Southwest Idaho ■ BOISE, PAYETTE, and SAWTOOTH NATIONAL FORESTS REVISED FOREST PLAN ■ July 2003

PAGE 1

I N S I D E

Boise, Payette & Sawtooth NFs

Release Revised Forest Plans ............................. 2

Reducing the Threat of

Un-characteristic Wildfire...................................... 2

Off the Beaten Path.............................................. 4

Livestock Grazing within the Ecogroup ................ 6

Management Indicator Species............................ 7

Summer Recreation.............................................. 8

Winter Recreation................................................. 9

Map..................................................................... 10

People and natural process have 

shaped the Boise, Payette, and 

Sawtooth National Forests for 

centuries. The Forests are special 

places with nationally significant 

resources. The Forest Service will 

continue providing places for people 

to work, play, enjoy, and utilize 

these significant resources. They will 

also continue to restore, maintain or 

improve the health of this incredible 

area found in southern and central 

Idaho. The same natural resource 

values that caught the attention of 

President Theodore Roosevelt, the 

American people, and Congress back 

in 1905 still exist today.

The Boise National Forest 

released its initial Land and Resource 

Management Plan in 1990, the 

Payette in 1988, and the Sawtooth 

in 1987. These plans have guided 

the management and protection of 

the forests through today and were 

developed following a number of 

years of study, analysis, and public 

involvement. The need to review 

and modify management for the new 

century, and in particular the next 

10-15 years, created the revised 2003 

Forest Plans. Our goal is to continue 

protecting and managing the land, 

so everyone can use and enjoy it for 

centuries to come. 

The Forests have reached a 

milestone with the release of the 

revised Forest Plans. This planning 

process began in 1996. It has taken 

a long time, and an enormous 

effort to finish. Factors effecting 

the development of the revised 

Forest Plans include new listings 

Setting a Course for the Future

of threatened and endangered 

plant, animal, and fish species 

under the Endangered Species 

Act; forest health issues including 

invasive plants, outbreaks of 

insects and disease, and the threat 

of un-characteristic wildfire; court 

decisions; water quality issues; 

new research findings and science 

from the Interior Columbia Basin 

studies; increased public interest 

in the management and protection 

of roadless areas; the National Fire 

Plan; and the President’s Healthy 

Forest Initiative.

The Forest Plans do the following:

● Describe management goals 

and objectives;

● Describe standards and 

guidelines to protect natural 

resources;

● Identify desired resource 

conditions; and

● Identify lands available and 

suitable for management.

The revised Forest Plans set a 

course for the future – a course that 

will benefit the communities we 

serve, the resources we are entrusted 

to manage, and the future generations 

who will inherit the results of our 

stewardship. To develop them, the 

Forests listened to what people had 

to say and analyzed the current 

conditions found on the landscape. 

The revised Forest Plans are 

different than the initial Plans in 

several ways. Particularly, the 

revised Plans emphasize restoration 

or maintenance of vegetation and 

watershed conditions. The plans 

maintain undeveloped areas and 

produce goods and services based on 

desired future conditions. 

Managing and protecting the 

natural resources on the 6.6 million 

acres administered by the Southwest 

Idaho Ecogroup to meet the needs 

and desires of the public and affected 

Tribes for today and into the future, 

and at the same time meet the needs 

of the resources, is very complex and 

demanding. Therefore, the revised 

Forest Plans may appear complex. 

We encourage people with an interest 

in these National Forests to take the 

time to read and learn the details and 

then work with us as we implement 

the plans. Please be patient, changes 

will not occur overnight and it will 

take time, years in many cases, 

to see the results. We will also 

need to amend or update the plans 

periodically and ask your input and 

involvement in helping to correct 

problems when they are identified.

We realize that the decisions 

being made for future management 

of the three Forests will not please 

everyone on every topic. However, 

we request that you take a close look 

at either an entire Forest or all three 

Forest Plans and consider the full mix 

of opportunities and uses, keeping in 

mind the laws that we must uphold. 

We truly believe that in ten or twenty 

years people will be able to look back 

and see improvements to the land, 

resources, recreation and commodity 

opportunities.

On behalf of the employees 

on our three National Forests, we 

personally thank you for the privilege 

and opportunity given us as stewards 

of your land for the protection and 

management of these special areas. 

We greatly value the time you have 

taken in the past to provide us with 

your thoughts and comments, and 

hope you will continue doing so in 

the future.

Sincerely,

Richard A. Smith

Boise Forest Supervisor

Mark J. Madrid

Payette Forest Supervisor

Ruth Monahan

Sawtooth Forest Supervisor

Only Time (and Monitoring) Will Tell................... 12

Special Areas...................................................... 13

Invaders of the Forest......................................... 14

Working Together So Everyone Has a Place ..... 15

Thanks for Letting Us Know ............................... 15

Healthy Water Conditions are the

Foundation for a Healthy Forest......................... 16

A River Runs Through It ..................................... 17

Variety is the Spice of Life .................................. 18

Redfish Lake

Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forests

Southwest Idaho Ecogroup
PAGE 2 

Redfish Lake

Prescribed burning

KEY DECISION: The National Fire Plan 

and Healthy Forests Initiative direction are 

incorporated using a combination of mechanical 

and prescribed fire treatments in wildland urban 

interface watersheds to reduce the acres of 

Condition Class 3. Working with cooperators such 

as county and state agencies is emphasized.

Skies engulfed in smoke. Flames racing or creeping toward homes, 

people struggling to make sense of blackened, scorched landscapes, 

environmental, social, and economic resources lost. The media has 

presented these scenes from the West with increasing frequency. Could this 

scenario happen here? Yes, it can and, in some areas such as Atlanta, Warren, 

the Boise foothills, and Hailey it already has. 

During the last decade over 454,000 acres burned on the Boise Forest 

(21% of the Forest), 673,000 acres on the Payette (29% of the Forest), and 

81,000 acres on the Sawtooth (4% of the Forest). Overall, our aging forests 

are becoming more susceptible to fire and the Forest Plan decisions set a path 

to better prepare landscapes and communities for uncharacteristic wildfire. 

The management strategy is embodied in the revised Forest Plans for 

the three Forests. The Plans provide direction for managing all of the 

resources on the three Forests. The Forests will continue to supply 

livestock forage, timber, a broad spectrum of recreation opportunities, and 

diverse and productive habitat for fish, wildlife, and plants.

The revised Forest Plans strive to match uses with the capability of 

the land. They emphasize active and flexible management of vegetation 

to provide properly functioning wildlife habitat and watershed conditions, 

and to reduce hazardous fuels. The Plans also establish goals and objectives 

for improving Forest user education and collaboration. Overall, the Plans 

provide guidance to ensure that the Forests are managed in a sustainable 

manner.

Each revised Forest Plan:

 Provides a long term Aquatic Conservation Strategy;

 Emphasizes restoration of degraded habitats;

 Incorporates the National Fire Plan and the Healthy Forests 

Initiative;

 Incorporates Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive species 

protection and recovery strategies;

 Recommends management of Inventoried Roadless Areas; and 

 Emphasizes timber harvest in high productivity, developed areas 

outside of Inventoried Roadless Areas and riparian areas; 

 Re-evaluates lands not suited for timber production; and

 Re-evaluates rangeland capability and suitability.

Management direction found in the Forest Plans was analyzed in the 

Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) that accompanies the revised 

Plans. Alternative 7 was developed following substantial public input on the 

Draft Revised Forest Plans and Draft EIS, released in November 2000, which 

contained six alternatives for managing the Forests. 

Alternative 7 responds to new initiatives such as the National Fire 

Plan and Healthy Forest Initiative and concerns about listed species; habitat 

“The revised Forest Plans 

strive to match uses with 

the capability of the land. 

They emphasize active and 

flexible management of 

vegetation to provide for 

wildlife habitat and watershed conditions, and to 

reduce hazardous fuels.”

Boise, Payette, and 

Sawtooth National 

Forests Release 

Revised Forest Plans

After seven years of analysis and planning, 

and more than 3500 public comments, a revised management strategy has been selected 

for the three National Forests in southwest 

Idaho – the Boise, Payette and Sawtooth National Forests. 

restoration; roadless area conservation; and timber production. Alternative 

7 makes individual decisions for managing roadless areas based on their 

inherent values. It recognizes the importance of watersheds (particularly 

watersheds with Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive listed species 

or watersheds needing restoration), and it addresses the need to reduce 

hazardous fuels to prevent wildfire in areas where life and property are 

considered at risk.

By federal law, each National Forest must develop a management 

plan, and then revise that plan every 10 –15 years or as changed conditions 

require. The Boise NF’s management plan was adopted in 1990, the Payette 

in 1988, and the Sawtooth Forest Plan in 1987. At that time there were fewer 

mountain bikes, fewer 

National Forest visitors, 

fewer Endangered 

Species Act listed 

species, and less 

public awareness about 

wildfire. In addition, 

our understanding of 

healthy ecosystems has 

grown substantially 

since that time. 

The revised Forest 

Plans address these 

changing conditions 

and incorporate new 

scientific understanding 

in their new management direction.

The revised Plans are unlikely to completely satisfy every group or 

individual, but they do set a reasonable course that provides a diverse mix of 

opportunities for a variety of users.

The management strategy that has been adopted is explained in more 

detail in the following pages. After reading this document, if you still have 

questions please let us know!

Reducing the Threat of Un-characteristic Wildfire
Un-characteristic wildfire

PAGE 3

Mechanical treatment

Approximately, 13% of the Ecogroup’s forested areas are considered 

to be in bad health. That is, they are considered to be in uncharacteristic 

conditions where a wildfire would have lethal or stand replacing effects in 

areas where fires occurred historically every 10 to 15 years and were nonlethal. Wildfire hazard is based on the vegetative conditions that influence 

fire behavior and potential effects. Wildfire hazard ratings are identified 

as condition classes 0-3; low (0), moderate (1), high (2), and extreme (3). 

Controlling high intensity, lethal wildfires is difficult, sometimes impossible. 

The Selected Alternative incorporates the Healthy Forest Initiative and 

National Fire Plan goals and objectives by emphasizing a combination of 

mechanical and fire treatments around National Fire Plan communities and 

within wildland urban interface watersheds. 

Restoration and maintenance of historic fire intervals commonly seen 

in the dry forest types (ponderosa pine) is emphasized through vegetation 

management actions that include prescribed fire, and mechanical equipment 

that would include some removal of timber products. Product removal in this 

case would generally be a by-product of the restoration activities designed to 

return conditions reflective of historic fire intervals. 

In addition, benefits such as products to communities, reducing longer 

term economic risks associated with wildland fire, as well 

as reducing risks to watersheds, particularly municipal water 

supplies are an outcome of management actions. 

It is important to note that other ecosystems found 

within the Ecogroup area, such as the lodgepole pine and 

other high-elevation vegetation groups did experience 

periodic stand- replacing fires and the normal functioning of 

these stands rely on these fires. As demonstrated by the 1988 

fires at Yellowstone National Park, also a lodgepole pine 

ecosystem, forests regenerate from high-intensity fires with 

surprising quickness. 

Most larger animals and many smaller animals can 

flee fires. However, people are part of the forests, and 

populations adjacent to the National Forest are growing at 

among the fastest rates in the nation. Obviously, wildfires 

cannot be allowed to burn uncontrolled within this urban 

interface area. One of the high priority objectives in the 

revised Forest Plans is to reduce hazardous fuels in the 

wildland urban interface. The question is how.

The Forest Service sees several answers, none simple 

or complete. One option is to manage vegetation through 

mechanical means. For example, thinning trees reduces the 

rate of fire spread, and may be particularly useful in some 

areas. However, thinning is not possible in certain areas 

During the last decade over 454,000 acres 

burned on the Boise Forest (21% of the 

Forest), 673,000 acres on the Payette (29% 

of the Forest), and 81,000 acres on the 

Sawtooth (4% of the Forest). 

including those with steep terrain, and the Sawtooth Wilderness Area and 

Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness.

Prescribed and natural fires is a second technique for abating fire 

potential. A prescribed fire is a well-planned and carefully watched fire, 

usually occurring in the spring and fall seasons. A natural fire is ignited by 

lightning and allowed to burn under very specific conditions. Natural fires 

are most likely to occur in wilderness or other remote areas. Both types of 

fire techniques benefit the forests. Fire management plans will be developed 

using revised Forest Plan direction to better determine, when, and if, these 

natural fires are appropriate.

We know that unless hazardous fuels are reduced, the number of severe 

wildland fires and costs associated with suppressing them will continue 

to increase. We also know we can’t do the job alone. The Forest Service 

will continue to work cooperatively with state and local governments, 

communities, and homeowners to address the threat of fire in the wildland 

urban interface. Everyone has to pitch in to reduce this threat because 

whether caused by lightening, careless recreational use, or unfortunately, 

arson, fire does not respect property lines.

Wildland urban interface
O F F T H E B E A T E N P A T H

Wilderness, Recommended Wilderness, 

Inventoried Roadless Areas

BOISE NF PAYETTE NF SAWTOOTH NF

Percent of Percent of Percent of

Management Forest’s IRA Forest’s IRA Forest’s IRA

Prescription Acres acres Acres acres Acres acres

Full range of

development Less than

options 23,900 2 percent 2,700 1 percent 121,200* 10 percent

Low levels of

development 868,100 78 percent 628,300 69 percent 838,200 68 percent

Maintain

undeveloped Less than

character 32,600 3 percent 70,200 8 percent 1,900 1 percent

Recommended

wilderness 183,900 17 percent 211,300 23 percent 263,900 22 percent

* Largely rangelands over which development would not be as concentrated or obvious as the forested lands on the Boise and 

Payette NFs.

PAGE 4 

Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs)

Of the vast array of resources managed within national forests, few resources spark as much debate as roadless areas. These generally 

unroaded and undeveloped areas may include features that make them 

suitable for future wilderness designation. For this reason, people are keenly 

interested in their location and extent, and the effects of any proposed 

management activities (or their restrictions) within these areas. 

To be considered an IRA an area has to be 5,000 acres or more in size 

or, due to physiography or vegetation, be manageable in its natural condition. 

An area can also be considered an IRA if it is a self-contained ecosystem 

such as an island, or is contiguous to an existing wilderness, primitive 

area, Administration endorsed wilderness, or another Federally managed 

roadless area. To be an IRA the area must be free of any improved roads.

The Ecogroup Forests conducted a Roadless area re-evaluation as part of 

the revision effort. The table provided under “Designated Wilderness Areas” 

shows the results of this re-evaluation.

Future management of roadless areas is a controversial and polarized 

issue. On many National Forests, roadless area management has been a 

major point of contention in land management planning. Roadless areas are 

valued for many resource benefits including their undeveloped fisheries and 

wildlife habitat, biological diversity, and dispersed recreation opportunities. 

Controversy continues to accompany most proposals to harvest timber, build 

roads, or otherwise develop inventoried roadless areas. Public opinions 

regarding the use of these areas vary greatly, ranging from full commodity 

development to maintaining undeveloped character through wilderness 

designation. 

In the revised Forest Plans, there are a variety of management 

prescriptions assigned to IRAs, including those that provide for:

§ A full range of development opportunities (including road 

construction, scheduled timber harvest or rangeland vegetation 

management); 

§ Low levels of development (including timber salvage or, in some 

areas, habitat restoration or treatments to reduce the hazard of insect 

infestation or uncharacteristic wildfire); 

§ Maintenance of undeveloped character (some limited management 

activities might occur in these areas, but no lasting signs of 

development would be produced);

§ Recommendation for wilderness designation. 

The following table indicates the mix of management options assigned 

to IRAs under the revised Forest Plans. Acreages are rounded to the nearest 

100 acres.

As shown in the table above, most of the IRAs will be managed to 

maintain their unroaded character while allowing for salvage harvest or 

restoration treatments when necessary. 

The Roadless Area Conservation Rule (RACR), published in 2001, 

was developed to respond to the national controversy over management of 

roadless areas. The RACR prohibited road construction and reconstruction 

in most IRAs and outlined procedures to evaluate the quality and importance 

of roadless characteristics. The RACR remains under review and litigation. 

About 20 percent of the Boise, 31 percent of the Payette and 22 percent of 

the Sawtooth IRA acres are completely consistent with the RACR.

Frank Church – River of No

Return Wilderness
Forest Existing Recommended Inventoried

 Wilderness Wilderness Roadless Areas*

 % / Acres % / Acres % / Acres

Boise 0% 8% 50%

 01 183,900 1,108,500

Payette 33% 9% 40%

 767,7002 211,300 908,500

Sawtooth 10% 12% 58%

 217,700 263,900 1,225,137

Mule deer

PAGE 5

Recommended Wilderness Areas

Recommended Wilderness Areas are areas identified as having wilderness characteristics and values but have not yet been designated by Congress. 

The revised Forest Plans did not change the number of Recommended 

Wilderness Areas within the Ecogroup Forests. While the number of 

recommended wilderness areas stayed the same in the revised plans, the acres 

recommended changed as a result of a few minor boundary adjustments for 

manageability, to preserve recreation opportunities, and as a result of better 

mapping technology. 

On the Boise Forest, the Needles, Red Mountain, and Ten Mile/Black 

Warrior areas continue to be recommended for Wilderness designation. On 

the Payette Forest the Secesh and Needles areas continue as recommended 

Wilderness. The Sawtooth Forest continues to recommend the Hanson Lakes, 

Boulder/White Clouds, and Pioneer Mountains for Wilderness designation. 

In total, over 650,000 acres within the Ecogroup will be managed to 

preserve existing wilderness values and characteristics until Congress makes 

wilderness designation decisions on these areas.

Designated Wilderness Areas

The Ecogroup Forests administer about 985,400 acres of wilderness, or 25 percent of the designated wilderness within Idaho. Wilderness areas 

found within the Ecogroup area are the Frank Church River of No Return 

Wilderness, the Hells Canyon Wilderness, and the Sawtooth Wilderness. 

These areas offer undisturbed landscapes, incredible scenic vistas, and 

solitude.

1Approximately 64,400 acres of the Boise National Forest lie within the Frank Church – River of 

No Return Wilderness but are administered by the Salmon-Challis National Forest.

2This figure does not include approximately 24,000 acres of the Payette National Forest within 

the Hells Canyon Wilderness that are administered by the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest.

Under the revised Forest Plans, visitors seeking undisturbed solitude or 

just a little peace and quiet will still find numerous opportunities within the 

Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth Forests.

Boulder – White Cloud 

Recommended Wilderness 

Lava Butte Lake
PAGE 6 

KEY DECISIONS: Riparian 

management standards for 

allotment management planning 

and grazing suitability were 

re-evaluated to better address 

long-term aquatic resources 

and recovery requirements for 

endangered species.

Livestock grazing has occurred within the 

Ecogroup for over 100 years. Livestock 

were initially brought into the area to 

provide meat and dairy products for miners 

and homesteaders. Livestock were also used as 

working animals for mining and associated timber 

operations. Unregulated grazing created localized 

areas of damaged rangeland vegetation, damaged 

riparian areas, and depleted forage surrounding the 

mining communities. Fire was used to expose ore 

bodies and clear land for grazing and cultivation.

As mineral deposits were discovered 

throughout the late 1800s, more mountain mining 

communities were established. Other communities 

began to appear along travel routes in nearby 

valleys, where the climate and terrain were more 

favorable for ranching and agriculture. The 

introduction of large herds of cattle (1860s) and 

sheep (1890s) exposed vegetation in the Ecogroup 

to an unprecedented level and duration of grazing. 

This condition was perpetuated for many years due 

to low production and shipping costs, a more stable 

forage base created by irrigated pastures and hay 

operations, and war-time demands for livestock 

products.

Livestock use on National Forest lands is 

calculated in Head Months (HMs). HMs are 

defined as the amount of dry forage required by 

one mature 1,000 pound cow for one month. The 

Ecogroup established rangeland capability and 

suitability criteria to guide the broad level decisions 

found in the Revised Forest Plans. Rangeland 

capability determines the land’s physical ability to 

support livestock grazing. Rangeland suitability 

determines whether or not grazing is appropriate in 

an area. Decisions specific to individual allotments 

will be based on site-specific analysis that will 

follow the Forest Plan Revision process. 

The Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National 

Forests administer about 6.6 million acres of 

National Forest System lands. An estimated 18% 

of those lands are capable for grazing. Of the 

6.6 million acres, an estimated 16% are suitable 

for grazing. The reduction between capable 

and suitable rangelands is due primarily to 

considerations for Threatened, Endangered, and 

Sensitive Species listed under the Environmental 

Species Act, big horn sheep and domestic sheep 

conflicts, and livestock grazing and recreation 

conflicts.

The following are highlights for each Forest:

● BNF – Grazing levels will continue near 

current levels but six allotments that have 

been vacant in recent years will be closed.

● PNF – Grazing levels are maintained close 

to current levels.

● SNF – Grazing levels are maintained 

similar to current levels, but small portions 

of allotments within two management areas 

are closed to address recreation livestock 

conflicts, a small portion of one allotment 

is closed to address noxious weed concerns 

and one allotment currently closed will 

remain closed to address bighorn sheep 

concerns. 

Many ranchers depend on allotments 

administered by the Boise, Payette and Sawtooth 

Forests to provide a portion of their year-round 

grazing operations. The Forests will continue to 

support many viable livestock operations and 

explore ways to improve conditions of rangelands. 

Livestock Grazing

within the Ecogroup

Methods for improvement include prescribed fire. 

Periodic fire helps improve the vigor of plants in 

aspen, mountain brush, and sagebrush vegetation 

communities. Livestock grazing will be carefully 

coordinated both before and after these fire use 

projects. Areas will need to be rested from grazing 

to prepare for the burns and to recover from them. 

Over the long-term though, grazing use for both 

domestic livestock and wildlife will benefit from 

the improved forage.

Changes in plan direction may result in some 

overall reductions in livestock numbers over time, 

but that will depend partly on how well grazing 

is managed. Any actual changes in permitted 

livestock numbers will only occur following sitespecific analysis to make adjustments that fit the 

particular allotment.

Any actual changes in 

permitted livestock numbers will only occur following site-specific analysis to make adjustments 

that fit the particular allotment.

Cattle 

grazing in 

Stanley 

Basin
White-headed woodpecker

Sage grouse

PAGE 7

FOREST SPECIES ASSOCIATED HABITAT

 Pileated woodpecker Mixed conifer forests

 capable of growing large

 diameter trees with

 multi-storied stands.

 White-headed woodpecker Open, mature ponderosa

BOISE AND PAYETTE pine and mixed ponderosa

NATIONAL FORESTS pine/Douglas-fir forests.

 Bull trout Stream beds free of sediment,

 cold water temperature, and

 access to other streams.

 Pileated woodpecker Mixed conifer forests capable

 of growing large diameter

 trees with multi-storied stands.

SAWTOOTH Bull trout Stream beds free of sediment,

NATIONAL FOREST cold water temperature, and

 access to other streams.

 Sage grouse Sagebrush and grasslands.

Management Indicator Species 

KEY DECISIONS: Ecosystembased direction is used to reflect 

current science from the Interior 

Columbia Basin Ecosystem 

Management Project. A suite 

of species is selected to better 

reflect habitat relationships and 

the effects of management, as 

well as the results of population 

trend monitoring. 

The Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National 

Forests provide habitat for many vertebrate 

species of wildlife including fish, reptiles 

(snakes and lizards), amphibians (frogs, toads, 

salamanders), mammals, and birds. Not all of these 

species are on the Forest all of the time. Many 

birds, for instance, migrate south for the winter, 

some as far as South America. Some of the species 

are rare on the Forest. 

Laws and regulations determine wildlife 

management on the National Forests by providing 

direction to maintain habitat and viability for 

all native and desired non-native species that 

reside within the Forest boundaries. There are 

over 300 terrestrial species that use the three 

Ecogroup Forests. Because it is extremely difficult 

to track every species individually, species are 

categorized according to the habitat they use. First, 

we determine which habitats our management 

is likely to affect. Then we select species that 

are dependent on those habitats. We call these 

species “Management Indicator Species (MIS).” 

By assessing representative species, we can infer 

that other species using the same habitats are 

experiencing similar conditions and effects. 

Considerations for selecting MIS include:

• Non-migratory species;

• Species that are sensitive to habitat or 

watershed condition changes;

• Changes to species habitat are influenced 

by forest management activities;

• Changes in species populations can be 

monitored; and

• Species whose habitats have changed 

significantly from historic conditions. 

The MIS for the Forests and their associated 

habitats are:

Pileated Woodpecker:

Pileated woodpeckers are non-migratory and occur 

on all Ranger Districts within the three Forests, 

except the 

southern 

portion of 

the Sawtooth 

NF. Pileated 

woodpeckers 

nest in large 

standing 

snags. 

Because they 

are the largest 

woodpeckers 

occurring 

within the 

three Forests, 

they need 

snags large 

enough to 

accommodate 

their body 

size when 

excavating 

nest cavities. 

Numerous other cavity-nesting birds within the 

Ecogroup depend on large trees. Because of 

their reliance on large-diameter trees and their 

importance to other wildlife species, and the 

potential for Forest management activities to affect 

large mixed conifer trees and snags, the pileated 

woodpecker is a selected MIS for all three Forests. 

White-headed Woodpecker:

White-headed woodpeckers are non-migratory 

and occur in most of the management areas on 

the Boise Forest and some of the management 

areas on the Payette Forest. Major habitat changes 

have occurred from selective harvesting of large 

ponderosa pine, snag removal in harvest areas, 

large areas of ponderosa pine mortality from 

wildfires during the last 15 years, and a change 

in composition and density of remaining stands 

because of long-term fire exclusion. Because of 

these habitat reductions, and the potential for 

Forest management activities to affect their habitat, 

white-headed woodpeckers are a selected MIS for 

the Boise and Payette National Forests. 

Bull Trout:

Bull trout were historically found in most streams 

in the Ecogroup area, except for the Snake River 

above Shoshone Falls and the Wood River. 

Today, bull trout are limited to streams that have 

streambeds free of sediment, lots of good hiding 

cover formed by wood, boulders, and deep pools, 

cold water temperatures, and good access to other 

nearby streams. Past management activities have 

reduced one or more of these conditions in many 

Forest streams. Bull trout is a selected MIS because 

its reliance on very specific habitat features, and 

the potential for Forest management activities to 

affect these features. 

Sage Grouse:

Sage grouse are found on the Sawtooth Forest 

and the southernmost portion of the Boise Forest. 

The species is a selected MIS for the Sawtooth 

Forest because of its dependence on sagebrush 

and grasslands to meet their habitat needs, and the 

potential for Forest management activities to affect 

its habitat. 

Management indicator species provide a way 

to monitor the effects forest management may have 

on species dependent on the Forests for survival. 

As information on these species is gathered over 

the next decade, it will help Forest managers 

determine if changes in management direction or 

practices are needed to help ensure viability of 

many species found on the Forests.

Pileated woodpecker
PAGE 8 

Summertime brings many visitors to the 

Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National 

Forests. These visitors enjoy fishing, hiking, 

riding horses, mountain biking, camping, and 

off-highway vehicle riding, just to name a few. 

The revised plans lay the groundwork to provide 

quality recreation to an increasing number of 

diverse recreation users. Keeping up with the 

growing numbers of people enjoying the outdoors 

and the impacts from increasing recreation use will 

continue to be a challenge. 

The Plans primary intent is to ensure people 

find opportunities for a wide spectrum of recreation 

experiences. Various methods are identified to 

help manage recreation uses and facilities to lessen 

impacts from recreation to other resources. 

Emphasized methods include:

● Prioritize opportunities to mitigate effects 

at and from recreation facilities on natural 

resources such as water quality or plant 

habitat. 

Estimated Acres of Summer ROS Class by 20181

ROS CLASS2 ACRES BY ROS CLASS

 BOISE NF PAYETTE NF SAWTOOTH NF

Primitive 0 768,000 227,000

Semi-Primitive Non- Motorized 457,000 458,000 367,000

Semi-Primitive Motorized 408,000 415,000 724,000

Roaded Natural 404,000 263,000 295,000

Roaded Modified 929,000 395,000 494,000

Rural 5,000 0 4,000

1Acreages are rounded to the nearest 1,000 acres. Totals may differ slightly due to rounding.

Percent of Ecogroup Forest Areas and Trails Open to Motorized Uses*

 BOISE NF1 PAYETTE NF1 SAWTOOTH NF1

Percent of Forest Open to Summer 24 22 37

Cross-Country Motorized Uses

Percent of Summer Trail Miles 80 35 55

Open to Motorized Uses

* Includes any form of motorized use during all or any part of the year.

● Manage cross-country travel to mitigate 

recreation and big game conflicts on winter 

and spring ranges. 

● Facilitate and encourage user groups to 

resolve use conflicts among themselves. 

● Develop recreation facilities based on 

increased public need, operating efficiency, 

reduction of conflict, or reducing resource 

degradation.

● Issue Outfitter and Guide special use 

permits when the use will not degrade 

Forest resources, and when the use is 

compatible with existing public recreation 

activities. 

● Use the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum 

to classify areas by recreation experience 

and setting to maintain an array of 

recreation opportunities.

With the diversity of landscapes found on 

these Forests, users have a variety of settings 

for a wide range of activities. They include 

primitive settings with solitude and challenging 

opportunities, to modified settings with more social 

interaction and comfort provisions. The Forests will 

continue maintaining and expanding opportunities 

for physically challenged recreationists. 

The Ecogroup Forests are unique in their 

concentration of threatened and endangered species 

listed under the Endangered Species Act. With 

species recovery, recreation opportunities and 

experiences benefit. 

In recent years, conflicts between recreation 

users and other resources, such as listed species, 

have developed largely from increasing recreation 

use. The revised Forest Plans lay the groundwork 

for maintaining recreation opportunities, 

and reducing conflicts. They also provide 

environmentally responsible access parameters 

and set the foundation for subsequent travel 

management planning.

Key decisions in each Forest Plan provides 

for a mix of recreational opportunities. The Forests 

use a classification system called the Recreation 

Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) to help describe 

different recreation settings and to help guide 

management activities.

Summer Recreation

KEY DECISION: A mix of recreation opportunities is offered 

to address growing demands from Boise, Twin Falls, and other 

communities in the Ecogroup Forest area. Travel management plans 

on all three Forests will be updated following the revision effort.

Hiking on the Payette National Forest
PAGE 9

The Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National 

Forests will continue to provide outstanding 

opportunities for winter recreationists 

including downhill and cross-country skiing, 

snowmobiling, and snowshoeing. 

 Downhill skiing opportunities are available 

at seven different downhill ski areas and resorts 

including Brundage Mountain, Little Ski Hill, 

Bogus Basin, Soldier Mountain, Pomerelle 

Mountain, Magic Mountain, and Sun Valley Bald 

Mountain. 

Outstanding cross-country skiing is available 

at the Little Ski Hill outside of McCall and Galena 

Lodge near Galena Pass, not to mention the vast 

tracts of forests open to skiers. The Ecogroup area 

provides approximately 110 miles of groomed trail 

experiences.

 Over 1200 miles of groomed snowmobile 

trails and 4.4 million acres of open terrain are 

available for snowmobile enthusiasts. The Boise 

National Forest manages three snowparks and 

the Sawtooth National Forest manages two parks. 

Remote forest areas provide abundant terrain for 

winter snow-play for snowmobile touring and himarking.

Most routes are groomed in partnership with 

organizations or agencies, including the Idaho 

Department of Parks and Recreation and local 

county governments. Some of the 4.4 million acres 

are not accessible to motorized use because of 

slope steepness, wildlife conflicts, or other natural 

limiting factors.

Increasing winter use increases the potential 

for conflicts between different users and other 

resources, such as wintering wildlife. In most cases, 

these conflicts are terrain use conflicts between 

motorized and non-motorized users. They occur in 

developed ski areas as well as backcountry areas. 

Most of these conflicts are site specific in nature, so 

full resolution is, typically outside the scope of the 

programmatic nature of the Plans. 

The intent is to continue to provide an array 

of winter recreation experiences and facilities, 

while meeting other resource goals and reducing 

Percent of Ecogroup Forest Areas and Trails Open to Motorized Uses*

 BOISE NF1 PAYETTE NF1 SAWTOOTH NF1

Percent of Forest Open to Winter 84 47 72

Cross-Country Motorized Uses

Percent of Winter Trail Miles 96 100 74

Open to Motorized Uses

* Includes any form of motorized use during all or any part of the year.

Estimated Acres of Winter ROS Class by 20181

ROS CLASS2 ACRES BY ROS CLASS

 BOISE NF PAYETTE NF SAWTOOTH NF

Primitive 0 768,000 219,000

Semi-Primitive Non- Motorized 206,000 447,000 123,000

Semi-Primitive Motorized 1,725,000 745,000 1,696,000

Roaded Natural 167,000 39,000 71,000

Roaded Modified 100,000 301,000 0

Rural 5,000 0 2,000

1Acreages are rounded to the nearest 1,000 acres. Totals may differ slightly due to rounding.

the levels of conflicts. Closures to any users will be 

determined on a site-specific or project level with 

ample opportunities for input from everyone.

Management direction affecting winter 

recreation activities was reviewed and revised 

in light of the growing popularity of all forms of 

winter recreation. New direction was developed, at 

both the Forest-wide and management area levels, 

to address conflict situations. 

Key direction includes:

● Addressing current recreation use and 

emerging recreation use conflicts while 

maintaining recreation opportunities where 

possible. 

● Emphasizing collaboration among users to 

reduce conflicts between recreational and 

environmental needs.

● Educating users of wildlife needs and 

promoting backcountry safety and user 

conflict methods. 

● Recognizing that some activities in the 

same locations may not be compatible 

and separation for user safety and quality 

recreation experiences should be noted. 

Key decisions in each Forest Plan provides 

for a mix of recreational opportunities. The Forests 

use a classification system called the Recreation 

Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) to help describe 

different recreation settings and to help guide 

management activities. 

 Winter Recreation

KEY DECISION: Programmatic management direction was reviewed 

and adjusted to provide a foundation for subsequent analysis 

and access management determinations. Site-specific winter 

access management will be addressed in the travel management 

planning process following the revision effort. A 

combination of methods, such as user education 

and collaborative user group conflict mitigation, is 

anticipated to resolve winter recreation conflicts. 

Hopefully, new management direction will foster resolution of conflicts among user groups 

themselves utilizing approaches such as the Winter Recreation Coalition effort on the Sawtooth National 

Forest. The new management direction provides added protection and awareness of potential threats to 

wildlife from recreationists during critical periods of the year.

Snowmobiling 

on the Payette 

National Forest
��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ��

�����

����

������

�������

������

��������

� ��������

���� ���� �������

� ��������

�������

���

�������

�������

������

�������

����

� ����������

�� � � � �� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

������

�����������

������ ������

Southwest Idaho Ecogroup

Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forests

PAGE 10 
��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�����

���������

��������

����

���� �����

������

�����

���� �������

��������

� ����

� ��������

������ �����

� ��������

���������

� ��������

�����

����

� ��������

��������

� � � � � � � � � �

� � � � � � � � � � � �

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

� �

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

������ ������

�������� ������������������ ���������������

����� ��������

����� �������� ������������� �������� �������������� �������� ������

���� ������

���� �������������

����� �������� �������������� �������� ������������� �������� ������

��������� ����� ��������

�� �� �

�����

PAGE 11
Only 

Time (and 

Monitoring) 

Will Tell: The 

New Plans 

Need To Be 

Adaptable

The Plans were built using an 

adaptive strategy that incorporated available information. 

As new information became 

available, it was incorporated 

into the planning process as 

appropriate. This adaptive 

strategy will continue through 

monitoring. 

Now that we have made decisions to guide 

Forest management over the next 10 to 

15 years, how will we know whether they 

are moving us toward our desired conditions? 

Moreover, what will happen if we are not moving 

in the right direction? 

Monitoring and evaluation focus on these 

questions and are required in planning for the 

future of all National Forests. Monitoring is simply 

checking periodically and answering the following: 

Did we do what we said we were going to do? How 

well is it working and why? Evaluation answers the 

question: What, if anything, do we need to change 

to move toward our goals? These activities provide 

the information needed to keep Forest Plans upto-date and to make sure that we learn from our 

successes and mistakes.

The large area and 

complex planning for the 

various uses and values 

of the Boise, Payette, 

and Sawtooth Forests 

made it impossible to 

anticipate every possible 

situation. We fully 

expect to make periodic 

adjustments to address 

monitoring results, 

changed conditions, new 

information or research, 

new policy, etc. Through 

monitoring we can 

review the assumptions 

made during the 

development of the plans, 

determine if objectives 

are being accomplished, 

and decide how well 

those actions are 

working. We can assess 

whether management 

direction in the Plans is 

sufficient to provide for 

long-term sustainability 

and desirable public 

opportunities. Finally, 

we can determine if we 

should change some 

aspects of the revised 

Forest Plans through 

amendments based on 

what we have learned. 

It is important to note 

that not all items will be 

monitored every year 

– some yearly, some 

every 3 years and so on.

Every year, each 

Forest will publish a 

Monitoring Report outlining how we are doing 

with Plan implementation, what we are finding, 

and what management actions, if any, we are 

considering as a result of the findings.

Through monitoring we can review the assumptions made 

during the development of the plans, determine if objectives 

are being accomplished, and decide how well those actions 

are working.

PAGE 12 

 PLAN AHEAD AND PREPARE. Proper 

planning and preparation helps hikers 

and campers have a safe and enjoyable 

trip, while minimizing damage to natural 

and cultural resources.

 TRAVEL AND CAMP ON DURABLE 

SURFACES. Damage to land occurs 

when visitors trample vegetation or 

communities of organisms beyond 

recovery. The resulting barren areas 

develop into undesirable trails, 

campsites and soil erosion.

 DISPOSE OF WASTE PROPERLY. 

Bury human waste in cat holes 6-8′′ deep 

and at least 200′ from water, trails, and 

campsites. Carry out toilet paper, food 

scraps and all trash.

 LEAVE WHAT YOU FIND. Allow others 

a sense of discovery by leaving rocks, 

plants, archaeological artifacts and other 

objects as you find them.

 MINIMIZE CAMPFIRE IMPACTS.

Lightweight camp stoves make low 

impact camping possible by eliminating 

the need for firewood, and the scars that 

remain after a campfire.

 RESPECT WILDLIFE. Observe wildlife 

from afar to avoid disturbing them. Store 

food securely and keep garbage and 

food scraps away from animals so they 

will not acquire bad habits. Keep pets 

leashed to avoid harassment or injury to 

wildlife.

 RESPECT OTHERS. Travel and camp 

in small groups, and help maintain 

the peace by camping out of sight and 

sound of others. Keep pets leashed and 

always pick up after your pet.

LEAVE NO TRACE!

Fish monitoring
S P E C I A L A R E A S

PAGE 13

Research Natural Areas

RNAs are part of a national effort to identify 

and preserve places within the National Forest 

System to conduct monitoring and research, 

to maintain biological diversity, and to foster 

education. The goal is to have representative 

examples of as many ecosystems as possible set 

aside for permanent protection. 

There are 34 RNAs found within the Ecogroup 

with a combined total of more than 26,000 acres. 

The Boise Forest has 14 designated RNAs, the 

Payette Forest has 13 RNAs, and the Sawtooth 

Forest has 6 RNAs. Basin Gulch on the Sawtooth 

Forest and Patrick Butte on the Payette Forest have 

already been proposed as additional RNAs. With 

the possible exception of Railroad Ridge (described 

below), no new RNAs were proposed through the 

Forest Plan Revision process.

The revised Forest Plans identify some 

unique areas on the Boise, Payette, and 

Sawtooth Forests. These areas fall into two 

different categories: Research Natural Areas 

(RNAs) and Special Interest Areas (SIAs). 

Differences

Major differences between RNAs and SIAs 

include:

■ RNAs are focused around areas in a natural 

condition, while SIAs are focused on 

environmental education of the attributes 

included within them.

■ RNAs are protected from uses such as 

recreation, timber harvest, and livestock 

grazing. Fire is allowed only if it is a 

research component of those ecosystems 

included in the RNA. By contrast, SIAs 

can include any or all of these activities, 

as long as they do not interfere with the 

values being protected or emphasized 

within them.

■ RNAs are primarily used by agency 

personnel or the scientific community, 

while SIAs are used as much by the 

general public.

■ While RNAs are selected based on a need 

to maintain representative ecosystems in as 

unmodified condition as possible, SIAs are 

chosen because of their unique attributes.

Special Interest Areas

SIAs are lands within the National Forest 

System established to protect and manage 

for public use and enjoyment, special areas 

with scenic, geological, botanical, zoological, 

paleontological, archaeological or other special 

characteristics or unique values. 

The Sawtooth Forest Plan proposes 

establishment of the Mount Harrison SIA on 

the summit of Mount Harrison, on the Sawtooth 

Forest’s south end. Mount Harrison is home to 

the only known population of Christ’s Indian 

paintbrush and has two of the largest intact tall forb 

communities remaining in Idaho. If established, the 

Mount Harrison SIA would maintain the tall forb 

communities, the Christ’s Indian paintbrush not 

encompassed within the adjacent Mount Harrison 

RNA, and other endemic rare plant species found 

on Mount Harrison.

Railroad Ridge, located in the northeastern 

part of the White Cloud Mountains, contains 

White Cloud milkvetch, a White Cloud endemic 

species, and the only know population of northern 

sagewort in Idaho. Common moonwort and slender 

moonwort, a candidate species for listing under 

the Endangered Species Act, are also found on 

Railroad Ridge. The Sawtooth Forest Plan includes 

an objective to propose establishment of a Railroad 

Ridge RNA or SIA.

Mt. Harrison – proposed SIA

Railroad Ridge – proposed RNA or SIA
Leafy spurge

Leafy spurge infestation

PAGE 14 

KEY DECISION:

Direction is established 

for a strong integrated 

noxious weed 

management program 

across the Forests in 

cooperation with other 

federal, state and local 

agencies. 

Noxious weeds have been 

described as “plants with a 

strong will to survive”, and 

they are. Unfortunately, this is at the 

expense of native plants that provide 

food and shelter for native wildlife 

and bird species. In addition, weeds 

increase the costs associated with the 

agricultural industry and their ability 

to supply us with food and the other 

products.

The diversity of ecosystems 

is severely threatened when nonnatives out compete native plants. 

These invasive and exotic plants 

are degrading wildland ecosystems 

at a rapid and ever-increasing rate. 

The Ecogroup Forests have seen a 

tremendous expansion of noxious 

weeds during the past 20 years, 

especially rush skeletonweed and 

leafy spurge. Other plants that are 

expanding rapidly include Dalmation 

toadflax, star thistle, and other 

various thistles.

Some of these plants were 

originally planted with good 

intention. Dyer’s woad was brought 

into North America from Europe, 

probably late in the 17th century. It 

was first introduced to the eastern 

United States by colonists as a 

source for blue dye (from the roots 

of the plant), and now has invaded 

extensive areas of agriculture, 

roadsides, and rangelands throughout 

the northwestern United States

Weeds spread in a variety 

of ways and can be found along 

roads and trails. Vehicles, humans, 

and horses can spread many of 

these plants. In addition, wildlife, 

livestock, wind, and water can play 

roles in weed establishment and 

spread. Many types of weeds can 

spread by birds or by the wind taking 

seeds to remote areas far away from 

human contact. 

So why have we seen such an 

increase in weeds during the past 20 

years? Increased population growth 

has resulted in more soil disturbing 

activities including construction 

of new highways and utility lines. 

Increased Off Highway Vehicle 

(OHV) travel through infested areas 

may spread weed seeds that are 

caught in the undercarriage or in tire 

treads. Use of weed-infested hay, 

straw or mulch will spread noxious 

weeds. Weeds may spread without 

anyone being aware that they might 

be hitching a ride on a vehicle, pet, or 

clothing.

Educating Forest users about 

noxious weeds is one of the focus 

areas of the public outreach efforts 

outlined in the revised Forest Plans. 

Forest-wide direction is 

provided to help prevent the 

establishment of new infestations 

and the transport of weed seed to 

other locations. This direction is 

primarily associated with a wide 

variety of management activities 

and uses on the Forests. Areas of 

high susceptibility to invasion are 

identified, along with precautionary 

measures identified for planning 

and implementing activities in 

site-specific areas. Integrated Weed 

Management goals and objectives 

address specific species and sites 

of concern. Noxious weeds are a 

problem that concerns everyone, 

from land managers to farmers and 

ranchers, and from recreationists to 

loggers.

Invaders

of the

Forest
PAGE 15

Thanks For 

Letting Us Know!

Over 3500 letters, e-mails, and postcards received

I

magine receiving over 3,500 comments from people in letters, e-mail, 

and postcards! That’s exactly what the Forest planners did as they 

reviewed each comment received on the Draft Forest Plans and Draft 

EIS, issued in November 2000.

Many of the comments received were mass formatted e-mails or 

postcards, but nearly 500 were carefully written letters from individuals. 

The Forests thank everyone who took the time and energy necessary to 

provide comments on this project.

What happened to your letter after the comment deadline in June 

2001? First, a team analyzed each letter, dissecting the messages. 

Those statements were then categorized under subject headings, such 

as “wildlife” or “alternative.” Each of these was considered a comment. 

These comments were condensed and given to a team for study. Team 

specialists, such as biologists and ecologists, as well as Forest planners 

and the Forest Supervisors, reviewed the comments. After the comments 

were compiled, a great deal more work and analysis was done to ensure 

the Forest Service was responding to public concerns. Appendix A of 

the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS Appendix Volume 1) 

contains the response to comments section of the planning effort.

It’s important to understand how the comments were used. Many 

comments expressed a desire for one type of management or their 

appreciation for certain values. These types of comments, while not 

generating any changes in the analysis, help give decision makers a 

sense of how strongly some of the public feels about a specific issue.

Comments from individuals, groups and other government agencies 

were influential in changes between the draft and the revised Forest 

Plans. Some alternatives suggested new alternatives or improved 

analysis. Public comments were carefully considered as Forest Planners 

crafted Alternative 7. 

Sometimes comments received did not directly relate to the 

decisions being made in the revised Forest Plans. Such was the case 

with the multitude of comments received about the Roadless Area 

Conservation Rule, specific roads and trails, and travel management 

planning. While we didn’t make any specific travel management 

decisions in the Forest Plans, we recognize there is a great deal 

of interest and diverse values related to access and travel. Travel 

management will be pursued in various planning efforts following 

release of the revised Forest Plans. Stay tuned for more information!

“The Forests thank everyone who took 

the time and energy necessary to provide 

comments on this project.”

Working 

Together 

So 

Everyone 

Has a 

Place!

As population numbers in southern and 

central Idaho continue to increase, so do 

the number of people 

who use the National 

Forests as a place to 

play, relax, exercise, 

and recreate. 

I

n 1997, recreation visits to these 

three Forests were estimated at 

more than 5.5 million visits. The 

Sawtooth National Recreation Area 

alone receives around 1,300,000 

visits a year and offers “world class” 

recreation settings and opportunities. 

The Forests are predicting a 2% 

yearly increase of visitors resulting in 

an increase of 2 million people by the 

year 2020. Along with this increase 

in users comes an increase in the 

amount and type of recreation uses 

and opportunities. It comes as no 

surprise that as use increases so does 

the potential for user conflicts. As a 

result, the Forests are experiencing 

a tug-of-war between various 

recreation user groups and their 

desires and demands of the Forests.

The most prominent recreation 

user conflict is between motorized 

and non-motorized recreationists. 

Recreationists using motorized 

equipment are rapidly growing 

and some non-motorized users are 

experiencing conflicts as a result. 

The Forests received many public 

comments about impacts on nonmotorized users from motorized 

users and vice versa, as well as the 

desirability of separating different 

types of uses. The combination 

of increasing users with an everimproving technology results in more 

people accessing more places than 

ever before. In addition to conflicts 

between users, larger numbers of 

unmanaged users increases the 

potential for impacts to resources 

such as vegetation, soil, water, fish, 

and wildlife.

The revised Forest Plans include 

management direction responsive 

to some of these issues. The Plans 

establish goals and describe “desired 

conditions” in which recreationists 

respect each other’s desires and 

reduce conflicts through their own 

behavior and through collaborative 

efforts. The revised Plans also place 

emphasis on user education to reduce 

conflicts and prevent impacts to the 

land.

The next decade will bring 

many challenges to those who love 

and use the Boise, Payette, and 

Sawtooth Forests. We believe the 

revised Forest Plans set a course 

that recognizes the importance of 

recreational pursuits while striving 

to maintain, protect, and improve the 

land. Quality of life for people and 

every other living thing that uses or 

depends on the Forest will hinge on 

how well we can work together to 

make the desired future a reality.

Environmental education

Josephine Lake
Goose Creek Falls

A forest stream

PAGE 16 

erosion and direct runoff away from 

the stream. User-created roads and 

trails often cause damage because 

they are not planned or engineered 

to minimize soil erosion or other 

impacts to water quality and aquatic 

life. Each revised Forest Plan 

contains management direction to 

address these types of concerns.

All Forest management 

activities - including timber 

harvesting, recreation, mining, and 

grazing - must follow standards 

and guidelines to protect watershed 

health. The revised Forest Plans 

include standards and guidelines 

necessary to protect soil, water, 

riparian, and aquatic resources.

Public comment on the 

draft Forest Plans identified the 

importance of managing water 

and aquatic resources. Direction 

in the revised Plans recognizes the 

importance of healthy streams and 

the aquatic systems that depend 

on them, as well as the need for all 

interested parties to work together 

to restore and maintain properly 

functioning conditions.

in the Interior Columbia Basin 

studies and opinions provided by the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and 

NOAA Fisheries.

The ACS replaces previous 

interim direction (PACFISH/

INFISH). The ACS, developed 

through consultation with the 

regulatory agencies noted above, 

acknowledges that long-term 

restoration may result in of shortterm effects that were not acceptable 

under the interim strategies. For 

example, previous direction may 

have not allowed the removal of a 

culvert that was blocking upstream 

habitat because the disturbance could 

temporarily increase sediment to the 

stream. Now, under the ACS, that 

work could proceed, thus improving 

habitat upstream, even though the 

disturbance could result in temporary 

or short-term impacts downstream. 

Another important objective is 

to reduce the risk of losing long-term 

soil productivity and soil-hydrologic 

function due to uncharacteristically 

lethal wildfire. There are 82 highly 

vulnerable sub-watersheds within the 

three Forests with a high or extreme 

hazard rating for uncharacteristic 

wildfire. Under the revised Forest 

Plans, the goal is to reduce this 

risk on about two-thirds of the 

sub-watersheds over the long-term 

through vegetation management.

Watersheds are areas that catch 

rain and snow that drain into rivers, 

streams, and lakes. For the revised 

Forest Plans, watersheds located 

wholly or partially on the Boise, 

Payette and Sawtooth NFs were 

evaluated in terms of natural and 

human-caused risks to their health. 

This is part of the Forest Service’s 

watershed management program, 

which seeks to manage activities 

to protect the watersheds against 

degradation.

When the health of a watershed 

is found to be at risk, steps must be 

taken to remedy the problem. These 

steps include modifying management 

activities, rehabilitating degraded 

resources, or doing both. Because 

watersheds do not recognize political 

boundaries, it is often necessary 

to work collaboratively with all 

landowners and land managers in 

a watershed to adequately address 

problems. The revised Forest 

Plans identify watersheds at low, 

moderate, or high risk and prioritize 

management actions to improve 

watershed health.

What degrades watersheds? 

Both natural and human-caused 

impacts can affect watershed health. 

Increased runoff and erosion from 

hill slopes after a fire, or changes 

in water chemistry from abandoned 

mine drainage, are two examples. 

Proper construction and maintenance 

of roads and trails are issues of 

critical concern for watershed health. 

On roads that are improperly built 

or maintained, runoff from rain or 

snowmelt can carry soil directly to 

a stream. Well-designed roads use 

effective techniques that minimize 

KEY DECISION: A 

long-term aquatic 

conservation strategy 

focuses restoration 

dollars in priority 

watersheds to achieve 

goals identified by the 

Endangered Species 

Act, Clean Water Act, 

and Native American 

Tribes. The strategy 

uses an ecosystem basis, 

and active or passive 

restoration. Short-term 

effects may be incurred 

to achieve long term 

restoration goals.

Water is critical for all life. 

Streams and riparian 

(streamside) areas are 

rich zones of biological diversity, 

supporting aquatic life such as 

insects, amphibians and fish, and 

providing important habitat for birds, 

mammals, and plants.

People also need water, and 

this demand will continue to 

increase as local communities and 

regional metropolitan areas grow in 

population. National Forests provide 

a clean and abundant source of fresh 

water to meet many downstream 

needs and uses. Watersheds are a 

foundation of multiple use forests.

Healthy watersheds provide 

clean water and sustain aquatic 

ecosystem health. The role of 

watershed protection on National 

Forest System lands is an element 

of the 1897 Organic Administrative 

Act, the first law directing how lands 

set aside as Forest reserves were to 

be managed. Congress directed that 

these lands, now known as National 

Forests, be set aside to “improve 

and protect the Forest within the 

boundaries, or for the purpose 

of securing favorable conditions 

of water flows, and to furnish a 

continuous supply of timber for the 

use and necessities of citizens of the 

United States.” 

A major goal of the Boise, 

Payette, and Sawtooth’s revised 

Forest Plans is to maintain and/or 

improve overall watershed health, so 

that physical, biological and chemical 

elements are functioning properly. 

The Aquatic Conservation Strategy 

(ACS) provides most of the guidance 

to achieve this goal. It is a long-term 

strategy to restore and maintain the 

ecological health of watersheds and 

aquatic ecosystems. It also refines 

and furthers the approaches outlined 

Healthy Water Conditions are the 

Foundation for a Healthy Forest

“All Forest management activities, including 

timber harvesting, recreation, 

mining, and 

grazing must 

follow standards 

and guidelines 

to protect watershed health. The 

Revised Forest 

Plans include 

standards and 

guidelines necessary to protect 

soil, water, aquatic, and riparian 

resources.”
Salmon

Sockeye salmon

A forest stream

PAGE 17

A River Runs 

Through It

KEY DECISION: River segments and their 

corridors that are eligible, suitable, or designated 

as Wild and Scenic Rivers are managed to 

retain their free-flowing status, classification and 

outstanding remarkable values. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was enacted by Congress to address 

the need for a national system of river protection on October 2, 1968. 

As an outgrowth of a national conservation agenda in the late 1960s, 

the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was in response to the dams, diversions, 

and water resource development projects that occurred on America’s rivers 

between the 1930s and 1960s. The Act concluded that selected rivers should 

be preserved in a free-flowing condition and be protected for the benefit and 

enjoyment of present and future generations. 

As of September 2002, some 160 river segments comprising 11,292 

miles have been protected in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System 

(National System). These nationally recognized rivers comprise a valuable 

network of natural and cultural resources, scenic beauty, and recreational 

opportunities. 

There are two parts to the Wild and Scenic Rivers study process; 

eligibility and suitability. Rivers are first studied for eligibility to determine 

if they are free flowing and have at least one outstandingly remarkable 

value. Once a river is found eligible it receives management direction 

to preserve its outstandingly remarkable values and classification until a 

suitability study is performed. Suitability determines whether eligible rivers 

should be recommended for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic 

Rivers System. Congress or the Secretary of the Interior officially designate 

Wild and Scenic Rivers. Wild and Scenic River suitability involves 

determining the best use of the eligible river and the best method to preserve 

the outstandingly remarkable values within the river corridor. 

The three Forests analyzed numerous rivers for eligibility. As a result, 

the Boise Forest determined 15 rivers comprising 321 miles as eligible, the 

Payette Forest determined 2 rivers comprising 25 miles as eligible, and the 

Sawtooth Forest determined 33 rivers comprising 401 miles as eligible. 

Suitability studies were completed on five rivers, the majority of which 

are on the Payette Forest. As a result, the South Fork Salmon River (90 

miles), found on the Boise and Payette Forests and the Secesh River (45 

miles), found on the Payette Forest, are both considered suitable and are 

recommended to Congress for Wild and Scenic River designation.

In the Ecogroup area, three rivers that are partially on the Payette 

Forest, and one river that is partially on both the Payette and Boise Forests 

are currently designated Wild and Scenic Rivers. These rivers are: • Middle Fork Salmon; • Rapid River; • Snake River; and • Salmon River

The Salmon 

River, Snake River, 

and Middle Fork 

Salmon River are 

managed by the Nez 

Perce Forest, WallowaWhitman Forest, and 

Salmon-Challis Forest 

respectively. The 

revised Forest Plans 

include direction for the 

management of Rapid 

River and the eligible 

and suitable Wild and 

Scenic rivers noted 

above. Most on-going 

uses will not be affected 

by a Wild and Scenic 

River determination. 

Salmon River
Sagebrush

PAGE 18 

VARIETY IS 

THE SPICE 

OF LIFE!

Moving toward 

vegetation 

diversity

KEY DECISIONS: The revised 

Forest Plans propose active and 

adaptive management primarily 

through vegetation treatments, of 

some areas of the Forest to create 

healthier ecosystems, restore 

species composition, structure and 

function, and reduce hazardous 

fuels.

Management direction for “old 

growth” has been replaced by 

the more encompassing “large 

tree size class” direction, which 

research indicates is more 

appropriate for addressing species 

viability.

Throughout the life of a forest, it is confronted 

by a wide array of natural disturbances such 

as fire, insects, disease, and winds. The 

ability of a forest to withstand such changes and 

continue to thrive is dependent upon its diversity 

– including its diversity of species, diversity of age, 

and diversity of tree size in forested areas across landscapes, ranging from 

seedlings and saplings to mature and old trees. This variety of conditions 

helps to provide stability in the face of disturbance agents. A pattern of larger 

and older trees interspersed with smaller and younger trees can help limit the 

extent of potentially severe disturbances, particularly fire and insect epidemics. 

In contrast, extensive areas of forests dominated by the same species and 

approximately the same size will allow insects and fire to spread rapidly and 

increase impacts to the forests.

The Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forests have changed 

dramatically in the time since European settlement occurred. Past management, 

coupled by our effective suppression of fires during the past 100 years, 

helped to form the landscapes we see today. Because of these changes, most 

of our vegetation communities lack adequate diversity in size, density, and 

composition.

As a result, we have lost the diversity of wildlife and bird habitats that 

once existed. Many species have evolved to use different sizes and species 

of vegetation and will thrive as long as their habitats exist. There are wildlife 

and birds that prefer dense stands of saplings, and there are those such as 

woodpeckers that prefer open stands of large trees and snags. There are birds 

that prefer sagebrush communities that have dense sagebrush cover, while 

others prefer more scattered cover. There are those that prefer aspen rather than 

pine, spruce, and fir forests.

The revised Forest Plans include specific desired conditions that restore 

those areas not managed for growth and yield to within a range of historic 

vegetative conditions. The revised Plans emphasize the use of a variety of tools 

to manage vegetation to move towards desired conditions. Depending on the 

management direction for an area, we will use tools such as timber harvest, 

thinning, prescribed fire and wildland fire use to increase diversity and move 

landscapes closer to their desired conditions.

Harvesting trees is a tool that can help achieve and maintain forest 

diversity by creating patterns of vegetation on the landscape. This results in a

Ponderosa pine stand
National Forest ASQ (annual) TSPQ (annual)

Boise 45.00 mmbf 66.27 mmbf

Payette 32.50 mmbf 40.27 mmbf

Sawtooth 6.0 mmbf 12.9 mmbf

PAGE 19

 Vegetation Treatment Fire or Other Treatments

 (Forested Acres/Decade) (Non-Forested Acres/Decade)

National Forest (estimated) (estimated)

Boise 200,500 19,400

Payette 136,200 0

Sawtooth 79,100 117,700

 Timber Harvest on Timber Harvest on

 Suitable Lands Unsuitable Lands

National Forest (decade) (decade)

Boise 72,300 acres 28,400 acres

Payette 45,100 acres 8,800 acres

Sawtooth 8,800 acres 10,900 acres

variety of trees of different sizes 

and age and, therefore, habitat for a 

variety of species. Some areas will be 

managed to emphasize commercial 

timber harvest (10% of Ecogroup 

acres). Other areas may also yield 

commercial timber as the result of 

accomplishing other objectives.

Prescribed fires will be used 

to a greater extent than in the past 

to create a combination of openings 

and stands across the landscape. 

Prescribed fires are fires ignited by 

the Forest Service under approved 

conditions to meet certain objectives. 

To a lesser extent, wildland fire 

use will be also used to manage 

vegetation. Wildland fire use refers 

to the management of fires caused by 

lightning to accomplish management 

objectives. Since wildland fire use 

depends on natural ignitions, it is not 

as reliable a tool as prescribed fire.

The revised Forest Plans 

propose active and adaptive 

management, primarily through 

vegetation treatments, of some areas 

of the Forest to create healthier 

ecosystems and reduce hazardous 

fuels. This would allow for the 

continued production of timber 

for human use in some areas, and 

in other areas, would allow other 

techniques to proceed with less 

human intrusion.

Over the next 10 years, the three Forests are expected to treat extensive 

areas with methods including prescribed fire and mechanical treatments: 

On some of the forested lands, thinning and harvesting will produce 

commercial timber products. Some of these forested acres are considered 

suited for timber management, while some are not. Commercial timber from 

the suited lands contributes to the Forest’s Allowable Sale Quantity (ASQ), 

measured in million board feet (mmbf). On the unsuited lands, timber is 

produced as a result of meeting other resource objectives, such as wildlife 

habitat improvement. Timber from the unsuited lands contributes to the 

Forest’s Total Sale Program Quantity (TSPQ), which includes volume from the 

suited and unsuited lands. 

Timber harvest will concentrate on restoring healthy conditions, and will 

be focused in areas where communities are within or next to the forest (the 

wildland-urban interface), and in areas currently developed with roads and 

other infrastructure.

Old Forests

In the previous Forest Plans, special management direction was provided 

for “old growth,” generally defined as areas of trees that are past maturity and 

in the last stage of forest succession. However, this approach treated old growth 

as a separate entity, rather than as one facet of forested vegetation related to 

habitat and species viability. 

Our new approach recognizes “large tree size class,” rather than old 

growth, as an important component of forested ecosystems. There are two 

important reasons for this change:

● Recent research indicates that historically, large trees were common 

across the landscape, while old growth was not. Old growth and late 

successional stages develop in the absence of frequent disturbances, 

while we know that in central Idaho, disturbances occurred frequently. 

Thus, we may have had historical stands dominated by large, old trees 

and maintained by frequent, low intensity fire, but these stands likely 

did not have all of the components that make up “old growth.” 

● Other research has shown that wildlife habitat is mainly a product 

of the vegetative structure of a community, rather than the age of the 

vegetation. Large trees are not always old, and old trees are not always 

large. Consequently, the revised Forest Plan direction recommends 

a 20 percent large tree component to maintain biological diversity 

and habitat needs for a host of species, including goshawk, pileated 

woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, and fisher.

Aspen and cottonwood stand

Aspen stand
PAGE 2

0

Boise National ForestSupervisor’s Office1249 S. Vinnell Way, Suite 200Boise, ID 83709208-373-4100Mountain Home Ranger District2180 American Legion BoulevardMountain Home, ID 83647208-587-7961Idaho City Ranger DistrictP.O. Box 129, Highway 21,Milepost 38.3Idaho City, ID 83631208-392-6681Cascade Ranger DistrictP.O. Box 696540 North Main StreetCascade, ID 83611208-382-7400Lowman Ranger District7359 Highway 21Lowman, ID 83637208-259-3361

Payette National ForestSupervisor’s Office800 W. Lakeside AvenueP.O. Box 1026McCall, ID 83638208-634-0700Council Ranger District500 East Whitely AvenueP.O. Box 567Council, ID 83612208-253-0100Weiser Ranger District851 East 9 StreetWeiser, ID 83672208-549-4200New Meadows Ranger District3674 Highway 95P.O. Box JNew Meadows, ID 83654208-347-0300Krassel Ranger District500 North MissionP.O. Box 1026McCall, ID 83638208-634-0600McCall Ranger District102 Lake StreetP.O. Box 1026McCall, ID 83638208-634-0400

Sawtooth National ForestSupervisor’s Office2647 Kimberly Road EastTwin Falls, ID 83301-7976208-737-3200Minidoka Ranger District3650 South Overland AvenueBurley, ID 83318-3242208-678-0430Ketchum Ranger DistrictP.O. Box 2356Ketchum, ID 83340208-622-5371Sawtooth National Recreation AreaHC 64, Box 8291Ketchum, ID 83340208-727-5000Sawtooth National Recreation AreaStanley OfficeHC 64, Box 9900Stanley, ID 83278208-774-3000Fairfield Ranger DistrictP.O. Box 189Fairfield, ID 83327208-764-3202

Twin Falls, Idaho 83301-79762647 Kimberly Road EastSawtooth National Forest PRSRT STD

USDA Forest Service

Postage and Fees Paid

Permit No. G-40

Southwest Idaho Ecogroup

Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forests

REVISED FOREST PLAN