically designed to increase tree 

vigor, increase tree resistance to mountain pine beetles, and decrease severity of wildfire. These 

conditions would decrease tree mortality rates from what might naturally occur. Therefore, it is 

reasonable to assume that snag recruitment in the CPA could be reduced by Alternative B. 

However, there is a potential for some recruitment in the action alternative, because it is likely that 

some mortality would occur as a result of prescribed fire. Conversely, most of the mortality would 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 180 

likely occur within a few years of burning, and therefore, fire would have little mitigating effect on 

long-term recruitment. 

It is possible that some snags would be cut for safety reasons, and that some snags may be 

accidentally knocked over during live tree harvest operations. Existing snags could also be 

consumed by prescribed fire. The potential decrease in snags from these possibilities is expected 

to be low and inconsequential to snag density at both the project and Forest-wide scales. 

According to the Phase II FEIS, snag recruitment is not expected to be a problem at the Forest-wide 

scale as long as management actions contribute to meeting the overall MA structural stage objectives. 

The Silviculturist Report shows that, by-and-large, that the CPA action alternative (Alt B) would not 

considerably change the Forest-wide Structural Stage (SS) percentages. In Management Area (MA) 

5.1 there were no changes in the percentage of any structural stages. In MA 5.4 there is a 1% increase 

towards the FP objective for SS 2 and SS 3A. Furthermore, structural stages 4B and 4C decreased in 

Management Area 5.4 by 1% towards FP objectives, while structural stage 4A increased 1% away 

from FP objectives, and SS 3B and SS 3C decreased 1% away from FP objectives. 

Very Large Trees

The Forest Plan structural stage objectives specify that at least 10% of structural stage 4 in MA 

5.1 and 5.4 should be in the “very large” tree size category. This category is achieved when the 

majority of a stand’s basal area is contributed by trees >16” dbh. The objective applies to MAs 

at the Forest-wide scale, not within the CPA. 

A stand’s tree size can be directly increased by removing small diameter trees. It can also be 

increased slowly over long periods of time through natural growth. Positive benefits from direct 

increases in very large tree habitat result in reduced competition with smaller trees. This 

understory reduction mimics the effects from frequent fire; competition from numerous smaller 

trees would decrease, ladder fuels would be reduced, and stand resiliency to fire and insects 

would increase. Furthermore, removing smaller trees could help create or restore the type of old 

growth stand that is characterized by open understories (Mehl 1992). These park-like stands are 

relatively limited in the Black Hills due to the absence of frequent low intensity fire, but they 

provide a structure that is important to some wildlife species (e.g., pygmy nuthatch, northern 

flying squirrel, etc.). 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Very Large Trees 

Tree size data are displayed in the Silviculturist Report. The Forest-wide tree size objectives 

(i.e., >10%) are currently being met or exceeded in MA 5.1 (13%), but not quite in MA 5.4 (9%). 

Alternative A could have an indirect effect on the Forest-wide percentages. MPB mortality and 

the wildfire hazard would continue to increase; jeopardizing the survival of very large trees. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 181 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Very Large Trees 

The proposed action would maintain conformity with the very large tree objective in MA’s 5.1 and 

5.4. This alternative would have a greater potential to maintain very large trees and mature pine 

stages in the long-term, by reducing the hazard of MPB related mortality and wildfire in the area. 

The Forest Plan Objectives do not include structural stage 5 (i.e., late succession or “old 

growth”) in the very large tree size requirements. This is because all of structural stage 5 is 

dominated by trees >16” dbh (i.e., the stage is defined by very large tree size). Ecologically 

speaking, structural stage 5 functions the same as the subset of structural stage 4 that has a very 

large tree size designation. For this reason, structural stage 5 will often be included in speciesspecific habitat discussions and analyses later in this report. It should also be noted that 

vegetation treatments in structural stage 5 are not planned in the CPA, except to enhance or 

maintain late successional characteristics. 

Special Status Species 

Table 3-31 provides the full list of MIS and SOLC that are applicable to any portion of the Black 

Hills National Forest (BHNF). The table also provides a basic habitat description for each 

species, and discloses whether that habitat is likely to occur within the CPA. Only those species 

with habitat in the CPA will be analyzed in subsequent text. The depth and content of analysis 

varies among species because each status category has different regulatory requirements, and 

because individual species have varying levels of information about them. 

Table 3-31 Identification of Special Status Species and Rationale for Project Level Analysis. Species Listed in 

Alphabetical Order within Major Life Form Groups. 

Birds Status Species/Habitat 

Present? 

Habitat Description1 & Rationale for 

Analysis 

American 

Dipper 

(Cinclus 

mexicanus)

SOLC No 

Swift-flowing montane streams. In Black Hills, 

restricted to Spearfish, Whitewood and Rapid 

Creeks & their tributaries. 

Black-andWhite Warbler 

(Mniotilta 

varia)

SOLC Yes 

Bur oak woodlands and associated edges at lower 

elevations (USDA Forest Service 2010). Habitat 

present. 

Black-backed 

Woodpecker 

(Picoides 

arcticus) 

MIS Yes 

Recently burned areas, late successional or dense 

mature forests, and forests with high mountain 

beetle populations (USDA Forest Service 2010). 

Forested habitat present. 

Broad-winged 

Hawk 

(Buteo 

platypterus)

SOLC Yes 

Found almost exclusively in extensive aspen 

stands in northern Black Hills and Bearlodge 

Mountains. However, species is known to use a 

mix of ponderosa pine and deciduous habitat. 

Habitat is present 

Brown Creeper 

(Certhia MIS Yes Late successional ponderosa pine and white spruce. Pine habitat present, limited spruce. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 182 

americana) 

Cooper’s Hawk 

(Accipiter 

cooperii)

SOLC Yes Uses a variety of habitats, including ponderosa 

pine. Habitat present. 

Goldencrowned 

Kinglet 

(Regulus 

satrapa)

MIS No 

Primarily spruce forests, including forests that 

have spruce as a minor component. Very limited 

habitat present. 

Grasshopper 

Sparrow 

(Ammodramus 

savannarum) 

MIS Yes Native mixed-grass prairies, especially in 

southern Black Hills. Habitat is present. 

Northern Sawwhet Owl

(Aegolius 

acadicus)

SOLC Yes Forest habitat generalist; dense coniferous or 

mixed forest. Habitat present. 

Pygmy 

Nuthatch 

(Sitta pygmaea)

SOLC Yes Mature ponderosa pine stands with large trees and 

snags. Habitat present. 

Ruffed Grouse 

(Bonasa 

umbellus)

MIS Yes Forests containing aspen or other hardwoods. 

Habitat present. 

Sharp-shinned 

Hawk 

(Accipiter 

striatus)

SOLC Yes 

A variety of forested areas, but nesting habitat 

typically restricted to dense young conifer stands. 

Habitat present. 

Song Sparrow 

Melospiza 

melodia

MIS Yes Closely associated with riparian and wetland 

habitats. Habitat present. 

Mammals 

Beaver 

(Castor 

canadensis) 

MIS Yes Lakes, rivers, streams, and marshes with 

perennial water. Habitat present. 

Long-eared 

Myotis 

(Myotis evotis)

SOLC Yes Coniferous montane habitats. Habitat present. 

Long-legged 

Myotis 

(Myotis volans)

SOLC Yes Coniferous montane habitats. Habitat present. 

Meadow 

Jumping 

Mouse 

(Zapus 

hudsonius) 

SOLC Yes Strongly associated with riparian habitats along 

small streams in meadows. Habitat present. 

Mountain Goat 

(Oreamnos 

americanus)

SOLC No 

Rugged terrain with cliffs, rock faces, ledges and 

talus slopes. Limited primarily to Black Elk 

Wilderness Area and Norbeck Wildlife Preserve. 

Northern SOLC Yes Boreal forests with coniferous or mixed 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 183 

Flying Squirrel 

(Glaucomys 

sabrinus)

coniferous-deciduous trees. Habitat present. 

Northern 

Myotis 

(Myotis 

septentrionalis)

SOLC Yes Coniferous montane habitats. Habitat present. 

Rocky 

Mountain 

Bighorn Sheep 

(Ovis 

canadensis)

SOLC Yes 

Cliffs, rock outcrops, and nearby meadows. 

Limited primarily to areas around Sheridan Lake, 

Dark Canyon (Rapid Creek), Spring Creek, and 

Custer State Park. Habitat present. 

Small-footed 

Myotis 

(Myotis 

ciliolabrum)

SOLC Yes 

Variable habitats, but usually associated with 

rocky areas like bluffs, dissected breaks, ridges, 

cliffs and major rock outcrops. Habitat present. 

White-tailed 

Deer 

(Odocoileus 

virginianus)

MIS Yes Uses a variety of habitats including pine forests. 

Habitat present. 

Invertebrates 

Atlantis 

Fritillary 

(Speyeria 

atlantis 

pahasapa)

SOLC Yes 

Wet meadows and boggy areas nears springs and 

headwaters of small streams. Habitat potentially 

present. 

Callused 

Vertigo 

(Vertigo 

arthuri) 

SOLC Yes 

Moist, relatively undisturbed forest with diverse 

understories, deep litter, and abundant woody 

material. Calcareous or schist soils. Habitat 

present. 

Frigid 

Ambersnail 

(Catinella 

gelida) 

SOLC Yes 

Limestone or schist soils. Usually in open 

ponderosa pine forest (sometimes spruce) with a 

deciduous tree and shrub component. Habitat 

present. 

Mystery 

Vertigo 

(Vertigo 

paradoxa)

SOLC Yes 

On limestone or schist soils, usually in spruce 

forests (but sometimes pine) with relatively 

closed canopy, abundant litter, and welldeveloped understories. Habitat present. 

Striate Disc 

(Discus 

shimekii)

SOLC Yes 

Usually limestone but sometimes schist soils, in 

litter of rich mesic forests, generally on shaded, 

north-facing slope bases; often bordering or 

ranging slightly onto stream flood plains. 

Tawny 

Crescent 

(Phyciodes 

batesii)

SOLC Yes Wet meadows and stream bottoms near forested 

openings. Habitat potentially present. 

1Habitat descriptions summarized from USDA Forest Service (2005) unless otherwise noted. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 184 

Management Indicator Species 

The criteria used to determine which Forest Plan MIS would be evaluated for this project was the 

presence of habitat within the CPA. The species evaluated are: 

 Beaver Song Sparrow Brown Creeper 

 Ruffed Grouse White-tailed Deer 

 Black-backed Woodpecker Grasshopper Sparrow 

Pertinent Forest Plan Direction: Objective 238 addresses MIS. In summary, the objective leads 

the BHNF to maintain or enhance habitat for MIS, as outlined through other objectives (mainly 

vegetation objectives). For example, the ruffed grouse habitat objective relies on specific direction 

relating to aspen (i.e., Objective 201), because aspen is the primary habitat used by grouse, and it 

was what the grouse was chosen to be an indicator for. To continue following this example, any 

actions that allow or contribute to a Forest-wide increase in aspen would demonstrate progress 

toward Objective 238a for ruffed grouse, because the recent Phase II Amendment FEIS shows that 

the Forest currently has less aspen than is called for in Objective 201. 

As demonstrated above, the parent objectives must be evaluated before the MIS objectives can 

be. In most instances, these evaluations are presented in either the Silviculturist Report, or in the 

Habitats and Features portion of this report (i.e., the Snag, Very Large Tree, Aspen, and Riparian 

sections). Therefore, it is imperative that the reader review these analyses in order to fully 

understand effects to MIS. 

For each MIS, the analyses below focus on how the project would influence the Forest-wide 

population trend, Forest-wide habitat trend, and attainment of MIS Objective 238. Effects 

disclosures typically center around changes to habitat, because this is invariably where the 

effects to wildlife are most certain and pronounced. Although project activities could on rare 

occasion cause injury or mortality to MIS, the likelihood of such effects are very low, and at 

most, only a few individuals would be affected (i.e., there would be no potential to affect 

populations). Therefore, this category of effects will not be further discussed for any species. 

Trend data for all species was obtained from the FY 2009 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation 

Report (FPMER; USDA Forest Service 2010a) unless otherwise indicated. According to the 

Phase II FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a), none of the Forest Plan MIS were selected because 

of concerns regarding species viability; therefore, no viability analyses are presented for MIS in 

this report. In the case where an MIS is also designated a Region 2 sensitive species (i.e., blackbacked woodpecker), a viability analysis is provided in the BA/BE. 

Beaver 

The beaver was selected as a Forest Plan MIS for its link to riparian and hardwood forests. The 

Forest Plan vegetation objectives that most closely apply to beaver in CPA are 201 and 213. The 

desired outcome of Objective 201 is a minimum of 92,000 acres of aspen on the Forest, which is

nearly a doubling of current acres. Objective 213 encourages maintenance of riparian area 

diversity, physical structure and size. See the Aspen and Riparian sections of this report for 

more information about these objectives. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 185 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a; Sec 3-3.3.8.1) provides information 

on the beaver, and this source is summarized in this paragraph with no additional or original

referencing. Beaver occur throughout much of North America. They are semi-aquatic, and in the 

Black Hills and elsewhere, are widely distributed in rivers, lakes, and marshes. Permanent water 

must be present. Beaver require aspen, willow, or cottonwood as a main food source. Beaver also 

use these and other woody plants to construct their dams and lodges. Beaver are classified as 

furbearers in both South Dakota and Wyoming, and as such are legally harvested in both states. 

Baseline beaver surveys conducted on the Forest during 2004 indicated 259 - 392 beaver existed 

in nearly 80 known colonies. The long-term beaver population trend has increased in the Black 

Hills since heavy trapping was moderated by hunting regulations. The long-term habitat trend 

suggests decline, as evidenced by the decreasing quality of riparian habitats since European 

settlement, and a decrease in the amount of aspen over at least the past 30 years. More recent, 

shorter-term habitat and population trends are unknown, but are expected to be clarified with 

implementation of newly developed Forest-wide monitoring protocols. 

In 2007, beaver abundance and distribution was monitored. Surveys were performed via helicopter to 

locate beaver food caches. Preliminary data resulted in a food cache density of approximately one 

cache for every 24 miles of perennial stream. Overall, 20 of the 52 6th level watersheds (38%) 

surveyed had beaver food caches present (USDA Forest Service 2009). 

Approximately 45,805 acres of aspen exist on the Forest. Approximately 881 acres of this 

occurs within the CPA. In total, nearly 3% of the CPA is comprised of aspen. No acres are 

typed as riparian. However, there are additional, but small amounts of both riparian and aspen 

habitats in stands dominated by pine or other species. 

Beaver colonies are known to exist within the CPA. Colonies are typically associated with 

streams and lakes with willows and/or aspen present at each site. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Beaver 

The following analysis incorporates information previously disclosed in the Aspen and Riparian 

sections of this report. Please see those sections for additional rationale and analyses. 

All alternatives are expected to maintain or enhance beaver habitat (Objective 238a). Alternative B 

would be the most favorable to beavers due to the expected increases in aspen. Increases in aspen 

habitat in Alternative B may contribute to a Forest-wide population increase when combined with 

other aspen restoration activities across the Forest. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Beaver 

Alternative A would not implement hardwood restoration treatments. MPB mortality would 

increase in existing pine stands, which could be a benefit for aspen. However, this would be

difficult to quantify. In areas where MPB related mortality isn’t an issue, pine encroachment would 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 186 

continue in the existing acres of aspen stands, affecting beaver food availability. This alternative 

would not have a direct influence on meeting aspen Objective 201. Alternative A would have no 

direct effects to riparian areas, and would fully maintain existing riparian characteristics in the 

short term. In the long-term MPB related mortality would increase, amplifying the wildfire 

hazard. Riparian areas and associated plant species are typically fire resistant, but could be 

indirectly affected by an increased sediment load, if the area were to flood post wildfire. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Beaver 

The proposed action would result in pine removal within and adjacent to aspen stands (881 acres) 

(hardwood retention/restoration). In addition, 750 acres of mixed pine and aspen stands that are 

currently classified as pine cover type would receive hardwood restoration treatments, and would 

be reclassified to aspen after treatment. Approximately 244 acres of pine would be removed 

adjacent to existing stands. Aspen acreage could potentially increase by approximately 994 acres. 

This would boost the total CPA acreage to roughly 1,875 acres, which would have a direct 

influence on meeting aspen Objective 201. 

In the action alternative, the occasional removal of pine from riparian zones could increase beaver 

habitat quality if it resulted in more aspen and/or willow growth. As shown in the Riparian 

section, riparian diversity, structure and size would be maintained through application of Standards 

and Guidelines. This would ensure that beaver habitat would also be maintained. All alternatives 

would be consistent with riparian Objective 213. 

Black-backed Woodpecker 

The black-backed woodpecker has dual management status; it is both an MIS and a Region 2 

sensitive species. To reduce redundancy, most life history, current condition, and predicted 

effects information are provided in one place: the sensitive species assessment (i.e., BA/BE). 

Only MIS-specific documentation requirements are provided here (e.g., trend information, 

analysis of Objective 238). 

The black-backed woodpecker was selected as a Forest Plan MIS for its link to burned forest, 

mature and late successional forest, insects, and snags. The Forest Plan vegetation objectives 

that most closely apply to the woodpecker in the CPA are 211 (snags), and 5.1-204 and 5.4-206 

(forest structural stages). The woodpecker MIS objective also mentions Objective 11-03, but 

this will not be evaluated here because areas with large, recent wildfires (i.e., within 5 years), do 

not exist in the CPA, and no salvage logging is proposed under any alternative. 

The Forest-wide population trend analysis reveals a notable increase and subsequent decrease in 

black-backed woodpecker densities (birds/km^2) in burned habitat from 2001 to 2007. However, in 

2009 these densities reached their highest levels. It is speculated that this increase in concentration 

could be from the amplified insect activity across the Forest (USDA Forest Service 2010a). 

Habitat trend analysis is more complicated because there are three preferred habitats to consider: 

recently burned areas (i.e., <5 years old), areas with large populations of bark beetles, and dense 

mature or late successional pine forests (i.e., structural stages 4C and 5). Overall, habitat for this 

species is being provided consistent with Objective 238b, Objective 221 and Objective 11-03. 

The “aging” of large burned areas, such as the Battle Creek Fire, into habitat less suitable for 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 187 

black-backed woodpeckers is likely being offset by the increasing acreage of insect-infested 

timber stands (USDA Forest Service 2010a). 

According to the CPA Silviculturist Report, there is an estimated total of 105,595 acres (MA’s 

5.1 and 5.4) of structural stages 4C and 5 ponderosa pine on the Forest. Approximately 3,688 

acres of 4C and 5 occur within the CPA. This amounts to 3% of the Forest-wide total habitat, 

and 13% of the total area within the CPA. 

The Forest Plan structural stage objectives all call for 5% of their respective MA’s to be 

managed for structural stage 4C, and 5% in structural stage 5. According to the Silviculturist 

Report, MAs 5.1 and 5.4 currently exceed the objective for 4C habitat Forest-wide, and both are 

moving toward the objective for structural stage 5. 

Another indicator of potential woodpecker habitat is the amount of area with a high hazard rating 

for mountain pine beetle attack. According to the CPA silviculturist Report, 14,045 acres (57%) 

of the CPA is currently rated as a high hazard. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Black-backed Woodpecker 

Because less than 1% of the Forest-wide woodpecker habitat would be affected under any 

alternative, all of the alternatives would be consistent with Objective 238b. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Black-backed Woodpecker 

Alternative A would not have a direct effect on the amount of 4C and 5 pine habitat or on snag 

availability within those habitats. However, over time, and in the absence of management action, 

MPB related mortality would decrease forest canopy closure and additional forest would shift 

towards lower structural stages. Snags could potentially increase in abundance in the short-term, 

but quality of these snags would decrease over the long term. The fuel hazard would also 

increase with MPB related mortality, escalating the threat of wildfire. 

The Silviculturist Report provides information and analyses on mountain pine beetle populations 

in the CPA, and is interpreted here for effects to the black-backed woodpecker. Alternative A 

would have no immediate effect on mountain pine beetle populations, and therefore would have 

no direct effect on this important woodpecker food source. MPB populations could continue to 

grow, and may continue at epidemic levels. This situation would provide the most food 

resources for woodpeckers compared to the action alternative. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Black-backed Woodpecker 

The proposed action and the concurrent MPB infestation would reduce the amount of forested 

(4C) woodpecker habitat present after treatment from 13% to 1% of the project area. This 

reduction occurs in the 4C structural stage (SS) because no treatments are proposed in SS 5. 

However, the very large tree component within MA 5.4 could slightly increase, allowing existing 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 188 

trees to succeed, due to treatments designed to increase average tree diameter by removing 

smaller trees in stands to be managed for late successional characteristics. 

As disclosed in the Snag section, the action alternative could decrease snag recruitment rates at 

the project scale. This could translate to reduced habitat quality and fewer woodpeckers within 

CPA over time. However, because the snag objective (211) would continue to be met at the 

Forest-wide scale, this component of woodpecker habitat would also be maintained at that scale. 

Alternative B would substantially reduce the MPB hazard to 9% (2,114 acres) of the project area 

being in the high insect hazard category, compared to the 57% found currently. 

Brown Creeper

The brown creeper was selected as a Forest Plan MIS for its link to dense mature pine forest, late 

successional pine forest, and spruce forest. The Forest Plan vegetation objectives that most 

closely apply to the creeper in the CPA are 5.1-204 and 5.4-206, which relate to structural stages 

of ponderosa pine. Objective 239-LVD relates to spruce, and is not significant to this project 

because spruce comprises less than 1% of the CPA, and is not a focus of proposed vegetation 

management activities. 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a; Sec 3-3.3.7.2) provides an 

overview of brown creeper requirements, and this source is summarized here with no additional 

or original referencing. Monitoring data collected on the Forest show that the species is well 

distributed but in low abundance here, and is closely associated with dense mature and late 

successional ponderosa pine stands (structural stages 4C and 5) and white spruce forests. Within 

that context, dead or decaying trees are particularly important because they provide nesting and 

foraging substrates. 

According to FPMER (USDA Forest Service 2010a), Forest-wide population trends have been 

stable prior to 2007. Relative densities declined for this species in 2007, compared to previous 

years, but have rebounded in 2009 in most habitats sampled. 

According to the CPA Silviculturist Report, there is an estimated total of 105,595 acres (MA’s 

5.1 and 5.4) of structural stages 4C and 5 ponderosa pine on the Forest and 25,749 acres of 

spruce. It is assumed that these figures represent the amount of brown creeper habitat on the 

Forest (131,344 acres total), although it is possible that not all of this habitat is occupied, and that 

other areas outside of this description may be occupied by creepers in very low densities. 

As presented in the Silviculturist Report, there are approximately 3,688 acres of 4C and 5 pine in 

and 24 acres of white spruce in the project area. This represents the total amount of creeper 

habitat in the CPA. It equals 3% of the Forest-wide total of brown creeper 4C and 5 pine habitat; 

and < 1% of the Forest-wide habitat total for white spruce. 

The Forest Plan vegetation objectives pertinent to the MIS brown creeper relate directly to 

structural stages of ponderosa pine in the CPA’s two MAs. The Objectives are, 5.1-204, and 5.4-

206. The objectives are similar in that they all call for 5% of their respective MA’s to be 

managed for structural stage 4C, and 5% in structural stage 5. According to Silviculturist 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 189 

Report, MAs 5.1 and 5.4 currently exceed the objective for 4C habitat Forest-wide, and both of 

them are moving toward the objective for stage 5. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Brown Creeper 

Alternative A would not have a direct effect on the amount of 4C and 5 pine habitat, or on snag 

availability within those habitats. Over time, and in the absence of management action, MPB 

related mortality would decrease forest canopy closure and additional forest would shift towards 

lower structural stages. Snags could potentially increase in abundance in the short term, but 

quality of these snags would decrease over the long-term. The fuel hazard would ultimately 

increase with MPB mortality, resulting in potential habitat loss due to the amplified threat of 

large-scale wildfire. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Brown Creeper 

The proposed action and the concurrent MPB infestation would reduce the amount of forested 

(4C) creeper habitat present after treatment from 13% to 1% of the project area. This reduction 

occurs in the 4C structural stage (SS) because no treatments are proposed in SS 5. However, the 

very large tree component within MA 5.4 could slightly increase, allowing existing trees to 

succeed, due to treatments designed to increase average tree diameter by removing smaller trees 

in stands to be managed for late successional characteristics. 

This reduction may decrease habitat for brown creepers within the CPA short-term. However, 

the action alternative has a greater potential to maintain very large trees and mature pine 

structural stages long-term by reducing the risk of MPB mortality and wildfire in the area. 

As disclosed in the Snag section, the action alternative could decrease snag recruitment rates at the 

project scale. This could translate to reduced habitat quality for brown creepers within CPA over 

time. However, because the snag objective (211) would continue to be met at the Forest-wide 

level, creeper habitat would be maintained at that scale. 

The action alternative is expected to maintain or enhance brown creeper habitat Forest-wide 

(Objective 238b). Approximately 1% of the Forest-wide brown creeper pine habitat would be 

affected under this alternative. Alternative B is expected to reduce the risk that mature forested 

habitat will be lost to MPB related mortality and stand-replacing fires. 

Ruffed Grouse 

The ruffed grouse was selected as a Forest Plan MIS for its link to aspen forests. The Forest Plan 

vegetation objective that most closely applies to ruffed grouse is 201, which encourages the 

Forest to provide at least 92,000 acres of aspen. 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a; Sec 3-3.3.7.5) provides

information on the ruffed grouse, and this source is summarized here with no additional or 

original referencing. Monitoring data collected on the Forest show that the species is 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 190 

widespread, but in low abundance. It is associated with aspen in a variety of structural stages. 

There are approximately 45,805 acres typed as aspen on the Forest. In the CPA, there are 

approximately 881 acres dominated by aspen. Both the Forest and the CPA have additional, but 

unquantifiable acres that have aspen as a minor component on them. 

According to FPMER (USDA Forest Service 2010a), the decline in aspen acres compared to 

historic conditions, has likely resulted in an associated population decline for ruffed grouse. A 

monitoring protocol has been developed to collect the necessary information for population trend 

analysis. See FPMER for more information about t monitoring protocol, and for existing survey 

data that applies outside of the CPA. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The following analyses incorporate information previously disclosed in the Aspen section of this 

report. Please see that section for additional rationale and analyses. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Ruffed Grouse 

Alternative A would implement no hardwood restoration treatments. MPB related mortality would 

increase in existing pine stands, which could be a benefit for aspen. However, this would be 

difficult to quantify. In areas where MPB mortality is not an issue, pine encroachment would 

continue in the existing acres of aspen stands. This alternative would not have a direct influence 

on meeting aspen Objective 201. 

In summary, Alternative A may not influence the attainment of MIS objective 238a, or notably 

influence Forest-wide population or habitat trends of ruffed grouse. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Ruffed Grouse 

The proposed action would result in pine removal within and adjacent to aspen stands (881 

acres)(hardwood retention/restoration). In addition, 750 acres of mixed pine and aspen stands 

that are currently classified as pine cover type would receive hardwood retention/restoration 

treatments, and would be reclassified to aspen after treatment. Approximately 244 acres of pine 

would be removed adjacent to existing stands. Aspen acreage could potentially increase by 

approximately 944 acres. This would boost the total CPA acreage to roughly 1,875 acres, which 

would have a direct influence on meeting aspen Objective 201. 

Alternative B would make progress toward enhancing ruffed grouse habitat (Objective 238a), 

and would positively affect the Forest-wide habitat trend. 

Song Sparrow

The song sparrow was selected as a Forest Plan MIS for its link to riparian areas. The Forest 

Plan vegetation objective that most closely applies to the song sparrow is Objective 213, which 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 191 

encourages management that maintains riparian area diversity, physical structure and size. There 

are other riparian area objectives (i.e., 213, 214, and 215) that promote active restoration of 

riparian habitats, but these fall outside the scope of this HFRA project, and there are no 

expectations to progress toward them. 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a; Sec 3-3.3.7.6) provides information 

on the song sparrow, and this source is summarized here with no additional or original referencing. 

Monitoring data show that the species is a summer resident of many Black Hills riparian areas, but 

it is most common in the northern Hills. It occurs mainly in streamside thickets, especially 

willows, and is dependent upon these habitats throughout the breeding season. 

According to FPMER (USDA Forest Service 2008), riparian habitats have decreased in quality 

since the pre-European settlement era, indicating a long-term declining habitat trend. Small 

riparian restoration projects have been implemented across the forest which may have a small 

positive influence on the habitat trend for song sparrows. A Forest-wide riparian habitat 

monitoring protocol has been developed, and is being implemented. (USDA Forest Service 

2005e – Monitoring Implementation Guide). 

Riparian habitats are typically very narrow, and are not well-sampled during the Forest’s 

corporate vegetation inventory process. Therefore, the vegetation database does not identify 

riparian habitats, and cannot be used to determine the amount or location of song sparrow habitat 

in the CPA. However, it is likely that suitable habitats are scattered around the project area in 

some of the drainages, and that song sparrows are present. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

All alternatives would meet the intent of MIS Objective 238a to maintain habitat for the song 

sparrow. It is unlikely that any alternative would have any influence on Forest-wide habitat or 

population trends. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Song Sparrow 

Alternative A would have no direct effects to riparian areas, and would fully maintain existing

riparian characteristics in the short term. In the long-term, MPB related mortality would 

increase, amplifying the hazard of wildfire. Riparian areas and associated plant species are 

typically fire resistant, but could be indirectly affected by an increased sediment load, if the area 

were to flood post wildfire. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Song Sparrow 

Riparian areas are not the focus of any treatments in the action alternative. It is possible that 

pine could occasionally be removed from riparian habitats. However, limited pine removal 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 192 

could reduce competition and potentially result in increased riparian plant growth, which would 

benefit song sparrow habitat. 

Standards 1301 through 1306 reduce the potential of riparian degradation by dictating that riparian 

areas be managed for long-term health and sustainability. More specifically, Standard 1306 

prohibits log landings, decks, and mechanical slash piling within riparian areas unless riparian 

integrity can be protected. Guidelines 9107 and 9108 prohibit vehicles from entering perennial 

streams where resource damage would occur, and restrict vehicular traffic in riparian areas to 

established roads and trails. It is assumed that these standards will be equally met in all action 

alternatives, and that any residual effects will be inconsequential to riparian diversity, physical 

structure and size. Therefore, the action alternative would meet the intent of Objective 213. 

White-tailed Deer 

The white-tailed deer was selected as a Forest Plan MIS mainly for its link to understory shrubs. 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a; Sec 3-3.3.8.2) provides pertinent 

information on the white-tailed deer, and this source is summarized here with no additional or 

original referencing. White-tails are widely distributed throughout most of North America. 

They occur year-round in the Black Hills, although they tend to use areas with higher elevation 

in summer than in winter. They require a diversity of habitat types including forests, meadows, 

and riparian areas. 

Hardwood forests, meadows, and riparian areas are particularly important because these are the 

sites that produce the most forage (e.g., aspen and various shrubs). 

Approximately 45,805 acres of aspen exist on the Forest. Approximately 881 acres occur within the 

CPA. This is nearly 2% of the Forest-wide Aspen total, and 3% of the CPA. There are currently 513 

acres are typed as bur oak in the CPA, which is approximately 2% of the total project acreage, and 

nearly 4% of the Forest-wide Bur Oak total. Meadow and riparian acreages are difficult to estimate at 

both the Forest-wide and CPA scale. Currently, about 1,180 acres in the CPA are classified as the 

grass covertype, which is probably a combination of meadows and grassy openings in the uplands. It 

is likely that additional meadows currently or potentially occur but are not represented in the database. 

No riparian areas are identified in the CPA vegetation database, but a few do occur. See the Aspen, 

Meadow, and Riparian sections for more information about these habitats. 

Deer can be sensitive to road traffic, especially where habituation does not readily occur (e.g., 

roads with sporadic traffic or low speed limits). Forest Plan Guideline 3203 recognizes this by 

directing the Forest to provide screening cover along at least 20% of arterial and collector roads. 

Screening cover is defined as any vegetation, topography (e.g., rock, ridges, steep slopes), or other 

features that would hide 90% of a deer standing within 200’ of a road. A roadside reconnaissance 

cover analysis was conducted for the CPA along all collector roads (i.e., Boulder Hill Road NFSR 

358, Calumet Road NFSR 392, and Horse Creek Road NFSR 243). The decision was made not to 

evaluate arterial roads because these are high-speed, high traffic roads (e.g., US, state, and county). 

They are also roads where habituation readily occurs, and deer often graze nearby. The analysis 

determined that approximately 81% of the collector roads provide screening cover through 

vegetation and topography. This demonstrates that Guideline 3203 is being exceeded. Therefore, 

screening cover does not require further evaluation for this project. Standard 5.4-9101 and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 193 

Guideline 5.4- 9102 provide additional direction pertaining to transportation and travel; restricting 

travel within certain areas of MA 5.4 between December 15 through May 15. 

According to the FPMER, the Black Hills white-tailed deer population peaked in 2006 and has

indicated a gradual decline since then. The Forest-wide habitat trend is stable or increasing. 

Open habitat that provides forage is increasing and screening cover is stable. The most recent 

Black Hills population estimate is approximately 39,000 white-tailed deer (Huxoll 2010). 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects – White-tailed Deer 

Both alternatives would increase foraging habitat quality for deer. As shown in the Aspen, 

meadow, and Bur Oak section, both alternatives would make progress toward achieving aspen 

and bur oak Objective 201 and meadow Objective 205. 

All alternatives would maintain or increase foraging habitat for deer, and be consistent with MIS 

Objective 238a. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects –White-tailed Deer 

Alternative A would result in no hardwood or meadow restoration treatments. MPB related 

mortality would continue to increase, amplifying the wildfire hazard. This could benefit these 

habitats by creating more. Conversely, conifers do provide cover for white-tailed deer (i.e., escape 

and thermal). MPB related mortality could reduce this basic need. In areas where the MPB 

infestation is not as big a problem; pine encroachment would continue to occur in these important 

areas, and over time, deer foraging quality could decrease. 

Alternative A would have no direct effects to riparian areas, and would fully maintain existing riparian 

characteristics in the short term. In the long-term MPB related mortality would increase, amplifying 

the hazard for wildfire. Riparian areas and associated plant species are typically fire resistant, but 

could be indirectly affected by an increased sediment load, if the area were to flood post wildfire. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – White-tailed Deer 

The proposed action would implement 1,875 acres of aspen enhancement treatments, and 1,500 acres 

of meadow restoration. Additional treatments in bur oak would increase this important habitat type by 

approximately 483 acres. These treatments would occur through mechanical and prescribed fire. 

Riparian areas are not the focus of any treatments within the CPA. However, the occasional removal 

of pine from riparian habitats could increase the quality of deer foraging habitat if it resulted in more 

riparian growth. As shown in the Riparian section, riparian diversity, structure and size would be 

maintained in the action alternative, through application of Standards and Guidelines. This would 

ensure that this deer habitat would not deteriorate. Consistency with riparian Objective 213 would 

remain intact. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 194 

Grasshopper Sparrow 

The grasshopper sparrow has dual management status; it is both an MIS and a Region 2 sensitive 

species. To reduce redundancy, most life history, current condition, and predicted effects information 

are provided in one place: the sensitive species assessment (i.e., BA/BE). Only MIS-specific 

documentation requirements are provided here (e.g., trend information, analysis of Objective 238). 

The grasshopper sparrow was selected as a Forest Plan MIS for its link to grassland habitats. The 

Forest Plan objective that most closely applies to the sparrow is Objective 205. 

According to the FPMER (USDA Forest Service 2008), density estimates for the sparrow have 

continued to increase since 2001. Grassland habitats are currently being maintained, but 

additional time is needed to meet Objective 205. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Grasshopper Sparrow

Alternative A would have no meadow restoration treatments. Meadows may continue to increase 

through MPB related mortality and hazards for wildfire. This increase could prove to be 

detrimental in areas where the fuel load may be high. Soil sterilization can occur if a wildfire 

burns very hot, ultimately affecting grassland establishment in the short term. Conversely, in areas 

where MPB infestation is not as big an issue, conifers would continue to encroach into meadows. 

This would ultimately reduce the quality and amount of meadows across the project area 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Grasshopper Sparrow 

Alternative B proposes meadow enhancement treatments. See the Silviculturist Report for specific 

details. In summary, pine would be removed from nearly 1,500 acres of meadows and draw 

bottoms, and from many additional, small openings that occur within pine dominated forests. The 

Silviculturist Report estimates that meadows would be increased by 335 acres with full 

implementation. Therefore Objective 205 will be sustained. 

Species of Local Concern 

Broad-Winged Hawk Pygmy Nuthatch Black and White Warbler 

Northern Flying Squirrel Rocky Mtn Bighorn Sheep Cooper’s hawk 

Northern Saw-whet Owl Sharp-shinned Hawk Snails 

 Meadow Jumping Mouse Butterflies 

Bats 

SOLC Viability Analyses and Pertinent Forest Plan Direction 

The Phase II Forest Plan Amendment FEIS evaluated population viability, and determined that 

all SOLC species are likely to persist on the Forest over the next 50 years if Forest Plan 

standards and guidelines are followed, and if conditions move toward Forest Plan objectives. 

Therefore, the following analyses will specifically evaluate how well the alternatives would meet 

pertinent Forest Plan direction for each species. A summary of project effects to species viability 

will be provided in a separate section following the final species evaluation. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 195 

The most relevant objective to SOLC is Objective 221. This objective leads the BHNF to “conserve 

or enhance habitat” for SOLC. There are no standards or guidelines to further direct attainment of 

the objective for the SOLC group as a whole. However, there are species-specific guidances that 

will be addressed as appropriate in the write-ups that follow. 

Effects disclosures typically center around changes to habitat, because this is invariably where 

the effects to wildlife are most certain and pronounced. Although project activities could on rare 

occasion cause injury or mortality to SOLC, the likelihood of such effects are very low, and at 

most, only a few individuals would be affected (i.e., there would be no potential to affect 

populations). Therefore, this category of effects will not be further discussed for any species. 

Black and White Warbler 

The Black Hills are at the western edge of the black-and-white warbler’s distribution in the US, 

and support a small population that is disjunct from others (Kricher 1995). The species is

considered uncommon and localized in the Black Hills. According to the FPMER, the species 

had been observed on 33 occasions during formal bird monitoring efforts on the Forest from 

2001 to 2009. The Black Hills observations were almost exclusively at low elevations near the 

periphery of the Hills, at approximately 4,700’ elevation. Most were in riparian zones and /or 

drainages. The vegetative composition of these riparian habitats have not been analyzed, but it is 

suspected that bur oak, green ash, and other hardwoods are important, as is a dense understory of 

shrubs such as ninebark, chokecherry, hawthorn, and currants. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Black and White Warbler 

The following analyses incorporate information previously disclosed in the Riparian section of this 

report. Please see that section for additional rationale and analyses. All alternatives would follow 

Forest Plan guidance set for riparian areas. This demonstrates effort toward conserving warbler 

habitat, and would meet the intent of SOLC Objective 221. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Black and White Warbler 

Alternative A would have no effects to riparian areas, and would fully maintain existing riparian 

characteristics. This alternative would meet the goal of riparian Objective 213. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Black and White Warbler 

Alternative B would have no treatments in riparian areas, and as a result would fully maintain 

existing warbler habitat. In this alternative, the occasional removal of pine from riparian zones 

could increase the quality of warbler habitat if it resulted in more riparian growth, i.e., bur oak, 

shrubs, and other hardwoods. As shown in the Riparian section, riparian diversity, structure and size 

would be maintained in the two alternatives through application of Standards and Guidelines. This 

would ensure that warbler habitat would be maintained. The action alternative would also increase 

hardwoods, both Bur Oak and Aspen. Consistency with riparian Objective 213, and hardwood 

Objective 201, would remain intact. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 196 

Broad-Winged Hawk

The broad-winged hawk is the most common woodland hawk throughout its range but is rare in 

the Black Hills. In the Black Hills, this bird is associated with ponderosa pine in mixed pine and 

deciduous habitats, occasionally with a white-spruce component. The Forest’s bird monitoring 

program has recorded this species mostly in the Bearlodge Mountains and the northern Black 

Hills. The highest numbers of occurrences have been detected in aspen habitat, although this 

species is known to utilize other habitats as well (USDA Forest Service 2008). The species has 

been sighted in the CPA. This species is an opportunistic raptor, feeding on amphibians, reptiles, 

insects, birds, and small mammals. The primary risk factor appears to be habitat alteration or 

loss that decreases nest site availability (Stephens and Anderson 2003). 

The Forest Plan vegetation objectives that most closely apply to the broad-winged hawk in the CPA 

are 201, 211, 212 through 214, 218, 221, 239-LVD, 5.1-204 and 5.4-206, which relate to maintenance 

of hardwoods, snags, downed woody material, spruce, pine structural stages, and riparian species 

diversity. Late seral conifers with large trees, large diameter snags, down woody debris, and 

vegetative diversity provide foraging habitat. Forest Plan standard 3204 protects known raptor nests 

from disturbance. See the Hardwoods, Very Large Tree, and Snag sections of this report. 

Broad-winged hawk pine habitat is quantified as structural stages 4B, 4C, and 5, especially with 

“very large” tree size. Forest MAs are moving towards objectives in pine structural stage 5, but 

meet or exceed Forest Plan objectives for 4B and 4C. The Forest is above large tree objectives 

for MA 5.1(13%), but slightly below this objective in MA 5.4 (9%). In MA’s 5.1 and 5.4 there 

are 335,687 acres of pine structural stages 4B, 4C, and 5 spread across the Forest. Spruce 

communities (25,749 acres) are above Forest objectives (USDA Forest Service 2010a). Progress 

is being made towards Objective 221, though it may take some time to achieve the desired 

amounts of some structural stage habitat to meet this species needs 

In the CPA, in MA’s 5.1 and 5.4, there are approximately 11,436 acres (41%) of 4B, 4C and 5 

pine, and 24 acres (<1%) of spruce in the CPA. Other habitats that pertain to the broad-winged 

hawk are addressed in the Very Large Tree, Snag, Aspen, and Riparian sections of this document. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Broad-Winged Hawk 

None of the alternatives would notably decrease the amount of broad-winged hawk habitat at the 

Forest-wide scale. Therefore, all alternatives would be consistent with Objective 221. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Broad-Winged Hawk 

Alternative A would have no direct effect on this species or its habitat. Indirectly, the MBP related 

mortality would decrease pine structural stages that are currently in the moderate to high insect 

hazard, negatively affecting 4B, 4C and 5 habitats. MPB would likely affect very large tree 

densities, especially in structural stage 4C and 5. The continuing MPB related mortality would 

also increase the risk for large scale wildfire, affecting habitat in the long-term. All of these 

indirect effects would result in less broad-winged hawk nesting habitat than currently exists. For 

these reasons, this alternative would be the least favorable for the broad-winged hawk. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 197 

Alternative B - Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects – Broad-Winged Hawk 

Alternative B may directly affect unknown broad-winged hawk nest stands. This alternative would 

reduce the amount of broad-winged nesting habitat to 1,458 acres. This decrease may reduce habitat 

for broad-winged hawks within the CPA short-term. However, the action alternative has a greater 

potential to maintain very large trees and mature pine stages long-term by reducing the hazard of 

MPB mortality and wildfire in the area. 

Cooper’s Hawk 

The Cooper’s hawk is uncommon, but well-distributed in the Black Hills. The Forest’s bird 

monitoring program has recorded the species in all of the major habitat types here, with no 

obvious affinity for any one (USDA Forest Service 2010a). 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a; Sec 3-3.3.4.4) provides pertinent 

information on the Cooper’s hawk, and that source is summarized in this paragraph with no 

additional or original referencing. The Cooper’s hawk is considered a habitat generalist but typically 

requires wooded areas for nesting. The bird is known to nest in riparian, conifer, and aspen forests. 

The most common forest type in the Black Hills – ponderosa pine – is known to be used for nesting 

here and in other parts of the bird’s range. Over the species range, most pairs nest in patches of 

mature forest with moderate to high (60 – 90%) canopy closure near openings. Nest tree diameters 

are typically smaller than those used by nesting goshawks, larger than what is used by sharp-shinned 

hawks, and larger than what is randomly available. This coincides most closely with structural 

stages 4B and 4C. The hawk hunts in a diversity of habitats, taking a variety of small to mid-sized 

birds and mammals. In general, the species is more tolerant of human presence and habitat 

fragmentation than either the goshawk or the sharp-shinned hawk. Adequate nesting habitat and 

prey availability are thought to be the most limiting factors to species persistence. 

According to the silviculturist report, there are approximately 333,394 acres (MA 5.1 and 5.4) of 

structural stages 4B and 4C pine on the Forest. The Calumet Project Area currently contains 

about 11,211 acres, which is 3% of the Forest-wide habitat. Forest Plan structural stage 

objectives (5.1-204, and 5.4-206) for both 4B and 4C are currently being exceeded Forest-wide. 

Alternative A - No Action

Direct and Indirect Effects – Cooper’s Hawk

Alternative A would have no direct effect on this species or its habitat. Indirectly, the MBP 

related mortality would decrease pine structural stages that are currently in the high insect 

hazard, negatively affecting 4B and 4C habitats. MPB would likely affect very large tree 

densities. The large scale wildfire hazard would also increase. All of these indirect effects 

would result in less Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat than currently exists. For these reasons, this 

alternative would be the least favorable for the Cooper’s hawk. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 198 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Cooper’s Hawk 

Alternative B, along with the concurrent MPB infestation, a reduction of approximately 9,938 

acres of Cooper’s nesting habitat would be reduced immediately after treatment in the short term. 

However, the action alternative has a greater potential to maintain very large trees and mature 

pine stages long-term by reducing the risk of MPB mortality and wildfire in the area. The 

Forest-wide MA structural stage objectives for 4B and 4C would still be exceeded in MA 5.1. 

The objective for 4B and 4C would be obtained in MA 5.4 under Alternative B. 

Fire prescriptions would be designed to reduce surface fuel loading and increase the crown base 

height ratio of trees. Structural stages are not expected to change, although there could be small 

numbers or pockets of trees that could be killed. Mortality of overstory trees is expected to be 

low (<10%), and overstory canopy would remain largely intact. Mortality at this scale is not 

expected to negatively affect Cooper’s hawk, and could possibly improve foraging habitat by 

creating snags and small openings. 

Standard 3204 direct the Forest to protect known raptor nests. If a Cooper’s nest is discovered 

during project implementation, standard 3204 would be initiated. 

The Burns and Cook (2006; Appendix C) guidance was recommended in the Calumet Project 

BA/BE for use in goshawk nest areas, which could apply to Cooper’s hawk, as well. The

guidance pertains primarily to limited use of mechanical treatments in order to reduce the area’s 

susceptibility to crown fire or insect infestation. 

With mechanical reduction of understory pine, the most essential Cooper’s hawk nest habitat 

characteristics (i.e., dense overstory of mature trees) would be maintained. Habitat quality could 

be improved to a greater degree than with use of fire only, because there would be more control 

over which trees are removed and which are retained. Assurance would be higher that overstory 

structure would be maintained, since understory thinning could occur in key locations before fire 

is applied (e.g., in ladder fuels directly under nest trees and clumps of trees with interlocking 

crowns). Treatments would be more likely to occur in a timely fashion because they would not 

be dependent on the rigid parameters (i.e., “burning window”) required for safe prescribed 

burning. Seasonal timing restrictions to accommodate nesting activity would be applied as per 

Standard 3204, with a no treatment timeframe of at least April 15th to August 15th. For these 

reasons, the implementation of Burns and Cook (2006) would be acceptable and perhaps 

advantageous when applied to Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat. 

To summarize effects, the action alternative would be consistent with SOLC Objective 221 to 

conserve or enhance habitat for the Cooper’s hawk. This is because nesting habitat may be 

sustained (i.e., in excess of structural stage objectives) across the Forest, and because Forest Plan 

standards would be implemented. 

Meadow jumping mouse 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a; Sec 3-3.3.5.3) provides pertinent 

information on the meadow jumping mouse, and that source is summarized in the two 

paragraphs immediately below with no additional or original referencing. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 199 

The meadow jumping mouse is distributed across much of the US and Canada, excluding the far 

western states. It is strongly associated with riparian and meadow habitats that occur along small 

streams. A dense understory of deciduous shrubs, grasses, forbs, and downed wood are often 

present. The mouse’s diet is varied, and includes seeds, berries, leaves, buds, fungi, and insects. 

The dense, diverse understory requirement may limit the species distribution and abundance. 

The meadow jumping mouse is not known to occur in the CPA. However, habitat could 

potentially occur along portions of Spring, Horse, and Bitter Creeks. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Meadow jumping mouse 

As shown in the Riparian section, riparian diversity, structure and size would be maintained in 

these two alternatives through application of Standards and Guidelines. This would ensure that 

jumping mouse habitat would be maintained. The action alternative would be consistent with 

riparian Objective 213 and 221. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Meadow jumping mouse 

Alternative A would have no direct effects to riparian areas, and would fully maintain existing 

jumping mouse habitat in the short term. In the long-term MPB related mortality would 

increase, amplifying the effects of wildfire. Riparian areas and associated plant species are 

typically fire resistant, but could be indirectly affected by an increased sediment load if the area 

were to flood post wildfire. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Meadow jumping mouse 

Alternative B may have the occasional removal of pine from riparian habitats, which could 

potentially increase the quality of jumping mouse habitat if it resulted in more riparian growth. 

Northern Flying Squirrel 

The flying squirrel resides in forested habitats over much of Canada and the western US 

(Higgins et al. 2000). The squirrel has been captured at multiple locations throughout the Black 

Hills, suggesting it may be widely distributed on the Forest (Duckwitz 2001, Krueger 2004). 

The species is nocturnal, and therefore, relatively little is known about its specific habitats and 

needs in the Black Hills. Krueger’s (2004) recent study in the northern Hills found squirrels in a 

variety of forested sites, including pure ponderosa pine and pine mixed with aspen, birch, or

spruce. Squirrels were captured in both managed and unmanaged (old growth) stands. None of 

the stands were reported in quantitative terms (e.g., by structural stage, snag density, or food 

abundance), but qualitative descriptions were given. Unmanaged stands had at least some snags 

and very large trees. The managed stands included areas where much of the mature pine had 

been selectively cut within the past 20 years, and sites where small to medium sized pine had 

been thinned. A separate study in Wind Cave National Park (Duckwitz 2001) found flying 

squirrels in ponderosa pine stands with open canopies and large trees. Dense ‘dog-hair’ pine 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 200 

stands were avoided during this study, probably because they limited the squirrel’s characteristic 

locomotive technique - gliding. 

Flying squirrels eat a varied diet, including fungi, lichens, seeds, insects, and bird eggs (Higgins 

et al. 2000). They nest and shelter in cavities of large trees and snags, and in small structures 

(dreys) that they build from twigs, bark and roots. 

Based on information presented above, it is reasonable to assume that good squirrel habitat is 

provided by mature pine stands that either have relatively open canopies (i.e., all 4A and 4B) or 

are characterized as having very large tree size (i.e., some 4A, 4B, 4C, and all 5). These habitat 

components, as well as snag density, are the subject of the following effects analysis for the 

northern flying squirrel. 

According to the Silviculturist Report, there are approximately 501,641 acres of pine structural stages 

4A and 4B Forest-wide (MA 5.1 and 5.4). Approximately 13,000 acres occur within the CPA. This is 

approximately 3% of the Forest-wide total, and 48% of the CPA’s total acreage. Forest-wide, there 

are 68,517 acres of very large tree habitat in MA’s 5.1 and 5.4. Within the CPA, there are 

approximately 244 acres. This represents <1% of the CPA’s total acreage (MA’s 5.1 and 5.4). 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Northern Flying Squirrel 

The following analyses incorporate information previously disclosed in the Snags and Very 

Large Tree sections of this report. Please see those sections for additional rationale and analyses. 

Regardless of project-level effects, the Forest-wide snag density objective (211) would continue 

to be met in all alternatives, and would likely meet squirrel habitat needs across the Forest. None 

of the alternatives would notably decrease the amount of flying squirrel habitat at the Forestwide scale. Therefore, it appears that all alternatives would be consistent with Objective 221. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Northern Flying Squirrel 

In Alternative A, snag densities would increase due to MPB related mortality. However, MPB 

created snags are short-lived on the landscape, with fall rates between 5-10 years (Schmid et al). 

Coincidently, this would also amplify the wildfire risk due to the increased fuel load, which 

could endanger the survival of “Very Large Trees” within the CPA. In areas where MPB 

mortality is not as severe, increases in canopy cover could offset some habitat gained through 

increasing tree size and snags. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Northern Flying Squirrel 

Alternative B would maintain conformity with the very large tree objective in MA’s 5.1 and 5.4. 

The action alternative has a greater potential to maintain very large trees and mature pine stages 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 201 

in the long-term, by reducing the hazard of MPB mortality and wildfire in the area. Snag harvest 

is not a part of the action alternative. 

As discussed in the Very Large Tree section, long-term increases in this habitat may be more 

valuable for the longevity of large trees and future source of large snags than they are for the 

immediate availability of large trees. Similarly, squirrels would benefit from the continual 

availability of potential tree roosts through time. 

The action alternative and the concurrent MPB infestation would increase the amount of squirrel 

habitat characterized by open-canopied mature forest (4A), by approximately 3,000 acres. 

Concurrently, Alternative B would decrease (4B) habitat by 6,600 acres. 

As disclosed in the Snag section, the action alternative would not notably affect snags except to 

potentially decrease snag recruitment at the project scale. This would likely be less of an issue in 

very large tree habitat than it would be in mature, open-canopied habitat. This is because most 

trees in the very large tree category are generally very old and past their prime, which could lead to 

higher mortality (snag recruitment) rates than are found in mature stands having smaller tree size. 

Northern Saw-whet Owl 

The saw-whet owl is distributed across much of the northern US, western US, and southern 

Canada. It is one of the most common forest-dwelling owls across most of its range (Cannings 

1993). There are few documented observations of the saw-whet in the Black Hills, but this may be 

more attributable to the bird’s nocturnal habits than to actual demographics (USDA Forest Service 

2010a). According to Panjabi (2005), this species may be fairly common throughout the Black 

Hills. This is substantiated by Fauna West Wildlife Consultants (2003), who characterized the 

species as widely distributed and common in the Black Hills. Drilling (2010) established that the 

saw-whet owl is the most common and widespread owl in the Black Hills. Saw-whet owls were 

detected at 15% of all survey points and on 93% of all routes, at all elevations, at any time of year. 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005; Sec 3-3.3.4.5) provides information 

on the saw-whet owl, and that source is summarized in this paragraph with no additional or 

original referencing. The saw-whet is a habitat generalist that is typically found in coniferous or 

riparian forests. The species nests in snag cavities that were originally excavated by flickers and 

other large woodpeckers. They tend to nest in mature forest. The saw-whet owl often forages 

along forest edges, where it preys upon small mammals and birds. The availability of mature 

forests (structural stages 4A, B, C, and 5) and nesting cavities (i.e., snags) appear to be the most 

limiting factors for this species. 

Forest-wide, there are approximately 607,000 (MA’s 5.1 and 5.4) acres of mature pine forest that 

could provide nesting habitat. Within the CPA, there are about 17,000 acres, and it is all pine. 

This is about 3% of the Forest-wide total. Saw-whets have been documented in the CPA. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Northern Saw-whet Owl 

Alternative A would have no direct effect on this species or its habitat. Indirectly, the MBP 

mortality would decrease pine structural stages that are currently in the high MPB hazard 

condition, negatively affecting saw-whet owl habitat. MPB would likely affect very large tree 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 202 

densities. All of these indirect effects would result in less owl nesting habitat than currently 

exists. For these reasons, this alternative would be the least favorable for the saw-whet owl. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Northern Saw-whet Owl 

Alternative B treatments and the concurrent MPB infestation would result in a loss of 

approximately 7,000 acres of owl habitat directly after treatment. According to the CPA 

Silviculture Report, this reduction would move the amount of 4B habitat Forest-wide, toward 

MA objectives. The amount of 4A habitat would remain the same in MA 5.1, but move away 

from objectives in 5.4. Structural stage 4C and 5 objectives would be sustained in MA 5.1. 

Structural stage objectives for 4C in MA 5.4 would progress toward the Forest-wide objective of 

5%. Structural stage 5 would be unchanged. 

As disclosed in the Snag section, the action alternative would not notably affect snags except to 

potentially decrease snag recruitment rates at the project scale. This could translate to reduced 

habitat quality and fewer owls within the CPA over time. However, because the snag objective 

(211) would continue to be met at the Forest-wide scale, owl populations and habitat would also 

be maintained at that scale. 

The action alternative demonstrates effort toward conserving saw-whet owl habitat, and would 

meet the intent of SOLC Objective 221. This alternative would also provide assurance that 

species viability would be maintained at the Forest-wide scale. 

Pygmy Nuthatch 

The pygmy nuthatch is patchily distributed throughout much of western North America from 

southern British Columbia down to central Mexico. The Black Hills are at the northeastern edge of 

the nuthatch’s range (Kingery and Ghalambor 2001). In the Black Hills, the species is a rare but 

regular and widespread year-round resident (USDA Forest Service 2010a). 

Studies across the nuthatch’s range show that the bird is often associated with old growth or 

mature pine stands. Trees and snags that are very large appear to be especially important. Very 

large trees are the only source of very large snags, and very large snags are preferred by 

nuthatches for nesting and roosting cavities (Kingery and Ghalambor 2001). Although the 

nuthatch has been observed in late successional pine, it does not appear to be limited to this 

habitat type in the Black Hills. 

It is thought that any mature pine forests with abundant big trees and snags provide good habitat 

in the Black Hills. This equates to stands having very large tree size (>16” dbh) in structural 

stages 4A, 4B, and 4C. It also includes structural stage 5, which by definition is dominated by 

very large trees. According to the FPMER, there are approximately 607,000 acres (MA’s 5.1 

and 5.4) matching this description Forest-wide. Approximately 17,000 acres occur within the 

CPA. No pygmy nuthatches or their nests have been observed in the CPA. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 203 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Pygmy Nuthatch 

The following analyses incorporate information previously disclosed in the Snag and Very Large Tree 

sections of this report. Please see those sections for additional rationale and analyses. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Pygmy Nuthatch 

Alternative A would have no direct effect on this species or its habitat. Indirectly, the MBP 

mortality would decrease pine structural stages that are currently in the high insect hazard 

condition, negatively affecting nuthatch habitat. MPB would likely affect very large tree 

densities. This mortality would also increase the large scale wildfire hazard in the long-term. 

All of these indirect effects would result in less nuthatch nesting habitat than currently exists. 

For these reasons, this alternative would be the least favorable for the pygmy nuthatch. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Pygmy Nuthatch 

Alternative B would maintain conformity with the very large tree objective in MA’s 5.1 and 5.4. 

The action alternative has a greater potential to maintain very large trees and mature pine stages 

in the long-term, by reducing the hazard of MPB mortality and wildfire in the area. 

As discussed in the Very Large Tree section, direct increases in this habitat may be more 

valuable for the longevity of large trees and future source of large snags than they are for the 

immediate availability of large trees. Similarly, nuthatches would benefit from the continual 

availability of potential large trees through time. 

The action alternative would not notably affect snags except to potentially decrease snag 

recruitment rates at the project scale. This could negate some of the positive effects created by 

increases in very large tree habitat under this alternative. This is because large trees are at least 

partly valuable for their ultimate fate as large snags. However, in this case the very large trees are 

probably also very old and past their prime, which would lead to higher mortality (snag 

recruitment) rates than are found in mature stands having smaller tree size. Overall, it is likely that 

the beneficial aspect of very large tree size would remain. 

Alternative B would essentially conserve or enhance nuthatch habitat and be consistent with 

Objective 221. 

Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep 

Bighorn sheep are found throughout much of the western U.S. and Canada where they are 

adapted to a wide variety of habitats. They typically prefer open habitats such as open 

grasslands, talus slopes, and rock outcrops where forage plants (mostly grasses, forbs, and 

shrubs) are abundant. Foraging habitats provide the ability to see and escape predators (e.g., 

mountain lions), and are usually within close proximity to escape cover (steep slopes). Risk 

factors include disease (epizootics), inclement weather, inbreeding depression, poor maternal 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 204 

care, human disturbance, and predators. Limiting factors include competition for forage and 

space with livestock and other ungulates, habitat deterioration and loss, and fragmentation. 

(Beecham et. al 2007). 

 

Although bighorn sheep numbers have declined dramatically with the settling of the West, they 

are still considered somewhat secure throughout much of their range. However, isolated herds 

have undergone changes in population numbers. Their susceptibility to massive die-offs due to 

disease has placed this species on the Forest Service Region 2 sensitive species list. The most 

recent Black Hills population estimate is approximately 300 bighorn sheep. (Huxoll 2010). 

The Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep was introduced to the Black Hills in 1924. It is classified as a 

big game animal; by the SDGF&P. Hunting permits are limited. The species occurs in small areas 

of the Black Hills with six sub-herds, occupying portions of Custer State Park, Rapid and Spring 

Creek drainages between Canyon City and Rapid City. 

Overall, it is estimated that 60% of the CPA is utilized by bighorn sheep. The CPA also contains the 

Strato Bowl Rocky Mtn. Bighorn Sheep Management Area. The Black Hills National Forest and the 

South Dakota Game Fish and Parks Department established this area in 1989. The area was set aside 

to provide an opportunity to enhance habitat and establish bighorn sheep on the Black Hills National 

Forest. Extensive vegetative management was implemented in order to create suitable habitat. In 

1991 and 1992, bighorn sheep from Colorado and Badlands National Park were transplanted into the 

management area. Presently, the herd is believed to be stable, however pine has continued to 

encroach, which has detracted from the open habitat that bighorn sheep require. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep 

None of the alternatives decrease the amount of bighorn sheep habitat. Therefore, all alternatives 

would be consistent with Objective 221. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep 

Alternative A would have no direct effect on the Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. MPB would 

likely affect forest structure, opening canopies and reducing late seral pine stands to early seral 

stages. In the absence of wildfire, this alternative would result in continual encroachment of pine 

into meadows and decline of forested acres characterized by sparse canopy cover. This could 

ultimately result in decreased forage availability and decreased sight distances. Alternative A, 

compared to the action alternative, has a greater potential for stand-replacing wildfires, which 

could increase this species habitat both short-term and long-term. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep 

Alternative B may indirectly affect individuals by inadvertent disturbance which could cause 

sheep to disperse quickly onto highways or to unstable terrain. However, this would be rare. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 205 

Alternative B would result in open-canopied habitats through treatments to reduce MPB and fire 

risk by varying degrees. Meadow restoration would also occur in the action alternative. 

Meadow enhancements and canopy reduction treatments would be advantageous to sheep, 

resulting in increases in forage availability and sight distances. Prescribed fire would improve 

habitat conditions where it coincides with bighorn sheep use areas. Burning would benefit sheep 

in a similar way as canopy reduction and meadow restoration treatments. 

Suitable habitat for this species (open grassland/riparian) will be enhanced by all alternatives either 

by openings created by MPB or vegetative treatments. Treatments where they overlap with 

bighorn sheep use areas my indirectly affect use of these areas short-term but would enhance this 

habitat long-term. Lambing/winter areas are identified in the CPA, design criteria that prevents 

disturbance during critical periods will reduce inadvertent loss to sheep recruitment. 

Sharp-shinned Hawk 

The sharp-shinned hawk is widely distributed throughout much of North America (Bildstein and 

Meyer 2000). The species also occurs widely within the Black Hills, but it appears to be one of the 

rarest hawks here. From 2001-2009, the sharp-shinned hawk was detected only 24 times during 

the Forest-wide bird monitoring program (USDA Forest Service 2010a). The observations 

occurred in nearly all habitat types sampled, indicating no obvious preference for any one habitat. 

The Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a; Sec 3-3.3.4.7) provides pertinent 

information on the sharp-shinned hawk, and that source is summarized in this paragraph with no 

additional or original referencing. Sharp-shinned hawks nest almost exclusively in conifers. 

Conifer stands of young age, high tree density and high canopy closure have all been identified as 

potentially important breeding habitat parameters range-wide. This equates to ponderosa pine and 

white spruce in structural stages 3B and 3C. It is thought that good foraging habitat is provided 

where a variety of different vegetation conditions are present near nest stands. This is because the 

sharp-shinned hawk preys upon numerous species of small animals (primarily birds), and no single 

prey species or habitat is most important. Furthermore, it does appear that mature aspen may be 

particularly important foraging habitat due to the high wildlife diversity that it supports. 

Presently, there is approximately 65,000 acres of ponderosa pine SS 3B and 3C (MA’s 5.1 and 5.4) 

and 26,000 acres of white spruce, Forest-wide. Approximately 2,600 acres occur within the CPA. 

Examination of data in the CPA Silviculturist Report show that existing amounts of 3B and 3C 

(combined) pine habitat are below Forest Plan structural stage objectives for MA’s 5.1 and 5.4. 

The overall deficiency suggests that sharp-shinned hawk habitat is expected to increase at the 

Forest-wide scale with full implementation of the Forest Plan. However, given the current 

Forest-wide deficiencies in structural stages that would grow into 3B or 3C quickest (i.e., stages 

2 and 3A), this may take some time to achieve. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Sharp-shinned Hawk 

All of the CPA alternatives would maintain sharp-shinned hawk habitat at the Forest-wide scale, and 

would follow Forest Plan standards. Therefore, all alternatives would be consistent with Objective 221. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 206 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Sharp-shinned Hawk 

Alternative A would have no direct effect on this species or its habitat. Indirectly, MBP related 

mortality would decrease pine structural stages that are currently in the moderate to high insect 

hazard condition, negatively affecting Sharp-shinned habitat. This reduction would inversely 

increase the large scale wildfire hazard. The increased fuel load would put nesting habitat at risk. 

The other important habitat type – aspen – could also be affected in the CPA. Please see the 

Aspen section for details supporting the following analysis. Alternative A would result in no 

hardwood treatments. Consequently, MPB related mortality may benefit aspen by reducing 

competition with pine; however this is difficult to quantify. In areas where MPB infestation is 

not as pronounced, pine encroachment would continue in the existing 881 acres of aspen stands. 

This could eventually decrease habitat quality and quantity for sharp-shinned hawks. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Sharp-shinned Hawk 

Alternative B treatments and the concurrent MPB infestation would result in a loss of Sharpshinned hawk habitat directly after treatment. Alternative B would lose approximately 1,900 

acres. These figures would decrease the proportion of the CPA that provides sharp-shinned 

conifer habitat. However, the acreage reductions could decrease the current amount of Forestwide habitat by approximately 1% in MA 5.4. 

The decreases in sharp-shinned hawk habitat could be off-set over time if there was an 

abundance of structural stages 2 or 3A that could grow into 3B or 3C. As discussed previously, 

this situation does not exist at the Forest-wide scale. The Calumet Project would change the 

amount of these stages under Alternative B in MA 5.1. Alternative B would create an additional 

5,455 acres of 3A, in MA’s 5.1 and 5.4. The increase in Alternative B would enlarge the Forestwide structural stage (3A) by 1% in MA 5.4. 

Alternative B would implement approximately 1,875 acres of hardwood treatments. These 

treatments would increase foraging habitat quality for the hawk. Treatments would be extensive 

enough to reclassify nearly 750 acres from the pine to aspen covertype, thereby demonstrating 

movement toward aspen objective 201. As shown in the Aspen section, both alternatives would 

make progress toward achieving aspen Objective 201. 

Bats (Long-eared, Long-legged, Northern, and Small-footed Myotis) 

Each of these bat species has similar limiting factors, response to management actions, and 

applicable Forest Plan direction. Because of this, they are summarized here as a group, with 

major similarities and differences discussed below. USDA Forest Service (2005a) provides 

information on the bats in Section 3-3.3.5, Subsections 1, 2, 6 and 8; this source is summarized 

below with no additional or original referencing. Supplemental references are given when used. 

All four SOLC bats have range-wide distributions that are much bigger than the Black Hills, 

encompassing portions of both Canada and the United States. The range of all but one (northern 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 207 

myotis) also includes parts of Mexico. All appear to be widely distributed throughout the Black 

Hills region (Tigner and Stukel 2003). Abundance varies between the species; the long-legged 

myotis may be the most common in the Black Hills, and the long-eared myotis is probably the most 

uncommon. All four bats use montane coniferous forests in the Black Hills and in other parts of

their ranges. Flying insects, especially moths and beetles, are important prey items for these species. 

Without exception, roosts are key habitat features for the SOLC bats, and are considered the primary 

limiting factor. Bats require suitable roosting sites every day, but roost characteristics vary 

depending on time of year (e.g., summer vs. winter), time of day (e.g., day vs. night), and 

reproductive status (e.g., nursing females vs. solitary males). Although there are also differences in 

roost selection between different species of bats, the types of roosts used are very similar between 

species when compared across all seasons and reproductive stages. In other words, different species 

of bats may use the same type of roosts at some point in their life cycles. Roost types include trees 

(live and dead), caves, mines, rocks, buildings, and railroad trestles. These structures are potentially 

suitable for roosting when they contain cavities and/or crevices that provide relatively stable 

temperatures and moisture patterns compared to nearby external environments. 

Trees are one of the most abundant potential roost structures available in the Black Hills. Not all 

trees, snags and forests provide suitable roosting habitat; bats tend to select large trees, large 

snags, and areas with high snag densities for roost sites. See the Snag and Very Large Tree 

sections of this report for more information about these features. Bats roost in tree cavities and 

behind loose bark. Hence, tree decay is an important process for roost creation. Ponderosa pine 

roosts most often house solitary or small numbers of bats, but roosts with >300 bats have been 

documented (Baker and Lacki 2006). Tree roosts are extremely difficult to identify without 

radio telemetry studies, and consequently, there are no known tree roosts within the CPA.

It is reasonable to assume that any mature pine forests with abundant big trees and snags provide 

good tree roosting habitat in the Black Hills. This equates to stands having very large tree size 

(>16” dbh) in structural stages 4A, 4B, and 4C. It also includes structural stage 5, which by 

definition is dominated by very large trees. According to the FPMER, there are approximately 

607,000 acres matching this description in the two main MAs, Forest-wide. Approximately 

17,000 acres occur within the CPA. 

Caves and mines (collectively termed ‘caverns’ hereafter) are other important roost resources in the 

Black Hills. Although caverns are not as common as trees, they provide communal opportunities, 

meaning that any one suitable structure has the potential to host a greater number of bat species and 

individuals than any one tree typically does. Currently there are 19 known caverns; four of them are 

located on private land that exists within the CPA. Some have been gated to prevent human entry 

and allow bat passage, and others are protected by topography and vegetation. It is reasonable to 

assume that all have the potential to serve as habitat for SOLC bat species. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Bats (Long-eared, Long-legged, Northern, and Small-footed Myotis) 

Bat roosts and hibernacula would be protected and maintained in all alternatives. Therefore, all 

alternatives would conserve habitat for the SOLC bats, and be consistent with Objective 221. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 208 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Bats (Long-eared, Long-legged, Northern, and Small-footed Myotis) 

In Alternative A, snag densities would increase due to MPB related mortality. However, MPB 

created snags are short-lived on the landscape, with fall rates between 5-10 years (Schmid et al. 

2009). Coincidently, this would also amplify the wildfire hazard due to the increased fuel load, 

which could endanger the survival of “Very Large Trees” within the CPA. In areas where MPB 

mortality is not as severe, increases in canopy cover could offset some habitat gained through 

increasing tree size and snags. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Bats (Long-eared, Long-legged, Northern, and Small-footed Myotis) 

Alternative B would maintain conformity with the very large tree objective in MA’s 5.1 and 5.4. 

The action alternative has a greater potential to maintain very large trees and mature pine stages 

in the long-term, by reducing the hazard of MPB mortality and wildfire in the area. 

As discussed in the Very Large Tree section, long-term increases in this habitat may be more 

valuable for the longevity of large trees and future source of large snags than they are for the 

immediate availability of large trees. Similarly, bats would benefit from the continual 

availability of potential tree roosts through time. 

As disclosed in the Snag section, the action alternative would not notably affect snags except to 

potentially decrease snag recruitment rates at the project scale. This could translate to reduced 

habitat quality and fewer bats within the CPA over time. However, other roost types would be 

unaffected by the project, and would continue to provide suitable roost sites in the project area. 

Also, because the snag objective (211) would continue to be met at the Forest-wide scale, SOLC 

bat populations and habitat would also be maintained at that scale. 

Vegetation removal near cavern entrances could potentially change temperatures or air flow patterns 

within them (Tigner and Stukel 2003). Standard 3102 recognizes this by mandating that 

microclimates be maintained in bat roosts. Standard 3207 prohibits vegetative changes within 500 

feet of cavernous maternity roosts and hibernacula unless the purpose is to improve bat habitat, or 

unless there are other features (e.g., topography) that would protect the openings from disturbance. 

Implementing Standard 3207 would serve two purposes: ensuring that microclimates are maintained 

and preventing disturbance to roosting bats. If topographical or other features are used in lieu of a 

500’ buffer, it is recommended that a wildlife biologist evaluate the site and make the final 

determination of where management activities can occur. This would ensure that the standards are 

applied properly and that there are no effects that were not disclosed in this document.

Butterflies (Atlantis Fritillary and Tawny Crescent) 

These two species have similar limiting factors, response to management actions, and applicable 

Forest Plan direction. Because of this, they are summarized here as a group. USDA Forest 

Service (2005a) provides pertinent information on the butterflies in Section 3-3.3.3, Subsections 

1 and 6, and is summarized below with no additional or original referencing. These butterflies 

are associated with meadows and riparian areas, particularly when found adjacent to each other 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 209 

(i.e., meadows along a stream). In South Dakota, both species are restricted to the Black Hills. 

Specific plant species are important to each butterfly for nectar supplies and/or larval hosts. The 

fritillary is most dependent on violets, and the tawny crescent is most closely associated with 

dogbane, leafy spurge, and aster. 

Butterfly surveys were recently completed in the Black Hills (Marrone 2005, 2006). Atlantis 

Fritillaries have been documented within the CPA. Currently, about 1,180 acres (4%) of the CPA 

are classified as the grass covertype, which is probably a combination of meadows and openings 

on the uplands. It is likely that additional meadows currently or potentially occur, but are not 

represented in the database. No riparian areas are identified in the CPA vegetation database, but a 

few do occur. See the Meadow and Riparian sections for more information about these habitats. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Butterflies (Atlantis Fritillary and Tawny Crescent) 

All of the alternatives would conserve or enhance butterfly habitats. Therefore, all alternatives 

would be consistent with SOLC Objective 221. Also, all of the alternatives would be consistent 

with intent of Objective 205. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Butterflies (Atlantis Fritillary and Tawny Crescent) 

Alternative A would have no direct effects to riparian areas, and would fully maintain existing 

butterfly habitat in the short-term. In the long term MPB related mortality would increase, amplifying 

the risk of wildfire. Riparian areas and associated plant species are typically fire resistant, but could 

be indirectly affected by an increased sediment load, if the area were to flood post wildfire. 

Alternative A would have no meadow restoration treatments. Meadows may continue to 

increase through MPB related mortality and increased hazard of wildfire. This increase could 

prove to be detrimental in areas where the fuel load may be high. This could lead to soil

sterilization if a wildfire burns very hot, ultimately affecting grassland establishment. 

Conversely, in areas where MPB beetle infestation is not as big an issue, conifers would continue 

to encroach into meadows. This would ultimately reduce the quality and amount of meadows

across the project area. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Butterflies (Atlantis Fritillary and Tawny Crescent) 

In Alternative B, the occasional removal of pine from riparian zones could increase the quality of 

butterfly habitat if it resulted in more riparian growth. As shown in the Riparian section, riparian 

diversity, structure and size would be maintained through application of Standards and 

Guidelines. This would ensure that butterfly habitat would also be maintained. All alternatives 

would be consistent with riparian Objective 213. 

The action alternative also proposes meadow enhancement treatments. See the Silviculturist 

Report for specific details. In summary, pine would be removed from nearly 1,500 acres of 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 210 

meadows and draw bottoms, and from many additional small openings that occur within pine 

dominated forests. The Silviculturist Report estimates that meadows would be increased by 335 

acres with full implementation. This would result in increased habitat and potential food plants 

for both butterflies. 

Snails (Callused Vertigo, Frigid Ambersnail, Mystery Vertigo, Striate Disc) 

Snail surveys were conducted on the Forest in 1991, 1992, and 1999. Results of all surveys are 

summarized in Frest and Johannes (2002), but are also found in Frest and Johannes (1991 and 

1993). There are four sites in the CPA. However, at that time the location of these sites yielded 

negative results. Sites 88, 89, 90, and 312 all occur on national forest system lands. 

All four SOLC have similar habitat requirements that need protection: mesic forests with a 

diverse understory, deep litter, and abundant down woody material. Activities that reduce these 

items could have a negative effect on snails. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Snails (Callused Vertigo, Frigid Ambersnail, Mystery Vertigo, 

Striate Disc) 

None of the alternatives would decrease the amount of known snail habitat. Therefore, all 

alternatives would be consistent with Objective 221. 

Alternative A - No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Snails (Callused Vertigo, Frigid Ambersnail, Mystery Vertigo, 

Striate Disc) 

Alternative A would have no direct effect on snails or their habitat. Over time, MPB mortality 

could increase litter deposition, and woody material on the forest floor. This would maintain or 

enhance snail habitat through time, but the risk of wildfire would be amplified, threatening 

habitat for these species. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Snails (Callused Vertigo, Frigid Ambersnail, Mystery Vertigo, 

Striate Disc) 

Alternative B could negatively affect snail populations if harvest operations were applied at the 

known sites. Standard 3103 directs the Forest to retain overstory and ground litter components at 

known snail sites sufficient to maintain important microclimate characteristics. It also mandates 

an avoidance of activities that might compact soils or alter vegetation composition and ground 

cover. All known sites are immediately adjacent to existing roads. The standard would be adhered 

to by marking snail site boundaries prior to timber activities occurring on the ground. It is 

recommended that a biologist be present to identify and mark snail colonies. Because Standard 

3103 would be applied under the action alternative, no effects are anticipated at the known sites. 

Known snail colonies could be affected if new road construction traverses through or adjacent to 

known colonies. However, no case of this is planned as a part of this project. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 211 

It is possible that snails remain undetected in areas that are proposed for treatment, and that 

changes in downed woody material could affect them. This potential would be adequately 

mitigated in the action alternative by following Forest Plan Standards 2308a and 3117, and 

Guidelines 1102a and 2307. These were specifically designed to provide woody debris after 

vegetation treatments, and were determined through the Phase II FEIS (USDA Forest Service 

2005) to adequately protect snails. 

SOLC Viability Summary 

The Phase II Forest Plan Amendment FEIS evaluated population viability, and determined that 

all SOLC species are likely to persist on the Forest over the next 50 years if Forest Plan 

standards and guidelines are followed, and if conditions move toward Forest Plan objectives. All 

standards and guidelines would be followed in the action alternative of the Calumet Project. 

Furthermore, all alternatives are consistent with Objective 221, which is to conserve or enhance 

habitat for SOLC species. Therefore, persistence of SOLC would not be affected by any 

alternative of the Calumet Project. 

Migratory Birds 

Migratory birds of concern are identified by many sources, including the Endangered Species 

Act, the Regional Forester’s sensitive species list, the BHNF MIS and SOLC lists, and the 

USFWS list of Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC; US Fish and Wildlife Service 2008). All 

of these sources and their respective species of concern, except the BCC have been examined 

elsewhere in this or other specialist reports. 

The BCC 2008 publication lists 28 species that occur in the conservation region that includes the 

Black Hills (See Appendix D for the list). All, but two of the species do not need to be addressed 

here because: (1) they have another status designation that is already included in this document 

or the BA/BE (e.g., MIS, SOLC, sensitive), or (2) no habitat exists for them in the CPA. The 

Red-headed Woodpecker and the Golden Eagle are the species remaining, and they are evaluated 

below. Please see Appendix D for the full list and specific disposition of all species. 

Red-headed Woodpecker 

This species occurs throughout much of the central to eastern US and Canada. It is a woodpecker 

found in relatively open forests and woodlots with low stem density. The bird is typically attracted 

to areas with dead and/or dying trees for cavities and feeding perches. It typically will nest in the 

trunk of an isolated dead tree (snag) without the bark (DeGraff et al. 1991). 

The red-headed woodpecker is locally distributed in the Black Hills, where it is generally 

uncommon to rare. The abundance and distribution of this species is tied to the availability of 

burned areas, where the density has increased since 2001 to 1.48 birds/km^2 (RMBO 2012). 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Red-headed Woodpecker 

Alternative A would not have a direct effect on this species or its habitat. Over time, and in the 

absence of management action, MPB related mortality would decrease forest canopy closure and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 212 

additional forest would shift towards lower structural stages. Snags could potentially increase in 

abundance in the short term, but quality of these snags would decrease over the long-term. The

fuel hazard would also increase with MPB related mortality, escalating the threat of wildfire. 

Alternative A would have no immediate effect on mountain pine beetle populations, and 

therefore would have no direct effect on this important woodpecker food source. MPB 

populations would continue to grow, and may continue at epidemic levels. This situation would 

provide the most food resources for woodpeckers compared to the action alternative. 

Alternative B - Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Red-headed Woodpecker 

Alternative B and the concurrent MPB infestation would reduce the amount of dense forested 

stands allowing existing trees to succeed, due to treatments designed to increase average tree 

diameter by removing smaller trees in stands to be managed for late successional characteristics. 

Alternative B would substantially reduce the MPB hazard to 9% (2,114 acres) of the project area 

being in the high insect hazard category, compared to the 57% found currently. 

The action alternative would create habitat for the red-headed woodpecker by opening stands of 

trees through the use of mechanical and prescribed burning treatments. 

Golden Eagle 

Golden eagles are one of the largest birds in North America. They can be found in a variety of 

habitats ranging from the northern tundra, grasslands, forested habitat, woodland brushlands, and 

south to arid deserts. They are aerial predators, which have a diet that can consist of reptiles, birds, 

and mammals up to the size of a deer. They are also known to scavenge on carrion (USFWS 2011e). 

Golden Eagles build nests on cliffs or in the largest trees of forested stands. On the Black Hills 

National Forest, golden eagles have typically resided on the periphery of the Forest, within the 

forest/prairie ecotone. Historically (1990), a golden eagle nest was observed in Spring Creek 

Canyon directly adjacent to the CPA. However, the nest is currently inactive and no longer 

appears to be intact. 

Common to All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Golden Eagle 

No direct effects to golden eagles are anticipated under any alternative. Some potential transient roost 

trees may be removed during timber harvest or road construction activities, but there would be no 

repercussions to eagles because these types of roost sites do not appear to be a limiting factor on the 

BHNF (USDA Forest Service 2010a). If nests or roost sites are discovered during project activities, 

Forest Plan Standards 3204 and 3101 would be implemented, and would fully protect them from 

disturbance. Furthermore, project activities would not affect any the golden eagle’s food source. 

Climate Change 

The USFS has embraced the management challenges posed by climate change. The agency’s 

“Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change” (Hayward et al. 2009) provides broad 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 213 

direction to guide future management and research to address climate change in all aspects of 

agency work. With this Framework, the agency has attempted to integrate climate change 

throughout its organizational structure. As a result, significant momentum is building from the 

individual Ranger District level up through the Washington Office to actively manage fish and 

wildlife habitat in a way that is mindful of climate change. It is assumed that climate change 

likely could lead to the loss of native species from extensive areas and result in increasingly 

scarce and fragmented populations in many others. Further changes within ecosystems could be 

triggered as invasive species, both plant and animal, increase in areas that are left as native 

species are lost. Rises in disturbance owing to fire, insects, and disease could accelerate the 

infiltration of invasive species. The loss of native ecosystems to invasive species affects many 

species as the effects of changing plant communities’ undulate through the ecosystems. As a 

result, many animal species could be lost as vegetation patterns change; associated changes in 

the food-web could cascade and further destabilize ecosystems. Until these changes are better 

understood, it would be difficult to reliably predict the environmental outcomes of forest 

management activities (Ruggiero et al. 2008, Reid and Lisle 2008). The potential impacts to 

species on the Forest are becoming better understood and that effects of any one project such as 

this are difficult to measure, especially at the scale of the project area. 

Cumulative Effects 

The cumulative effects analysis area is set at the project boundary (including private lands). This 

was chosen because it is significantly larger than the home ranges of wildlife residing in the 

CPA, excluding migrations that occur outside of the Black Hills. The time frame evaluated 

varies among activities, but can be more than 100 years past, and up to 15-20 years future. This 

range accommodates the period from Anglo settlement of the area to a time in which actions are 

reasonably foreseeable. Activities evaluated are those most relevant to the area and to the 

species, and include fire suppression, fire occurrence, timber harvest, prescribed burning, land 

development, and roads. With the notable exception of land development, all of the activities 

occur on both public and private lands. This analysis is dependent on and complimentary to the 

CPA Silviculturist and Hazardous Fuels Reduction reports; please see those documents for 

additional information. The Phase II FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a) addresses cumulative 

effects of Forest management at the ecoregional (Black Hills) scale; please see that document for 

effects appropriate to that scale. 

Wildfire suppression has been very influential within the CPA. Historically, frequent low and 

high intensity fires maintained open pine stands interspersed with meadows, shrubs, and 

hardwoods. A century of fire suppression has increased pine density and dominance, and 

decreased early successional plant communities. Correspondingly, many wildlife species 

associated with meadows, shrubs, and hardwoods have also decreased at the benefit of those 

associated with late successional conditions. Fire suppression would continue to influence 

communities in the CPA regardless of alternative. 

The CPA has been affected by recent wildfires. Proposed activities, including timber harvest and 

prescribed burning, have been specifically designed to reduce the potential for large scale 

wildfire. The potential reduction is directly related to the proposed type and extent of treatments. 

Wildfire potential would be reduced the most with Alternative B, and would increase in 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 214 

Alternative A. Stand-replacing wildfire can drastically alter or eliminate wildlife habitat for 

most species for long periods of time (e.g., >50 years). The reduction in potential for devastating 

wildfire as a result of proposed CPA activities is expected to benefit most wildlife species, with 

the notable exception of the black-backed and red-headed woodpecker. 

Timber harvest has been occurring within the project area since the late 1800s. Past, current, and 

future timber management activities result in periodic shifting of much of the dense, mature 

conifer forest that results from fire suppression toward younger, more open stands. The effects 

of individual treatments are relatively short lived, because forest growth continues to occur, but 

treatments have been repeated in both space and time. A more persistent effect has been a 

reduction of stands in the very large diameter classes (i.e., old trees). After these stands were 

initially harvested, many mid-aged stands have been precluded from achieving late successional 

character. Alternative B would continue this trend to a lesser degree than in the past, because 

there would be more emphasis on retaining very large trees for their natural fire resistance. 

The No Action alternative would not contribute to cumulative effects of past and current harvest, 

and forest maturation would continue in areas where MPB infestation is low. The harvest-induced 

shifts from mature, dense forest to younger, open canopy forest have benefited species associated 

with those habitats (e.g., deer and bighorn sheep). Conversely, species associated with mature, 

closed-canopy pine such as the brown creeper and black-backed woodpecker have been negatively 

affected. Past treatments have also affected snag densities by decreasing the number of low vigor 

trees available to become snags. Insect and disease control and firewood gathering have also 

reduced snag densities. 

The Forest is currently analyzing the Mountain Pine Beetle Response Project, which encompasses 

approximately 250,000 acres of National Forest System lands in South Dakota and Wyoming. The 

Proposed Action would treat recently infested MPB areas within 242,000 acres of ‘High Risk’ stands 

on National Forest System lands to reduce and slow the spread of MPB; and reduce wildfire hazard on 

the Forest. Integrated Pest Management techniques are proposed for areas that are at high risk and 

most susceptible to MPB infestation, with the objective of treating and removing infested trees before 

mountain pine beetles can disperse. However, none of these proposed treatments associated with the 

Mountain Pine Beetle Response Project would occur within the Calumet Project Area. 

Livestock grazing has occurred in the CPA for at least the past 100 years. Intensive grazing 

likely occurred initially, resulting in decreased shrubs and palatable grasses, degraded riparian 

habitats, and degraded meadows. The current, much improved grazing practices of the past 20-

30 years have allowed most areas to recover from impacts of early intensive grazing, but impacts 

do still occur. Effects of grazing would be the same under all alternatives, as this activity is 

outside the scope of this project. 

Roads can remove habitat, create barriers, or decrease habitat quality for some species (e.g., land 

snails). Their use by humans can also result in increased disturbance to wildlife, particularly to 

nesting raptors. High road densities increase accessibility, and can facilitate wildlife poaching and 

illegal removal of snags. Road densities have increased in the CPA as a result of vegetation 

management activities, private land development, and recreation. Alternative A would maintain 

current road densities and conditions. Alternative B would add, reconstruct, and maintain more 

roads. None of the alternatives would close any existing roads unless they were specifically created 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 215 

or upgraded for vegetation treatment activities. With respect to cumulative effects of roads, 

Alternative A would be most favorable for wildlife because it would not add roads. Alternative B 

would be the least favorable. Implementation of the Black Hills National Forest Travel Management 

Record of Decision (ROD) may add or close new road/ trails within the CPA. The effects to wildlife 

would remain the same, as this activity is outside the scope of the Calumet project. 

Homesteading was prevalent in the late 1800s and early 1900s, and most often occurred along 

streams and in meadows. Today, these areas are dominated by community and rural housing 

developments. This has permanently supplanted many acres of prime wildlife habitat in riparian 

areas and meadows. These habitats are very limited in extent. Riparian-associated species are 

most affected by these developments, which includes the song sparrow, beaver, black-and-white 

warbler, meadow jumping mouse, and many others. Private land development is still occurring, 

and the trend is expected to continue into the future. None of the CPA alternatives are contributing 

to these habitat losses. Alternative B would help improve the extent and quality of meadows on 

public lands through conifer removal treatments. Riparian areas would be largely unaffected. 

FISHERIES 

Affected Environment 

Fish native to the Black Hills include a few species of suckers, chubs and dace (USDA Forest 

Service 2005a). The mountain sucker is designated as a Rocky Mountain Region sensitive species 

and a Management Indicator Species (MIS) on the Black Hills National Forest. Other native fish 

species documented in the analysis area include the creek chub, fathead minnow, longnose dace 

and white sucker. There are no federally listed fish species in the analysis area (USFWS 2011). 

The primary recreational fishing opportunities in the project area are on Sheridan Lake and 

Spring Creek. Sheridan Lake is a 385-surface acre impoundment on Spring Creek, constructed 

from 1938-40, and is operated by the Forest Service. Recreational fisheries are comprised of 

non-native gamefish species, primarily trout. Brook and brown trout fisheries are sustained 

almost entirely by natural reproduction, whereas hatchery-raised rainbow trout are routinely 

stocked for high-use “put and take” fisheries. Brook and brown trout spawn in the fall with the 

fry emerging in late winter/early spring. A number of other gamefish species, such as bass, 

crappie, pike and perch, occur in Sheridan Lake due to incidental or illegal stockings. Of the 

twelve fish species reported in Sheridan Lake (SDGFP 2010), only the white sucker is a native 

species. A “walk-in” fishing experience exists on Spring Creek immediately downstream of 

Sheridan Dam, because no roads exist that are open to motorized vehicle use by the public. 

All streams and lakes in South Dakota are assigned the beneficial uses of irrigation and fish and 

wildlife propagation, recreation, and stock watering. Additional fish-specific uses assigned to 

surface waters in the Spring Creek drainage include coldwater permanent fish life propagation 

for Spring Creek upstream of Sheridan Lake and coldwater marginal fish life propagation for 

Spring Creek downstream of Sheridan Lake and also for Horse Creek. Coldwater marginal 

waters are suitable for stocked, catchable-size coldwater fish during portions of the year, but are 

not suitable for a permanent coldwater fish population because of critical natural conditions 

including low flows, siltation or warm temperatures. Spring Creek upstream of Sheridan Lake is 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 216 

not meeting its coldwater permanent fish use based on temperature criteria exceedance due to 

natural sources (SD DENR 2010). Sheridan Lake is assigned the beneficial use of coldwater 

permanent fish life propagation, which is not being attained due to low dissolved oxygen levels 

and warm water temperature (SD DENR 2010). Additional information on water resources can 

be found in the Watershed, Geology, and Soils section. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects

Fish species have evolved with natural disturbance events, such as mountain pine beetle 

epidemics and wildfire. In the short-term, fish populations may decline but they typically 

recover fairly quickly if watershed functions have not been severely and permanently degraded. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects

Direct and indirect effects to fisheries resulting from land management activities were disclosed in 

the Forest Plan Phase II Amendment FEIS (USDA Forest Service 2005a). Direct effects to fisheries 

are those in-water activities that have the potential to immediately injure or kill fish (all life stages). 

These in-water activities are typically associated with the installation or repair of structures, such as 

culverts at road-stream crossings. The normal operating season for road work is June 1 to November 

1, which minimizes the overlap with fall-spawning brook trout and brown trout, that are more 

susceptible to harm because their eggs are buried in the stream bottom in concentrated pockets 

(redds) and require a fairly long time to incubate, hatch and emerge as compared to native fishes. 

The implementation of design criteria to keep heavy equipment out of streams during October 1 

through April 1 should mitigate potential adverse direct effects to brook/brown trout. 

The indirect effects to fisheries are the predicted changes in water quality, flow regimes, stream 

temperature, etc. that result from implementation of the proposed action. These effects are disclosed 

in the Watershed, Geology, and Soils section of the EIS. The input of fine sediments from roads 

have the potential to adversely affects fisheries by reducing forage and pool depth and degrading 

spawning habitat. Implementation of Forest Plan standards and guidelines (Standards 1106, 1109, 

1113, 1201, 1203 and Guidelines 1115 and 3212), Rocky Mountain Region Watershed Conservation 

Practices (WCP’s; Forest Service Handbook 2509.25) and design criteria specific to the Calumet 

Project would control non-point source water pollution (sediment) and meet water quality standards. 

Subsequently, no long-term negative effects to fish spawning, rearing, foraging or sheltering are 

anticipated. No new barriers to fish movement would be created because all new instream structures 

would allow for the passage of fish consistent with Standard 1203. Effects specific to the mountain 

sucker are disclosed in the Biological Evaluation and summarized in Appendix D of this EIS. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 217 

Cumulative Effects 

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, such as recreational fishing, non-native fish 

stocking, livestock grazing, road use/maintenance and water impoundment would continue to 

directly or indirectly affect fish populations and/or their habitat under both the no action 

alternative and the proposed action. 

Overall, the proposed action could have a positive incremental impact to fishery resources. 

Vegetation treatments that move ecological conditions (reduced fuel loads and risk of 

catastrophic fire) to a more desired fire regime condition class would be beneficial. Ongoing 

road use and maintenance would continue to add sediment to the stream network and Sheridan 

Lake. The stream network would continue to be fragmented by Sheridan Dam and other 

instream barriers on private lands. The maintenance and improvement of existing road-stream 

crossings under the proposed action provides an opportunity to reduce sediment input into 

streams in the long-term and maintain or improve fish passage and aquatic habitat consistent 

with Objectives 103, 217, 219, and Standard 1203. 

Overall, habitat conditions to support recreational fishing opportunities would be maintained. 

No substantial increase in sediment transport to water bodies is anticipated and water quality 

criteria should be maintained. Fisheries beneficial uses that are not currently being met are likely 

to continue not to be met or if met, would be a result of actions undertaken outside the scope of 

the proposed action. 

The proposed action is not anticipated to spread existing populations of aquatic nuisance species 

(ANS; curlyleaf pondweed and European Rudd) in Sheridan Lake to other waterbodies or result in 

the introduction of new ANS in the project area. 

Emphasis Species 

Region 2 Sensitive Species 

The finescale dace, lake chub, and mountain sucker are Region 2 sensitive species known to 

occur on the Black Hills National Forest. There would be no impact to the finescale dace 

(Phoxinus neogaeus) or the lake chub (Couesius plumbeous), because neither of these species 

occurs in the analysis area (Isaak et al. 2003). 

The mountain sucker (Catostomus platyrhynchus) has been historically reported in Spring Creek 

and Horse Creek (Stewart and Thilenius 1964, Ford 1988, SDGFP 2009), within the Calumet 

Project Area. Schultz and Bertrand (2012) concluded after surveys in 2009, that mountain 

sucker appear to be extirpated from Spring Creek. Negative interactions with non-native trout in 

combination with recurrent droughts and stream fragmentation were cited as factors in the 

decline of mountain sucker. 

Direct effects are likely to be discountable given the potential absence of mountain sucker in the 

project area and the low probability of in-water activities in Horse Creek or Spring Creek. 

Effects to stream flow, water quality, sediment, etc. as disclosed in the geology, soil and water 

section are predicted to meet water quality standards through the implementation of Forest Plan 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 218 

standards and guidelines, regional watershed conservation practices and project-specific design 

criteria. Cumulative effects are likely to be negligible given the lack of direct effects and 

mitigated indirect effects. Subsequently, both alternatives would have no impact on the

mountain sucker because of its limited occurrence or potential absence in the analysis area and 

the lack of proposed management activities that are likely to directly or indirectly affect this 

species in Horse Creek or Spring Creek. Long-term viability for this species was evaluated in 

the Biological Evaluation (BE) for the Forest Plan Phase II Amendment (USDA Forest Service 

2005a). The Phase II BE determined that the mountain sucker was likely to persist for the next 

50 years if land management activities are implemented consistent with Forest Plan standards 

and guidelines. This project is consistent with the Forest Plan. 

Management Indicator Species 

The mountain sucker was selected as a Forest MIS to evaluate the effects of Forest Plan 

implementation on aquatic habitat quality and connectivity (USDA Forest Service 2005a). 

Based on the mountain sucker’s historic occurrence in the analysis area, it was identified for 

project-level MIS analysis. This MIS discussion focuses on this project’s effects on the Forestwide population and/or habitat trend and this project’s consistency with the mountain sucker 

MIS objective in the Forest Plan (Objective 238d). The mountain sucker is also a Region 2 

sensitive species. Direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to the mountain sucker are disclosed in 

the Biological Evaluation (BE) and summarized in Appendix D. 

The Forest-wide population trend for mountain sucker is one of decline when comparing past to 

present abundance and distribution (USDA Forest Service 2005a and 2010a, Schultz and 

Bertrand 2012). The proposed action would have a neutral effect on the Forest-wide population 

trend for the mountain sucker. The implementation of design criteria, Forest Plan standards and 

guidelines, and regional watershed conservation practices would meet the intent of Objective 

238d to maintain habitat quality and connectivity for this species. Reducing the fire/fuels hazard 

and the risk of mountain pine beetle infestation at the landscape level may have some minor 

positive benefits to this species indirectly through increased watershed resiliency, but the 

proposed action is not focused on the environmental threats identified by Schultz (2011), 

primarily the negative interaction with non-native fish in combination with recurrent drought and 

a fragmented stream network (Sheridan Dam), which are outside the scope of this decision. 

BOTANY 

This section is a synthesis of information provided in two separate documents: the Botany 

Biological Assessment/Evaluation, and the Botany Report. 

Affected Environment 

The Calumet Project Area supports a diversity of plant community types as a result of the range of 

elevation and variations in geology and geomorphology. At least 45 unique plant community

types were documented during surveys; with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) community types 

being the most abundant throughout the project area. Most drainages are characterized by mixed 

hardwoods including aspen (Populus tremuloides), paper birch (Betula papyrifera) and oak 

(Quercus macrocarpa). The availability of moist, deep soil in drainages contributes to increased 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 219 

plant diversity in these areas. Upland and riparian meadows consisting of grasses, sedges, forbs, 

and shrubs are interspersed throughout the project area. Habitat types and distribution are similar 

across the project area with no noticeable gradient moving from north to south. 

Suitable habitat for Region 2 sensitive species (R2) and Species of Local Concern (SOLC) is 

limited and confined to drainages within the project area. R2 and SOLC plants are primarily 

found in two habitat types: spruce with mixed hardwoods, and riparian areas with saturated to 

mesic soil moisture. Only one 25 acre stand of spruce was located during surveys, therefore it is 

possible, but unlikely, that R2 and SOLC plants associated with spruce and hardwoods would be 

present in the project area. Riparian community types are typically confined to narrow strips 

along perennial streams. Spring Creek is a 5th order stream that flows from the west boundary of 

the project area to the east boundary. Spring Creek supports a diversity of riparian vegetation 

and community types that have the potential to support R2 sensitive species and SOLC. 

Numerous intermittent streams with varying amounts of associated riparian vegetation occur 

throughout the project area. 

No Botanical Areas (Management Area 3.1), Research Natural Areas (Management Area 2.2), or 

other Management Areas emphasizing botanical conservation occur within the project boundary. 

Species Considered and Evaluated

Federally Listed Plant Species 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) website list for Threatened and Endangered 

species was accessed on November 18, 2011, for the state of South Dakota. As of this date, there 

were no threatened or endangered plant species known or suspected to occur within the Black 

Hills of South Dakota (USDI Fish & Wildlife Service 2011a and 2011b), nor were there any 

proposed or candidate threatened or endangered plant species known to occur in South Dakota 

(USDI Fish & Wildlife Service 2011c and 2011d). 

Threatened, endangered, and proposed plant species which could potentially occur on the Black 

Hills National Forest (BHNF) were identified and addressed through informal consultation with 

the South Dakota and Wyoming Field Offices of USFWS during the Phase II Amendment 

development (USDA Forest Service 2005). Subsequently, these threatened, endangered, or 

proposed species do not need to be further analyzed and are not mentioned in subsequent sections. 

No further analysis is needed for species not known or suspected to occur in the project area. 

It is my determination that implementation of any of the two alternatives as described will not 

affect any threatened or endangered plant species or designated critical habitat. Endangered 

Species Act Section 7 Consultation is not required for this project. 

Region 2 Sensitive Plant Species 

The Forest Service Manual defines sensitive species as those plant and animal species identified by a 

Regional Forester for which population viability is a concern, as evidence by:

• Significant current or predicted downward trends in population numbers or density. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 220 

• Significant current or predicted downward trends in habitat capability that would reduce a 

species’ existing distribution (Forest Service Manual 2670.5, 19). 

The most recent list of Region 2 sensitive species issued by the Regional Forester took effect May 

25, 2011 (USDA Forest Service 2011a). All Region 2 sensitive plant species confirmed to occur 

in the Black Hills National Forest were considered in the evaluation. No Region 2 sensitive 

species are known to occur within the project area. Habitat exists in the Calumet Project Area for 

eight Region 2 sensitive plant species. Habitat types for Region 2 sensitive species in the project 

area can be categorized as white spruce and hardwood dominated drainages, wet meadows and 

unknown habitat classification. Species that fall into the “unknown habitat” classification have 

insufficient information available to determine a specific habitat type; therefore, it will be assumed 

they have the potential to occur within any habitat type in the project area. Table 3-32 summarizes 

Region 2 sensitive plant species having suitable habitat within Calumet Project Area. Based on 

available information, species with habitat preferences differing from habitat types present within 

the Calumet Project Area were not analyzed. 

Table 3-32 Region 2 Sensitive Plant Species with Suitable Habitat in Calumet Project Area 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME KNOWN TO 

OCCUR IN 

PROJECT 

AREA

SUITABLE 

HABITAT

HABITAT CATEGORY FOR 

ANALYSIS

Botrychium 

campestre 

prairie moonwort N + + 

Botrychium lineare narrowleaf 

grapefern 

N + + 

Carex alopecoidea fox-tail sedge N Y wet meadow 

Cypripedium 

parviflorum

yellow lady’s 

slipper 

N Y white spruce/hardwood 

drainage 

Lycopodium 

complanatum

trailing clubmoss N Y white spruce/hardwood 

drainage 

Platanthera 

orbiculata 

large round-leaved 

orchid 

N Y white spruce/hardwood 

drainage 

Sanguinaria 

canadensis 

bloodroot N Y hardwood drainage 

Viburnum opulus 

var. americanum 

highbush cranberry N Y hardwood drainage 

+Based on limited knowledge of habitat requirements for this species, presence/absence of suitable habitat in the 

project area and the habitat category for analysis were not determined. 

Species of Local Concern (SOLC) 

A Species of Local Concern is described in the Forest Service Manual as plant, fish or wildlife 

species (including subspecies or varieties) that do not meet the criteria for sensitive status. These 

could include species with declining trends in only a portion of Region 2, or those that are 

important components of diversity in a local area. The local area is defined as NFS lands within 

the Black Hills National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2005). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 221 

The most recent list of Species of Local Concern issued by the Black Hills National Forest 

Deputy Supervisor took effect August 23, 2011 (USDA Forest Service 2011b). No Species of 

Local Concern are known to occur within the project area. Habitat exists in the Calumet Project 

Area for nine Species of Local Concern. Habitat types for plant Species of Local Concern in the 

project area can be categorized as white spruce and hardwood dominated drainages, wet 

meadows, and unknown habitat classification. Species that fall into the “unknown habitat” 

classification have insufficient information available to determine a specific habitat type; 

therefore, it will be assumed they have the potential to occur within any habitat type in the 

project area. Any potentially suitable habitat that may exist for SOLC overlaps with suitable 

habitat for R2 sensitive species. Table 3-33 summarizes SOLC having suitable habitat within 

Calumet Project Area. Based on available information, species with habitat preferences differing 

from habitat types present within the Calumet Project Area were not analyzed. 

Table 3-33 Plant Species of Local Concern with Suitable Habitat in Calumet Project Area 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME KNOWN TO 

OCCUR IN 

PROJECT AREA

SUITABLE 

HABITAT

HABITAT CATEGORY 

FOR ANALYSIS

Botrychium multifidum leathery grapefernN Y white spruce/hardwood 

drainage 

Gentiana puberulenta downy gentian N Y + 

Listera convallarioides broadlipped 

twayblade 

N Y white spruce/hardwood 

drainage 

Lycopodium annotinum stiff clubmoss N Y white spruce/hardwood 

drainage 

Mitella pentandra fivestamen 

miterwort 

N Y white spruce/hardwood 

drainage 

Petasites figidus var. 

sagittatus 

arrowleaf sweet 

coltsfoot

N Y wet meadow 

Polystichum lonchitis northern hollyfern N Y hardwood drainage 

Salix lucida shining willow 

(eastern species) 

N Y wet meadow 

Salix lasiandra var. caudata shining willow 

(western species) 

N Y wet meadow 

+Based on limited knowledge of habitat requirements for this species, presence/absence of suitable habitat in the 

project area and the habitat category for analysis were not determined. 

Other Plant Species 

There are several uncommon plants in the Calumet Project Area that do not appear on the R2 

sensitive species list or the Black Hills SOLC list, but they merit consideration. Plants tracked 

by the South Dakota Natural Heritage Database are of particular conservation concern. These 

plants and their conservation status are listed in Table 3-34. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 222 

Table 3-34 Other Plant Species of Interest Known to Occur in the Calumet Project Area 

SCIENTIFIC NAME TARGET LIST * SD RANK** TOTAL FOUND IN 

SURVEYS

Prenanthes racemosa var. multiflora II NRUR 2 

Cynoglossum virginianum var. boreale SD S3 2 

Carex rosea II NRUR 2 

Polygonatum biflorum PI NRUR 11 

Circaea lutetiana ssp. canadensis II NRUR 6 

Botrychium michiganense II NRUR 3 

Botrychium simplex SD S3 45 

Orobanche uniflora SD S2 1 

Achnatherum robustum SD S3 1 

Dichanthelium linearifolium II NRUR 1 

Hierochloe odorata PI NRUR 2 

Selaginella leptostachya II NRUR 1 

Phryma leptostachya PI NRUR 2 

* Target List: II = insufficient information; PI = other species of interest; SD = South Dakota Natural Heritage 

Database Ranked 

** SD Rank: S1 = critically imperiled; S2 = imperiled; S3 = vulnerable; S4 = apparently secure; NRUR = not 

ranked or under review (may or may not be rare); ? = inexact rank. 

Environmental Consequences 

An effects analysis was completed for those species that could potentially be impacted by the 

proposed project. This analysis addresses Region 2 sensitive species and Species of Local 

Concern with suitable habitat in the project area. No further analysis is needed for species that are 

not known or suspected to occur in the project area, and for which no suitable habitat is present.

No populations of R2 sensitive species or plant SOLC are known to occur in the project area 

therefore, the effects analysis focuses on effects to habitat types that could potentially support 

these species. Any potentially suitable habitat that may exist for Black Hills National Forest 

Species of Local Concern overlaps with suitable habitat for Region 2 sensitive species. Therefore, 

effects to R2 sensitive species and their habitat include potential habitat for SOLC as well. 

The Calumet Project Area has suitable habitat for the following species: 

• R2 sensitive species: Botrychium campestre, Botrychium lineare, Carex alopecoidea, 

Cypripedium parviflorum, Lycopodium complanatum, Platanthera orbiculata, 

Sanguinaria canadensis, and Viburnum opulus var. americanum

• SOLC: Botrychium multifidum, Gentiana puberulenta, Listera convallarioides, 

Lycopodium annotinum, Mitella pentandra, Petasites figidus var. sagittatus, Polystichum 

lonchitis, Salix lucida, and Salix lasiandra var. caudata.

Because suitable habitats for the analyzed Region 2 sensitive plant species and Species of Local 

Concern can be grouped into like habitats, effects analysis were combined for species based on 

habitat type as divided in Table 3-35. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 223 

Table 3-35 Habitat Types for Region 2 Sensitive Species Analyzed in Effects Analysis 

Suitable Habitat Type R2 Species included in 

habitat 

SOLC Species included in habitat 

Drainages associated with white 

spruce and hardwoods 

 Cypripedium parviflorum, 

Lycopodium complanatum, 

Platanthera orbiculata

Botrychium multifidum, Listera 

convallarioides, Lycopodium 

annotinum, Mitella pentandra 

Hardwood drainages Sanguinaria canadensis, 

Viburnum opulus var. 

americanum 

Wetlands Carex alopecoidea Petasites frigidus var. sagittatus, 

Salix lucida, Salix lasiandra var. 

caudata 

Unknown habitat classification Botrychium campestre, 

Botrychium lineare 

Gentiana puberulenta 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - R2 Sensitive Species and SOLC Occurring in All Habitat Types 

Under Alternative A (no action), there would be no negative and/or beneficial direct effects to 

any of the habitat groups because implementation of elements of the proposed action would not 

take place. Ongoing management activities such as road maintenance, fire suppression, livestock 

grazing, and small scale mining would continue as directed by the Forest Plan. See the 

Cumulative Effects section for a discussion of these and other management activities within the 

project area. Regardless of which alternative is chosen, natural disturbances would continue to 

occur within the project area. These disturbances may include fire and ponderosa pine mortality 

from mountain pine beetle infestation. 

Low intensity/severity fires, commonly associated with light fuels (grass and small diameter 

woody debris) generally do not burn continuously or with great heat through white spruce

drainages, hardwood dominated drainages, or wetlands and therefore do not have a catastrophic 

impact on these community types. If the project area remains untreated, over time there would be 

an increase in the amount of fuel in the area as trees are killed by mountain pine beetle and fall 

leading to an increased risk of high intensity/severity wildfire. High severity fires can have long 

lasting impacts on plant communities by altering soil, hydrologic, and biochemical processes in an 

ecosystem (Lentile et al. 2006). These impacts could potentially affect all habitat types. 

Over time, if no action is taken within the Calumet Project Area, mountain pine beetles would 

continue to cause ponderosa pine mortality. As the trees fall, more sunlight and precipitation 

would be allowed through the canopy to the understory. Increased sunlight and precipitation can 

change the microclimate and ultimately the vegetation composition of habitat types. Fallen trees 

could also crush sensitive species and cover up suitable habitat. These impacts could potentially 

affect all habitat types but would have the greatest impacts in the unknown habitat classification. 

Ponderosa pine are not the dominant overstory species in the wetland, hardwood, and white 

spruce drainage habitat types, therefore death of ponderosa pine would not have as great of an 

effect on understory vegetation. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 224 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Species Occurring in White Spruce/Hardwood Drainages 

Under Alternative B, treatment would not occur in the white spruce/hardwood drainage because the 

ground is inoperable. Because treatments would not be taking place in this habitat type, there would 

be no direct effects to sensitive species. Indirect effects to sensitive species could include an increase 

in dust pollution from road use. Sensitive plants that are undetected along roads could experience 

reduced photosynthetic capacity due to a coating of dust on the leaves. Ground disturbance from 

equipment and log skidding could create bare soil. During large rain events, bare soil could wash into 

the drainage covering sensitive species and creating areas vulnerable to weed invasion. 

White spruce with mixed hardwoods occur in parts of the northern Black Hills and on north facing 

slopes or moist shaded areas in parts of the central hills. Within the Calumet Project Area, there is 

very limited habitat containing spruce (approximately 25 acres). Because spruce is found in areas 

where soil moisture is higher and evaporation rates are lower than habitats supporting ponderosa pine, 

low intensity fires do not generally carry through these areas. However, if fuel moisture was low 

enough for fire to occur in these areas, it would remove the understory and litter layer from the forest 

floor. This loss of organic matter could decrease the moisture content of the soil. The heat generated 

by combustion of organic matter could also damage the mycorrhizal fungi community upon which 

some sensitive species are dependent, however this effect is usually slight if fire intensity is kept low 

(Bastias et al. 2006). In addition, burning removes existing understory vegetation, reducing 

competition, and opening up habitat for invasion by other species. Once established, these exotic 

species could out-compete native vegetation causing a shift in the plant composition of the area. 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Species Occurring in Unknown Habitat Classification and 

Hardwood Habitats

Effects to Unknown habitat type include all habitat types within the Calumet Project Area. Because 

management including timber harvest, log skidding, tree felling, slash burning, road building and 

prescribed burning may occur in hardwood habitats, as well as unknown habitat classification, the 

effects of those activities would be combined for the two habitat types. 

Direct negative effects of the proposed action to undetected individuals could include destruction of 

individuals during tree felling, road building and skidding operations, burial, crushing, uprooting, and 

burning of individuals by slash piles, trampling by equipment and/or personnel, and burning of at least 

above ground parts as part of broadcast prescribed burning. 

Application of fire, particularly broadcast prescribed burning, removes the understory and litter layer 

from the forest floor. This loss of organic matter could decrease the moisture content of the soil. In 

addition, burning removes existing understory vegetation, reducing competition, and opening up 

habitat for invasion by other species. These effects are magnified in areas experiencing intense/severe 

burns, such as slash piles (Haskins and Gehring 2004). Once established, these exotic species could 

out-compete native vegetation causing a shift in the plant composition of the area. 

Indirect effects of conifer removal would be a more open canopy that would allow more sunlight 

and precipitation to reach the ground, possibly altering habitat characteristics. Depending on the 

species, these alterations could be beneficial or harmful. See the Botany Biological Evaluation 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 225 

for a discussion of effects to individual Region 2 sensitive species. Potentially beneficial indirect 

effects result from expansion of hardwood and meadow communities by removal of encroaching 

conifers. These treatments may result in direct impacts to plants and key fungal and biological 

relationships in the short-term, but improve sensitive plant habitat over the long-term by 

preventing the conversion of the stand to ponderosa pine. These effects would be greater in the 

unknown habitat type compared to the hardwood habitat type because conifers are not the 

dominant overstory species in the hardwood habitat type. 

Other potential indirect effects could result from greater use of existing roads for hauling resulting in 

an increase in dust pollution. Sensitive plants that are undetected along roads could experience 

reduced photosynthetic capacity due to a coating of dust on the leaves. Also, removal of timber may 

also open access to areas previously protected from impacts by livestock and illegal off-road vehicle 

use. Increased livestock utilization and illegal off-road travel in previously inaccessible areas not only 

increases the potential for grazing, trampling, and other losses of individuals, but also increases the 

chance for non-native species invasion. 

Direct and Indirect Effects - Species Occurring in Wet Meadows 

Wetlands are protected from damaging management activities by the Clean Water Act, the USFS 

R2 Watershed Conservation Practices Handbook, South Dakota Best Management Practices, 

Forest Plan standards and guidelines, and Design Criteria. Direct impacts to wetland habitats 

could include destruction of individuals during tree felling and skidding operations, and trampling 

by equipment and/or personnel. However, state and federal regulations, as well as Design Criteria 

specific to this project protect wetland habitats from activities that would have damaging effects to 

ecosystem health. Indirect effects of timber harvest and prescribed burning could include 

increased sediment or debris after rainfall events, increased surface water from runoff and snow 

melt, and alteration of hydrology. Timber harvest, road building activities, and prescribed burning 

would increase the amount of bare soil for the short-term. Large rain events could cause erosion of 

hillsides and increase sediments and/or debris in drainage ways and streams. Rain and snow melt 

reaching wetlands may also increase in the short term because there would be less vegetation to 

stop or slow the movement of surface water down drainage ways. Large rain events can deliver 

large amounts of water to wetlands in a relatively short amount of time (Moore et. al. 2006). This 

rapid flow of water may have to potential to cut stream banks or deposit sediment or debris in 

wetland. Alteration of hydrology can occur when roads bisect natural drainage ways. Water 

would then be diverted either towards or away from the wetland. 

Other potential indirect effects result from greater use of existing roads for hauling resulting in an 

increase in dust pollution. Sensitive plants that are undetected along roads could experience reduced 

photosynthetic capacity due to a coating of dust on the leaves. Also, removal of timber may also open 

access to areas previously protected from impacts by livestock and illegal off-road vehicle use. 

Wetlands are particularly susceptible to damage from off-road vehicles and impacts from livestock 

use. Increased livestock utilization and illegal off-road travel in previously inaccessible areas not only 

increases the potential for grazing, trampling, and other losses of individuals, but also increases the 

chance for non-native species invasion. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 226 

Cumulative Effects 

The cumulative effects are bound in space by an area half a mile outside the project area, because 

the influence of other management activities (particularly timber management) on botanical 

resources is primarily determined by impacts on hydrology and a half-mile buffer is sufficient to 

capture this influence. The cumulative effects are bound in time ten years prior to the decision 

and ten years after the decision because this is the average amount of time between vegetation 

treatments in any given area. 

The Calumet Project Area is in Management Area 3.7 - Late Successional Forest Landscape, 5.1- 

Resource Production Emphasis, 5.4 - Big Game Winter Range, and 8.2 - Developed Recreation 

Complexes. Management of these areas would continue as directed by the Forest Plan regardless 

of which alternative is chosen. These activities could include, but are not limited to, range 

improvements, prescribed burning, road or trail improvements, and recreational developments. 

These activities would require separate environmental review and analysis of effects on 

resources to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act therefore they will not be 

addressed in the cumulative effects analysis. 

Current and ongoing activities that would continue regardless of which alternative is chosen include: 

firewood gathering, Christmas tree cutting, utility right-of-way maintenance, grazing, small scale 

mining, wildfire suppression, recreation, and development of private lands. 

Firewood gathering occurs in designated areas, generally away from known occurrences of sensitive 

species and their habitat, therefore the risk of firewood gathering to sensitive plant species is low. 

This activity would most likely be more common in the project area if Alternative B is chosen 

because firewood gathering areas are usually associated with slash piles and former timber sales. 

Because Christmas tree cutting occurs Forest-wide, it can affect sensitive plant species and their 

habitat. Because this activity occurs when the ground is frozen and the impact area is small, the risk 

to Region 2 sensitive plant species is low and generally limited to removing spruce trees which 

provide shade and microhabitat. This activity would remain at current levels if regardless of which 

alternative is chosen. This activity would affect hardwood and white spruce drainages, wet 

meadows, and unknown habitat classification suitable habitat types. 

Road and utility right-of-way clearing affects areas already impacted by the presence of roads and 

utility corridors. Effects of these activities are similar to those of timber sales and include crushing, 

trampling, and uprooting of individual plants, as well as changing the light and moisture regime 

within the project area. This activity would continue at current levels regardless of which alternative 

is chosen. This activity would affect hardwood and white spruce drainages, wet meadows, and 

unknown habitat classification suitable habitat types. 

Livestock grazing affects most of the project area, with the greatest impacts on meadows, riparian, 

and wet areas. Impacts to sensitive plant species includes trampling and grazing on individuals by 

livestock, as well as soil disturbance and compaction. If Alternative B is chosen, livestock grazing 

could potentially impact a wider area of NFS lands because thinning would increase understory 

forest production as well as increase grazing accessibility. This could have a both a positive and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 227 

negative impact on sensitive species. It could help more evenly distribute grazing and decrease 

impacts to suitable habitat such as meadows, riparian areas and drainages where rare plant species 

may be found. On the other hand, it could allow livestock to reach areas that were previously 

protected due to tree density. If Alternative A is chosen, livestock grazing may be further 

concentrated into meadows and riparian areas because as conifers encroach on meadows and convert 

from grassland to woodlands, less forage is available to livestock outside of the open grassy areas. 

This would result in livestock concentrating in smaller areas, particularly meadows and drainages, 

for longer periods of time, thus increasing their impact on these habitats. 

 

Small scale mining occurs Forest-wide and in a variety of habitats, therefore it has the potential to 

affect all R2 sensitive species, SOLC and their habitat. The results of these activities can have longterm effects on rare plants and their habitats and include destruction of above and below ground 

plant parts and alteration of suitable habitat by digging, overstory removal, and weed invasions. 

Mining would continue to occur at the same rate regardless of which alternative is chosen. 

Under Alternative A, wildfire suppression would continue at current levels however, the risk of 

wildfires may increase over time due to increased fuel loads in the area from pine regeneration and/or 

mountain pine beetle kill. Under Alternative B, wildfire suppression would continue at current levels 

however, the risk of wildfires may decrease due to reduction of fuels in the project area. 

Private land within and adjacent to the Calumet Project Area would continue to be developed 

regardless of which alternative is chosen. Development of private land decreases the amount of 

suitable habitat available for Region 2 sensitive species and Species of Local Concern. 

SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT 

This section will describe the affected environment and environmental consequences for each 

alternative to the Social Environment (Travel Management, Scenic Quality, Recreation Use, Lands 

and Special Uses, Heritage, and Social). 

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT 

Background 

The Record of Decision (ROD) for the Black Hills National Forest Travel Management Plan was 

signed on May 7, 2010. Implementation began with publication of the initial Motorized Vehicle

Use Map effective December 1, 2010, and a subsequent revision for 2012. The Travel 

Management Plan will help meet the increasing demand for recreational travel opportunities and 

provide a range of quality experiences for Forest users, while offering many recreational 

opportunities over time. The ROD designated 707 miles of system trails of various types Forestwide, as well as 548 miles of roads open to all vehicles. These roads and trails were designated 

to provide diverse motorized recreation opportunities in off-highway settings rather than roaded 

settings, to meet user interests and best manage public safety risks, disperse users, and reduce 

crowding and conflicts with other users. Motorized cross-country travel is prohibited, other than 

for dispersed camping and game retrieval along selected routes. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 228 

The Travel Management Plan recognizes that the total number of off-highway vehicle miles included 

in the decision will not likely be available in a given year, with some trails closed for project work or 

seasonal closures. The ROD also acknowledges that certain designated routes may not be available in 

any particular season or year because of contractor or timber purchaser operations, public safety, or 

resource concerns, leading to reduced miles available for OHV recreation. 

Affected Environment 

Displayed in Table 3-36 below are the miles of various types of routes designated for motorized 

travel in the Calumet Project Area by the Forest Travel Management Plan Record of Decision 

(ROD). Also shown in the table below are the trail mileages open for motorized travel as shown 

on the 2011 Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM). Miles of open trails is lower on the MVUM 

than designated in the ROD, since a number of trails require improvement before 

accommodating motorized traffic. The number of miles of roads open seasonally to highway 

legal vehicles is greater on the MVUM than in the ROD, because many of those roads will 

become roads open to all vehicles when the ROD is fully implemented. The trails and roads 

open to all vehicles in the project area are scattered along the northeastern boundary in the 

Victoria Lake area, and adjacent to and west of Highway 385 in the Horse Creek area. 

Road and trail conditions vary throughout the project area. In areas with currently active timber 

sales, roads meet maintenance standards due to recent or ongoing maintenance activities by the 

timber purchaser. Other roads and trails that were system roads prior to becoming a designated trail 

likely do not meet maintenance standards. All or portions of some trails were “unauthorized” routes 

submitted by the public prior to designation. None of these routes have been maintained to any 

standard, and some of these routes may be poorly located, do not have adequate drainage structures, 

and may have steep grades with rutting and surface material loss resulting in sediment movement. 

Table 3-36 Miles of Routes in the Calumet Project Area Designated for Motorized Vehicle Use By the Black 

Hills National Forest Travel Management Plan Record of Decision, and the 2011 Motor Vehicle Use Map

Route Type Open Yearlong Open Seasonally Total 

ROD MVUM ROD MVUM ROD MVUM 

Highway Legal Only 38 38 13 23 51 61 

Roads Open To All 11 1 0 0 11 1 

Trails Open To All 2 0 1 1 3 1 

Trails Open to Vehicles <62” 3 2 0 0 3 2 

Trails Open to Motorcycles 4 2 1 0 5 2 

TOTAL 58 43 15 24 73 67 

Note: Miles of National Forest System Roads closed yearlong = 42. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Under Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, there would be no direct effects to motorized 

recreation or to designated routes because no proposed activities would occur in the project area. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 229 

Some beneficial, indirect effects include no increased dust, noise, and traffic associated with 

project activities under Alternative B. 

Adverse, indirect effects of the No Action Alternative are that maintenance, 

relocation/reconstruction, and closures of routes not designated for motorized travel that are 

associated with and funded by timber harvest would not occur. Trails with steeper grades and 

those without adequate drainage structures would continue to erode and rutting would deepen as 

surface material continues to wash off the road. Soil and water resources would continue to be 

negatively affected by soil movement and sedimentation. Motorized recreation experiences 

would be negatively affected as the condition of the roads and trails continues to deteriorate. 

Unauthorized roads not designated for motorized travel would remain on the landscape, possibly 

leading to illegal use. Existing road closures in the project area that are currently ineffective 

would not be reinforced to restrict motorized travel until additional funding could be obtained. 

Continued motorized use of routes and areas meant to be closed to motorized travel would 

negatively impact those routes and areas, as well as the non-motorized recreational experiences 

of those seeking quiet and solitude. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The action alternative proposes construction, reconstruction, maintenance, and reinforcement of 

some existing but ineffective road closures. Direct effects from these activities are short-term 

vegetation loss/removal, soil disturbance and compaction, and an increase in noise, dust, and 

traffic during project operations. Some motorized trails and roads open to all that were system 

roads prior to designation as trails would be converted back to system roads to accommodate 

project activities and thus would not be available for non-highway legal motorized use, either 

seasonally or yearlong. Trails needed for project activities that were unauthorized routes or citizen 

submitted routes prior to designation would be closed to all motorized use during project activities, 

including non-commercial treatments. Project activities could also delay opening of designated 

trails and roads open to all that are not currently open, until after project activities are completed. 

Beneficial direct and indirect effects include maintenance, and relocation/reconstruction of some 

trails and roads open to all that are utilized for project activities would occur. Closures 

associated with and funded by timber harvest of some routes not designated for motorized travel 

would also occur. All road work would comply with Best Management Practices and road 

design criteria. Safety issues would be addressed in the road design phase. Some routes would 

be realigned and relocated to reduce steep grades. Newly constructed routes could provide 

additional motorized recreation opportunities with the potential to be added to the designated 

trail system at some point in the future. The newly constructed closed roads could, however, 

lead to illegal motorized use of the routes. 

Newly constructed routes would be closed to motorized vehicles upon completion of harvest 

activities. Long-term, miles of roads and trails designated for motorized recreation would not 

change as a result of implementation of Alternative B, therefore the mileages shown in Table 3-

36 above would remain the same post-project. As previously noted, the miles of roads and trails 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 230 

designated by the Forest Travel Management Plan ROD for motorized travel, as displayed 

above, are the maximum amount of routes available; not all the routes would be available for 

motorized recreation in any given year, regardless of project activities. 

Cumulative Effects 

There are potential cumulative effects to the larger motorized trail system across the Forest. 

Temporary changes from trails to roads would likely be needed in other parts of the Forest, in 

addition to the Calumet Project Area, to respond to vegetation management needs associated with 

the ongoing mountain pine beetle epidemic. These additional temporary changes to the motorized 

trail system could affect the total amount of trails available to recreation users at any given time, and 

also affect the connectivity of various trails within the system. 

SCENIC QUALITY 

Affected Environment 

The Calumet Project Area is located southwest of Rapid City, and northeast of Hill City, on the 

Black Hills National Forest. Recreationists, permittees, and homeowners travel through this 

planning area on a daily basis. During the spring and fall, the area is heavily used by hunters. In 

the summer, the area is heavily used for camping, fishing, boating, and hiking. 

Mountain pine beetle (MPB) activity – resulting in killed “red needle” pine trees - is evident 

from communities, recreation facilities (i.e., campgrounds – public and private), trails, highways, 

and private lands outside communities. Scenery is an important to people that live and work in 

the area, and to those visiting the area. The main difference between the Black Hills and the 

surrounding landscape (to the north, east, and south) is the vegetation, specifically trees, and the 

landform, canyons and “hills.” People enjoy the natural beauty of these two landscape elements 

– whether it is the shade, the forest canopy above, or the green carpet of trees that blankets the 

hills – people value this forested landscape for its beauty. 

Valued Landscape Character 

Landscape character gives a geographic area its visual and cultural image, and consists of the 

combination of physical, biological, and cultural attributes that make each landscape identifiable 

or unique. Existing landscape character may range from predominantly natural landscapes to 

those that are heavily culturally influenced. The landscape character units are derived from an 

ecological framework utilizing ecological land descriptions and existing landscape uses. 

Ecological units are the mapped landscape analysis units used for ecosystem planning and 

management. The visual image created by the physical, biological, and cultural factors in the 

ecological land unit description helps define the landscape character for scenery management. 

Scenic Class measures the relative importance of, or value, of discrete landscape areas having 

similar characteristics of scenic attractiveness and landscape visibility. Scenic Class is used to 

compare the value of scenery with the value of other resources. The components of Scenic Class 

are Scenic Attractiveness (which is based upon human perceptions of the intrinsic beauty of 

landform, water characteristics, vegetative pattern, and cultural land use) and Landscape 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 231 

Visibility (which is based upon the distance zones from the observer and the concern level for 

scenery. The higher the Scenic Class, the more important it is to maintain the highest scenic 

value. The inventoried Scenic Class Values, on the Black Hills NF, are 1 (Highest), 2, 3, and 4 

(Lowest). The scenic class values demonstrate the importance of the views in different areas. 

Approximately 49% of the Calumet Project Area is designated as Class 1, 36% a Class 2, 15% a 

Class 3, and 0% a Class 4. 

Inherent Scenic Attractiveness is obtained by classifying the landscape into different degrees of 

variety. This determines which landscapes are most important and those that are of lesser value 

from the standpoint of scenic quality. The classification is based on the premise that all 

landscapes have some value, but those with the most variety or diversity have the greatest 

potential for high scenic value. The combination of valued landscape elements such as landform, 

water characteristics, vegetation, and cultural features are used in determining the measure of 

scenic attractiveness. Scenic attractiveness classifications are: A - Distinctive, B – Typical, and 

C - Indistinctive. Approximately 15 % of the Calumet Project Area is in the Class A - 

Distinctive classification, 66 % in the Class B – Typical, and 19 % in the Class C – Indistinctive. 

Landscape Visibility is the portions of landscapes visible from travel ways and use areas. Which 

are important to constituents for their scenic quality, aesthetic values, and landscape merits. 

Travel ways and use areas are identified and classified during the Forest-wide planning process, 

in order to determine which observer locations, and their importance, to use in the landscape 

visibility analysis. 

Concern Level 1 travel ways that lead to important scenic features, residential areas, resorts, 

recreation areas, unique natural phenomena, wilderness trailheads, national parks, state and 

county parks, attract higher percentage of users having high concern for scenic quality, thus 

increasing the importance of those travel ways. 

The majority of the views from roads in the project area are limited to the Foreground and 

Middleground distances. Approximately 66 % of the USFS lands within the planning area are 

viewed from Concern Level 1 Corridors (where people have the highest concern for scenery) 

including U.S. and State Highways, main trails (Centennial and Flume trails), recreation facilities 

(campgrounds, picnic areas, beaches), and communities. 

Approximately 50 % of the USFS lands within the planning area are viewed from Concern Level 

2 Corridors (where people have the moderate to high concern for scenery in this area) including: 

County Roads, other trails, and other private lands. 

Scenic Integrity Objectives (SIO) are management objectives that were adopted from the scenic 

class values. Scenic Integrity is a measure of the degree to which a landscape is visually 

perceived to be “complete.” The highest scenic integrity ratings are given to those landscapes 

that have little or no deviation from the character valued by constituents for its aesthetic appeal 

(USDA FS 1995, Chapter 2, pg. 1). Within the Calumet Project Area, approximately 47 % have 

a HIGH SIO, 34 % a MODERATE SIO, 19 % a LOW SIO. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 232 

Existing Scenic Integrity represents the current status of a landscape. It is determined on the basis 

of visual changes that detract from the scenic quality of the area. Direct human alterations may be 

included if they have become accepted over time as positive landscape character values. Existing 

scenic integrity is the current visual state, which is measured in degrees of deviation from the 

natural appearance of the landscape character type. These ratings give an indication of the present 

level of visual quality and visual evidence of management activities. The frame of reference for 

measuring achievement of scenic integrity levels is the valued attributes of the existing landscape 

character unit being viewed. In natural or natural appearing character, this is limited to natural or 

natural appearing vegetative patterns, features of water and rock, and landforms. 

The area is noted for Sheridan Lake, a man-made reservoir, which has been accepted over time as 

a positive landscape character value (in a landscape essentially devoid of natural lakes). Conifer 

stands blanket the gently rolling, and in places steep, terrain. Meadows generally can be found 

along streams and intermittent streams, and are limited in size by encroaching pine trees. There 

are pockets of aspen and other hardwood trees, which are also limited by pine trees. Forested areas 

are predominantly populated by ponderosa pine communities, but small isolated Spruce 

communities can be found along streams and in wet areas. Water features include Sheridan Lake 

(approximately 281 acres), Spring Creek, and other small, low-flow, intermittent streams. 

Apparent human alterations in the form of roads have generally been accepted over time as part 

of the positive cultural landscape character attributes – when they do not dominate the landscape 

in appearance or quantity, and are limited around non-motorized areas or recreation facilities. 

Vegetation alterations in the form of fuel treatments (small trees removed), noncommercial 

thinning, commercial thinning, seed tree cuts, and overstory removals are scattered, and only 

readily apparent when adjacent to a main road. Pine and spruce stands are expanding into 

meadows and hardwood stands. 

The areas around the lake, and in the campgrounds, primarily the Foreground areas were logged 

within the past five years. Efforts were made to have minimal visual impact and meet a High 

Scenic Integrity Objective. Once the slash was treated, and a growing season to re-establish 

ground cover, those efforts met a High SIO. 

Overall the appearance of trees attacked by MPB changes from green, to light green as the tree 

slowly dies, during these phases the tree still appears “alive” to most observers. The “red” stage is 

the most visible – when the tree is dead and the needles are red in color. Eventually, the needles 

will fall off (usually one to two years), and the trees appear gray in the landscape. Currently, the 

MPB are spreading into more heavily traveled portions of the Forest and are much more visible to 

the general public. In addition, due to the limitations of logging equipment to less than 40% 

slopes, vegetation is going un-managed and natural processes are taking place on these steeper 

slopes. Trees are evident in the green/red/gray stages across the Forest. Trees killed and down 

from MPB activity are not readily apparent, except along hiking trails in the Black Elk Wilderness 

and other portions of the Forest where MPB activity killed the trees years ago. However, this 

would change within the next two to seven years, as trees on steep slopes (greater than 40% slope), 

visible from US and State Highways, are coming under attack of MPB. A landscape covered by 

green forest was identified as the single best predictor of public acceptance of Scenic Integrity 

(Visual Quality Classes), in a Canadian Public Perception study of Mountain Pine Beetle Attack. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 233 

Across a landscape, as the green forest diminishes and turns red, then grey, the public will less like 

the landscape they are viewing (British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range 2010). 

In the surrounding landscape, outside this planning area, past vegetation treatments are evident in 

the middle ground and background views from the Calumet Project Area. Areas to the north – 

the “Bald Hills” – are open grass lands, to the west and east is an inter-mix of Forest and open 

meadows, to the south is predominantly forested. Mountain pine beetle is predominantly evident 

on the outside the planning area to the southwest - Black Elk and around Three Forks areas. 

Environmental Consequences 

Analysis Method 

Scenery assessment illustrates how the features of the landscape can be inventoried and analyzed 

so managers can compare and evaluate vegetation management treatments based on an 

understanding of how people value their environment. 

Four primary steps were followed in the scenery assessment of the Calumet Project Area, 

including: 1) Identify and the landscape character; 2) Identify the key scenic features 

(identified in scenic class and scenic attractiveness Forest GIS layers), and landscape visibility 

of the area; 3) Compare the existing scenic integrity with the Black Hills National Forest LRMP 

Scenic Integrity Objectives assigned to this area; 4) Evaluate the expected level of scenic 

integrity resulting from the Alternatives. 

Alternative A-No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Existing conditions and natural processes of trees growing and regenerating are expected to 

continue. The quantity of trees within the forest could become denser. These conditions are 

primed for normal ecological processes, in the form of wildland fire, insects and disease, to take 

place. These ecological processes are not easily controlled and may affect natural resources in a 

manner that is undesirable or move the landscape vegetation away from the Desired Future 

Condition in areas that are valued for their scenic beauty. 

Currently, there is a large out-break of mountain pine beetle (MPB) in the forest. In areas similar 

to the Calumet Project Area, with a basal area of 90 or greater, the MPB have killed the majority 

of trees (approaching 100%). Currently, there is evidence (attacked and killed trees have needles 

that have turned red) of small pockets of MPB activity within the planning area. These pockets, 

in areas of high tree densities, could expand killing greater and greater numbers of trees. 

An example of the level of change is evident in the following two pictures. In 2009, 

approximately 1/10th of the vegetation on this mountain had MPB activity. Two and 1⁄2 years 

later, more than 1⁄2 the vegetation on the mountain has been killed by MPB activity. 

Figure 3-14, February, 2009 – US Hwy. 16/385 looking north (approximately 1,500 ft. north of 

the entrance into Crazy Horse Memorial). Mountain top in photo is approximately one mile in 

distance. Trees killed by mountain pine beetle appear red-brown along the horizon – right slope 

of the mountain. (S.Keegan, USFS).
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 234 

Figure 3-14 February, 2009 – US Hwy. 16/385 Looking North (approximately 1,500 ft. North of the Entrance 

into Crazy Horse Memorial)

Figure 3-15 September, 2011 – US Hwy. 16/385 Looking North (From Approximately the Same Location as 

the Previous Photo)

Figure 3-15, September, 2011 – US Hwy. 16/385 looking north (from approximately the same location 

as the previous photo). Subsequent spread of mountain pine beetle – evident from the appearance of

the red-brown beetle-killed trees in the photos – in the past 2 1⁄2 years (S. Keegan, USFS). 

Within 10 years the trees should snap off, or fall, creating openings in the forest. In the 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 235 

foreground and middleground, the color and texture of the down trees would dominate the 

landscape. In the background, the forms of these open areas would dominate the landscape. The 

remaining trees would likely provide the seed source for new trees. Seedlings would sprout over 

time. A dense canopy of seedlings, approx. 10 feet tall, covering these same areas can be 

expected in 20-30 years. Long-term as the new forest grows up through the down trees, and the 

down trees decay, the new growth would help these areas to blend into the landscape. This 

process is a natural process, but it would likely be widespread. 

During this time, the down trees would breakdown, providing a receptive fuel bed for wildfires. 

The densely growing seedlings would provide vertical fuel structure. This combination would 

supply a wildfire with a readily available fuel source. Wildfires would likely have the ability to 

rapidly spread during hot and dry conditions. When fires have a long residence time in one area, 

the concentrated heat can break down the structure of the soil. This damaged structure allows 

the soil to be easily eroded, inhibiting future plant growth. Areas of eroded soil and lack of plant 

life can be evident in the landscape, and can be detrimental to the scenic integrity of an area. 

Cumulative Effects 

Wildland fire is an essential ecological process in this ecosystem, which should increase plant and 

scenic diversity. However, wildfires would continue to be extinguished as quickly as possible. As 

a result, the forest would continue to grow densely, becoming thicker and reducing visible open 

space. Views into the forest would become more limited as the trees grow more densely – 

reducing visual diversity, including wildflowers, shrubs, hardwoods, and open meadows. Should 

wildfires burn into stands of densely packed growing trees, smaller trees can act as “ladder fuels” 

moving the fire up into the crowns of the trees, resulting in groups of fire killed trees. Should fires 

spread beyond initial containment, such as in drought and/or high wind conditions, and spread into 

hillsides of densely packed trees, we could expect to see hillsides of fire-killed trees. 

With a high level of mountain pine beetle killed trees, once the trees come down, they would 

provide a large quantity of “fuel.” The effects of a wildland fire in the heat of the summer, can 

cause deep burning through the different soil layers and kill any seeds in the soil, sterilizing the 

soil structure, which would then create a need for pioneer species to re-colonize and restore the 

soil structure. Where there was not a large quantity of fuel we observed plant germination had 

occurred within seven days of the fire moving through an area. With the heavy fuel loading in 

this area, similar results would be expected over large areas – open areas that would take time to 

re-establish plants. If this type of an event occurred, the form of the land would dominate the 

view. Rock formations that this area is noted for would be more visible. During periods when 

the ground is snow covered, these areas would be highly visible in the landscape. Positive

vegetative elements that provide color, variety, and texture in the landscape, including large 

trees, would no longer be present. The scenic quality would be greatly reduced until vegetation 

patterns are re-established in the landscape. 

In areas where no disturbance occurs, the vegetation would grow into a thick dense forest, with 

competition for light, water, and nutrients. In some areas, the dense conifers are out-competing 

the hardwoods for these necessary components for plant growth. This dense vegetation provides 

the greatest potential for disturbance (fire or insect) that could greatly change the visual 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 236 

appearance of the vegetation across the landscape. The dense vegetation may shade out shrubs, 

wildflowers and other low growing plants – reducing visual diversity. 

Alternative B- Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Vegetative Treatments result in the removal of trees within a stand. How well these treatments 

blend into the characteristic landscape, and meet the Scenic Integrity Objective (SIO), is based 

upon the slope, aspect, and vegetation remaining on the site. Thinning trees to an even spacing 

can result in a managed, un-natural appearance. Reducing soil disturbance, uneven spacing of 

the trees remaining in the landscape, and cleaning up the slash (branches and tree tops left when 

trees are commercially removed from the forest) to natural levels, can result in an appearance 

that is in harmony with the landscape character, often resulting in a higher SIO being achieved. 

Those treatments where more large trees remain can generally blend into the characteristic 

landscape the best, or maintain the most desired vegetative characteristics. Those treatments that 

leave the least large trees can be the most visible. The action alternative proposes to treat the 

planning area prior to the MPB killing large numbers of trees across the planning area. The goal, 

by thinning the forest, is to maintain visually desirable trees, though widely spaced, over the 

forested landscape. At the same time, the removal of trees would limit the large quantity of fuel 

that would occur – if the trees remained and the MPB killed them. The treatments should 

enhance the large tree component, when present, by reducing competition for nutrients. A 

variety of vegetation structure, smaller and larger trees, increasing numbers of hardwoods, 

grasses and shrubs should result. Overall, the variety of vegetation, at the stand level, should be 

very positive from a scenery standpoint. The resulting more open forest structure should 

promote views into the forest to view large diameter trees, spring and fall color, and wildlife 

The rolling nature of the terrain in this planning area limits views to the Foreground and near 

Middleground. The action alternative creates a variety of treatments. Areas that would remove 

the greatest number of trees are scattered around the area, so no single viewshed area is heavily 

impacted. In other areas, the treatments would reduce the density of trees, though still 

maintaining a natural appearing condition. Approximately 19,300 acres or 61% of the project 

area would be mechanically treated under this alternative through commercial and noncommercial vegetation treatments, meadow and hardwood enhancements, and fuel treatments. 

Of the commercial treatments, removal cuts and commercial thins to a 30 basal area (cable 

logging), are the most evident (by creating large open areas) and have the greatest potential to 

negatively affect the scenery within the project area – these treatments would make up 

approximately 3% of the project area. These units potentially could be the most visible in the 

Foreground and Middleground distance zones. 

Skidding logs on, or across, steep slopes can remove vegetation and displace soil creating 

opportunities for noxious weeds to become established in treated areas. These weeds (i.e., 

mullein) have shapes that are not common in the natural landscape, drawing attention to them. 

Noxious weeds are generally recognized as non-natives and out-of-place in the landscape by the 

general public. As the quantity of these weeds increase in the landscape, they can out-compete 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 237 

native plants, resulting in the visual quality decreasing. Efforts are made to minimize this 

potential, however it is difficult to predict where and how wide spread this effect could be. 

Thinning and reducing the overall density of ponderosa pine vegetation can lead to amount of

grasses, forbs, shrubs, and hardwoods increasing in the landscape. This could increase the 

variety of colors evident now, and in the future, across the landscape. Thinning trees to an even 

spacing can result in a managed, un-natural appearance. 

There is a potential for hardwoods to increase (creating a greater amount of fall color in across 

the landscape) as a result of the removal of conifers in fuel breaks that traverse hardwood stands, 

however it would be limited to these corridors. 

Alternative B would also modify the vegetation across the landscape so that management 

activities would be more evident. The variety of treatments would create an assortment of 

textural patterns and improve opportunities to view hardwoods and wildlife. Removal cut 

treatments generally do not meet the High or Moderate Scenic Integrity Objective. The assigned 

SIOs would likely not be achieved in all locations. However, due to the rolling hills and ridges, 

the visibility of these types of treatments, become less evident on the landscape. Restoration 

treatments to increase hardwoods and meadows should meet the assigned SIO. Thinning 

treatments to decrease potential for MPB to attack forest stands may be highly evident, 

depending upon the level of MPB activity. These various treatments would foster a more open 

vegetation pattern in this landscape - closer to conditions that emulate the effect of a natural fire 

interval in this ecosystem. Hardwoods should be more evident and provide seasonal color and 

textural variety in the landscape. 

Cumulative Effects 

Understanding past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, is necessary in order to evaluate 

potential cumulative effects of the action alternative. The boundary on the ground for analyzing 

cumulative effects is primarily that of the project area. This identified area is the landscape that 

is evident in the foreground and middle ground from the main travel routes, with particular 

attention to recreation facilities, recreation trails, and the communities, due to viewer’s stationary 

position or slower pace while moving through the landscape. 

The time boundary for this analysis extends from 1980 (when the start of recent vegetation 

management activities took place) to 2050 [completion of management activities (2020), 

followed by five years for pine seedlings to become established, and approximately 25 years for 

trees to grow up and visually ‘fill’ open areas]. This time period includes known management 

activities, and activities that are planned, but have yet to be accomplished. 

Fire suppression over the past century has played a role in the increased density of the vegetation 

on the forest. Large wildfires have occurred within the Forest boundary on a frequent basis, since 

2000. The Battle Creek Fire occurred within, and adjacent to the planning area in 2002; changing 

the landscape from densely forested to open grassland over the majority of the burned area. 

Likewise, much of the Forest was pre-commercially thinned by the Civilian Conservation Corp 

in the 1930s and 1940s, however we do not know if that effort included any or all of this project 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 238 

area. The construction of Sheridan Lake, Sheridan Lake Road, and US Hwy 385, focused the 

public’s attention on this portion of the Black Hills, further establishing the area as a recreation 

destination, for its human-made and natural scenery. 

Under the action alternative, trees of all sizes would be removed. The resulting appearance of 

vegetation treatments would slightly change for the first ten years after the treatments are 

complete. These treatments would result in fewer trees across the landscape - reducing risk of 

mountain pine beetle infestation and fire risk. However, after ten years’ time, the understory in 

commercial treatments could start to be more evident in the landscape and the vegetation could 

have a less managed appearance. 

The remaining commercial and non-commercial treatments, which are mostly viewed in 

Foreground and Middleground distance zones, should produce a natural appearing forest – but 

one that has fewer trees – as if fire had continued to play its natural role all along. As long as the 

mountain pine beetle pockets, and the corresponding treatment, stay small and scattered, and the 

MPB activity can be reduced (as a product of these treatments), a less dense (but) forested 

landscape may be maintained across the landscape where large trees would be highly evident. 

Existing roads and other activities that change the natural contours may be more evident with the 

removal/thinning of the vegetation on the landscape. A forested backdrop to private land could 

be maintained with a Moderate level of Scenic Integrity being maintained in the project area. 

RECREATION USE 

Affected Environment

The Calumet Project Area offers a good mix of dispersed and developed recreation activities. 

Recreation in the project area is managed to allow moderate to high contact with other groups 

and individuals. 

Developed Recreation 

The Sheridan Lake Concentrated Public Use Area (CPUA) is located in the center of the project 

area and provides a variety of recreational activities. The developed facilities within the Sheridan 

Lake CPUA consist of one single unit campground (130 sites), one group campground (five sites), 

two boat launches, three picnic grounds, two swim beaches, two hiking trails, and one marina. The 

other developed facility in the project area is Spring Creek Picnic Ground. This nine unit site is 

located one mile east of the Sheridan Lake CPUA on Spring Creek and used primarily as a stream 

access for fishermen. 

Dispersed Recreation 

Dispersed recreational activities include big game hunting (e.g., turkey, elk, and deer), ice 

fishing, fly fishing, target shooting, and wildlife viewing. Concentrated dispersed use including 

fishing, hiking, and nature viewing occur from the base of Sheridan Lake dam to the Upper 

Spring Creek Trailhead off Highway 228. This area below the dam is a popular fly fishing area 

and used regularly for short, round trip day hiking on the Flume and Centennial trails. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 239 

Dispersed camping is allowed in the project area within 300 feet of a road or motorized trail. 

Camping within the Sheridan Lake CPUA is allowed only in developed campgrounds. 

Special Use Authorizations 

Three outfitter guide special use permits authorize commercial use for hunting and fishing in the 

project area. Two ice fishing tournaments on Sheridan Lake are authorized under recreation event 

special use permits. There are also 11 recreation residence cabins under special use permit located in 

the project area. Nine cabins are located off Balsar Gulch Road near Spring Creek Picnic Ground, one 

is adjacent to south Sheridan beach and one behind Coon Hollow Trailhead off Silver Mountain Road.

Non-motorized Trails 

A large number of local users in pursuit non-motorized trial opportunities recreate in the project 

area. The Flume Trail, designated a National Recreation Trail, runs east-west for 10 miles through 

the center of the project area. This trail begins at the Rockerville Coon Hollow Trailhead off Silver 

Mountain Road and ends at Calumet Trailhead on the southeast corner of Sheridan Lake. Only

hiking is allowed on this trail. Four trailheads, Upper Spring Creek, Boulder Hill, Calumet, and 

Coon Hollow provide parking and trail access points. 

The Centennial Trail bisects the center of the project area running north-south and intercepts the 

Flume Trail along the south shore of Sheridan Lake. Horseback riders, hikers and mountain bike 

recreationists use this trail. Three trailheads, Samelius, Calumet, and Dakota Point provide parking 

and trail access points. 

A network of user defined mountain bike trails the locals have named Storm Mountain Trails exist in 

the project area. This network of looping trails can be accessed at the Flume Trail’s Coon Hollow 

Trailhead located off Silver Mountain Road. A recreation special use permit authorizes mountain 

bike races in the summer season on the Storm Mountain trail system. 

Motorized Use 

Motorized recreation within the project area consists of All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) and Off 

Highway Vehicle (OHV) riding, motorcycle riding, and other vehicle driving on all levels of 

National Forest System Roads. Motorized use is limited to designated roads and trials within the 

project area (USDA Forest Service 2010). See Travel Management Section. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Both dispersed and developed recreation users would benefit in the short-term as there would not 

be any noise, dust or closures due to the timber activity. In the long-term the health of the forest 

would decrease as the area becomes more susceptible to insects, disease, and large-scale wildfire. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects

This vegetative treatment would open up the forest and improve wildlife habitat (e.g., turkey, elk, and 

deer), meadows, and fuel breaks near developed recreation sites and recreation residences. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 240 

This improvement in habitat would increase opportunities for recreationists to view and observe deer 

and other wildlife. The proposed treatments would also open up the forest and enhance scenic view 

sheds. Treatments around the Sheridan Lake CPUA would reduce MPB and wildfire hazard and 

improve the safety for recreationists to pursue activities. Roadside treatments would make travel 

within the forest safer by removing hazard trees that may fall over the roads. 

Recreation users in both the dispersed and developed portions of the project area are most affected by 

the visuals of tree removal which include skid trails, less screening, slash on the ground, slash piles, 

and piles of logs during and after project implementation. Recreationists perceive a healthy forest 

when they view a thick stand of trees and/or other vegetation in a “natural” looking environment 

(USDA Forest Service 2009a). As the forest ground cover regenerates, the recreational user’s visual 

experience would increase. 

Recreationists would be displaced during project implementation as some roads and motorized trails 

could be temporarily closed during logging operations for safety reasons and concerns. 

Removing MPB infested trees adjacent to the Sheridan Lake CPUA would slow the spread of the MPB 

infestation in and around the developed sites, thus preserving scenic integrity of this area. 

Cumulative Effects 

General maintenance and site specific hazard tree removal would continue to occur on developed 

recreation sites within the project area. This includes, but is not limited to: tilling beach sand, 

painting picnic tables, replacing grills, mowing, etc. Special use permits (e.g., recreation residences, 

outfitter guides, etc.) would continue to be administered to standard by the Forest Service. 

LANDS and SPECIAL USES 

Affected Environment 

The Calumet Project Area has a long history of being used for: 27,617 acres National Forest 

System lands; private property (approximately 4,155 acres of private property - Mineral Survey 

(MS) and Homestead Entry Survey (HES) parcels); utility distribution and transmission line 

corridors (electric and telephone); land survey monuments/corners; county maintained roads; 

private roads and National Forest System Roads (NFSR). 

In 1862, Congress passed the Homestead Act that authorized the Federal Government to sell 

federal lands to settlers and/or land company speculators. The passage of the U.S. Mining Laws 

Act in May 1872, assisted the progress of miners and settlers to the west. Passage of the Organic 

Administration Act of 1887, established many Forest Reserves in the west. Since the passage of 

the Small Tracts Act in 1983, the Forest has been active in “squaring up” its boundary through 

land conveyance to private individuals under the provisions of this act. The Forest has 

conducted one land exchange within the project area. Currently, Hell Canyon Ranger District is 

working on a land exchange that affects a portion of the project area. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 241 

The Calumet Project Area has several areas that have been administratively withdrawn for power 

lines, highway uses, mineral entry, reclamation, administrative site, and recreation. The purpose of 

a withdrawal is to withhold National Forest System land from operation of the mining laws and 

other public land laws, to either reserve the area for some future use or to maintain other public 

values of the area. Additional purposes would be to protect administrative sites and other capital 

improvements and to protect designated management areas not compatible with mining activity. A 

withdrawal usually prevents the land from leaving federal ownership, may prevent entry under the 

mining laws and does not affect existing rights and does not invalidate existing permitted uses. 

Of the more than 1.5 million acres within the Black Hills National Forest boundary, 

approximately 289,000 acres are in private, state, or other federal ownership. This creates a 

complex landownership pattern. Complications and inefficiencies resulting from this ownership 

pattern include the need to: 1) acquire private private property or convey National Forest System 

lands out of federal ownership for private property by land exchanges or Small Tracts Act cases; 

and 2) acquire, grant and manage rights-of-way and other special use permits across both public 

and private lands for roads, trails, and overhead and underground utility lines. This ownership 

pattern has provided an opportunity for the Forest Service to acquire easements and to grant 

rights-of-ways to individuals, and local and state agencies. 

The Calumet Project Area pattern of land ownership is typical for the Black Hills National Forest. 

That is, parcels of private property that are surrounded by the National Forest System lands. Also 

typical of land ownership patterns in the Black Hills is the move towards subdividing the more 

historic working ranches into rural residential home sites. 

The Calumet Project Area contains approximately 30 miles of distribution and transmission 

overhead power utility lines under special use permits to Black Hills Power, Black Hills Electric 

Cooperative, Qwest, and Black Hills Fiber Com. 

Most of the roads within and adjacent to the Calumet Project Area are utilized throughout the 

year to access special use permitted areas, such as utility lines right-of-ways, recreation 

residences, public water systems, electronic tower installations, subdivisions, and private 

property. The existing road system also provides excellent opportunities to adequately disperse 

the number of individuals engaged in recreational activities within the project area. 

There are a number of private road easements and public road easements that have been granted in 

the project area for access across the NFS lands, and easements that the Forest Service acquired to 

cross private land. There are also Special Use Permits and other authorizations issued for utility 

and water lines, outfitting and guiding permits and other uses of NFS lands within the project area. 

The project file contains information related to these easements and other special uses. 

Environmental Consequences 

All Alternatives 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Road system changes could have potential adverse effects if access to permitted areas, facilities 

and private property is not accommodated. Certain access roads, private road easements, and 

public road easements must be provided for maintenance and management activities.
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 242 

Unclassified roads that are currently being used for private road easements need to remain 

unclassified and maintained by the easement holder. If these roads are changed to system roads 

there could be increased road maintenance costs, increased time needed to convert private road 

easements to public road easements. 

Cumulative Effects

All alternatives would continue existing easements and special use permits. New construction of 

houses and subdivisions is anticipated. This would result in new requests for road access and 

utility access routes across the NFS lands. Regardless of which alternative is implemented the 

Forest Service would continue to respond to requests for legal access and utility lines to private 

property would address each request on its own merits under existing land and policy direction. 

The Calumet Project Area would continue to be maintained, used and managed for: utility 

corridors, private land in holdings, subdivisions, land survey monuments/corners, private roads, 

National Forest System Roads, and public highways. 

FLPMA (Federal Land Policy Management Act) Private Road Easements would continue to be 

granted landowners and/or landowner associations that need access across National Forest 

System lands to private property. FRTA (National Forest Roads and Trails Act) Public Road 

Easements would also continue to be granted to Pennington County Highway Department for 

subdivisions and county maintained roads. All identified Lands/Special Use Permits requests 

would be completed under this alternative. 

The Forest Service would continue to work with utility companies on overhead and underground 

power lines, telephone lines and other utility lines as needed. Additional access roads may need 

to be constructed and/or reconstructed to provide access to overhead and underground utility 

lines and to private property. The Forest Service would also continue to acquire easements from 

individuals for access across private property to NFS land. 

HERITAGE 

Affected Environment 

The central Black Hills contain a wide variety and number of cultural resources. Prehistoric period 

resources include habitation sites, hunting camps, stone quarries, and rock shelters. Historic period 

resources represent economic activities related to ranching, timber, and mining; occupation activities 

related to homesteading; infrastructure development related to water resources, transportation, and 

fire control; and recreational activities. Traditional cultural properties, which may fall under either 

time period, can include Native American individual or single family use prayer sites, current use 

Sundance locations, annual ceremonial sites such as Harney Peak, and locations associated with 

tribal origin and oral history such as Buffalo Gap and Wind Cave. 

The Black Hills are part of the greater culture area of the Northwestern Plains (Rom et. al. 1996; 

Sundstrom 1989). The rugged central Black Hills prehistory is mainly represented by summer 

and fall camps that exhibit habitation and hunting related activities. Time periods represented 

include the Middle Archaic, Late Archaic, and Late Prehistoric (Rom, et. al. 1996:2c.8-9). Other 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 243 

site types include short term camps associated with specific resource procurement, such as stone 

quarry sites (Rom, et. al. 1996:2c.9). Among the many sites discovered in the Calumet Project 

Area are a prehistoric lithic scatter, time period unknown, and a Middle Archaic isolated 

projectile point. However, the majority of the sites in the project area are associated with the 

Historic period. Site types include mining, Civilian Conservation Corps construction projects, 

railroad and stage lines, and recreation sites. 

Between 1982 and 2009, archaeologists conducted a total of 39 cultural resource surveys on 

approximately 18,354 acres of NFS lands within the Calumet Project Area. A total of 9,263 

additional acres were identified for survey on NFS lands to complete the coverage for this project. 

This last survey was completed by Mystic Ranger District heritage staff between May 2010 and 

September 2011 (Laybolt 2012). All 40 surveys cover the entire 27,617 acres of NFS lands within 

the Calumet Project Area. 

A total of 234 cultural resources were recorded on 27,617 acres of NFS lands in the Calumet 

Project Area between 1982 and 2011. Of this total, 183 were determined to be Not Eligible and 

51 were determined to be Eligible or were Unevaluated for listing on the National Register of 

Historic Places (NRHP). No Traditional Cultural Properties are currently known to be present 

within the project area. 

Eligible and Unevaluated cultural resources would be protected by following the compliance process 

mandated by Section 106 of the NHPA and recommendations outlined in the cultural resource

reports. The regulations governing Section 106 review are contained in 36 CFR Part 800, which 

describes the compliance process. All Eligible and Unevaluated sites would be protected by 

avoidance or other site-specific mitigations identified by the district archaeologist (see Appendix B). 

Environmental Consequences

Heritage resource effects were assessed through a presence/absence determination of significant 

cultural resources and mitigation measures/design criteria to be employed during commercial 

thinning, prescribed fire (broadcast burning), fuel break construction and/or fuel reduction 

activities, road construction, and non-commercial thinning. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

If there is no federal action, then there is no undertaking as defined in 36 CFR Part 800.16(y), for 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f) (NHPA). However, no 

action could result in the destruction or damage to cultural resources due to increased fuel 

loading and tree mortality from MPB. Fifty-one cultural resources in the Calumet Project Area 

are Eligible or Unevaluated for listing on the NRHP. Several of these cultural resources have 

wood-frame or log architectural features and surface artifacts. 

The risk of damage to wood-frame or log architectural features and surface artifacts would 

increase as MPB trees die and fall on or in the vicinity of these cultural resources. The increased 

number of dead trees on and near cultural resources would increase the fuel load in these areas. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 244 

The potential for wildfires would increase with higher fuel loads over time. This would create a 

high risk to flammable architectural features and surface artifacts. Wildfires, as seen in many 

areas of the Black Hills, could completely destroy these vulnerable cultural resources or 

permanently damage them. 

Fighting wildfires creates another set of threats to cultural resources. These threats could include 

damage from tree felling, creating fuel breaks and access roads, and establishing fire camps to 

fight the wildfire. Erosion following the loss of protective vegetation could cause increased runoff 

across prehistoric sites, potentially damaging the context of artifacts and features. Wildfire could 

also expose sites to vandalism and unauthorized collecting due to the increased visibility. 

Wildfire could also permanently destroy or damage glass, ceramic, stone, metal, cloth, and paper 

surface artifacts. Data loss would occur as a result. For example, a bottle with a temporally 

diagnostic marker’s mark on the base could be completely melted and unrecognizable (Jackson 

1998:17) or intact paper labels destroyed. Stone tools could heat rapidly and shatter or change color, 

affecting identification. Wildfire could also make identification of unintentional heat treatment 

versus intentional prehistoric heat treatment of stone materials virtually impossible. Again, this 

would lead to the permanent loss of data. 

Appropriately managed fuel loads, using low intensity prescribed burns, presents a considerably lower 

level threat to a cultural site than high intensity, wildfire (Jackson 1988:18). 

Cumulative Effects 

Archaeological resources are non-renewable. The cumulative effects of taking no action to 

reduce the threat of the MPB and reduce fuel loads is that more cultural resources would be 

destroyed or permanently damaged by falling trees and wildfires. Over time, fewer 

archaeological resources would be available to learn about past human lifeways. 

Under Alternative A, the Calumet Project Area could ultimately lose its essential character with 

respect to prehistoric and historic use of the central Black Hills. The loss of these cultural areas 

could not be replaced by reclamation of any type. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Under Alternative B, there would be No Adverse Effect to any of the 51 Eligible or Unevaluated 

cultural resources if the design criteria and mitigation measures are implemented and followed 

(see Appendix B). 

Cumulative Effects 

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions within the Calumet Project Area include 

mineral exploration and extraction, watershed control and development, timber harvest, road 

construction, prescribed fire, community growth, and recreation and associated improvements. 

All of these activities may have cumulative effects on cultural resources such as erosion, ground 

surface disturbance, increased visitor use and traffic, and vandalism. Although difficult to 

quantify, impacts could be avoided or minimized by implementing site-specific mitigation 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 245 

measures and design criteria developed in consultation with the SD SHPO and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation. 

Subsurface cultural resources are potentially present, but may not yet be identified in the Calumet 

Project Area. If previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all 

operations must cease within a 100 meter radius of the site location and a District Archaeologist 

notified immediately. Any cultural resources located during project implementation would be 

protected based on the recommendations of the District Archaeologist and the South Dakota State 

Historic Preservation Office (SD SHPO). All sites would be evaluated under the terms specified in 36 

CFR 60.4, 36 CFR 800 and applicable Forest guidelines (FP Guidelines 4102, 6101, and 6106). 

Consultation 

The Heritage Resource Reports will be sent to the SD SHPO for Review and Compliance for 

comment and eligibility determination for the heritage resources located within the project area. 

Likewise, the reports will be sent to Tribal Historic Preservation Officers and tribal groups that 

request reports, for their review and comment, and for any additional recommendations in 

protecting American Indian traditional use sites. Follow-up contact will be made with the Tribal 

representatives, to ensure there are no concerns on the environmental document. Concurrence for 

several additional sites involving roadside or mechanical treatments will need to be reviewed by 

the SD SHPO on a case-by-case basis. 

SOCIAL 

Affected Environment 

The Calumet Project Area lies in Pennington County of South Dakota about six miles southwest of 

Rapid City, the regional trade center and second largest city in South Dakota. The project area 

encompasses private lands, subdivisions, businesses, and a major recreational complex. Forest 

resources play an important role for the people living in and adjacent to the project area. The 

project area provides great scenery and abundant dispersed recreation in a setting that is close to 

town, or for some, right out their back door. 

The project area also encompasses the Sheridan Lake Concentrated Public Use Area (CPUA), 

which provides aquatic recreation opportunities such as fishing, motor boating, canoeing, etc. 

The Sheridan Lake CPUA contains one single unit campground (130 sites), one group 

campground (five sites), two public boat launches, three day use picnic grounds, two designated 

swim beaches, two hiking trails, and a boat marina. Located approximately one mile east of the 

Sheridan Lake CPUA is the Spring Creek Picnic Ground. This day use picnic ground is 

primarily used as fishing access on Spring Creek. 

Demographics 

The examination of population trends is important to the understanding of the overall nature of 

an area. The use and occupation of the Black Hills is increasing due to population growth and a 

fairly diverse and flexible economy. Subdivisions and home construction building permits on 

private lands within and adjacent to the project area have increased steadily and demands for 

public access roads and utility lines across the project area continue to exert additional pressure 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 246 

on the Forest. The average household size within the project area is between 2.20 and 2.41 

persons (Census 2010). 

Wildland-Urban Interface 

Most of the Calumet Project Area within Pennington County is categorized as wildland urban 

interface (PCCWPP). 

Individuals that live within the WUI or secluded areas are lured by solitude and the opportunity 

of being close to nature. Problems brought about by the influx of people are not just wildfirerelated. Development of subdivisions and private lands within the project area are complete with 

forest insect/disease outbreaks, vegetation management, and urban forestry concerns. Many new 

residents moving to the area carry expectations of urban services with them. Residents with 

tenure have a strong tradition of multiple-use of resources and expect a balance of goods and 

services from these resources. Wherever there are people living in or adjacent to wildland areas 

there is a concern about the threat of wildfire. 

Communities by nature of their location, play a key role in mitigating wildfire hazard. The 

resources, authorities and people share in the responsibility with adjacent landowners and 

managers, for developing healthy and disaster resilient communities. Without significant action 

by communities to mitigate hazards (e.g., homes, yards and private forested lands that are highly 

ignitable), there would be continued high probability for catastrophic wildfire in the wildland 

urban interface in spite of actions on Federal lands. 

These same communities are also concerned with the mountain pine beetle epidemic that is currently 

expanding within and adjacent to the project area. As trees are killed, they fall to the ground adding 

dead, dry fuels within an area already rated as having high wildfire hazard. These dead falling trees 

also have the potential to damage fences, structures, power lines, and block access. 

Lifestyles 

Although population growth is bringing in more people with new and different ideas, there is 

little evidence that attitudes or lifestyles are changing in a major way. The beauty of the area 

brings in new residents and those with tenure are tied to the way the Forest is already managed, 

either by employment such as the logging/ranching industries or people are outdoor-oriented and 

have developed varied and specific outdoor user expectations (e.g., hunting, fishing, biking, offroad use and tourist based activities). Some residents in the area consider the forest resources 

and forest health as an important part of their quality of life. Visitors, both local and non-local 

use the area for a wide range of dispersed recreation activities including, hunting, fishing, 

boating, camping, wildlife viewing, and off-road vehicle use. 

Human Health and Safety 

Public safety is more often affected by the choices people make on their own while visiting the 

project area, or by the consequences of natural events, like wildfires, flooding or wind and hail 

storms. Despite being in close proximity to Rapid City, Keystone, Rockerville, and Hill City, the 

project area is rural forested and in places semi-remote. Hazards exist in the form of natural and 

human-caused conditions. Wild animals, insects, like ticks which may carry Lyme disease, are 

present. Weather-related events can be life threatening, and probability of a wildfire is a risk every 

month of the year. Most human activities in the Forest, including hunting, hiking, mountain 

biking, boating, and driving a vehicle, carry some inherent risk. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 247 

Vegetative treatments that reduce the existing MBP epidemic and potential of a large scale 

wildfire from occurring also help to protect human health and safety. Fuel treatment areas are 

marked and signed to make travelers aware of individuals and actions associated with the 

activity. Smoke from prescribed broadcast burning and wildfire could be a nuisance and may 

pose a threat to human health and safety. 

Currently, there is an extensive road system throughout most of the project area for fire suppression. 

A main concern is the ability of the Forest Service and local volunteer fire departments to have 

access and that important arterial and access roads are not closed in order to suppress most fires 

while they are still small in size (see Fire and Fuels Report discussion on access). 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A – No Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects

Under this alternative there would be no reduction to current insect or fire/fuels hazards or changes to 

roads/access relative to implementing any proposed actions in the Calumet Project. 

The mountain pine beetle epidemic is expanding within and adjacent to the Calumet Project Area. 

This epidemic is killing large numbers of mature pine trees. This epidemic is changing vegetation 

structure and wildlife habitat on a landscape scale. As trees are killed they fall to the ground 

adding dead, dry fuels within an area already rated as having high wildfire hazard. The mountain 

pine beetle is at epidemic levels across parts of this area right now and is going to continue to 

increase across the entire project area over the next few years (USDA Forest Service 2012a). 

A great deal of attention has also been focused on the increasing size and severity of wildfires 

occurring on forested lands, particularly pine forests of the west. Recent wildfires on the Black 

Hills National Forest have demonstrated that these fires are larger, hotter and more lethal to 

vegetation and soils than historic fires in ponderosa pine ecosystems. Additionally, these wildfires 

are more dangerous or damaging to human settlements, property, and values because of settlement 

patterns of humans within these environments. 

A large, uncontrolled fire could threaten the numerous subdivisions and homes previously described 

within the surrounding wildland-urban interface. These homes may have dense and continuous 

vegetation surrounding them, inadequate space between flammable fuels, lack of fire-resistant 

landscaping, and woodpiles or other flammable debris near structures. Although rarely noted for 

loss of life in the Black Hills to date, fires in the wildland/urban interface are responsible for 

extremely large property losses (Alabaugh Canyon Fire, 2007 included one human fatality, 33 

homes lost, and a burn over of firefighters).

If a large scale wildfire were to happen, aesthetics, privacy, and economic property values in the 

burned area would likely be considerably diminished in the short-term. Also, highways and roads, 

transmission lines, and municipal watersheds values could be affected by large-scale wildfires. As 

vegetation grows back and burned dead timber falls and deteriorates, the long-term (beyond 10-15 

years) effects of the wildfire on property values would be lessened. Sense of loss of amenities and 

property values gradually fades. People become accustomed over time to changes in scenery and 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 248 

other impacts like loss or damage to structures. Large amounts of smoke could affect the city of Rapid 

City and surrounding communities during a fire event. Smoke from such a wildfire would present 

health problems to elderly and persons with respiratory problems (see Fire and Fuels section). 

The Black Hills National Forest issued a forest-wide Travel Management Plan (USDA Forest 

Service 2010) designating routes for motorized use (see Transportation and Travel Management 

sections). There would be no effect to access and travel beyond current impacts, as management 

activities would not change. 

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

Direct and Indirect Effects

Under Alternative B, forest vegetation would be treated on a broad landscape scale to reduce the 

rapidly expanding MPB epidemic and fire and fuel hazards within the Calumet Project Area. 

Prescribed broadcast burning (15,990 acres) would occur under Alternatives B. The potential social 

effects from prescribed broadcast burning and pile burning include the risk of fire escape, smoke 

impacts to health and safety, and associated costs. These risks are minimized by design criteria such 

as construction of fire lines, the use of suppression engines and crews, and adherence to prescribed 

burn plans (see Appendix B). 

The reduced MPB risk and fire hazard in the treatment areas and the completion of fuel breaks 

along private lands would reduce the potential for large-scale wildfire and would increase the 

likelihood that firefighters would be suppressing, from defensible positions, low to moderate 

intensity fires that may threaten private property, at-risk communities and forest resources versus a 

high intensity one. 

The Black Hills National Forest issued a forest-wide Travel Management Plan (USDA, Forest 

Service 2010) designating routes for motorized use (see Transportation and Travel Management 

sections). Some roads and trails could be temporarily closed for project activities (see 

Transportation and Travel Management sections). 

Cumulative Effects 

The population would continue to grow in the future. The majority of this growth is expected on 

private lands in and near the forested areas located outside, but near established towns and 

communities. 

Fuel treatments that reduce the potential for large-scale wildfire occurrence, helps to protect 

human health and safety. Since no vegetative treatments or prescribed broadcast burns occur 

with Alternative A, this alternative would be the least effective in protecting human health and 

safety. In fact, the potential for a serious incident would increase with increased fuel loadings 

and fire behavior under the No Action Alternative. Alternative B would provide more benefits in 

the long-term to protecting human health, well-being, and safety than Alternative A (see Fire and 

Fuels, and Vegetation sections). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 249 

Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898 (February 11, 1994) directs Federal agencies to focus attention on the human 

health and environmental conditions in minority communities and low-income communities. The

purpose of the Executive Order is to identify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations and low-income populations. 

None of the communities in the project area contain low-income or minority populations as defined 

by Executive Order 12898. During the course of this analysis, no alternative resulted in any 

identifiable effects or issues specific to any minority or low-income population or community. The 

agency has considered all input from persons or groups regardless of age, race, income status, or 

other social and economic characteristics. 

Civil Rights 

No civil rights effects associated with age, race, creed, color, national origin, or sex have been 

identified. 

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF 

RESOURCES 

Irreversible commitments of resources are those that cannot be regained, such as the extinction 

of a species or the removal of mined ore. Irretrievable commitments are those that are lost for a 

period of time such as the temporary loss of timber productivity in forested areas that are kept 

clear for use as a power line rights-of-way or road. For further discussion of the effects on the 

resources listed below, see Chapter 3 under the respective resource topics. 

There are no irreversible commitments of resources with any of the alternatives analyzed. 

Irretrievable commitments of resources include the following: 

Soil productivity and timber productivity is lost where road construction is planned in 

Alternative B (about 5 miles). 

Air quality is temporarily impacted (lost) to varying degrees by smoke generated from prescribed 

burning and dust from road use resulting from implementation of the action alternatives. 

Wildlife habitat loss or modification for certain wildlife species is likely under the action 

alternatives. As vegetation recovers, habitat would eventually return over various periods of 

time depending on the amount of vegetation treatment and/or disturbance. 

Noxious and invasive weeds resulting from alternative implementation could potentially have 

an irretrievable commitment of resources if allowed to persist. Infestation can impact native plan 

communities that lead to losses in wildlife habitat, soil productivity, soil erosion, forage for 

grazing, and vegetative diversity. 

Scenic conditions will be modified to varying degrees depending on the action alternative 

implemented. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 250 

SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 

NEPA requires consideration of “the relationship between short-term uses of man’s environment 

and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity” (40 CFR 1502.16). For further

discussion of the effects on the resources listed below, see Chapter 3 under the respective 

resource topics. 

Actions under Alternatives B are implemented using design measures that protect soil productivity. 

Any decrease in long-term soil productivity resulting from actions will be negligible. 

As provided for by the Forest Plan, minimum management requirements guide implementation of the 

action alternative. Adherence to these requirements ensures that long-term productivity of the land is 

not impaired by short-term uses. Monitoring specified in this EIS and the Forest Plan validates that 

the management requirements and mitigation are effective in protecting long-term productivity. 

 

UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS 

The following is a description of adverse effects that are unavoidable with implementation of action 

alternatives. For further discussion of the effects on the resources listed below, see Chapter 3 under 

the respective resource topics. 

Forest Insect and Disease will continue in the project area, at epidemic levels, in some areas and 

endemic levels in others. 

Wildlife habitat for certain species will be adversely affected to varying levels with 

implementation of the action alternatives. The Wildlife section of this EIS discloses those effects. 

Air quality will be adversely affected on a temporary/seasonal basis as a result of planned 

prescribed burning and dust from roads and activities. 

Scenic quality will be affected adversely for some observers by the various levels of vegetation 

treatment and other actions planned. 

Fire/Fuels hazard will be increased during the short-term in some areas as a result of slash 

created from vegetation treatment. With disposal treatment this hazard will be reduced. There 

exists a higher long-term potential for large-scale wildfire under Alternative A versus the action 

alternative. 

Soils can be eroded wherever vegetation and soils are disturbed. Compaction can occur where 

vehicles and equipment are used. 

Heritage resources can be disturbed or destroyed where human or natural activities take place. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 251 

CHAPTER 4 BIBLIOGRAPY/REFERENCES 

Agee, J.K. 2005. The complex nature of mixed severity fire regimes. Mixed Severity Fire 

Regimes: Ecology and Management Symposium Proceedings, Spokane, Wash., 17–19 

November 2004. 

Alberta Forests, Lands and Wildlife, Forest Service. 1986. Mountain Pine Beetle control 

program 1980-1986, a success story. Edmonton, AB. 

Allen, Kurt. 2011. Personal communication. Entomologist, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 

USDA – Forest Service. Rapid City, SD. September, 2011. 

Allen, K. 2012. Evaluation of Mountain Pine Beetle Activity in the Calumet Project Area, USDA 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Forest Health Management, Rapid City Service Center. 

Alexander, R.R. 1987. Silvicultural Systems, Cutting Methods, and Cultural Practices for Black 

Hills Ponderosa Pine. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-139. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest And Range Experiment Station. 32 p. 

Allotment 2210 Files. Located at the Mystic Ranger District Office. 

Anderson, M.T. 1980. Water quality and quantity of three adjacent Black Hills watersheds. 

Rapid City, SD: South Dakota School of Mines and Technology. 159 p. Thesis. 

Anderson. T. 2002. Conservation assessment for the American dipper in the Black Hills

National Forest, South Dakota and Wyoming. [Online]. Black Hills National Forest. Custer, 

SD. 35pp. Available: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/blackhills/projects/planning/assessments/american_dipper.pdf 

Anderson, T. 2003. Conservation assessment for the woodpeckers in the Black Hills National 

Forest, South Dakota and Wyoming. USDA Forest Service, Custer, South Dakota. 176pp. 

Arno, Stephen F., Joe H. Scott, and Michael G. Hartwell. 1995. Age-Class Structure of Old Growth 

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-Fir Stands and Its Relationship to Fire History. Research Paper INT-RP481. Ogden, UT: Intermountain Research Station, United States Department of Agriculture - Forest 

Service. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/journals/standstructure.pdf 

Backlund, D. 2007. The American dipper, Cinclus mexicanus, in the Black Hills of South 

Dakota: Past and present. South Dakota Dept. Game, Fish and Parks. [Online] 

http://www.sdgfp.info/Wildlife/Diversity/dipper/index.htm Baker, M. D. and M. J. Lacki. 2006. 

Baker, M. D. and M. J. Lacki. 2006. Day-roosting habitat of female long-legged myotis in 

ponderosa pine forests. Journal of Wildl. Manage. 70(1):207-215. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 252 

Bastias, Brigitte A., Zhihong Xu, and John W.G. Cairney. 2006. Influence of long-term 

repeated prescribed burning on mycelial communities of ectomycorrhizal fungi. New

Phytologist. 172: 149-158. 

Beam, B. 2012. Personal communication regarding vault toilet and well locations on Black 

Hills National Forest lands within the Calumet Project Area. January 11, 2012. 

Beckner, Craig. 2007. Personal communication with Mark Vedder, RMS regarding effect of 

pine needles on forage quality and palatability for livestock use. 

Beecham, J. J. Jr., C.P. Collins, and T. D. Reynolds. (2012, February 12). Rocky Mountain 

Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest 

Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/rockymountainbighornsheep.pdf. 

Belsky, A. Joy & Blumenthal, Dana M. April. 1997. Effects of Livestock Grazing on Stand 

Dynamics and Soils in the Upland Forests of the Interior West. Conservation Biology, Vol. 11, 

No. 2, pp. 315-327. 

Bildstein, K. L., and K. Meyer. 2000. Sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus). No. 482, In: The Birds of 

North America A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

Black, S. H., D. Kulakowski, B.R. Noon, and D. DellaSala. 2010. Insects and Roadless Forests:

A Scientific Review of Causes, Consequences and Management Alternatives. National Center 

for Conservation Science &Policy, Ashland, OR. 

Boldt, Charles E.; Van Deusen, James L. 1974. Silviculture of ponderosa pine in the Black 

Hills: the status of our knowledge. Res. Pap. RM-124. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 45 p. 

British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range. 2010. Visual impact of mountain pine beetle 

attack and resulting salvage operations in British Columbia: a public perception study. Forest 

Practices Branch. Victoria, B.C. Available at: 

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Mr/Rec/Rec041.pdf 

British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range. 2006. The Public Response to Harvest 

Practices in British Columbia at the Landscape and Stand Level, Forest Practices Branch, 

Victoria, B.C. Available at: http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Mr/Rec/Rec038.pdf 

British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range. 2002. Predicting the Visual Impacts of 

Retention Cutting, Forest Practices Branch, Victoria, B.C. Available at:

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Mr/Rec035.htm 

Brooks, K.N.; Ffolliott, P.F.; Gregersen, H.M.; and DeBano, L.F. 1997. Hydrology and the 

Management of Watersheds. Iowa State University Press. Ames, IA. 502 p. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 253 

Brown, P. 2001. Landscape Age Structure of Ponderosa Pine Stands, Limestone Plateau, Black 

Hills National Forest: Final Report. Challenge Cost Share Agreement No. CCS-11020399-23 

between Rocky Mountain Tree Ring Research, Inc. and Black Hills National Forest, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture-Forest Service. Available at: 

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/firehistory/firescar/northamerica/supplemental/bh_age_fin

alreport_text.pdf 

Brown, P.M., Seig, C.H. 1996. “Fire History in the Interior Ponderosa Pine Communities of the 

Black Hills, South Dakota, USA.” International Journal of Wildland Fire 6(3):97-105, USA. 

Available at: http://www.publish.csiro.au/?act=view_fileandfile_id=WF9960097.pdf 

Brown, P.M. and C. Hull Sieg. 1999. Historical variability in fire at the ponderosa pine – northern 

Great Plains prairie ecotone, southeastern Black Hills, South Dakota. Ecoscience 6(4): 539-547 

Brown, P.M., C.L. Wienk and A.J. Symstad. 2008. Fire and Forest History at Mount Rushmore. 

Ecological Applications, 18(8), 2008, pp. 1984-1999. 

Brown, Peter M., Blaine Cook. 2006. Early settlement forest structure in Black Hills ponderosa 

pine forests. Forest ecology and management 223:1-31-3, 284-290, Elsevier, 2006. 

Brown, Peter M. 2006. Climate Effects on Fire Regimes and Tree Recruitment in Black Hills 

Ponderosa Pine Forests Ecology, 87(10) 2500-2510. 

Brown, Thomas C. and Terry C. Daniel. 1986. “Predicting Scenic Beauty of Timber Stands”. 

Forest Science, Vol. 32, No. 2 (1986). pp. 471-487. Available at: 

http://gis.fs.fed.us/rm/value/docs/scenic-beauty-prediction.pdf 

Bunkers, M.J. 2011. NOAA, National Weather Service, Rapid City, SD. Personal 

Communication. 23 Feb 2011. 

Burns, K. and B. Cook. 2006. Forest Plan implementation clarification on goshawk 

management. USDA Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest. Custer, SD. 

Busse, M.D.; Hubbert, K.R.; Fiddler, G.O.; Shestak, C.J.; and Powers, R.F. 2005. Lethal soil 

temperatures during burning of masticated forest residues. International Journal of Wildland 

Fire. 14:267-276. 

Busse, M.D. 2006. USFS Pacific Southwest Research Station. Personal email communication 

to Jessica Gould regarding minimum soil and duff moisture levels to prevent detrimental soil 

heating during prescribed burning. October, 2006. 2p. 

Bureau of Land Management. 2011. LR2000 Mining Claim Geographic Reports. 

Canadian Forest Service and British Columbia Ministry of Forests. 1996. Clear Cutting and 

Visual Quality - A Public Perception Study, Forest Resource Development Agreement II Report, 

Victoria, B.C. Available at: http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Frr/Frr270.htm 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 254 

Cannings, R. J. 1993. Northern Saw-whet Owl (Aegolius acadicus). In The Birds of North 

America, No. 42 (A. Poole and F. Gill, Eds.). Philadelphia: The Academy of Natural Sciences; 

Washington, D.C.: The American Ornithologists’ Union. 

Carter, J.M.; Driscoll, D.G.; Williamson, J.E.; and Lindquist, V.A. 2002. Atlas of Water 

Resources in the Black Hills Area, South Dakota. Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-747. U.S. 

Geological Survey: Reston, VA. 130 p. Available online: http://pubs.usgs.gov/ha/ha747/#pdf. 

Carter, J.M.; Driscoll, D.G.; and Sawyer, J.F. 2003. “Ground-Water Resources in the Black 

Hills Area, South Dakota.” Water Resources Investigation Report 03-4049. U.S. Geological 

Survey: Rapid City, SD. 41 p. Available online: http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri034049/ 

Carter, U.S. President Jimmy. 1977a. Executive Order 11988 - Floodplain Management. 

Available online: http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/regs/eo11988.html. 

Carter, U.S. President Jimmy. 1977b. Executive Order 11990 - Protection of Wetlands. 

Available online: http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/regs/eo11990.html. 

Chatwin, S.C.; Howes, D.E.; Schwab, J.W.; and Swanston, D.N. 1994. A Guide for 

Management of the Landslide-Prone Terrain in the Pacific Northwest. Second Ed. Canadian 

Ministry of Forests with USDA Forest Service. Land Management Handbook, ISSN 0229-

1622:18. Research Branch, Ministry of Forests: Victoria, British Columbia. 220 p. 

Colorado State University Extension Office Revised 2008. Canada thistle facts sheet 

http://search.colostate.edu/search-csu.aspx?cx=001074770120494240330%3Annxeddf6qe0 

&sa=Search&cof=FORID%3A11&q=seed+viability+canada+thistle#1184

Cook, Blaine. 2006. Personal communication. Forest Silviculturist, Black Hills National

Forest, USDA – Forest Service. Custer, SD. December, 2006. 

Cook, B. and Allen, K. 2008. Black Hills National Forest – Timber Harvesting Effects on the 

Mountain Pine Beetle. USDA Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest. 

Davis, A.D., Webb, C.J., and Paterson, C.J. 1998. Comprehensive Inventory of Known Abandoned 

Mine Lands in the Black Hills of South Dakota. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology. 

DeBano, L.F.; Neary, D.G.; and Ffolliott, P.F. 1998. Fire’s Effects on Ecosystems. John Wiley 

and Sons, New York, NY. 333 p. 

DeGraaf, Richard M., V.E. Scott., R.H. Hamre., L. Ernst., and S. H. Anderson. January 1991. Forest and 

Rangeland Birds of the United States: Natural History and Habitat Use. Agricultural Handbook 688. 

DeKeyser, S. et. al. December, 2009. Are Changes in Species Composition on Central North 

Dakota Rangelands Due to Non-Use Management? Rangelands. Vol. 31, No. 6: 16-19. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 255 

Dewitt E., Redden, A., Wilson, A. B., Busher D., Dersch, J.S. 1986. U.S. Geological Survey 

Bulletin 1580, Mineral Resource Potential and Geology of the Black Hills National Forest, South 

Dakota and Wyoming, Washington D.C. 

Dixon, Gary E. 2003. Essential FVS: A user’s guide to the Forest Vegetation Simulator. Internal 

Rep. Fort Collins, CO: USDA, Forest Service, Forest Management Service Center. 193p. 

Doran, J.W. and Parkin, T.B. 1996. Defining and Assessing Soil Quality” in J. W. Doran et al 

(Ed.) Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment. SSSA Spec. Pub. 35. SSSA, 

Madison, WI. p 25-37. 

Driscoll, D.G.; Hamade, G.R.; and Kenner, S.J. 2000. Summary of Precipitation Data for the Black 

Hills Area of South Dakota, Water Years 1931-98. Open–File Report 00-329. USDI, US 

Geological Survey. 151 p. Available online: http://sd.water.usgs.gov/pubs/abstracts/ofr00-329.html. 

Drilling, N.E. 2010. 2009 Black Hills Owl Surveys. Technical Report. M-SDBBA2-03. Rocky Mountain 

Bird Observatory, Brighton, CO, 13pp. 

Driscoll, D.G.; Carter, J.M.; Williamson, J.E.; and Putnam, L.D. 2002. Hydrology of the Black 

Hills Area, South Dakota. Water Resources Investigation Report 02-4094. USDI, US 

Geological Survey. 150 p. Available online: http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri024094/. 

Driscoll, D.G.; Carter, J.M.; and Ohlen, D.O. 2004. “Hydrologic Effects of the 1988 Galena Fire, 

Black Hills Area, South Dakota.” Water Resources Investigation Report 03-4323. U.S. Geological 

Survey: Rapid City, SD. 73 p. Available online: http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri034323/. 

Driscoll, D.G. and Norton, P.A. 2009. Hydrologic Characterization for Spring Creek and 

Hydrologic Budget and Model Scenarios for Sheridan Lake, South Dakota, 1962-2007. U.S. 

Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5059. 80p. 

Duckwitz, J. J. 2001. Small mammal survey of Wind Cave National Park. Master’s Thesis, Wildlife and 

Fisheries Sciences. South Dakota State University, Brookings. 

Evans, M. and Warburton, J. 2007. Geomorphology of Upland Peat: Erosion, Form, and 

landscape Change. Blackwell Publishing: Malden, MA. 288 p. 

Everett, A.M. 2004. 2004 Field Audit Report: Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation of 

South Dakota Forestry Best Management Practices. Black Hills National Forest Resource 

Association. Rapid City, SD. 33 p. 

Fauna West Wildlife Consultants. 2003. 2003 survey results for small forest owls, the northern goshawk 

and other raptors of interest in the Black Hills, South Dakota. Report prepared for South Dakota 

Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Pierre. 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 1998. National Flood Insurance Program, 

Q3 Flood Data. GIS data on CD-ROM for South Dakota. Available online: 

http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/dfm_ptd.shtm. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 256 

Federal Registry, Vol. 66, No.3, Thursday, January 4, 2001, Notices

Fettig, Christopher J., et al. 2007. The effectiveness of vegetation management practices for 

prevention and control of bark beetle infestations in coniferous forests of the western and 

southern United States. Forest Ecology and Management 238, pg. 24-53 

Ford, R.C. 1988. Black Hills Stream Inventory and Classification 1984 and 1985. South 

Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks. Report No. 88-1. 

Foster, G.R. 1982. Modeling the erosion process. In: Haan, C.T., Johnson, H.P., Brakensiek, 

D.L., eds. Hydrologic Modeling of Small Watersheds. St. Joseph, MI. American Society of 

Agricultural Engineers. Chapter 8, p295-380. 

Frest, T. J., and E. J. Johannes. 1993. Land snail survey of the Black Hills National Forest, 

South Dakota and Wyoming. Unpubl. Report prepared for USDA Forest Service, Black Hills 

National Forest. Custer, SD. 

Frest, T. J., and E. J. Johannes. 1993. Survey of Spearfish Canyon and vicinity, Black Hills, 

South Dakota and Wyoming, for Oreohelix stigosa cooperi (Binney, 1858) and associated land 

snails. Final Report to USDA Forest Service and USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 59pp. 

Frest, T. J., and E. J. Johannes. 2002. Land snail survey of the Black Hills National Forest, 

South Dakota and Wyoming, Summary Report 1991-2001. Unpubl. Report prepared for USDA 

Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest. Custer, SD. 127pp. and appendices. 

Furniss, M.J. 2001. The Five-D System for Effective Waterbars. Internal memo, USDA Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 2p. 

Gary, H.L. 1975. Watershed management problems and opportunities for the Colorado Front 

Range ponderosa pine zone: The Status of our Knowledge. Res. Pap. RM-139. Fort Collins, CO: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment 

Station. 32 p. 

Godwin, D.C, and J.R. Miner. 1996. The Potential of Off-Stream Livestock Watering to Reduce 

Water Quality Impacts. Bioresource Tech. 58(3):285-290. 

Gould, J.J. 2003. Hydrologic Modeling of High-Intensity, Short-Duration Rainfall on Burned 

Ponderosa Pine Forested Watersheds Existing in Highly Permeable Geology within the Black Hills of 

South Dakota. M.S. Thesis. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology: Rapid City, SD. 121 p. 

Grafe, E. and Horsted, P. 2002. Exploring With Custer: The 1874 Black Hills Expedition. 

Golden Valley Press: Custer, SD. 300 p. 

Graham, R.T.; Harvey, A.E.; Jurgensen, M.F.; Jain, T.B.; Tonn, J.R.; and Page-Dumroese, D.S. 

1994. Managing Coarse Woody Debris in Forests of the Rocky Mountains. INT-RP-477. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Intermountain Research Station. Odgen, UT. 15 p. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 257 

Graham, R.T.; Jain, T.B. 2005. Ponderosa Pine Ecosystems. in USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech 

Rep. PSW-GTR-198. 32p. 

Graham, Russell T.; McCaffrey Sarah; Jain Theresa B. tech. eds. 2004. Science basis for changing 

forest structure to modify wildfire behavior and severity. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-120. Fort 

Collins, CO: Rocky Mountain Research Station; Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; 43 p. 

Graham, Russell T.; Harvey, Alan E.; Jain, Theresa B.; Tonn, Jonalea R. 1999. The Effects of 

Thinning and Similar Stand Treatments on Fire Behavior in Western Forests. Gen Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-463. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. 27p. 

Graves, Henry S. 1896. Black Hills Forest Reserve 

Grimm, E.C. 2000. Paleoenvironmental Data from Iron Bogs in the Black Hills of South 

Dakota: Ironclad Evidence for Environmental Change. Poster Presentation. American 

Quaternary Association Meeting, May 22-24, 2000. University of Arkansas. Fayetteville, AR. 

Gucinski, H.; Furniss, M.J.; Ziemer, R.R.; and Brooks, M.H. 2000. Forest Roads: A Synthesis 

of Scientific Information. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 120 p. 

Harden, T.M., O’Conner, J.E., Driscoll, D.G., and Stamm, J.F. 2011. Flood-Frequency Analyses 

from Paleoflood Investigations for Spring, Rapid, Boxelder, and Elk Creeks, Black Hills, Western 

South Dakota. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011-5131. 136p. 

Haskins, Kristin E. & Catherine A. Gehring. 2004. Long-term effects of burning slash on plant 

communities and arbuscular mycorrhizae in a semi-arid woodland. Journal of Applied Ecology. 

41: 379-388. 

Higgins, K. F., E. D. Stukel, J. M. Goulet, and D. C. Backlund. 2000. Wild mammals of South 

Dakota. South Dakota Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks, Pierre. 278pp. 

High Plains Regional Climate Center (HPRCC). 2012. [Online] Available at: 

http://www.hprcc.unl.edu/data/historical/index.php?state=sd&action=select_state&submit=Selec

t+State . Accessed January 9, 2012. 

Hoffman, George R.; Alexander, Robert R. 1987. Forest vegetation of the Black Hills National 

Forest of South Dakota and Wyoming: a habitat type classification. Res. Pap. RM-276. Fort 

Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 48 p. 

Hopkins, A.D. 1905. The Black Hills Beetle. USDA, Bureau of Entomology, Bulletin No. 56, p.13 

Horsted, P. 2006. The Black Hills: Yesterday & Today. Golden Valley Press: Custer, SD. 304 p. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 258 

Hoxie, J. and Engelskirger, C. 2009. 2009 Field Audit Report: Implementation Monitoring and 

Evaluation of South Dakota Forestry Best Management Practices. Black Hills Forest Resource 

Association, South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Lawrence 

County Conservation District. Rapid City, SD. 18 p. 

Hough, M. and C. Dieter. No Date. Proposal: Habitat use and ecology of the northern flying 

squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus), and habitat use of the red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) in 

the Black Hills and northeastern South Dakota. South Dakota State Univ., Brookings. 

Hungerford, R.D.; Frandsen, W.H.; and Ryan, K.C. 1992. Heat Transfer into the Duff and 

Organic Soil. Final Project Report. FWS Agreement No. 14-48-0009-92-962. USDA Forest 

Service Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Lab. Missoula, MT. 52 p.

Huxoll C. 2010. Big Game Harvest Projections. South Dakota Game Fish and Parks Report 

No. 2011-05. Pierre, South Dakota. 77pp. 

Isaak, D.J., W.A. Hubert, C.R. Berry, Jr. 2003. Conservation assessment for lake chub, 

mountain sucker, and finescale dace in the Black Hills National Forest, South Dakota and 

Wyoming. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Black Hills National Forest. Custer, 

South Dakota. Available at: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/blackhills/projects/planning/assessments/chub_sucker_dace.pdf 

Jackson, Robert J. 1988. Prescribed Fire and the Protection of Heritage Resources. A Heritage 

Resources Management Module Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, 

National Forests of the Sierra Nevada. Ms. on file at the Black Hills National Forest. Custer, SD. 

Kennedy, R. 1997. Road Maintenance Frequency versus Sediment Production. Region 4. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Bridger-Teton National Forest. Jackson, WY. Pg 11-15. 

King, J.G. and Tennyson, L.C. 1984. “Alteration of Streamflow Characteristics Following Road 

Construction in North Central Idaho.” Water Resources Research 20, No. 8: 1159-1163. 

Kingery, H.E., and C.K. Ghalambor. 2001. Pygmy nuthatch (Sitta pygmaea). In: The Birds of North 

America, No. 567. A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania. 

Kricher, J. C. 1995. Black-and-white Warbler (Mniotilta varia). In The Birds of North America, 

No. 158 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and The 

American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. 

Krueger, E. M. 2004. Distribution and habitat associations of the northern flying squirrel in the 

northern Black Hills of South Dakota. Self-published; Filed in Black Hills National Forest 

Supervisor’s Office (Forest Biologist’s files), Custer, South Dakota. 

Larson, G. E.; J.R. Johnson. August 1999. Plants of the Black Hills and Bear Lodge 

Mountains. Brookings, SD. South Dakota State University. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 259 

Laybolt, A.D., M. Schwab, J. Swallow, M. Salisbury. 2012. A Level III Heritage Resource 

Inventory of the Calumet Analysis Area, Mystic Ranger District, Black Hills National Forest, 

Pennington and Custer Counties, South Dakota. Section 106 Report on file with SD State 

Historic Preservation Office, Pierre, SD. 

Leaf, C.F. 1975. Watershed management in the Central and Southern Rocky Mountains: A 

summary of the status of our knowledge by vegetation types. Res. Pap. RM-142. Fort Collins, 

CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 28 p. 

Lee, W.K. 2001. Wyoming Silviculture Best Management Practices Field Audit: 

Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation. Wyoming Timber Industry Association and 

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality. Saratoga, Wyoming. 17 p. 

Lee, W.K. and Everett, A.M. 2001. South Dakota Silviculture Best Management Practices 

Audit Project Final Report: Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation. Black Hills Forest 

Resource Association and South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 

Rapid City, SD. 48 p. 

Lentile, L., Smith, F.W., Sheppard, W. 2000. “Snag Management in the Black Hills National 

Forest.” Unpublished Research Paper. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University and Rocky 

Mountain Research Station, United States Department of Agriculture - Forest Service. 

Lentile, L.B., Smith, F.W., Sheppard, W.D. 2006. Influence of topography and forest structure 

on patterns of mixed severity fire in ponderosa pine forests of the South Dakota Black Hills, 

USA. International Journal of Wildlandfire 15, pp.557-566 

Lentile, Leigh B., Zachary A. Holden, Alistair M.S. Smith, Michael J. Falkowski, Andrew T. 

Hudak, Penelope Morgan, Sarah A. Lewis, Paul E. Gessler and Nate C. Benson. 2006. Remote 

sensing techniques to assess active fire characteristics and post fire effects. International Journal 

of Wildland Fire. 15: 319-345. 

Litton, R. Burton, Jr. 1984. Visual Vulnerability of the Landscape Control of Visual Quality. 

Research Paper WO-39. Berkley, CA: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Research Station, 

United States Department of Agriculture - Forest Service. Available at:

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d02973094s;page=root;view=image;size=100;seq

=3;num=3 

Luce, C.H. and Black, T.A. 1999. Sediment Production from Forest Roads in Western Oregon. 

Water Resources Research 35, No. 8: 2561-2570. 

Madden, E. 2011. GIS Technician, Pennington County, South Dakota. Email Communication 

providing latest address data for Pennington County 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 260 

Marc, Jaques. 2004. Public Opinion - What Do People Like, British Columbia Ministry of 

Forests - Forest Practices Branch, Victoria, B.C. Available at: 

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/DKL/external/!publish/Forest_Development_Info/General_FSPand

FDP_info/Exit%20Presentations/Visuals/Marc02.pdf 

Marrone, G. M. 2005. A butterfly survey of the southern Black Hills and adjacent areas with 

emphasis on species monitored by the South Dakota Natural Heritage Program. Report 

submitted to South Dakota Dept. Game, Fish and Parks. Fort Pierre, South Dakota. 

Marrone, G. M. 2006. A butterfly survey of the northern Black Hills and adjacent areas with 

emphasis on species monitored by the South Dakota Natural Heritage Program. Report 

submitted to South Dakota Dept. Game, Fish and Parks. Fort Pierre, South Dakota. 

Martin, J.E.; Sawyer, J.F.; Fahrenbach, M.D.; Tomhave, D.W.; and Schulz, L.D. 2004. 

Geologic Map of South Dakota, General Map 10. South Dakota Department of Environment and 

Natural Resources, Geological Survey. 21 p. 

McCambridge et al. 1982. Ponderosa Pine Mortality Resulting from a Mountain Pine Beetle 

Outbreak. Research Paper RM-235. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 

McCambridge, W.F.; Stevens, R.E. 1982. Effectiveness of Thinning Ponderosa Pine Stands in 

reducing Mountain Pine Beetle-Caused Tree Losses in the Black Hills-Preliminary Observations. 

Research Note RM-414. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment 

Station. 

McDonald, Phillip M., and R. Burton Litton, Jr. 1998. Combining Silviculture and Landscape 

Architecture to Enhance the Roadside View. Research Paper PSW-RP-235. Albany, CA: 

Pacific Southwest Research Station, United States Department of Agriculture - Forest Service. 

Meehan, W.R. ed. 1991. Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on Salmonid Fishes 

and Their Habitats. AFS Special Publication 19. Bethesda, MD. 751 p. 

Megahan, W.F. 1986. Recent studies on erosion and its control on forest lands in the United 

States. In: Richard, F. ed. Range basin sediment delivery: Proceedings, 1986, August. 

Albuquerque, NM. IAHS Publication 159, Wallingford, Oxon, United Kingdom:178-189. 

Mehl, S. M. 1992. Growth descriptions for the major cover types in the Rocky Mountain 

region. In: Old-growth forests in the Southwest & Rocky Mountain regions, Proceedings of a 

workshop. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rept. RM-213. 

Mitsch, W.J. and Gosselink, J.G. 2007. Wetlands. 4th ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, 

NJ. 582 p. 

Molinar, F., Galt, D. & Holechek, J. 2001. Managing For Mulch. Rangelands, Vol. 23 No.4, 3-7. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 261 

Moore, Lynn., Sandy Friedley, and Donald L. Hazlett. 2006. Carex alopecoidea Tuckerman (foxtail 

sedge): A technical conservation assessment. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 

National Wildfire Coordinating Group. 2001. Smoke Management Guide for Prescribed and 

Wildland Fire. PMS 420-2. Boise, ID: National Wildfire Coordinating Group, National 

Interagency Fire Center 

Neary, D.G.; Ryan, K.C.; and DeBano, L.F. eds. 2005. Wildland Fire in ecosystems: effects of 

fire on soils and water. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol.4. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest 

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 250p. 

Negron, J.F., et al. 2007. Susceptibility of ponderosa pine, Pinus ponderosa (Dougl.exLaws) to 

mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins, attack in uneven-aged stands in the 

Black Hills of South Dakota and Wyoming, USA, Forest Ecol. Manage. 

Newport, Carl A. 1956. A History of Black Hills Forestry. Pierre, SD: South Dakota

Department of Game, Fish and Parks. 112p. 

Omi, P. N., Martinson, E. J., Chong, G. W. 2007. Tested by Fire: What Happens When 

Wildfires Meet Fuel Treatments. Joint Fire Science Program. Fire Science Brief. Issue 1, 

October, 2007. www.firescience.gov. 

Orr, H.K. 1968. Soil-moisture trends after thinning and clearcutting in a second-growth 

ponderosa pine stand in the Black Hills. Res. Note RM-99. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 8 p. 

Orr, H.K. 1972. Throughfall and stemflow relationships in second-growth ponderosa pine in the 

Black Hills. Res. Note RM-210. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 7 p. 

Orr, H.K. 1975. Watershed management in the Black Hills: The status of our knowledge. Res. 

Pap. RM-141. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. 

Orr, H.K. and VanderHeide, T. 1973. Water yield characteristics of three small watersheds in 

the Black Hills of South Dakota. Res. Pap. RM-100. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 8 p. 

Panjabi, A. 2005. Monitoring the birds of the Black Hills: Year 4 annual report. Rocky Mountain Bird 

Observatory. Brighton, Colorado. http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/blackhills/projects/wildlife/index.shtml 

Parrish, J.B.; Herman, D.J.; Reyher, D. J. 1996. A century of change in Black Hills forest and 

riparian ecosystems. B 722. Brookings, SD: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Agriculture Experiment Station, South Dakota State University. 20 p. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 262 

Parsons, A.; Robichaud, P.R.; Lewis, S.A.; Napper, C.; and Clark, J.T. 2010. Field guide for 

mapping post-fire soil burn severity. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-243. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 49 p. 

Pennington County Community Wildfire Protection Plan. 2006. Pennington County, SD 

Permit 2230 Files. Located at the Mystic Ranger District Office. 

Putnam, L.D. and Long, A.J. 2007. Analysis of Ground-Water Flow in the Madison Aquifer 

using Fluorescent Dyes Injected in Spring Creek and Rapid Creek near Rapid City, South 

Dakota, 2003-04. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5137. 27p. 

Rahn, P.H. and Gries, J.P. 1973. “Large Springs in the Black Hills, South Dakota and Wyoming,” 

Report of Investigations No. 107. South Dakota Geological Survey: Vermillion, SD. 54 p. 

Reinhardt, E.D., Keane, R.E., Calkin, D.E., Cohen, J.D. 2008. Objectives and considerations for 

wildland fuel treatment in forested ecosystems of the interior western United States. Forest 

Ecology and Management, 256, pp. 1997-2006 

Reynolds, R. T. 1983. Management of western coniferous forests for nesting accipiter hawks. 

USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Report RM-102. 

Reynolds, R. T. and S. M. Joy. 2006. Demography of goshawks in northern Arizona, 1991-

1996. Studies in Avian Biology 31:63-74. 

Ribe, Robert G. 1989. “The Aesthetic of Forestry: What Has Empirical Preference Research 

Taught Us?” Environmental Management, Volume 13, Number 1. Available at: 

http://www.springerlink.com/content/v4x5132735646770/fulltext.pdf 

Ribe, Robert G. 2004. “Aesthetic perceptions of green-tree retention harvests in vista views: 

The interaction of cut level, retention pattern and harvest shape.” Landscape and Urban 

Planning, Vol. 73, Issue 4, (December 15, 2005). pg. 277-293. Available at: 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204604000970 

Rick, Randall. R. 2010, 2011. Mystic District Silviculturist – Field observations of recently 

harvested units on the Mystic Ranger District. 

Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory. 2012. http://www.rmbo.org/public/monitoring/default.aspx 

Rom, Lance, Tim Church and Michele Church. 1996. Black Hills National Forest Cultural

Resources Overview. Ms. on file at the Black Hills National Forest. Custer, SD. 

Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology: Pagosa Springs, CO. 350 p. 

Running, S.W. 2006. Is Global Warming Causing More, Larger Wildfires? Science. 18 August 

2006. Vol 313:927-928. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 263 

Ryan, Robert L. 2005. Social Science to Improve Fuels Management: A synthesis of Research 

On Aesthetics and Fuels Management. General Technical Report NC-261. St. Paul, MN: North 

Central Research Station, United States Department of Agriculture - Forest Service. 

Sando, S.K. 1998. Techniques for Estimating Peak-Flow magnitude and Frequency Relations

for South Dakota Streams. USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4055. 52p. 

Schmid, J.M.; Mata, S.A; Kessler, R.R.; and Popp, J.B. 2007. The Influence of Partial Cutting 

on Mountain Pine Beetle-caused Tree Mortality in Black Hills Ponderosa Pine Stands. Res. Pap. 

RMRS-RP-68. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 19p. 

Schmid, J.M.; Mata, S.A. 2005. Mountain pine beetle-caused tree mortality in partially cut plots 

surrounded by unmanaged stands. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-54. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 11p. 

Schmid, J.M.; Mata, S.A. and Obedzinski, R.A. 1994. Hazard Rating Ponderosa Pine Stands for 

Mountain Pine Beetles in the Black Hills. Res. Note RM-529. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 

Schmid, J.M., S.A. Mata, R.K. Watkins, M.R. Kaufmann. 1991. Water potential in ponderosa 

pine stands of different growing-stock levels. Canadian Journal of Forestry Research 21: 750-755. 

Schmid, J.M., Mata, S.A., Schaupp, W.C. July 2009. Mountain Pine Beetle-Killed Trees as 

Snags in Black Hills Ponderosa Pine Stands, USDA, RMRS-RN-40. 

Schmid, J.M., S.A. Mata and W.C. Schaupp, Jr. 2009. Mountain Pine Beetle-Killed Trees as Snags 

in Black Hills Ponderosa Pine Stands. Rocky Mountain Research Station Research Note (In Press).

Schmidt, K.M., Menakis, J.P., Hardy, C.C., Hann, W.J., Bunnell, D.L. 2002. Development of coarsescale spatial data for wildland fire and fuel management. Gen. Tech. Rep., RMRS-GTR-87. Fort 

Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

Schultz, B. 2012. Senior Scientist, Air Quality Staff. South Dakota Department of Environment 

and Natural Resource. Pierre, South Dakota. Personal Telephone Communication. 

Schultz, L.D. 2011. Environmental factors associated with long-term trends of mountain sucker 

populations in the Black Hills, and an assessment of their thermal tolerance. 

http://pubstorage.sdstate.edu/wfs/thesis/Schultz%20Luke%20D%202011%20MS.pdf 

Schultz, L.D. and Bertrand, K.N. 2012. Long Term Trends and Outlook for Mountain Sucker in 

the Black Hills of South Dakota. Am. Midl. Nat. (2012) 167:96–110. 

http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1674/0003-0031-167.1.96 

Scott, J.H., Burgan, R.E. 2005. Standard fire Behavior Fuel Models: A Comprehensive Set for 

Use with Rothermel’s Surface Fire Spread Model, GTR RMRS-GTR-153 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 264 

SDDA-State of South Dakota. 2010. Noxious and Invasive Plant List 

http://sdda.sd.gov/Ag_Services/Plant-Protection/Weed%20and%20Pest/State-Noxious-Weeds.aspx 

SD DENR. 2010. The 2010 South Dakota Integrated Report for Surface Water Quality 

Assessment. http://denr.sd.gov/documents/10irfinal.pdf 

SDGFP. 2009. Stream Fisheries Database. May 11, 2009. 

SDGFP. 2010. Statewide fisheries surveys 2009. Part 1 – Lakes. Region 1. Annual Report 

No. 10-12. http://gfp.sd.gov/fishing-boating/tacklebox/lake-surveys/western-lakes/docs/LakeSurveys-2009.pdf 

Severson, Keith E., and Jeremiah J. Kranz. 1978. Management of bur oak on deer winter range. 

Wildlife Society Bulletin 6(4):212-216. 

Shepperd, Wayne D.; Battaglia, Michael A. 2002. Ecology, silviculture. And Management of 

Black Hills Ponderosa Pine Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-97. Fort Collins, CO. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 122p. 

Shepperd, W.D.; Troendle, C.E.; and Edminster, C.B. 1992. Linking water and growth and 

yield models to evaluate management alternatives in Subalpine ecosystems. In: Murphy, D., 

comp. Getting to the future through silviculture—Workshop proceedings; 1991 May 6–9; Cedar 

City, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-291. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Intermountain Research Station: 42–48. 

Sieg, Carolyn Hull; Severson, Keith E. 1996. Managing habitats for white-tailed deer in the 

Black Hills and Bear Lodge Mountains of South Dakota and Wyoming. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMGTR-274. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Forest and Range Experiment Station 24 p. 

Skinner, C., Ritchie, M. 2008. The Cone Fire: A Chance Reckoning for Fuel Treatments. Joint

Fire Science Program. Fire Science Brief. Issue 4, January, 2008 

Smith, F.M. 1983. Appraisal of water yield as affected by basal area reduction of ponderosa 

pine: Sturgis Watersheds, Black Hills, S.D. Cooperative agreement 16-949-CA. Fort Collins, 

CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. 36 p. 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 1998. The 1998 

South Dakota 303(d) Waterbody List and Supporting Documentation. 109 p. Available at: 

http://denr.sd.gov/des/sw/IntegratedReports.aspx 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 1999. Article 

74:51. The Administrative Rules of South Dakota (ARSD 74:51:01, :02, and :03). South 

Dakota's Surface Water Quality Standards. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 265 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 2002. South 

Dakota Total Maximum Daily Load Waterbody List 2002. 67 p. Available at: 

http://denr.sd.gov/des/sw/IntegratedReports.aspx 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 2004. The 2004 

South Dakota Integrated Report for Surface Water Quality Assessment. 230 p. Available at: 

http://denr.sd.gov/des/sw/IntegratedReports.aspx 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 2006. The 2006 

South Dakota Integrated Report for Surface Water Quality Assessment. 211 p. Available at: 

http://denr.sd.gov/des/sw/IntegratedReports.aspx 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 2008. The 2008 

South Dakota Integrated Report for Surface Water Quality Assessment. 262 p. Available at: 

http://denr.sd.gov/des/sw/IntegratedReports.aspx 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 2010. The 2010 

South Dakota Integrated Report for Surface Water Quality Assessment. 272 p. Available at: 

http://denr.sd.gov/des/sw/IntegratedReports.aspx 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 2012a. Water 

Rights Program. South Dakota Well Completion Reports Database. Accessed January 9, 2012. 

Available at http://denr.sd.gov/des/wr/dblogsearch.aspx 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 2012b. Ground 

Water Quality Program, Online Spill Reporting Database. Accessed January 9, 2012. Available 

at http://denr.sd.gov/des/gw/Spills/SpillData.aspx 

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources (SD DENR). 2012c. The 

Draft 2012 South Dakota Integrated Report for Surface Water Quality Assessment. 272 p. 

Available at: http://denr.sd.gov/des/sw/IntegratedReports.aspx 

South Dakota Division of Forestry (unknown date). Best Management Practices For Water Quality 

Protection on Timber Harvest And There Silvicultural Activities In South Dakota, Pierre, SD. 

South Dakota Pennington County. 2007. Noxious and Invasive Plant List 

http://www.co.pennington.sd.us/weedpest/localwds.htm 

South Dakota State University (SDSU), South Dakota Cooperative Extension Service, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural 

Resources and South Dakota Department of Agriculture. 2003. Forestry Best Management 

Practices for South Dakota. 39 p. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 266 

Stephens, R. M. and S. H. Anderson. 2003. Conservation assessment for the Broad-winged 

hawk of the Black Hills National Forest, South Dakota and Wyoming. [Online]. USDA Forest 

Service. Black Hills National Forest. Custer, SD. 25pp. Available: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/blackhills/projects/planning/assessments/broad_winged_hawk.pdf 

Stewart, R.K. and C.A. Thilenius. 1964. Stream and lake inventory and classification in the 

Black Hills of South Dakota. Dingell-Johnson Project F-1-R-13, Job Numbers 14 and 15. South 

Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Pierre. 

Sundstrom, Linea. 1989. Archaic Hunting Practices Depicted in Northwest Plains Rock Art 

Style. Plains Anthropologist 34 (124) 149-169. 

Thomas, S. 2008. BMP/WCP Monitoring Report. Black Hill National Forest. Mystic and Hell 

Canyon Ranger Districts 2002-2007. Rapid City, South Dakota. 93 p. 

Thomas, S. 2012. BMP/WCP Monitoring Report. Black Hill National Forest. Mystic and Hell 

Canyon Ranger Districts 2002-2007. Rapid City, South Dakota. 93 p. 

Troendle, C.A. and King, R.M. 1987. The effect of partial and clearcutting on streamflow at 

Deadhorse Creek, Colorado. Journal of Hydrology. 90: 145–157. 

Tigner, J. and E. D. Stukel. 2003. South Dakota Dept. Game, Fish and Parks Wildlife Division 

Report 2003-05. Pierre, South Dakota. 

Turner, A.K. and Schuster, R.L. eds. 1996. Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Special 

Report 247, National Research Council, Transportation Research Board. National Academy 

Press: Washington, D.C. 675 p. 

Ursek, Daniel W.; Severson, Kieth. 1988. Influence of Ponderosa Pine Overstory on Forage

Quality in the Black Hills, South Dakota. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station 5p. Great Basin Naturalist Vol. 48 No. 1 

January 1988. 

Ursek, Daniel W.; Severson, Kieth. 1989. Understory-overstory relationship in ponderosa pine 

forests, Black Hills, South Dakota. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station 6p. Journal of Range Management Vol. 42 No. 

3 May 1989. 

Ursek, Daniel W.; Severson, Kieth. 1998. Response of Understory Species to Changes in 

Ponderosa Pine Stocking Levels in the Black Hills. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station 16p. Great Basin Naturalist Vol. 

58 No. 4 1998. 

US Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. 

Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory, Waterways 

Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. 143 p. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 267 

US Army Corps of Engineers and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2008. 

Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources – Final Rule. Federal Register April 

10, 2008. Part II. Department of Defense, Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers at 33 

CFR Parts 325 and 332; Environmental Protection Agency at 40 CFR Part 230. 113 p. 

US Census Bureau. 2010. Available at http://www.census.gov 

USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). 2010. Federal Noxious Weed List 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/weeds/index.shtml 

USDA – Forest Service, Manual 2230. 

USDA – Forest Service, Handbook 2209.13 

USDA – Forest Service, Handbook 2409.15 – Timber Sale Administration Handbook, Chapter 

50, Specified Transportation Facilities, Black Hills Supplement No. 2409.15-92-1. 

USDA Forest Service, Agricultural Handbook 434. 1973. National Forest Landscape 

Management, Volume 1. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

USDA Forest Service, Agricultural Handbook 483. 1977. National Forest Landscape 

Management, Volume 2 - Chapter 4, Roads. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

USDA Forest Service, Agricultural Handbook 559. 1980. National Forest Landscape 

Management, Volume 2 - Chapter 5, Timber. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

USDA Forest Service. 1982. Photo Series for Quantifying Forest Residues in the Black Hills: 

Ponderosa Pine Type and Spruce Type. USFS Rocky Mountain Region. 80p. 

USDA Forest Service, Agricultural Handbook 608. 1985. National Forest Landscape 

Management, Volume 2 - Chapter 6, Fire. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

USDA-Forest Service. 1990. Photo Series For Quantifying Forest Residues in the: Black Hills – 

Ponderosa Pine Type and Spruce Type. A-89-1-90. Ft. Collins, CO: Rocky Mountain Research 

Station, United States Department of Agriculture - Forest Service. 

USDA Forest Service, Agricultural Handbook 701. 1995. Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook for

Scenery Management, and (2000) Landscape Aesthetics Handbook Revision. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Government Printing Office. Available at: http://www.esf.edu/es/via/USDA Forest Service. 1995. 

Burned-Area Emergency Rehabilitation Handbook, FSH 2509.13. Washington DC. 122 p. 

USDA Forest Service. 1996. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Revised Black Hills 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Black Hills National Forest. Custer, SD. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 268 

USDA Forest Service. 1996a. Memo 2500/2600 (July 29, 1996) NEPA Guidance for 

Watershed from Jim Maxwell, Water Program Team Leader to Region 2 Director of Planning 

and Budget and Region 2 Watershed Staff. 

USDA-Forest Service. 1996b. Rangeland Analysis and Management Training Guide. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Denver, Colorado. August, 2006. 

USDA Forest Service. 1997. Revised Black Hills National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan. Black Hills National Forest. Custer, SD. 

USDA-Forest Service. 1997b. Livestock Grazing Environmental Assessment for 

Pactola/Harney Ranger District. U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, Black Hills 

National Forest. Rapid City, South Dakota. September, 1997. 

USDA Forest Service. 1999. Biological Evaluation R2-00-03, Evaluation of Mountain Pine 

Beetle Activity in the Black Hills National Forest. 19 p. 

USDA Forest Service. 1999a. Indicators for analysis of water/road interactions, Appendix 2. 

In: Roads analysis, informing decisions about managing the National Forest transportation 

system. Miscellaneous Report FS-643. USDA Forest Service, Washington Office. 

UDSA Forest Service. 1999. Roads Analysis: Informing Decisions about Managing the 

National Forest Transportation System. Misc. Rep. FS-643. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of

Agriculture Forest Service. 222 p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2001a. R2 Roads Analysis Supplement to FS-643. Denver, Co. 

USDA Forest Service. 2001b. Agricultural Manual 7700 Transportation System, Chapter 10 Atlas, 

Records, and Analysis, Chapter 20 Development, and Chapter 30 Operation and Maintenance. 

USDA Forest Service. 2002. Memo 2070/2520-7/2620 (March 19, 2002) Wetland Protection - 

Fens from Bruce F. Short (FOR) Marisue Hilliard, Director Renewable Resources to Region 2 

forest supervisors. 

USDA Forest Service. 2003. Black Hill National Forest, Forest Plan Best Management 

Practices Evaluation. Custer, South Dakota. 82 p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2004. Forest Health Evaluation R2-04-02, Evaluation of MPB Activity 

on the Black Hills National Forest. 17p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2004a. Western Forests, Fire Risk, and Climate Change. Science 

Update, Issue 6. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. Portland, Oregon. January 2004. 12 p. Available online: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/ccrc/topics/wildland-fire.shtml. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 269 

USDA Forest Service. 2005a. Black Hills National Forest Phase II Amendment Final 

Environmental Impact Statement. Custer, SD. 

USDA Forest Service. 2005b. Record of Decision for the Phase II Amendment to the 1997 

Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Black Hills National Forest. Custer, SD. 

USDA Forest Service. 2005c. Biological Evaluation for the Phase II Amendment to the Forest 

Plan. Black Hills National Forest. Available online: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/blackhills/projects/planning/amendments/phase_II/feis/10_append_c_20

05_1019_p1-106.pdf 

USDA-Forest Service. 2005d. Analysis of Alternative Treatment Methods to Maintain Limited Fire 

Potential Following the Prairie Project, Black Hills National Forest. U.S. Department of 

Agriculture-Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest. Rapid City, South Dakota. March, 2005. 

USDA Forest Service. 2005e. Monitoring implementation guide for the Black Hills National 

Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Custer, South Dakota. 

USDA Forest Service. 2006a. 1997 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the 

Black Hills National Forest, as amended by the Phase II Amendment. Custer, SD 

USDA Forest Service. 2006b. Forest Service Minerals and Geology Program Handbook FSH 

2809.15. United States Department of Agriculture-Forest Service. 

USDA Forest Service. 2006c. Forest Service Handbook, Region 2 Supplement, 2509.25 – 

Watershed Conservation Practices Handbook. Rocky Mountain Region, Ft. Collins, Colorado. 

USDA Forest Service. 2006d. Monitoring Implementation Guide for Sensitive Plant Species 

and Plant Species of Local Concern for the Black Hills National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan (Addendum to the October 2005 Guide). [Online]. Custer, SD. Available:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/blackhills/projects/planning/plant_monitoring_guide_2006.pdf

USDA, Forest Service. April, 2006e. Writing a Cumulative Effects Analysis for Rangeland/ 

Allotment Planning Documents. Version 2.0 Rocky Mountain Region (Chuck Quimby). 27 pages. 

USDA Forest Service. September, 2006f. Black Hills National Forest FY2005 monitoring and 

evaluation report. [Online] Black Hills National Forest, Custer, South Dakota. 

http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsm9_011879.pdf 

USDA Forest Service. May, 2007. Black Hills National Forest FY2006 monitoring and 

evaluation report. [Online] Black Hills National Forest, Custer, South Dakota. 

http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsm9_012248.pdf 

USDA Forest Service. 2007a. Ground Water Technical Guide. Washington Office, 

Washington DC. 295 p. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 270 

USDA Forest Service. December. 2008. Black Hills National Forest FY2007 monitoring and 

evaluation report. [Online] Black Hills National Forest, Custer, South Dakota. 

http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5112254.pdf 

USDA Forest Service. 2008a. Forest Service Manual 2880 - Geologic Resources, Hazards, and 

Services. Washington Office, Washington DC. 18 p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2009a. National Visitor Use Monitoring Results – USDA Forest Service, 

Region 2 - Black Hills National Forest – February 2009. United States Department of Agriculture - 

Forest Service, Southern Research Station (Producer). Updated June 11, 2010. Available on-line at 

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/nvum/2009/BlackHills_FY2009.pdf 

USDA Forest Service. September, 2009b. Black Hills National Forest FY2008 monitoring and 

evaluation report. [Online] Black Hills National Forest, Custer, South Dakota. Available: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/blackhills/projects/planning/fy2006_report.pdf 

USDA Forest Service. 2009d. Slate Castle Project Area Final Environmental Impact Statement. 

Black Hills National Forest. Rapid City, South Dakota. 

USDA Forest Service. 2009e. Memorandum of Understanding between USDA Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Region and Northern Region and South Dakota Department of Environment 

and Natural Resources. Forest Service Agreement #09-MU-11020000-014. 8 p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2009f. Forest Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol. Volume I: Rapid 

Assessment and Volume II: Supplementary Methods, Statistics, and Data Collection. USDA 

Forest Service, General Technical Report WO-82a and 82b, September 2009. Available online 

at: http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/34427 and http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/34426. 

USDA Forest Service. 2010. Black Hills National Forest Travel Management FEIS and Record 

of Decision, May 7, 2010. Available at http://www.fs.usda.gov/bhnf 

USDA Forest Service. 2010a. Black Hills National Forest FY09 monitoring and evaluation report. 

USDA Forest Service. 2010b. Forest Service Manual 2550 – Soil Management. Washington 

Office, Washington DC. 20 p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2011a. Forest Service Manual 2670 – Threatened Endangered and Sensitive 

Plants and Animals R2 Supplement FSM 2600-2011-1. Rocky Mountain Region, Denver CO. 22p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2011b. Forest Service Manual 2600- Wildlife, Fish, and Sensitive Plant 

Habitat Management Black Hills National Forest Supplement r2_bh_2600-2005-1. Black Hills 

National Forest, Custer SD. 11p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2011. Watershed Condition Framework: A Framework for Assessing 

and Tracking Changes to Watershed Condition. FS-977. 24 p. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 271 

USDA Forest Service. 2012a. RCSC-7-12, Mountain Pine Beetle Activity in the Calumet 

Project Area. 5 pages 

USDA-Forest Service. 2012. Aerial Detection Survey Results for the Black Hills, 2011. 

Technical Report . Rapid City, SD: Forest Health Management, Rapid City Service Center, 

United States Department of Agriculture - Forest Service. 

USDA Forest Service, Best Management Practices for the Control of Nonpoint Pollution from 

Silvicultural and Related Road Activities. Black Hills National Forest, Custer, South Dakota, n.d. 

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2009. Soil Data Mart, Geospatial data 

for Soil Survey Area SD604 – Custer and Pennington Counties, Black Hills Parts, South Dakota. 

[Online] Available at: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed October 30, 2011. 

USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1990. Soil Survey of Custer and Pennington Counties, Black 

Hills Parts, South Dakota. US Department of Agriculture. 309 p. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1998. Riparian Area Management: Process for Assessing 

Proper Function Condition. Tech. Ref. TR-1737-9. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of 

Land Management: Denver, CO. 58 p. 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1995. National Wetlands Inventory. Digital and 

supporting data available online: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1999a. Peatland Mitigation Policy Considerations. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6, Ecological Services. Colorado Field Office, 

Lakewood Colorado. 43 p. 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1999b. Memo (January 14, 1999) Regional Policy on 

the Protection of Fens, as amended from Dennis Buechler, Senior Staff Specialist for Federal 

Activities to multiple individuals and agencies as listed in included distribution list. 7 p. 

USDI Fish & Wildlife Service. 2007. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review 

of Native Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice 

of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions. 

Federal Register. Vol. 72 No. 234. 69034. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. United States 

Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, 

Arlington, Virginia. 85 pp. [Online version available at <http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/>] 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Endangered Species by County List. Last updated 27 

October 2011. South Dakota Ecological Services Field Office. 

http://www.fws.gov/southdakotafieldoffice/SpeciesByCounty.pdf. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 272 

USDI Fish & Wildlife Service. 2011a. USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species System 

(TESS) for South Dakota. [Online] Accessed May 09, 2011. 

USDI Fish & Wildlife Service. 2011b. Plants of the Mountain Prairie Region. [Online]

http://www.fws.gov/mountain%2Dprairie/species/plants/ Accessed January 11, 2011. 

USDI Fish & Wildlife Service. 2011c. USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species System for 

South Dakota: Proposed Species. [Online] 

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public//pub/stateListing.jsp?state=SD&status=proposed Accessed 

January 11, 2011. 

USDI Fish & Wildlife Service. 2011d. USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species System for 

South Dakota: Candidate Species. [Online] 

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public//pub/stateListing.jsp?state=SD&status=candidate Accessed 

January 11, 2011.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011e. Golden Eagles Status Fact Sheet. United States 

Department of Interior. [Online version available at <http://www.fws.gov/1800/344 WILD] 

USDI Interagency Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) Team. 2001. Elk Mountain Complex 

Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Plan: Roger’s Shack and Elk Mountain II 

Fires. On file at the Black Hills National Forest, Forest Supervisor’s Office, Custer, SD. 

USDI Interagency Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) Team. 2002. Grizzly Gulch Fire 

Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Plan. Spearfish, SD. On file at the 

Black Hills National Forest, Forest Supervisor’s Office, Custer, SD. 

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2009. What is a Watershed? [Online] Available 

at: http://water.epa.gov/type/watersheds/whatis.cfm 

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2011a. Our Waters. [Online] Available at: 

http://water.epa.gov/type/ 

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2011b. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System. Clean Water Act. Available [Online] Available at: 

http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/laws/cwa.html. 

US Geological Survey (USGS). 1995. Science in Your Watershed: General Introduction and 

Hydrologic Definitions. HTML version of Manual of Hydrology: Part 1. General Surface-Water 

Techniques by W.B. Langein and K.T. Iseri, Water Supply Paper 1541-A, “Methods and 

practices of the Geological Survey”. [Online] Available at: 

http://water.usgs.gov/wsc/glossary.html#INTRODUCTION 

US Geological Survey (USGS). 2008. National Hydrography Dataset, Watershed Boundary 

Dataset. [Online] Available at: http://nhd.usgs.gov/data.html. Accessed April 21, 2010. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 273 

US Geological Survey (USGS). 2012. National Water Information System (NWIS). 

Streamflow statistics for selected stations on Spring Creek. [Online] Available at: 

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/sd/nwis. 

Vallentine, J.F. 1989. Range Developments and Improvements, Third Edition. Academic Press. 

524 pages. 

Vandendriesche, Don. 2004. Black Hills National Forest Phase II Amendment - Description of 

the Analysis Process regarding the Construction of Vegetative Yield Profiles Black Hills 

National Forest, Custer, South Dakota, n.d. 

Van Dyck, Michael G. 2005. User’s guide to the post processors for the Forest Vegetation 

Simulator. USDA, US Forest Service, Forest Management Center, Fort Collins, CO. 

Waters, T.F. 1995. Sediment in Streams: Sources, Biological Effects, and Control. AFS 

Monograph 7. Bethesda, MD. 251 p. 

Wells, G. 2012 Bark Beetle and Fire: Two Forces of Nature Transforming Western Forest. 

Issue 12, February 2012. www.firescience.gov 

Westerling, A.L.; Hidalgo, H.G.; Cayan, D.R.; and Swetnam, T.W. 2006. Warming and Earlier

Spring Increases Western U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity. Sciencexpress. 6 July 2006. 9 p. 

Available online: www.sciencexpress.org. 

Williamson, J.E.; Jarrell, G.J.; Clawges, R.M.; Galloway, J.M.; and Carter, J.M. 2000. Digital 

data sets for map products produced as part of the Black Hills Hydrology Study, Western South 

Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-471. Online only. Available at:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/ofr00-471/ofr00471.html. 

Wyoming Game and Fish Department. No date. Raptor survey dates and protection dates. 

Wyoming Range Service Team. 2001. Wyoming Rangeland Monitoring Guide: A Cooperative and 

Voluntary Approach to Monitoring Rangelands. Wyoming Department of Agriculture. June, 2001. 

Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 275 

CHAPTER 5 GLOSSARY 

Access The opportunity to approach, enter and make use of public or private lands. 

Activity Fuels Fuels resulting from or altered by forestry practices, such as timber harvest or 

thinning, as opposed to naturally created fuels. 

Adaptive Management Implementing policy decisions as science-driven management 

experiments that test assumptions and predictions in management plans. 

Age Class Groups of trees or shrubs approximately the same age. 

Air Quality Classes Classification established under the "Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration" portion of the Clean Air Act, which limits the amount of air pollution considered 

significant within an area. Class I applies to areas where almost any change in air quality would 

be significant; Class II applies to areas where the deterioration normally accompanying 

moderate, well-controlled growth would be permitted; Class III applies to areas where industrial 

deterioration would generally be allowed. 

Appropriate Suppression Response (Fire Management) The planned strategy for suppression 

action (in terms of type, amount, and timing) on a wildfire that most efficiently meets the Forest 

Plan fire-management direction under current and expected burning conditions. The planned 

response can range from prompt control to one of containment or confinement. 

Confine: To limit the spread of wildfire within a predetermined area principally by use of 

natural or pre-constructed barriers or environmental conditions. Suppression action may be 

minimal and limited to surveillance under appropriate conditions. 

Control: To complete the control line around a fire, any spot fire there-from, and any interior 

unburned areas to be saved; to burn any unburned fuel or areas adjacent to the fire side of the 

control line and to cool all hot spots that are immediate threats to the control line until the 

control line can reasonably be expected to hold under foreseeable conditions. 

Contain: To surround a fire and any spot fires there-from with a control line, as needed, 

which can reasonably be expected to check the fire's spread under prevailing conditions. 

Aquatic Ecosystem The stream channel, lake or estuary bed, water, biotic communities, and the 

habitat features that occur within an ecosystem (biological and physical components and their 

interactions) in which water is the principal medium. Examples include wetlands, streams, reservoirs, 

and areas with plants or animals characteristic of either permanent or seasonal inundated soils. 

Area of Potential Effects The geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may cause 

changes in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist. 

Artificial Regeneration The renewal of a tree crop by seeding or planting. 

At-Risk Community An area (A) that is comprised of —(i) an interface community as defined 

in the notice entitled “Wildland Urban Interface Communities Within the Vicinity of Federal 

Lands That Are At High Risk From Wildfire” issued by the Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary of the Interior in accordance with Title IV of the Department of the Interior and 

Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (114 Stat. 1009) (updated 66 Fed. Reg. 43384, 

August 17, 2001); or (ii) a group of homes and other structures with basic infrastructure and 

services (such as utilities and collectively maintained transportation routes) within or adjacent to 

Federal land; (B) in which conditions are conducive to a large-scale wildland fire disturbance 

event; and (C) for which a significant threat to human life or property exists as a result of a 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 276 

wildland fire disturbance event.” 

Basal Area (Timber Resource) The cross-sectional area of a stand of trees measured at breast 

height. The area is expressed in square feet per acre. 

Best Management Practices (BMPs) Land management methods, measures, or practices intended 

to minimize or reduce water pollution. Usually BMPs are applied as a system of practices rather 

than a single practice. BMPs are selected on the basis of site-specific conditions that reflect natural 

background conditions and political, social, economic, and technical feasibility. 

Big Game Certain wildlife that may be hunted for sport under state laws and regulations. In the 

Black Hills, these animals include deer, elk, turkey, mountain goats, and bighorn sheep. 

Biological Control Methods Use of natural organisms such as insects, diseases, parasites, and 

predators to reduce pest populations of insects, diseases, or weeds. Methods may include

importation and release; conservation of native natural-enemy species; and augmentation 

(supplementation through rearing and release or genetic improvement) of biological control agents. 

Biological Diversity The full variety of life in an area including the ecosystems, plant, and 

animal communities; species and genes; and the processes through which individual organisms 

interact with one another and with their environments. 

Biological Evaluations As defined by FSM 2670.5, a biological evaluation is a documented 

Forest Service review of Forest Service programs or activities in sufficient detail to determine 

how an action or proposed action may affect any threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive 

species. FSM 2672.4 identifies biological evaluation objectives and standards. 

BMPs (See "Best Management Practices.") 

Board Foot A unit of timber measurement equaling the amount of wood contained in a board 

one-inch thick, 12-inches long, and 12-inches wide. 

Broadcast Burning A fire ignited under specific conditions (prescriptions) and within 

established boundaries to achieve some land-management objective. 

BTU British thermal unit. The quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of one pound of 

water by one degree Fahrenheit at or near its maximum density. 

Burning Index A relative number related to the contribution that fire behavior makes to the 

amount of effort needed to contain a fire in a specified fuel type. Doubling the burning index 

indicates that twice the effort will be required to contain a fire in a specified fuel type, providing 

all other parameters are held constant. 

Canopy, Canopy Closure (Canopy Cover), Canopy Layer (Silviculture) 

Canopy: The cover by vegetation and/or branches. Often but not always restricted to the tree 

layer or greater than six feet tall. 

Canopy Closure/Cover: The percentage of the ground and/or sky covered by vegetation 

and/or branches. These are perceived from a human point of view perpendicular to flat ground. 

Canopy Layer: Cover by vegetation and branches in different height intervals. These 

intervals are often defined in terms of vegetation, such as herbaceous or grass/forbs less than 

two feet tall, shrubs less than six feet tall, and overstory greater than six feet tall. 

Cavity Nesting Species Wildlife species that depend on cavities in trees for their shelter and/or 

nesting. These species include primary cavity nesters, such as woodpeckers, which excavate 

cavities in soft or decayed wood for nesting, and secondary cavity nesters that typically nest in 

natural cavities or those excavated by another species. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 277 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations. 

Closed Road An intermittent service road in Maintenance Level 1 that is closed to all vehicular 

traffic for more than one year. The closure may be ordered under 36 CFR 261. 

CMAI (See "Culmination Mean Annual Increment.”) 

Commercial Thinning (See "Thinning.”) 

Commercial Timber Sales The selling of timber from National Forest System (NFS) lands for 

the manufacture of commercial products such as lumber, plywood, etc. 

Community (Social) The people who reside in one locality and are subject to the same laws or 

who have common interests, etc. 

Community Life-styles The ways in which residents conduct their everyday routines and how 

the "way they live" is associated with the National Forest. 

Condition Class 2 This term means the condition class description developed by the USDAForest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station (RMRS) in the Development of Coarse-Scale 

Spatial Data for Wildland Fire and Fuel Management (RMRS-GTR-87, 

http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr87.html ), dated April 2000 (including any subsequent 

revisions), under which 

• Fire regimes on the land have been moderately altered from historical ranges; 

• A moderate risk exists of losing key ecosystem components from fire; 

• Fire frequencies have increased or decreased from historical frequencies by one or more 

return intervals, resulting in moderate changes to 

—The size, frequency, intensity, or severity of fires; 

OR 

—Landscape patterns 

AND 

—Vegetation attributes have been moderately altered from their historical ranges. 

Condition Class 3 This term means the condition class description developed by the Rocky 

Mountain Research Station (RMRS) in RMRS-GTR-87 (see above) under which 

• Fire regimes on land have been significantly altered from historical ranges; 

• A high risk exists of losing key ecosystem components from fire; 

• Fire frequencies have departed from historical frequencies by multiple return intervals, 

resulting in dramatic changes to 

—The size, frequency, intensity, or severity of fires; 

OR 

—Landscape patterns 

AND 

—Values of vegetation attributes have been significantly altered from their historical ranges. 

Confine (Fire Management) (See "Appropriate Suppression Response.”) 

Conifer A group of cone-bearing trees, mostly evergreen, such as the pine, spruce and juniper. 

Conservation The management of a renewable natural resource with the objective of sustaining 

its productivity in perpetuity while providing for human use compatible with sustainability of the 

resource; for a forest this may include managed periodic cutting and removal of trees followed 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 278 

by regeneration. 

Construction (Roads) The displacement of vegetation, soil, and rock and the installation of 

human-made structures involved in the process of building a complete, permanent road facility. 

The activities occur at a location, or corridor, that is not currently occupied by a road. 

Contain (Fire Management) (See "Appropriate Suppression Response.”) 

Continuous Fuel Concentrations (Fire Management) An uninterrupted distribution of fuel 

particles (surface or aerial) in a fuel bed, which allows a fire to sustain combustion and actively 

continue to spread. 

Control (Fire Management) (See "Appropriate Suppression Response.”) 

Coppice A traditional method of woodland management which takes advantage of the fact that 

many trees make new growth from the stump or roots if cut down. This technique is used 

primarily for hardwood regeneration.

Cord A unit of gross volume measurement for stacked roundwood based on external 

dimensions; generally implies a stack of 4 feet by 4 feet vertical cross sections 8 feet long (128 

stacked cubic feet). 

Cost Effective Achieving specified outputs or objectives under given conditions for the least cost. 

Cost Efficient A comparative measure of economic efficiency determined by maximizing the

present net worth or value of an alternative, subject to meeting the objectives of the alternative. 

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) An advisory council to the President established by 

the National Environmental Policy Act NEPA) of 1969. 

Cover Type The vegetative species that dominates a site. Cover types are named for one plant 

species or non-vegetated condition presently (not potentially) dominant, using canopy or foliage 

cover as the measure of dominance. In several cases, sites with different species dominant have 

been lumped together into one cover type; co-dominance is not necessarily implied. 

Critical Ecosystems Specific areas, including riparian areas, wetlands, winter range, and habitat 

for threatened and endangered species. 

Crown (Vegetation) The upper part of a tree or other woody plant carrying the main branch 

system and foliage and surmounting at the crown base a more or less clean stem. 

Crown Closure (See "Canopy Cover.”) 

Crown Density The thickness both spatially in depth and in closeness of growth (compaction) of 

an individual crown, such as its opacity as measured by its shade density. 

Crown Height For a standing tree, crown height is the vertical distance from ground level to the base 

of the crown, measured either to the lowest live branch-whorl or to the lowest live branch, excluding 

shoots arising spontaneously from buds on the stem of a woody plant or to a point halfway between. 

Cubic Foot A unit of measure usually referring to wood volume (1 foot wide by 1 foot long by 1 

foot thick). 

Culmination Mean Annual Increment (CMAI) The point at which a tree or stand achieves its 

greatest average growth, based on expected growth, according to the management systems and 

utilization standards assumed in the Forest Plan. 

Cultural Element Attributes in a human-altered landscape; scenically positive cultural elements, 

most of which have historical backgrounds or nostalgic connotations. Examples include splitrail fences, stone walls, barns, orchards, hedgerows, and cabins. 

Cultural Landscapes Human-altered landscapes, especially those with slowly evolving 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 279 

landscapes, scenic vegetation patterns, or scenic structures. Addition of these elements creates a 

visually pleasing complement to the natural character of a landscape. 

Cultural Properties (See "Historic Property.”) 

Cultural Resources (See "Heritage Resources.”) 

Cumulative Effects Collective results of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions, regardless of which agency or person undertakes the actions. 

Cutover Area Timber stands that have been cut. 

DBH (See "Diameter at Breast Height.”) 

Dead Fuels (Fire Management) Fuels with no living tissue within which moisture content is 

governed almost entirely by solar radiation. 

Dead Woody Material (See "Down Woody Material.”) 

Decision Documents Documents that provide the criteria and information used in the 

formulation and evaluation of alternatives and the preferred alternative. 

Desired Future Condition, Desired Ecological Condition A portrayal of the land or resource 

conditions that are expected to result if goals and objectives are fully achieved. A description of 

the landscape as it could reasonably be expected to appear at the end of the planning period if the 

Plan's goals, objectives, standards, and guidelines for that landscape are fully achieved. 

Desired Landscape Character Appearance of the landscape to be retained or created over time, 

recognizing that a landscape is a dynamic and constantly changing community of plants and 

animals. It is a combination of landscape design attributes and opportunities as well as 

biological opportunities and constraints. 

Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) The diameter of a standing tree at a point 4 feet, 6 inches 

from ground level. 

Direct Effects Results of an action occurring when and where that action takes place. 

Diversity Diversity refers to the distribution and abundance of different plant and animal 

communities and species within the area covered by a land and resource management plan 

(LRMP). This term is derived from the National Forest Management Act (NFMA). This term is 

not synonymous with "biological diversity." 

Down and Dead Woody Material, Down Logs, Down Woody Material (Vegetation) Woody 

material from any source that is dead and lying on the forest floor. 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) The statement of environmental effects 

required for major federal actions under Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and released to the public and other agencies for comment and review. 

Easement A right held by one person to make use of the land of another for a limited purpose, 

such as a special-use authorization for a right-of-way that conveys a conditioned interest in 

National Forest System (NFS) land and is compensable according to its terms. 

Ecosystem A community of living plants and animals interacting with each other and with their 

physical environment. A geographic area where it is meaningful to address the interrelationships 

with human social systems, sources of energy, and the ecological processes that shape change 

over time. The complex of a community of organisms and its environment functioning as an 

ecological unit in nature. 

Ecosystem Management A concept of natural resources management where-in National Forest 

activities are considered within the context of economic, ecological, and social interactions 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 280 

within a defined area or region over both short-and long-term. 

Egress Path by which a person goes out; exit. The means or act of going out. Often used with the 

word "access." 

EIS (See "Environmental Impact Statement.”) 

Eligible (Heritage Resources) Indicates a specific heritage resource qualifies for or is already 

listed in the National Register of Historic Places. 

Endangered Species Any species of animal or plant in danger of extinction throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range and so designated by the Secretary of Interior in accordance with 

the 1973 Endangered Species Act. 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) A document prepared by a federal agency in which 

anticipated environmental effects of a planned course of action or development are evaluated. A 

federal statute requires that such statements be prepared. It is prepared first in draft or review form and 

then in a final form. An impact statement includes the following points: the environmental impact of 

the proposed action; any adverse impacts that cannot be avoided by the action; the alternative courses 

of actions; the relationships between local short-term use of the human environment and the

maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; and a description of the irreversible and 

irretrievable commitment of resources that would occur if the action were accomplished. 

Ephemeral Streams A stream or portion of a stream that flows briefly in direct response to 

precipitation in the immediate vicinity and whose channel is at all times above the water table. 

Ephemeral areas drain water to intermittent or perennial stream channels. Any sediment created by soil 

erosion during logging or road-building activities can be carried by way of the ephemeral, intermittent, 

and perennial stream channels to the watershed outlet. Ephemeral areas generally occur above the 

upper reaches of intermittent or perennial streams. Since they can direct water into intermittent or 

perennial stream channels, care should be taken to minimize disturbing soil in these areas. 

Erosion The wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice, gravity, or other 

geological activities. 

Erosion Hazard Rating The probability of soil loss resulting from complete removal of 

vegetation and litter. It is an interpretation based on potential soil loss. 

Escape Route (Fire Management) A path of travel to get away from danger, such as the threat 

of wildfire. 

Even-aged Management The application of a combination of actions that results in the creation 

of stands in which trees of essentially the same age grow together. Managed even-aged forests 

are characterized by a distribution of stands of varying ages (and therefore, tree sizes) throughout 

the forest area. The difference in age between trees forming the main canopy level on a stand 

usually does not exceed 20 percent of the age of the stand at harvest rotation age. Regeneration 

in a particular stand is obtained during a short period at or near the time of harvest. Clear-cut, 

shelterwood, or seed-tree cutting methods may produce even-aged stands. 

Existing Road System All existing roads owned or administered by various agencies that are wholly 

or partly within or adjacent to and serving the National Forests and other Forest Service-administered 

areas or intermingled private lands. These roads may or may not be included on the current Forest 

Transportation Inventory but are evident on the ground as meeting the definition of a road. 

Fire Incidence The average number of fires in a specified area during a specified time period. 

Fire Occurrence Number of fires per unit time in a specified area (synonym for fire frequency). 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 281 

Fire Protection Assessment (FPA) (Fire Management) A computer software based analysis to 

assist managers in determining where specific types and intensities of fire-management activities 

should occur. The analysis uses three map overlays depicting fuel flammability (Hazard); 

potential value change from fire (Value); and the potential that an ignition will occur (Risk) as a 

means of identifying and prioritizing appropriate fire- management activities for a given land unit. 

Risk: A term within the Fire Protection Assessment identifying the potential for an ignition 

to occur in a given land unit based on historical data associated with frequency of natural 

ignitions and the probability of human ignitions based on an assessment of human activities. 

Hazard: A term within the Fire Protection Assessment that represents a function of potential 

fire line intensity based on fuels, topography, and weather influences. 

Value: In the context of the Fire Protection Assessment, value refers to the potential for negative 

value change from wildfire. Value considerations would include the value of developments and 

natural resources, including aesthetics, all of which are subject to change from wildfire. 

Fire Risk The chance of a fire starting, as affected by the nature and incidence of causative 

agents, including lightning, people, and industry. Three risk scales are used: high, moderate, and 

low. High-risk areas include locations where lightning, people, or industry have commonly 

caused fire in the past; moderate-risk areas include locations where lightning, people, or industry 

have periodically caused fire in the past; and low-risk areas include locations where lightning, 

people, or industry have infrequently caused fire in the past. 

Fire Suppression All the work and activities connected with fire-extinguishing operations 

beginning with discovery and continuing until the fire is completely extinguished. 

Fire Suppression Objective To suppress wildfires at minimum costs consistent with land and 

resource management objectives and fire-management direction as determined by National Fire 

Management Analysis System (NFMAS). This includes all work and activities associated with 

fire-extinguishing operations beginning with discovery and continuing until the fire is 

completely extinguished. An example might be that a fire suppression objective is set at 5 acres, 

based on a cost-effectiveness analysis. 

Fireline Intensity The rate of heat energy released per unit time per unit length of a fire front. 

Numerically, it is the product of the heat combustion, quality of fuel consumed per unit area in the 

fire front, and the rate of spread of a fire as measured in BTUs per second per foot of the fire front. 

Firewood (See "Fuelwood.”) 

Fiscal Year (FY) Within the Forest Service, the fiscal year includes October 1 to September 30. 

The fiscal year is referred to by the calendar year beginning January 1. For example, October 1, 

1991, to September 30, 1992, is referred to as Fiscal Year 1992. 

Forage Vegetation used for food by wildlife, particularly ungulate wildlife and domestic livestock. 

Forbs Any herbaceous plant other than those in the grass, sedge, and rush families. For example, 

any non-grass-like plant that has little or no woody material. 

Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (RPA) An Act of 

Congress requiring the preparation of a program for the management of the National Forest's 

renewable resources, and of land and resource management plans for units of the National Forest 

System (NFS). It also requires a continuing inventory of all National Forest System (NFS) lands 

and renewable resources. 

Forest Interior Habitat That portion of the stand not affected by edge is termed interior habitat. 

The value of forest stands in providing interior habitat depends on the effects of edge on the 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 282 

microclimate of the stand. In the Black Hills, forest interior is defined as that portion of a forest 

stand more than 300 feet from an opening. 

Forest Supervisor Official responsible for administering the Black Hills National Forest. The 

Forest Supervisor reports to the Regional Forester. 

Forest System Roads Roads that are part of the Forest Development Transportation System that 

includes all existing and planned roads as well as other special and terminal facilities designated 

as part of the Forest Development Transportation System. 

Forested Area Land at least 10 percent of which is occupied by trees of any size or formerly 

having had such tree cover and not currently developed for non-forest use. Lands developed for 

non-forest use include areas for crops; improved pastures; residential or administrative areas; 

improved roads of any width; and adjoining road clearing and powerline clearing of any width. 

FSH Forest Service Handbook. 

FSM Forest Service Manual. 

Fuel Breaks Generally wide strips of land 60 to 1,000 feet in width on which native vegetation 

has been modified so that fires burning into them can be more readily controlled. Some fuel 

breaks contain fire lines such as roads or hand lines that can be widened. 

Fuel Continuity Degree or extent of continuous or uninterrupted distribution of fuel particles 

(surface or aerial) in a fuel bed that affects a fire's ability to sustain combustion and spread. 

Fuel Loading The volume of the available or burnable fuels in a specified area, usually 

expressed in tons per acre. 

Fuel Reduction Treatments Prescribed burn, non-commercial thin, mechanical fuel treatment, 

and product other than log (POL) sales. 

Fuel Treatment Any manipulation or removal of fuels to reduce the likelihood of ignition 

and/or to lessen potential damage and resistance to control, including lopping, chipping, 

crushing, piling, and burning (synonym for fuel modification). 

Fuels The organic materials that will support the start and spread of a fire: duff, litter, grass, 

weeds, forbs, brush, trees, and dead woody materials. 

Fuelwood Round, split, or sawed wood cut into short lengths for burning as fuel. 

Goal Broad, general statement that encompasses the desired future conditions that the U.S. 

Forest Service seeks to attain. 

Grass/Forb, Grass/Forb Stage (Structural Stage 1) (See Structural Stages - Structural Stage 1) 

Green Slash Wood residue left on the ground after logging that still contains moist phloem tissue 

and wood and may be susceptible to attack by bark beetles, generally within 1 year after cutting. 

Guideline Preferred or advisable courses of action; deviations from guidelines are permissible, 

but the responsible official must document the reasons for the deviation. 

Habitat The place where an organism (plant or animal) lives. 

Hard Snags (Vegetation) A dead or partially dead tree composed primarily of sound wood, 

particularly sound sapwood. 

Hardwood Pertains to broadleaf trees or shrubs. 

Hazard (Fire Management) (See "Fire Protection Assessment.”) 

Hazard Reduction (See "Fuel Treatment.”) 

Heavy Fuels Fuels of large diameter, usually 3 inches or more, like snags, logs, large branchwood, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 283 

and peat that ignite and burn more slowly than fine fuels (synonym for coarse fuels). 

Herbaceous Fuels Grasses, forbs, and other plants that contain little woody tissue. 

Herbicide A chemical substance used for killing or suppressing plants. 

Heritage Resources The physical remains (including but not limited to artifacts, structures, 

landscape modifications, rock art, trails, or roads) and conceptual content or context (as a setting 

for legendary, historic, or prehistoric events, such as a sacred area for native peoples) of an area. 

High Risk (Fuels) (See "Fire Risk.”) 

Historic Property Any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included 

in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register. This term includes artifacts, records, and 

remains related to and located within such properties. 

Human-caused Risk (Fire Management) A number related to the potential of fire starts originating 

from human activities to which a protection unit will be exposed during the rating period. 

IDT (See "Interdisciplinary Team.”) 

Ignition (Fire Management) The initiation of combustion. 

Implementation Those activities necessary to initiate the actions in the approved land and 

resource management plan (LRMP). 

Indirect Effects Results of an action occurring at a location other than where the action takes 

place and/or later in time but in the reasonably foreseeable future. 

Infrastructure The facilities, utilities, and transportation systems needed to meet public and 

administrative needs. 

Ingress The act or right to enter; access; entrance. 

Inholdings Lands within the proclaimed boundaries of a National Forest that are owned by some 

other agency, organization, or individual. 

Insect and Disease Epidemics High population levels of insect-or-disease pests that cause 

substantial injury to plant or animal hosts. 

Insect and Disease Suppression Management practices applied to reduce insect-and-disease 

pest populations or damage. Insect- and-disease suppression includes actions taken to limit the 

spread of pests or to reduce susceptibility of hosts in imminent danger of being attacked. 

Intensity (Fire Management) How hot a fire is. Specifically, a measure (in BTUs per foot per 

second) of the energy released per unit of time in an area of actively burning fire. The amount of 

heat released per foot of fire front per second. 

Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) A group of individuals with different specialized training 

assembled to solve a problem or perform a task. The team is assembled out of recognition that no 

one discipline is sufficiently broad to adequately solve the problem. Through interaction, 

participants bring different points of view and a broader range of expertise to bear on the problem. 

Intermediate Cut (Timber Management) Any removal of trees from a stand between the time 

of their regeneration and the final harvest. 

Intermittent Stream A stream that flows only at certain times of the year, as when it receives 

water from springs or from a surface source, such as melting snow. A stream that does not flow 

continuously, as when water losses from evaporation or seepage exceed the available streamflow. 

Ips (Pine Engraver Beetle) A genus of bark beetle that feeds beneath the bark of pines, 

typically killing branches, tops, or entire trees. These beetles often breed in logging slash or 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 284 

attack stressed and injured pines. 

Irretrievable, Irretrievable Commitments Applies to losses of production or use of renewable 

natural resources for a period of time. For example, road construction leads to an irretrievable 

loss of the productivity of the land under which the road is located. If the road is later obliterated, 

the land may eventually become productive again. The production lost is irretrievable, but the 

action is not irreversible. 

Irreversible, Irreversible Commitments Decisions causing changes that cannot be reversed. 

For example, if an area is mined, that area cannot, at a later date, be allocated to some other 

resource activity, such as Wilderness. Once mined, the ability of that area to meet Wilderness 

criteria, for instance, has been irreversibly lost. Irreversible commitments often apply to nonrenewable resources, such as minerals and heritage resources. 

Land Unit (Watershed) A mapped land type polygon; or a mapped soil unit. 

Landline (Land Survey) For Forest Plan purposes, National Forest property boundaries. 

Landscape (Silviculture) The primary unit of analysis for silviculture. A landscape for purposes 

of silviculture is a sixth-level watershed. 

Landscape Character Particular attributes, qualities, and traits of a landscape that give it an 

image and make it identifiable or unique. Valued landscape character creates a "sense of place" 

and describes the image of an area. The landscape character provides a reference for defining 

the inherent scenic attractiveness classes. 

Landscape Scale A heterogeneous land area composed of a cluster of interacting ecosystems 

that are repeated in similar form throughout. Landscapes vary in size from many thousands of 

acres to only a few acres. 

Late Succession Ecosystems distinguished by old trees and related structural features. This term 

encompasses the later stages of stand development that typically differ from earlier stages in 

structure, composition, function, and other attributes. 

There are two types of late-successional ponderosa pine defined for the Black Hills. The first 

type, open-canopy late-successional ponderosa pine, occurs where periodic, low-intensity fires 

have been part of the ecosystem. These late-successional stands would consist of clumps or 

groups of trees with grasses in the openings between the clumps. They would contain large old 

trees with open branches, irregular, and flattened crowns. The clumps or groups of trees would 

contain little down dead material and few small trees. 

The second type, closed-canopy late-successional ponderosa pine occurs where periodic, lowintensity high-frequency fires have not been a significant part of the ecosystem. These stands 

would contain large old trees with open branches and irregular crowns. The stands would have 

multiple canopy layers made up of various-aged trees. They would be well stocked with trees 

and contain standing dead and down trees. 

Local Roads (See "Road Functional Classification.”) 

Logging Debris Unmerchantable tree parts like crowns, rotted logs, and uprooted stumps that 

remain after harvest. 

Logging Slash The wood residue left on the ground after harvesting. It includes unused logs, 

uprooted stumps, broken or uprooted stems, tops, branches, and leaves. 

Lopped, Lopping (Timber Management) Cutting off one or more branches of a tree, whether 

standing, dead, or fallen. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 285 

Lopping and Scattering Lopping logging debris and spreading it more or less evenly on the ground. 

Low Risk (Fuels) (See "Fire Risk.”) 

Maintenance Levels (See "Road Maintenance Level.”) 

Management Indicators (Wildlife) Plant or animal species or habitat components selected in a 

planning process that are used to monitor the effects of planned management activities on 

populations of wildlife and fish, including those that are socially or economically important. 

Management Objectives Clearly stated objectives describing the intended post-management 

status of an area. Typically, objectives are disclosed in the NEPA documentation. 

MBF Thousand board feet. 

MCF Thousand cubic feet. 

Meadow An area of perennial, herbaceous vegetation, usually grass or grass-like. A natural opening 

in a forest, generally at higher elevations, that produces exceptional levels of herbaceous plants, 

which is usually a consequence of high soil/water content or a perched water table. Generally, a 

prairie grassland will occupy a convex surface while a meadow will occupy a concave surface. 

Midstory (Vegetation) Vegetative layer 10 to 40 feet tall between the overstory trees and 

ground layer. May consist of trees and/or shrubs. 

Mitigation Includes avoiding the impact altogether by not taking certain action or parts of an action; 

minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; 

rectifying the impacts by repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the affected environment; reducing or 

eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the 

action; or compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. 

MMBF Million board feet. 

MMCF Million cubic feet. 

Moderate Risk (Fuels) (See "Fire Risk.”) 

Moisture Regime (Soils) The presence or absence of groundwater or water held at a tension of 

less than 15 bars in the soil or in specified horizons by periods of the year. 

Monitoring The sample collection and analysis of information regarding Forest Plan 

management practices to determine how well objectives have been met as well as the effects of 

those management practices on the land and environment. 

Multi-storied Stands (Vegetation) Plant communities having two or more recognizable canopy 

layers or height levels. 

Multiple Use According to the Multiple-use Sustained-yield Act of 1960, multiple use is the 

management of all the various renewable surface resources of the National Forest System (NFS) 

so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the needs of the American people; 

such management makes the most judicious use of the land for some or all of these resources or 

related services over areas large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic adjustments in 

use to conform to changing needs and conditions. Some lands will be used for less than all of the

resources. Harmonious and coordinated management of the various resources is employed, each 

with the other, without impairment of the productivity of the land. Consideration is given to the 

relative values of the various resources and not necessarily the combination of uses that will give 

the greatest dollar return or the greatest unit output. 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) An act declaring a national policy to 

encourage productive harmony between people and their environment; to promote efforts that 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 286 

will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and the biosphere and simulate the health 

and welfare of people; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural 

resources important to the nation; and to establish a Council on Environmental Quality. 

National Fire Management Analysis System (NFMAS) A broad umbrella process to help fire 

managers identify the most efficient fire program meeting the direction in the Forest Plan. This 

includes information for the planning record on program composition, annual programmed costs, 

emergency firefighting costs, expected resource impacts, and net value change. 

National Forest Management Act (NFMA) A law passed in 1976 amending the Forest and 

Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act that requires the preparation of Regional and 

Forest Plans and the preparation of regulations to guide that development. 

National Forest System (NFS) Land Federal lands designated by Executive Order or statute as 

National Forests, National Grasslands or Purchase Units, or other lands under the administration 

of the Forest Service. 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) A list of heritage resources that have local, state, 

or national significance. The list is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. 

Natural Fuels Fuels resulting from natural processes and not directly generated or altered by 

land-management practices (compare activity fuels). 

Natural Regeneration The renewal of a tree crop by natural means without seeding or planting done 

by people. The new crop is grown from self-sown seed or by vegetative means, such as root suckers. 

Net Public Benefit The overall long-term value to the nation of all outputs and positive effects 

(benefits) less all associated inputs and negative effects (costs) whether they can be 

quantitatively valued or not. Net public benefits are measured by both quantitative and 

qualitative criteria rather than a single measure or index. 

Non-motorized Activities Activities that do not incorporate the use of a motor, engine, or other nonliving power source. Non-motorized activities exclude such machines as aircraft, hovercraft, motorboats, 

automobiles, motor bikes, snowmobiles, bulldozers, chainsaws, rock drills, and generators. 

Noxious Weeds Those plant species designated as weeds by federal or state laws. Noxious weeds 

generally possess one or more of the following characteristics: aggressive and difficult to manage; 

poisonous; toxic; parasitic; a carrier or host for serious insects or diseases; and generally non-native. 

Objective Concise statement of desired measurable results intended to promote achievement of

specific goals. Attainment of objectives is limited by the application of standards and guidelines. 

Obliteration (Transportation) The reclamation and/or restoration of the land occupied by a 

transportation facility for purposes other than transportation. 

Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Any motorized vehicle designed for or capable of cross-country 

travel on or immediately over land, water, snow, ice, marsh, swampland, or other natural terrain. 

Openings (Tree Canopy) The hole created by removing the majority of the tree canopy. This 

includes the harvesting of the majority of trees in a given area. 

Overstory (Biological Diversity) The portion of vegetation in a forest forming the uppermost 

foliage layer. 

Pine Engraver Beetle (See "Ips.”) 

Piling and Burning (Timber Management) Piling slash resulting from logging and 

subsequently burning individual piles. 

Plant Associations A grouping of plants that has reached dynamic equilibrium with the local 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 287 

environmental conditions and is equivalent to climax. On site, there is no evidence of 

replacement by other dominant plant species (and there is no evidence of serious disturbance.) 

Plant Communities Assemblage of plant species living in an area. It is an organized unit to the extent

that it has characteristics in addition to the individuals and populations and functions as a unit. 

Pre-commercial Cutting (See "Thinning.”) 

Preparation Cut (Silviculture) A timber harvest method that removes trees near the end of a 

rotation so as to open the canopy and enlarge the crowns of seed bearers to improve conditions 

for seed production and natural regeneration, as typically in a shelterwood method. 

Preparedness Level (Fire Management) Planning levels of suppression readiness dependent on 

fire activity, fuel moisture, drought conditions, fire weather, fire danger, and resources deployed or 

available. There are five preparedness levels with level five being the most active state of readiness. 

Prescribed Burning Controlled application of fire to wildland fuels in either their natural or 

modified state under specified environmental conditions that allows the fire to be confined to a 

predetermined area and at the same time produce the fireline intensity and rate of spread required 

to attain planned resource management objectives (synonym for controlled burning). 

Prescribed Fire A fire burning within prescription resulting from planned or unplanned ignition. 

Prescription (Fire Management) A written statement defining objectives to be attained, as well 

as temperature; humidity; wind direction and wind speed; fuel-moisture content; and soil 

moisture, under which the fire will be allowed to burn, generally expressed as acceptable ranges 

of the various indices, and the limit of the geographic area to be covered. 

Present Net Value (PNV) The difference between the discounted value (benefits) of all outputs 

to which monetary values or established market prices are assigned and the total discounted costs 

of managing the planning area. 

Pre-suppression (Fire Management) Activities required in advance of fire occurrence to ensure 

an effective suppression action. It includes recruiting and training fire forces; planning and 

organizing attack methods; procuring and maintaining fire equipment; and maintaining structural 

improvements necessary for the fire program. 

Products Other than Logs (POL), Products Other Than Sawlogs, Products Other Than 

Sawtimber Products such as posts, poles, and fiber from trees or parts of trees less than sawlog 

size. POL usually include trees greater than 5 inches diameter breast height (dbh) (4.5 feet from 

ground level) and less than 7.9 inches diameter breast height (dbh), with tops of trees greater 

than 4 inches to less than 6 inches in diameter. 

Project One or more site-specific activities designed to accomplish a specific on-the-ground 

purpose or result. Projects are tiered to the Forest Plan and will have further site-specific analysis. 

Public Access Usually refers to a road or trail route over which a public agency has secured a 

right-of-way for public use. 

Ranger District Administrative subdivisions of the Forest supervised by a District Ranger who 

reports to the Forest Supervisor. 

Raptor Habitat Habitat required by hawks, falcons or owls, especially for nesting. 

Rate of Spread (Fire Management) Relative activity of a fire in extending its horizontal 

dimensions, expressed as rate of increase of the perimeter, rate of increase in area, or rate of 

advance of its head, depending on the intended use of the information, generally in chains or 

acres per hour for a specified period in the fire's history. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 288 

Reforestation Reestablishment of a tree crop on forested land. 

Regeneration (Silviculture) The renewal of vegetation whether by natural or artificial means. 

Also, the new growth itself. 

Resource Value-at-risk (Fire Management) Fire-suppression planning tool providing a relative 

expression in five classes of fire effects on all resources but not the value of the resources 

themselves (compare values at risk). 

Resource Values The tangible and intangible worth of forest resources. 

Responsible Official The Forest Service employee who has the delegated authority to make a 

specific decision. 

Retention (Vegetation Management) To keep the existing extent of a vegetative component. 

Usually refers to a species, such as aspen, birch, or bur oak. 

Revegetation The reestablishment and development of a plant cover. This may take place 

naturally through the reproductive processes of the existing flora or artificially through the direct 

action of reforestation or reseeding. 

Rights-of-way Land authorized to be used or occupied for the construction, operation, 

maintenance, and termination of a project or facility passing over, upon, under, or through such 

land. The privilege that one person or persons particularly described may have of passing over 

the land of another in some particular line. 

Rights-of-way Corridors A linear strip of land identified for the present or future location of 

transportation or utility rights-of-way within its boundaries. 

Riparian Area (See "Riparian Ecosystem.”) 

Riparian Communities Repeating, classified, defined, and recognizable assemblages of plantor-animal communities associated with riparian areas. 

Riparian Ecosystem The moist transition zone between the aquatic ecosystem and the relatively 

drier, more upland, terrestrial ecosystem(s). This transition zone can extend both laterally and 

longitudinally away from aquatic ecosystems, sometimes into headwater swales that have no defined 

stream channel. The riparian ecosystem is the area whose soil is relatively more moist than the 

adjacent upland and whose vegetation growth reflects the greater accumulation of available water. 

Risk (Fire Management) (See "Fire Protection Assessment.”) 

Risk Index (Fire Management) A number related to the probability of an ignition of a fire 

(Compare "Human-caused Risk.") 

Roads A general term denoting a way with at least two-wheel tracks for purposes of travel by 

vehicles greater than 50 inches in width. 

Road Functional Classification The way in which a road services land and resource 

management needs and the character of service it provides. Functional classifications for roads 

are forest arterial, forest collector, and forest local. 

Forest Arterial Road: Provides service to large land areas and usually connects with public 

highways or other Forest arterial roads to form an integrated network of primary travel routes. 

The location and standard are often determined by a demand for maximum mobility and travel 

efficiency rather that specific resource management service. It is usually developed and 

operated for long-term land and resource management purposes and constant service. 

Forest Collector Road: Serves smaller land areas than a Forest arterial road and is usually 

connected to a Forest arterial or public highway. Collects traffic from Forest local roads and/or 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 289 

terminal facilities. The location and standard are influenced by both long-term multi-resource service 

needs, as well as travel efficiency. May be operated for either constant or intermittent service 

depending on land use and resource management objectives for the area served by the facility. 

Forest Local Road: Connects terminal facilities with Forest collector or Forest arterial roads 

or public highways. The location and standard are usually controlled by a specific resource 

activity rather than travel efficiency. Forest local roads may be developed and operated for 

either long- or short-term service. 

Road Maintenance Level Defines the level of service provided by and maintenance required for 

a specific road consistent with road management objectives and maintenance criteria. The 

maintenance levels are 

Maintenance Level 1: Assigned to intermittent service roads during the time they are closed to 

vehicular traffic. The closure period is 1 year or longer. Basic custodial maintenance is performed. 

Maintenance Level 2: Assigned to roads open for use by high-clearance vehicles. Passenger 

car traffic is not a consideration. 

Maintenance Level 3: Assigned to roads open and maintained for travel by a prudent driver 

in a standard passenger car. User comfort and convenience are not considered priorities. 

Maintenance Level 4: Assigned to roads that provide a moderate degree of user comfort and 

convenience at moderate travel speeds. 

Maintenance Level 5: Assigned to roads that provide a high degree of user comfort and 

convenience. Normally, roads are double-laned and paved or aggregate-surfaced with dust 

abatement. 

Road Prism Equivalent to the term "roadway." The portion of the road within the limits of 

excavation and embankment, including slope rounding. A similar term is "road template," the 

shape and cross-sectional dimensions of the roadway to be constructed as defined by the

construction staking notes and the characteristics of the typical sections. 

Roadside Corridors A passageway that frames a road or travelway. The corridor includes the 

viewing area and facilities, which may be within the immediate roadside area or part of a 

sweeping distance panorama. 

Roadway (See "Road Prism.”) 

Salvage Harvest Removal of damaged, dead or dying trees resulting from insect and disease 

epidemics, wildfire, or storms to recover logs before they have no commercial value for 

production. 

Salvage of Dead Material (See "Salvage Harvest.”) 

Sanitation Cutting, Sanitation Harvest (Silviculture) The removal of trees occupied by insect 

or disease pests to reduce pest populations and limit their spread. 

Sawtimber Trees suitable in size and quality for producing logs that can be processed into lumber. 

For planning purposes, trees with an 8-inch diameter or more are classified as sawtimber. 

Scarify To abrade, scratch, or modify the surface of the ground to expose mineral soil. 

Scenery The composition of basic terrain, geologic features, water features, vegetative patterns, and 

landrise effects that typify a land unit and influence the visual appeal the unit may have for visitors. 

Scenic Class Scenic classes measure the relative importance or value of discrete landscape areas 

having similar characteristics of scenic attractiveness and landscape visibility. Scenic classes are 

used during forest planning to compare the value of scenery with the value of other resources, such 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 290 

as timber, wildlife, late succession, or minerals. The higher the scenic class, the more important it 

is to maintain the highest scenic value. Scenic classes are determined and mapped by combining 

the three classes of scenic attractiveness with the distance zones and concern levels of landscape 

visibility. A numerical value of 1 to 7 is assigned to Forest lands. Generally, scenic classes 1-2 

have high public value; classes 3-5 have moderate value; and classes 6 and 7 have low value. 

Scenic Integrity (Existing or Objective) State of naturalness or conversely the state of 

disturbance created by human activities or alteration. Integrity is stated in degrees of deviation 

from the existing landscape character in a national forest. It is the measure of the degree to 

which a landscape is visually perceived to be complete. The highest scenic integrity ratings are 

given to those landscapes that have little or no deviation from the character valued by

constituents for its aesthetic appeal. Scenic integrity is used to describe an existing situation, 

standard for management, or desired future conditions. 

Very High: A scenic integrity level that generally provides for ecological change only. 

High: A scenic integrity level meaning human activities are not visually evident. In high 

scenic integrity areas, activities may only repeat attributes of form, line, color, and texture 

found in the existing landscape character. 

Moderate: A scenic integrity level that refers to landscapes where the valued landscape 

character "appears slightly altered.” Noticeable deviations must remain visually subordinate 

to the landscape character being viewed. 

Low: A scenic integrity referring to the landscapes where the valued landscape character 

"appears moderately altered." Deviations begin to dominate the valued landscape character 

being viewed, but they borrow valued attributes such as size, shape, effect, and pattern of

natural opening, vegetative type changes, or architectural styles within or outside the 

landscape being viewed. They should not only appear as valued character outside the 

landscape being viewed but compatible or complimentary to the character within. 

Very Low: A scenic integrity level that refers to landscapes where the valued landscape 

character "appears heavily altered.” Deviations may strongly dominate the valued landscape 

character. They may not borrow from valued attributes such as size, shape, edge effect, and 

pattern of natural openings, vegetative type changes, or architectural styles within or outside 

the landscape being viewed. However, deviations must be shaped and blended with the 

natural terrain so that elements such as unnatural edges, roads, landings, and structures do not 

dominate the composition. 

Unacceptable Low: A scenic integrity level that refers to landscapes where the valued 

landscape character being viewed appears extremely altered. Deviations are extremely 

dominant and borrow little if any line, form, color, texture, pattern, or scale from the landscape 

character. Landscapes at this level of integrity need rehabilitation. This level should only be 

used to inventory existing integrity. It must not be used as a management objective. 

Second Growth (Silviculture) Forest growth that has become established after some 

disturbance with the previous forest stand, such as cutting, serious fire, or insect attack. 

Sediment Material suspended in water or that has been deposited in streams and lakes. 

Sediment Load The solid material transported by a stream and expressed as the dry weight of all 

sediment that passes a given point in a given period of time. 

Sediment Yield Amount of sediment leaving an analysis area and entering a channel. 

Seed Cutting (Silviculture) A harvest method that removes all mature trees from a stand except 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 291 

for selected seed-bearing trees retained on the site to provide a seed source for stand 

regeneration. In a two-step shelterwood cutting method, the first of the shelterwood cuttings. 

Seed Tree, Seed-tree Cutting Small number of seed-bearing trees left singly or in small groups 

after timber harvest to provide seed for regeneration of the site. 

Selection Cut (Silviculture) A harvest method that periodically removes mature trees 

individually or in small groups from an uneven-aged forest. By this method, both regeneration 

cutting and tending of immature stand components are accomplished at each entry. 

Sensitive Species Those plant and animal species identified by the Regional Forester for which 

population viability is a concern, as evidenced by significant current or predicted downward 

trends in population numbers or density; or significant current or predicted downward trends in 

habitat capability that would reduce a species' existing distribution. 

Seral (Ecology) A biotic community that is in a developmental, transitory stage in an ecological 

succession. 

Seral Stages (Ecology) The sequence of a plant community's successional stages to potential 

natural vegetation. 

Severely Burned Soil A condition in which most woody debris and the entire forest floor is 

consumed down to bare mineral soil. Soil may have turned red due to extreme heat. Also, fine 

roots and organic matter are charred in the upper one-half inch of mineral soil. 

Shelterwood, Shelterwood Method (Silviculture) A harvest method in which a portion of the 

mature stand is retained as a source of seed and/or protection during the period of regeneration. 

The mature stand is removed in two or more cuttings commonly termed seed cutting and 

removal cutting. The seed cutting may or may not be preceded by a preparatory cutting. 

SHPO (See "State Historic Preservation Officer.”) 

Silvicultural System A management process that tends, harvests, and replaces forests, resulting 

in a forest of distinctive form with a desired condition. 

Silvicultural Treatment A management practice that utilizes a method of tree culture, harvest, 

or replacement (See "Single-tree Selection,” "Shelterwood Method,” "Group Selection,” "Evenaged Management,” "Uneven-aged Management,” and "Clearcutting.”) 

Silviculture Generally, the science and art of tree management, based on the study of the life history 

and general characteristics of forest trees and stands, with particular reference to local factors; more 

particularly, the theory and practice of controlling the establishment, composition, constitution, and 

growth of forests for desired conditions. 

Site An area considered in terms of its physical and/or biological environment; for example, a riparian 

zone, a homogenous stand of vegetation, or a campground. 

Site Index A measure of the relative productive capacity of an area for growing trees. Measurement 

is based on height of the dominant trees in a stand at a given age. 

Site Preparation (Silviculture) The activity that prepares a site for natural regeneration or the 

planting of seedlings. The objective is to create a favorable environment for establishing and growing 

the desired vegetation classes. Treatments could include chemical, mechanical, or fire. 

Site Productivity Production capability of specific areas of land. 

Skid Trails (Timber Management) Any way, more or less prepared, over which logs are dragged. 

Any road or trail leading from stump to landing. 

Skidding (Timber Management) Moving logs from the stump to a collecting point. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 292 

Skyline Logging Taking logs from the stump area to a landing using an overhead system of winchdriven cables to which logs are attached with chokers.

Slash (Timber Management) The residue left on the ground after harvesting, sanitation operations, 

windstorm, or fire. It includes such material as unutilized logs, uprooted stumps, broken or uprooted 

stems, tops, branches, and leaves. 

Snag (Vegetation) Standing dead tree or standing portion from which at least the leaves and smaller 

branches have fallen; often called a stub if it is less than 20 feet tall. 

Snag-dependent Species (See "Cavity Nesting Species.”) 

Soft Snags (Vegetation) A snag composed primarily of wood in advanced stages of decay and 

deterioration, particularly in the sapwood (outer) portions; generally there are no live branches 

on the snag. 

Softwood A conventional term for both the timber and the trees belonging to the evergreen group, as 

the pine, spruce, fir, etc. 

Soil Compaction A physical change in soil properties that results in a decrease in porosity and an 

increase in soil-bulk density and strength. 

Soil Erosion The detachment and movement of soil from the land surface by water or wind. Soil 

erosion and sediment are not the same (See "Sediment.”) 

Soil Productivity The inherent capacity of a soil to support the growth of specified plants, plant 

communities, or a sequence of plant communities. Soil productivity may be expressed in terms of 

volume or weight/unit area/year, percent plant cover, or other measures of biomass accumulation. 

Soil Surveys The systematic examination, description, classification, and mapping of soils in an area. 

Standard Mandatory courses of action; any deviation from standards requires amendment of the LRMP. 

Stand (Vegetation) A community, particularly of trees, possessing sufficient uniformity as

regards to vegetation type, age class, risk class, vigor, size class, and stocking class that 

distinguishes it from adjacent communities and thus forms a management or silvicultural unity. 

Within a stand, a dominant or primary species and age class is identifiable, but there may be 

inclusions or clusters of different species or ages. R2 RIS stands are typically greater than 10 

acres. IRI stands are typically greater than 5 acres. 

Stand-replacing Fire A fire that kills all or most living overstory trees in a forest and initiates 

secondary succession or regrowth. 

Stand Risk Rating (Insects) A ranking of relative forest stand conditions that reflects the degree of 

susceptibility to attack by a particular insect species and the potential level of damage if an outbreak 

occurs. It does not indicate where or when an infestation will actually occur. For mountain pine 

beetles in ponderosa pine, a computer model exists to determine low-, medium- and high-risk stands 

based on measures of stand structure, average basal area, and average tree diameter. 

State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) A person appointed by a state's governor to 

administer the State Historic Preservation Program. 

Stream Health The condition of a stream relative to robust health for that stream type and 

landscape, considering indicators such as channel pattern; slope; particle size; pool frequency and 

depth; bank vegetation; and woody debris that reflect the stability and habitat quality of the stream. 

Structural Stages (Vegetation) Any of several developmental stages of tree stands described in 

terms of tree size and the extent of canopy closure they create. They include 

Structural Stage 1 (Grass/Forb): An early forest successional stage during which grasses 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 293 

and forbs are the dominant vegetation. At the RIS site level, Structural Stage 1 is defined as 

nonstocked, with an AMD less than 10 percent. Small-scale Structural Stage 1 within RIS 

sites are at least one acre in size, do not meet the seedling stocking criteria, and contain no 

saplings, poles, or mature trees. 

Structural Stage 2 (Shrubs/Seedlings): Developmental stage dominated by tree seedlings 

(less than one inch dbh) and shrub species. 

Structural Stage 3 (Sapling/Pole): Developmental stage dominated by young trees 1 to 7 

inches dbh, 10 to 50 feet tall, and usually less than 50 years old. This stage is subdivided into 

three canopy closure classes: A (less than 40 percent); B (40 to 70 percent); and C (greater 

than 70 percent). 

Structural Stage 4 (Mature): Consists of trees larger and older than structural stage 3. Also 

classified by the same canopy closure categories as structural stage 3. 

Structural Stage 5 (Late Succession): This structural stage is characterized by trees 160 

years of age and older. 

Subdivisions Areas of previously undeveloped land divided into individual home sites and/or 

blocks of lots. 

Successional Stages (Seral Stages) The relatively transitory communities that replace one 

another during development toward a potential natural community. 

Suitability The appropriateness of applying certain resource management practices to a 

particular area of land, as determined by an analysis of the economic and environmental 

consequences and the alternative uses foregone. A unit of land may be suitable for a variety of 

individual or combined management practices. 

Suppress a Fire To extinguish a fire or contain it within specified boundaries. 

Suppression (See "Fire Suppression" and "Insect and Disease Suppression.”) 

Swale A landform feature lower in elevation than adjacent hillslopes, usually present in 

headwater areas of limited areal extent, generally without display of a defined watercourse or 

channel that may or may not be underlain by porous soils and bedrock that readily accepts

infiltrating water. These are areas where soil moisture concentrates that often do not exhibit 

pedalogic or bontanic evidence of saturated conditions. 

Temporary Roads (See "Short-term Transportation Facility.”) 

Thinning (Silviculture) The practice of removing some of the trees in a stand to meet desired 

conditions. Two types of thinning may be done: 

Pre-commercial, Non-commercial: Removing trees that are too small to make a 

merchantable product. 

Commercial: Removing trees that have reached sufficient size to be manufactured into a 

product and to improve tree spacing and promote more rapid growth. 

Threatened Species Any species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future 

throughout all or a significant portion of its range and that has been designated in the Federal 

Register by the Secretary of Interior as such. 

Timber A general term applied to tree stands that provide a wood-fiber product. 

Timber Stand Improvement (TSI) The elimination or suppression of the less desirable vegetation in 

favor of the more desirable tree growth, such as thinning, cleaning, weeding, and release cuttings. 

Trail A general term denoting a way usually less than 50 inches wide for purposes of travel by 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 294 

foot, stock, or trail vehicle. 

Transportation System All roads needed to manage and administer Forest resources. A road network. 

Transportation/Utility Corridor A linear strip of land identified for the present location of 

transportation or utility rights-of-way within its boundaries. 

Travel Corridor A strip of land that includes up to a maximum of 1,000 feet for major roads 

(500 feet either side of the road's centerline) or 500 feet for major trails (250 feet either side of 

the trail's centerline); travel corridors form a passageway that allows travelers to experience and 

interact with the quality and character of the landscape. 

Travel Management Travel management is the movement of people and products to and 

through national forests and grasslands. It connects many different varieties of users and multiple 

uses on National Forest System (NFS) lands. 

Treated Area Area on which management such as timber harvesting or prescribed burning occurs. 

Tree Improvement (See "Timber Stand Improvement.”) 

Understory (Vegetation) The lowest layer of vegetation in a forest or shrub community composed 

of grass, forbs, shrubs, and trees less than 10 feet tall. Vegetation growing under the tree canopy. 

Uneven-aged Management (Silviculture) The application of a combination of actions needed 

to simultaneously maintain tall, continuous cover, recurring regeneration of desirable species, 

and the orderly growth and development of trees through a range of diameter or age classes to 

provide a sustained yield of forest products. Cutting is usually regulated by specifying the 

number or proportion of trees of particular sizes to be retained within each area, thereby 

maintaining a planned distribution of size classes. Cutting methods that develop and maintain 

uneven-aged stands are single-tree selection and group selection. 

Value (Fire Management) (See "Fire Protection Assessment.”) 

Values at Risk (Fire Management) Any or all natural resources, improvements, or other values 

that may be jeopardized if a fire occurs (Compare "Resource Values-at-risk.”) 

Vegetative Buffer Strips Strips of grass or other erosion-resisting vegetation between areas of 

ground disturbance and areas needing protection from sedimentation. 

Vegetative Management, Vegetative Manipulation, Vegetative Treatment Any activities 

undertaken to modify the existing condition of the vegetation. 

Vertical Diversity The diversity in an area that results from the complexity of the above-ground 

structure of the vegetation; has two or more layers; the more tiers of vegetation or the more 

diverse the species makeup, or both, the higher the degree of vertical diversity. 

Viable Population Group of individuals of a particular species that produces enough offspring for 

long-term persistence and adaptation of the species or population in a given place. 36 CFR 219.19 

defines a viable population for planning purposes as one that has the estimated numbers and 

distribution of reproductive individuals to insure that a continued viable population is well 

distributed in the planning area. Planning area is further defined by 36 CFR 219.3 as the "area of 

the National Forest System covered by a regional guide or forest plan." Direction from the Forest 

Service Manual (FSM) defines a viable population as one that has the estimated numbers and 

distribution of reproductive individuals to ensure the continued existence of the species throughout 

its existing range (or range required to meet recovery for listed species) within the planning area. 

Viewshed Total visible area from a single observer position or the total visible area from multiple 

observer positions. Viewsheds are accumulated seen areas from highways, trails, campgrounds, 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 295 

towns, cities, or other view locations. Examples are corridors, feature, or basin viewsheds. 

Water Influence Zone The land next to streams and lakes where vegetation plays a major role in 

sustaining the long-term integrity of aquatic ecosystems. Includes the geomorphic floodplain, 

riparian ecosystem, and inner gorge, and has a minimum horizontal width (from top of each bank) 

of 100 feet or the mean height of mature dominant late-seral vegetation, whichever is greater. 

Watershed The area of land bounded by a divide that drains water, sediment, and dissolved 

materials to a common outlet at some point along a stream channel or to a lake, reservoir, or 

other body of water. Also called drainage basin or catchment. 

Watershed Level The number assigned to an entire drainage basin contributing to the stream 

segment of a given level and bearing an identical designation; for example, a first-level 

watershed contains all the drainage area of a first-level stream (See “Stream Level.”) 

6th Level Watersheds: A watershed coded with a 12-digit code, typically 10,000 to 30,000 

acres in size. 

Waters of the United States Includes essentially all surface waters such as navigable waters and 

their tributaries, all interstate waters and their tributaries, all wetlands adjacent to these waters, 

and all impoundments of these waters. Waters of the United States include perennial and 

intermittent streams, lakes, wetlands, and their tributaries. 

Wetlands Those areas that are inundated by surface water or groundwater with a frequency 

sufficient to support and under normal circumstances do or would support a prevalence of 

vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth 

and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as 

sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mud flats, and natural ponds. 

Wildfire Any wildland fire not designated and managed as a prescribed fire within an approved 

prescription. All wildfires will be given an appropriate suppression action. 

Wildland-Urban Interface In applying Title I of the HFRA, this term means: 

• An area within or adjacent to an at-risk-community (ARC) identified in recommendations 

to the Secretary in a Community Wildfire Protection Plan 

OR 

• In the case of any area for which a Community Wildfire Protection Plan is not in effect: 

—An area extending 1⁄2 mile from the boundary of an at-risk community (ARC) 

—An area within 1 - 1⁄2 miles of the boundary of an at-risk community (ARC), including any

land that 

Has a sustained steep slope that creates the potential for wildland fire behavior

endangering the at-risk community (ARC) 

Has a geographic feature that aids in creating an effective firebreak, such as a road or ridgetop 

OR 

Is in Condition class 3 as documented by the Secretary in the project-specific 

environmental analysis 

AND 

An area that is adjacent to an evacuation route for an at-risk community (ARC) that the 

Secretary determines—in cooperation with the at-risk community (ARC)—requires 

hazardous-fuel reduction to provide safer evacuation. 

Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 297 

CHAPTER 6 LIST OF PREPARERS 

Interdisciplinary Team

 

Robert Thompson District Ranger - Bachelor of Science, Geology, University of Montana, 

1979. Thirty one years of Forest Service experience at district and forest 

level in Montana and South Dakota. Fourteen years of experience as 

geologist conducting mineral appraisals, permitting, environmental analysis 

and compliance. Certified Review Mineral Examiner. Eighteen years as 

District Ranger on two ranger districts responsible for managing a full range 

of resources, goods and services. 

Lou Conroy ID Team Leader, Wildlife Biologist – M.S. Colorado State University 

(2007), B.S. Black Hills State University (1999); 17 years of Forest Service 

experience at the district and research level in SD, NE, NM, CO, and WY. 

Planning and implementation experience includes vegetation management, 

special uses, lands, minerals, prescribed fire and fuels, range management, 

travel management, botany, and recreation. 

Jessica Eggers Writer/Editor - Master of Science in Forestry Wildland Recreation with a

minor in Public Administration, University of Tennessee, 2005; Bachelor of 

Science in Forestry Wildland Recreation with a minor in Wildlife and 

Fisheries Science, University of Tennessee, 2003. Three years with the 

National Park Service as a Law Enforcement Park Ranger. One year with 

the National Park Service as the Natural Resource Program Coordinator. 

Four years of Forest Service experience at the district level in 

planning/litigation. 

Randy Rick Silviculturist – Bachelor of Science, Forest Resources: Ecosystems and 

Silviculture, University of Minnesota, 1984. Continuing Education in 

Ecosystem Management, 2002. Twenty-eight years of Forest Service 

experience at the district level in timber sale preparation, fire, and 

silviculture, including 6 years as Sale Prep Forester and 8 years as a 

Silviculturist. Region 2 Certified Silviculturist. 

Chris Stover District Assistant Fire Management Officer, Fuels - Bachelor of Science, 

Geography, University of Wyoming, 1992. Eleven years of experience in 

fire operations, fuels, and prescribed fire planning at the District level on 

the Black Hills National Forest. Fire qualifications include Incident 

Commander Type 4 and Ignitions Specialist. 

Shirlene Haas Travel Management Specialist / Wildlife Biologist - Master of Science in 

Wildlife Ecology, Utah State University, 1991; Bachelor of Science in 

Biology, University of Nebraska, 1986. Twenty-one years of Forest Service

experience at the district and forest level in South Dakota, Wyoming, and 

California in project and forest planning, and wildlife program 

management. Planning experience includes vegetation management, 

special uses, lands, minerals, prescribed fire and fuels, range management, 

travel management, and recreation. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 298 

Jessica Gould Hydrologist – Master of Science in Civil Engineering, South Dakota School 

of Mines and Technology. Currently working towards a PhD in Geology & 

Geological Engineering, focusing on hydrogeology. Fifteen years of Forest 

Service experience at the district level in Montana and South Dakota 

managing soil and water resources. 

Dawn Laybolt District Archaeologist – Ph.D. Anthropology (Archaeology focus) University 

of Alaska Fairbanks, 2012; Master of Arts Anthropology (Archaeology focus) 

Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2000; Three years with the National 

Forest Service as an Archaeologist. Five years in the private sector consulting 

on Cultural Resource Management for private companies and individuals, as 

well as state, and federal agencies. 

Darci Collins Roads and Travel Management Engineering Technician and Forest 

Accessibility Coordinator, Twenty nine years of Forest Service experience at 

the District and Forest level in transportation planning, road design, contract 

preparation and administration, environmental analysis, law enforcement, 

timber marking and recreation facilities maintenance and design. Certified in 

Roads, bridges, trails, concrete, asphalt, aggregate base & surfacing, contract 

inspection and administration for Timber Sales and Public Works under the 

National Construction Certification Program. Past firefighting experience 

includes fire line construction, squad boss, engine operator, sawyer, ground 

support, ordering manager, dispatch recorder, radio operator, and driver and 

food unit leader trainee. 

Kelly Owens Botanist- Bachelor of Science in Botany, University of Wyoming, 2008. Three 

years of experience in botany and research with the Forest Service and State in 

South Dakota. 

Eugene F. Bolka Noxious Weed Coordinator – Twenty-seven years with the United States Air 

Force as a Life Support Superintendent. Nineteen years of Forest Service 

experience with YCC program, recreation, range, and noxious weed 

management. Representing the Forest Service in the Deerfield/Hill City and 

Doty Springs Noxious Weed Management Areas. 

Amy Ballard Recreation Forester - B.S. Aquatic Biology/Ecology, Allegheny College, 1986. 

M.S. Recreation Resources, Colorado State University, 1988. M.F. Forestry, 

University of Montana, 1990. Twenty-three years with USFS as a recreation 

forester. 

Steve Keegan Landscape Architect - BS, Landscape Architecture & Environmental Studies, 

State University of New York, 1980; BS, Syracuse University 1980; AA, State 

University of New York - Onondaga, 1978. Twenty-nine years of Forest 

Service experience at the forest and zone level in MT, ID, OR, SD, conducting: 

Scenic Resource Assessments, watershed analysis, recreation facility design, 

scenic byway coordination, and road design. 

Mark Vedder Rangeland Management Specialist – Bachelor of Science, Range Resources, 

University of Idaho 1978. Thirty-three years of experience with the Forest

Service in ID and SD in Fire/Fuels Management, Range Management, noxious 

weed control, trail construction and maintenance, road maintenance and special 

projects, travel management, and contract preparation with administration. 
Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 299 

Gary Haag Geologist/Minerals Specialist –Master of Science, Geology, Rutgers 

University, 1982. Bachelor of Arts, Geology, Rutgers University, 1979. New 

Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection 1984-1989, groundwater discharge 

permit program. South Dakota Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources 

1989-2010, groundwater discharge permit program. February 2010 - present on 

BHNF as a geologist working on locatable and mineral material projects and 

mineral potential reports for mineral withdrawals and timber sales. 

Steve Hirtzel Fisheries Biologist – Bachelor of Science in Wildlife & Fisheries Science, 

South Dakota State University. Twenty-four years of experience in research, 

regulatory and management programs with various federal agencies, the past 

seven years on the Black Hills NF. 

Rodney Brown Lands/Recreation Forester – Bachelor of Science, Michigan State University, 

1977. Over 30 years working for the US Forest Service at the District level in

Michigan and South Dakota working in special use permit administration, 

recreation residence permits, small tract act and land exchange cases; acquired 

and granted road and trail easements; working with utility companies on new 

and existing over head and underground power lines, telephone and fiber optic 

lines. 

Calumet Project Draft EIS, Page 301 

CHAPTER 7 INDEX 

ARC, 2, 295 

At-Risk-Community, 2 

BA, 2, x, 133, 139, 167, 175, 184, 186, 194, 

198, 211 

Basal Area, 2, 276 

CMAI, 2, 137, 140, 277, 278 

collaboratively, 31 

Community Wildfire Protection Plan, 2, 14, 

20, 25, 34, 141, 262, 295 

Condition Class, 2, 34, 35, 87, 148, 277 

crown density, 163 

CWPP, 2, 14, 18, 20, 25, 28, 31, 141, 150, 

158 

Deciding Official, v, 22, 27, 28, 29 

design criteria, 11, 23, 31, 46, 60, 115, 122, 

205, 216, 218, 229, 243, 244, 245, 248 

EIS, 2, i, iii, iv, v, 11, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 

29, 31, 33, 34, 40, 46, 51, 60, 68, 70, 74, 

75, 79, 84, 86, 90, 94, 98, 107, 114, 134, 

152, 216, 250, 280 

Environmental Impact Statement, 2, i, 11, 

14, 134, 152, 166, 176, 267, 269, 270, 

279, 280 

fire hazard, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 25, 28, 

29, 35, 55, 77, 130, 133, 134, 136, 138, 

139, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 149, 

150, 151, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 

161, 163, 164, 168, 248 

Fire Protection Assessment, 281, 282, 288, 

294 

fire regime, 25, 34, 148, 157, 160, 161, 217 

fire suppression, iv, 13, 28, 31, 80, 89, 156, 

163, 213, 214, 223, 247, 281 

Firewise, 31 

Forest Plan, 2, i, iii, iv, v, vi, vii, 14, 15, 16, 

20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 33, 46, 

65, 70, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 84, 95, 97, 104, 

105, 113, 118, 124, 127, 129, 132, 133, 

134, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 144, 145, 

147, 149, 151, 152, 155, 156, 158, 165, 

175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 184, 

186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 192, 194, 195, 

196, 197, 198, 205, 206, 208, 211, 212, 

216, 217, 218, 223, 225, 226, 250, 253, 

268, 269, 275, 278, 284, 285, 286, 287 

FP, 2, 15, 180, 245 

fuels reduction, 137, 151 

hardwood stands, 22, 29, 35, 36, 140, 141, 

166, 169, 170, 232, 237 

Healthy Forest Initiative, i, iii, 20 

Healthy Forests Restoration Act, 2, i, iii, v, 

11, 20, 155 

HFRA, 2, i, iii, 11, 20, 27, 28, 31, 32, 105, 

106, 138, 178, 191, 295 

hydrogeology, 48, 298 

ID Team, 2, iv, 23, 27, 297 

insect and disease, i, iii, 15, 17, 29, 41, 78, 

133, 134, 137, 142, 289 

Interdisciplinary Team, 2, iv, 21, 283, 297 

MA, 2, v, 15, 18, 21, 25, 37, 130, 131, 161, 

179, 180, 181, 187, 188, 189, 193, 196, 

197, 198, 200, 201, 202, 203, 205, 206, 

208, 255 

Management Area, 2, vii, viii, ix, 15, 18, 19, 

130, 131, 133, 144, 145, 146, 161, 179, 

180, 204, 219, 226 

management areas, 25, 130, 161, 241 

Management Areas, 298 

Management Indicator Species, 2, viii, 175, 

184, 215, 218 

MIS, 2, 16, 175, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 

188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 211, 

215, 218 

mitigation, iv, 23, 30, 31, 32, 113, 127, 243, 

244, 250 

monitoring, iii, 11, 19, 24, 30, 31, 34, 51, 

64, 81, 85, 87, 95, 100, 142, 145, 152, 

165, 173, 174, 185, 190, 191, 195, 196, 

197, 205, 262, 269, 270 

mountain pine beetle, i, iii, iv, 13, 18, 19, 

20, 21, 24, 28, 29, 36, 51, 77, 121, 128, 

129, 133, 134, 136, 138, 139, 141, 143, 

144, 145, 147, 149, 169, 187, 212, 216, 

218, 223, 227, 230, 233, 234, 235, 238, 

246, 247, 252, 261 
Slate Castle Project Draft EIS, Chapter 7 – Page 302

MPB, 2, i, iii, iv, v, x, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 21, 

22, 24, 25, 26, 29, 33, 34, 35, 37, 51, 56, 

64, 69, 73, 78, 79, 80, 89, 92, 96, 115, 

128, 129, 132, 134, 135, 136, 137, 139, 

142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 149, 154, 

155, 156, 158, 163, 171, 176, 177, 178, 

179,180, 181, 185, 187, 188, 189, 190, 

191, 193, 194, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 

201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 208, 209, 

210, 211, 212, 214, 230, 232, 233, 236, 

237, 238, 240, 243, 244, 248, 268 

National Environmental Policy Act, 2, i, iv, 

11, 20, 28, 40, 226, 278, 279, 285 

National Fire Plan, i, iii, 20, 155 

National Forest System, 2, iii, ix, 12, 15, 20, 

24, 47, 117, 118, 119, 122, 123, 125, 126, 

129, 130, 131, 140, 147, 163, 168, 172, 

214, 228, 239, 240, 241, 242, 277, 279, 

281, 285, 286, 294 

NEPA, 2, i, iv, 11, 20, 23, 27, 28, 31, 40, 

104, 105, 114, 250, 268, 278, 279, 285 

NFS, 2, v, viii, ix, x, 15, 16, 17, 31, 45, 46, 

47, 140, 141, 147, 150, 153, 165, 168, 

172, 173, 174, 220, 226, 241, 242, 243, 

277, 279, 281, 285, 286, 294 

noxious weed, 298 

noxious weeds, 13, 172, 173, 174, 175, 236 

prescribed broadcast burning, 16, 28, 36, 59, 

67, 70, 153, 157, 158, 161, 162, 247, 248 

prescribed fire, 13, 19, 25, 29, 30, 33, 52, 

59, 67, 68, 72, 73, 74, 75, 86, 97, 105, 

113, 142, 148, 153, 155, 157, 159, 160, 

161, 163, 166, 169, 170, 171, 174, 175, 

179, 180, 193, 243, 244, 295, 297 

proposed action, i, iii, iv, v, 11, 16, 21, 22, 

23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 39, 120, 

124, 176, 177, 178, 179, 181, 186, 187, 

189, 190, 193, 216, 217, 218, 223, 224, 

276, 280 

Record of Decision, 2, ix, 31, 118, 165, 166, 

215, 227, 228, 269, 270 

restoration, 16, 20, 29, 33, 54, 65, 67, 81, 

88, 103, 104, 114, 115, 122, 140, 141, 

145, 170, 176, 177, 178, 185, 186, 190, 

191, 193, 194, 205, 209, 286 

Restoration, 2, i, iii, v, 11, 20, 26, 30, 31, 37, 

38, 134, 138, 140, 141, 155, 237 

retention, 29, 140, 145, 168, 170, 177, 186, 

190, 262 

Retention, v, 26, 30, 37, 38, 138, 140, 141, 

252, 288 

ROD, 2, 31, 118, 120, 122, 166, 215, 227, 

228, 230 

scoping, iii, iv, v, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 

31, 32, 40, 169, 172 

slash, 25, 65, 67, 71, 73, 79, 81, 84, 85, 130, 

136, 139, 141, 142, 143, 156, 161, 168, 

179, 192, 224, 226, 232, 236, 240, 250, 

257, 283, 286 

snags, 35, 36, 78, 79, 147, 179, 180, 182, 

186, 187, 189, 196, 198, 199, 200, 201, 

202, 203, 207, 208, 212, 214, 282 

Snags, 282, 292 

soils, 46, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 

61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 

72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 

83, 84, 85, 88, 89, 92, 94, 97, 99, 102, 

103, 106, 111, 113, 114, 124, 128, 148, 

155, 163, 174, 183, 210, 247, 250, 261, 

275, 292, 293 

SOLC, 2, 16, 175, 181, 182, 183, 194, 195, 

198, 202, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 

219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 227 

Species of Local Concern, 2, viii, ix, 175, 

194, 219, 220, 221, 222, 227, 269 

structural stage, 18, 19, 29, 33, 34, 35, 36, 

128, 129, 130, 132, 133, 135, 139, 140, 

141, 143, 146, 149, 150, 153, 154, 156, 

157, 163, 179, 180, 181, 187, 188, 189, 

196, 197, 198, 199, 202, 205, 206, 207, 

293 

structural stages, 18, 19, 26, 34, 35, 130, 

135, 143, 144, 149, 154, 175, 180, 186, 

187, 188, 189, 190, 196, 197, 200, 201, 

202, 203, 205, 206, 207, 212 

transportation system, 117, 120, 122, 123, 

124, 168, 268 

Transportation System, ix, 117, 268, 282, 

294 

transportation systems, 283 

values at risk, 14, 20, 34, 150, 288 
Slate Castle Project Draft EIS, Chapter 7 – Page 303

Values at Risk, 294 

wildfire, i, iii, iv, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 

22, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 35, 36, 51, 55, 60, 

64, 67, 68, 69, 71, 72, 73, 74, 78, 80, 83, 

89, 90, 93, 94, 96, 98, 103, 104, 106, 112, 

115, 116, 121, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 

147, 156, 161, 163, 169, 172, 173, 175, 

177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 186, 187, 189, 

191, 193, 194, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 

201, 203, 204, 206, 208, 209, 210, 212, 

213, 214, 216, 223, 226, 227, 235, 239, 

240, 244, 246, 247, 248, 250, 257, 275, 

280, 281, 289 

wildfire hazard, 14, 25, 35 

wildfires, i, iii, iv, 13, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25, 28, 

35, 41, 59, 60, 68, 71, 72, 73, 83, 116, 

135, 139, 145, 148, 155, 164, 169, 174, 

175, 177, 186, 204, 213, 227, 235, 237, 

244, 246, 247, 281, 295 

wildland-urban interface, 14, 17, 20, 25, 34, 

134, 135, 144, 151, 247 

Wildland-Urban Interface, 2, iii, 246, 295 

WUI, 2, iii, x, 20, 21, 28, 34, 141, 144, 150, 

151, 155, 246