This is the April Update designed to keep you abreast of developments and activities concerning the implementation of the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act, or HFQLG.


The program of work developed for FY01 includes:

  1. Implementing projects planned in FY00,
  2. Coordinating HFQLG activities with Framework direction
  3. Continuing environmental analysis for FY01 resource management activities
  4. Analyzing watersheds for FY01 riparian management projects,
  5. Updating the HFQLG Implementation Plan,
  6. Implementing FY01 resource management activities, and
  7. Collecting data and planning for outyear projects.

A. Implementing projects planned in FY00

Eleven new projects were identified and analyzed under seven site-specific Environmental Assessments (EAs) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). These seven EAs analyzed approximately 12,000 acres of DFPZs, 366 acres of group selection, and 1,000 acres of individual tree selection. All projects were in compliance with the California spotted owl mitigation measure required by the HFQLG ROD. All seven decisions were released by the end of FY00 and eighteen appeals of these EAs were received by the Regional Forester. Project implementation was delayed until the appeals were decided. The Regional Forester's Appeal Decisions, affirming six decisions and reversing one, can be found at the following Website The HFQLG project decision that was reversed was revised and released in February, the appeal period ended March 26 and three appeals were received. The Regional Forester will issue a decision by May 10. Subsequently, the FY00 projects will be implemented in FY01. Table 1 lists the FY00 projects and their status.

Ten watersheds were analyzed to identify site-specific riparian management projects. Two riparian restoration projects were accomplished in two of the watersheds analyzed. The Pine Creek project, located on the Lassen National Forest, involved stream channel realignment and the Grizzly Creek project, located on the Plumas National Forest, involved stream bank stabilization. Riparian projects are considered accomplished when a service contract is awarded for that activity or when the activity is completed on the ground.

Table 1. FY2000 HFQLG Project Status
Project Name DFPZ Activity Acres Group Selection Activity Acres Individual Tree Selection Activity Acres Contract Status
Timber sales
Marmalade 640 0 172 Award 9/30/99
Summit Small Log 1631 0 170 Award 7/28/00
Signal Small Log 860 0 329 Award 8/16/00
Cant Thin 175 0 127 Award 9/15/00
Bridge Thin 500 0 146 Award 10/29/00
Pittville 2338 200 0 Award 3/27/01
Lahonton 219 66 363 Pending
Leftover 762 100 693 Pending
Service Contracts
Jelly 137 0 0 Award 8/9/00
Skippy 528 0 0 Award 8/22/00
Dotta 224 0 0 Award 9/11/00
Spike Buck 800 0 0 Award 9/27/00
Red Clover 1196 0 0 Award 10/17/00
Red Mtn Arkansas 717 0 0 Award 11/14/00
Prattville 1356 0 0 Award 4/9/01
Cherry Hill 875 0 Award 4/9/01
Pittville North 1000 0 0 Award 4/9/01
Pittville South 1000 0 0 Award 4/9/01
Antelope-Border 2100 0 0 Award 2/16/01
TOTAL 17,058 366 2000  

Timber Sales are agreements between a Purchaser and the Forest Service in which the Purchaser pays the Forest Service for the merchantable products removed from the sale area. Merchantable products are commonly sawlogs and chips.

Service contracts are agreements in which the Forest Service pays the operator to perform specific activities such as cutting and piling brush with hand tools or chainsaws, crushing brush or thinning small diameter trees using mechanical equipment, or constructing fireline.

B. Coordinating HFQLG activities with Framework direction

The Regional Forester signed the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (Framework) on January 12, 2001. To date, the Chief of the Forest Service has received 15 appeals, however, the appeal period ends April 17. The Framework developed a conservation strategy for the California spotted owl that replaces both the CASPO (California spotted owl) Interim Direction and the mitigation measure of the HFQLG Record of Decision. The Framework affects the overall implementation of the DFPZ (Defensible Fuels Profile Zone), Group Selection (GS) and Individual Tree Selection (ITS) projects. All projects will comply with the standards and guidelines of this new owl strategy, which includes canopy closure and large tree retention requirements. The Regional Forester expects that up to 90% of the DFPZs will be implemented and intends to carry out as much of the pilot project as possible; however, the new owl strategy will change the extent of treatments. The Group Selections currently being planned for FY 01 in non-suitable owl habitat are expected to continue without modification.

As directed by the Regional Forester, an administrative study is currently being planned that will investigate how owls and features of their habitat respond to certain silvicultural treatments. Group Selections within suitable owl habitat are expected to be one of the silvicultural treatments investigated. In February, a team of scientists led by Dr. Peter Stine from the Pacific Southwest Research Station, began development of the study, which will include portions on the HFQLG Pilot Project.

C. Continuing environmental analysis for FY01 resource management activities

In order to define proposed actions, required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for implementing projects, it is necessary to collect site-specific data and conduct analysis. Often, it takes up to two years from the start of project planning and environmental analysis before contracts can be awarded. The activities associated with implementing projects include field reconnaissance such as wildlife, archeological, and plant surveys; NEPA planning and compliance for release of decision documents; field preparation such as designating boundaries, designating vegetation (brush or trees) to be removed, and designating buffers around streams and meadows; and contract preparation, advertisement and award. These activities must be completed for each timber sale or service contract before implementation of the project can take place.

All work will be conducted at a level commensurate with FY01 available funds.

Table 2 shows the status of those projects currently being analyzed under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the proposed treatment acres associated with each. It is important to note that these are only proposals, not decisions to be implemented. The proposals and alternatives will be subjected to analysis with public involvement during the next several months. Project decisions are expected by late spring or early summer.

Table 2. FY 01 Projects under environmental analysis
Analysis Area Name Scoping Initiated EA or DEIS* Notice and Comment DFPZ Acres GS Acres ITS Acres Rx Burn Acres
Lassen National Forest
Pegleg 6/6/00 4/3/01 6,640 429 0 not determined
Lakes (EIS) 12/11/00 4/01* 7,780 1,100 460 not determined
Blacks Ridge 12/18/00 3/27/01 7,000 750 0 11,395
North Coble 3/20/01 5/01 5,600 650 0 7,870
Plumas National Forest
Stony Ridge 10/26/00 3/21/01 1,176 250 0 1,652
Last Chance 11/22/00 4/01 4,669 170 0 1,699
Poison 11/22/00 4/01 3,034 0 0 364
Red Clover 1/8/01 4/01 0 160 357 not determined
Upper Slate 2/12/01 4/01 1,500 0 0 1,500
Cold 2/12/01 4/01 1,600 0 0 1,062
Lower Slate 2/16/01 4/01 3,507 0 0 3,507
Waters 2/16/01 4/01 8,000 0 0 6,874
Kingsbury Rush 2/21/01 4/01 3,968 0 0 3,694
Tahoe National Forest
Scraps 2/23/01 5/01 2,714 261 1,051 4,914
TOTAL     57,188ac 3,770ac 1,868ac  
*Environmental Assessment or Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Districts are expected to initiate scoping on additional projects listed on the HFQLG Implementation Plan later this spring.

D. Analyzing watersheds for FY01 riparian management projects

It is necessary to analyze watersheds prior to NEPA analysis that implements the HFQLG riparian management projects. Ten watersheds are expected to be analyzed in FY01. Site-specific environmental analyses are planned for thirteen riparian management projects in FY01. In addition to these planning efforts, eighteen projects with analyses completed in previous years are scheduled for implementation in FY01. Final FY01 funding will determine whether the projects listed in Table 3 are completed.

FY01 Riparian Management Projects
Projects with NEPA Decisions ready to implement Projects ready for NEPA analysis Projects within watersheds to be analyzed
Prattville; Jonesville; Deer Creek; Mill Creek; Antelope Creek; Big Jacks; and Susan River
Yellow Creek.
Thompson Creek; Upper Stone Dairy Creek; Robinson Meadow II; and Red Clover Road Red Clover Creek; Clarks Creek; Stone Dairy Creek; Siegfried and Jordon Creeks; Lost Creek; Antelope Creek; Kinzie Ravine; Slate Creek; Granite Basin; and Little Grass Valley Reservoir Last Chance Creek; Frenchman Creek; Lost Creek; Antelope Creek; Kinzie Ravine; Slate Creek; Granite Basin; and Little Grass Valley Reservoir
Carmen Valley Meadow; Scraps Riparian; Little Truckee Road; Davies Creek; Davies Creek Road Merrill Creek; Merrill Creek Road Borda and Smith Neck Borda Watershed and Smith Neck Watershed

E. Updating the Implementation Plan

The HFQLG Implementation Plan is a working document and subject to frequent updates based on funding and project planning. Because final budget allocations are expected soon, the revised HFQLG Implementation Plan will be released in June. The current version, which is based on full funding and does not yet incorporate the new California owl strategy identified in the Framework, can be found at the HFQLG Website under Current Activities. Questions about this plan should be directed to Assistant Project Manager Phil Tuma (530-283-7721).

F. Implementing FY01 resource management activities

Table 4 shows a list projects with environmental analysis complete and decisions made. These projects are expected to be implemented on the ground this 2001 field season.

Table 4. FY01 Projects with Decisions
Projects to be implemented in FY01 DFPZ Acres GS Acres ITSAcres Rx Burn Acres
West Dusty 600 0 0 0
Misc. SAI 400 0 0 0
Dotta 2 200 0 0 0
Spike Buck 2 0 0 0 1300

G. Collecting data and planning for outyear projects

As stated previously, it is necessary to collect site-specific data and conduct NEPA analysis prior to project implementation. Eighteen FY02 projects will be initiated in FY01, covering approximately 41,000 acres of resource management activities. Specific treatments and associated acres for outyear projects can be found in the HFQLG Implementation Plan.


Details of this plan are available from Monitoring Team Leader Wayne Johannson (530-283-7881).


The HFQLG Act requires the Secretary of Agriculture to annually submit a status report to Congress. The report covering Fiscal Year 2000 has been sent to Washington, DC. Questions about the Report to Congress should be directed to Assistant Project Manager Phil Tuma (530-283-7721).


The Californians for Alternatives to Toxics (CATs) lawsuit continues. Plaintiffs are currently reviewing the Administrative Record. The Appellant and the U.S. Department of Justice are currently in the midst of briefing the case, and a hearing is set for April 12, 2001.

Where to get more information: