Page images
PDF
EPUB

ALTERNATIVE NO. 1

8.1.4 Vegetation

Timber management without control of competing vegetation would produce the following significant impacts to vegetation during the first decade:

(a) Early successional stages would be initiated on approximately 24,000 acres based on clearcut and regeneration cut acres.

(b)

Removal of timber in the 70-200 year age classes would occur on
approximately 4,890 acres on high intensity land.
land. This constitutes
about 4 percent of the existing timber in these age classes.

(c) Old growth timber (200+ years) would be removed on about 22,500 acres on high intensity lands. This accounts for approximately 23 percent of existing old-growth timber on high intensity lands.

(d)

(e)

Short-term destruction of surface vegetation due to yarding methods (including gross yarding) would occur on about 8,100 acres. This

could lead to an increase in soil erosion on these acres.

Complete long-term elimination

of

vegetation would occur on about 1,770 acres based on new road construction with continued maintenance of these roads.

8.1.5 Animals

During the first decade about 74,500 acres would would be subjected to habitat modification through harvest, road building, and thinning practices. In most cases modifications would be great enough to change the animal composition and density on those acres.

about a 116

Clearcuttings and shelterwood regeneration harvest would percent increase in early successional stage vegetation that would benefit those species that use those habitats (see Table 2-6), and potentially could lead to a 116 percent increase in animals that use this habitat.

As no to control competing vegetation are proposed, the resulting early stage habitat would be diversified in composition and structure which would benefit a larger variety of animal species than would an early successional stage that had been manipulated to achieve single plant species dominance.

About 23 percent of the old growth currently existing on the high intensity lands of the JKSYUS would be harvested during the first decade. This could mean a 23 percent reduction in old-growth dependent species such as northern spotted owl, northern flying squirrel and Vaux's swift on these lands. Old growth would be eliminated on the high intensity lands of the JKSYUS by the year 2048 if this alternative were implemented.

The use of poison bait for gopher control would have an adverse impact to gophers on 6,850 acres.

Worst case analysis discloses a total of 12,945 tons of sediment (see Section 8.1.3.2) could be deposited in the streams the streams of the JKSYUS. This could be detrimental to an individual stream and its fishery resources, but it would be insignificant to the JKS YUs as a whole.

No adverse impacts are expected to occur to any Federally listed threatened or endangered species. The Siskiyou Mountain salamander and the river otter, which are currently undergoing status review and the northern spotted owl, a species considered threatened by the State of Oregon, could have their habitat reduced and/or degraded. While individuals may be affected, the species would not be adversely impacted (See 3.6.4).

[blocks in formation]

Impacts would be of similar type to those of the proposed action. Health or safety hazards to recreationists would be less than under the existing situation. Hiking and sightseeing would be difficult, due to decreased visibility along roads and in the forest without control. The quality of hiking and sightseeing experiences would decrease. No significant change in visitor-days associated with general sightseeing and miscellaneous use would result.

The alteration of small, undeveloped pristine areas would total about 24,698

acres.

8.1.7 Cultural Resources

Impacts would be the same type as those resulting from the proposed action.

8.1.8 Visual Resources

Impacts would be of similar type as those of the proposed action. The use of vegetative control to create opportunities to view attractive or interesting features would be nonexistent. Some esthetically desirable shrub species would be preserved. The adoption of this alternative would result in 29,690 acres being maintained in a more nearly natural ecological state. These areas would have more visual variety. For example, a mixed stand of hardwood and Douglas-fir would be more attractive, with more fall color. In some cases, visual variety would decrease when desired vegetative configurations cannot be developed.

[blocks in formation]

Impacts would be the same as those of the proposed action.

ALTERNATIVE NO. 1

8.1.10 Noise

Impacts of timber management operations would be similar to those of the proposed action. There would be no noise of helicopters or motorized pressure systems used in the application of herbicides.

8.1.11 Ecologically Significant Areas

Impacts to ecologically significant areas would be the same as those of the proposed action.

8.1.12 Socioeconomic Conditions

The economic analysis of each alternative is based on estimates of timber sales, harvest, and associated employment, personal income, and public revenues. Population impacts would follow patterns of timber harvest and employment. Both short-term and long-term impacts are analyzed and summarized in Tables 8-2 and 8-3, respectively. These tables also display average annual economic conditions based on 1974 to 1976 data as well as expected impacts of continued current management and the proposed action.

Short-term impacts are projected for 1980 since much of the data are projected in 10-year intervals. The nearest year to full implementation of the proposed or alternative harvest levels is 1980.

Long-term impacts are based on projected harvest levels during the second decade and expected values of economic indicators in 1990. At this point each alternative's harvest level has either reached a long-term equilibrium (sustainable yield) or is approaching it. Economic estimates were derived using methodologies similar to those used in Chapter 3.

During the first decade, average annual timber harvest would be 6 percent less than levels that would be expected from continued current management (Table 8-2). By the second decade, the annual difference would average nearly 7 percent (Table 8-3). By comparison, the proposal would vary from this alternative in terms of expected harvest by 1 percent and 2 percent respectively. During the first decade, direct direct local employment generated by BLM timber harvest would be about 30 percent less than with either current management or the proposal. The impacts on total (direct plus indirect) employment would follow trends in direct employment. Initially, fewer (the equivalent of about 370 and 360 less) local jobs would be generated by this alternative than either continued current management or by the proposal respectively. However, after the first decade the differences in total jobs would decline.

Each year about $3.2 million and $3.1 million less direct personal income would be generated than with current management or the proposal, respectively. Total (direct plus indirect) income impacts would follow similar patterns.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

1/ Weighted average estimate of employees per million board feet of timber harvest taken from Table 2-18 and adjusted for log flows from Jackson and Klamath units to counties of destination. employees taken from Table 2-16, pulp and paper employees

2/

Weighted average employment multipliers

Nonlocal estimate of

3/ Weighted average direct income coefficient per employee = weighted average annual payroll per lumber and wood products employee X weighted average community personal income coefficient Weighted average income multiplier

གི

5/ Public Finance = Timber harvest X stumpage price ($154/M bd. ft.) x .5 6/ Public Finance/true cash value of O&C Counties (Appendix I, Table 1-2)

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

1/ Weighted average estimate of employees per million board feet of timber harvest taken from Table 2-18 and adjusted for log flows from Jackson and Klamath units to counties of destination. employees taken from Table 2-16, pulp and paper employees

2 Weighted average employment multipliers

Nonlocal estimate of

3/ Weighted average direct income coefficient per employee = weighted average annual payroll per lumber and wood products employee X weighted average community personal income coefficient

4/ Weighted average income multiplier

5/ Public Finance = Timber harvest X stumpage price ($204/M bd. ft.) X .5

Public finance/true cash value of O&C Counties (Appendix I, Table I-2)

« PreviousContinue »