Pathways to the vision... Alternatives explored
Alternative 1 - No Action (existing condition)
Objective: Required to evaluate as existing condition without management intervention.
Outcome: Management of recreation, fire suppression, hazard trees, road maintenance and re-closure of breached roads continue at current levels
Tradeoffs: No actions taken to reduce risk across the landscape. Under analysis.
Desired vegetation density for LSR (old growth) habitat
Dark green=dense
patterns
light green=open patterns
Current Project Area Fire Risk
Red=severe Brown=medium Green=low
Current
areas with high competition stress and susceptibility to bark beetles
and disease
Purple=high
Light green=medium/low
Alternative 2 - click to view treatment descriptions
Objective: Reduce short-term risk while minimizing short-term watershed and other effects that can be associated with active forest management
Limit tree harvest in Late Successional Reserves (old growth)
Outcome: Defensible space buffer treatments are fully implemented for public safety, 71% of the total project area is treated, mostly through underburning (7000 acres) and thinning small trees (12" diameter or less)(5000 acres)
Remove hazard trees, restore aspen stands (75 acres), restore meadow habitat (35 acres), prune/girdle/top trees with dwarf mistletoe (50 acres)
Tradeoffs: Less long term reduction of risk. Under analysis.
Desired vegetation density for LSR (old growth) habitat
Dark green=dense
patterns
light green=open patterns
Project Area Fire Risk following treatment
Red=severe Brown=medium Green=low
Areas with high competition stress and high susceptibility to bark beetles and disease following treatment.
Alternative 3 click to view treatment descriptions
Objective:Balances risk reduction with impacts from forest management (similar to Alternative 4)
Addresses concerns about the size of trees removed (tree size is limited to 16" diameter for ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and larch and 21" diameter for white fir)
Outcome: Defensible space buffer and landscape scale treatments are fully implemented for public safety, 74 percent of the project area is treated, mostly through thinning dense trees (11,000 acres) and underburning (1000 acres)
Actions to restore aspen meadows and aspen stands, to management dwarf mistle toe, and to address hazard trees are the same as Alternative 2
Tradeoffs: Some forest areas may remain overstocked with large dense trees. Under analysis.
Less impact from removal of larger trees.
Desired vegetation density for LSR (old growth) habitat
Dark green=dense
patterns
light green=open patterns
Project Area Fire Risk following treatment
Red=severe Brown=medium Green=low
Areas with high competition stress and high susceptibility to bark beetles and disease following treatment.
Proposed Action --- Alternative 4 click to view treatment descriptions
Objective: Balances risk reduction with impacts from forest management while maintaining adequate late-successional habitat for a variety of species. (similar to Alt3)
Larger trees would be removed (tree size is limited to 21" diameter for ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and larch and 25" diameter for white fir)
Outcome: Defensible space buffer and landscape scale treatments are fully implemented for public safety, 74 percent of the project area is treated, mostly through thinning.
Other than tree size, the actions are the same as under Alternative 3.
Tradeoffs: More impact from removal of larger trees. Under analysis.
Desired vegetation density for LSR (old growth) habitat
Dark green=dense
patterns
light green=open patterns
Project Area Fire Risk following treatment
Red=severe Brown=medium Green=low
Areas with high competition stress and high susceptibility to bark beetles and disease following treatment.
Alternative 5 click to view treatment descriptions
Objective: Focus on maximizing risk reduction across the landscape. No diameter limit on trees which could be removed, however removal of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fire larch trees larger than 21" diameter would be and exception, and only occur under certain conditions.
Outcome: 75 percent of the project area would be treated by proposed actions. Actions to restore meadow and aspen stands, to manage dwarf mistletoe, and to address hazard trees are the same as under Alternative 2.
Thin dense stands (10,555 acres), underburn (1,010 acres), regenerate stands with high mortality (295), small group openings to restore stagnate larch stands (810 acres)
Tradeoffs: More openings in the forest; more large trees removed. Under analysis.
Desired vegetation density for LSR (old growth) habitat
Dark green=dense
patterns
light green=open patterns
Project Area Fire Risk following treatment
Red=severe Brown=medium Green=low
Areas with high competition stress and high susceptibility to bark beetles and disease following treatment.