Return to Table Of Contents
Section 3
Socioeconomic Environment






Socioeconomic Considerations

Affected Environment

This section describes the baseline conditions in order to examine socioeconomic impacts of implementing the Act. It provides analysis of current trends and conditions in the planning area. Further information on this topic is provided in Appendix S and Appendix T. For the purpose of socioeconomic analysis, the planning area is divided into two parts:

  1. A core area consisting of Lassen, Plumas, and Sierra Counties. Most of the population of these counties is located in the planning area. The local timber industry is an important component of the private sector economy of these counties.
  2. A peripheral area consisting of Butte, Nevada, Shasta, Tehama, and Yuba Counties. Small portions of each of the peripheral counties are located in the planning area. These counties tend to dominate the economy of the core area. Most recreational visitors to the core area come from the peripheral area, and a substantial part of the timber from the planning area is processed there.
The socioeconomic characteristics of the core area counties (Lassen, Plumas, and Sierra) are somewhat different from the peripheral area counties (Butte, Nevada, Shasta, Tehama, and Yuba) because of their relative isolation and lesser reliance on agriculture and other economic activity in the Sacramento Valley. They are especially different from Sierra Nevada counties to the south of the planning area whose economies are influenced by the presence of residents who are retired or who commute to nearby urban areas. As noted in Appendix S, "A total of 1,649 core residents traveled outside the core area on a daily basis. This is more than double the 819 people who lived outside the core area and worked in the core area. All three core area counties have more residents commuting outside the area than non-residents commuting into the area. . . . The most substantial commute from the core area was to a place of work in Reno (Washoe County, Nevada)."

The existing socioeconomic situation in the planning area can best be assessed at the community level. Communities are socially recognizable units of analysis that capture variation in social conditions. Although they are informative at a broad level, county-level statistics obscure important intra-county variation. The characteristics of larger communities or urban areas often overshadow those of smaller communities. For example, communities with high poverty levels are often found within counties having low or moderate poverty levels. Likewise, not all communities in high poverty counties experience high poverty levels. Indeed, Plumas County

had a 1990 poverty rate of 12 percent for the county population; however, only 3 percent of the population of the community of Graeagle lived below the poverty line, whereas 16 percent of the combined population of Greenville and Indian Valley were in poverty (Jensen et al. 1999).

The National Forests play an important role in the economies of the region, particularly in the case of Plumas and Sierra counties. Table 3.55 displays the percentage of National Forest System land in each county, including land outside of the planning area. It shows that 70 percent of Plumas County and 29 percent of Sierra County contain National Forest System lands.

Table 3.55 Percentage of National Forest Acres for each County
County Total Acres in the County National Forest Acres in the County Percent of Total Acres
Butte
1,072,710
135,913
13
Lassen
3,022,175
467,286
15
Nevada
623,920
21,040
3
Plumas
1,672,774
1,163,751
70
Shasta
2,463,699
243,020
10
Sierra
615,518
178,781
29
Tehama
1,891,651
187,473
10
Yuba
411,699
24,899
6

Population

The planning area is popular with retirees and "urban escapees," people interested in a rural setting in which to retire or raise families. The lower cost of living, reduced congestion, more open space, and lower crime rate are undoubtedly incentives for individuals and families to move to the area. The core area experienced modest population growth from 1990 to 1998. Its total population grew by more than 3,600 persons, with an average annual growth rate of 1.0 percent, as compared to 1.3 percent for the peripheral area, and 1.4 percent for the State of California. Lassen County accounted for most of this increase, apparently due to completion of the High Desert State Prison. Between 1990 and 1998, Plumas County showed an increase of 835 persons and Sierra County 85 persons. In-migration is typically by people aged 40 years and over. Out-migration occurs among young adults (ages 20 to 30 years), who leave to seek better income opportunities. Over 85 percent of the peripheral area's population, and over 88 percent of the core area's population, is non-Hispanic white, as compared to only 51.5 percent for the State as a whole. Hispanics and Native Americans are the primary minority populations in the core area, currently at 9.7 percent and 2.7 percent respectively (7.8 percent and 1.8 percent respectively for the peripheral area) (Jensen et al. 1999).

Public Education

Compared to the peripheral area and to the State, the core area has a higher rate of increased school enrollment and a lower high school dropout rate. Students in the core area tend to have lower Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores and are less likely to go on to college than their counterparts in the peripheral area or in the State. They tend to make less use of the school lunch program and of Limited English Proficiency services. Fifty percent of forest reserve revenues are mandated for education. Changes in levels of National Forest management activities would change the amount of forest reserve revenues for schools. 43



Footnotes:
  43Appendix S, section (J)(3) contains a description of forest reserve revenues.


Labor

Although the population in the region is growing, the labor force is declining. This is indicative of an area that includes a high percentage of retirees, homemakers, and discouraged workers (unemployed persons not seeking work). The unemployment rate in the core area has consistently been 3 to 4 percentage points above the Statewide rates for the period 1990 to 1998. The core area unemployment rate was lower than that of the peripheral area between 1990 and 1992. However, in 1993 it rose higher than the peripheral area's rate and has remained over 1 percent higher ever since (Jensen et al. 1999).

As indicated by Appendix S, retirement income is often in the form of income from investments; that is, income derived from interest and dividend payments. Income from interest and dividends is indicative of the overall wealth of the region. Wealthier individuals tend to have more investments, and thus, more investment income (Appendix S). California is a wealthy State, with 18.7 percent of total personal income from interest and dividend payments in 1996. The core area had 17.9 percent of its total personal income from interest and dividends, a considerable amount given the relative wealth of the region as compared to California. The peripheral area, which has a greater degree of both retirement and wealth than the core area, earned 20.2 percent of its total personal income in interest and dividends in 1996.

There is a substantial difference in personal income by industry sector in the core area, the peripheral area, and the State of California as a whole. The core area, in particular, receives a larger amount of personal income from agriculture and government, and a smaller amount from manufacturing, finance, and services. The peripheral area receives larger amounts of income from construction and retail trade than do either the core area or the State. In 1996, income from government, which includes National, State, and local governments, accounted for 36.1 percent of personal income in the core area, 20.7 percent for the periphery area, and 14.9 percent in the State. In Lassen County, over half of all earnings came from the government (Appendix S).

Total personal income growth between 1990 and 1996 was slightly higher for the core area than for the State as a whole. The population is more heavily dependent on personal income from government employment and transfer payments than the State average. Growth in median household income has been substantial in the core area, outpacing personal income growth and growth in median household income for the State. This reflects an increase in the number of households with two wage earners. Median household income in the region, though increasing, is still less than the State average. Although income in the region was lower than in the State, the cost of living was also lower. Indeed, the cost-of-living differential was greater than the income differential. This means that cost of living adjusted incomes in the core area were greater than in the State (Jensen, 1999).

In 1990, transfer payments were 23 percent of the core area personal income; in 1996 they were 25 percent. Retirement and disability benefits, the largest component of transfer payments, were 12 percent of total core area income in 1996. Business payments to individuals in 1996 were 1.5 percent of total transfer payments. Interest and dividend personal income was 20 percent of core area personal income in 1990; in 1996 it was 18 percent. In 1996, 29 percent of the core area personal income came from the basic economic sectors (agriculture, forestry, and fishing; construction and mining; and manufacturing) combined.

Electricity Generation

Hydroelectric generation in the planning area takes place in the Pit River, Battle/Cow Creek, Butte Creek, Feather River, and Yuba/Bear River watersheds. Annual production in megawatt hours (MWh) at a particular power plant is the product of capacity in megawatts (MW) and the hours of operation at full capacity (Table 3.56).

Table 3.56 Average Annual Hydroelectric Production by Watershed
(1970 to 1994)
Source: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Appendix S)
Watershed Average mwh production
Pit River
3,874,965
Battle/Cow Creek
90,527
Butte Creek
167,098
Feather River
5,736,826
Yuba/Bear River
2,668,565
TOTAL
12,537,981

Forest products (biomass) are used in "cogeneration" plants to produce electricity. A survey of 13 cogeneration plants in the core and peripheral areas indicated that the combined capacity of these plants was approximately 260 MWh in the year 1998 (Jensen et al., 1999). For additional information on this topic, reference Appendix K.

Local Timber Industry

The local timber industry has traditionally depended on the output of wood from 770,000 acres of private timberland, and 1.7 million acres of National Forest System timberland in the core counties. In 1990, the total timber harvest in the core counties was 430 million board feet (MMBF) (log scale), of which 33 percent was from National Forest System lands. In 1998, these figures were, respectively, 187 million board feet (MMBF) and 21 percent. In terms of value, the decline in the role of the National Forest System lands is more pronounced. In 1990, the value of timber harvests from all ownerships was $86 million with 63 percent of the value accounted for by timber from National Forest System lands. In 1998, these figures were respectively $59 million and 20 percent (Figure 3.11).


The timber industry is an important part of the basic economy of the planning area because it generates revenues by selling much of its output outside the region. The Center for Economic Development, California State University, Chico has estimated that the timber industry has $970 million in annual sales and employs 7,700 persons full-time, year-round, and 3,500 full-time on a seasonal basis in the eight-county planning area. For the three core counties, the timber industry has $410 million in annual sales and employs 3,100 persons full-time, year-round, and 1,200 full-time on a seasonal basis. Because of the highly competitive nature of the lumber business, returns to capital in sawmilling are very small, with the vast bulk of gross revenues going to pay for labor, maintenance, stumpage, and supplies.

Appendix S discusses the seasonality of employment in the timber, agriculture, and recreation industries. With regard to the timber industry, it should be noted that, although logging and other woods work are seasonal, wood processing (such as sawmilling), in general, no longer has the seasonality of employment that characterized it decades ago. For example, data in Appendix S show that the five sawmills in the core area have a total work force of 983, of which 963 are full-time, year-round employees. The wood-processing subsector is, thus, an important stabilizing component of the economic base in terms of monthly variation in employment.

Timber sales information available for Fiscal Year 1998 for the Lassen and Plumas National Forests indicate that successful bidders were primarily from inside the core or peripheral counties. Sierra Pacific Industries, based in Shasta County, with local mills in Loyalton, Quincy, and Susanville, California was the major purchaser of timber in terms of the number of sales (23) and value, purchasing 63 percent of the value of all sales for Lassen and Plumas National Forests combined. Reductions in national forest timber sales during the 1990s have in a significant decline in the number of companies available to bid on such sales. Before 1991, six companies operated sawmills in the core area; in 1998, only three remained.

Five sawmills (three are owned by a single company) are currently in operation in the core area. Two Shasta County mills are close-by. Since 1991, four core area sawmills, with a combined labor force of approximately 220 and a combined output of nearly 100 million board feet (MMBF), have closed in part due to reductions in national forest timber harvest. 43 Because of these closings a shift in the composition of the local timber industry occurred, with larger companies specializing in sawmilling and smaller companies focusing on logging, hauling, and other activities, frequently under contract to the sawmills.

The majority of timber-dependent companies within the core counties are not direct purchasers of sales. Within the three core counties (Lassen, Plumas, and Sierra 44), business information showed 45 timber-related companies, employing 1,654 people in 1997. 45 Of these companies, only five were successful bidders on timber sales in Fiscal Year 1998, three could be classified as small businesses. Many of the larger timber companies in the area have scaled-down their operations in the last 10 to 15 years so that they specialize only in milling, while subcontracting the harvesting and transport of logs to independent companies.



Footnotes:
  43Paul F. Ehinger and Associates (1988).  Economic impacts.  California Mill Closures and California Mills Currently in Operation:  Report to California Forestry Association.  April 1988.

  44Sierra County timber-dependent companies were restricted to those within the Sierraville Ranger District boundary only

  45Data obtained from Plumas Corporation.



The forest products industry accounts for approximately 13 percent of total employment in the eight counties of the planning area (Goldman, 1999), but a much higher percentage of employment in the economic base of the area. Readily identifiable basic economic sectors in the core area are: (1) agriculture, forestry, and fishing; (2) construction and mining; and (3) manufacturing. Manufacturing in Lassen and Plumas Counties, primarily sawmilling, provides 48 percent of the employment in these sectors. These sectors, along with other basic sectors such as tourism and retirement income, support the rest of the economy of the area. Although data on manufacturing in Sierra County is unavailable, but sawmilling appears to be the dominant component of manufacturing.

The core area, the peripheral area, and the State all experienced a drop in manufacturing employment between 1990 and 1997. The Employment Development Department did not report Sierra County's manufacturing employment for 1990 or 1991. When Sierra County is factored out, the core area saw a decrease in manufacturing employment of 2.5 percent, while the periphery area's manufacturing employment dropped 1.4 percent, and the State's dropped 1.1 percent.

The average sawtimber sales offering in the planning area from Fiscal Years 1993 through 1998 was 127 million board feet (MMBF), which is close to the modeled level (123.6 MMBF) for Alternative 1. Alternative 2 has the highest level of sawtimber modeled (286.3 MMBF). This represents an increase of 162.7 million board feet (MMBF) over Alternative 1. The volume of timber harvested from National Forest System lands in Lassen, Plumas, and Sierra Counties in 1990 was 273 million board feet (MMBF) according to reports from the State Board of Equalization. The economic analysis was conducted using the IMPLAN input-output model assumed that 80 percent of timber from the pilot project would be processed locally and 20 percent processed outside the area. Eighty percent of the Alternative 2 level is 229 million board feet (MMBF).

The five sawmills in the core area and the two close-by in Shasta County currently consume slightly less than 500 million board feet (MMBF) of sawtimber annually. It appears that this consumption could be increased sufficiently to handle the increases in harvest volumes indicated by the various alternatives, if the supply of logs from the pilot project was reasonably certain. This would be so, even if a substantial portion of the increase was in the form of small logs. The potential increase in consumption of larger logs would be much greater.

The demand and supply for biomass is nearly in balance. However, the production of chips created by flail-debarking small logs (3 inches in diameter or larger) and sale for pulp and paper or wood-based panel production is feasible if the supply of such logs is reasonably certain. There is also the possibility that adoption of public policies favoring the use of renewable resources, such as wood biomass, would increase the demand for unbarked chips. In addition, production of ethanol is a potential use of woody biomass. Appendix K discusses the current and potential use of small-diameter trees and woody biomass for the production of energy, ethanol, and wood-based products.

Appendix S presents results of a telephone survey of businesses that will potentially be affected by the Act. Those are businesses involved in harvesting and processing forest resources in Butte, Lassen, Nevada, Plumas, Sierra, Shasta, Tehama, and Yuba counties. The survey was conducted by the Center for Economic Development at California State University, Chico. Types of businesses surveyed included logging companies, sawmills, power plants, lumber and log truck companies, forest consultants (including those performing cruising, marking, and sale preparation), log scalers, tree planters, timber stand improvement businesses, fire suppression and fuels treatment companies, re-manufacturing plants, wooden truss makers, fence post makers, paper mills, chip mulching plants (plants that convert raw forest materials into a product), and construction companies that have completed watershed improvement projects. Businesses that primarily use non-local materials (such as lumber brokers, lumber retailers, and cabinetmakers) and private timber owners that only harvest on their own lands and have no mill were excluded.

A total of 200 businesses, including divisions of companies, were identified by the survey; 28 in Butte County, 17 in Lassen County, 25 in Nevada County, 23 in Plumas County, 71 in Shasta County, 9 in Sierra County, 15 in Tehama County, and 12 in Yuba County. In terms of their major activity, of the 200 businesses identified, 7 were energy producers, 40 were in forestry services (including consulting, scaling, reforestation, silvicultural activities, and restoration), 4 were in hazard tree removal, 88 were in logging and road construction, 5 were in processing of woody materials other than lumber, 21 were in remanufacturing of lumber (including production of trusses and fence materials), 16 were in sawmilling, and 19 were in engaged in trucking of logs or lumber. Six of the sawmills have power cogeneration facilities. The survey found that for the years 1998 and 1999, 11,438 persons were employed by forestry and woods products industry businesses n the eight-county area. These jobs include full-time year-round, part-time year-round, and full-time seasonal. Total annual sales for the businesses surveyed were $970,333,771.

A number of the businesses in the survey do not currently have any work in the region, but did previously and could again in the future (loggers were heavily represented in this category). Similarly, greater log availability made possible by the pilot project would increase the percentage of logs or chips from the region to be processed by mills. It is important to track these companies as part of the baseline to study the impact of the Act, because if the Act is successful, many of these companies may report a resurgence of work in the region.

Because of the difficulty of defining businesses by use (current, former, and potential) of raw materials from the region, businesses ultimately deemed relevant were included in the aforementioned work categories, regardless of current usage. Inclusion in this list was based on the following conclusions. Logging companies and lumber and log truck companies can move easily between ownerships, whereas sawmills and power plants are all affected by log availability. Although re-manufacturing mills, wooden truss makers, and fence post makers buy lumber from both local and non-local mills, a substantial number buy materials from small and large mills in the eight-county area that use raw materials from the region. Most plants that convert woody materials to products other than lumber (for example, paper and panel mills, and chip mulching plants) were using local materials. Further, among forest consultants doing cruising, marking, and sale preparation, and log scalers, tree planters, timber stand improvement, fire suppression, and fuels treatment, percentages of work from the region appeared to be increasing. Construction companies that have done watershed improvement projects would be affected by implementation of the Act's restoration component.

Other Economic Impacts of National Forests

One of the most direct impacts the Forest Service has on local jobs in the area is its role as an employer. As with other government agencies, the advantages of Forest Service permanent employment include relative job stability, year-round employment, and benefit packages. Many permanent positions are high paying, "white collar" jobs, requiring advanced training and education. In some of the smaller communities of the region these employees may comprise the highest percentage of "professional" workers, whose skills and leadership are important locally, and who make up an important component of local human and social capital. National forests

in the area currently employ 687 people, including the Tahoe National Forest Supervisor's Office and Sierraville Ranger District. Temporary seasonal employment for the Lassen and Plumas National Forests, and Sierraville Ranger District was approximately 980 people in 1998 (Kusel et al. 1999).

In addition to providing direct employment, the Forest Service contracts for services, supplies, and construction that provide a source of potential employment and income for local residents (Table 3.57). Service contracts awarded by the Forest Service range from tree planting, architecture and engineering, timber stand improvement, audiovisual production, equipment rental, janitorial services, exhibits and graphics, archeology, and writing. Supply contracts furnish commodities, products, or equipment, including the manufacture, fabrication, or processing of raw material into a finished product, and the procurement of raw materials. Typical supply contracts include gravel, fertilizer, cattleguards, wooden fencing, culverts, trailer houses, posts, fabricated metal, lumber, communications equipment, and pipe. Construction contracts include the construction, alteration, or repair of buildings, trails, visitor facilities, roads, dams, fences, campgrounds, sewer and water lines, bridges, and well drilling (Kusel et al., 1999).

Table 3.57 Service Contract Data for Fiscal Year 1998 for the Planning Area
(Location of Contractors in Relation to Number and Value of Contracts)
Location of contractor
Core
Periphery
Outside
Number of contracts
38
25
36
Percent of all service contracts
38
25
36
Sum of service contract values ($)
1,541,648.30
3,243,935.12
3.479.379.81
Percent of value of all contracts
19
39
42
Mean contract value
40,569.69
129,757.40
96,649.44

Payments to Counties (Forest Reserve Revenue)

The Payments to States Program (payments to counties or forest reserve revenue), initiated by the Act of May 23, 1908, requires that 25 percent of timber sale and other receipts, be returned to counties, with 50 percent going to school districts and 50 percent to highway departments. Appendix S notes, "Public road maintenance is a problem for most rural areas. Even with 50 percent of revenue from timber receipts mandated to go to public roadways, rural areas can barely maintain their roads."

Various Government policies designed to restrict timber harvesting on Federal lands, including efforts to protect the California spotted owl, went into effect in 1993 resulting in a 52 percent drop in forest reserve revenues between 1993 and 1994 for the core area. During that period, forest reserve revenues fell 38 percent in the peripheral area and 22 percent for the State. In general, revenues in this category, vary from year to year as total timber harvests vary. When timber production is low, forest reserve revenue falls, limiting road maintenance and school expenditures if no alternative source of funding is found.

The core area has experienced a rapid decline in payments to counties as a percentage of the total budget, from a peak of 12.6 percent in 1990, to a low of 4 percent by 1997. Data in Appendix S indicate that payments to core area counties in Fiscal 1997 were 42 percent of the payments in Fiscal Year 1990, representing a $4 million reduction. State of California Board of Equalization data indicates that the value of public timber harvests for Calendar Year 1998 were 22 percent of Calendar Year 1990. The peripheral area experienced a more gradual decrease in payments. Forest reserve revenue declined for the State as a whole (Jensen et al., 1999).

Timber Yield Tax Revenue

The California timber yield tax program was initiated by State legislation in 1976 and applies to timber cut from both private and public lands. Currently, the tax amounts to 2.9 percent of the value of the timber harvested, as determined by the State Board of Equalization, which administers the program on behalf of the counties. The tax is paid by the timber owner in the case of private land, and by the timber purchaser in the case of public timber. Reductions in national forest timber sales have had a significant effect on core county yield tax revenues. Reports from the Board of Equalization indicate the level of public timber harvest in the core counties dropped from 430 million board feet (MMBF) in 1990 (with a total value of $54 million) to 187 million board feet (MMBF) in 1998 (with a total value of $12 million). This resulted in a revenue reduction in 1998 relative to 1990 of over $1 million.

Recreation and Tourism

Although it is seasonal in character, recreation activity on the national forests is economically important to the region. Data in Appendix S, indicates that Lassen National Forest had 4.3 million visits and Plumas National Forest had 6.1 million visits in 1996 (the latest year data is available). Furthermore, if it is assumed the Sierraville Ranger District has 20 percent of the Tahoe National Forest's recreation activity, it accounted for 2.8 million visits. Thus, the core area had a total of approximately 13 million visits in 1996. In terms of economic impact, only expenditures by visitors from outside the region contribute to the local economy, because those expenditures generate regional income. Expenditures by recreationists who are residents of a region do not add to regional income because if they do not spend money on local recreation they spend it in other ways. An exception to this is the case where the availability of local recreation opportunities induces residents to stay in the region rather than seek recreational opportunities outside it.

Much of the national forest recreation activity is motor vehicle-based, and programs which maintain or improve road access can contribute to the overall attractiveness of the national forests as a recreation destination. The most popular activities on the Lassen, Plumas, and Tahoe National Forests are travel and sightseeing, camping, picnicking, and swimming.

Grazing on National Forest System Lands

The planning area provides approximately 65,139 animal unit months (AUM) for grazing. The Forest Service charges $1.35 per AUM. Twenty-five percent of grazing receipts are returned as revenue to counties.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Economic stability and community well being are affected by local and regional social and economic factors, and by national and global conditions. The pilot project area is dominated by the forest ecosystem of the Sierra Nevada. This ecosystem provides a desirable place to live and visit, and also provides economic benefits to the local communities through the production of goods and services such as timber and grazing. The proposed action and alternatives propose varying levels of resource management activities. To estimate and compare the economic impacts of the proposed action and alternatives, an analysis using the IMPLAN input-output model was conducted (Appendix V). The IMPLAN model estimates the total economic effects of implementation of the proposed action and alternatives would have on the eight-county area. The economic analysis assumes that 80 percent of timber from the pilot project would be processed locally and 20 percent processed outside the area. Community well being is considered in this analysis only as it is affected by increased employment and income opportunities. A monitoring plan has been developed to monitor impacts on socioeconomic in the pilot project area (Appendix T).

Consequences Common to All Alternatives

Income, employment, and product sales resulting from management activities common to all alternatives directly impact the socioeconomic situation in the eight-county area. Twenty-five percent of receipts from timber sales and other revenue-generating activities go to counties for roads and schools (forest reserve revenues). In addition, county general funds receive timber yield taxes paid by purchasers of Federal timber at the rate of 2.9 percent of the timber harvest value set by the State of California Board of Equalization.

Timber harvests from Federal land contribute to a flow of products needed to sustain the wood products industry and the biomass energy industry. The basic (direct) employment provided by the pilot project is primarily in sawmilling and wood processing, trucking, logging, and roadwork sectors, and in connection with reduction of fuels by prescribed fire and other means. Alternatives with high levels of timber harvest activity, and to a lesser extent fuels reduction activity, would provide substantial job opportunities for skilled, semi-skilled, and unskilled workers. Dollars spent on employment, income, and sales in the wood products industry create impacts throughout the eight-county area as businesses and employees spend the money they receive at other regional businesses, either to provide the services necessary for their operation or to consume final goods. Population in the eight-county area is expected to continue patterns of modest growth without significant changes due to pilot project implementation.

The proposed action and alternatives provide strategies to lessen risk and intensity of wildfire. Diminished risk of high intensity wildfire promotes ecological, commodity, and aesthetic values in the region.

Economic impacts on non-basic economic sectors (dependent or service sectors) of the eight-county area would vary according to the level of commodity output in the proposed action or alternatives.

Use of Values Resulting from SPECTRUM and IMPLAN Modeling - The SPECTRUM linear programming model and the IMPLAN economic input-output model were used in this analysis to estimate the effects of implementing the proposed action and alternatives. The values produced by these models are estimates based on the best information available (Table 3.58). These values are valuable for making comparisons between alternatives; however, they should not be interpreted as precise or exact values that will result from implementation of the alternatives.

Table 3.58 Summary Comparison of Effects
Per Year by Alternative 46
  Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5
Forest reserve revenues ($)
8,992,730
20,829,328
18,280,038
6,170,452
994,542
Population No change Slight increase Slight increase  No change Potential decrease
Employment impacts (jobs)
1,217
2,965
2,711
1,048
432
Total impacts on income ($)
55,683,027
133,120,102
120,594,291
43,236,937
12,161,305
Total sales ($)
113,623,195
267,155,386
239,979,971
85,891,857
22,209,400
USFS employment No change Increase Increase Decrease Decrease
Amount of service contracts No change  Large increase Large increase Decrease Large decrease
Tourism No change No change No change  No change  No change
Recreation  No change No change  No change No change  No change
Grazing No change No change  No change  No change No change


Footnotes:
  46All numbers reflect multiplier effects, see Appendix V, IMPLAN Modeling for Socioeconomic Impacts of Alternatives


Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects

Alternative 1 - Counties would receive receipts from forest reserve revenues similar to current levels. The SPECTRUM analysis predicts forest reserve revenues of $8,992,730 annually for Alternative 1. Direct and indirect employment is estimated to be 1,217 jobs. Total annual income in the eight-county area from the implementation of Alternative 1 is estimated to be $55,683,027. Total sales in the eight-county area would be $113,623,195 annually. Biomass would continue to be available for energy production at current levels. The pilot project area Forests would continue to provide 20 to 40 percent of the area timber harvest. Continuation of Forest Service timber sales at current levels would pose difficulties for the long-term operation of local mills. No changes due to levels of management activities are expected for Forest Service employment or amount of service contracts. No changes are expected in levels of tourism, recreation, or grazing on Federal lands from implementation of this alternative.

Alternative 2 - The SPECTRUM analysis predicts forest reserve revenues of $20,829,328 annually for Alternative 2. This is more than twice the current (Alternative 1) level and would temporarily bolster county funding for roads and schools. Resulting direct and indirect employment impacts for economic sectors are estimated to be 2,965 jobs. This would provide increased employment opportunities throughout the area in jobs related to the forest products industry, as well as all other jobs for the term of the pilot project. Total impacts on annual income from the implementation of Alternative 1 are estimated to be $133,120,102. The total impacts on sales in the eight-county area would be $267,155,386 annually.

Forest Service employment would increase as would service contracts. A 6 percent increase in the supply of biomass would have little effect on the biomass market. More than twice the current supply of logs from National Forest System lands would be available to local mills. No changes are expected in harvest levels from private land (personal communication: Ed Murphy, Sierra Pacific Industries and Jay Francis, Collins Pine Company). No changes are expected in levels of tourism, recreation, or grazing on National Forest System lands from implementation of this Alternative 2.

Alternative 3 - The SPECTRUM analysis predicts forest reserve revenues of $18,280,038 annually for Alternative 3. Direct and indirect employment impacts for economic sectors are estimated to be 2,711 jobs. Total impacts on annual income from the implementation of Alternative 3 are estimated to be $120,594,291. The total impacts on sales in the eight-county area would be $239,979,971 annually. Economic effects of Alternative 3 are similar, but slightly less than those of Alternative 2. The supply of biomass would increase by 23 percent and may weaken the already marginal biomass market by flooding the biomass market, unless new markets are developed. Twice the current supply of National Forest System logs would be available to local mills. Forest Service employment may increase as would service contracts. No changes are expected in levels of tourism, recreation, or grazing on Federal lands from implementation of Alternative 3.

Alternative 4 - The SPECTRUM analysis predicts forest reserve revenues of $6,170,452 annually for Alternative 4. This is 32 percent less revenue available to counties than under Alternative 1, and would reduce revenues for road and school programs. Direct and indirect employment impacts for economic sectors are estimated to be 1,048 jobs. Employment opportunities would be similar to the current situation under Alternative 1. Total impacts on annual income from the implementation of Alternative 4 are estimated to be $43,236,937. The total impacts on sales in the eight-county area would be $85,891,857 annually.

Under Alternative 4, several sawmills in the eight-county area may close. The supply of biomass would be about half the levels of Alternative 1. This reduction in supply of biomass could raise biomass prices and affect the long-term operation of cogeneration plants. Private timberlands that are economically feasible for biomass removal have, for the most part, already been treated and would not be available for additional biomass removal for 20 to 30 years (personal communication with Jay Francis, Collins Pine Company).

Forest Service employment may decrease as would service contracts. No changes would be expected in levels of tourism, recreation, or grazing on Federal lands from implementation of Alternative 4.

Alternative 5 - This Alternative provides the least amount of receipts to counties from forest reserve revenue. The SPECTRUM analysis predicts forest reserve revenues of $944,542 annually for Alternative 5, which is 11 percent of the revenues provided by Alternative 1. County road and school programs would affected. Direct and indirect employment impacts for economic sectors are estimated to be 432 jobs. This is 65 percent fewer jobs than under current Forest Service management. Fewer jobs in the pilot project area may result in more commuting out of region and out-migration of local residents. Total impacts on annual income from the implementation of Alternative 5 are estimated to be $12,161,305.

Alternative 5 would affect the local timber industry because of they low sawtimber harvest, only 13 million board feet (MMBF). Several sawmills in the eight-county area may close. The supply of biomass would be approximately one-third of current levels. This reduction in the supply of biomass may have an affect on the long-term operation of cogeneration plants in the eight-county area. The total impacts on sales in the eight-county area would be $22,209,400 annually. Forest Service employment would decrease as would service contracts. No changes would be expected in levels of tourism, recreation, or grazing on Federal lands from implementation of this alternative.

Summary of Effects

Alternative 2 would result in greater short-term economic activity for the eight-county area than the other Alternatives (Table 3.60). Alternatives 2 provides the most forest reserve revenues to counties, and provides the most impacts on employment, income, and sales. Alternatives 2 and 3 would impact short-term job creation. Alternative 2 provides 2,965 jobs in the eight-county economy. It is closely followed by Alternative 3, which provides 2,711 jobs. The employment impacts of these Alternatives are substantially higher than those of Alternatives 1 and 4, which provide 1,217 and 1,048 jobs respectively. Alternative 5 provides 432 jobs.

Alternative 2 generates the greatest amount of short-term revenues to county school and roads, providing 2.3 times the revenue of Alternative 1. Alternative 3 would provide twice the forest reserve revenues of Alternative 1. Alternative 4 provides counties revenues that are 69 percent of the Alternative 1 levels, while Alternative 5 provides 11 percent of Alternative 1 revenues.

Sawtimber harvest is 2.3 times the Alternative 1 harvest level for Alternative 2, and 2.0 times the harvest level of Alternative 3. Alternatives 4 and 5 provide 69 percent and 11 percent respectively of the Alternative 1 harvest level. The implementation of either Alternative 4 or 5 may result in sawmill closings in the eight-county area. Biomass harvest relative to Alternative 1 would be 106 percent for Alternative 2, and 129 percent for Alternative 3. Alternatives 4 and 5 provide 50 percent and 31 percent respectively of the Alternative 1 biomass harvest.

Total timber sale revenues are computed as the sum of gross revenues from the sales of biomass and sawtimber (Table 3.59). Total timber sale costs include timber sale and salvage sale preparation and administration and road costs. Sawtimber revenue is calculated using a stumpage price of $310 (Lassen and Tahoe National Forests) and $312 (Plumas National Forest) per thousand board feet (MBF). Biomass revenue is calculated using a value of $15 per bone dry ton. In terms of the difference between these revenues and costs, Alternative 2 would provide net revenues of $305,829,413 for the pilot project period. Alternative 3 provide net revenues of $270,416,794 for the pilot project period. The net revenue associated with Alternative 5 would result in a decrease in economic activity for the eight-county area with possible substantial impacts on employment and income in the core area.

Table 3.59 Costs and Revenues for Timber Sale Activities by Alternative for 5 Years
Alternative Cost 47
($)
Revenue 48
($)
Net Revenues
($)
1
67,078,750
208,277,100
141,198,350
2
156,287,000
462,116,413
305,829,413
3
140,920,000
411,336,794
270,416,794
4
54,465,999
139,801,141
85,335,142
5
9,747,000
25,206,707
15,459,707

Table 3.60 Total Costs and Economic Activities for Implementing Each Alternative for 5 Years
Alternative
Cost 49
($)
Economic Activities 50
($)
1
296,185,000
891,495,000
2
335,710,000
2,105,520,000
3
517,334,000
1,894,270,000
4
335,130,000
676,495,000
5
267,665,000
276,575,000


Footnotes:
  47Cost includes timber sale and salvage sale preparation and administration and road costs.

  48Revenue includes value for thousands of board feet (MBF) and value for biomass.

  49Costs include fixed costs, timber sale and salvage sale preparation and administration, reforestation, fuel treatments, road construction, road reconstruction, road maintenance, road decommissioning, and riparian restoration and monitoring.

  50Economic activities include total impacts on sales, income, and forest reserve revenues as assessed through IMPLAN modeling.



Disclosures

Relationship of Short-term Uses and Long-term Productivity - The harvest level for Alternatives 2 and 3 cannot be sustained beyond the term of the pilot project. There would not be enough trees available to harvest that are below the current minimum diameter retention guidelines required by interim direction for the protection of California spotted owl. SPECTRUM modeling indicates the pilot project area would "grow itself out" of management options due to large tree retention guidelines in suitable owl habitat. Also, many areas would be expected to grow into suitable owl habitat, and thus be subjected to the large tree retention guidelines. Therefore, direct economic benefits would be short-term.

Unavoidable Adverse Effects - There are no unavoidable adverse effects due to socioeconomic factors.

Irreversible Commitments of Resources - There are no known irreversible commitments due to socioeconomic factors.

Irretrievable Commitment of Resources - There is no known irretrievable commitments due to socioeconomic factors.

Other Relevant Disclosures - There are no additional relevant disclosures related to socioeconomic factors.

Cultural Heritage Resources

Affected Environment
The affected cultural resource environment for the area is complex. Heritage resources in the planning area represent some 9,000 years of prehistory and history, documenting a wide array of economic, social, and ideological activities that crosscut by a diversity of ethnic groups. At the time of Euro-American immigration, many Native American groups were present. These groups included the Washoe, Paiute, Maidu, Yana, Achomawi, Atsuge, and Atsugewi. Many of their descendents maintain traditional use of national forest locales, including sacred areas, places of origin and cultural importance (burial sites), and sites where traditional gatherings or ceremonies occur. Descendents of Euro-American pioneers and settlers also identify with many historic locations.

The types and locations of projects for which cultural inventories have been undertaken generally bias the existing inventory of cultural resources. In the planning area, over 7,000 heritage resources have been identified to date (approximately 3,000 on Lassen National Forest, 4,000 on Plumas National Forest, and 500 on the Sierraville District of the Tahoe National Forest). Although this represents a large portion of the heritage resource inventory, much of the planning area remains to be adequately inventoried for cultural resources, with cultural heritage sites remaining to be discovered are estimated to exceed 15,000 sites. Moreover, less than 10 percent of the identified cultural resources have been evaluated to determine their eligibility for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Of those already evaluated, several hundred are eligible.

Current information about the types and numbers of cultural sites in the planning area is contained in several documents prepared by the Forest Service and other sources. Authors include: Markley and Henton (1985), Carlson (1986), Jackson Research Projects (1982), Johnston and Budy (1982), Neuenschwander (1994), and Kowta (1988). In addition to general overviews of the prehistory, history, and ethnography of the planning area, these documents identify and discuss issues regarding interpretation of archaeological data.

Environmental Consequences

Consequences Common to All Alternatives
The proposed action and alternatives require resource management activities that are likely to affect cultural heritage resources. Although alternatives vary in their level of management, each includes some combination of timber harvest (fuel break construction, group selection, and individual tree selection), road construction, and prescribed fire. Effects from management activities on cultural heritage resources are expected to vary with the type, location, and extent of individual projects, and by the nature of the cultural heritage resource. Although effects would need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis at the site-specific level, there is sufficient information regarding proposed resource management activities to make general statements regarding potential consequences to cultural heritage resources.

Ground-disturbing activities, such as harvesting and prescribed burning, pose the most obvious potential threat to cultural heritage resources. Mechanical treatments can damage or destroy historic and prehistoric archaeological sites and features. Road and landing construction, tree felling, skidding, and slash disposal activities could alter or destroy surface or shallow sites and other physical features. In addition to directly affecting the location and physical features of cultural heritage resources, ground-disturbing activities could indirectly affect the feeling or setting of a cultural heritage resource. This can occur even if activities are not conducted inside the site boundaries. The importance of a cultural heritage site may encompass its setting and landscape association as much as with its physical features. Effects to setting, association, or feeling can also detract from a cultural heritage resource's value for public interpretation and education.

Prescribed fire could directly alter, damage, or destroy cultural heritage resources. Historic structures incur the greatest risk from fire, but other components of prehistoric archaeological sites could also be affected. Current research suggests that the effects of wildfire can change the rate at which obsidian absorbs water and alter the results of hydration analysis, an important technique for determining the age of an archaeological deposit (Deal, 1999). Prescribed fire and wildfire can directly impact surface and shallow subsurface components of archaeological sites if fire intensity is sufficiently high.

Not all management activities would adversely affect cultural heritage properties. It is important to recognize that some can enhance cultural heritage values, even when they do not directly affect the landscape in the cultural heritage resource boundary. Timber harvesting in an area of historic logging camps and facilities could enhance the historic character of the resource by restoring its original landscape context. Burning and other silvicultural practices can promote the growth and spread of important resources such as bear grass or hazel, traditionally collected by Native Americans (Wilson and Dutschke 1998).

Management activities that increase public access or ground visibility can affect cultural heritage resources. Increased traffic can destroy sites through inadvertent damage caused by compaction or other ground-disturbing activities. Looters and vandals could severely damage or destroy cultural heritage values. Heritage sites on adjacent, non-Federal property are particularly subject to these impacts.

Management activities can benefit cultural heritage resources by providing opportunities for study; thereby adding to knowledge of past human behavior and the evolution of human-environment interactions. Further understanding of how to best manage natural resources comes as a direct result of efforts to understand past human impacts on the environment (McKelvey and Johnston 1992; Johnston 1997; O'Brien 1997; Woolfenden 1996). These opportunities are enhanced when cultural heritage properties are identified, evaluated, and studied. Areas managed for recreation provide opportunities for protection and interpretation of cultural heritage resources for public education and enjoyment.

The potential effects from implementation of the proposed action and each alternative varies and would be site-specific. Direct and indirect effects to cultural heritage resources by management activities would need to be evaluated on an individual, site-specific basis. While the proposed action and alternatives could potentially effect cultural heritage resources, the number of affected resources would vary substantially.

Consequences by Alternative

Alternative 1 - For the years 1997 and 1998, approximately 25,000 acres were surveyed each year for cultural heritage resources (Heritage Resources Annual Reports, 1997 and 1998). Data suggest that under Alternative 1, with an approximate 25,000 acres of treatments annually, the following annual averages are expected in the planning area: (1) 138 new cultural heritage resources would be recorded, (2) 250 cultural heritage resources would need to be re-recorded, and (3) 130 cultural heritage resources would be evaluated to determine their eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places.

Alternative 2 - Treatment of up to 70,000 acres annually through a combination of defensible fuel profile zone construction, and group selection and individual tree selection harvest would be planned. This represents a 180 percent increase over the current number of acres of cultural heritage resources that must be considered. Comparing current annual acres with projected Alternative 2 acres, approximately 1,400 cultural heritage resources would be expected to be newly identified, require re-recording, or require evaluation annually. Although cultural heritage resources can be located anywhere on the landscape, the construction of defensible fuel profile zones along or adjacent to existing roads and around communities could increase the rate at which archaeological sites and features are encountered. Present day community locations and transportation routes often reflect those used in the past; a higher density of cultural heritage resources could be expected in areas targeted for defensible fuel profile zone placement.

Alternative 3 - Treatment of up to 70,000 acres annually through a combination of defensible fuel profile zone construction, and group selection and individual tree selection harvest would be planned. This represents a 180 percent increase over the current number of acres of cultural heritage resources that must be considered. Comparing current annual acres with projected Alternative 3 acres, approximately 1,400 cultural heritage resources would be expected to be newly identified, require re-recording, or require evaluation annually.

Although cultural heritage resources can be located anywhere on the landscape, the construction of defensible fuel profile zones along or adjacent to existing roads and around communities could increase the rate at which archaeological sites and features are encountered. Present day community locations and transportation routes often reflect those used in the past; a higher density of cultural heritage resources could be expected in those areas targeted for defensible fuel profile zone placement. Emphasis is placed on area fuel treatments, which include isolated and overlapping blocks varying from ½ acre to 2 acres in size. The difference in effect on cultural heritage resources with Alternative 3 is unclear, but one possible effect could be to increase public access to culturally-sensitive areas by opening up areas away from roads.

Alternative 4 - The range of effects on cultural heritage resources would be similar to those described for Alternative 1. Treatment of up to 30,000 acres per year through a combination of defensible fuel profile zone construction and group selection and individual tree selection harvest would be planned. Although cultural heritage resources can be located anywhere on the landscape, the construction of defensible fuel profile zones placed along or adjacent to existing roads and around communities could increase the rate at which archaeological sites and features are encountered. Present day community locations and transportation routes often reflect those used in the past; a higher density of cultural heritage resources could be expected in those areas targeted for defensible fuel profile zone placement. Emphasis is placed on area fuel treatments that include isolated and overlapping blocks varying from ½ acre to 2 acres in size. The difference in effect on cultural heritage resources using Alternative 4 is unclear, but one possible effect could be an increase in public access to culturally-sensitive areas by opening up areas away from roads.

Alternative 5 - Management activities could include up to 40,000 acres per year, but Alternative 5 emphasizes prescribed burning over mechanical treatment. Burning has a direct impact on some cultural heritage resources, particularly historic structures, although there are fewer of these site types. Direct effects to prehistoric lithic scatters and other sites containing obsidian may be substantial if fires substantially raise ground temperature. Current research indicates that prescribed fire in areas of high fuel loads can adversely effect obsidian hydration bands and alter estimates of age for the archaeological deposit (Deal, 1999). In addition, standard protection measures (flag and avoid) for cultural heritage resources are less effective with prescribed burning than mechanical treatment. Flagged areas can be seen and avoided by human operators where fire cannot be controlled with the same precision. A prescribed fire program requires a significant increase in the number of determinations of eligibility and data recovery programs before burning.

The lack of defensible fuel profile zone construction under Alternative 5 would result in fewer cultural heritage resources identified as compared to Alternatives 2 and 3, and slightly more than expected for Alternatives 1 and 4. However, the emphasis on prescribed burning over mechanical treatment also requires that evaluations and data recovery programs be emphasized over less costly standard cultural heritage resource protection measures.

Summary of Effects

Although the potential effects to cultural heritage resources are broadly similar in all alternatives, the scope of effects varies considerably resulting in different levels of cultural heritage management. Cultural heritage management includes the personnel and resources needed to identify cultural heritage resources before implementing site-specific activities and evaluation of cultural resource eligibility for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.

Disclosures

Relationship of Short-term Uses and Long-term Productivity or Effects - Timber harvest, fuel treatments, road construction, broadcast burning, and other resource management activities may damage or disturb irreplaceable traditional cultural properties that have not yet been identified. The pilot project has the potential to affect the setting, feeling, and atmosphere of traditional cultural properties if resource management activities are conducted immediately adjacent to them.

Unavoidable Adverse Effects – No unavoidable adverse effects are expected.

Irreversible Commitment of Resources - Irreversible commitments would consist of irreparable disturbance to cultural heritage resources such that values are permanently lost.

Irretrievable Commitment of Resources – Irretrievable commitments would consist of cultural heritage resource disturbance that would preclude further study and documentation.

Other Relevant Disclosures - No relevant other disclosures are applicable.

Native American Tribes and Communities

Affected Environment
California Indians residing in the vicinity of the planning area are directly related to the original inhabitants. It is well documented through anthropological investigation that the ancestors of these local people lived in and used the planning area for thousands of years (Moratto 1984; Kowta 1988). Diverse ecosystems provided flora, fauna, and other natural resources that the tribal groups depended on. Rivers, streams, lakes, meadows, marshes, and forests provided food and materials required by these people. Fire was used to manipulate and enhance the environment keeping areas free of brush, managing game, stimulating production of food crops, controlling insects and diseases, and facilitating material gathering. Euro-American influence after 1849 had a dramatic effect on landscapes through mining, grazing, farming, transportation development, hydroelectric development, fire suppression, and timber harvesting. The cumulative effects of historic and contemporary human activities have led to a decrease of many traditionally-important plant and animal species used by California Indians (Anderson, 1996).

The onset of the Gold Rush brought emigration of miners and settlers and the initiation of Federal tribal legislation and policy. During that time, California Indians living in the Sierra Nevada endured serious population decreases and cultural degradation. Estimates are that by 1900 only 25 percent of the pre-contact population remained. Acculturation and assimilation of tribal communities was advanced by non-reservation boarding school systems, such as the Greenville Indian Industrial School. The Greenville School, located in the planning area, ceased operations in 1922 (Jones, 1978).

Many local tribal groups maintain their cultural identities and ties with the land. Many tribes are viable and dynamic and have continued interest in ancestral practices. In the last 10 years, tribal organizations have become more involved and influential in land management issues, as a means for providing economic development for members, re-establishing aboriginal land-use practices, repatriating ancestral remains and cultural items, and protecting sacred sites.

Today, there are approximately 24 Indian tribes and community groups with traditional territory in the planning area. These consist of 8 Federally-recognized tribal governments, 4 tribes seeking Federal recognition, 2 terminated rancherias, and 2 tribes without federal recognition (USDI Bureau of Indian Affairs 1999; CDHDC 1996) (Tables 3.61 through 3.65).

The demographics of the affected tribes comprise a complex pattern of reservations, rancherias, and allotments. The estimated population of the Federally-recognized tribal members in the planning area is over 2,000, and can be extrapolated to an overall population exceeding 4,000. Indian communities and individuals reside primarily off reservations and rancherias, though some live on family allotments inside National Forest System boundaries. Approximately 300 acres of land are owned by the tribes in the planning area, and due to this small land ownership, National Forest System lands are important to the tribes. The majority of culturally significant sites and resources (traditional ceremonial sites, cemeteries, gathering areas, and historic tribal villages) are located on National Forest System lands. These areas are considered by the tribes to be very important for continued traditional cultural and spiritual practices.

Land use issues of highest importance to tribes involve the effects of site-specific projects on traditional cultural and spiritual sites. The tribes do not openly identify many of these sites because of their sacred nature; however, most sites are identified when appropriate consultation is conducted and actions may affect them. Consultation with tribes is required (Table 3.66) to ensure that activities or programs do not affect native religious beliefs and practices, sites, or objects that are traditionally important. (Source for following tables: Forest Service National Resource Book on American Indian and Alaska Native Relations)

Table 3.62 Federally Recognized Tribes in Planning Area
Indian Community Tribal Affiliation County
Berry Creek Rancheria Maidu Butte
Chico Band of Mechoopda Maidu Butte
Enterprise Rancheria Maidu Butte
Greenville Rancheria Maidu Plumas
Mooretown Rancheria Maidu Butte
Pit River Tribe 11 autonomous bands Shasta, Modoc, Lassen, Siskiyou
Susanville Indian Rancheria Achomawi, Maidu, Pit River, Paiute, Washoe, Atsugewi Lassen
Washoe Reservation Carson, Dresslerville, Woodsfords, Stewart Bands Alpine and Sierra (California)
Douglas and Carson (Nevada)

Table 3.63 Tribes Seeking Federal Recognition
Indian Community Tribal Affiliation County
United Maidu Nation Maidu Lassen
Wadatkuht Band of the Northern Paiutes of Honey Lake Valley Paiute Lassen
Konkow Valley Band Konkow Maidu, Wailaki Butte
T’si-akim Maidu Maidu Plumas

Table 3.64 Tribes Without Federal Recognition
Indian Community Tribal Affiliation County
Big Meadows Lodge Tribe Maidu Plumas
Plumas County Indians, Incorporated Maidu Plumas
Northern Maidu Tribe Maidu Lassen

 

Table 3.65 Terminated Rancherias
Indian Community Tribal Affiliation County
Taylorsville Rancheria Maidu Plumas
Strawberry Valley Rancheria Maidu Yuba

Table 3.66 Tribal Groups, Non-Profits, and Community Organizations
Indian Community Tribal Affiliation County
Helym Nesem Maidu Cultural Center Maidu Plumas
Honey Lake Maidu Maidu Lassen
Yahmonee Bear Dance Committee Maidu Lassen
Stiver Indian Cemetery Association Maidu Plumas
Roundhouse Council Maidu Plumas
Maidu Cultural and Development Center Maidu Plumas
Butte County Cultural Preservation Committee Maidu Butte

Table 3.67 Federal Legislation and Executive Orders
Legislation Contact Subject
American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 Traditional religious practitioners Obtain and consider views during planning and decision making
Archeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 Tribal officials If planned activities may harm or impact Indian religious of cultural sites
National Forest Management Act of 1976 Tribal officials Provide opportunity to raise issues and comment on land use plans
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 Tribal officials, lineal descendents, affiliated groups Treatment and disposition of human remains and associated funerary items and items of cultural patrimony
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Tribal officials Provide opportunity to participate in land management decision making
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 Tribal officials, traditional cultural leaders Provide opportunity to consult as "interested persons" if planned activities may affect properties of historic value to a tribe
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 Religious practitioners Ensure agency decisions do not burden free exercise of religion (access, use, or ritual practices
Executive Memorandum, Government-to-Government Relations (1994) Tribal governments Consult to the greatest extent and operate in a government-to-government relationship
Executive Order 13007 – Sacred Sites (1996) Tribal officials, religious leaders Accommodate access to and ceremonial use of sacred sites and avoid physically-affecting the integrity of sites
Executive Order 13084 (1998) Tribal governments Consult and coordinate with Indian tribal governments

Environmental Consequences

Consequences Common to All Alternatives
Traditional cultural properties and values are defined as those areas of interest that have an association with the historic cultural practices or beliefs of a living community, and are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community. (National Park Service 1993). Cultural properties are often hard to recognize in the field because many do not have the physical characteristics that are typically associated with other heritage properties, such as archaeological or historical sites. The majority of the known traditional cultural properties within the planning area were identified during heritage resource inventories and were noted only because they do have physical attributes (examples are petroglyphs or marked cemeteries). The majority of traditional property locations are often obscure and undefined.

Traditional ceremonial locations may merely look like a mountain top, lake, or stretch of river; plant gathering areas may occur along nondescript sections of road; or a family burial could exist on the side slope of a hill marked only with a small rock. Traditional ceremonies and gathering for food, medicine, ceremonial regalia, basketry supplies, and other activities are ongoing in the planning area. Known locations for some traditional sites exist; however, the present needs and practices are not fully known. It is not practical to inventory all locations in the pilot project area.

Many plant and animal species have cultural importance for tribal values. Specific cultural uses are attributed to many species that are not afforded special management protection, such as provided for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species. Bear grass, deer grass, and porcupine quills are used for traditional basket materials. The consequences of site-specific implementation may affect the cultural use of, access to, or viability of these species.

Disclosures

Relationship of Short-term Uses and Long-term Productivity or Effects – Timber harvest, fuel treatments, road construction, broadcast burning, and other resource management activities may damage or disturb irreplaceable traditional cultural properties that have not yet been identified. The pilot project has the potential to affect the setting, feeling, and atmosphere of traditional cultural properties if resource management activities are conducted immediately adjacent to them.

Unavoidable Adverse Effects – No unavoidable adverse effects are expected.

Irreversible Commitment of Resources - Irreversible commitments would consist of irreparable disturbance to a site such that values are permanently lost. Fire, including prescribed burning, could cause irreversible damage when the intensity is too high.

Irretrievable Commitment of Resources – Irretrievable commitments would consist of site disturbance that would preclude further use of an area by contemporary users, such as a plant gathering site.

Other Relevant Disclosures - No relevant other disclosures are applicable.

Return to Table Of Contents