Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

II. PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVES 

In this chapter, we present information related to what our proposal is about and how it would be 

put into action, should the decision be made to proceed. To begin the description of our proposal, the objectives for the work (what is to be achieved) are outlined, particularly in relation to 

the need for action that was defined in Chapter I. Next, the timing and details of the agency’s 

Proposed Action are explained, including the several activities, features and specifications that 

collectively form the proposal. Also included in this description are the mitigation measures and 

other criteria imbedded in the proposal that serve to reduce or avoid undesirable effects. 

Following the description of the Proposed Action, we consider the possibility of alternative actions to the Proposed Action and describe our evaluation about the utility of developing alternative proposals (since, typically, many varied and differing approaches could be devised with the 

intent of either marginalizing certain environmental impacts or to assist in understanding environmental consequences under review). Finally, we define the bounds for the no action alternative (that is, for deciding not to take action now). The no action alternative is the essential 

baseline and comparison point for assessing effects of the Proposed Action and revealing the 

detriments or benefits of taking action. 

The development of the Proposed Action is in accordance with provisions for areas inside the 

WUI and within 1.5 miles of the boundary of the WUI, under Title I of the HFRA. This project 

is authorized under Section 102 (a)(5); projects that will enhance protection from catastrophic6

wildland fire for threatened and endangered species or their habitats and that maintain and restore such habitats. As authorized by HFRA, the Forest Service is not required to analyze any 

alternatives to the proposed action, with one exception. If the at-risk community has adopted a 

Community Wildfire Protection Plan and the proposed action does not implement the recommendations in the plan regarding the general location and basic methods of treatments. In this 

case, an Agency is required to analyze the recommendations in the plan as an alternative to the 

proposed action (Section 104(d)(2) and (3)). 

Josephine County adopted the Josephine County Integrated Fire Plan in 2002. The Proposed 

Action is designed to implement the community recommendations contained therein. Policy 

under this Act also requires the Forest Service to evaluate the effects of failing to implement the 

proposed project, i.e., no action. 

Additionally, provisions of HFRA restrict the Forest Service from authorizing hazardous fuel 

treatment projects in any of the following locations: Wilderness areas, Wilderness study areas or 

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

 

6 Catastrophic wildland fire - term used under 102 of HFRA, which refers to a large-scale, high-severity wildland fire aggravated by 

extreme fire weather conditions to cause widespread resource and/or property damage and at times loss of human life 

17
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

lamation (including prohibitions in the area’s implementation plan). The Butcherknife/Slate 

WUI contains no such areas. 

A. Development of the Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action is developed to address the need for the project by treating the smaller 

diameter material and younger stands within the analysis area. The seven areas of older/mature 

forest in the analysis area are not proposed for treatment. On the areas to be treated, leave the 

larger, more fire resistant trees and species. 

Within the northwest portion of the analysis, which is in unroaded condition and is dominated by 

serpentine plant communities, only fire treatments are proposed. This part of the proposed action 

is due to the lack of effects of past management actions on fuel accumulations (no previous mechanical treatments) and the serpentine soils. 

Another consideration of the project development is no new permanent road construction. The 

Watershed Analysis (USDI Bureau of Land Management 1996) demonstrates the need to reduce 

roading, not increase roading. 

Interaction with the Forest Service interdisciplinary team and the Josephine County Stewardship 

Group produced the design criteria and mitigation measures for the Proposed Action. In particular, the following items are part of the Proposed Action: 

1. Systematically track noxious weed locations and use nonchemical weed control strategies, 

2. Follow Best Management Practices, such as cleaning equipment to prevent weed spread. 

Follow the guidance in the Invasive Plant Program, Preventing and Managing Invasive 

Plants - Record of Decision (USDA Forest Service 2005).

3. Monitor active project areas of ground disturbance and equipment use for noxious weeds and 

take measures to prevent the establishment of weed populations. 

4. Specifically track the Dire’sWode and Rush Skeleton Weed and remove the existing population of Meadow Knapweed on Slate Creek. 

5. Prevent the spread of Phytophthora lateralis by employing mitigating strategies and avoid 

using ground based equipment off road in riparian areas that are uninfected. 

6. Limit road construction and employ low impact yarding systems to help restore and maintain 

watershed health. 

7. Use operator spurs (temporary nature) to access thinning units. Avoid placing such spurs 

where cutting across a midslope or lower slope would occur. 

8. Use existing roads as much as possible for landings and staging areas. 

9. Release white and black oaks by the removal of vegetation around them, 

10. Retain legacy pines and large trees. 

11. Use variable spaced thinning in existing plantations and emphasize the retention of cedar, 

pine, and deciduous tree species. 

12. Protect the seven late successional conifer forest stands in the project area, 

13. Repair culverts, bridges, or orther channel modifications that impede fish migration. 

14. Emphasize fall burning, if possible. 

18
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

15. Avoid any road construction in the unroaded area in the northwest corner of the analysis area. 

B. Implementation Objectives of the Proposed Action 

How would the Proposed Action address the need? The Forest Service proposal to treat hazardous fuels and restore forest stands in prospective treatment areas is intended to advance tree 

growth and development in a way that provides for lessened fuel accumulations and desired 

outcomes in the future. To maintain (or realign) developmental trajectories in targeted stands, 

several broad objectives for management are defined to direct implementation. To achieve the 

LRMP and NFP allocation outcomes, the overall objectives for project implementation are: 

1. Reduce and maintain the fuel hazard (vegetative density, ladder and down fuel loading) to an acceptably low level such that the area can provide reasonably safe locations for personnel to implement either prescribed fire or fire suppression actions as 

well as reducing the area’s potential to sustain a high intensity/severity wildfire that 

could kill people or destroy structures and vegetation. 

2. Re-introduce fire as an essential, periodic, ecological process and natural change 

agent. 

3. Increase the relative abundance of fire-adapted species (such as pine) and seral species such as black/white oak and reduce their potential loss from insect/disease or 

high vegetation density. 

4. Improve the growth and vigor of conifer and hardwood trees such that the number of 

30”+ diameter trees will be significantly increased across the landscape within 30 

years. (It is desired to develop 20-50, large (30+” DBH) trees per acre on lands capable of sustaining such numbers (non-ultramafic sites)). 

5. Maintain or increase the abundance or acreage of special habitats such as pine/oak 

savannahs, meadows, etc. 

6. Maintain or improve watershed or fishery conditions. 

7. Provide resource outputs (timber, firewood, post/poles, biomass, etc) consistent with 

the above objectives in order to provide jobs, support the local economy, and provide 

income to pay for other desired resource management projects. 

C. Features and Specifications of the Proposed Action 

The Forest Service proposes various vegetation management, hazardous fuel reduction, wildlife 

and botanical habitat and fish and watershed maintenance/improvement treatments within the 

Butcherknife/Slate analysis area (~5,850 acres). 

We propose for work to begin in calendar year 2009 and the duration of the project would last 

for 10 to 15 years. Private contractors would complete much of the work, which will be described shortly, and would conduct their operations as specified by Forest Service contracts. 

To accomplish the thinning and complete all other needed work within treatment units, a series 

of actions and activities would be undertaken. These actions and activities are described next, 

19
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

including the features and specifications that are essential and required for doing the work. Figure 2 shows the analysis area perimeter, the juxtaposition of the analysis area within the landscape and proposed treatment units. 

Figure 2. Butcherknife/Slate Analysis Area showing the treatments proposed for this action. 

To Grants Pass

To Cave Jct

199

2500

2500

02 01

07 11

18

19

06

35 36

12

13

24

14

31

23

03

34

15

22

10 08

17

20

05

32

27 26 25 30 29

25 30 27 26 29

Slate Creek

Ramsey Creek

Waters Creek

Butcherknife Creek

No Name

Clear Creek

Bear Creek

Love Creek

Cove Creek

Cedar Log Creek

No Name

020

306

018

744

630

695

163

760

742

285

673

225

224

753

743

235

244

214

314

751

602

716

650

738

696

256

223

693

747

64

69

0

4

278

770

161

226

684

670

700

275

660

745

741

746

685

698

772

771

160

748

212

739

162

686

661

678

695

226

686

2500000

2500000

T360S

T360S

T370S

T370S

R070W

R070W

R080W

R080W

¬

This product is reproduced from information prepared by

the USDA, Forest Service or from other suppliers. The Forest

Service cannot assure the reliability or suitability of this

information for a particular purpose. The data and product accuracy

may vary due to compilation from various sources, including modeling

and interpretation, and may not meet National Map Accuracy Standards.

This information may be updated, corrected or otherwise modified

without notification. For more information contact: 

the Rogue River Siskiyou NF at 541-471-6500

The USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

December 15, 2008

Legend

Rogue River Siskiyou NF

Butcherknife/Slate Project Boundary

Private

Road

Stream

Temporary Roads 

H/F Trail 

Machine Trail 

Temp Road

Proposed Road Treatment

Close 

Decommission

Proposed Land Treatments

Density Management

Meadow Understory Treatment plus Underburn

Small Vegetation Density Management

Underburning

No Treatment

Butcherknife/Slate

Proposed Land

Treatments

20
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

1. Stand Density Reduction and Radial Thinning 

The first proposed vegetation treatment is ‘thinning from below’ where typical leave trees are 

those that have already demonstrated their ability to out compete nearby trees by exhibiting 

larger diameters, greater crown lengths/fullness or are taller (dominance). In this type of 

thinning, the first choice for removal are those trees that show a relative inferiority to nearby 

trees in that they generally have smaller diameters, less height, shorter crown lengths or volume, evidence of disease or insect attack, or poor stem quality (forked trees, crooks, broken 

tops, etc.). This tends to result in the larger, taller, more vigorous trees being left. 

In some cases, when two or more trees growing close to each other show little difference in 

overall quality (diameter, height, etc), a choice is made to cut one or more in order to provide 

the other(s) with increased opportunities to utilize the site’s resources (sunlight, water, etc.) 

in order to increase growth and vigor. The larger diameter remnants ‘legacy’ from the previous generation, would usually be left. Such thinning would include both commercial and 

non-commercial activities and would include associated fuel/slash reduction treatments such 

as biomass removal, piling/burning, sectioning/scattering, pruning (ladder fuel), understory 

burning or other treatments. 

The alteration of stand density would be accomplished through the use of stand prescriptions 

that specify the residual stocking level as well as the silvicultural details regarding the selection of trees to remove and the trees to be retained. The primary specifications for density 

reduction are listed here. 

a. Removal of biomass (typically that material less than 6” in diameter- such as the tops of 

harvested trees) is desired in order to reduce the costs or need for hazardous fuel reduction under the timber sale or stewardship contract. This material should be utilized as 

much as possible for firewood, post/poles, electrical power generation, mulch, etc. 

b. Leave tree spacing will be variable depending upon the specific treatment site such as 

plant community, aspect, elevation, species, size of leave vegetation, etc. Wide spacing 

may be used for special management objectives such as pine or oak species maintenance 

or meadow, pine/oak savannah or serpentine site restoration. Both conifers and hardwoods will be designated for leave. Conifers and hardwoods may have different, independent, spacing objectives. Leave vegetation spacing may vary from: 

i. For conifers 

20-50 feet (+ or - 25% variation) 

ii. For hardwood trees 

40-60 feet (+ or - 25% variation) 

iii. For brush 

20 feet (+ or - 25% variation) (for situations where trees are absent). 

c. Prune to maintain at least a 40% live crown ratio. Typical pruning heights range from 8- 

16 feet above the ground. 

21
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

d. Any Density Management area that is determined to be untreatable with a commercial 

harvest will be considered for Small Vegetation Density Management, understory burning or No Treatment in that order. 

Another type of proposed density reduction treatment is termed ‘radial thinning.’ This treatment involves removing all vegetation from under an individual tree crown (or clump of 

trees) and for a specified distance out from the tree crowns drip line. This treatment significantly reduces competition to the tree (or trees) being left and will be used in order to help 

maintain species such as ponderosa pine, sugar pine, white oak and black oak within these 

landscapes. These trees are being lost from these stands because of competition-related mortality or increases in insect and disease attacks and are particularly sensitive to high stem 

density. These treatments will also provide benefits to certain wildlife species, such as sooty 

grouse, that depend on canopy openings for some of their habitat requirements. 

Radial thinning would be accomplished through the use of prescriptions that specify the silvicultural details regarding the selection of trees to remove and the trees to be retained. The 

primary specifications for radial thinning are listed here. 

a. Selected larger ponderosa/sugar pine and black/white oak individuals or clumps will have 

radial vegetation removal treatments in order to reduce competition and improve survival 

of these ‘at risk’ species. All vegetation shall be cut and piled or removed for a distance 

of 25-35 feet from the drip line of these individuals or clumps of individuals. 

b. Retain larger diameter (approx. 30”+ DBH) ponderosa/sugar pine and black/white oak 

(approx. 12”+ DBH) as leave trees or leave ‘clumps’. Consider leave ‘clumps’ similar to 

individual trees for thinning spacing. 

Tables 2 and 3 show the types of treatments/activities may be implemented in areas labeled 

as such on the project map. 

Table 2. Density management on 2,093 acres (36% of area). 

ACTIVITY TYPE 

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE 

ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION 

Commercial Thinning 

(larger than 8” DBH 

trees) 

2,093 acres Thin from below. First select smallest vegetation for 

removal and proceed up through diameter classes 

until desired residual density is achieved. This also 

includes planned roadside thinning 200-feet 

(horizontal distance) of the road edge 

Radial Vegetation 

Removal 

2,093 acres Remove all vegetation below and around selected 

ponderosa/sugar pine, black oak or white oak for a 

distance up to 25 to 35 feet from the drip line of 

individual stems or clumps of individuals. 

Product Extraction 2,093 acres Removal of timber, firewood, post/poles, biomass, 

special forest products, etc. 

Product Haul 37 miles This is the maximum miles of road utilized for any 

use involving removal of a commercial product from 

National Forest and can include anything from 

22
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE ACTIVITY TYPE DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

removal of mushrooms to timber haul. 

Small Diameter Thinning 

& Release 

2,093 acres ‘Thin from Below’ (less than 8” DBH vegetation). 

First select smallest vegetation for cutting and 

proceed up through diameter classes until desired 

residual density is achieved. 

Ladder Fuel Reduction 2,093 acres Remove live and dead branches from conifer or 

hardwood trees and/or remove understory brush in 

order to reduce the chance of a surface fire igniting 

the branches or brush and moving up into overstory 

trees. 

Fuel Pullback 2,093 acres Treatment is designed to remove fuel near base of 

tree such that tree is more likely to survive a surface 

fire or an understory burn. Duff, litter, bark, lichen, 

dead or live fuels, etc. around base of tree is removed 

for a specified distance from base of tree or up the 

bole of the tree. The maximum distance this material 

is treated is out to the dripline of tree plus 1 foot and 

up to 8 feet above the ground. 

Sectioning & Scattering 

Slash 

700 acres This activity involves cutting slash into smaller 

pieces and scattering the fuel to reduce depth, 

concentration and ultimately fire intensity during a 

wildfire or prescribed fire. 

Hand Piling and Burning 793 acres Slash typically less than 4-6 inches in diameter (large 

end) is piled and covered in order to keep it dry so it 

can be completely consumed when burned during 

wet or snowy weather. 

Machine Piling and 

Burning 

600 acres Usually, this occurs on a landing where un-utilized 

wood material is piled and covered with 

polyethylene in order to keep it dry so it can be 

completely consumed when burned during wet or 

snowy weather. At other times, such machinery will 

complete this piling in a harvest unit with the same 

size material targeted for piling as with hand piling. 

Machine 

Chipping/Mastication 

150 acres This could involve either machines with articulated 

arms with rotating cutting blades (such as a 

‘slashbuster’) that travel through a unit under their 

own power and selectively chip/masticate either 

standing, small diameter, live or dead vegetation or 

down, dead fuels or hand fed chipping machines. 

Self propelled machines are limited to a maximum of 

approx 40% slopes. Hand fed chippers are even 

more limited on slope steepness. 

Vegetation Slashing 700 acres This typically involves cutting small diameter 

vegetation (usually less than 4” diameter) in order to 

provide a suitable fuel bed to assist in implementing 

an understory burn. This cut vegetation provides 

areas with higher fire intensities that can assist in 

implementing an understory burn during higher 

moisture conditions. 

Hand Fireline 36 miles This involves in creating an area of exposed mineral 

23
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE ACTIVITY TYPE DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

Construction/Reconstructi

on 

soil from 1.5 to 2 feet wide around the perimeter of a 

planned understory burn. It also involves removing 

all vegetation and fuels near the fireline that might 

increase fire intensity or result in flaming debris 

crossing the fireline. These firelines are typically 

developed adjacent to private lands, along ridgetops 

(within 200 feet), along areas to be protected from 

fire, etc. 

Understory burning 2,093 acres This is a prescribed fire that is implemented under an 

overstory of vegetation (trees). 

Wildlife Habitat 

Improvement 

2,093 acres Create crown and bole defects in large live trees, 

create large snags, install bird boxes, forage seeding, 

supplement coarse woody debris, etc. 

Table 3. Small vegetation density management on 619 acres (11% of area).

ACTIVITY TYPE 

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE 

ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION 

Small Diameter Thinning 

& Release (less than 8” 

DBH) 

619 acres Thin from below. First select smallest vegetation for 

cutting proceed up through diameter classes until 

desired residual density is achieved. 

Radial Vegetation 

Removal 

300 acres Remove all vegetation below and around selected 

ponderosa/sugar pine, black oak or white oak for a 

distance up to 25 feet from the drip line of individual 

stems or clumps of individuals. 

Ladder Fuel Reduction 619 acres Remove live and dead branches from conifer or 

hardwood trees and/or remove understory brush in 

order to reduce the chance of a surface fire igniting 

the branches or brush and moving up into overstory 

trees. 

Fuel Pullback 300 acres Treatment is designed to remove fuel near base of 

tree such that tree is more likely to survive a surface 

fire or an understory burn. Duff, litter, bark, dead or 

live fuels, etc. around base of tree is removed for a 

specified distance from base of tree or up the bole of 

the tree. The maximum distance this material is 

treated is out to the drip line of tree plus 1 foot and 

up to 8 feet above the ground. 

Sectioning & Scattering 

Slash 

100 acres This activity involves cutting slash into smaller 

pieces and scattering the fuel to reduce depth, 

concentration and ultimately fire intensity during a 

wildfire or prescribed fire. 

Hand Piling and Burning 519 acres Slash typically less than 4-6 inches in diameter (large 

end) is piled and covered with polyethylene in order 

to keep it dry so it can be completely consumed 

when burned during wet or snowy weather. 

Machine Piling and 50 acres Usually, this occurs on a landing where un-utilized 

24
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE ACTIVITY TYPE DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

Burning wood material is piled and covered with 

polyethylene in order to keep it dry so it can be 

completely consumed when burned during wet or 

snowy weather. At other times, such machinery will 

complete this piling in a harvest unit with the same 

size material targeted for piling as with hand piling. 

Machine 

Chipping/Mastication 

50 acres This could involve either machines with articulated 

arms with rotating cutting blades (such as a 

‘slashbuster’) that travel through a unit under their 

own power and selectively chip/masticate either 

standing, small diameter, live or dead vegetation or 

down, dead fuels or hand fed chipping machines. 

Self propelled machines are limited to a maximum of 

approx 40% slopes. Hand fed chippers are even 

more limited on slope steepness. 

Hand Fireline 

Construction/Reconstructi

on 

12 miles This involves in creating an area of exposed mineral 

soil from 1.5 to 2 feet wide around the perimeter of a 

planned understory burn. It also involves removing 

all vegetation and fuels near the fireline that might 

increase fire intensity or result in flaming debris 

crossing the fireline. These firelines are typically 

developed adjacent to private lands, along ridgetops 

(within 200 feet), along areas to be protected from 

fire, etc 

Understory burning 619 acres This is a prescribed fire that is implemented under an 

overstory of vegetation (trees). 

2. Understory Broadcast Burning 

Another proposed vegetation density reduction/maintenance treatment is understory burning. 

This treatment involves implementing prescribed fire treatments to reduce vegetation density, 

ladder and down fuels, recycle nutrients, restore this primary landscape disturbance agent on 

these sites, and maintain low-moderate fuel conditions to reduce the potential for large scale, 

high intensity wildfires to destroy natural resources, structures or take human lives. 

Understory burning would be accomplished through the use of fire prescriptions that specify 

the details regarding burn timing and results to be achieved. The primary specifications for 

understory burns are listed here. 

a. Consider appropriate understory burning during the fall season in order to mimic natural 

fire regimes. 

b. Appropriate smoke management techniques should be used to avoid smoke impacts to the 

Grants Pass Designated Areas (DA) or to avoid or limit smoke impacts to other nearby 

communities. Oregon State smoke management requirements will be followed as defined 

in the Oregon Smoke Management Plan (OAR 629-43-043)

25
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

c. Pile coverings must conform to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the 

Oregon Department of Forestry and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (Oregon Department of Forestry and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, March 

2005). 

d. Fuel treatments may occur within treatment areas, managed stands and up to approximately 200 feet of either of the above boundaries in order to provide a safe fire control 

line location in order to prevent fire escapes during a planned understory burn 

e. Understory burning should occur when fuel moistures are such that the probability of escape, mineral soil exposure and projected leave tree mortality is acceptable. 

f. A prescribed understory burn may be conducted twice on any single site during the life of 

this project unless there is a prohibition for a specific area restricting fire use to a single 

occurrence. 

g. Understory burning (broadcast burning) will occur when fuel moistures are such that the 

probability of escape, soil exposure and projected leave tree mortality is acceptable. 

Table 4 shows the types of treatments/activities may be implemented in areas labeled as such 

on the project map. 

Table 4. Understory burning on 1,812 acres (31% of area). 

ACTIVITY TYPE 

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE 

ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION 

Understory burning 1812 acres This is a prescribed fire that is implemented under 

an overstory of vegetation (usually trees). 

Fuel Pullback 1812 acres Treatment is designed to remove fuel near base of 

tree such that tree is more likely to survive a 

surface fire or an understory burn. Duff, litter, 

bark, dead or live fuels, etc. around base of tree are 

removed for a specified distance from base of tree 

or up the bole of the tree. The maximum distance 

this material is treated is out to the dripline of tree 

plus 1 foot and up to 8 feet above the ground. 

Vegetation 

Slashing/Scattering 

450 acres This typically involves cutting small diameter 

vegetation (usually less than 4” diameter) in order 

to provide a suitable fuel bed to assist in 

implementing an understory burn. This cut 

vegetation provides areas with higher fire 

intensities that can assist in implementing an 

understory burn during higher moisture conditions. 

This activity can also include cutting slash into 

smaller pieces and scattering this fuel. 

Hand Fireline 

Construction/Reconstructi

on 

15 miles This involves in creating an area of exposed 

mineral soil from 1.5 to 2 feet wide around the 

perimeter of a planned understory burn. It also 

involves removing all vegetation and fuels near the 

fireline that might increase fire intensity or result 

in flaming debris crossing the fireline. These 

firelines are typically developed adjacent to private 

lands, along ridgetops (within 200 feet), along 

areas to be protected from fire, etc 

26
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

3. Various Maintenance/Improvement Treatments 

Lastly, various maintenance/improvement treatments are proposed for various wildlife and 

botanical habitat and fish/watershed/riparian areas. Such treatments would include: 

• noxious weed control (examples = pulling, covering, burying, etc.), 

• snag and down woody material habitat creation (examples = girdling, topping, felling, 

etc.), 

• fish habitat improvement (examples = structure creation, cover development, thinning, planting, etc.), 

• riparian vegetation density reduction (examples = thinning, fuel piling/burning, understory burning, etc.), 

• serpentine meadow restoration (examples= thinning, fuel piling/burning, understory 

burning, etc.), and 

• watershed restoration (examples= road reconstruction/maintenance, road stability improvement, erosion control, culvert cleaning/replacement, road closures, etc.). 

Tables 5 and 6 show the types of treatments/activities may be implemented in areas labeled 

as such on the project map. 

Table 5. Meadow understory treatment and understory burn on 122 acres (2% of 

area). 

ACTIVITY TYPE 

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE 

ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION 

Pre-Commercial Thinning 

& Release (less than 6” 

DBH) 

122 acres Thin from below. First select smallest vegetation 

for cutting proceeds up through diameter classes 

until desired residual density is achieved. 

Hand Piling and Burning 122 acres Slash typically less than 4-6 inches in diameter 

(large end) is piled and covered with polyethylene 

in order to keep it dry so it can be completely 

consumed when burned during wet or snowy 

weather. 

Hand Fireline 

Construction/Reconstructi

on 

3 miles This involves in creating an area of exposed 

mineral soil from 1.5 to 2 feet wide around the 

perimeter of a planned understory burn. It also 

involves removing all vegetation and fuels near the 

fireline that might increase fire intensity or result 

in flaming debris crossing the fireline. These 

firelines are typically developed adjacent to private 

lands, along ridgetops (within 200 feet), along 

areas to be protected from fire, etc 

Understory burning 122 acres This is a prescribed fire that is implemented under 

an overstory of vegetation (usually trees). 

27
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Table 6. Stream, riparian or fish habitat restoration on 5.4 miles of stream. 

ACTIVITY TYPE 

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE 

ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION 

Thinning & Release 2 miles Thin from below. First select smallest vegetation 

for cutting proceed up through diameter classes 

until desired residual density is achieved. 

Sectioning & Scattering 

Slash 

2 miles This activity involves cutting slash into smaller 

pieces and scattering the fuel to reduce depth, 

concentration and ultimately fire intensity during a 

wildfire or prescribed fire. 

Hand Piling and Burning 2 miles Slash typically less than 4-6 inches in diameter 

(large end) is piled and covered with polyethylene 

in order to keep it dry so it can be completely 

consumed when burned during wet or snowy 

weather. 

In-stream Fish Habitat 

Enhancement 

2 miles Placement of in-stream log and rock structures to 

improve fish habitat conditions. 

4. Logging (Harvest) Systems and Roads 

Harvest (removal) of cut trees and biomass is planned to be accomplished by a variety of 

methods including ground based (rubber-tired skidders, tractors, mechanical tree shears, cutto-length processors, forwarders, excavators, etc) or cable (skyline, etc). Considerations such 

as road access, cost, resource management standards and guides, etc. influence the choice of 

harvest system. 

Harvesting and wood product haul will require use of existing roads, the reopening of existing, old road templates that have been closed by vegetation growth, waterbars, etc. and some, 

new ‘stubbie’ roads (e.g. temporary roads). No new, permanent roads (system) will be constructed. 

Table 7 shows the types of activities that may be implemented in areas labeled as such on the 

project map. 

Table 7. Road construction, reconstruction or maintenance. 

ACTIVITY TYPE 

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE 

ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION 

New Permanent Road 

Construction 

0 miles No new, permanent (e.g. system), road construction 

is proposed. 

Road Decommissioning 0.33 miles This involves returning an existing road to a 

condition similar to adjacent areas such that it will 

support trees and other vegetation 

Road Closure 

(Level 1) 

0.5 miles Assigned to intermittent use system roads during the 

times they are closed to vehicular traffic (including 

administrative traffic). Physically blocked or 

28
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE ACTIVITY TYPE DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

entrance disguised. Maintenance done only to 

minimize resource impacts. 

Road Closure 

(Barricade) 

1.2 miles This involves installation of a barricade (gate, 

post/rail, ditch, etc) to discourage or prevent vehicle 

access to a section of road while maintaining the 

potential to access the area for administrative 

purposes, emergencies, etc. 

Reconstruction of 

Existing (non-system) 

Road Templates 

6 miles Existing road templates are old road excavations 

that are still visible on the ground but that were 

blocked from vehicle use either intentionally or by 

vegetation and are not driveable in their current 

condition. Some existing road templates would be 

reopened and reconstructed for use in this project 

‘Stubbie’ (e.g. 

Temporary) Road 

Construction 

3 miles These roads are constructed to provide short-term 

access for harvest and fuel reduction. Typically, 

they (a) are constructed on the upper 1/3 of a slope 

in order to avoid riparian areas (b) are less than an 

average of 500 feet long per treatment unit and (c) 

are barricaded/obliterated following their use to 

accomplish this project work. 

Existing System Road 

Reconstruction or 

Maintenance 

29 miles Road reconstruction/maintenance involves any 

work that creates conditions such that the road can 

be utilized for an intended purpose such as log haul. 

This can include replacing damaged culverts, 

repairing bridges, removing encroaching vegetation 

or hazards, cleaning ditches and culverts, etc. 

Table 8 shows the number of acres excluded from treatment in areas labeled as such on the 

project map. 

Table 8. No treatment on 1,187 acres (20% of area). 

ACTIVITY TYPE 

ESTIMATED 

UNITS WHERE 

ACTIVITY 

WOULD OCCUR 

DESCRIPTION or EXPLANATION 

No Treatment 1,187 acres No planned activities. These include such areas as 

most of the relatively intact mature to over-mature 

stands, sensitive sites (botanical or wildlife), etc 

5. Mitigation Measures 

The following specifications, instructions, criteria and actions are integral measures or criteria for implementation of the Proposed Action. 

29
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

a. Protection of Public Safety 

• Contracts shall require the purchaser/contractor to post signs that clearly warn the 

public of nearby logging activities and truck hauling traffic associated with proposed treatments. 

• During implementation, the Forest Service will notify nearby landowners prior to 

proposed treatment activities commencing on National Forest System lands that 

are adjacent to private property. 

• During implementation, the Forest Service will provide notice to Forest visitors, 

by means of posted signs and/or news releases, when portions of national forest 

trails, roads or sites would be closed or use-restricted. A description of operations 

for which a use restriction is needed (such as helicopter logging or prescribed 

burning), the location (trail number, road number, site, etc.) of the closed or restricted area, as well as the duration and time period of the closure or restriction, 

will be included in the notice. 

• Appropriate hazardous condition/safety warnings should be provided to the public 

during prescribed fire operations. Depending upon the potential hazard, such 

warnings can be provided by newspaper articles, TV/radio, signs, flaggers, etc. 

Consider both trail and road access in these decisions. 

b. Logging Systems and Roads 

• Avoid new landing construction if possible. Utilize existing roads for landings 

whenever possible. 

• For “stubbie” roads (e.g., temporary roads): 

o Identify all existing road templates and map such that might be used to access 

a treatment area prior to contemplating building a ‘stubbie’ road. 

o New, individual, temporary roads should be limited to less than an average of 

500 feet per treatment unit. This does not apply to existing road templates. 

o Plan these roads on upper 1/3 of slope. If this is not possible, all drainage 

crossings should be field reviewed and approved by a hydrologist. 

o All roads will be effectively waterbarred or treated to prevent erosion prior to 

the wet season if needed beyond the current year to complete project activities. 

o Native surface roads will not be used during wet weather when erosion is a 

concern. 

o Road location, construction, etc requirements, timing, etc. should utilize 

BMP’s that protect water quality. 

o After use, these roads will be closed by barricade, earth, vegetation, etc such 

that further use as a road cannot occur. 

o Eliminate road access to Cedar Log Botanical Area at Slate Creek ‘ford’ 

unless required to provide access to valid mining claims. 

30
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

o Avoid road construction through ultramafic areas. 

• For system roads: 

o Road reconstruction/maintenance requirements, timing, etc. should utilize 

BMP’s that protect water quality. 

o Review potential to obtain ROW across private land in Butcherknife Creek to 

shorten haul distance. 

o Individual, temporary roads should be limited to a maximum of 1⁄4 mile in total length. 

o Roads should avoid locations that cross riparian areas unless approved by a 

hydrologist. 

o All roads will be effectively waterbarred prior to the wet season if needed beyond the current year in order to complete project activities. 

o Native surface roads will not be used during wet weather when erosion is a 

concern. 

c. Measures and Specifications to Protect Water Quality 

• No aerial ignition or fueling of equipment/drip torches should occur within 100 

feet (slope distance) of live water bodies in order to prevent ignition fuel from 

getting into the water. 

• Avoid manual or mechanical or understory burn activities on unstable landslide 

areas. 

• Mechanical harvest equipment should ONLY be used in areas where soils, sideslopes, etc. do not result in significant, long term impairment of soil productivity. 

• Native Surface Roads and Firelines Construction Requirements 

o Fireline construction near fish bearing or perennial streams should use ‘light 

on the land tactics’. 

o Firelines should be constructed/reconstructed/maintained such that erosion is 

minimized and any erosion does not deposit sediment into stream channels. 

o Waterbars of adequate spacing are required, as shown in Table 9, on firelines 

or native surface roads. 

Table 9. Distance between waterbars, based on slope gradient. 

Slope Gradient % Maximum Distance Between 

Waterbars (feet) 

1- 9% 100 

10- 19% 75 

20- 39% 50 

Greater than or equal to 40% 25 

o Do not construct waterbars on bedrock or in areas with more than 80% rock. 

o Install waterbars at a 45-degree angle to the slope, pointing down slope. 

31
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

o Dig the waterbar deep enough to catch and carry water across the entire width 

of the fireline. 

o Dig the outlet deeper than the inlet and dig through any side 

berms to keep the outlet from filling with material and plugging. 

o Place slash, rocks or debris below the outlet or extend the 

waterbar into thick vegetation or rock outcrops to dissipate 

the force of the runoff. 

o Rehabilitate waterbars immediately after adjacent project activities so they continue to appropriately satisfactorily function. 

d. Fuel Reduction and Smoke Management (Air Quality) Specifications and Measures 

• Burn treatment plans will be prepared for all prescribed burning activities to define slash consumption objectives, ignition parameters and smoke dispersal requirements. All burning would comply with the Oregon Smoke Management 

Plan (OAR 629-43-043). 

• Prescribed burning would be coordinated and planned to avoid smoke intrusion/impacts at all times into the Grants Pass Designated Area or Medford Designated Area as well as the (Class I) Kalmiopsis Wilderness. 

• During the northern spotted owl breeding season, March 1 to June 30, all prescribed burn activities shall be planned and initiated to avoid smoke intrusion or 

drift into an active spotted owl nest stand. Where the intensity or duration of 

smoke impacts are uncertain with regard to a known active nest, burn planning 

and initiation shall be coordinated with a wildlife biologist to control potential 

detrimental smoke impacts on spotted owl adults, nestlings or fledglings. 

• Pile coverings (plastic sheeting) will conform to the March, 2005 Memorandum 

of Understanding (MOU) between the Oregon Department of Forestry and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, which defines the specifications for 

the thickness of polyethylene plastic acceptable for use in keeping burn piles dry. 

A copy of this MOU is included in the Analysis File (Fire/Fuels/Smoke Report). 

e. Sensitive Plant Measures 

• Protect all known threatened, endangered, and sensitive plants consistent with the 

biological evaluation. 

• Serpentine meadows or Jeffrey pine savannahs should not be used for driving, 

parking and/or staging ground for workers and their equipment/vehicles and 

handpiling for slash disposal should be avoided in rare or sensitive plant areas in 

order to avoid high intensity fire damaging such plants. 

32
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

f. Invasive Plant Control Measures 

• Monitor areas with expected ground disturbance to detect changes in invasive 

plant occurrence. 

• All Forest Service & contract vehicles, tools and equipment should be cleaned 

prior to entry onto National Forest land such that they are free of infested dirt or 

mud and/or plant parts (e.g. weed free) to avoid the spread of POC root disease or 

invasive plants. 

• Plan activities in treatment areas in the following priority order: 

o Non-POC or invasive plant areas 

o Un-infested POC areas without invasive plants 

o Un-infested POC areas with invasive plants 

o Infested POC or invasive plant areas 

• Do not drive through, park upon, or bury under slash or debris any identified invasive plant sites. 

• Because the proposed activities may occur over a 15-year period, updated weed 

surveys including treatment and mapping should be planned every 2 years in order to quickly detect and treat any infestations. 

• Use only native seed or certified weed-free materials (ALL materials including 

plant materials, sand, gravel, etc.) for any project activity. It is preferable that 

natural re-vegetation occur following disturbance (given the relative absence of 

weeds in this area). 

• Coordinate all proposed road re-construction/maintenance activities with the invasive plant coordinator. 

• If a site containing invasive plants is needed for landings, roads, etc. (example: 

the old brick plant site just off Highway 199), cover the plants sufficiently to 

eradicate the population. 

• Use only native seed or certified weed-free materials (ALL materials including 

plant materials, sand, gravel, etc.) for any project activity. It is preferable that 

natural re-vegetation occur following disturbance (given the relative absence of 

weeds in this area). 

• Coordinate all proposed road re-construction/maintenance activities with the invasive plant coordinator. 

• Reduce the amount of invasive weeds at the old ‘Brick Plant’ site just off Highway 199. 

33
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

g. Port-Orford-Cedar Root Disease Control Measures 

• The Forest Service will identify and record active Port-Orford-cedar (POC) root 

disease infestations inside activity areas and along proposed transportation routes 

during project implementation. Infested cedar areas will be identified on sale area 

maps (if known when maps are made) as well as on the ground (using flagging, 

paint and/or signs) to alert workers to where inoculum is present. 

• All project activities shall comply with the direction and practices in the Record 

of Decision and Land and Resource Management Plan Amendment for Management of Port-Orford-Cedar in Southwest Oregon (USDA Forest Service 2004b) 

as invoked when there is a management need identified by the POC Risk Key. As 

needed, the POC root disease contract provision will be included in the timber 

sale contract(s). A copy of the POC Risk Key and other pertinent information is 

included in the Analysis File. 

h. Measures to Protect Listed Wildlife 

• Spotted Owl 

o Within suitable spotted owl dispersal habitat, maintain at least a 40% canopy 

cover following treatment. However, up to 20% of these acres can have less 

than 40% canopy cover with individual openings less than 2 acres. 

o Manage for 100% snag biological potential within suitable spotted owl dispersal habitat. 

o Do not permit smoke to drift into occupied spotted owl nest sites between 

March 1 and June 30 (e.g. nesting season). The wildlife biologist should provide occupancy information. 

o Any known spotted owl activity center located in or near treatment unit 

boundaries would be subject to a seasonal restriction between March 1 and 

June 30. All timber cutting, timber removal (skidding, yarding), slash disposal and other activities associated with logging, as well as understory burning activities, shall be prohibited at the specified distances shown in Table 10. 

Log hauling and other truck use on open system roads would not be restricted 

where these roads are currently available to public travel, regardless of the 

proximity of a spotted owl nest to the open road. 

o If an active spotted owl nest or activity center is located within or adjacent to 

a treatment unit, delay the project activity until after September 30th, or until 

the action agency biologist determines that young are not present. 

34
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Table 10. Specified distances from an active northern spotted 

owl nest within which the activities/operations are restricted seasonally during the owl nesting period (to protect owl breeding 

sites from noise or other disruption). 

Type of Activity/Operation 

Zone of 

Restricted 

Operation 

Broadcast burning, site preparation 0.25 mi 

Blasting w/ more than 2 pounds of explosives I mile 

Blasting w/ less than 2 pounds of explosives 120 yards 

Impact pile driver, jackhammer or rock drill 60 yards 

Helicopter or single-engine airplane 120 yards 

Large Helicopter (type 1 or 2) 0.25 miles 

Chainsaws (hazard trees. tree harvest. etc.) 65 yards 

Heavy equipment 35 yards 

• Red Tree Vole (RTV) 

o The following treatments are considered acceptable/compatible activities 

within Habitat Areas (e.g. stands containing RTV) and result in low risk to 

continued site occupancy. 

1. Pile and Broadcast Burning 

a. Piles should be created and burned such that direct heat and smoke 

does not enter nest crowns, including nests confirmed as active, assumed active or status undetermined. For purposes of this project, this 

means that no piles should be constructed within 25 feet of a nest tree 

or under the drip line of a nest tree crown whichever is greater. 

b. Burning should not remove or modify nest trees with active, assumed 

active or status undetermined nests; the canopy structure of the stand; 

or remove any dominant, co-dominant, or intermediate crowns within 

the Habitat Area. 

c. The number of piles per acre should not place the delineated Habitat 

Area at greater risk of loss from natural or human caused fire ignition. 

d. Pile burning should be conducted during a time of year and under conditions when the likelihood of fire escaping into the tree canopy is low. 

e. Prior to broadcast burning, ensure that fuels within the Habitat Area 

will be at a level that permits broadcast burning to occur with average 

scorch heights of < 15 feet. 

2. Fire Lines 

a. Fire lines may be constructed through Habitat Areas but should not 

remove sound green trees in the dominant, co-dominant or intermediate tree canopy. In some cases, trees that are providing such intermediate, co-dominant, or dominant tree canopy but have the potential to 

burn through and fall or ‘crown out’ may be felled IF they do not contain nests and are not adjacent to active, assumed active or status unde35
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

termined nests. The objective is to not modify canopy structure 

around active nests. 

b. Removal of shrubs, ground cover or low limbs is acceptable throughout the Habitat Area. 

3. Thinning 

a. Thinning should not remove or modify nest trees, the canopy structure 

of the stand, or remove any dominant, co-dominant or intermediate 

crowns within the Habitat Area. This includes activities that may isolate nest trees or reduce the interconnectivity of branches within the 

canopy. See “Management Recommendations for the Oregon Red 

Tree Vole”, Version 2.

4. Pruning 

a. Pruning of branches less than 15 feet above the ground is acceptable. 

b. Mechanical damage should not be inflicted on confirmed active, assumed active or status undetermined nest trees, nest tree roots or trees 

within a 50 foot radius of active nest trees. 

• Woodpeckers 

o Retain snags at 100% of potential population level for woodpeckers in unmanaged stands. 

i. Measures to Protect Listed Fish 

• No vegetation cutting should occur within 25 feet of a perennial stream (fish bearing or non-fish bearing) OR on unstable areas. 

• Prescribed fire ignition should be implemented a suitable distance from stream 

courses such that most vegetation is maintained within any no treatment area near 

a stream. 

• A substantial hardwood component (30% minimum) should be left within the inner riparian reserve (e.g within 50 feet of the channel) in order to provide for deciduous litterfall to benefit fish. 

• Hand piles should be located outside of any no-treatment area along a stream 

course and far enough away from such protected vegetation so that burning does 

not result in loss of live vegetation within the 25-foot no treat area. 

• Within 100 feet of a streamcourse (fish-bearing, perennial or intermittent), fireline 

location and construction techniques should maintain 90% of pre-activity soil infiltration rates. In other words, avoid building extensive sections of fireline parallel to streams. Ground based mechanical equipment may enter the riparian 

reserve only if it can meet this mitigation measure. 

• When removing water out of a fish bearing stream (e.g. drafting), use a screen on 

draft hose with openings not to exceed 3/32 (0.094) inches to prevent intake and 

36
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

impingement of juvenile salmonids (Sickling 2003). This screen is most critical 

during coho salmon fry emergence (February through April). 

• Avoid walking on spawning gravels during spawning and fry emergence season 

(September 16 to June 14). 

• When practical and economically feasible, use cut trees for any nearby fish habitat/watershed improvement projects. 

j. Protection of Heritage Resources 

• Protect known sites from damage during mechanical treatments and understory 

burning. Heritage personnel will flag out protected areas upon request. 

k. Monitoring Activities 

The HFRA contains provisions requiring that the Forest Service monitor the results of a representative sample of authorized hazardous fuel reduction projects and submit a report every 

5 years that includes an evaluation of the progress toward project goals and recommendations 

for project modifications. Fire sciences research funded by the National Fire Plan is assessing monitoring schedules and protocols to meet the requirements of the HFRA, as well as 

those of the National Fire Plan. Recommendations for implementation will be made to the 

Wildland Fire Leadership Council. 

Section 102(g)(5) of the HFRA instructs the USDA Forest Service to establish a collaborative multiparty monitoring, evaluation, and accountability process when significant interest is 

expressed in such an approach. The process would be used to assess the beneficial or adverse ecological and social effects of authorized fuel-reduction projects. 

The requirement for multiparty monitoring is not directly connected to the requirements for 

monitoring a representative sample of projects, but shall be used where “significant interest is 

expressed,” in the judgment of the field unit involved. The Forest Service has experience 

with multiparty monitoring, which can be an effective way to build trust and collaborate with 

local communities and diverse stakeholders, including interested citizens and Tribes. Multiparty monitoring would be subject to available funding and the ability of stakeholders to contribute funds or in-kind services. 

D. Are there Alternatives to the Proposed Action? 

As part of this environmental review, we considered whether there might be one or more reasonable but alternative courses of action that would achieve the need described in Chapter I. Our 

deliberations regarding alternative actions and approaches, and their utility for this analysis, are 

briefly discussed below. In summary, we eliminated from detailed Analysis all alternatives but 

the Proposed Action for the reasons explained in the following paragraphs. 

37
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Potentially, an alternative to the Proposed Action can be devised by creating an option (or several options) whereby the size of the total treated area is either increased or decreased. Changing 

the quantity of area treated would certainly cause differences in the magnitude of various impacts, which could be comparatively displayed so long as the size of area differed markedly 

between options. Less area affected by any mix of proposed treatment units would typically 

result in fewer effects to the existing environment while the converse result (more area treated = 

more impacts) would also occur. Correspondingly, the size of area to be treated within specific 

allocations, such as Riparian Reserves, could be reduced in an attempt to curtail or avoid altogether particular environmental consequences in those places. 

While it is clearly evident that more or fewer consequences could be realized by changing the 

scale or amount of treatment area within an allocation, merely decreasing/increasing the total 

treatment area or avoiding all vegetation treatment work in Riparian Reserves tends to obscure 

the basic environmental tradeoffs that are a consequence of taking action on the legitimate need. 

The purpose for this environmental review is not to simply minimize all effects today for the 

sake of minimization per se, and thus postpone those effects to the future (or not achieve programmed outcomes at all), but rather to determine if proposed activities have consequences that 

elevate the needed environmental review to the preparation of an EIS (or surpass expected impacts revealed in higher-order plans). Given that the primary reason for proposing this action is 

to respond to a specific need (problem), we assert that casual alterations to project size or treatment locations (especially when those alterations only increase the need later on) provides little 

useful information for understanding whether or not preparation of an EIS is necessary. Therefore, no alternative is presented in this EA that treats fewer or more acres than are identified in 

the Proposed Action. 

Another alternative we considered for this environmental review would have excluded cutting of 

commercial-sized trees and then removing them from overdense treatment stands (i.e., logging). 

This optional strategy for fuel reduction, then, would depend entirely on understory brush and 

small tree cutting using chainsaws (and other hand-operated equipment) as well as the use of 

prescribed fire to dispose of slashed vegetation. Thus, understory brush cutting and burning 

would be used together to collectively reduce the quantity of fuel available on the ground and in 

the lowest forest canopy levels and no materials would be moved off-site. 

However, the alternative of excluding commercial tree cutting and removal was not evaluated in 

detail in this environmental review because many forest stands presently contain excessively 

high quantities of live and dead biomass. On-site disposal of the accumulated debris and vegetation would be a technical challenge to cut into small sizes for disposal and to burn the debris 

without damaging adjacent desired trees. As well, use of understory brush/small tree cutting and 

prescribed fire exclusively would likely cost too much and take too long to effectively assist in 

protecting values now at risk, including human and structure safety. As importantly, an analysis 

of the effects of this alternative would not add meaningfully to an understanding of whether or 

not an EIS is needed for implementing proposed fuel reduction activities in the analysis area. 

Moreover, this alternative would not meet the need for this project. Many stands resulting from 

fire exclusion and past management have excess numbers of stems that are greater than eight 

inches diameter at breast height (commercial-sized trees). Leaving large numbers of those 

smaller but commercially-sized trees would not lessen stand density and inter-tree competition, 

38
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

which is the cause of decreased tree growth rates and vigor in area forests. Furthermore, understory brush and small tree clearing alone would not act to arrest the mortality of large remnant 

trees in the area, such as sugar/ponderosa pine and black/white oak, which the Forest Service 

proposes to feature and conserve. Finally, the proximity of homes in and near to the analysis 

area, and the fact that many residents have only had one-way ingress/egress, makes treatment of 

area stands a time-sensitive priority. Consequently, environmental review of this alternative was 

eliminated from detailed study of effects in this EA. 

E. The No Action Alternative 

Under this alternative, current management plans and previously approved management actions 

would continue to be implemented in the analysis area. However, the Forest Service would not 

implement the actions or activities proposed for consideration in this EA. No actions would be 

taken now to reduce the stocking of existing stands and to manipulate stand outcomes by influencing their trajectory and characteristics, as portrayed within their respective allocations. 

Stands would continue to grow and mature subject to successful fire suppression and would be 

shaped in the short-term primarily by natural forces and processes. However, because of ongoing forest management responsibility for stands within the analysis area, the Forest Service could 

devise a plan of action, and then propose and consider those actions, for managing stands on the 

public estate in another 5 to15 years. 

F. Comparison of Alternatives 

In Table 11, a summary of the consequences, which are predicted to accrue, is presented for the 

No Action and Proposed Action alternatives. The comparisons made in the table focus only on 

key features and principal impacts that vary between the two alternatives. Hence, the reader 

should not consider this table as the sole source for distinguishing attributes or effects information for each alternative. The analytical basis for the impacts conclusions listed in the table are 

described in Chapter IV as well as in individual resource reports. 

Table 11: Comparison of alternatives. 

Activity or Quantities/Effects/Results by Alternative 

Environmental 

Indicator 

No Action Proposed Action 

Mechanical Treatment Fuel 

Reduction 

0 acres 2093 acres density management and 

619 acres small diameter treatment 

Prescribed Fire Fuel Reduction 0 acres 3,905 acres 

Oak and Pine Large Tree 

Restoration 

0 acres 2,393 acres 

Risk of Catastrophic Wildfire High long-term risk due to high 

stand density and excess fuel 

quantity 

High short-term risk until fuels are treated. Low 

long-term risk due to reduced stand density and 

reduced fuel quantity on treated acres 

System Roads Decommissioned 

for Vehicle Use and Closed 

0 miles 2.03 miles 

Stubby (temporary) Roads 

Constructed and Closed 

0 miles 3 miles 

39
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Activity or Quantities/Effects/Results by Alternative 

Environmental 

Indicator 

No Action Proposed Action 

New Permanent Roads 

Constructed 

0 miles 0 miles 

Air Quality 272 tons/year for ten years from 

other projects and ownerships 

588 tons per year for ten years – cumulative 

effect 

No unacceptable impacts to Smoke Sensitive 

Receptor Areas of Grants Pass or Medford 

Slope Stability No acceleration of slope instability 

unless of a wildfire occurance 

Very low potential for slope instability due to 

avoidance of unstable terrain and thinning from 

below 

Detrimental Soils Impact 74 existing acres of detrimental 

impact due to compaction 

242 acres (including the 74 acres existing) of 

detrimental impact due to compaction from 

construction of stubbies and logging equipment 

Change in Peak Flow to 6th Field 

Watershed 

No detectable Change No detectable Change 

Long Term Watershed Benefit of 

Large Trees 

Slowed growth with increased risk of 

stand replacement by wildfire 

Faster growth of large trees with decreased risk 

of stand replacement by wildfire 

Impacts to Gentner’s Firtillary Lack of canopy gaps and light 

reaching the understory are 

detrimental to the populations 

Proposed Density Management may improve 

habitat conditions 

Impacts to Clustered Lady 

Slippers 

No Effect All known populations buffered to exclude 

management activities. Due to the unknown of 

additional populations, the proposed action may 

impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely 

contribute to a trend towards federalist listing or 

cause a loss of viability to the species. 

Impacts to Mendocino Gentian No Effect May impact individuals or habitat, but will not 

likely contribute towards federal listing or loss of 

viability to the species. 

Impacts to Stipuled Trefoil No Effect May have a net benefit over time due to 

Disturbance 

Impacts from Invasive Plants No Change Increased risk of vulnerability to invasion and 

establishment of invasive species due to 

disturbance. Mitigated by seeding of native 

grasses. 

Existing Old-growth Stands 7 stands maintained 7 stands maintained 

Impacts to Chinook and Coho 

Salmon 

No Effect Short-term for Coho– may affect, not likely to 

adversely affect. 

Short-term for Chinook – may impact individuals 

or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing or loss of viability to the 

populations. 

Long-term – Beneficial effect to coho salmon 

and Chinook by decreasing risk of high-severity 

wildfire. 

Impacts to Northern Spotted Owl Implementation of No Action would 

have no direct effect on the owls or 

owl habitat. Has a potential for an 

indirect and cumulative negative 

effect due to a higher risk of loss of 

habitat due to large-scale high 

intensity wildfire. No Action then 

may effect, and is likely to adversely 

All suitable habitat would be maintained. Shortterm degradation of suitable habitat on 1,029 

acres of nesting, roosting, foraging habitat to a 

canopy closure still >40%. Canopy is reduced to 

promote the growth of larger pines and 

hardwoods while reducing fuels in the interface. 

Short-term may effect, likely to adversely affect 

the Northern Spotted Owl. 

40
 Butcherknife/Slate Fuels Reduction Project Environmental Assessment

Activity or Quantities/Effects/Results by Alternative 

Environmental 

Indicator 

No Action Proposed Action 

affect the Northern Spotted Owl. Long-term beneficial effect on the Northern 

Spotted Owl. 

Owl Core Areas – Site 303 

70 Acre Patch Area 40 acres Suitable Habitat 40 acres Suitable Habitat 

500 Acre Core Area 42% Suitable Habitat 42% Suitable Habitat 

3340 Acre Home Range 56% Suitable 52% Suitable* (4% is degraded/maintained due 

to reduction to <60% but > 40% canopy closure) 

Owl Core Areas – Site BKS 08 

70 Acre Patch Area 59 acres Suitable Habitat 59 acres Suitable Habitat 

500 Acre Core Area 

52% Suitable Habitat 48% Suitable Habitat* (4% is 

degraded/maintained due to reduction to <60%, 

but > 40% canopy closure) 

3340 Acre Home Range 

45% Suitable Habitat 45% Suitable habitat*(9% is 

degraded/maintained due to reduction to <60%, 

but >40% canopy closure) 

Risk of Barred Owl/Spotted Owl 

Interaction 

Existing older multilayed forests at 

higher risk to adverse Wildfire 

impacts and increased interactions 

All seven patches of older multilayered forests 

are not treated by the Action except for the 

reduced risk of adverse wildfire effects, due to 

treatment of adjacent stands. May be a reduced 

risk of interactions between owl species. 

* Degraded/maintained means the habitat still functions as suitable habitat but its value is lessened for the described use since canopy cover remains above 40%, but less than 60%.. 

III. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 

Within this chapter is a brief description of the current setting and existing forest environment 

within which the Proposed Action would occur. This section also identifies existing and pertinent land management direction that bounds the proposal within a pre-determined administrative 

setting, which in turn establishes the results to be achieved. 

A. General Setting 

The 493,000-acre (770-square-mile) Applegate Sub-basin is located on the northeastern flank of 

the Siskiyou Mountains in southwestern Oregon. Watershed lands are steep and rugged, ranging 

in elevation from 850 feet to 7,418 feet above sea level. Numerous small tributaries flow into 

the Applegate River, which then joins the Rogue River near the City of Grants Pass. The Slate 

Creek drainage is the last major tributary to the Applegate River above its confluence with the 

Rogue River. The Illinois Sub-basin, just to the south of the Applegate drainage, is also a major 

tributary to the Rogue River. The project area occurs on and just north of the watershed divide 

between the Applegate and Illinois Rivers. All but a small portion of the project is within the 

Slate Creek sub-watershed, and so drains to the Applegate River. The remainder of the project is 

within Lower Deer Creek sub-watershed, which drains into the Illinois River. Full descriptions 

and characteristics of the watershed that encompasses most of the analysis area are provided in 

the Cheney/Slate Watershed Analysis (USDI Bureau of Land Management 1996). 

41