º shelf Alpine Lakes Area UNIT sº NZ ºº gº tº Land Management Plan U.S. Department of Agriculture DRAFT Environmental Impact Statement Wenatchee and Mt. ºn- National Forests Cover photo by Asahel Curtis. Reproduction of photogravure published in 1900 in Artwork of the State of Washington by Edmond S. Meany. Asahel Curtis (1874-1941) was the younger brother of the celebrated Edward Curtis, whose photographic Studies of Native Americans are a primary link with the American past. Attention is turning increas. ingly to work by the younger Curtis, much of which captured for the first time scenery in the Cascade Range. A nature trail and memorial grove of old growth trees in the Alpine Lakes Area were named after Curtis in 1964. His photograph of Mt. Index on the cover of this document was taken prior to the turn of the century. It testifies to the enduring hold which this region exerts on the sense of wonder. looking southwest across E U.S. Forest Service. º - wing Basin. Photo by - - ***** Draft Environmental Impact Statement Alpine Lakes Area Management Plan Chelan, King, Kittitas, Snohomish Counties Lead Agency: Responsible Official: For further information COntact: Abstract Washington USDA — Forest Service R.E. Worthington, Regional Forester Pacific Northwest Region (for National Forest lands) Dale R. Potter Alpine Lakes Area Planning Team Leader Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests 1601 Second Avenue Building Seattle, Washington 98101 (206)442-7160 The Environmental Impact Statement displays five alternatives which describe integrated management and resources within the Alpine Lakes 393,360 acre Wilderness and Intended Wilderness and the 547,155 acre manage- ment unit. The “No-action” or current management carried into the future alternative is one of the five alternatives that are described. The estimated short and long term effects of implementing each of the alternatives are discussed and evaluated. The Forest Service preferred alternative is identified and the rationale for this is shown. Comments regarding this Statement must be received by the Forest Supervisor of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie or Wenatchee National Forest by . Lead Agency: Responsible Official: SUMMARY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Alpine Lakes Area Management Plan Chelan, King, Kittitas, Snohomish Counties Washington USDA — Forest Service R.E. Worthington, Regional Forester, R-6 Pacific Northwest Region (for National Forest lands) For further information Contact: Dale R. Potter Alpine Lakes Area Planning Team Leader Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests 1601 Second Avenue Building Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 442-7160 Date of transmission to EPA and the public: Nature of Action The proposed action is to develop a land manage- ment plan which provides for a broad range of land uses and opportunities. This plan is required by the Alpine Lakes Area Management Act of 1976 which directs the Secretary of Agriculture to prepare a single multiple use plan for the federal lands in the Alpine Lakes management unit. The plan provides specific land management direction for the National Forest lands within the Alpine Lakes Wilderness and management unit. The Alpine Lakes Area is located on both the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests and includes portions of Chelan, King, Kittitas and Snohomish Counties. Alternatives Considered and Environmental Effects The goals for management of the Alpine Lakes Area include the maintenance or improvement of the quality of the physical, biological and social/economic environments. Five alternatives of- fering different combinations of activities and con- straints were developed. A Comparison of the alter- natives resulted in the Selection of an alternative that most nearly meets these goals. It provides for a diversity of management approaches and a balance between goods and Services available within the area. It is reasonably sensitive to a wide range of environment needs and provides for a fairly stable social and economic environment to local com- munities balanced with regional and National goals. Alternative E is recommended by the Forest Service as its preferred management plan. Here is how the alternatives compare with the Alpine Lakes manage. ment in 1979 and an indication of their environmental effects. Alternative A This Alternative could produce increased oppor. tunities for wood fiber production on commercial forest lands in the management unit; accom- modating a long run increase of as much as 60 per- cent. Wilderness use could increase 131 percent, the highest of any alternative. Increased opportunities for motorized recreation would be available, but, overall, there would be a one percent reduction in recreation visitor days within the management unit. Environmental impacts would be the greatest in this alternative. They would be those associated with the highest level of ground disturbing activity. Alternative B Low density Wilderness recreation use would prevail in this Alternative; an increase of just 28 percent over visitation in 1979. Recreation in the manage- ment unit would increase by 6 percent with primitive forms of dispersed and undeveloped recreation em- phasized. Wood fiber outputs could increase by two percent in the long run; the lowest of any alternative. Environmental impacts would be the least of the five alternatives. Alternative C This strategy could increase visitation in the Wilderness by as much as 78 percent while providing a variety of experiences. The most extensive areas available for modern and rustic campgrounds would occure in the management unit and motorized dispersed recreation would be emphasized. A 12 per- cent increase in recreation could occur and a 5 per- cent increase in wood fiber production in the long run. Environmental impacts associated with exten- sive development for recreationists would be greatest in this Alternative, however, only Alternative B would have less overall environmental impacts. Alternative D This option was produced by extending current management of the area into the future. It would per- mit a 79 percent increase in available Wilderness recreation and a two percent increase in recreation opportunities in the management unit. Wood fiber production would increase by 55 percent. The Com- bination of timber harvest level and the type of recreation use it emphasizes would produce relative- ly high environmental impacts, second only to Alternative A. Alternative E The Forest Service preferred alternative would permit an increase of 73 percent in Wilderness recreation use and a variety of Wilderness opportunities. The amount of recreation in the management unit could increase by 12 percent. Modern rustic camping facilities would be expanded and a variety of both motorized and non-motorized dispersed recreation areas provided. Wood fiber production would occur on the most suitable lands and could result in a 41 percent increase in outputs over the long term. Alternative E occupies the middle position in terms of environmental impacts. Consultation with Others. The following is a partial list of groups and agencies Consulted during planning: Groups and Individuals Consulted Alpine Lakes Protection Society Alpine Veneers Apple Country Snowmobile Club Backcountry Horsemen of Washington Burlington Northern Cascade Grotto of National Speleological Society Cascadians Central Washington Cascade Study Team Cle Elum Chamber of Commerce Cougar Lakes Alliance A.R. Grant, Mining Consultant Industrial Forestry Association L.C. Lloyd, Construction MazamaS MountaineerS National Campers and Hikers Association North Cascades Conservation Council North Cascades Snowmobile Association Northwest Mining Association Northwest Sled Dog Association Pacific Northwest Four Wheel Drive Association Pan Pacific Company Seaboard Lumber Company Seattle Audubon Society Sierra Club Stevens Pass, Inc. The Pack River Company Timber Purchasers Defense Fund Trailblazers U. S. Seaplane Pilots Northwest Washington Environmental Council Washington Native Plants Society Washington State Good Sams Washington State Hi-Lakes Washington State Mineral Council Washington State Snowmobile Association Western Environmental Trade Association — Washington Western Forest Industries Association Weyerhaeuser Company Wilderness Society Yakima Indian Tribal Council Yakima River Group Sierra Club State of Washington Agencies Consulted College Forest Resources, University of Washington Department of Ecology Department of Natural Resources Department of Transportation Game Department Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Parks and Recreation Commission Washington Natural Heritage Program U.S. Government Agencies Consulted Bureau of Mines Bureau of Reclamation Geological Survey, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service Northeast Forest Experiment Station Pacific Northwest Forest & Range Experiment Station Rocky Mountain Forest & Range Experiment Station U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Counties Consulted Chelan County Commissioners Chelan Counnty Planning Department Kittitas County Commissioners Kittitas County, Planning Department King County Commissioners King County, Engineering Department King County, Planning Department TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Vicinity Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Nature of Decision to be Reached . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 The Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 The Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Major Issues and Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Physical Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Landforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Visual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Wilderness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Fire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Biological Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Plants of Special Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Animals of Special Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Human Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Overview .................................... 22 Cultural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Railroads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Summer Trails and 4x4 Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Winter Trails and Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Minerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Utility Corridors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Wood Fiber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Economic Influence Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Demographic Influences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Economic Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Page Assumptions About Supply and Demand . . . . . . . . . . . 34 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Timber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 EVALUATION CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Alternative Development Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Land Allocation Areas (management unit). . . . . . . . . . 41 Developed Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Special Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 General Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Scenic Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Dispersed Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Wilderness Use Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Transition Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Semi-Primitive Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Primitive Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Trailless zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Alternative Management Plans Considered . . . . . . . . 44 Management Direction Common to all Alternatives. 44 Alternative A Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Alternative B Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Alternative C Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Alternative D Management Plan - (Current Situation Extended) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Alternative E Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 EFFECTS OF IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative A. . . . . . 65 Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative B . . . . . . 71 Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative C. . . . . . 76 Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative D . . . . . . 81 Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative E (Current Situation Extended). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Summary of Effects of All Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Economic and Social Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 FOREST SERVICE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE . . . 107 CONSULTATION WITH OTHERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Process Used a s is e e º 'º e º e s e º 'º e º e º e s s a e e º e e s e e s a e s e e 113 Consultation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Management Direction Common To All Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Visual Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Access Management Direction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wilderness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cultural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lands Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wildlife and Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Special Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mt. Index Scenic Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tumwater Scenic Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denny Creek Scenic Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teanaway Recreation Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stevens Pass Historic District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Denny Creek Recreation Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Asahel Curtis Recreation Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . Red Top Recreation Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Liberty Historic District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teanaway Research Natural Area. . . . . . . . . . . Tumwater Botanical Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nason Ridge Recreation Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kachess Quiet Water Recreation Area . . . . . . Blewett Historic District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Plan Revision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wilderness Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Visual Ouality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cultural . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social and Economic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wildlife and Plants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Timber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alpine Lakes Area Management Act of 1976 . . . Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Those Sent Environmental Statement . . Page 131 133 133 133 134 134 135 136 138 138 139 144 144 144 145 146 146 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5. Table 6. Table 7. Table 8. Table 9. Table 10. Table 11. Table 12. Table 13. Table 14. Table 15. Table 16. Resource Complex Acreage . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Existing Visual Condition in the Alpine Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Fire History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Known and Potential Cultural Sites in the Management Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Current Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Acres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Potential for Adverse Impacts on Known and Potential Cultural Sites – Alternative A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Acreage Summary and Annual Long term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Potential for Adverse Impacts On Known and Potential Cultural Sites – Alternative B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Potential for Adverse Impacts On Known and Potential Cultural Sites — Alternative C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Potential For Adverse Impacts On Known and Potential Cultural Sites — Alternative D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Potential for Adverse Impacts on Known and Potential Cultural Sites – Alternative E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Summary of Acres and Annual Long Term Benefits For Each Alternative . . . . . . 91 Table 17. Table 18. Table 19. Table 20. Table 21. Table 22. Table 23. Table 24. Table 25. Table 26. Table A-1. Table A-2. Table A-3. Table A-4. Table B-1. Table C-1. Table D-1. Predicted Visual Effects as a Percent of the Management Unit Short Term Average Annual Benefits and Costs in the Alpine Lakes Area (1980-2000) Short Term Implementation Costs in the Alpine Lakes Area (1980-2000) . . . . . . . . 98 Net Dollar Benefits Foregone Per Additional Recreation Visitor Days of “Primitive” and “Semi-Primitive Motorized and Nonmotorized” Recreation Compared to Alternative D . . . . 98 Recreation Visitor Days of “Roaded Natural” Recreation Foregone Per Additional RVD of “Primitive” and “Semi-Primitive Motorized and Nonmotorized” Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Dollar Change in Cost in Visual Management Compared to Alternative D Per Visitor Day of Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Dollar Cost Per Additional Developed Campground Recreation Visitor Day . . . . . . 99 Employment and Income Impacts by Alternative Population by Minority Status (1977-78)... 100 Evaluation of Alternatives by Goals . . . . . . 103 Fire Behavior Parameters Consistent With Prescription Fire Intensity Zones ... 140 Fire Management Direction by Land Allocation Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 Maximum Individual Size for Wildfires in General Forest and Scenic Forest Allocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Maximum Burn Area Per Decade for Wildfires in the General Forest and Scenic Forest Allocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Alpine Lakes Wilderness Fires 1970-1979 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 Alpine Lakes Visual Management Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Water Quality Compared to State Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 Table D-2. Table F-1. Table F-2. Table F-3. Table F-4. Table F-5. Table F-6. Table F-7. Table F-8. Table G-1. Table G-2. Table G-3. Table G-4. Table G-5. Table H-1. Table H-2. Table H-3. Table H-4. Table I-1. Page Current Water Yields in the Alpine Lakes Area by Resource Complex . . . . . . . 191 Projected Population of Counties Sur- rounding the Alpine Lakes Area (In Thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 Age Distribution Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 Employment and Payrolls for Westside Cascades Counties, 1977 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196 Employment and Payrolls for Eastside Counties, 1977 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 Community Dependent on Lumber, Plywood and Shake/Shingle Mills. . . . . . . . 198 Average Annual Harvest 1980-2000 . . . . . . 198 Area of Mature Commercial Forest Land Available for Harvest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Assumed Distribution of Harvest to Mills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Sensitive Plants Occurring in The Alpine Lakes Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 Acres of Wildlife Habitat Plant Community Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 Wildlife Vulnerability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Relative Wildlife Diversity In The Alpine Lakes Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Animals of Special Interest in the Alpine Lakes Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 Timber Capability — National Forest Acreage Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 Timber Component Acreage Summary by Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2O7 Volume Summary by Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 Timber Size Class In Each Resource Complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 Acres for Wilderness, Intended Wilderness and Management Unit. . . . . . 211 Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure 7. Figure 8. Figure 9. Figure 10. Figure 11. Figure 12. Figure 13. Figure 14. Figure 15. Figure 16. Figure 17. Figure 18. Figure 19. Figure A-1. Figure D-1. LIST OF FIGURES Page Vicinity Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Alpine Lakes Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . 4 Alpine Lakes Area Resource Complexes. 6 Core Enchantment Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Commercial Grazing Allotments . . . . . . . . . 21 Mineral Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Alternative A Prescribed Fire Zones . . . . . 47 Alternative B Prescribed Fire Zones . . . . . 51 Alternative C Prescribed Fire Zones . . . . . 55 Alternative D Prescribed Fire Zones . . . . . 58 Alternative E Prescribed Fire Zones . . . . . . 62 Recreational Use Patterns-Alternative A 66 Recreational Use Patterns-Alternative B . 72 Recreational Use Patterns-Alternative C.77 Recreational Use Patterns-Alternative D.82 Recreational Use Patterns-Alternative E. .87 Comparison of Alternative Visual Quality Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Areas Allocated to Regulated Harvest . . . .94 Potential Annual Wood Fiber Yield . . . . . . 94 Suppression Decision Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Water Resources Inventory. . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 Looking east up the Middle Fork Snoqualmie River (left) and Burntboot Creek (right). Photo by U.S. Forest Service. Figure 1. Vicinity Map Canada Washington Alpine Lakes Area ; ^_-_*. Oregon Z \ Everett Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Wenatchee National Forest National Forest º Skykomish Snoqualmie Pass Ellensburg Intended Wilderness - Management Unit Boundary Nature of Decision to be Reached This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) presents five alternative land management plans for national forest lands within the Alpine Lakes Area. The management plans describe decisions concern- ing resources and uses, and allocate lands available for projects or activities. The alternatives will give management direction and guidelines for specific lands, activities and resources. The alternatives res- pond to local, regional and national goals and laws, as well as public issues, management concerns and resource opportunities. The Alpine Lakes Area Management Act of 1976 directs the Secretary of Agriculture to “prepare, complete, and implement a single multiple-use plan for the federal lands in the Alpine Lakes management unit.” Wilderness in the Alpine Lakes has been established by Congress so Wilderness land allocations or boundaries are not at issue in the Statement. How and where management directions contained in this Statement are implemented will be determined by site specific project analysis. This is done during the budget programming process of the two National Forests involved. Management planning for the area involves a process that began with the Congressional classification of land into Wilderness, Intended Wilderness, and a sur- rounding management unit. The acres for these are: Wilderness 306,934 Intended Wilderness 86,426 management unit _547,155 TOTAL 940,515 These acres include intermingled private lands. A complete break-down of these acres, by county and national forest, is found in Table I-1 of Appendix I. Background The Alpine Lakes Area is a part of Wenatchee and Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forests. It includes portions of Chelan, King, Kittitas, and Snohomish Counties. The name Alpine Lakes takes its origin from the over 700 small mountain lakes nestled among the high rock peaks and timbered valleys of the region. It is significant that the two National Forests, within which the Alpine Lakes are situated, were both nam- ed after Indian terms descriptive of the country. Wenatchee is a term used by Yakima Indians which means “Water pouring out” and Snoqualmie is from an Indian word meaning “moon people" from the legend that people from the moon had come to earth to live in this beautiful land. Proximity to the large metropolitan area makes the Alpine Lakes one of the most popular natural areas in the Northwest. Half of Washington State's popula- tion of 3.6 million people are within an hour drive of the area. By the year 2000, that population is ex- pected to increase to over 5 million people. The Act The Alpine Lakes Area Management Act is found in its entirety in Appendix I. The provisions that pertain to the administration of, and planning for the area are paraphrased below. Area Description "...the Alpine Lakes region comprises an environ- ment of timbered valleys rising to rugged, snow COvered mountainS, dotted with Over Seven hundred lakes, displaying unusual diversity of natural vegeta- tion, and providing habitat for a variety of wildlife.” Congress Found “This region is abundant in its multiple resources, in- cluding "...water, commercial forests, an outdoor laboratory..., and opportunities for great diversity of recreational use...during all seasons. .” Purpose of Act “...to provide for public outdoor recreation and use and for economic utilization of commercial forest lands... by present and future generations..." To establish an “Alpine Lakes Area including an Alpine Lakes Wilderness, an Intended Wilderness and a management unit...” Management Unit Management Direction The management unit shall be managed “...in accor- dance with the laws, rules, and regulations ap- plicable to the national forests...to provide for the management of all the resources...” Renewable resources will be managed “...in accor- dance with the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960...to obtain multiple use and sustained yield of the Several products and services obtained." “The Secretary shall permit and encourage the use of renewable resources within the management unit..." Hunting and fishing shall be permitted under Federal and State laws, except in emergencies regulations shall be issued only after consultation with the Fish and Game Department of Washington. The “right to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction...” and “right to tax" non-Federal proper- ty is preserved for the State or other political subdivi- SiOnS.. Wilderness Management Direction The Wilderness shall be administered by “provisions Of this Act and...the Wilderness Act whichever is the more restrictive." The “Intended Wilderness shall become part of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness..." upon acquisition of the adjacent non-Federal lands. Planning Direction The Secretary shall: Prepare “a single multiple-use plan for the Federal lands in the management unit.” Provide opportunities for “full public involvement.” “In conjunction with the preparation of a Wilderness management plan ... the Secretary shall prepare a special study of the Enchantment Area of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, taking into consideration its especially fragile nature, its ease of accessibility, its unusual attractiveness, and its resultant heavy recreational usage.” The purpose of the study is to “...explore the feasibility and benefits of establishing special provi- sions for managing the Enchantment Area to protect its fragile beauty, while still maintaining the availability of the entire area for projected recrea- tional demand.” The Planning Process The overall process used for planning appears in Figure 2. This figure describes a pre-planning phase, plan formulation phase and plan selection phase. Within each of these phases, milestones for achieve- ment are Shown. The basis for planning of the Alpine Lakes was a capability/suitability analysis. Resource capability was assessed by mapping the physical characteristics of land or water that affect its ability Figure 2. ALPINE LAKES PLANNING PROCESS PRE-PLANNING PHASE MILESTONE 1 – DEFINE THE PLANNING JOB A. Identify Laws, Regulations, Policies and Directions. Describe end product. Define resources and activities anticipated and describe the intensity of inventory. Prepare public involvement plan. Identify management issues and concerns. Develop the evaluation criteria. MILESTONE 2 – ORGANIZE THE PLANNING JOB A. laentify coordinating requirements (county, state, other Federal agencies). B. Identify data needs focusing on physical, biologic, economic, social and other factors necessary for analysis of alter- natives. MILESTONE 3 – DEFINE MANAGEMENT SITUATION AND ASSUMPTIONS A. Identify land units for planning. B. Describe present physical, social, economic and institutional components of the human environment. C. List assumptions about future demand, Supply. PLAN FORMULATION PHASE PLAN SELECTION PHASE MILESTONE 4 – INVENTORY A. Form data base — assemble resource in- ventories, published research, etc. (Informa- tion on land productivity and land manage- ment activities). B. Capability analysis. C. Suitability analysis. MILESTONE 5 – FORMULATE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES A. Develop management strategy for the management unit and Wilderness. B. Identify mixes of resources and uses. C. Determine management direction for each alternative. MILESTONE 6 – ANALYZE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES A. Identify kinds and amounts of goods and services resulting from each alternative by quantifying consequences (acres allocated, costs, outputs, etc.). B. Identify changes from base line in physical, social, economic and institutional environment. MILESTONE 7 — EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES A. Compare changes resulting from each alternative with goals. B. Compare outputs with goals and objectives. C. Evaluate alternatives against four tests of feasibility. 1. Technical 2. Legal 3. Financial 4. Political MILESTONE 8 – PLAN SELECTION A. Recommend one management alternative as the Forest Service preferred alternative. MILESTONE 9 – DOCUMENTATION A. Prepare and distribute a Draft Environmenal Impact Statement that describes the management alternatives being considered and their expected consequences. B. Prepare and distribute a Final Environ- mental Impact Statement that is responsive to COmments received about the Draft Statement. to accommodate use or produce resources. This was based upon intrinsic, measurable characteristics, such as climate, slope, landform, soils and geology, that are relatively static over time. The results of this mapping typically ranked lands into relative levels of capability to support an activity. This was done without regard to competing uses for land. Land found to be capable of supporting a given use was then analyzed to determine whether it was suited to that purpose. Will the value of such utiliza- tion outweigh negative consequences or side ef- fects? Certain land, for instance, was judged to be capable of producing different levels of wood fiber for commercial harvesting. A suitability analysis then determined whether roads could be built without unacceptable soil damage, if water quality could be protected, if cultural and other resources could be Safeguarded. If, at the end of this screening process, the unit of land was still available for commercial timber harvest, it was evaluated along with other resource activities which were also found to be suitable. Various mixes of activities form the five alternatives presented later. Major Issues and Concerns Planning and management of the Alpine Lakes Area can be effective only if it is responsive to the public as well as to the law under which it was created. One of the first steps in the planning process was to identify major issues. This was done during workshops and through contacts with many in- dividuals and organizations. Concerns expressed dur- ing the Alpine Lakes Act legislative process were reviewed. Discussion which occurred during the development of the Wenatchee and Mt. Baker— Snoqualmie National Forest Off-road Vehicle, Snoqualmie Draft Timber Resource Management and the Kittitas and Chelan Land Allocation Plans was examined. These are some of the most frequently raised questions. Transportation How will existing and proposed roads and trails af- fect access into the Wilderness? How much roadway will be provided and at what level of service? Recreation How and where will off-road vehicle opportunities be provided? How will we manage and protect the visual quality in the Alpine Lakes Area; particularly as seen from In- terstate 90, Highway 2, Highway 97, Middle Fork Snoqualmie River and loicle River corridors, and trailheads and access trails to the Wilderness? How will overcrowding in developed recreation sites and dispersed areas be reduced? Where are the opportunities for rockhounding and under what conditions will this activity take place? Will provisions be made for recreational vehicle needs such as dump stations and camping areas? Will there be any new ski areas or existing ski area expansion? If so, where are the potential ski areas, and how will this affect local communities? Wilderness Should a buffer strip be retained around the Wilderness? How will overuse of the Wilderness be prevented? How will human waste disposal in the Enchantments and similar areas be managed? Where will dogs and stock be allowed in the Wilderness? Will recreation use of float planes be allowed to resume in the Wilderness? What party size limitation will be placed on Wilderness use? Will limitations be placed on commercial packers and permittees? Timber How will timber harvesting affect soil erosion, wildlife, watersheds, particularly the Domerie Creek and Icicle watersheds, and access to Wilderness, dispersed and developed recreation areas? Where will timber be harvested and managed in the Alpine Lakes management unit and particularly in the West Fork Teanaway, Middle Fork Teanaway, North Fork Teanaway, Icicle Creek, Highway 2, and In- terstate 90 corridors, Miller River, Pratt River, Middle Fork Snoqualmie River, Domerie Creek, Silver Creek, and at the trailheads? How will timber harvesting affect supply of logs to local mills? Special Areas How will we manage special areas such as Mt. Index Scenic Area, Tumwater Scenic Area, and Teanaway Special Recreation Areas? What activities will be per- mitted in these areas? What changes from present use are anticipated? What will be done with the Stevens Pass Historic District? Are there any other special or unique features which need special area classification? Miscellaneous Are there any provisions for revising the manage- ment plan for the Alpine Lakes Area? What land in private ownership should be in public ownership? What land in public ownership should be in private ownership? What will happen to the availability of mineral resources? What will be done to inventory and protect threaten- ed or endangered wildlife and plants? What will the economic and social effects on nearby communities be as a result of Forest Service actions in the Alpine Lakes Area? Can there be federal control of private land use within the management unit? Definitions Many terms used in this Environmental Statement are defined in the glossary. Several are critical, however, because they refer to different portions of the area. Four terms refer to the Alpine Lakes: Wilderness, In- tended Wilderness, management unit, and Alpine Lakes Area. Alpine Lakes Area — Hereafter, reference to the Alpine Lakes Area will include lands in the Wilderness, Intended Wilderness, and management unit as described by the Alpine Lakes Area Manage- ment Act. Wilderness — Reference to Wilderness will mean those classified lands, 306,934 acres, included under the National Wilderness Preservation System under authority of the Wilderness Act of 1964. Intended Widerness — As a matter of convenience, reference to the Wilderness will include those lands designated Intended Widerness. This latter designa- tion is 86,426 acres of mixed private and public ownership that will become Wilderness without fur- ther Congressional action after public acquisition of the private lands. Management unit — Reference to the management unit will include those 547,155 acres of land designated by Congress. This unit surrounds the Wilderness and Intended Wilderness. It is a mixture of private and public ownership. However, as directed by the Act, the management plans apply on- ly to the Federal lands administered by the Forest Service. Resource Complexes – Land management planning for such a large, diverse area can best be ac- complished by dividing it into smaller units. This subdivision can serve three important purposes: 1. Assist planners with an inventory of resources and use patterns in the area, 2. Aid the decision making process by enabling planners to analyze the effects of each management alternative in different portions of the area, and 3. Similarly help members of the public relate their concerns to a particular portion of the area. There are numerous ways to subdivide the manage- ment unit, i.e., along hydrographic or other physical boundaries, along existing administrative boundaries or according to primary land use. Units combining a variety of features were felt to be most useful. Eight subdivisions called “resource complexes” were form- ed. Each contains a variety of interacting uses and resources with distinguishable characteristics. Each affords a certain set of opportunities and contains a certain collection of Constraints. The third purpose for “resource complexes” is par- ticularly relevant to readers of this document. People living in and around the Alpine Lakes Area have a direct and intense interest in what happens in their immediate proximity. People residing outside the area often have places of particular concern to them. For loggers living in Cle Elum, for instance, the availability of nearby timber in the Kachess Resource Complex is what matters, not the total availability of timber for the entire management unit. For those who are devoted to a single recreation area, what happens there is crucial, not the overall availability of recreation. It must be emphasized that “resource complex” sub- division is a temporary planning tool and should not be confused with Ranger Districts, the established administrative division of National Forest land. Six Ranger Districts include land within the area and will implement the plan after its adoption. Figure 3 shows the resource complexes used for planning the Alpine Lakes management unit. Follow- ing is a brief description of each. 1. Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Resource Complex Bound on the north, east, and south by the Alpine Lakes Wilderness and Intended Wilderness boun- daries. Bound on the west by the Alpine Lakes management unit and National Forest boundary. 2. I-90 Corridor Resource Complex Bound on the north by the Alpine Lakes Wilderness and Intended Wilderness boundaries, on the east by the Keechelus Ridge between Keechelus and Kachess Lakes and on the south and west by the Alpine Lakes management unit boundary. 3. Kachess Resource Complex Bound on the north by the Alpine Lakes Wilderness and Intended Wilderness boundaries, on the east by the ridge separating the Teanaway and Cle Elum drainages, on the south by the Alpine Lakes manage- ment unit/National Forest boundary, and on the west by the ridgetop between Keechelus and Kachess Lakes. Figure 3. Alpine Lakes Resource Complexes Within Management Unit cºnsº 2. WilderneSS | Resource Complexes N Middle Fork Snoqualmie |-90 Corridor Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 Corridor Icicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West .R. Nason Ridge (outside Alpine Lakes Area) 4. Teanaway Resource Complex Table 1. Bound on the north by the Alpine Lakes Wilderness and Intended Wilderness boundary, on the east by the Teanaway Ridge, on the south by the Alpine Resource Complex Acreage. Lakes management unit/National Forest boundary and on the west by the ridgetop between the - Resource National Other Total % of Teanaway and Cle Elum Rivers. Complex Forest Ownership National Forest in Complex 5. Highway 97 Corridor Resource Complex acres -- - Middle Fork Bound on the west by Teanaway Ridge, and the Snoqualmie 21,535 15,236 36,771 58 Alpine Lakes Wilderness and Intended Wilderness |-90 31,470 22,377 53,847 58 boundaries, on the north by Icicle Creek and the 2,560' National Forest boundary, on the east and South by Kachess 64,683 40.559 º: 61 the Alpine Lakes management unit boundary. Teanaway 66,154 10,092 76,246 87 Highway 97 60,052 16,156 76,208 79 6. Ici mplex Icicle 22,891 20,374 43,265 53 lcicle Resource Comp U.S. 2 East 35,368 18,527 54,165 66 U.S. 3 West 69,748 19,803 89,551 68 Bound on the north by Chiwaukum Creek and Wenatchee River near Tumwater campground, * Total 372,171 163,124 547,155 68 east by the Alpine Lakes management unit boundary, - on the southeast by the Icicle Creek, on the south Nason Ridge 20,314 2,950 23,264 87 and west by the Wilderness and Intended Wilderness - boundaries. 'Amount is acres under Keechelus Lake. *Amount is acres under Kachess and Cle Elum Lakes. 7. U.S. 2 East Bound on the north and east by the Alpine Lakes management unit boundary, on the South by the Alpine Lakes Wilderness and Intended Wilderness boundaries and on the west by Stevens Pass. 8. U.S. 2 West º Bound on the north by the Alpine Lakes management 3º unit boundary, on the east by Stevens Pass, on the $22) South by the Alpine Lakes Wilderness boundary and sº Ž º on the west by the management unit and/or National Z J Forest boundary. \L- E. Table 1 presents an acreage summary for the N | resource complexes. ſ Q \ . Nason Ridge – This area is outside but adjoins the S management unit to the north of Highway U.S. 2 bet- SN ween the crest of Nason Ridge and Lake Wenatchee w - 2’D N and Little Wenatchee River. The area is included in N | º 22 | % % this Environmental Impact Statement to insure coor- N \ -- º dination and continuity of management over the en- § º Ø º tire ridge. In a previous decision in the Chelan Plan- ning Unit Land Allocation Proposal, the Regional Forester directed that decision concerning manage- ment of Nason Ridge be delayed until the Alpine Lakes management unit plan is complete. | * ºn º - º Looking north across Little Kachess Lake to Mineral Creek. by U.S. Forest Service. Photo Physical Environment Geology The Alpine Lakes Area lies completely within the North Cascades landform as described by Easter- brook and Rohm (1970). This area is characterized by Steep and rugged topography. Highly fractured granitics (intrusive igneous) are the most common rocks in the area. Other major rock types occurring in decreasing order of occurance are: sedimentary (Swauk sandstone complex and non-marine deposits); metamorphics (gneiss and Schist); ultra basic rock complex (serpentine); and the extrusive igneous group (basalt, andesite and rhyolite). Basalt and andesite dikes are common in the Swauk formation, but most are very narrow (less than ten feet wide) and discontinuous. Most of the Foss Lakes area and the Enchantment Lakes lie in areas of granitic rock. Metamorphic rocks are exten- sively exposed in the northern part, while most of the southern part is underlain by volcanic and sedimentary rocks and much of the Wenatchee Range is composed of peridotite. Alpine glaciers have left surficial deposits of till, lacustrine, and outwash on many of the valleys, and till on many valley sidewalls and in cirque basins. As a result of major volcanic activity in adjacent areas of the Cascades, ash has been deposited over much of the area. These deposits are mostly thin (2 inches or less) and were derived from a variety of Sources. Along the northeastern fringe, there are a few deposits that are several feet thick which most likely originated from Glacier Peak. Landforms Uplift, faulting and glaciation have been dominant processes which have created the rugged, tall peaks and deep valleys that characterize the area. Eleva- tions range from 1,600 feet in the lowest valley to 9,415 feet on the summit of Mt. Stuart, the highest peak in the area. Much of the topography is rugged and extremely steep with extensive areas of cliffs and large talus slopes. Many river valleys exhibit a “U” shaped cross section characteristic of recently glaciated areas. Hundreds of small cirques (many of which contain lakes), along with other glacially Carv- ed features such as horns and aretes, occur at higher elevations. The highest parts of the area are composed largely of bare rock and meadows with small glaciers and snowfields persisting among the jagged peaks of the Cascade Crest and Mt. Stuart area. Looking north across the Enchantment Lakes Basin. Photo by U.S. Forest Service. 11 12 Soils Soils are formed over time, by the interaction of climate, vegetation, topography and parent material. Over 200 different soils were mapped at the recon- naissance level and are shown in the Soil Resource Inventories of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests. These inventories pro- vide interpretation on soil behavior so that en- vironmentally sound management practices can be Selected. The data in the soil resource inventories provided the base for several of the planning activities which were evaluated for the area. Examples include timber capability, potential developed recreation sites, visual absorption capability, and road risk mapping. Space does not permit a duplication of the soil resource inventories in this discussion. Generally, however, deep, Sandy loam, well to moderately well drained, is found on valley bottoms west of the mountains. Shallow to deep sandy loam gives way to deep but unstable gravelly loam on steeper slopes (landslide hazard) and shallow, gravelly and stony loams at high elevation (avalanche, debris and slump- ing hazard). On the east side, glaciation is a major factor. Deep and fine to moderately fine soils prevail above glaciers in the higher elevations and deep but moderately course soil in the steep, glaciated forest zone. Rooting depth here is often restricted by com- pacting. At the lower elevations on the east side, on gentle ridge tops and in basins, the soil is varied in consistancy and depth. These areas are generally Small in size. A detailed description of soil types found in the Alpine Lakes Area is available as a special report to this DEIS. Climate The Cascade Range is a physical barrier which Causes great variations in the local climates found within the Alpine Lakes Area. Moist marine air regularly moves from west to east across the area and much of the moisture drops on the western slopes as air is uplifted over the mountain range. Very little moisture remains in the air masses by the time they reach the eastern boundary of the Alpine Lakes Area. This affects the growth of trees, the nature of fire hazard and the types of recreational op- portunities found in the Alpine Lakes Area. Annual precipitation ranges from 55 inches in the western lowlands to as much as 180 inches near the crest. As little as 10 inches per year occurs in the ex- treme eastern fringes of the area. Precipitation is rain in the spring and fall and heavy snow in the winter at the upper elevations. The winter snow level is normally around 2,000-2,500 feet on the west and near 1,000 feet on the east. Much of the area above 4,000 feet does not become snow free until at least early July. Winter snow fall usually begins by mid-October at the higher eleva- tions, though mid-summer snowfall is not unusual. The average summer daytime temperatures in the area range from the mid to upper 70's F. at the lower elevations on the west Side to the mid 90's on the eastern edge. They range in the mid 60's at the 4,000 foot level. Extreme temperatures into the mid 90's have occured as high as 4,000 feet on the west side of the Cascades while 100 degrees F. is not uncom- mon on the east side. Wintertime temperatures often dip into the mid 20's on the western edge and near zero on the eastern slopes. Nightime frost can be ex- pected any time throughout the summer above 3,500 feet. Many of the lakes at the higher elevations re- main frozen well into July. Summer thunder storms frequently develop over the area when moist marine air from the West meets the dry unstable air created by the thermal heating of the Columbia Basin to the east. These Storms are often intense and the resulting lightning causes forest fires. Relative humidity also varies greatly between the east and west. Midday summer humidities on the west slopes are in the 35-45 percent range and in the 10-15 percent range on the east side. Very low humidities are experienced periodically in the western foothills due to dry Subsiding air masses associated with “east” winds. This phenomenon oc- curs principally in the late Spring and again in the early fall and usually lasts from three to four days. During these periods temperatures rise into the low 90's and humidity drops into the low 20's. There is very little change in nighttime humidity. This is a significant factor in fire danger on the western slopes. Frequently during the Summer and fall, temperature inversions develop over the Puget Sound basin. These result in higher temperatures on the slopes near the crest than in the lower elevations. Often there is fog and haze trapped under the inversion for days but it remains clear at the upper elevations. This condition significantly affects air quality which is discussed in another Section. Occasionally, Severe pressure gradient differences develop as Pacific storms move into the area. This often results in winds of 65-75 miles per hour occur ring as a storm approaches the mountains. These moist Storms typically occur in the fall and winter and often cause severe timber damage in the form of blowdown, especially on the exposed ridges of the western slopes. Since the air is warm, the moisture usually falls in the form of heavy rain, which creates flooding if it falls on snow or frozen ground. Visual The geologic process described earlier and the relentless workings of ice, water and vegetation over time result in Scenic quality of the highest order. This quality is described in the Act that designated the area and was accordingly given high priority in planning the area's future. Measures proposed to protect visual quality reflect the acceptance of three assumptions. 1. Continuing modification of private forest lands will decrease the availability of natural-looking land- scapes and thereby increase the demand for such areas on public lands. 2. Increased housing and other development on private lands within the Alpine Lakes Area will in- crease public resistance to management alternatives which alter the landscape. 3. Increased participation in dispersed and developed recreation will have the same effect as above. To help minimize the effect of management activities on scenic values, a systematic inventory and analysis was performed. This inventory included: 1. A survey of the existing visual condition as the area now appears. 2. An inventory of the landscape's visual attrac- tiveness (variety class). 3. A determination of the public's visual expectations about the scenic quality (sensitivity). 4. An inventory of the land's Visual Absorption Capability (VAC) to determine the effort required to accommodate alterations without unacceptable damage to visual quality. 5. The development of visual quality objectives for each portion of the area. 6. Prediction of the long term visual condition which would exist under each of the alternative manage- ment plans. The natural character of the Alpine Lakes Area in Some cases has been substantially altered by the ac- tivities of humans. Electric transmission facilities, roads, recreation developments and timber harvesting activities have created artificial focal points which distract from the natural quality of the landscape. The following visual condition classes were used to describe the current status of the visual resource within the Alpine Lakes Area. Table 2 shows that amount of area in each of these classes. Class I – Essentially an unmodified natural environ- ment in which the evidence of man is minimal. The landscape appears to be generally untouched by human activities. These landscapes would provide the environmental setting for primitive types of recreation opportunities. Table 2. Existing Visual Condition In The Alpine Lakes. Resource Class I Class || Class III Complex (Unmodified) (Subtle (Substantially Modification) Modified) -------- acres — — — — ---- Middle Fork Snoqualmie 23,705 11,292 1,774 I-90 12,698 28, 184 12,965 Kachess 54,247 43,675 7,320 Teanaway 56,744 18,916 586 Highway 97 19,385 56,474 349 Icicle 26,991 14,625 1,649 U.S. 2 East 24,223 28,502 1,440 U.S. 2 West 34,960 36,849 17,742 Total 252,953 238,517 43,825 Wilderness, Intended Wilderness 393,360 O O Nason Ridge 9,982 10,568 2,714 'Area does not include Keechelus, Kachess and Cle Elum Lakes. - Class II – Landscapes with subtle modifications to the natural environment in which the influences of humans are apparent. The evidence of activity may be noticeable, but the natural landscape still remains dominant. These landscapes would provide for semi- primitive recreation opportunity settings. Class III – A substantially modified environment in which the evidence of humans dominates the natural landscape. This environment provides only for those types of recreation opportunity where natural- appearing landscapes are not necessary. One of five visual quality objectives—preservation, retention, partial retention, modification, or rehabilitation—was assigned to every portion of the area. There was no land in the area considered ap- All resource modification activities affect the visual resource to some degree. With landscape management, the impacts of those modifications can be minimized. Note on the left sketches the clear- cut logging and power line which are quite apparent with sharp- edged patterns and lack of visual linkage with the natural landscape. Those on the right show irregular or feathered edges thus reducing the sharp contrasts and creating visual linkage with the natural land- scape. propriate for inclusion in the sixth category—max- imum modification. With the exception of the first, which permits change to occur only through natural processes, each objective allows a different degree of alteration based on the scenic importance of the area in question. The degree of alteration is measured in terms of visual contrast with the sur- rounding landscape. This process permitted the Forest Service to estimate the effect of each management alternative on the visual resource. Where a land use allocation is compatible with an area's visual quality objective, the effects are considered favorable. Where the visual quality objectives have been lowered to meet other resource objectives, the result is considered adverse. In preparing the visual resource inventory, only na- tional forest lands were included. On other public or private lands visual quality objectives may or may not be met. Local public agencies or private land- owners may agree to adopt a similar approach on their land but no means of coordinating this current- ly exists. In order to evaluate the effects of the alter- natives on scenic values, however, the total land base must be considered. Since significant changes in the character of landscape could occur on private land, the success of any management alternative in meeting visual quality objectives is contingent on a successful land adjustment program (exchange or purchase), or the compatability of Forest Service visual objectives with objectives of adjacent land- Owners. The State of Washington “Scenic and Recreational Highway Act of 1967: (RCW 47.39)” provides open space, protects historic, geologic, and scenic resources along transportation corridors, and pro- vides recreational access and development of recrea- tional resources. Interstate 90, U.S. 2 and U.S. 97 have been designated as part of this system. Under the State Scenic Rivers System, rivers of the state with their immediate environs which possess outstanding natural, scenic, historic, ecological and vegetation values have been identified. These rivers shall be preserved in as natural a condition as prac- tical and overuse of such rivers shall be discouraged. Rivers within Alpine Lakes which are designated as being in the state scenic river system are: 1. Skykomish River to the junction of the Tye and Foss Rivers; 2. Beckler River upstream from the Skykomish River approximately eight miles; 3. Tye River from its junction of the Skykomish River upstream to Tye Lake. The U.S. Department of Interior Heritage Conserva- tion and Recreation Service is currently in the pro- cess of a nationwide rivers inventory program for evaluating wild, scenic, and recreational river areas. In the Alpine Lakes Area, this inventory currently in- cludes all State Scenic Rivers plus: Icicle Creek, Mid- 13 dle Fork Snoqualmie River, and Wenatchee River. This DEIS makes no evaluation of these rivers for their qualifications as Wild and Scenic Rivers but each alternative preserves, for the future, the option to so designate. The evaluation of the effects of the alternatives upon rivers and highways is confined to the amount of change from the natural environment, and whether the prospects for special designation will be pro- tected under each alternative. Scenic Areas are places of outstanding or matchless beauty of national character which require special management to preserve these qualities. The two Scenic Areas in Alpine Lakes which have been designated are Mt. Index and the Tumwater Canyon. Water The shaping power of water is everywhere apparent in the Alpine Lakes Area. In addition to the area's 727 natural lakes, which exceed a combined 6,000 acres there are 335 miles of Forest Service class one and two streams. Glaciers and permanent snowfields in the Wilderness occupy 2,176 acres. Photo by Richard F. Buscher. Water quality in the Alpine Lakes is exceptionally high, despite some local, short lived deviations. A study of 60 Wilderness lakes of varied physical characteristics and climatic settings revealed generally excellent water quality (Dethier et al. 1979). Results of a comparison with similar data for 600 lakes elsewhere in the State showed that the Alpine Lakes are the most pristine in Washington (Bortleson 1977). Water in the management unit is also high quality. National Forest lands are classified as AA extraor- dinary by the State; a standard which can be relaxed temporarily during timber harvest. In this case “best management practices” standards take effect. Water quality is constantly monitored (see Appendix D, Table D-2) and protection measures are contained in every alternative. Domestic and Industrial – Headwaters of four rivers—the Skykomish, Snoqualmie, Wenatchee and Yakima—are located within the Alpine Lakes Area. The South Fork Tolt River, a tributary of the Snoqualmie, supplies Seattle, the biggest domestic user, while the communities of Index, Baring, Grotto, Scenic, sº Pass, Timberline Village and Alpen- tal receive water from streams with headwaters in the Alpine Lakes Area. Skykomish uses Alpine Lakes water as an emergency supply. On the east side, Roslyn, Valley Hi, Leavenworth, Icicle Irrigation District, Leavenworth Federal Fish Hatchery and Snoqualmie Summit are supplied by Alpine Lakes Water. The draft Comprehensive Regional Water Plan for Seattle (1978) forecasts an increase of 63 percent in the demand for water in the next 50 years. The Seattle Water Department's tentative choice for addi- tional water is the North Fork Tolt River. Appendix D, Figure D-1 provides a map of the water resources in the Alpine Lakes. Irrigation – Water for agricultural uses is enhanced by the area's average elevation of 4,500 feet. At this height approximately 60 percent of the annual precipitation falls as snow. The heaviest snowpack usually occurs in early April. Because of this, the land itself serves as a “reservoir" which releases water as snow melts throughout the summer. On the west side of the Cascades about 10,000 acre feet of water are diverted for irrigation in the Snohomish Valley. Conflict between domestic water use and irrigation is expected there by the year 2020. Water for irrigation is much more significant on the east side of the Cascades. Water stored in the Keechelus, Kachess and Cle Elum reservoirs totals 833,700 acre-feet or 78 percent of the total storage capacity of Yakima Project reservoirs. The critical Source is a narrow band along the east side of the Cascade Range above 4,500 feet in the 30-inch average precipitation range. About 532,000 acres of land are irrigated in the Yakima Basin, 498,000 from surface water. Some 60,000 acre-feet of additional water could be used im- mediately. By 2020, to accommodate a projected dry land Conversion on 40,000 acres an additional 200,000 acre-feet would be required. Water Yield — The current yield of water from the Alpine Lakes is about 1.8 million acre-feet per year. Appendix D, Table D-2, provides water yield informa- tion for each Resource Complex. Water yield can be increased by forest practices. In the west Cascades, timber harvest increases runoff by an estimated average of 20 inches annually and in the east, between four and 10 inches (Fox and Wooldridge, 1974). Tree growth reduces runoff to a negligible level in about two decades (Lee, Symons, and Robeck 1970). Studies have indicated that weather modification (cloud seeding) above Cle Elum and the Teanaway River Basin could increase water yield by 95,000 to 115,000 acre-feet annually. This yield would be in- viting to the irrigation user especially during dry years. However, vegetation manipulation through tree harvest could at best, contribute marginally to the need for predictably constant flows. Flood Control — Violently destructive floods have regularly occurred on Alpine Lake waterways. Since 1896, when stream flow records were initiated, more than a dozen major floods have been recorded on the east side of the Cascades. Dams have been offered as a solution to the damag- ing effects of floods. The Corps of Engineers has ex- plored several sites for flood control. The North and Middle Fork Snoqualmie River sites would provide protection for the lower Snoqualmie and Snohomish valleys. The Middle Fork proposal, if constructed, would create a reservoir extending two miles inside the Alpine Lakes Area. Wilderness Congress recognized Wilderness as a distinct resource in the Wilderness Act of 1964, section 2(c) which defines this resource: “A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by 14 ſnan, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retain- ing its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements of human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally ap- pears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.” The Alpine Lakes Wilderness was designated in 1976 with the passage of the Alpine Lakes Area Manage- ment Act. It presently contains 306,934 acres with an additional 86,426 acres to be added upon acquisition of intermingled private lands. While the Alpine Lakes Area Management Act directed the Forest Service to prepare a plan for the management unit, it did not require that management direction for the Wilderness be prepared at the same time. However, many of the actions taken in the management unit affect and must be compatable with management of the Wilderness. Thus, planning for both areas has been conducted simultaneously. Recreation, scenic, scientific, educational, conserva- tion and historical values are all found in Wilderness but the value requiring the greatest attention is recreation. The area's striking scenic beauty and easy access from large population centers have resulted in a 7 percent per year increase in visitation. A loss of solitude and damage to the resource has occurred in a number of popular areas. However, matchless scenery and solitute are still available in other areas. Both the heavily used and pristine areas require careful management if they are to be pro- tected and maintained. Management of the resource and activities within it are described in detail in Appendix B, the Alpine Lakes Wilderness Management Plan. Enchantment Area of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness — With the passage of the Alpine Lakes Area Manage- ment Act, the Enchantment Area was recognized as being unique and requiring special study. A study was conducted during 1978 and the results sum- marized as a special report to this Environmental Im- pact Statement. | º º - ºr - Looking east from Chikamin Ridge to Mt. Stuart. Ph Gary A. Morrison. - º | 3. | --ºº ºº oto by 15 The Enchantment Area, as defined for planning pur- poses, consists of approximately 3,520 acres where special study was focused (see Figure 4 for location). The core area is a high plateau ranging from 6,785 feet near the lowest lakes to approximately 8,040 feet at Aasgard Pass. It has eight major lakes, seven of which are in the same general basin and can be visited with relative ease once the plateau has been reached. Precipitous peaks, granite barrens, lakes and perma- nent snow fields occupy over 90 percent of the core area. Small scattered meadows and open stands of alpine larch, subalpine fir and whitebark pine suitable for camping are present on less than 500 aCreS. Primary access to the core is either by way of Snow Lake or Colchuck Lake. The elevation gain from Snow Lake trailhead on Icicle Creek to Snow Lake is 4,140 feet. The core is 1,680 feet higher for a total elevation gain of 5,820 feet in approximately eleven miles. Over 80 percent of the visitors require two days to reach the core with an over night stay at Snow or Nada Lakes. The Colchuck Lake travel route has an elevation gain of 2,210 feet from the Stuart Lake trailhead to Col- chuck Lake. An additional 2,180 feet in elevation is needed to reach the Enchantment Basin for a total elevation gain of 4,390 feet in approximately six miles. Most visitors traveling the Colchuck route spend the first night at Colchuck Lake and reach the core area on the second day. The trail to Snow Lake and Colchuck Lake has sus- tained portions of very steep grade. Access to Snow Lakes is by a trail suitable for pack and saddle stock. Access to Colchuck Lake is suitable for hikers only. From both lakes, travel routes revert to hiker-only, scramble-travel routes. The hiker routes are unusable by pack and saddle stock. Although most of the core area is used for various types of recreation, camp sites are concentrated near the main watercourses and the lakes. The two main access corridors at Snow Lake and Colchuck Lake also have heavily concentrated camp areas. The Leavenworth Ranger District maintains sixteen toilets in the Enchantment area; nine inside the core and seven in adjacent areas. Three in the core are sealed vaults serviced annually in the fall by helicopter. Use of the Enchantments area has grown steadily. It is estimated that less than 20 people visited the area annually through the 1950's. During the next decade use increased and by 1978 was over 18,000 recrea- tion visitor days. A recent survey indicates that more Figure 4. Core Enchantment Area. To Everett Seattle North Bend Snoqualmie - t r r Keechelus Lake Core Enchantment Area Leavenworth 16 than 65 percent of the current users reside in the Puget Sound area, more than 93 percent reside in Washington State, and more than 70 percent travel in parties of three or less and stay approximately 3 days. On an average day during the 1978 season, 99 people could be expected in the core area. Fire Scarred trees, even-aged patches of seral species within climax old growth stands and non-forested areas occupied by remnants of past stands record episodes in the history of Alpine Lakes Area fires. Such patterns of fire history depend on fire type and intensity (crown or surface fire), fire size, and fire fre- Quency (Sando 1978). Table 3 describes fire history characteristics of the plant community zones of the Alpine Lakes. *— Table 3. Fire History. Plant Community Fire Fire Interval Size Zone (intensity) (years) (acres) Ponderosa pine light 1-20 1,000 + Douglas fir light 30-50 300-500 Grand fir moderate 150-200 200-300 Sub-alpine fir high 300 100-200 Sub-alpine Shrub moderate 50-100 0-25 Mountain hemlock moderate 200-300 300-500 Silver fir moderate 200-300 300-500 fººm-- The number of lightning caused fires in the Alpine Lakes Area varies from year to year. From five to eight fire-starting storms occur over the area annual- ly and result in approximately 25 fires. This is consis- tent with literature which indicates that, over time, the Washington Cascades experience 25 to 30 lightn- ing fires per million acres per year. Distribution of lightning fires over the past 20 years shows that, an- nually, 42 fires occur on the east side and eight on the west. There is no evidence to indicate that the lightning occurrence is increasing or decreasing. 9f the lightning caused fires in the Alpine Lakes Area in the past ten years, 75 percent occur below 5,500 foot elevation, while only five percent occur above 6,500 feet. Most of these fires occur from late June through mid-August. Lightning caused fires seldom occur after September 1. Of the total, 90 per- cent were contained at less than one quarter acre and only nine fires (eight of which were in 1970) have exceeded ten acres. Human activities have caused over 70 percent of the fires in the Alpine Lakes Area in the past 10 years. Of the 65 human caused fires per year, 80 percent occur on the east slopes, where the climate is typically warmer and dryer than on the west side. The majority occur from late June through early September, with the peak in early August. The greatest number of these fires are associated with recreation activities, but they seldom result in large burned acreages. Only two recreation related fires in the past ten years have exceeded ten acres. Most have occurred along the U.S. 2 highway cor- ridor. Few occur at the higher elevations in the Wilderness. Restrictions in recent years on the use of campfires in some areas outside the Wilderness have reduced the number of escaped campfires. Another cause of fires has been railroad operations over Stevens and Snoqualmie Passes. In recent years these have not been large, but this has not always been the case. Large fire scars along U.S. 2 resulted from the early day (pre-1920) railroad operations. In- creased prevention efforts and improved railroad equipment have greatly reduced the number of railroad fires and the trend continues to improve. Fires resulting from logging equipment operation burn the greatest acreages, but they occur less fre- quently than other causes. There is no evidence that the annual frequency is increasing. Debris burning, car fires, airplane crashes and other miscellaneous causes also have started fires. They are usually of low intensity but occasionally burn significant acreages. Again, the trend is relatively stable and expected to remain the same unless ac- tivity levels change significantly. As would be expected in an area with diversified vegetation, topography and climate, the flammability (a measure of fire intensity) of the Alpine Lakes Area varies greatly. It can range from creeping fires with no visible flame to fires with flames up to 15 feet high and spreading in the tree crowns. The overall flammability of the area is increasing due to human influences. Fire protection has all but eliminated the light intensity surface fires on the east slopes which periodically “cleaned up" the litter and natural branch fall. This results in large ac- cumulations of forest residues. Another human influence on flammability has been timber management activities. Here the residues from the unutilized portions of trees are added to the residues which are normally present Creating poten- tial for higher fire intensity levels. Prescribed fire is the use of fire originating from natural or human causes under a predetermined set of fuel, weather and topographic conditions to ac- complish a specific resource objective. To date, there has been no prescribed fire used within the Wilderness. In the management unit, it has been limited to disposal of timber management and road construction residues and experimental projects to measure fire effects on other resource outputs. Over the past 10 years this has amounted to approximate- ly 1,400 acres of prescribed fire application per year. Some plant communities are dependent on fire as an essential element in their development. Fire affects site preparation, seed germination, tree stocking level, competition and disease. The specific role of fire in the development of plant communities is not fully known, but evidence indicates that each plant community develops under precise rules, including long term fire history. Noise The standard background noise level in a mature coniferous forest, under low wind conditions, is about 35 decibels on the A scale (dBA) (Dailey and Redman 1975). Some typical sources of noise in the Alpine Lakes Area include motorbikes (75-150 dBA), wood chopping (50-100 dBA), human voices (50-100 dBA) and gunshots (100-150 dBA). The most pronounced and sustained noise in the area is created by road construction (which can in- volve the use of explosives), timber harvest, the transport of timber and other vehicular travel. Interstate 90, U.S. 2 and Route 97 produce a constant hum of vehicle traffic noise. Aircraft overflight is also a source of noise in the Alpine Lakes Area. Several commercial airlines have their east-west traffic pattern over the area. Recrea- tional aircraft flights, including float plane use, is a Common and popular pursuit. Routine recon- naissance flights for fire detection and other ad- ministrative purposes also occur during the summer months. A military aircraft training route runs north and south along the western portion of the Alpine Lakes. Periodic flights occur at low elevation following the terrain. For a short duration, the noise level is very high. 17 Air The Alpine Lakes Area is included in parts of three air quality control regions of Washington State. They are Puget Sound which includes King and Snohomish Counties, South Central for Kittitas County and Northern Washington for Chelan County. The Federal Clean Air Act of 1963 and its amend- ments, state laws and implementation plans and local air quality regions regulate air quality. Regular testing establishes the average amount of each pollutant occurring each year and this is compared against the established standard. Three sites near the Alpine Lakes Area monitor suspended particulate. The Tolt Reservoir site shows a geometric mean of Il micrograms per cubic meter which is considerably better than the air quality stan- dard of 60. There has been little change over the past five years. Values recorded at Wenatchee and Ellensburg are consistently worse than the air quality standard for suspended particulates, but these areas are not typical of the forested areas of the east slopes because both areas are heavily cultivated and subject to blowing dust. Suspended particulate of the forested areas of the east side is likely to be higher than those on the west side because air cleansing rainfall is considerably less frequent. The mean suspended particulate values mentioned above have been measured over periods when prescribed burning, logging activities and road Con- struction and use have occurred. The present level of air quality is, therefore, directly related to land management activities and administrative regulations and controls. Pollutants such as sulfur oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and ozone have been confined to the urban areas of Puget Sound. There is no data available describing the concentrations of these elements over the Alpine Lakes Area, but they are thought to be low. During periods of extreme atmospheric stability, thick inversion layers form over the Puget Sound Basin and concentrations of urban pollutants occa- sionally drift into the lower valleys of the west slopes. This is manifested by a yellow brown haze layer that appears at the 2,000-2,500 foot level in the atmosphere. Smoke from management activities in forested areas may be trapped under this inversion layer creating a concentration of pollutants. Typical- ly, one can expect six to eight such periods during the year. They usually last three or four days. In 1975, an Environmental Protection Agency program to prevent significant deterioration of air quality went into effect. A classification system included in the 1977 amendments to the Clean Air Act requires that Wilderness over 5,000 acres designated as of August 7, 1977, be classified as Class I areas, where signifi- cant deterioration of air quality will be prevented. The remaining forest lands were put in Class II, where moderate degradation of air quality was per- mitted for suspended particulates and sulfur oxides. The 1977 amendments also set goals for prevention of future impairment of visibility in the Class I areas where such impairment results from man-made air pollution. At the present time, neither the method of measuring visibilty nor the baseline values have been determined. Also, it is uncertain as to what time period should be used to develop the baseline values. In view of this, the best measures of visibility in the area are very subjective. There are many days when the air is crystal clear but there are some days when visitors can expect to have their view impaired by smoke or haze that develops well outside the Wilderness area. Biological Environment Vegetation Extremes in elevation, variety of aspect, Soil depths and climate have produced a wide variety of Con- trasting vegetation in the Alpine Lakes Area. Eight of the twelve major vegetative zones occurring in Washington State are here. On the west Cascades foothills, the upper fringes of the Western Hemlock Zone are evidenced by the dense stands of Douglas-fir, western hemlock, western red cedar and red alder. Vine maple thickets are prevalent. The forest understory is commonly comprised of salal, hazel, salmonberry, devil's club and Oregon grape. The upper elevation of this zone is about 2,000 feet. The Silver Fir Zone is the next vegetative classifica- tion encountered as you move upslope on the west side. It extends from 2,000 to approximately 4,000 feet in elevation. Herein lies the principal timber pro- ducing lands of the Alpine Lakes Area. Stands dominated by old growth Douglas-fir and western hemlock occur at the lower ranges blending into stands of Pacific silver fir, noble fir and mountain hemlock at the higher elevations. Sitka alder and Douglas maple are prominent hard- wood species while salal, Oregon grape, kinnikinnick and twin-flower provide understory foliage in the fir stands. Prevalent species growing in forest openings include red alpine blueberry, trailing blackberry, sticky currant, elderberry and Sitka mountain ash. At elevations between 4,000 and 6,000 feet, the Mountain Hemlock Zone occurs. The lower portion of this zone is occupied by continuous stands of silver fir and mountain hemlock. The upper portions are Characterized by open and scattered stands of sub- alpine fir, dwarf juniper and alpine larch. Scenic qualities of this zone are enhanced by the many mountain meadows with wild flowers such as avalan- Che lily, Indian paintbrush, mountain bluebell and spreading phlox. Tree and shrub vegetation at the higher elevation is often matted and deformed because of the severe winds and harsh growing con- ditions at these altitudes. The timber line throughout the Alpine Lakes Area is found at approximately 6,000 feet. Lands above this elevation constitute the Sub-Alpine Meadow Zone. Rugged beauty characterizes this zone with huge rock peaks providing a back-drop for picturesque mountain meadows and azure lakes. Isolated clumps of alpine fir and larch struggle for survival in this harsh climate where snow often stays all summer and numerous small glaciers and Snow fields exist. Many small and delicate plants, such as red heather, forget-me-not, snow lily, columbine and lupine, dot the glades. Soils are very thin to non-existent. Much of this zone is extremely fragile with very slow recuperative characteristics once damage is done. - - - - - xerophyllum tenax (beargrass). Photo by Richard F. Buscher. 18 At the lower elevation on the extreme eastern fringe of the area lies the Ponderosa Pine Zone. This zone Occupies the narrow band between 1,000 and 1,500 feet elevations. As the name implies, it is a zone dominated by open stands of ponderosa pine, often pure but also in combination with Douglas-fir and associated species. The grass-sedge community usually is dominated by cheatgrass, pine-grass, wheatgrasses or elk sedge. Flowers common to this ZOne include balsam root, flebane, hawkweed, mariposa lily and rock lily. Soils tend to be deep and Well drained. With increases in elevation on the eastern slopes, the next zone encountered is the Douglas-fir Zone, which occupies the 1,500 2,500 foot elevations. This Zone blends into the Ponderosa Pine and Grand Fir Zones found on either side. Pure stands of Douglas fir are found, but the species usually occurs in association with others such as western larch, lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, grand fir or silver fir. Understory vegetation is generally absent except along the moist drainages where alder and vine maple may occur. Kinnikinnick, pinegrass, fescue and wheatgrasses may be found in the more open areas. Various sedges may be found depending on SOils. At elevations from 2,500 to 4,000 feet on the eastern slopes is the Grand Fir Zone. This zone is dominated by white fir, which is usually associated with Douglas-fir at the lower elevations and sub-alpine fir and hemlock at the upper levels. Understory vegeta- tion usually consists of a variety of grasses and Sedges and low shrubs. Frequently, pine grass, elk Sedge, low huckleberry, snowberry, vine maple, white alder and elderberry are found. The uppermost forested zone on the eastern slopes is the Alpine Fir Zone. The lower portions of the zone are occupied by continuous stands of sub-alpine fir, white fir, silver fir and mountain hemlock. Occasional patches of Engelmann spruce and alpine larch may be found. The upper reaches are much like the moun- tain hemlock zone of the westside and are Characterized by patches of sub-alpine fir and meadows. Subordinate vegetation is much the same as is found on the west side at this elevation. Insect and disease attacks have caused varying amounts of damage to Alpine Lakes trees over the years. Primary among these invaders are the Western Pine beetle, spruce budworm, Douglas-fir bark bee- tle, tussock moth, balsam wooly aphid, dwarf mistletoe and white pine blister-rust. Less damage has occurred on the Snoqualmie National Forest While portions of the management unit on the Wenatchee National Forest have been recently treated for a 1976, 1977 and 1978 spruce budworm at- tack. Local soil conditions, aspect and climate create en- vironments which result in a variety of plant associa- tions within each of these vegetational zones. Fires, windstorms, avalanches and insect infestations and recent human activities including livestock grazing, fire protection, timber harvest and recreation have all contributed to the present character of vegetation. Plants of Special Interest Plants of special interest are “rare, endangered or threatened vascular plants” in Washington listed by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and Washington Natural Heritage Pro- grams and adopted by the Regional Forester as of- ficial “sensitive plants”. At this writing, the list is pending state legislation. The designation of threatened or endangered species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is currently pending. Appendix G, Table G-1, lists 35 sensitive plant species found in the Alpine Lakes Area. Wildlife Initial wildlife abundance and diversity in the Alpine Lakes was based upon well established forest and brushland ecosystems interrupted only by natural oc- Currences of fire, insects and diseases. This was followed by human settlement and alterations of habitat. In recent times, land management and resource husbandry dictate wildlife populations and occurrence. Timber harvest and fire, for example, can be good or bad for wildlife depending upon where it happens, how it is managed and the wildlife species involved. The Alpine Lakes Area supports an abundance of wildlife species. Some 271 terrestrial vertebrate species plus 37 accidental or migrant species are thought to occur in the area. This is based upon a literature survey of wildlife home ranges by the University of Washington (Hanley and Taber 1979). A list of the species potentially occuring in the Alpine Lakes Area may be obtained as a separate report to this DEIS. The 271 wildlife species can be cataloged as follows: Common Species Number of Species amphibians 13 reptiles 12 birds 177 mammals 69 TOTAL 271 Management of wildlife in the Alpine Lakes is a joint responsibility of the State Game Department and Forest Service. By long standing agreement, the manipulation of animal populations by regulating the harvest is the job of the State. Management of habitat that affects wildlife abundance and distribu- tion is the job of the federal land manager. 19 The assessment of wildlife in this plan, accordingly, focuses on habitat. The 271 species listed above were placed into five plant community groups on the basis of reproductive and feeding requirements." Species of the same plant community can be ex- pected to respond similarly to given modifications of habitat. The acreage of each plant community and the vulnerability rating of each species were determined. Appendix G shows a tally of acres in each plant com- munity group along with relative vulnerability of species to habitat modification or loss. The species reproducing and feeding in or near water—the riparian ecological zone—live in the most sensitive and vulnerable wildlife habitat in the Alpine Lakes. Riparian land is critical for these reasons: 1. It is in relatively short supply and the largest proportion of it is in the management unit, where habitat is more frequently altered than in Wilderness. 2. Half of the wildlife species found in wetlands are highly vulnerable to habitat modification. 3. It produces more biomass — plant and animal life — than other areas (Thomas, 1979). Habitat alterations in the riparian zone will affect wildlife far more than indicated by the proportion of the total area disturbed. Forty-eight wildlife species inhabit this zone in the Alpine Lakes including mink, otter, muskrat, beaver, heron, bittern, sandpiper, and many species of ducks, frogs, and salamanders. Big game species also use this zone for travel corridors between high elevation summer ranges and low elevation winter ranges. Diversity of forest ecosystems is recognized as a good measure of the welfare of wildlife (Margalef 1969, Thomas 1979). For example, where a conifer forest and deciduous forest or two successional stages come together, the resulting “edge” usually creates a wildlife habitat richer than the adjoining plant communities or successional stages. It is Forest Service policy to “provide for species diversi- ty...” Table G-2 of Appendix G shows an analysis of diver- sity that currently exists in the Alpine Lakes Area. Several conclusions can be drawn from this analysis. Diversity resulting from naturally occurring edges is generally low to medium. Diversity resulting from management activities as measured by timber harvest and the resulting mosaic of size class is generally medium to high. It is evident that timber management practices can enhance wildlife diversity but such forest practices must be planned and ex- ecuted with wildlife habitat goals in mind. See Hanley and Taber 1979 (page 17) for the rela- tionship between plant communities and other vegetation classification systems. Pressure on wildlife has been increasing rapidly because of population growth and the rising popularity of outdoor recreation. Photography and the observation and study of plants and wildlife by people pursuing other activities—nonconsumptive use of the out of doors—has increased four fold na- tionally in a five year period (USDI 1972, USD 1977). Hunting is also popular, but it is not keeping pace with growth in population (Hendee and Potter, 1975). Big game animals are harvested annually under regulations imposed by the State Game Department. About 30 percent of the deer hunters normally ex- perience success during regular season hunts, while the special early buck hunt in the high Cascades nor- mally produces a success ratio under 5 percent. Mountain goats are hunted under a closely regulated permit system. The two deer species are found throughout the Cascade Range. Generally, the blacktailed deer utilizes the western, more heavily vegetated slopes, while mule deer roam the more open country to the east. Population counts in King County have in- dicated a most productive blacktail herd with estimates of 12 to 15 animals per square mile. Both species utilize the Alpine Lakes high country primari- ly as summer range. An estimated 200 to 300 elk summer in the Ingalls and Icicle Creek drainages, while a lesser number move into the Cle Elum River drainage for summer range. Forty or so animals of the Rainier elk herd in- habit lands along the Middle Fork Snoqualmie River. Winter range for deer and elk is a critical considera- tion for animals that migrate to lower elevations dur- ing the winter months. Food supply is often low and competition for the use of the land is high. A higher intensity of land use for developments, agriculture, roads and livestock grazing can produce a significant supply problem. The mountain goat may be found throughout the higher elevations. A very hardy animal, it seems to thrive in the harshest of habitats. South facing slopes with exposed rock faces interspersed with vegetation appear to be its favorite habitat. Primary points of concentration include Mt. Stuart, Mt. Cashmere, Icicle Ridge, Davis Peak, Red Mountain, Thorp Mountain, Chickamin Mountain and Cone Mountain, Money Creek and Miller River. Furbearers are found in Small populations throughout the area. They include beaver, otter, weasel, mink, bobcat, and badger. Fish Most of the high lakes were barren of fish until human settlement occurred near the Alpine Lakes. Although many are shallow and subject to periodic freezing, other lakes are regularly stocked by the State Game Department. Usually introduced by air- craft, fish include brook, rainbow, and cutthroat trout. Productivity is cyclic with the deeper and more fertile lakes producing fish in the 14 to 16 inch range. - - º -- - Photo by Richard F. Buscher. Kokanee have been introduced to the Cle Elum, Kachess and Keechelus reservoirs. The Kokanee is a freshwater form of the Sockeye Salmon which migrates up the tributaries of these lakes to spawn. The larger natural lakes in the Wilderness also con- tain populations of lake trout (mackinaw) and Dolly Varden. For a list of the fish stocking history in the Alpine Lakes turn to Appendix B, Exhibit D. 20 The Wenatchee and Skykomish Rivers support anadromous fish runs of sockeye, coho and Chinook Salmon and steelhead. Icicle Creek contains artificial Spawning runs of salmon and steelhead originating at the hatchery, while Peshastin Creek, Teanaway and Yakima Rivers support remnant runs of Chinook and steelhead. Commercial and sport fishermen harvest salmon and steelhead in the ocean and rivers Supplied by these tributaries. Native cutthroat can be found in the headwaters of many streams and the Game Department maintains a put-and-take rainbow trout fishery throughout the system. Animals of Special Interest The animals listed in Table G-5 of Appendix G are “Species of Special Interest” tentatively listed by the State Game Department. The most critical species are those listed as “threatened” or “endangered" on the Federal Register. These species are subject to the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended. One animal is listed as “threaten- ed" and two are listed as “endangered". Other, species deserve attention because their population is declining, their population is unknown of the Species has particular habitat requirements that are sensitive to forest management practices. Federal “endangered” species are the gray wolf and peregrine falcon. The bald eagle is listed as threaten- ed. However, no sightings of the peregrine falcon have been reported near Alpine Lakes in recent years and verification of occurrence of the gray wolf is needed. Range Livestock grazing began in the Central Cascades Range shortly after the turn of the century. The en- - tire Alpine Lakes management unit was under permit to various parties. Use steadily increased in the area until the late 1930's, when a downward trend in range Condition became apparent and grazing on this marginal and relatively inaccessible land in the Cascades became less profitable. By the early 1940's, permits were reduced, both in total number and in the number of animals allowed on a given per- mit. Current use is approximately 20 percent of the peak level of 1930. In 1978, 89,451 acres of the management unit was under permit. Most grazing OC- Curs on scattered eastern slope meadows, with livestock traveling into the higher cirque basins and Western slopes as summer progresses. Four allotments are located all or partly within the management unit on the Wenatchee National Forest. They are the Corral-Fortune Creek, Swauk, and Wildhorse-White Pine sheep allotments and the Staf- ford cattle allotment (see Figure 5 for locations of Figure 5. Commercial Grazing Allotments. -- To Seattle Ú North Bend O Nº. To Seattle Commercial Grazing Allotments Wilderness and Intended Wilderness Management Unit Wildhorse Sheep and Goat Corral — Fortune Creek Sheep and Goat Stafford Creek Cattle and Horse Swauk Sheep and Goat Q) Leavenworth "To A º Wenatchee Cle Elum Yº- To Ellensburg < º 21 commercial grazing allotments). In addition, portions of the Corral-Fortune Creek and Wilderness- Whitepine sheep allotments are within the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. The four allotments currently have a total animal unit month (AUM) capacity of 1,459. Range improvements are limited to five miles of sheep driveway and one water development. At various times, permits have been issued to graze sheep on transitory range (clearcuts, 1-7 years after site preparation) on the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Na- tional Forest. Currently all of the range allotments are under inten- sive management with alternate year rotation on allotments outside the Alpine Lakes Area. As vegetative succession converts old burns previously abundant with forage to shrub and timber stands, less land is suitable for grazing. The range resource inventory has classified 21,240 acres on the Wenatchee National Forest as suitable primary rangeland. Of the total, 508 acres are wet grasslands, 513 acres are dry grasslands, 4,611 are annual grasslands and 15,608 acres are woodland- chaparral-browse. Sensitive plants associated with serpentine soils are known to be present within the Corral-Fortune Creek and Stafford Allotments. Other sensitive plants are present on the Swauk Allotment. Recreation pack and saddle stock grazing is low, totaling approximately 80 animal unit months in 1978. Recreation animal use rose 16 percent between 1967-1972 and the trend is continuing. In some loca- tions, cattle and sheep grazing has been eliminated from important recreational stock grazing areas. Moderate populations of deer and elk also forage within the management unit. Much of the game range is unavailable to recreation or commercial livestock. Critical feed conditions for big game are on their winter range, generally outside the unit. Human Environment Overview It is difficult to strictly separate the “physical" and “human” environment in the Alpine Lakes Area or anywhere else where humans have ventured. Water, air, visual quality and noise levels—included in the “physical environment”—are obviously affected by human activities. But transportation, mining, timber harvest, recreation, the evolution of landownership patterns, and the long term economic outlook are purely in the realm of human endeavor. They were the means by which the Alpine Lakes Area became, and remains, conscious of itself. - - º- -- º, º º ºn º Nº º º * & One of the most widespread of Native American creation stories on the Columbia River Plateau locates the source of all human life in the Alpine Lakes Area. According to the story, Coyote fought an epic battle with Wishpoosh, the monstrous beaver living in Lake Cle Elum, and the rough-and-tumble of their combat tore the river basin into its present con- dition. When, at the mouth of the Columbia, Coyote prevailed, he cut Wishpoosh into pieces, each of which became an Indian nation. Today place names memorialize this and other Native American stories. Little is known of the first cultures to use the Cascades. Relics depicting the lifestyle of some of the earliest known people to enter what is now Washington State following the last glaciation have yet to be found, a condition which requires attention and care in the management of likely sites. It is generally agreed that these early people shared a similar, unspecialized, land-oriented lifestyle. Small, dispersed and highly mobile bands spread out across the country-side, guided by the geographic distribution and seasonal availability of their food sources. Living sites were temporary, tools were multifunctional. Gradual shifts in population pat- terns, technologies and resource use, in concert with changing climate and vegetation, led to the develop- ment of Indian groups that were encountered by the first explorers and fur traders in the area. Four rivers have their headwaters in the area, but none crosses it. From the time of earliest habitation until the most recent road improvements, passage through the maze of towering rock has been central to attitudes about the area. Prehistoric settlement in and around the Alpine Lakes was usually concen- trated along the waterways, which often had the same name as the people gathered there during the winter season. Accordingly, Wenatchees dwelt along the Wenatchee River, the Upper Yakima or Kittitas along the Yakima River and its tributaries and, on the west side, Snoqualmie and Skykomish along those rivers and their tributaries. In the summer, Wenatchee gathering places in or near the area included Camas Meadows near Blewett Pass and a fishing area near the mouth of Icicle Creek. Hyas Lake above Lake Cle Elum was a favorite summer camp for the Kittitas Indians. West of the Cascade crest, Skykomish Indians dispersed from their headquarters between Sultan and Index and the Snoqualmie from what is now North Bend. They practiced prescribed fires to enhance the berry harvest, a strategy which was later emulated by early sheep-herders to increase the amount of forage. In addition to physical necessities in the form of game and berries, the Alpine Lakes Area provided spiritual sustenance. Young people traveled into the “tall white mountains” on vision quests, solitary 22 w §º ſ | | º º § § l § º- N º º U º l i º i T | |º: t N t . U N vigils in which a relationship with a guardian Spirit WaS established. The mountains did separate people who organized their lives according to different opportunities. In- dians on the west side of the crest were in regular contact with the ocean based cultures on the coast. Eastside residents traveled into the plains and traded with those who ordered their lives around the buf- falo. But travel across the mountain passes was regular and important. Goods and information were exchanged, intermarriage was frequent. The subse- quent quest for the mountain pass by newcomers in the 19th Century began with an exploration of this trail system. One of the first encounters between whites and Native Americans of this area was recorded by the fur trader Alexander Ross, who wintered on the Okanogan River in 1811 and traveled into the Yakima Valley for horses in 1814. Sporadic dealings with fur traders and early settlers continued along with dis- quieting news about conflict with settlers elsewhere and frightful new diseases. But the Alpine Lakes Area was removed from the mainstream of migration and the traditional way of life continued until the 1850's when missionaries, Isaac Stevens and the discovery of gold in British Columbia produced ir- revocable alteration. Indian treaties negotiated by Stevens in 1855 precipitated hostilities and members of most Alpine Lake Area Indian groups were involv- ed. Kittitas Indians were prominent in several cam- paigns directed by Yakima Chief Kamiakin including the defeat of Lt. George Haller in 1855. Resistance to the treaties west of the Cascades was centered in the Green River area, just south of the Alpine Lakes boundary. Another project of Stevens, first territorial governor of Washington, was of little immediate significance to the area but was to have very large future conse- quences. His 1853-54 survey for a railroad across the Central Cascades was the first chapter of the railroad period. Lt. George McClellan, while incorrect- ly informing Stevens that Snoqualmie Pass would be impassable to rail travel in the winter, provided this description, which may have named the area: “The cluster is of sharp granite rock very jagged and bold in outline and decidedly alpine in its character.” The Fraser River gold strike of 1858 was of major significance to the Alpine Lakes Area. Miners from the depleted fields in California sought access to British Columbia through Indian country producing raids and retaliation, the final significant episodes of armed struggle in this area. It also resulted in the first effort to ship freight over Alpine Lake Area passes. Portland enjoyed a monopoly in supplying the northern mining district via the Columbia River, and Puget Sound merchants tried unsuccessfully to break it with pack trains, briefly employing camels, over what is now Stevens Pass. Finally, the market for beef at the “Caribou" mines provided the impetus for the establishment of extensive stock growing operations in the Yakima Valley. That market declin- ed as the Puget Sound population increased and cat- tle drives began in earnest through the Alpine Lakes Area at Snoqualmie Pass. The Fraser River gold rush also deepened an addic- tion to prospecting which was already pandemic. But, while gold was found in and around the Alpine Lakes Area and invariably created a sensation, the payoff was rarely substantial enough to support sus: tained, large-scale operations in such forbidding teſ: rain. Mining has been more or less continuous in the Swauk and Blewett-Peshastin districts since discoveries in the 1870's. The overall yield from the two districts, relatively low, is no measure of their importance in the minds of eastside residents and to the development of the area. The town of Ellensburg was virtually emptied by word of the Swauk discovery in 1873. Promoters trumpeted word of mineral wealth far and wide. Much of the earliest road building in the area was the product of this min- ing activity. The most extensive mining in the vicini- ty, however, was for a more pedestrian substance, coal. Located adjacent to the Alpine Lakes southeastern boundary above Cle Elum, the Roslyn Coalfield was one of the most extensive on the West Coast. In the rich ethnic mixture of its population, the magnitude of its mining disasters and the role it played in the Northwest labor movement, Roslyn has received ex- tensive attention. Its history is inseparable from the railroad. The early coal claims were acquired by the Northern Pacific Railroad (NP), which Selected Stampede Pass for the first penetration of the Cascades by rail partially on the basis of its proximi- ty to Roslyn coal. A notion of the central role which the railroad land grant played in western settlement is suggested by legislative history. The Union Pacific Act, authorizing the transfer of alternate sections of public lands to railroads to subsidize construction, was passed in May of 1862, the same month and year which produc- ed the Homestead Act. The Northern Pacific received one of the largest land grants—44 million acres—in 1864. It resulted in 240,000 acres in Checkerboard ownership in the vicinity of the Alpine Lakes Area. Financial aberrations of the period, and the strength of Oregon in Congress (the NP main line was diverted to Portland) delayed construction of the railoads to Puget Sound until 1887, but its impact on the development of communities around the Alpine Lakes Area was immense. The City of Yakima, for in- stance, was picked up and moved to accommodate the rail alignment of the Northern Pacific, and homesteading was greatly accelerated. Stevens Pass was named after the other important Stevens in this region, John F., who located the route through the mountains for the Great Northern 23 Railroad. Stevens found the pass while exploring headwaters of the Skykomish and Wenatchee Rivers then directed the construction of nine switchbacks, which served until the completion of the original tun- nel in 1900. He was also an advisor in the Construc- tion of the 7.8 mile tunnel currently in use. The Great Northern was a vital institution in the area, built without the assistance of a land grant. Its founder, James J. Hill, was a tireless supporter of agriculture, which provided his line with freight, and a major fac- tor in early Western settlement. Railroad development was also critical in the evolu- tion of the area's primary economic base, timber pro- ducts. It opened new markets for Northwestern timber in the mid-west, revolutionized the extraction and local transport of timber and provided the Weyerhaeuser Company with a large portion of its early timber holdings. Weyerhaeuser purchased the bulk of its early holdings from Northern Pacific, one block of 900,000 acres for $6.5 million in 1900. The largest portion of Weyerhaeuser timber land from NP is on the west side of the Alpine Lakes Area. On the east side, some 800,000 acres of NP land passed in- to the ownership of the Pack River Timber Company, now owned by Idaho Pine Timber Associates. The railroad, now Burlington Northern, retained and is currently harvesting timberland in and near the Alpine Lakes management unit. The Forest Service has played a dominant role in the Alpine Lakes. The Service has administered land in the Area since 1905, when responsiblity for the na- tional forest reserves was transferred to the Depart- ment of Agriculture. Initially, because of plentiful supplies of timber on private land and a modest market for timber products, the task of national foresters was primarily custodial. Fire control was in- itiated and was related to the beginnings of systematic re-forestation. A burn at Granite Mountain near Snoqualmie Pass was replanted in 1915 with trees from the region's first nursery. The first campground in the area was opened on Denny Creek in 1917, but visitation by recreationists remained low until the mid-20's. Then, as travel by automobile became possible for more and more Nor- thwestern families, forest managers found their duties expanded dramatically by a surge of outdoor excursion trips. In 1923, auto visitation on the Sno- qualmie forest reached 81,000 visitors and by 1927 it was 200,000. This period was also the heyday of railroad logging, with entire logging camps housed in railroad cars. Stumpage fees in 1922 were $2 per thousand board feet for Douglas fir and 50 cents for western hemlock. The resources of the Forest Service were stretched thin by this acceleration in timber harvest and recreation, a condition which was relieved by the º------- ---* -- -----º º- - º :-- - º-º --. --- - - -- - --- --- : - s * º Four horsepower taking Buick Roadster over Snoqualmie Pass – 1916. Photo from Mary Ferrell, North Bend, Wa. 24 Creation of the Civilian Conservation Corps during the Depression. A large portion of the trails, fire lookouts, campgrounds and administrative facilities in the area were constructed by CCC crews supervis- ed by the Forest Service. East of the Cascade crest, the protection of upper meadow lands used as summer range by stockmen was a major responsibility of the Wenatchee Na- tional Forest. Pressure on the rangeland was relieved after World War II when the introduction of synthetic fibers reduced the demand for wool. Demand for timber products during the war marked the beginning of intensive timber management in and around the area. Counties with land in the Na- tional Forests began deriving considerable revenue for their 25 percent share of timber receipts. Major developments in the 1950's and 60's were the replacement of the fire lookout system by aerial observation, the development of ski areas at Stevens and Snoqualmie Passes and the rapid growth of the Conservation movement. Passage of the National Environmental Policy Act in 1969 coupled with great- ly increased demand for national forest timber pro- duced a corresponding expansion of Forest Service responsibilities. The creation of the North Cascades National Park resulted in the consolidation of the Mt. Baker and Snoqualmie National Forests in November of 1973 and with the passage of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning and Na- tional Forest Management Acts, the Forest Service began charting the future of the area into the 21st Century. The journals and recollections of early foresters pro- vide the largest body of information on the Alpine Lakes Area in existence. One legacy is a host of live- ly place names. Most of the lakes with feminine names are memorials to the wives, girlfriends, mothers, sisters and daughters of early foresters (Not all the place naming was this prim. Miners and other woods workers reportedly named some lakes after women of easy virtue). Other names were in- Spired by landforms, an encounter with unusual weather and pure whimsy. A.H. Sylvester, who became the first supervisor of the Wenatchee National Forest in 1908, affixed his “Enchantment” to the best known cluster of glacial lakes in the area. But despite the delight which he and other foresters took in naming features, they usually deferred to the Indian name if it was known. Said Sylvester: “I gather that the Indians had the ability to put into a Word meanings, pictures, and descriptions that it takes our more complicated civilizations sentences, even paragraphs and pages to convey.” The birthdate of the Seattle based Mountaineers, 1906, attests to the long standing attachment to natural areas in this region. As early as 1920, members of this organization and Oregon Out- doorsmen sought the inclusion of the Alpine Lakes Area in Washington Cascades National Park. The Forest Service designated 243,000 acres of the Cen- tral Cascades as the Alpine Lakes Limited Area in 1946. The Environmental Movement of the 1960's focused public attention on diminishing wildlands and the im- portance of a relatively undisturbed area of great scenic beauty almost immediately adjacent to the Puget Sound Metropalitan population center; “Central Park West.” Scores of proposals were set forth by environmentalists, recreation associations, the timber industry and public resource agencies. A Forest Service study team developed three alter- natives and made its boundary recommendations in 1973. Several pieces of legislation were introduced. A compromise was reached in February of 1976 which called for a Wilderness surrounded by a management unit. On July 12, 1976, President Gerald Ford signed the bill creating the Alpine Lakes Area. Past mining leaves a historical record in the Cle Elum River area. Photo by Dale R. Potter. Cultural Remnants of previous habitation and commerce exist in the Alpine Lakes Area today. West of the Cascade divide, vegetation cover has hindered the discovery of prehistoric sites, but along the eastern slopes, ar- chaeological evidence of temporary camps and In- dian fisheries have been found along the upper reaches of the Yakima and Wenatchee Rivers and ad- jacent to the major lakes. Quarries, where rock was obtained for the manufacture of early tools, have been tentatively identified in the Swauk Valley. Ceremonial practices in the higher elevations are in- dicated by painted pictographs on the basalt cliffs bordering the upper Wenatchee valley. Remnants of Indian trails survive near Snoqualmie Pass. Historically, the relics of abandoned mining opera- tions include assorted equipment, adits, millsites, cabins, tramways, pack trails, and wagon roads. The Stevens Pass Historic District was created in 1976 to preserve, protect and enhance the 87 year old railroad grade. The old townsite of Wellington, where 25 96 people perished in 1910 when an avalanche Swept two trains and seven locomotives away, and the timbered and concrete remains of the numerous Snowsheds and tunnels can be viewed. Railroad grades, standing trestles and the debris left by transitory occupation mark several localities within the Alpine Lakes Area. Intermingled are the foundations of homestead, trapping and hunting cabins, former townsites and cemeteries, recrea- tional lodges and developments, early irrigation im- provements, Forest Service guard stations, lookouts and Shelters, and the Structures and facilities con- structed by the Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) during the Depression Era. In the Course of inventorying Alpine Lakes, some 158 Cultural sites were identified in the management unit (see Table 4). Among these are two National Register Districts (Stevens Pass and Liberty), two National Register sites (Salmon La Sac Guard Station and Blewett Arrastra), one potential National Register District (Blewett) and twelve other sites of potential significance. In addition to those sites already inven- toried, prehistoric and historic land use patterns in- dicate a high probability for other significant cultural Sites in the Alpine Lakes Area. In summary, the country encompassed within the Alpine Lakes Area is rich in cultural resources. These Cultural remnants provide a glimpse of former lifestyles, an understanding of techniques employed to Cope with an unpredictable environment and an appreciation for a heritage bequeathed to us through the pioneering efforts of others. Railroads Although railroads have declined as major passenger carriers, they have retained a major role in movement of freight. Railroads are especially important because of their ability to compete with other modes in the shipment of bulk commodities. In Washington State about 1 percent of interstate and 0.3 percent of intrastate passenger trips are made by rail. This relatively small share of the total passenger market is not expected to increase significantly in the immediate future. As a result of current levels of demand for passenger service eastward from Seattle, there are proposals to decrease the amount of rail service currently provid- ed. The current energy situation could change this. Railroad logging in Alpine Lakes began around 1909. The railroads replaced animal and water transport of logs in, among other places, the Teanaway, the Pratt, the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie, the Foss and the Swauk drainages. Trucks began to compete with the railroads in the 1920's and by 1944 railroad logging WaS OV6ſ. Table 4. Known and Potential Cultural Sites in The Management Unit. Number of Known Sites Condition of Remains Interpretive Value Potential for Additional Sites' Resource Site . Historic Prehistoric Complex Historic Prehistoric Fair Deteriorated Only Unknown Yes No Unknown | H M L H M L Middle Fork Snoqualmie 14 - 3 5 3 3 4 10 *= X X |-90 24 3 6 11 6 4 8 16 3 X X Kachess 17 6 8 11 1 3 10 10 3 X X Teanaway 19 2 5 9 3 4 4 12 5 X X Highway 97 21 1 12 4 2 4 13 7 2 X X lcicle 5 4 4 5 tº- - 4 4 1 X X U.S. 2 East 12 4 7 4 3 2 10 5 1 X X U.S. 2 West 26 - 5 6 7 8 9 13 4 X X Total 138 20 50 55 25 28 62 77 19 "Potential for Additional Sites. H — High potential for occurrence of presently unidentified cultural resources based upon terrain features and reported land use patterns. M – Moderate potential for occurrence of presently unidentified cultural resources. Selected areas within a complex may have a high cultural resource potential and will require consideration on a project-by-project basis. L — Low potential for occurrence of presently unidentified cultural resources. Selected areas within a complex may have a high cultural resource potential and will require consideration on a project-by-project basis. Roads State Road System — There are approximately 1,250 miles of road in the Alpine Lakes management unit. Included in this total are approximately 30 miles of Interstate 90, Snoqualmie Pass Highway. Since 1975 the average daily traffic, measured at Lake Keechelus, has increased by 10 percent per year to 16,300 vehicles per day in 1978. In 1981 the west bound lanes under construction west of Snoqualmie Pass are expected to open, and in 1985 all current construction is expected to be completed. The Washington State Department of Transportation expects the present traffic volumes to increase by 1.7 times by 1990. Seasonal traffic (ski- ing, hunting and holidays) cause temporary conges- tion near the pass. The segment of the highway east of Hyak will approach 1.8 times designed capacity levels by 1990. The winding alignment and long mountainous grades near Hyak contribute to this traffic congestion. Trucks comprise 25 percent of the total traffic. This corridor is identified as a bicycle corridor in the Washington State Department of Transportation's Master Plan for Statewide Bicycle Corridors. However, bicyclists currently are pro- hibited from using I-90. There are about 57 miles of U.S. 2 and Stevens Pass Highway, within the management unit. In 1923 the Wenatchee National Forest Supervisor, A.H. Slyvester, surveyed a route over Stevens Pass. King, Snohomish and Chelan counties together with the Forest Service financed the construction of a road that was officially opened in 1925. In 1927, the Tumwater Canyon section was opened and in 1929, the road became part of the state highway system. Today, a mostly two lane undivided highway has an average daily traffic load of 3,450 vehicles measured near the town of Skykomish and 3,950 in the Tumwater section. Highway 2 has shown a 10 per- Cent average annual increase in traffic in recent years. The major mode of travel is the automobile with truck traffic accounting for about 10 percent of the total. By 1990, traffic demand is projected to ex- ceed design capacity on 22 percent of the roadway. Spot Safety improvements will need to be im- plemented to help reduce accidents. Blewett Pass, Highway 97, is a two lane undivided highway with approximately 40 miles in the Alpine Lakes management unit. In 1879, the first wagon road crossed Blewett Pass. In 1915, 36 autos met at the summit to celebrate the opening of the route to automobiles. In 1956, the new Blewett Pass Highway was constructed over Swauk Pass by the Bureau of Public Roads financed with $1,366,498 of Forest Ser. vice funds. In 1978, the average daily traffic measured 2,750 vehicles at Ingalls Creek. U.S. Highway 97 has shown a 4 percent average annual 26 increase in traffic since 1975. The route is mainly us- ed for interregional travel, 18 percent of which is truck traffic. Portions of U.S. 97 which will be too heavily used by 1990 include segments near Swauk Pass. U.S. Highways 97 and 2 are also bicycle cor- ridors, which can be used by cyclists. Other state highways in the Alpine Lakes Area in- clude about a half mile of State Highway 903 and a two lane undivided asphalt road just east of Lake Cle Elum that joins Kittitas County Road 23509. In addi- tion, State Highway 906 is a two lane undivided asphalt road that provides access to the ski areas at Snoqualmie Pass. County Road System — There are about 19 miles of the Kittitas County road system in the Alpine Lakes management unit. The entire system is two lane un- divided asphalt with average daily traffic volumes - - - - - º Cº. oº ºleºcº- * Mºsawayº oay, sº ºws ºss º - - - that range from a low of 50 on the Yellowstone Trail Road near Snoqualmie Pass, to nearly 500 on Road 23509, which provides access to the Cle Elum and Cooper River Valleys. Kittitas County does not an- ticipate any construction or major reconstruction within the Alpine Lakes Area. In addition to the roads within the area, Kittitas County Road 22109 provides access to the Teanaway. There are about 27 miles of King County road system in the management unit. About 15 miles are gravel surfaced roads of 18 feet or less width; the re- mainder are 20 feet wide asphalt surfaced. King County estimates that only the Money Creek Road (898.70) would have an average daily traffic of over 100 vehicles. Outside the management unit, County Road 98.990 provides access to the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie. Currently, King County intends to pave 2.5 miles of Road 89730 from one mile west of Skykomish to U.S. 2. Also planned is bridge decking replacement on Miller River Bridge No. 999-W. Chelan County has approximately 26 miles of road in the management unit. Nineteen miles are double lane asphalt; the remainder are aggregate surfaced. Most are frontage roads to U.S. 2 between Winton and Merritt and to Highway 97 along Peshastin Creek. Chelan County road systems provide access to such popular areas as the Icicle, Ingalls Creek and the Old Blewett Pass from the county line north to Highway 97. At this time, the County does not plan any new construction or major reconstruction in or near the Alpine Lakes. Private Road System — The private road systems within the management unit are essentially com- plete. Except for two areas, primary roads are in place. On the east side, the Silver Creek area is cur- rently unroaded. On the west side, the Pratt River drainage is currently unroaded. Nearly all private roads are single lane gravel. Future road construc- tion will be filling in and extending the current road system. Forest Service Road System — The Forest Service currently manages 808 miles of road in the Alpine Lakes management unit. Nearly all of this system is single lane aggregate surfaced road. The average road density on national forest lands in the manage- ment unit is relatively light with 1.4 miles per section of land. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1975) estimates that there are currently 2.5 miles of road per section on commercial forest land in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Alaska. The average road density within the management unit, regardless of land ownership and including state, county, private, and Forest Service road systems, is 1.5 miles per section. Because of its character, much of the Alpine Lakes management unit will continue to be unroaded because the rough topography makes road access extremely difficult or expensive. Also, fragile soils and other resource values may be damaged by road construction and potential commodity resource values often do not warrant the costs involved. An analysis of road access capability based upon slope, soil stability, and erosion potential indicated that 36 percent of the management unit has a high relative risk associated with road construction. Forty Seven percent of the area is considered to have a moderate risk and 17 percent to have relatively low risk. There is considerable evidence that roads are the primary Source of environmental impacts associated with forest activities. It is well documented that forest roads are the primary source of accelerated erosion and sedimentation. In addition to the im- pacts on water and soil resources, roads are the 27 cause of much of the damage done to the visual quality. Many of the issues surrounding Alpine Lakes are founded in the perceived effects of increased ac- cess and associated use. Road construction, reconstruction, and subsequent management can af- fect substantially adjacent areas. The existing transportation system in Alpine Lakes was built without anticipation of a Wilderness designation. This circumstance results in road Corridors that penetrate miles into what otherwise would be Wilderness. Distorted Wilderness boundary lines were required to exclude them. Some of these roads, such as the Icicle and Middle Fork Snoqualmie River, were originally planned to cross the Area and provide for roaded recreation. These road corridors are a cen- tral public issue and a management concern. Summer Trails and 4 x 4 Routes Trails were the original transportation system in the Alpine Lakes Area. They will continue to be an impor- tant part of the total existing and future transport systems. Most of the trails on the east side of the Cascades were established near the turn of the cen- tury by herdsmen moving sheep through the high mountain country. The trails normally ran from alpine meadow to alpine meadow by the shortest route, circled lakes along wet, fragile shores and crossed from drainage to drainage by the most direct route, going straight up and through low mountain passes. Many of the trails on the west side of the Cascades developed as scramble routes by fishermen as they climbed from lake to lake. Like sheep driveways, these trails followed the shortest path of least resistance with little consideration given to scenic vistas, resource impacts or variety of hiking ex- periences. In the early 1900's, following the establishment of the National Forests, trails became important for dif- ferent reasons. The trail system became the transportation network between fire lookout and fire guard stations. They provided fire fighters relatively quick access to fires. Later, the Civilian Conservation Corps expanded the trail systems to provide improv- ed fire protection. Currently 84 percent of the system can be used by horse packers. The recreational use of trails predominates today. Thus the basic purpose for trails is significantly dif- ferent than when most of the approximately 800 miles was first constructed in the Alpine Lakes Area. Not only have the numbers and types of users changed but also the mode of use. Two separate segments of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail traverse a total of 12.5 miles of the management unit. One is located between Yakima Pass on the southern edge of the unit and the Alpine Lakes Wilderness boundary one mile north of Snoqualmie Pass. This segment traverses 8.5 miles of intermingled public and private lands. Less than half is in national forest. Portions of the trail pass private lands which have been heavily logged or are likely to be logged in the future. The Forest Service has acquired an easement for the Pacific Crest Trail where it crosses these private lands. Travelers along this section of the trail receive a variety of ex- periences characterized by displays of timber pro- duction activities, major developed ski complexes, and a very heavily used interstate transportation cor- ridor. The second segment is located north of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness extending for four miles between the Wilderness boundary and the head of Nason Creek. This area is characterized by a developed winter sports complex and a major cross-Cascade transportation corridor. One national recreation trail has been designated in the area. The one mile long Deception Falls Trail on the Mt. Baker–Snoqualmie National Forest, six miles west of Stevens Pass, was designated in 1979. Two potential national recreation trails have been identified within the management unit. The 17.5 mile long Nason Ridge Trail No. 1583 and 1583.1, with 6.5 miles of arterial trails, has high potential for a variety of recreation opportunities through an easily acces- sible subalpine environment. The 25 mile long Coun- ty Line Trail along the divide between Chelan and Kittitas Counties also provides a variety of forest en- vironments, ranging from Douglas fir forest and open grass covered ridges to subalpine cirque basins. Both trails offer a variety of outdoor recreation op- portunities and are readily accessible (less than 2 hour drive) from the Puget Sound and Wenatchee ur. ban areas. In the mid-fifties, light, relatively inexpensive trail bikes came on the market and placed an entirely new category of user onto the trail system. At the same time, the use of four-wheel drive vehicles expanded and, as use increased, four-wheel drive enthusiasts and bikers searched for new challenges in forested and unroaded areas. Currently, 40 percent of the trails are available for motorcycle use in the manage- ment unit. There are about 11 miles of designated 4 x 4 routes in the Highway 97 Corridor Resource Complex. The road to Gallagher Head that previously served as a popular four-wheel drive route is current- ly closed to 4 x 4 use. In accordance with the Executive Order 11644, the Wenatchee and Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forests prepared ORV plans in 1977. These plans are available at their respective Forest Supervisor Offices. Winter Trails and Routes In past winters, recreational use of the Alpine Lakes Areas was limited to the few ardent hikers unwilling to remain away from the mountains during the long winters. With the advent of snowmobiles in the 1960's, motorized winter use of trails began to grow. More recently, as skiing became more popular, peo- ple began to leave the groomed slopes of the alpine ski areas and seek the solitude and beauty of the winter mountain country. Few winter pedestrian or motorized trails have been constructed or formally designated and signed in the area. Numerous areas were identified as desirable for the development of both motorized and non- motorized winter trails during this planning process. Photo by Robert DeWitz. 28 Nordic skiing has shown a phenomenal increase in the past five years. Because of an abundance of favorable terrain, pleasant winter weather and good Snow conditions, coupled with easy access from the Puget Sound metropolitan area, the Alpine Lakes is receiving much of this increase in trail as well as Cross-country use. Reliable Nordic ski conditions can be expected from mid-December through early March in the eastern half of the management unit. Less reliable conditions occur in the western half of the unit above 2,000 feet elevation. Numerous in- dividuals, groups and corporations have established Nordic ski schools which provide both equipment and instruction, often on groomed trails on both public and private lands within the management unit. It is anticipated that there will be an increasing need for designated trails as well as other facilities (i.e. parking and sanitation) related to this activity both on and adjacent to the national forests. Another rapidly growing winter activity is snowshoe- ing. Participants have many of the same needs and expectations as Nordic skiers. However, in addition to the areas used by skiers, they can be expected to travel into higher and much more adverse terrain. This is made possible by recent equipment im- provements. A consequence of this is increased eX- posure to the high avalanche hazards common in the mountains of the Alpine Lakes Area. A less familiar winter recreation trail use within the management unit is dog-sledding. Trailed and roaded areas on the Lake Wenatchee and Cle Elum Ranger Districts have been popular for this activity in the past. Additional desirable areas have been identified in the Teanaway drainage on the Ellensburg District. Conflicts between dog-sleds and other winter trail users have been minimal in the past. Minor conflicts have occurred with 4 x 4 vehicles on unplowed, Snow-covered forest roads used as dog-sled access to heavier snow areas. Snowmobiling in the management unit has increased at a moderate rate in recent years. Many of the forest roads and trails, particularly along the extreme eastern and southeastern boundaries, provide good Opportunities for the snow vehicles. One area north of Swauk Pass in Tronsen Creek has been closed to motorized winter travel to avoid conflict with the heavy pedestrian use. Off-road or trail travel by Snowmobile is generally not practical in the area because of steep terrain and/or dense vegetation. Many of the roads and trails that provide oppor- tunities for motorized use are also popular for Nordic Skiers. Zoning may be appropriate in many areas to reduce conflict. The State of Washington has established and main- tains “Sno-parks” at six locations within the manage- ment unit. One of these winter parking areas is near the mouth of Mill Creek approximately six miles east of Stevens Pass and adjacent to Highway 2. Another is at Swauk Pass adjacent to Highway 97. Four are adjacent to Interstate 90 east of Snoqualmie Pass; one at Cabin Creek approximately thirteen miles east of the pass; another at the Stampede Pass inter. change some twelve miles east of the pass, a third at Price Creek approximately ten miles east of the pass and the fourth at Gold Creek approximately two miles east of the Pass. With expected increases in winter recreation, additional safe and convenient parking areas will probably be needed. Minerals Mineral resources with commercial potential have been identified on approximately 163,000 acres in the Alpine Lakes Area, of which about 55,000 acres are in the Wilderness. See Figure 6 for general locations. Many Smaller deposits, some of them suitable for recreational mining, exist elsewhere in the area. Past production records indicate that more than $5 million worth of metallic resource, primarily gold and cop- per, have been removed during the past 130 years. Mining activity still occurs in the Middle Fork Snoqualmie River, Blewett and Liberty districts, but much of the mineral resource has not been fully ex- plored. At least three factors have been involved: 1. The high unit-cost required to dig a shaft in such a region was not considered economical between 1890 and 1940, when most mining occurred. Prospects were entered by adit and little depth of exploration resulted. 2. Facilities for the milling of gold from sulfide ores or separating Copper, lead and zinc in merchantable concentrations were in very short supply. Ores were generally shipped directly to smelters, one of which operates today in Tacoma. 3. It has been recognized more recently that narrow high grade veins close to the surface may indicate large but low grade Copper deposits beneath. Although recent increases in the price of metals will undoubtedly stimulate recreational mining activity, no dramatic increase in commercial mining is ex- pected in the next ten years. This prediction takes in- to account the long lead time required to develop a substantial mining property. Over the long term (10 to 20 years) large scale Com- mercial mining is most feasible in the lower Money Creek and Miller River drainages, Quartz Creek and the Goldmeyer Hot Springs-La Bohn Gap area. About half of the latter district (La Bohn Gap) is in Wilderness, which imposes more rigorous conditions for mineral extraction. The most prevalent nonmetallic minerals are coal and limestone. The Cle Elum-Roslyn coal fields, im- mediately adjacent to the management unit, pro- duced an estimated 61 million tons of coal before the last mine closed in 1963. Explorations Continue in this field, which extends into the management unit, and it is possible mining may resume if economical means of extraction can be found. Coal deposits are known to exist in the Southern and eastern sections of the Alpine Lakes Area in parts of Townships 22 and 23 N., Range 11 through 17 E., and Township 24 N., Range 13 E. Sedimentary rocks over the Snoqualmie batholith formerly were a source of limestone for cement plants in the area. Past production is estimated at 2 million tons. There is a wide variety of other nonmetallic mineral deposits but none appear to have economic importance at this time. The U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Bureau of Mines have completed a geological and minerals study of the lands within the management unit. An area of 324 square miles was studied in 1971 and 1972 and the report was made available for public inspection in October 1973. Eighteen additions totalling 275 square miles were studied in 1973 covering the re- mainder of the Alpine Lakes Area. Utility Corridors Presently three transmission utility corridors traverse parts of the Alpine Lakes management unit: Stevens Pass, Snoqualmie Pass and along Stampede Pass which crosses only a small portion of the manage- ment unit South of Keechlus Lake. These corridors connect the Puget Sound load center with the Grand Coulee and Hanford generating centers. Stevens Pass corridor contains two Bonneville Power Administration lines and a Puget Power and Light line. At present, transmission capacities are adequate to serve Puget Sound loads according to Bonneville Power. In 1995 either the Stampede Pass or Snoqualmie Pass lines would probably be replaced with higher capacity lines. Expansion of capacity on the Stevens Pass corridor would most likely take É. after the year 2000 according to Bonneville OWeſ. Based on Bonneville Power data, it is anticipated that any new lines constructed within 20 years will occur within the limits of existing rights-of-way. Two potential routes for the Northern Tier Pipeline Cross the Alpine Lakes Area via Snoqualmie and Stampede Passes. 29 Figure 6. Mineral Sites. Lennox Creek ſ (Au., Cu.) º § - - - -- º - n- ------ - ~Green Ridge Lake y Tº -- º ºr- s . *(Cu, Mo., wo.) º ...- - - *: … Nº.4 -- - ----- - * º y - - Known mineralization, showing area or mine name and dominant commodity. Favorable geology, showing area or mine name and dominant commodity. Hypothetical mineral potential, showing area name ſ r and dominant commodity (where known). Recreation mining site or area. º * * * - - - - - º … . * - * > l - *. **cº `-->\ \ Middle Fork Snoqualmie River - *(Cu., Mo.) --- --- --- --- --- ---- * . - _**** - **** 3. Van Epps Pass -- º -- . (Cu.) - * Gold Creek - .*.*.* ------- (Cu, Mo., Pg., Ag). º ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ". cle Elum District º - º - \, ., Au., Ag): I Mineral Creek (Cu, Mo.) º Red Mountain * (Cu, Mo.) -- - Recreation Mining Sites Map Name No. 1 Maloney 2 Scenic Hot Spring 3 Devils Canyon 4 Green Ridge Lake 5 Middle Fork 6 Clipper 7 Chair Peak 8 Guye Peak 9 Denny Mountain 1 O Denny Mountain 11 Hansen Creek 12 Gaynor 13 Ruth 14 Merritt 15 Tumwater Canyon 16 Leavenworth 17 Trout Creek 18 Trout Lake 19 Kachess Ridge 20 Cle Elum Lake 21 Silver Creek 22 French Cabin Cr. 23 Boulder Creek 24 Teanaway 25 Yellow Hill 26 Red Top 27 Crystal Mountain 28 Goldmeyer Hotspring Mineral Limestone, calcite crys" garnet, magnetite, che Hot spring Quartz crystal ouartz crystal, amathy: Quartz crystal' Quartz crystal Limestone float, chert . Limestone, calcite crys" garnet, magnetite, otheſ Quartz crystal Limestone, garnet, magnetite, calcite crys" others Quartz crystal amathys Garnet Talc Silica Talc Silica Asbestos Asbestos Quartz crystal? Quartz crystal” Silica" Limestone Olivene Limestone Agate’ - Agate, geodes, onyx, ſº quartz, crystal Agate, crystal Hot spring : Some mined for commercial purposes. *Report and location not verified. *Location uncertain. “Gold vein location uncertain. 30 Energy It has been reported that geothermal resources are present in parts of Townships 21 through 27 N., Ranges 10, 11, 12 E.; Townships 23 through 27 N., Range 13 E.; Townships 25, 26, 27 N., Range 14 E. in the Middle Fork Snoqualmie River and near Stevens Pass. Hydroelectric generation has a potential future in the Alpine Lakes Area as energy needs increase. The Silver Creek and French Cabin Creek areas above Cle Elum appear on a Corps of Engineers list of north- west sites as possible pump storage for hydroelec- tric generation. According to a Corps study, the Silver Creek location is still under consideration, but it ranks lower in priority to other sites in the north- West. Wood Fiber Many important commercial tree species are found in the management unit. The west slopes of the Cascades support heavily stocked, high volume Douglas fir, western hemlock, pacific silver fir and western redcedar. The drier east slopes of the Cascades support Ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, grand fir, western larch and western hemlock. Minor Com- Photo by Robert De Witz. mercial tree species on both sides include mountain hemlock, sub-alpine fir, Englemann spruce, western white pine, noble fir and lodgepole pine. A general description of these species may be obtained as a special report to this DEIS. National forest land in the Alpine Lakes management unit contains about 193,846 acres of commercial forest land (CFL). This amounts to approximately 23.4 percent of the CFL in the Wenatchee working circle and 21.3 percent of the CFL in the Snoqualmie working circle. The magnitude of timber harvest in the Alpine Lakes management unit can be best understood by looking at the rest of the state or region. During the period 1968-1977 the average yearly timber harvest in the State of Washington was 6.8 billion board feet. The annual harvest on national forest land during that same period amounted to 1.4 billion board feet. By comparison, the total harvest in Chelan, King, and Kittitas counties amounted to about 10 percent of the State total whereas the national forest volume in those three counties amounted to 2 percent of the state total or about 136.8 million board feet of the State total. The Alpine Lakes management unit contribution to these figures is a yearly average over the last 10 years of approximately 40 million board feet or less than one-third of the national forest volume in the three counties and 0.6 percent of the State total. The following depicts the above relationships graphically: Total State Timber Harvest — 6.8 Billion B.F. All N.F. Land — 1.4 Billion B.F. Three Counties N.F. Land — 137 Million B.F. Alpine Lakes N.F. Land – 40 Million B.F. An analysis of capability and suitability for harvest areas was completed in 1979. The commercial forest land was classified into three levels of productivity. Of the 193,846 acres of commercial forest land, 45,916 acres were classified as Level A (highest level) lands, 87,234 acres as Level B, and 60,696 acres as Level C. This analysis was used in the con- Struction of alternatives and land allocation process. The analysis process is described in Appendix H. A wide range of tree age classes exists throughout the management unit. Mature and over mature trees cover 126,581 acres of commercial forest land while 31 pole-size trees (5 to 10 inches in diameter) can be found on 50,594 acres and seedlings and saplings (up to 5 inches in diameter) cover 7,560 acres. Cut- Over lands replanted with young trees cover about 9,111 acres. Forest management practices are being intensified as the national need for timber becomes more Critical and more forest lands become accessible for management. These practices consist of planting new trees with genetically improved stock, pre- commercial thinning, commercial thinning and fer. tilization and are being employed to better protect soil, water, and Scenic resources. Hardwood tree species, especially red alder in Alpine Lakes management unit, are utilized for furniture and firewood. Fuel wood demands have begun to increase due to increased use of wood stoves for home heating. On the Snoqualmie National Forest, firewood permits in- creased 153 percent in one year and the predicted in- crease for 1980 is at least 100 percent above the 1979 level. Firewood is made available primarily from dead trees and down logging slash. Alder firewood is being supplied from unmerchantable trees in stands that need thinning. Demand for alder is not being met from this source. The Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests are presently programming their allowable tree harvest using plans approved in 1964 for the Snoqualmie and in 1963 for the Wenatchee. These plans encompass two “working circles,” or areas organized for a harvest level objective. The yearly programmed allowable tree harvest for these working circles is 106 million board feet on the Wenatchee and 115 million board feet on the Snoqualmie. Tree removal techniques have varied greatly over the years with the clearcutting method most commonly employed. Partial or selection cutting, which leaves many trees standing on a logged area, has also been used successfully. Advanced logging systems have been employed to better protect soil, water, wildlife, and Scenic qualities of the landscape. Recreation The Alpine Lakes Act describes in some detail the great diversity of recreational use and enjoyment of the area. In particular, the Act mentions “quality hunting, fishing, motorized recreation, skiing, pic- nicking, camping, rock collecting, nature study, backpacking, horseback riding, swimming, boating, mountain climbing, and many others, together with the opportunity for millions of persons traveling through the periphery of the area to enjoy its unique values.” Rather than elaborating on each of the many recrea- tion activities occurring in the area, recreation plan- ning will focus on recreational experiences and the circumstances within which activities take place. The Alpine Lakes management unit provides a range of opportunities from which members of a broad seg- ment of the public may select the recreation ex- perience which most suits them. The Recreation Op- portunity Spectrum (ROS) inventory system describes a continuum of recreational opportunities which was applied to the Alpine Lakes Area. The six classes in the spectrum accommodate a range of op- portunities by providing different physical and social circumstances. Each requires a different approach to management. See Appendix A (Recreation) for detail- ed descriptions of the six classes. At either end of the spectrum are found the “primitive” and “modern-urban” classes. The “primitive” class represents the most remote, undeveloped and inaccessible opportunities; while the “modern-urban” represents the most developed, accessible and convenience-oriented experience available on national forest lands. Table 5 illustrates the current availability of the six ROS classes on na- tional forest land within the Alpine Lakes manage- ment unit. Table 5. Current Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Acres. Recreation . Opportunity Class Acres Primitive 1,709 Semi-primitive - Non-motorized 38,942 Semi-primitive Motorized 138,506 Road Natural 190,141 Rural 2,873 Modern-urban O In 1978, National Forest lands within the manage- ment unit received a total of 3,322,800 recreation visitor-days (RVD) of use. This compares with 2,075,000 RVD's in 1972 when initial studies began. The total would be considerably higher if use on private lands not accessed by federal roads and the total number of persons driving through the area on the three state scenic highways were included. Within the ROS classes, the management unit is heavily used for many types of recreational activities. Camping, fishing, scenery viewing, rock hounding, boating, swimming, and horseback riding are some popular activities during the summer. Hunting, berry picking, and wood cutting are popular in the autumn. Winter conditions are excellent for alpine and Nordic skiing, snowshoeing and snowmobiling. Hiking and white water boating are favorite spring activities. The single most popular recreation activity is alpine skiing. It accounts for 23 percent of all use. Developed site camping is second with 18 percent of the total. Five of the twelve major ski developments in the state are located within the managment area, as are over one fourth of the most popular mountain peaks for climbers. Twenty-four major federal campgrounds and five picnic areas Currently exist. Locations for an additional 72 potential developed camping and pic- nicking sites have been identified. The Alternative C allocation map, identifies their locations and pro- vides a more detailed description of each. Popular historic attractions include the Blewett and Liberty mining communities and Stevens Pass where feats of early railroad construction were performed. Unique scenic attractions include the Mt. Index area and Tumwater Canyon. Geological features including the Red Top agate beds, the Cave Ridge caves and the Middle Fork Snoqualmie River quartz crystal deposits attract recreational miners. Over 350 miles of maintained trails provide horse, hiker, motor bike, and four-wheel drive access within the management unit. Primary and secondary roads currently provide direct access to approximately 48 percent of the national forest land within the management unit. Trailhead facilities have been developed to varying degrees at major access points into the undeveloped areas. Boat launching facilities are available at Keechelus, Kachess, and Cle Elum reservoirs and at Cooper Lake. There are eleven existing summer home tracts under Special use permit on national forest lands. Many of these permits are being phased out and none are being issued for new buildings. Nine organization camps are located near the winter sports complexes and Kachess Reservoir. Private developments associated with established winter sports complexes are being expanded at an ever increasing rate. Condominiums and recreation residences are being erected in the Snoqualmie Pass area. Subdivisions for recreation residences have been platted adjacent to Keechelus, Kachess, and Cle Elum reservoirs with a considerable number of buildings under construction or completed. Some 32 landowners who have been primarily Oriented toward timber production are now turning with increased in- terest to both the summer and winter recreation potentials of their lands. The type and intensity of recreation use has caused ecological deterioration at popular sites, and use COnflicts have become more common. The FOrest Service is attempting to protect the resource and reduce conflicts. Some trails and areas are closed to motorized use, and a few to horses. Pack and Saddle Stock is prohibited from grazing or being tethered within 200 feet of all lakes on national forest land. A number of sensitive sub-alpine areas have been closed to campfires. In addition, the forests have em- barked upon a road closure program to reduce ac- Cess to fragile, undeveloped areas. National trends in recreation show a greater focus upon scenic values and dispersed recreation oppoſ- tunities, both of which are readily available in the Alpine Lakes Area. Estimates of future recreation de- mand indicate that hiking, camping, picnicking, and pleasure driving will increase nearly 80 percent in popularity by 2000 (Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission 1976). These figures reflect recreation use before the current energy crisis. It is difficult to predict what effect gas shortages and increased prices will have on future recreation use. However, with national forest lands, such as the Alpine Lakes, close to large population centers, visitation will pro- bably show an overall increase as recreationists forego longer trips. The number of visits may * decrease while time spent in the area on each trip is likely to increase. Within the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, a wide variety Of recreation opportunities are available. The ROS in- ventory system was applied to the Wilderness. .. However, when using that system, nearly the entire area was identified in the “primitive” category. For detailed management of the Wilderness it is necessary to have a more definitive delineation Of management areas. Thus a modification of the ROS system was developed to allocate areas within the Wilderness into four use zones: transition, Semi- primitive, primitive and trailless. See Appendix B, Ex- hibit J, Figures J-1 to J-4 of the Wilderness Plan for general descriptions and for management strategies for each zone. Over 700 lakes, ranging in size from 257 acres to Small tarns less than one acre, distinguish the Wilderness. Many miles of streams also provide fishing and viewing opportunities. Numerous game animals including deer, elk, bear, mountain goat and grouse may be viewed and hunted. Nongame birds and animals abound in the area, providing viewing opportunities. Over 450 miles of developed trails af- ford opportunities for summer hiking and horseback riding. Approximately 72 miles of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail traverse the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. This high Standard horse and hiker trail attracted 46,200 visitor days of Wilderness use in 1978. Vast, rugged untrailed areas offer a high degree of solitude. In 1978, a total of 309,800 visitor days of use were recorded in the Wilderness, up from 259,000 in 1972 when records for the area were first compiled. Winter recreation use of the area has been very low in the past. Recent improvements in skis, Snowshoes, and winter camping equipment, as well as the rapidly increasing popularity of Nordic skiing and ski mountaineering, have resulted in increased winter Wilderness use. Additional increases can be expected as more people discover the winter beauty of the Wilderness and the many opportunties for solitude and unconfined recreation experiences. Lands Approximately 30 percent of the multiple-use lands within the management unit are in other public and private ownership. The largest privately owned tracts of land are held by Burlington Northern, Weyerhaeuser and Idaho Pine Timber Associates. Landownership trades or purchases are being con- ducted with these companies and with owners of smaller parcels. Currently, the Forest Service is in the process of acquiring 41,679 acres of intermingled private land within the 86,426 acres of Intended Wilderness. This was directed by Congress in the Alpine Lakes Management Act. In addition, negotia- tions for the exchange of other lands in the Middle Fork Snoqualmie and U.S. 2 East Resource Com- plexes are being conducted. These exchange and purchase programs are de- scribed in the Alpine Lakes Area Acquisition Final Environmental Statement of 1979 and supplement. Some non-federal properties are primarily used or planned for intensive land development oriented toward outdoor recreation. The largest of these tracts is at Snoqualmie Pass. Intensive studies, similar to the Snoqualmie Pass classification study (U.S. Forest Service 1973), will be required before ownership adjustments can be recommended. All land (both public and private) within the manage- ment unit will be placed into one of five categories described later. This classification process provides an inventory of land adjustment opportunities and will help establish the land base needed to meet Forest Service long term goals and management Ob- jectives. The present complex pattern of landowner- ship is not conducive to efficient public and private land management. A balance of resource uses from both public and private lands that will best meet present and future public needs must be achieved. This will insure pro- tection and improvement of the quality of water, soil, vegetative cover and natural beauty. Economic Influence Zone Potentially, the impacts of decisions on management of the Alpine Lakes Area are far reaching in Scope. Commodities such as timber enter national markets after local processing. Water from the management unit is used for irrigation of food crops in eastern Washington. Those crops, in turn, are shipped throughout the country. Recreationists come from distant states and countries to enjoy the area. The most significant impacts of the various manage- ment proposals, however, will be felt in the local areas. We define the influence zone, for purposes of this analysis, to be the six county area surrounding the management unit: Snohomish, King, and Pierce counties to the west of the Cascade Crest; Chelan, Kittitas and Yakima COunties to the east. Demographic Influences The most recent population projections by Washington State (1978) predict rapid growth in the six county area around Alpine Lakes (see Appendix F, Table F-1). The westside Cascades increase is pro- jected to be 43 percent by 2000 and eastside coun- ties are expected to increase 23 percent by 2000. Snohomish County shows the largest increase of ap- proximately 67 percent over the next 20 years. These increases will affect demand for both recreation and wood products. Another factor influencing future recreation demand is the changing age structure of the population (See Appendix F, Table F-2). Smaller families, longer lifespans and aging of the post-war baby boom are significant factors. The latter development will pro- duce a large increase in people between the ages of 30-44, an age group which traditionally has been in- clined toward outdoor pursuits. Current economic conditions and the steadily increasing cost of gasoline make the task of predicting the utilization of recreation areas a perplexing one. Historically, in times of economic distress, outdoor recreation in- creases because it is less expensive, at least in Some of its forms, than other leisure activities. The Cost of gasoline, however, can be expected to discourage travel. That factor may be diminished in importance by the proximity of the area to a large population center. During the first oil embargo, travel to the western portions of the area increased sharply and visitation on the east side of the Cascades declined, but this may have been the result of reduc- ed availability of gasoline rather than its price. 33 Economy As might be expected from the larger population, the westside Cascade Mountain counties exhibit a much more diversified economic structure than the eastside counties (See Appendix F, Table F-3 and F-4). In general, the westside counties have a larger percentage of employment in the manufacturing and service sectors than the eastside counties, which have more employment concentrated in the agricultural, wholesale and retail trade sectors. Within the manufacturing sector, Pierce and Snohomish Counties show the highest percentage of employment in the lumber and wood and paper pro- ductS SectorS. The forest products industry is often the major employer in some communities surrounding the Alpine Lakes Area even though it may account for a relatively small portion of employment in the coun- ties involved. The dependence of these communities on the forest products industry can be determined by comparing mill capacity (an indicator of employment) with population (see Appendix F, Table F-5). Snoqualmie Falls, North Bend, Sultan, Peshastin, Roslyn and Cle Elum were found to be the most heavily dependent communities near the Alpine Lakes Area. Economic Outlook In the timber sector of the economy, raw material supplies will become scarce in the next several decades. Timber production from forest industry lands in western Washington is projected to decline substantially by the year 2000. Gedney et al. (1975) projects a 33 percent reduction in western Washington softwood harvest in the 1980-2000 period." Adams and Haynes (1979 in press) forecast a 30 per- cent decline in forest industry timber harvests for western Washington and Oregon combined. If these predicted declines materialize, the likely ef- fect on the western counties are several: a substan- tial increase in stumpage prices (Adams and Haynes project a 30-40 percent increase in excess of infla- tion), closure of older, less efficient mills, increased 'The decline will not be of the same magnitude in all parts of the westside. The Puget Sound Area (which includes Island, Kitsap, Skagit and Whatcom coun- ties) appears to be in the worst position with regard to forest industry harvests. At 1973 rates of growth and removal, the timber inventory on forest industry lands was being reduced at the rate of 4.8 percent per year Compared to 3.3 percent in southwest Washington and 0.7 percent on the Olympic Pennin- sula (Bassett and Choate 1974). competition for national forest stumpage, more in- tensive utilization of presently non-commercial material for lumber and fiber production and a decline in logging and mill employment. The magnitude of these effects will depend, in part, on future policies and trends of log exports, nondeclin- ing timber yield policy and programmed harvest levels. For eastside Cascades counties, the timber supply picture is more favorable. Private timber harvests are projected to increase, though not dramatically (Adams and Haynes 1979). However, timber shor- tages on the westside will have an impact on de- mand for timber east of the Cascade crest. Assumptions About Supply and Demand Assumptions about future demands for goods and services are an integral part of the planning and deci- sion making process. The following is a list of assumptions developed after consulting published agency documents, census figures and industry trends. These assumptions were used as a guide in the development of management alternatives. The public was given an opportunity to comment on this list before the preferred alternative was selected. General The population in the Puget Sound region will in- crease faster than the national average. For example, the population in King, Pierce and Snohomish Coun- ties will increase by 35 percent by 2000, compared to a statewide average of 30 percent and a national average of 12 percent. Aesthetic and environmental COnsiderations will con- tinue to be important in land management. Existing contracts, permits and other valid agreements will be honored. Water The management of national forest land will provide water at a quality that will meet or exceed state water quality standards, regardless of the alternative Selected. The management of national forest land will not significantly affect water yields beyond normal yearly fluctuations. Wildlife Public interest will increase in animals and birds that are not hunted. The protection of threatened, endangered and sen- Sitive animals and plant species will receive greater attention. Vital wildlife habitat, such as winter range or unique ecological conditions that support sensitive species, will be discovered through future research. Recreation Demand for recreation opportunities available in the Alpine Lakes management unit will increase by 2.9 percent annually, reflecting a 35 percent expected population increase in the influence zone by the year 2000. Participation in recreation activities in the Alpine Lakes management unit will increase 30 percent by 2000. Demand for recreation Opportunities available in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness will increase an average of 7 percent per year through 2000. Timber National demand for wood products will increase 46 percent by 2000. Environme...al and visual concerns will bring pressure for changes in road construction and log- ging methods on national forest lands. Timber harvested in the Alpine Lakes management unit will be processed primarily in King, Pierce, Snohomish, Chelan, Kittitas and Yakima Counties, but increasing amounts of timber will be transported as far as Oregon for processing. The eastside coun- ties draw a greater proportion of their timber from national forest lands. Demand for wood fiber will be higher than amount available for harvest on national forest lands. Wood exports from private and state lands will con- tinue to grow, putting additional pressure on national forest lands. Harvest from industry timber lands in the Puget Sound area will decrease significantly over the next 10-20 years. Greater pressure will be placed on publicly owned timber growing lands for harvests to supply local mills. 34 Looking west along the Chelan/Kittitas County line, Ingalls Peak (left), Mt. Stuart (right). Photo by U.S. Forest Service. º sº º * Evaluation criteria are used to evaluate the alter- natives and to help select the preferred alternative. The following evaluation criteria in the form of goals were developed after an evaluation of pertinent laws, executive orders, national and regional direction, mission statements for the two Forests, issues iden- tified by the public and management concerns. 10. 11. 12. 13. EVALUATION CRITERIA Goals APPLIES TO Mgt. Unit Mgt. Unit & PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Only Wilderness Enhance or maintain water X quality at state and Federal standards. Enhance or maintain the X quality of the air resource. Provide for the protection of X the soil resource. Provide for development and X use of energy sources. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT Provide for protection of X threatened and endangered plants, plant communities and animals. Provide fish and wildlife X habitat to insure diversity in Species and habitat types. Maintain or increase areas X for sustained timber produc- tion. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT Protect cultural, historical X and archeological values. Contribute to social and X economic stability of local Communities. Provide a pleasing and X natural looking forest environment. Maintain a high quality X wilderness. Provide for a variety of X high quality year-round forest recreation oppor- tunities to accomodate a wide variety of users. Acquire or dispose of X National Forest land units where land adjustment would have a significant positive effect on total public benefits. 37 * º | - Looking northwest up the Tumwater Canyon. Photo by U.S. Forest Service. Alternative Development Process The process used in developing alternatives for managing the Alpine Lakes Area began with the iden- tification of public issues, management concerns and an extensive inventory of resource and develop- ſment opportunities contained within the area. Infor- ſnation, opinion and suggestions were solicited from interested individuals, special interest groups and government agencies. Recreation, timber management and other land uses associated with the area received capability and Suitability analysis. A high, moderate or low rating for capability and suitability was determined for lands in both the Wilderness and the management Unit. Five alternative management strategies, including a no-action alternative, were designed to address ma- jor issues, concerns and opportunities. Each in- cludes activities, both noncommercial and commer- Cial, historically associated with the area. They differ from one another in emphasis. All comply with existing legislation and Forest Service programs and policies. Each alternative is designed to be a manageable plan within the capability and suitability of the land. All are intended to be technically, financially and legally feasible and could be accommodated by forest pro- graming, planning and budgeting procedures. After several revisions, the Forest Service analyzed the alternatives to determine their effect on the physical, biological and social environments. A Forest Service Preferred Alternative was then iden- tified for public review and comment. Land Allocation Areas (management unit) Earlier in this Environmental Impact Statement the division of land into eight resource complexes was described. This subdivision enabled the Forest Ser. Vice to display the effects of each management alter- native in different portions of the area. Resource Complexes remain the same in all alternatives. Five allocations — Developed Site, Special Areas, General Forest, Scenic Forest and Dispersed Recrea- tion — were used to describe primary land manage- ment approaches. The size and disposition of alloca- tions vary between alternatives. Maps accompanying this Statement show these allocations in different Colors revealing at a glance the management direc- tion and emphasis of each alternative. To quickly grasp the full range of options, consult the maps while reading descriptions of each alternative. Developed Site These areas are characterized by substantially modified environments for campgrounds, boating, ski areas, Summer home tracts, administrative sites or other similar developments. Sights and sounds of people are readily evident and the concentration of users is often high. Roads, trails, and parking accommodate expected use. This allocation generally has the highest density of roads and trails (miles per section). Access often determines suitability of the site. Roads and trails are managed to provide access to the site, but with emphasis on nonmotorized activity on-site. Resource manipulation, including timber harvest or other forestry practices, will be done only for the enhancement or protection of the area for its primary use. Commercial forest lands within this allocation are placed in the unregulated timber component. Fire management will be to quickly suppress all wildfires at the least possible size. Prescription fire may be used under very constrained conditons. Special Area Special areas are protected for their uniqueness and natural Conditions and, where appropriate, to foster public use, enjoyment or Study. Because of its uniqueness, each special area has its own manage- ment direction, which is found in Appendix A. Resource manipulation or developments such as roads, parking, picnicking facilities, interpretation and timber harvest will enhance and protect the area and its unique opportunities. Commercial forest lands are placed in the unregulated timber compo- nent. Fire management depends upon specific objectives for the area. Fire will be managed to enhance or maintain the unique resources for which the area was established. For example, where special qualities could be endangered, aggressive fire sup- pression will be taken. Prescription fire might be ap- propriate in an area where fire's role is natural but not at a historic site, where the preservation of early structures is paramount. General Forest The greatest intensity of resource extraction occurs on these lands. This allocation contains both com- mercial and non-commercial forest lands. On Com- mercial forest land, timber harvest with a full range of silvicultural practices is found and these lands are placed in the regulated timber component and classified as standard, special or marginal. N sº 7. 4% º ==#| - - - º º_ºffſ - 4. - º /// º #!. º º % º *}^ "º tº &º Yº Management activities are designed to meet visual quality objectives and emulate natural appearing forms. Dispersed recreation sites are common and en- counters between recreationists may be numerous. Rustic recreation facilities may be provided for the convenience of users, as well as for safety and resource protection. Motorized recreation activities are COmmon. Land in this allocation is generally accessible by road. This allocation has the second highest road density (miles per section). Roads and trails stan- dards, maintenance and management range from pro- viding optimum operating conditions for high volume mixed traffic to obliteration after project completion. The Forest Service will normally share cost for road Systems with intermingled land owners in this allo- Cation. General Forest areas fall into the light prescribed fire intensity zone. Fire may be prescribed only under Specified intensity which does not threaten timber or other commodities. All wildfires will be supressed. - - ºn Nº. wº *: º: 5. -2 º º/% % - * º ſ £2.2/Z. º // º / § ſ: 23 41 Scenic Forest The objective in these areas is to retain or enhance viewing and recreation experiences. Developments and permitted uses in the seen area from recreation sites, roads and trails within this allocation will meet adopted visual quality objectives. These proposed uses within the allocation will be integrated with the natural landscape. Commercial forest land within these areas will be included in the programmed allowable timber harvest under the regulated compo- nent. A full range of silvicultural practices will be used to meet visual and recreational objectives. The Scenic Forest Allocation generally falls within the light intensity prescribed fire zone. Wildfires will be suppressed. Dispersed Recreation Land in this allocation will be managed primarily in an unroaded condition with emphasis on dispersed recreation, scenic, wildlife or other amenity values. No roads will be constructed nor will existing roads be maintained for travel by motorized vehicles in- tended for highway use. Three exceptions to road building may be found: 1. Routes for 4 X 4 vehicle use may be permitted. 2. If no alternative road access to intermingled land owners is available, access may be granted for a minimum standard road. This will be closed to public travel by vehicles exceeding 40 inches in width. The Forest Service will not share in the cost of such roads. 3. Temporary roads may be permitted for timber harvest as specified below. Commercial forest lands shall be placed in the - --- * #7% unregulated timber component. Timber harvest would - ºw. . . ſº w º "{\|||||||| only be permitted to protect adjacent lands from in- º ºTſ. #ºſſºm º - sect, disease or fire damage. Wºlf *** **ului Cutting of trees may be permitted for on-site or off- site recreational or scientific purposes. However, such cutting shall be designed to meet visual quality objectives. Concentration of recreation users is low and evidence of and contact with other users is relatively minimal compared to other allocation areas. Land within this allocation shall be managed for a minimum of on-site controls and restrictions; when present, they will be subtle. Any resource modification shall be designed to emulate the natural environment and create the least disturbance possible. The medium prescribed fire intensity generally en- compasses this area. Wilderness Use Zones The Alpine Lakes Wilderness was established by Congress, thus the Wilderness boundary remains the Same in each management alternative. The Wilderness is characterized by predominantly un- modified natural environments within which a variety of recreational activities may occur. To protect the Wilderness resource and minimize friction between different types of visitors, four Wilderness Use Zones were established. Each calls for a slightly different management strategy. The Wilderness Zones — Transition, Semi-Primitive, Primitive and Trailless — generally relate to the trail access system and are displayed on the trail transportation map accompanying each management alternative. A Service Level A trail in Wilderness nor- mally occurs in a Transition Wilderness Use Zone; Level B in Semi-Primitive, etc. Wilderness Use Zones reflect the overall management strategy for the Alpine Lakes Area and are compatible with the road and trail transportation systems and land allocations of the adjacent management unit. Fire management considerations are independent of the four use zones. Wildfires will be suppressed in the most cost efficient manner. The intent of medium intensity prescription fires would be to maintain natural process without jeopardizing land Outside the Wilderness. Transition Zone This zone usually is adjacent to major trailheads, where visitors make the transition from roadways to foot or horse travel and are first introduced to the Wilderness area. The Zone may extend from the Wilderness boundary inward along primary travel routes up to 3 miles and at least 500 feet on either side of the travel route. An exception to the 3 mile limit is the 72 miles of Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail. Day users mixed with those traveling to and from the Wilderness interior predominate in the Tran- Sition Zone. Semi-Primitive Zone This is the second zone in progressive steps toward isolation. The concentration of users is low, but there is evidence of other visitors. Minimum on-site Controls and restrictions may be present but are subtle. Facilities are primarily provided for the pro- tection of Wilderness resource values and the safety of users. On-site materials are used where possible. Spacing of groups may be regulated to disperse visitors and provide low to moderate contacts with other groups or individuals. Primitive Zone In this zone, the concentration of users is very low and evidence of other area users is minimal. The area is managed to be essentially free from evidence of man-induced restrictions and controls. Only essential facilities for resource protection are used and they are constructed of native materials. No facilities for comfort or convenience of the user are provided. Spacing of groups is informal and dis- persed to minimize contacts with other groups or in- dividuals. Trailless Zone This zone is intended to preserve the most extensive natural environments. Natural processes and condi- tions have not and will not be measureably affected by the actions of users. The area is managed to be as free as possible from the influence of human ac- tivities. Humans are only brief visitors. No facilities are provided. Spacing of groups is informal and dispersed to minimize contacts with other users. * | Waptus Lake. Photo by Richard F. Buscher. 43 Alternative Management Plans Considered Management Direction Common To All Alternatives The management plan for any area the size of Alpine Lakes must necessarily contain an enormous amount of information. An effort has been made to minimize cross referencing in this Statement. To reduce repe- tition, however, it was necessary to combine management directions common to all alternatives in a separate section, Appendix A. Reference to this Appendix should be made when reading the descrip- tion of each management alternative. It should not be assumed that directions common to every alter- native are negligible. Appendix A contains many of the major considerations involved in the future of Alpine Lakes Area. In order to adequately evaluate management alter- natives it is also necessary to use the Statement's maps. Maps, in this instance, are more than sup- plemental illustrative material; they provide essential guidance in comprehending the emphasis and im- plications of each alternative when it is deployed on the ground. Maps include: 1. Land Allocation and Transportation (Roads and Trails) 2. Timber Components 3. Visual Quality Objectives 4. Recreation Opportunity Spectrum 5. Land Ownership 6. Prescribed Fire Zones (in text) 7. Recreation Use Patterns (in text). Alternative A Management Plan This Alternative provides a mix of goods and ser- vices as follows: 1. Emphasize wood fiber outputs on commercial forest lands. 2. Emphasize roadless dispersed recreation on non- commercial and inaccessible forest lands. 3. Emphasize roaded dispersed recreation on com- mercial forest lands. 4. Management of the Wilderness to allow for in- Creased visitation. 5. Provide for special areas to the extent they do not appreciably reduce wood fiber production. Land Allocation Areas and Wilderness Use Zones The following shows the mix of allocations and use zones for Alternative A. See Land Allocation Areas (management unit) and Wilderness Use Zones sec- tions for the meaning of these allocations and zones. Also see the Allocation Map A for specific locations. Allocation Areas (management unit) Acres Developed Site 2,020 Special Area 70,825 Mt. Index Scenic Area (11,706) Stevens Pass Historic District (8,454) Tumwater Scenic Area (5,032) Tumwater Botanical Area (1,104) Asahel Curtis Recreation Area (129) Teanaway Recreation Area (44,400) General Forest 200,571 Scenic Forest 63,411 Dispersed Recreation 35,344 Wilderness Use Zones Transition 24,485 Semi-primitive 35,636 Primitive 2,788 Trailless 330,451 The following is management direction unique to Alternative A. See also Appendix A: Management Direction Common to All Alternatives. Visual Management Direction 1. Maintain or enhance scenic quality on all: a Varie- ty Class “A” landscapes (those with exceptional scenic value); b. Areas seen from only the most heavily used places, trails and roads. 2. Take advantage of foreground screening where it exists to permit more extensive timber harvest on land in mixed private and public ownership. 3. See the Visual Quality Objective Map Alternative A for specific locations. Transportation Management Direction Consistent with the resource objectives of wood fiber production and the emphasis on roaded dispersed recreation, Alternative A would require the reconstruction of approximately 63 miles of existing road and the estimated construction of 394 miles of new road. The levels of service that the existing road System will ultimately provide are shown on the Land Allocation Map for this Alternative. Management of the propos 3 System will be consistent with the in- tent of this Alternative. For example, new construc. tion in the Pratt River drainage and the Silver Creek area would be open to public recreation travel by conventional automobile. A detailed explanation of Service levels is found in Appendix A under Access Management for Roads. ^, * || ". f . . . | | - - - - - | L * \\ - 44 The increased recreation use of the Wilderness will require the construction, reconstruction and maintenance of relatively high standard trails. The Commodity emphasis will result in reduced trail op- portunity in the management unit. The final trail and 4x4 route systems are shown on the alternative map. A detailed explanation of the level of service that these facilities are expected to provide is found in Appendix A under Access Management for Trails. Recreation Management Direction 1. Maintain existing campgrounds to established maintenance and administrative standard at the following Experience Levels (measure of facilities provided): 3. Maintain existing developed winter sports com- plexes at the size currently under special use permit as depicted on the Alternative A Allocation Map. 4. Acquire necessary easements over private lands, construct connecting trail segments and designate Nason Ridge Trail and County Line Trail as National Recreation Trails (P.L. 90-543). 5. Construct, reconstruct and maintain all recreation trails for the amount and type of use as indicated on the Alternative A Allocation Map. 6. Develop and maintain trailheads to provide safe parking, Sanitation and other facilities commen- Surate with the expected use on the Service Level of trail(s) being accessed. Trailheads currently requiring additional development include: Stafford Creek Denny Creek Experience Experience Level 2 Level 3 Tucquala Meadows Taylor River Fish Lake Commonwealth Scatter Creek Denny Creek Esmeralda Money Creek De Roux Creek Miller River FOSS River Beckler River White Pine Fish Pond Experience Glacier View Level 4 Riverside Bridge Creek Swauk Chatter Creek Salmon La Sac Eightmile Wish Poosh OWhi Kachess Red Mountain Nason Creek Cle Elum River Tumwater Crystal Springs Bonanza Tronsen Park Mineral Springs Beverly Creek Johnny Creek Rock Island lda Creek 2. Maintain existing day use sites to established maintenance and administrative standards at Ex- perience Level 3. Asahel Curtis Lake Keechelus Deception Falls Swiftwater Red Top Beverly Creek Bear/Miller Creek Blewett Pass Lake Serene Index Creek Evans Lake Scatter Creek Deception/Fisher TucCuala Meadows Creek Salmon La Sac Tunnel Creek Cooper Lake Rainy Pass Kachess Campground Snowy Creek French Cabin Creek Rock Lake Knox Creek Merritt Lake Lake Elizabeth Butcher Creek Taylor River McCue Ridge Camp Brown Hatchery Creek 7. Provide Opportunities for dispersed area recreation activities as defined within each recreation oppor- tunity spectrum (ROS) class described in Appendix A(4) and as depicted on the ROS map accompanying Alternative A. 8. Cooperate with private landowners, the State of Washington, user groups and concessionaires in development of dispersed winter recreation oppor- tunities along the I-90, Highway 97 and U.S. Highway 2 corridors. 9. Maintain under permit, recreation residence special uses in all developed tracts currently under permit. 10. Continue all existing organization camps under permit. 11. All areas identified as having recreational mining opportunities (see Figure 6) will be maintained and remain accessible for recreational mining, unless claims or mineral leases are filed to restrict public entry. Wilderness Management Direction 1. Manage the Wilderness with strong emphasis on recreation use. Accommodate expected increases in visitation to the extent possible without violating the intent of the Wilderness Act, Region 6 Standards of acceptable resource impacts (See Appendix B, Exhibit E) and standards set by this plan. 2. Entrance permits will be required for the entire Wilderness to distribute use within the area. 3. Manage use within the general carrying capacities for the four use zones described in Appendix B and as depicted on the Alternative A allocation map. More Specific carrying capacities may be set for heavy use areas to meet standards and plan objec- tives. The Specific carrying capacity for the core Enchantment Area will be 100 persons at one time (PAOT). 4. Current commercial outfitting and guide permits may be continued. Additional permits may be issued where there is an identified need for the services and they are Compatible with general public use of the aſ ea. 5. Provide for the continued use of existing commer- cial grazing allotments. Additional permits may be issued if forage becomes available through vegetative changes such as fire. Grazing use will Conform to the standards and objectives stated in the management plan. 6. Floatplane use will be allowed under special use permit for recreational purposes on all lakes with an established history of prior use. Lakes include: Waptus, Spade, Marmot, Colchuck, Chiwaukum, Fisher, Otter, Big Hart, Angeline, Chetwood, Copper, Hester, Snoqualmie, Dorothy, Snow, Caroline, Upper TusCohatchie, Gold and Philippa. 7. Special management provisions for the core Enchantment Area will: a. Manage within Region 6 standards of acceptable bio-physical resource impacts. The number of en- Counters with other hikers (social impacts) will be in excess of Region 6 standards but within standards Set by this plan. b. Encourage users not to take dogs into the area. C. Provide primitive pit toilets and vault toilets to handle human waste. Locate pit toilets on suitable Sites near camp areas away from fragile vegetation and Soils and away from water bodies, wet areas and Water Courses. Locate vault toilets at sites requiring human waste disposal but not suitable for pit toilet 45 installation. Locate all toilets so as not to distract views of the natural landscape. Service the vault toilets once annually (during low use period) using a helicopter. d. Ban wood campfires except in the Rat Creek drainage. The ban is to prevent damage to esthetic snags and to prevent blackened rock. e. Service Level B trail will be maintained from Snow Lakes to Colchuck Lake. Service Level C trails will be maintained from Nada Lake through the Rat Creek drainage to Perfection Lake. Construct minimum standard, Service Level C trails to heavily used camp areas and toilets within the area. Provide all necessary facilities on the Level B trail for user safety. f. Require camping in designated campsites. g. Designate campsites on most durable soils, away from water courses, on unvegetated sites or on vegetated sites least susceptible to damage, (del Moral 1978, Dethier 1978). h. Limit visitor stays to two nights. i. No party size limit. j. Ban the discharge of firearms except during the hunting season. Fire Management Direction See the Prescribed Fire Zone Map Figure 7 for the locations of where the various intensity prescription fires may be applied under this Alternative. Details of each prescription intensity zone are found in Appendix A(Fire). Land Ownership Direction See Lands Ownership Map Alternative A for loca- tions of land ownership adjustment recommenda- tions. Timber Management Direction 1. Timber harvesting will continue in the Alpine Lakes management unit under authority of the 1963 Wenatchee and Snoqualmie Working Circle Timber Management Plans as amended. 2. See Timber Component Map Alternative A for loca- tions of standard, special, marginal and unproductive timber components. 3. Emphasize the conversion of over-mature and mature timber stands to young managed timber Stands. Range Management Direction 1. The four existing commercial range allotments will be managed at their optimum level consistent with Other resource values. 2. Adjust commercial grazing operations to allow adequate forage for wildlife and to achieve improving vegetative trend (if in less than good condition). 3. Range improvements will include introduction of non-native Species, herbicide use and structural im- provements, including holding pens and water developments. º St. § N N N t § i § N R N § º§N wN s § § º § i i s - § S -| § º S § s § Ps - ". 46 Figure 7. Prescribed Fire Zones Alternative A. - - --- - - N - º 7 º º - - - - º º Yº: over-est º- - - - ºn-y --- º -- sur-ºacher ----- - ** -- As - - - - º wn rº- - - -- - * - - - - - - - Alternative B Management Plan This Alternative provides a mix of goods and ser- vices as follows: 1. Emphasize dispersed and undeveloped recreation. 2. Provide for wood fiber outputs on currently managed commercial forest lands. 3. Manage the Wilderness resource with emphasis on low levels of recreation and high degrees of Solitude. Land Allocation Areas and Wilderness Use Zones The following shows the mix of allocations and use zones for Alternative B. See Land Allocation Areas (management unit) and Wilderness Use Zones sec- tions for the meaning of these allocations. Also see the Allocation Map B for specific locations. Allocation Areas (management unit) Acres Developed Site 2,350 Special Area 8,147 Mt. Index Scenic Area (15,671) Stevens Pass Historic District (8,454) Tumwater Scenic Area (5,734) Tumwater Botanical Area (1,104) Denny Creek Scenic Area - (946) Teanaway Recreation Area (46,966) Asahel Curtis Recreation Area (129) Red Top Recreation Area (347) Eldorado Research Natural Area (1,221) Blewett Historic District (899) General Forest 101,794 Scenic Forest 51,695 Dispersed Recreation 134,861 Wilderness Use Zones Transition 6,788 Semi-primitive 10,061 Primitive 37,939 Trailless 338,572 The following is management direction unique to Alternative B. See also Appendix A: Management Direction Common to All Alternatives. Visual Management Direction 1. Maintain or enhance scenic quality from: a. All trails and use areas which enhance primitive types of recreation; b. All areas seen from major Wilderness access and recreation routes. 2. See the Visual Quality Objective Map Alternative B for specific locations. Transportation Management Direction The transportation system, Service Levels and mode of trail travel are shown on the Land Allocation Map for this Alternative. A detailed explanation of Service Levels is found in Appendix A under Access Manage- ment for roads. The emphasis on more primitive forms of recreation and reduced timber harvest will require lower road standards and maintenance levels. Alternative B ultimately will require the reconstruction of approx- imately 13 miles of road and an estimated 136 miles of new construction. Regulation and traffic control of the road system would accomplish resource objectives and would limit capital investments to improvements of known safety hazards and control of resource damage. These improvements are not intended to increase road capacity or reduce haul Costs. Controls would be necessary to establish limits on haul volumes and other traffic to take advantage of the existing system without exceeding its capacity. º - jº | 7 - º º º º * * , º " . A ºr / ‘º º, º ſº º * ~~~~ - º . % ſ N. “J”. º º * . º - º 4. Uſ º * | ſ Żºłº #ſº - § U. º º - º W º | ſº | " - "wº i. Q'º'; % º MU "|||}|, | ſºlº/ £º *% º *}ººſ/Aſºlºſ; *Wº% */ ſ Y II III. º U w" ºr a The emphasis on solitude within the Wilderness would not require an extensive trail system. This Alternative would provide a higher percentage of low Standard, low maintenance hiker trails within the Wilderness. Relatively higher standard horse and hiker trails would be located in dispersed recreation areas in the management unit. Recreation Management Direction 1. Maintain the following existing campgrounds to established maintenance and administrative stan- dards at the following Experience Levels (measure of facilities provided): Experience Experience Level 1 Level 3 Tucquala Meadows Taylor River Fish Lake Commonwealth Denny Creek Experience Money Creek Level 2 Miller River Beverly Creek Scatter Creek Foss River Esmeralda Beckler River De Roux Creek White Pine Fish Pond Experience Glacier View Leve, 4 Riverside Chatter Creek Swauk Owhi Salmon La Sac Red Mountain Wish Poosh Cle Elum River Kachess Crystal Springs Nason Creek Bonanza Tumwater Tronsen Park Mineral Springs ſº (lºw A * * * tº L - ſº . . ... " ' ". - º - º , , | wn . " . .. | ſ fiftº, ºf . - ſ LIL *śī.S. Wºº º † Wººl SW º D º - *|| "ºtºſ 48 2. With construction of Upper Chatter Creek Campground, convert the following existing Campgrounds to day use sites and maintain to established maintenance and administrative Stan- dards at Experience Level 3. Eight Mile Bridge Creek lda Creek Johnny Creek Rock Island 3. Maintain all existing day use sites to standard at Experience Level 3. Asahel Curtis Lake Keechelus Deception Falls Swiftwater Red Top 4. Construct, as needed to meet demand, the follow- ing Experience Level 3 campgrounds. Ranger District Site Name and Inventory Number PAOT Capacity North Bend Mountain View (no number) 720 Ellensburg Mineral Springs Extension – 51 200 Swauk Extension (North) – 61 200 Swauk Extension (South) – 60 100 Teanaway – (no number) 200 Leavenworth Tumwater Extension – 61 380 Tronsen Meadow – 83 200 Lake Wenatchee White Pine – 102 100 White Pine Extension — 104A 200 Nason Ridge — 97 200 Skykomish Fir Grove — 49 120 Wildflower Flat – 85 180 5. Construct, as needed to meet demand, the follow- Ing Experience Level 4 campgrounds. Ranger District site Name and Inventory Number PAOT Capacity North Bend Tinkham — (no number) 235 Cle Elum Speelyi — 91 1,500 Kachess Extension - (no number) 280 Leavenworth Upper Chatter Creek — (no number) 1,740 6. Conduct further study to determine conflicts bet- Ween recreation use of the Money Creek Camp- ground (Skykomish Ranger District) and bald eagle needs in the area. If conflicts are found that Cannot be mitigated, the campground will be removed with recreation demand being met by the Beckler River, Miller River or development of other available sites Will accommodate Money Creek visits. 7. Maintain existing developed winter sports com- plexes at the size and capacity currently under special use permit and as depicted on Alternative B Allocation Map. Encourage permittees to incorporate dispersed winter recreation opportunities into their operations where possible. 8. Acquire necessary easements over private lands, construct connecting trail segments and designate Nason Ridge Trail and County Line Trail as National Recreation Trails (P.L. 90-543). 9. Construct, reconstruct and maintain all recreation trails for the amount and type of use as indicated on Alternative B Allocation Map. 10. Develop and maintain trailheads to provide safe parking, sanitation and other facilities commensurate with the expected use on the Service Level of trail(s) being accessed. Trailheads currently requiring addi- tional development include: Stafford Creek Pratt River Beverly Creek Taylor River Bear/Miller Creek Camp Brown Lake Serene Kachess Campground Blewett Pass Cle Elum River at Boulder Creek Index Creek Salmon La Sac Lake Elizabeth Cooper Lake Evans Lake Knox Creek Rainy Pass French Cabin Creek Rock Lake Gold Creek Merritt Lake Kachess Lake (Sec. 5, Glacier View T.21 N.,R.13 E.) Campground Cle Elum Lake at the dam 11. Provide opportunities for dispersed area recrea- tion activities as defined within each recreation op- portunity spectrum (ROS) class described in Appendix A(4) and as depicted on the ROS map ac- companying Alternative B. 12. Cooperate with private landowners, the State of Washington, user groups and concessionaires in development of dispersed winter recreation oppor- tunities along the I-90, Highway 97 and U.S. Highway 2 corridors. 13. Give notice to permittees within Gale Creek and Lake Cle Elum recreation residence tracts that the sites are identified for campground development, that the permits will be terminated and the residences must be removed to allow site restoration prior to development. Continue to issue annual per- mits until actual site development is programmed (approximately 5 years prior to construction). 14. Continue all existing Organization camps under permit. 15. Manage the Red Top Recreation Area for the enhancement of its rock hounding opportunities. Where possible, withdraw the area from mineral en- try to allow continued public recreation mining. To make withdrawals along legal Subdivision lines, areas outside the Recreation Area may be included. All other areas identified as having recreational mineral opportunities (See Figure 6) will be maintain- ed and remain accessible for recreational mining unless claims or mineral leases are filed to restrict public entry. Wilderness Management Direction 1. Manage the Wilderness with primary emphasis on maintenance of primitive ecosystems. Manage for low levels of recreation use with high degrees of Solitude and minimal Wilderness resource impacts. 2. Entrance permits required to limit use within prescribed carrying capacities in all areas. 3. Manage use within the general carrying capacities for the four Wilderness Use Zones described in Appendix B and as depicted on the Alternative B Allocation Map. More specific carrying capacities may be set for heavy use sites and areas to meet standards and plan objectives. Specific carrying capacity of the core Enchantment Area will be 20 persons at one time (PAOT). 4. Existing commercial outfitting and guide permits will be continued only in areas where they do not conflict with use of the area by the general public. 5. Because of vegetative changes, the Wildhorse- Whitepine Allotment will be evaluated to determine if it is capable of being Continued as a viable commer- cial grazing allotment. If no longer capable, the Allotment will be terminated when the permittee no longer desires to use the area and relinquishes his permit. The available forage will be allocated to wildlife and recreation livestock needs. That portion of the Corral-Fortune Creek Commercial Allotment within the Wilderness will be maintained for commercial grazing. Grazing will be in com- pliance with the standards and objectives stated in the management plan. 6. Floatplanes will be permitted on Otter and Phillipa Lakes. Both are isolated lakes without system trail access, have a history of prior floatplane use, and have only occasional other recreation use. 49 7. Special management provisions for the core Enchantment Area will: a. Manage within Region 6 standards (see Appendix B, Exhibit E) of acceptable bio-physical and social impacts. b. Ban dogs from the area. c. Provide a minimum number of primitive pit toilets to handle human waste. Locate and maintain toilets away from fragile vegetation and soils, water bodies, Wet areas and water Courses. d. Locate toilets away from campsites but in such a way as to encourage their use while providing as much privacy as possible. e. Ban wood campfires from entire core area. The ban is to prevent damage to esthetic snags and to prevent blackened rocks. f. Service Level C trail will be maintained from Snow Lake to Colchuck Lake and from Perfection Lake to Prusik Pass. No additional trails will be constructed or identified in the core area. Construct only the minimum number of trail facilities needed for user safety. g. Designate campsites on most durable soils, away from the water courses, on unvegetated sites or on vegetative sites least susceptible to damage, (del Moral 1978, Dethier 1979). h. Limit stays to two nights. i. Limit party size to 6. Fire Management Direction See the Prescribed Fire Zone Map (Figure 8) for the location of where the various intensity prescription fires may be applied under this Alternative. Details of each prescription intensity zone are found in Appendix A (Fire). Due to similarities in land allocations between this and Alternative C, there are no differences in the pro- tection strategy maps. Land Ownership Direction See Land Ownership Map Alternative B for location of land ownership adjustment recommendations. Timber Management Direction 1. Timber harvesting will continue in the Alpine Lakes management unit under authority of the 1963 Wenatchee and Snoqualmie Working Circle Timber Management Plans as amended. 2. See Timber Component Map Alternative B for loca. tion of Standard, special, marginal and unproductive timber components. 3. Adjust Silvicultural priorities to establish com. patibility with visual and undeveloped recreation. Range Management Direction 1. Continue to manage the Corral-Fortune Creek and Swauk Allotments for Commercial use while main- taining an improved vegetative trend. 2. Because of vegetative changes, the Wildhorse- Whitepine Allotment will be evaluated to determine if it is capable of being continued as a viable commer- cial grazing allotment. If it is no longer capable, the Allotment will be terminated when the permittee no longer desires to use the area and relinquishes his permit. The available forage will be allocated to wildlife and recreation livestock needs. 3. Because of limited forage available for commercial grazing, need for high elevation forage by recrea- tional livestock along the proposed National Recrea- tion Trail, and sensitive plants associated with the area's serpentine soils, only portions of the Stafford Creek Allotment will be maintained for commercial grazing. Use will have the following stipulations: a Grazing area limited to upper reaches of Bean, Standup and Stafford Creeks. b. Permitted numbers to be 35 with no allowance for private land. c. Grazing season limited to August 1 to September 30. d. Grazing system to be alternate years. e. Riding to control stock movement and prevent over-use will be required. f. There will be no improvements to be maintained. 50 |（~~~~ ~~~~ - -- --- … ！ = |- * overco-tº- Prescribed Fire Zones Alternative B. Alternative C Management Plan This Alternative provides a mix of goods and ser- vices as follows: 1. Emphasize a wide variety of compatible recreation opportunities including those recommended by user groups. 2. Provide for wood fiber outputs on currently managed commercial forest lands. 3. Manage the Wilderness resource with emphasis on a moderate level of recreation use with a variety of user experiences. Land Allocation Areas and Wilderness Use Zones The following shows the mix of allocations and use zones for Alternative C. See Land Allocation Areas (management unit) and Wilderness Use Zones sec- tions for the meaning of the types of allocations and zones. Also see the Allocation Map C for specific locationS. Allocation Areas (management unit) Acres Developed Site 4,280 Special Area 94,605 Mt. Index Scenic Area (15,671) Stevens Pass Historic District (8,454) Tumwater Scenic Area (5.734) Tumwater Botanical Area (1,104) Asahel Curtis Recreation Area (129) Teanaway Recreation Area (71.321) Denny Creek Scenic Area (946) Red Top Recreation Area (347) Blewett HistoriC District (899) General Forest 46,839 Transportation Management Direction The transportation system, Service Levels and mode of trail travel are shown on the Land Allocation Map for this Alternative. A detailed explanation of Service Levels is found in Appendix A under Access Management for roads. Alternative C would require improved access to plan- ned campground development and to provide for in- creased recreation traffic within those corridors that remain open to public travel. Ultimately, this Alternative will require the reconstruction of approx. imately 12 miles of road and an estimated 174 miles of new Construction. The wide variety of recreation opportunities recom- mended by various users would require the most ex- tensive system of trails and 4x4 routes. Recreation Management Direction 1. Maintain existing campgrounds to established maintenance and administrative Standards at the following Experience Levels (measure of facilities provided): Experience Experience Level Level 3 Tucquala Meadows Taylor River Fish Lake Commonwealth Denny Creek Scenic Forest Dispersed Recreation Wilderness Use Zones Transition Semi-primitive Primitive Trailless 117,676 108,771 15,273 23,030 20,364 334,693 Following is management direction unique to Alternative C. See also Appendix A: Management Direction Common to All Alternatives. Visual Management Direction Experience Money Creek Level 2 Miller River Foss River Scatter Creek Beckler River Esmeralda White Pine De Roux Creek Fish Pond Glacier View Experience Riverside Level 4 Chatter Creek OWhi Swauk Red Mountain Salmon La Sac Cle Elum River Wish Poosh Crystal Springs Kachess Bonanza Nason Creek Tronsen Tumwater Park 1. Improve opportunities to view natural appearing landscapes from motor vehicle and developed recrea- tion sites. 2. Maintain or enhance scenic quality in all areas seen from roads, trails, and use areas identified by the public. 3. See the Visual Quality Objective Map Alternative C for specific locations. Mineral Springs Beverly Creek 52 2. With construction of Upper Chatter Creek Cam- pground, convert the following existing campgrounds to day use sites and maintain to established maintenance and administrative standards at Ex- perience Level 3. Eightmile Bridge Creek lda Creek Johnny Creek Rock Island 3. Construct, as needed to meet demand the follow- ing Experience Level 3 campgrounds. Ranger District Site Name and Inventory Number PAOT Capacity North Bend Mountain View (No Number) 720 Ellensburg Mineral Springs Extension — 51 200 Swauk Extension (North) — 61 200 Swauk Extension (South) – 60 100 Teanaway (no number) 200 Leavenworth Tumwater Extension — 61 380 Tronsen Meadow — 83 200 Lake Wenatchee White Pine — 102 100 White Pine Extension — 104A 200 Nason Ridge – 97 200 Skykomish Fir Grove — 49 120 Wildflower Flat – 85 180 4. Construct, as needed to meet demand, the follow- ing Experience Level 4 campgrounds. Ranger District Site Name and Inventory Number PAOT Capacity North Bend Tinkham (no number) 235 Cle Elum Speelyi — 91 1,500 Kachess Extension (no number) 280 Leavenworth Upper Chatter Creek (no number) 1,740 5. Maintain all existing day use sites to standard at Experience Level 3. Asahel Curtis Lake Keechelus Deception Falls Swiftwater Red Top 6. Maintain existing developed winter sports com- plexes at the size currently under special use permit as depicted on Alternative C Allocation Map unless through the Ski Area Master Planning process a need for expansion is identified. Need could be: 1) finan- Cial, to maintain an area's solvency or, 2) additional Capacity to satisfy increased demand. 7. Manage the Dardanelles area (Sec. 4, 8, 10, 16, T. 26 N., R. 16 E.) to retain its potential for future development as an alpine ski area. 8. Acquire necessary easements over private lands, construct connecting trail segments and designate Nason Ridge Trail and County Line Trail as National Recreation Trails (P.L. 90-543). 9. Construct, reconstruct and maintain all recreation trails for the amount and type of use indicated on Alternative C Allocation Map. 10. Develop and maintain trailheads to provide safe parking, Sanitation and other facilities commensurate with the expected use on the Service Level of trail(s) being accessed. Trailheads currently requiring addi- tional development include: Stafford Creek Lake Elizabeth Beverly Creek Evans Lake Bear/Miller Creek Rainy Pass Blewett Pass Rock Lake Fish Lake Guard Merritt Lake Station North Fork Tolt River Scatter Creek Glacier View Salmon La Sac Campground Cooper Lake Wenatchee River Gold Creek Snowy Creek Kachess Lake (Sec. 5, Tumwater T.21N.,R.13E.) Campgroun Denny Creek Wedge Mountain Pratt River Hatchery Creek Taylor River East Fork Foss River Camp Brown Lake Serene Proctor Creek River Butcher Creek East Fork Miller River West Fork Miller 11. Provide opportunities for dispersed area recrea- tion activities as defined within each recreation op- portunity spectrum (ROS) class described in Appendix A (Recreation) and as depicted on the ROS Map accompanying Alternative C. 12. Cooperate with private landowners, the State of Washington, user groups and concessionaires in development of dispersed winter recreation oppor- tunities along the I-90, Highway 97 and U.S. Highway 2 corridors. 13. Give notice to permittees within Gale Creek and Lake Cle Elum recreation residence tracts that the sites are identified for campground development, that the permits will be terminated, and the residences must be removed to allow site restoration prior to development. Continue to issue annual per- mits until actual site development is programmed (approximately 5 years prior to construction). 14. Continue all existing organization camps under permit. 15. Develop group camping facilities adjacent to Icicle Creek west of Rock Island Campground. 16. Manage the Red Top Recreation Area for enhancement of its rock hounding opportunities. Where possible, withdraw the area from mineral entry to allow continued public recreation mining use. To make withdrawals along legal subdivision lines, areas outside the Recreation Area may be in- cluded. All other areas identified as having recrea- tional mining opportunities will be maintained and remain accessible for recreational mining unless claims or mineral leases are filed to restrict public entry. Wilderness Management Direction 1. Manage the Wilderness for a moderate amount of recreation use with a variety of user experiences resulting in moderate levels (within Region 6 Stan- dards, see Appendix B, Exhibit E) of social and bio- physical impacts. 2. Maintain voluntary self-registration in all areas. En- trance permits may be required in high use or heavily impacted areas if indirect management measures fail to maintain the experience opportunities of a given Wilderness Use Zone. Indirect management measures will include: improve, maintain or lower standard of access roads, trailhead facilities and trails; advertise special attributes of the areas; iden- tify the range of recreation opportunities in surroun- ding areas; educate users to basic functions of the Wilderness ecosystems; make users aware of little used areas and general patterns of use. 3. Manage use within the general carrying capacities for the four Wilderness Use Zones (see Appendix B) as depicted on the Alternative C Allocation Map. Set Specific carrying capacities for heavy use sites and areas to meet standards and plan objectives. Carry- ing capacity for the core Enchantment area will be set at 50 persons at one time (PAOT). 4. Commercial outfitting would be limited to permit- ted areas and continued only where there is a demonstrated public need. The service must be com- patible with general public use. 5. The Corral-Fortune Creek commercial grazing Allotment would be maintained. Grazing will be in compliance with the standards and objectives Stated in the management plan. 53 Because of vegetative changes, the Wildhorse- Whitepine Allotment will be evaluated to determine if it is capable of being continued as a viable commer- cial grazing allotment. If no longer capable, the allot- ment will be terminated when the permittee no longer desires to use the area and relinquishes his permit. The available forage will be allocated to wildlife and recreation livestock needs. 6. Floatplanes will be allowed under special use per- mit for recreational purposes on Waptus and Dorothy Lakes. Both have a history of prior floatplane use and are within the Transition Wilderness Use Zone where management is to accommodate high levels of recreation. 7. Special management provisions for the core Enchantment Area will: a. Manage within Region 6 Standards (see Appendix B, Exhibit E) of acceptable bio-physical and social impacts. b. Allow dogs in the area. c. Provide primitive pit toilets, vault toilets, and bin composters to handle human waste. Locate pit toilets on suitable sites near camp areas away from fragile vegetation and soils and away from water bodies, wet areas and water courses. Locate vault toilets on sites requiring human waste disposal but not suitable for pit toilet installation. Locate bin composters near the vaults. Locate all toilets and composters so as not to distract from the natural landscape. d. Ban wood campfires except in the Rat Creek drainage. The ban is to prevent damage to esthetic snags and to prevent blackened rocks. e. Maintain Service Level B trail from Snow Lakes through the core area to Aasgard Pass. Service Level C trail will be maintained from Aasgard Pass to Colchuck Lake. Service Level C trail will be con- structed and maintained from Nada Lake through the Rat Creek drainage to Perfection Lake. f. Require camping in designated campsites. g. Designate campsites on most durable soils away from water courses, on unvegetated sites or on vegetative sites species least susceptible to damage (del Moral 1978, Dethier 1978). h. Limit stays to two nights. i. Limit party size to 6. j. Ban the discharge of firearms except during the hunting season. Fire Management Direction See the Prescribed Fire Zone Map (Figure 9) for the location of where the various intensity prescription fires may be applied under this Alternative. Details of each prescription intensity zone are found in Appen- dix A (Fire). Due to similarities in land allocations between this and Alternative B, there are no dif- ferences in the protection strategy maps. Land Ownership Direction See Lands Ownership Map Alternative C for location of land ownership adjustmant recommendations. Timber Management Direction | 1. Timber harvesting will continue in the Alpine Lakes management unit under the authority of the 1963 Wenatchee and Snoqualmie Working Circle Timber Management Plans as amended. 2. See Timber Component Map Alternative C for loca- tion of standard, special, marginal and unproductive timber components. 3. Adjust silvicultural priorities to achieve com- patibility with visual objectives. Range Management Direction 1. Continue to manage the Corral-Fortune Creek Allotment for optimum commercial use while main- taining an upward vegetative trend. 2. Because of vegetative changes, the Wildhorse- Whitepine Allotment will be evaluated to determine if it is capable of being continued as a viable commer- cial grazing allotment. If it is no longer capable, the Allotment will be terminated when the permittee no longer desires to use the area and relinquished his permit. The available forage will be allocated to wildlife and recreation livestock needs. 3. Reduce the amount of forage utilization on the Swauk Allotment by 200 animal unit months to meet the increased visual quality objectives resulting from intensive recreation development. 4. Reduce forage utilization in the Highway 97 cor- ridor of the Swauk Allotment to 25 percent of available forage to meet visual objectives. Particular emphasis will be placed on achieving low utilization of snowberry by moving stock through the area as rapidly as possible. 5. Because of limited forage available for commercial grazing, need for high elevation forage by recrea- tional livestock along the proposed National Recreation Trail, and needed protection of sensitive plants associated with the area's serpentine soils, Only portions of the Stafford Creek Allotment will be maintained for commercial grazing. Use will have the following stipulations: a. Grazing area limited to upper reaches of Bean, Standup and Stafford Creeks. b. Permitted numbers to be 35 with no allowance for private land. c. Grazing season limited to August 1 to September 30. d. Grazing system to be alternate years. e. Riding to control stock movement and prevent over use will be required. f. There will be no improvements to be maintained. 54 Figure 9. Prescribed Fire Zones Alternative C. Zone Zone II Zone III - --- -- ------- º --- --- ---- -- -- -- * -- ºv - -- º w - - - ------- over-e- cº-º - º º ------ - - - - | a_- - - - - - - - - --- - ------ - --- º Alternative D Management Plan (Current Situation Extended) Alternative D is a projection of management prac- tices which currently prevail in the area. Regarded at this moment, it constitutes a “no action” plan and is useful in comparing various actions with the current situation. A continuation of current practices, of course, would produce change and it should not be considered as a permanent condition. This Alternative provides a mix of goods and ser- vices as follows: 1. Manage under existing resource and multiple-use plans. 2. Provide special areas as they exist at present. 3. Continue to manage the Wilderness resource for a variety of user experiences. Land Allocation Areas and Wilderness Use Zone The following shows the mix of allocations and use zones for Alternative D. See Land Allocation Areas management unit and Wilderness Use Zones sec- tions for the meaning of the types of allocations and zones. Also see the Allocation Map D for specific locations. Allocations Areas (management unit) Acres Developed Site 2,020 Special Area 75,692 Mt. Index Scenic Area (13,173) Stevens Pass Historic District (8,454) Tumwater Scenic Area (5,734) Tumwater Botanical Area (1,104) Asahel Curtis Recreation Area (129) Teanaway Recreation Area (47,098) General Forest 216,302 Scenic Forest 76,783 Dispersed Recreation 1,374 Wilderness Use Zones Transition 13,333 Semi-primitive 33,697 Primitive 8,121 Trailless 338,209 The following is management direction unique to Alternative D. See also Appendix A: Management Direction Common to All Alternatives. Visual Management Direction 1. Continue current direction for maintaining scenic quality consistent with expected increases in recrea- tion use. 2. See the Visual Quality Objective Map, Alternative D for specific locations. Transportation Management Direction The transportation system, Service Levels and mode of trail travel are shown on the Land Allocation Map for this Alternative. A detailed explanation of Service Levels is found in Appendix A under Access Manage- ment for roads. These represent the most likely con- dition expected to exist in the future. This Alternative would ultimately require the reconstruction of 23 miles and construction of 365 additional miles of road. Planned road construction in the Silver Creek area and Pratt River would be closed to public recreation travel by automobile. Recreation Management Direction 1. Maintain all existing campgrounds to established maintenance and administrative standards at current Experience Levels (measure of facilities provided): Experience Experience Level 2 Level 3 Tucquala Meadows Taylor River Scatter Creek Commonwealth Esmeralda Denny Creek De Roux Creek Money Creek Miller River Foss River Beckler River Experience White Pine Level 4 Fish Pond Glacier View Swauk Riverside Salmon La Sac BridgeCreek Wish Poosh Chatter Creek Kachess Eightmile Nason Creek Owhi Tumwater Red Mountain Cle Elum River Crystal Springs Bonanza Tronsen Park Mineral Springs Beverly Creek Johnny Creek Rock Island lda Creek 2. Maintain all existing day use sites to established maintenance and administrative standards at Experience Level 3. Asahel Curtis Lake Keechelus Deception Falls Swiftwater Red Top 3. Maintain existing developed winter sports com- plexes at the size currently under special use permit as depicted on the Alternative D Allocation Map, unless through the Ski Area Master Planning process a need for expansion is demonstrated. Need could be 1) financial, to maintain an area's solvency or 2) additional capacity to satisfy increased demand. 4. Acquire necessary easements over private lands, construct connecting trail segments and designate Nason Ridge Trail and County Line Trail as National Recreation Trails (P.L. 90-543). 56 5. Construct, reconstruct and maintain all recreation trails for the amount and type of use indicated on the Alternative D Allocation Map. 6. Develop and maintain trailheads to provide safe parking, sanitation and other facilities commensurate with the expected use on the Service Level of trail(s) being accessed. Trailheads currently requiring addi- tional development include: Blewett Pass Evans Lake Beverly Creek Deception/Fisher Tucduala Meadows Creek Salmon La Sac Tunnel Creek Kachess Lake (Sec. 5, Rainy Pass T.21N., R.13E.) Snowy Creek Kachess Campground Rock Lake Gold Creek Merritt Lake Butcher Creek Hatchery Creek Denny Creek Lake Serene 7. Provide opportunities for dispersed area recreation activities as defined within each recreation Oppor- tunity Spectrum (ROS) Class described in Appendix A and as depicted on the ROS Map accompanying Alternative D. 8. Cooperate with private landowners, the State of Washington, user groups and concessionaires in development of dispersed winter recreation oppor- tunities along the I-90, Highway 97 and U.S. Highway 2 corridors. 9. Maintain existing recreation residence special uses in all developed tracts. 10. Continue all existing organization camps under permit. 1. All areas identified as having recreational mining opportunites (see Figure 6) will be maintained and re- main accessible for recreational mining unless claims or mineral leases are filed to restrict public entry. Wilderness Management Direction 1. Continue to manage the Wilderness according to Current management direction. A variety of user ex- periences and varying impacts on the bio-physical resource will result. Resource impacts will be within Region 6 standards (see Appendix B, Exhibit E). Social impacts would be higher than Region 6 stan- dards but within standards set by this plan for high USe areas. 2. Encourage voluntary registration at major trailheads. 3. Manage use within the general carrying capacities for the four Wilderness Use Zones (see Appendix B) as depicted on the Alternative D Allocation Map. Specific carrying capacities for heavy use sites and areas may be set to meet standards and plan objec- tives. User awareness techniques rather than permits will be used to meet standards and achieve objec- tives. 4. Current commercial outfitting permits will be con- tinued. Additional permits would be allowed where there is a demonstrated public need and if the ser. vice is compatible with general public use. 5. The existing commercial grazing allotments will be retained. Grazing use will conform to the standards and objectives stated in the management plan. 6. Floatplanes will not be permitted. 7. Special management provisions for the core Enchantment Area will: a. Discourage visitors from taking dogs into the area. b. Install and maintain pit toilets on suitable sites near high use camp areas. Install vault toilets near heavy use campsites where suitable pit toilet sites are not available. Vaults will be serviced as needed by helicopter. c. Ban wood campfires except in the Rat Creek drainage. The ban is to prevent damage to esthetic Snags and to prevent blackened rocks. d. Service Level C trail will be maintained from Snow Lake to Aasgard Pass and from Perfection Lake to Prusik Pass. No additional trails will be constructed or maintained in the core area. e. Encourage camping in established campsites. f. Encourage users to limit stay to two nights in the COre area. g. Discourage the discharge of firearms except dur- ing the hunting season. Fire Management Direction See the Prescribed Fire Zone Map (Figure 10) for the location of where the various intensity prescription fires may be applied under this Alternative. Details of each prescription intensity zone are found in Appendix A (Fire). Land Ownership Direction See Lands Ownership Map Alternative D for location of land ownership recommendations. Timber Management Direction 1. Timber harvesting will continue in the Alpine Lakes management unit under authority of the 1963 Wenatchee and Snoqualmie Working Circle Timber Management Plans as amended. 2. See Timber Component Map Alternative D for loca- tion of standard, special, marginal and unproductive timber components. 3. Optimize wood fiber production on all accessible Commercial forest lands classified standard and Special. Range Management Direction 1. Continue to manage the four existing commercial range allotments for upward vegetative trends. 57 Figure 10. Prescribed Fire Zones Alternative D. -- - ------ Alternative E Management Plan This Alternative provides a mix of goods and ser- vices as follows: 1. Emphasize allocating land to optimize timber and recreation based on capability and suitability of land to support various activities. 2. Feature wood fiber use on highest productivity lands. 3. Feature a variety of dispersed recreation oppor- tunities on highest suited recreation lands. 4. Feature developed recreation where future use is expected to exceed capacity at existing facilities. 5. Manage the Wilderness resource with a moderate amount of recreation use and preserve a variety of experiences and opportunities for solitude. 6. Insure continuation of unique areas, recreation op- portunities and outstanding special features. Land Allocation Areas and Wilderness Use Zones The following shows the mix of allocations and use zones for Alternative E. See Land Allocation Areas (management unit) and Wilderness Use Zones sec- tions for the meaning of the types of allocations and zones. Also, see the Allocation Map E for specific locations. Allocation Area (management unit) Acres Developed Site 2,350 Special Area 95,979 Mt. Index Scenic Area (13,175) Stevens Pass Historic District (8,454) Tumwater Scenic Area (5,734) Tumwater Botanical Area (1,104) Asahel Curtis Recreation Area (129) Teanaway Recreation Area (53,560) Denny Creek Recreation Area (1,871) Red Top Recreation Area (347) Eldorado Research Natural Area (1,221) Nason Ridge Recreation Area (5,170) Annette Lake Recreation Area (2,538) Kachess Lake Recreation Area (1,777) Blewett Historic District (899) pearing landscapes in the area by both vehicles and primitive means. 2. Provide natural appearing foreground areas along Granite Mountain, McClellan Butte and Pacific Crest Trail routes. 3. See the Visual Quality Objective Map Alternative E for specific locations. Transportation Management Direction The transportation system, Service Levels and mode of trail travel are shown on the Land Allocation Map for this Alternative. A detailed explanation of Service Levels is found in Appendix A under Access Manage- ment for roads. Alternative E would ultimately require the reconstruc- tion of 30 miles and the construction of 355 miles of road. The wide variety of resource objectives for this Alternative will require a variety of access manage. ment objectives that range from obliteration (Service Level E) to optimum operating conditions for high volume mixed traffic (Service Level A). Recreation Management Direction 1. Maintain existing campgrounds to established maintenance and administrative standards at the following Experience Levels (measure of facilities provided): Experience Experience Level 1 Level 3 Tucquala Meadows Taylor River Fish Lake Commonwealth Denny Creek Money Creek General Forest Scenic Forest Dispersed Recreation Wilderness Use Zones Transition Semi-primitive Primitive Trailless 136,822 82,971 54,049 12,242 32,242 10,182 338,694 Following is management direction unique to Alter. native E. See also Appendix A: Management Direc- tion Common to All Alternatives. Visual Management Direction 1. Provide improved opportunities to view natural ap- Experience Miller River Level 3 Foss River Beckler River Scatter Creek White Pine Esmeralda Fish Pond De Roux Creek Glacier View Beverly Creek Riverside Experience Chatter Creek Level 4 Owhi Red Mountain Swauk Cle Elum River Salmon La Sac Crystal Springs Wish Poosh Bonanza Kachess Tronsen Nason Creek Park Tumwater Mineral Springs 59 2. With construction of Upper Chatter Creek Campground, convert the following existing camp grounds to day use sites and maintain to established maintenance and administrative standards at Experience Level 3. Eight Mile Bridge Creek lda Creek Johnny Creek Rock Island 3. Maintain all existing day use sites to standard at Experience Level 3. Asahel Curtis Lake Keechelus Deception Falls Swiftwater Red Top 4. Construct, as needed to meet demand the follow- ing Experience Level 3 campgrounds. Ranger District Site Name and Inventory Number PAOT Capacity North Bend Mountain View (no number) 720 Ellensburg Mineral Springs Extension – 51 200 Swauk Extension (North) – 61 200 Swauk Extension (South) – 60 100 Teanaway (no number) 200 Leavenworth Tumwater Extension – 61 380 Tronsen Meadow — 83 200 Lake Wenatchee White Pine — 102 100 White Pine Extension – 104A 200 Nason Ridge – 97 200 Skykomish Fir Grove — 49 120 Wildflower Flat – 85 180 5. Construct, to meet demand, the following Experience Level 4 campgrounds. Ranger District Site Name and Inventory Number PAOT Capacity North Bend Tinkham (no number) 235 Cle Elum Speelyi — 91 1500 Kachess Extension (no number) 280 Leavenworth Upper Chatter Creek (no number) 1740 6. Conduct further study to determine conflicts bet- ween recreation use of the Money Creek Campground, (Skykomish Ranger District) and bald eagle needs. If conflicts are found that cannot be mitigated, the campground will be removed with recreation demand being met by the Beckler River, Miller River or development of other available sites. 7. Maintain existing developed winter sports com- plexes at the size currently under special use permit as depicted on Alternative E Allocation Map, unless through the Ski Area Master planning process a need for expansion is demonstrated. Need could be: 1) financial, to maintain an area's solvency or 2) addi- tional capacity to satisfy increased demand. Permit- tees will be encouraged and may be requested to in- corporate dispersed winter recreational opportunities into other operations. 8. Manage the Dardanelles area (Sections 4, 8, 10, 16, T. 26 N., R. 16 E.) to retain its potential for future development as an alpine ski area. 9. Acquire necessary easements over private lands, construct connecting trail segments and designate Nason Ridge Trail and County Line Trail as National Recreation Trails (P.L.90–543). 10. Construct, reconstruct and maintain all recreation trails for the amount and type of use indicated on Alternative E Allocation Map. 11. Develop and maintain trailheads to provide safe parking, sanitation and other facilities commensurate with the expected use on the Service Level of trail(s) being accessed. Trailheads currently requiring addi- tional development include: Stafford Creek Pratt River Beverly Creek Taylor River Bear/Miller Creek Proctor Creek Blewett Pass Lake Serene Scatter Creek Index Creek Fish Lake Guard Lake Elizabeth Station Evans Lake Salmon La Sac Rainy Pass Cooper Lake Rock Lake Knox Creek Merritt Lake French Cabin Creek Butcher Creek Gold Creek Hatchery Creek Kachess Campground Snowy Creek Kachess Lake (Sec. 5, Tunnel Creek T.21N.,R.13E.) North Fork Denny Creek Tolt River 12. Provide opportunities for dispersed area recrea- tion activities as defined within each recreation op- portunity spectrum (ROS) class described in Appendix A(Recreation) and as depicted on the ROS Map accompanying Alternative E. 13. Cooperate with private landowners, the State of Washington, user groups and concessionaires in development of dispersed winter recreation oppor- tunities along the I-90, Highway 97 and U.S. Highway 2 corridors. \|| Nº. *} jº Vº *\ Nº § 14. Give no ice to permittees within Gale Creek and Lake Cle Elum recreation residence tracts that the sites are identified for campground development and that the permits will be terminated and residences must be removed to allow site restoration prior to development. Continue to issue annual permits until actual site development is programmed (approxi- mately 5 years prior to construction). 15. Maintain all existing organization camps under permit. 16. Develop group camping facilities adjacent to Icicle Creek west of Rock Island campground. 17. Develop access at the Kachess Campground and manage Little Kachess Lake as a quiet water (non- motorized) boat area. 18. Manage the Red Top Recreation Area for enhancement of its rock hounding opportunities. Where possible, withdraw the area from mineral entry to allow continued public recreation mining use. To make withdrawals along legal sub-division lines, areas outside the recreation area may be in- cluded. All other areas identified as having recrea- tional mining opportunities (See Figure 6) would be maintained and remain accessible for recreational mining unless claims or mineral leases are filed to restrict public entry. 60 Wilderness Management Direction 1. Manage the Wilderness to provide a moderate amount of recreation, a variety of user experiences and solitude with low impact on the resource. Bio- physical resource impacts will be within Region 6 Standards (see Appendix B, Exhibit E). Social im- pacts will be within standards set by this plan. 2. Registration will be required in all areas. If indirect Controls such as user awareness techniques fail to maintain the core Enchantment Area within Social and biological standards, entrance permits will be required. 3. Manage use within the general carrying capacities (see Appendix B) for the four Wilderness Use Zones as depicted on the Alternative E Allocation Map. Set Specific site and area carrying capacities for heavy use areas to meet established standards. Carrying capacity for the Enchantment Area will be 60 per- Sons at one time (PAOT). 4. Commercial outfitting and guide permits will be limited to currently permitted areas and would be º continued only where there is a demonstrated public need compatible with general public use. 5. Because of vegetative changes, the wildhorse: º Whitepine Allotment will be evaluated to determine if it is capable of being continued as a viable commer- cial grazing allotment. If it is no longer capable, the allotment will be terminated when the permittee no longer desires to use the area and relinquishes his permit. The available forage will be allocated to wildlife and recreation livestock needs. That portion of the Corral-Fortune Creek Allotment within the wilderness will be maintained. Grazing will be in compliance with the standards and objec- tives stated in the management plan. 6. Floatplane use is not permitted. However, their use will be given consideration based on public input to this Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 7. Special management provisions for the core Enchantment Area will: a. Manage the area within Region 6 Standards of acceptable bio-physical resource impacts. Set encounter levels (social impacts) in excess of Current ... on 6 Standards but within standards set by this Olan. b. Ban dogs from the area. C. Provide both primitive pit toilets and vault toilets to handle human waste. Locate pit toilets on suitable Sites near camp areas away from fragile vegetation and soils and away from water bodies, wet areas and water courses. Locate vault toilets on sites requiring human waste disposal but not suitable for pit toilet installation. Locate all toilets so as to not distract from the natural landscape. Service the vault toilets once annually using a helicopter. Service to be carried out during low use periods. d. Service Level C trail will be maintained from Snow Lakes to Colchuck Lake and from Perfection Lake to Prusik Pass. Additional Service Level C trails will be maintained to toilets as needed to protect the reSOUſCe. e. Ban wood campfires from the entire core area. The ban is to prevent damage to esthetic snags and to prevent blackened rocks. f. Require camping in designated campsites. g. Designate campsites on most durable soils, away from water courses, on unvegetated sites or on vegetative sites least susceptible to damage (del Moral 1978, Deither 1978). h. Limit stays to two nights. i. Limit party size to 6. j. Ban the discharge of firearms except during the hunting season. Fire Management Direction See the Prescribed Fire Zone Map (Figure 11) for the location of where the various intensity prescription fires may be applied under this Alternative. Details of each prescription intensity zone are found in Appen- dix A(Fire). Land Ownership Direction 1. See Lands Ownership Map Alternative E for loca- tion of land ownership adjustment recommendations. Timber Management Direction 1. Timber harvesting will continue in the Alpine Lakes management unit under authority of the 1963 Wenatchee and Snoqualmie Working Circle Timber Management Plans as amended. 2. See Timber Component Map Alternative E for loca- tion of standard, special, marginal and unproductive timber components. Range Management Direction 1. Continue to manage the Corral-Fortune Creek Allotment for commercial use while maintaining an upward vegetative trend. 2. Because of vegetative changes, the Wildhorse- Whitepine Allotment will be evaluated to determine if it is capable of being continued as a viable commer- cial grazing Allotment. If it is no longer capable, the allotment will be terminated when the permittee no longer desires to use the area and relinquished his permit. The available forage will be allocated to wildlife and recreation livestock needs. 3. Reduce forage utilization in the Highway 97 cor- ridor of the Swauk Allotment to 25 percent of available forage to meet visual objectives. Particular emphasis must be placed on achieving low utiliza- tion of snowberry by moving stock through the area as rapidly as possible. 4. Because of limited forage available for commercial grazing and need for high elevation forage by recrea- tional livestock along the proposed National Recrea- tion Trail, and Sensitive plants associated with the area's Serpentine soils, only portions of the Stafford Creek Allotment will be maintained for commercial grazing. Use will have the following stipulations: a. Grazing area limited to upper reaches of Bean, Standup and Stafford Creeks. b. Permitted numbers to be 35 with no allowance for private land. c. Grazing season limited to August 1 to September 30. d. Grazing system to be alternate years. e. Riding to control stock movement and prevent over use will be required. f. There will be no improvements to be maintained. 5. Recreation livestock forage needs in the Teanaway Recreation Area (currently within the Stafford Creek Allotment), along the County Line National Recrea- tion Trail and adjacent to the Alpine Lakes Wilderness will receive particular range management emphasis. That emphasis will be on forage inven- tories, use monitoring, minimum impact camp site and grazing area designation and trail location, con- Struction and maintenance. 61 Figure 11. Prescribed Fire Zones Alternative E. -- - º - --- - - - ------ - - - - - - - - - - -- --- - - - - - - - º --- ov-º- ºn- º --- º - - .4 | º Looking northeast across Interstate 90 near Snoqualmie Pass up Gold Creek to Chikamin Peak. Photo by U.S. Forest Service. This section describes the anticipated effects of im- plementing each management plan alternative. In- cluded for each alternative are: A. The acreage of major activities and uses. B. Anticipated outputs of goods and services C. The cost of implementing each alternative and the anticipated revenue. D. The predicted effects in the physical, biological and human components of the environment. Where possible, changes will be described in terms of their magnitude, duration and significance. Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative A Soils Management activities in this Alternative would cause several types of soil impacts. Physical soil im- pacts include compaction, displacement, puddling, Surface erosion and mass failure. Chemical Soil im: pacts are those which degrade the soils by causing a deficiency in one or more soil nutrients or by causing an unfavorable ratio between nutrients. Often, the physical and chemical soil impacts are interrelated. The greatest soil impact levels would be associated with road construction and timber harvest. Therefore, the amount of soil impact in this Alternative is close- ly related to the miles of road constructed or the aCres of timber harvested. Visuals This Alternative would result in the greatest negative impacts, both short and long term. Timber harvesting and road construction may dominate approximately 40 percent of the management unit (see Figure 17 lands listed as modification). A natural appearing set- ting for scenic highways and rivers would be limited to the foreground (% — V2 mile seen areas). Manage- ment of outstanding scenic values is limited to the most outstanding areas. The visual impact of modifications in this Alternative would not only be Visible inside the management area, it would be seen from many portions of the Wilderness. Water As explained in the Affected Environment section, timber harvest increases water run-off. Timber harvest in this Alternative would produce an estimated 22,289 acre feet of additional water per year in run-off from the management unit. Roads adversly affect water quality. Road density would increase 49 percent in this Alternative from the existing 1.4 miles per Square mile. The increased roading and attendant harvest would moderately affect water quality in logging related pollutants such as sediment, turbidity, temperature, debris and nutrientS. Transportation For the most part, roads are considered irretrievable commitments of resources. Alternative A would ultimately require 8,414 acres of land committed to roads. This constitutes 2.3 percent of the National Forest lands in the management unit. No roads of major issue have been identified for obliteration in this Alternative. Approximately 69 percent of the total area would be accessible for day use when the entire transportation system for Alternative A is in place and under management. Recreation use is expected to follow the pattern for extended and day use shown on Figure 12. Focal points under the day use areas would have potential for heavy use. Higher road stan- dards, increased road density, new trail construction and changes in travel mode contribute to make the area more accessible, particularly in the Pratt River, Maloney Ridge, Coulter Creek and Thorp Mountain areas. The 5,600 acres of extended use area in the Middle Fork Teanaway/Jolly Creek area are the result of a change in mode of trail travel from bike to horse. This Alternative would make 35 percent of the Wilderness available to the average day user. Recreation Opportunities for approximately 4 million recreation visitor-days (RVD) of use would be provided. A description of the procedure used to calculate recreation inputs is available as a special report to the DEIS. This would be approximately 122,000 an- nual RVD's less than Alternative D (current situa- tion extended) and would provide the lowest total recreation opportunity within the management unit. It would result in a narrow recreation opportunity spectrum within the management unit, with most of the opportunities being “rural” and “roaded natural” see (ROS Map with Alternative A). It would exceed anticipated need for “roaded natural” recreation op- portunities. It would be expected to meet anticipated need for “semi-primitive motorized" recreation oppor- tunities only during the years of the plan implemen- tation period. It would not be expected to meet the anticipated need for "rural", “semi-primitive non- motorized" and "primitive" opportunities in the management unit. Wilderness This Alternative would result in the greatest bio- physical impacts on the Wilderness. It would allow for the greatest number of visitors resulting in the least opportunity for solitude. The greatest number of miles of trail would be constructed and main- tained at the highest Service Levels. The general car. fying capacity for the Wilderness would be approxi- mately 716,000 RVD's annually, which is approxi- mately 162,000 RVD's greater than Alternative D (cur. rent situation extended). A description of the pro- cedure used to calculate Wilderness recreation out- puts is available as a special report to this DEIS. Based on a predicted 7 percent annual increase in use and assuming proper distribution of visitors, the area could be expected to meet recreation needs until the early 1990's. Permits would be required to properly distribute use. This would be the most cost- ly alternative to implement. 65 Figure 12. Recreational Use Patterns Alternative A. | Day Use Areas T Extended Stay Areas - ſº f - - - - - - --- - - -- --- - - - - - - *. º *- - - --- - - - º ...) ºr * -º-º-º-º-º-º- vić-- tº º - - ** --- - º - - - - - |--|-- - tº- - --- - - -- - ... " - --- | - - - - 9 - - - --- ------ *-ºn-º-º-º-º: *> --- --- ****** *-*---- --- -- | Cultural Under Alternative A, potential impacts to cultural resources would be highest of the five alternatives (See Table 6). Logging operations, road construction and increased access have the potential to damage Significant cultural resources or their environmental Setting. Damage to sites could eliminate manage- ment options for interpretation and Scientific ſeSearch. Conflicts between cultural resources and timber harvesting would be greatest in the Middle Fork, Kachess, Highway 97 and U.S. 2 West Resource Complexes. Proposed road construction in the Middle Fork Snoqualmie Complex may damage a probable National Register historic property. In the |-90 Complex, two potential National Register sites fall within probable timber harvest areas. Two known National Register sites fall within the general forest allocation in the Highway 97 complex. In addition, timber harvesting and road construction along the ridges and stream courses in the Highway 97 Complex coincides with an area having a high poten- tial for archaeological resources. The emphasis on recreation in the Teanway Complex would be generally compatible with known and Suspected cultural properties. Allocation of the Stevens Pass Historic District to Special Area would give added management protec- tion to the historic values. Proposed trail Construct tion within the district would provide management Options for interpretation. Under this Alternative, recreational impacts on Cultural sites in the Wilderness would increase Substantially as public use increased. Alternative A would result in the necessity of pro- gramming a high level of funding for inventory and mitigation of cultural sites at the expense of management and interpretation. The public would benefit less from the cultural resource program under this Alternative. The potential impact of this Alternative to traditional Indian religious sites would be likely. The emphasis on timber harvesting, particularly in presently unroaded localities, may alter the character of tradi. tional religious areas or resources. Minerals All areas identified as having recreational mining op- portunities (see Figure 6) would be maintained for that purpose. Current access to these areas would be maintained. No particular protection would be af. forded to any of the identified recreational mining Table 6. Potential for Adverse Impacts on Known and Potential Cultural Sites — Alternative A. Resource Complex Middle I-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway loicle U.S. 2 U.S. 2 Total Fork 97 East West Snoqualmie Known sites' High 4 4 2 LOW 3 12 7 Potential Cultural Sites' High Medium High Medium "Potential for Adverse Impact 4 O O 4 19 13 2 3 10 64 5 7 13 12 75 High Medium High Medium High H — High level of impact from timber harvesting, road construction, recreational development, increased accessibility and ORV use. Timber harvesting is intensive, utilizing full range of silvicultural practices. M — Moderate level of impact from land modifying activities. Timber harvesting may involve constraints in type of logging Systems used. Road construction does not directly impact sites, but increased access poses threats to unprotected Sites. Recreational use includes bikes, horses and hikers. L – Low level of impact from land modifying activities. No commercial forest land allocated for timber harvesting. Recreational use confined to horse and hiker. areas to assure their continued availability for public use (i.e. mining claims could be staked on the areas resulting in commercial mineral outputs and the prevention of public access to the areas). Aggregate materials, once removed and placed upon roads, would be considered an irreversible commit- ment of resources. Alternative A would ultimately re- quire 3,088,000 cubic yards of common materials. Commercial mineral deposits and related mining ac- tivities would not be affected by nor would they af- fect this Alternative. Lands This Alternative would provide the opportunity to ex- change approximately 45 sections of national forest land for higher priority lands elsewhere on the forest. The opportunity to protect or enhance any unfore- seen special resource values on this land would be minimal. Land adjustment costs would be relatively |OW. Wildlife The diversity of animal hibitat could be the highest in Alternative A because of the high level of timber harvest expected. If the spacing of tree harvest units and the age classes of trees is optimal, this Alter- native should favor the greatest diversity and abun- dance of wildlife species. This would be especially true in the l-90, Kachess and U.S. 2 West Resource Complexes. These areas have low natural forest diversity which can be greatly increased in these units as a result of tree harvest. The level of timber harvest in this Alternative would not favor those wildlife species dependent upon old growth forests. The spotted owl known to frequent areas along Highway 97 and south of Snoqualmie Pass is an example. This adverse effect would be partially compensated for in the Alpine Lakes Area by old growth forests contained in the Wilderness. 67 M º, |º|§--- º ".ºZZ. Aºº º º*/º-% : ºſ ºº--- -º. ºf%*-*º tºº, | º ºš º - D * - - * -- º i i- NWN º-t § º S º : !!! | | | º ! ow. Aſ ſº < Wood Fiber This Alternative would result in 176,236 acres of regulated commercial forest land programmed for harvest. It would produce an annual potential yield of 69 million board feet under long term assumptions, the highest of all alternatives. Under short term assumptions the potential yield would be about 50 million board feet. The short term output is 41 per- cent higher than could be produced under Alternative D, whereas the long term output would be only two percent more than Alternative D. This Alternative has the greatest contribution to the local timber economy in terms of employment, pro- duction, and income. Range This Alternative would make 1,459 animal unit months (AUM) of commercial forage available for use. This would be the same number of AUM's as Alternative D (current situation extended). This Alter- native, as with Alternative D, would make the greatest amount of commercial forage available. The four existing commercial grazing allotments would be maintained and available for use at their optimum potential for forage output. Table 7 is a summary of acreages and long term benefits of implementing Alternative A. Economy For an extensive analysis of economic considera- tions see Economic discussion at the end of this Section. Table 7. Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative A. Middle Fork |-90 Management Unit Allocations Developed Site (acres) 10 1,281 Special Area (acres) O 129 General Forest (aCreS) 12,947 15,875 Scenic Forest (acres) 7,576 11,629 Dispersed Recreation (aCreS) 1,002 2,556 Wilderness Use zones Transition (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Semi-Primitive (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Primitive (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Trailless (aCreS) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A TOTAL (RVD's) N/A N/A Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Ural (acres) 10 1,281 (RVD's) 9,000 1,267,515 Roaded Natural (acres) 20,523 27,633 (RVD's) 106,669 175,393 Semi-Primitive Motorized (acres) 1,002 2,556 (RVD's) 1,002 2,556 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized (acres) O O (RVD's) O O Primitive (acres) O O (RVD's) O O TOTAL (RVD's) 116,671 1,445,464 Wood Fiber Production Standard (acres) 5,409 10,630 (MBF) 2,851 4,260 Special (acres) 8,536 6,392 (MBF) 4,707 2,850 Marginal (acres) 3,016 3,045 (MBF) 1,338 1,155 TOTAL Regulated (MBF) 8,896 8,265 Unregulated (acres) 49 631 Unproductive (acres) 4,525 10,742 Water Annual Water Flow Increase due to Timber Harvest (acre ft) 2,642 3,558 Grazing Commercial Range (acres) O O Available Forage (AUM's) O O Roads Acres 546 1,085 Miles 78 155 Aggregate Material (Cubic Yos) 296,400 589,000 Trails Hiker only (Miles) 3 13 Horse (Miles) 2 17 Bike (Miles) 13 O 4x4 (Miles) O O TOTAL (Miles) 18 30 Visual Quality Preservation (Acres) O O Retention (Acres) 8,035 16,308 Partial Retention (Acres) 5,925 1,278 Modification (Acres) 7,575 13,884 TOTAL (Acres) 21,535 31,470 Land Ownership' Category (Acres) 0 O Category II (Acres) 12,001 20,640 Category III (Acres) 24,770 23,890 Category Iv (Acres) O 9,317 Category v (Acres) O O TOTAL (Acres) 36,771 53,847 T- 'Acres does not include Keechelus, Kachess, and Cle Elum Lakes. tegory I — Forest Service retain or acquire as directed by Congress. e # Sategory 11 — Forest Service retain or acquire as needed for administration or special designation. Sategory III — Neutral (management the same regardless of ownership). Kachess 338 6,938 33,486 13,438 10,483 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 764,572 15,291 5,479 17,119 5,992 4,581 1,595 13,066 2,564 25,128 4,060 20,467 233 1,785 510,000 11 22 49 O 82 O 20,946 19,485 24,252 64,683 Resource Teanaway 22 37,322 23,323 3.882 1,605 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 22 26,280 39,053 129,060 18, 104 16,560 8,975 8,100 O O 180,000 9,617 3,160 8,623 2,781 68 24 5,965 10,256 37,590 1,380 27,937 264 637 91 182,000 47 104 8,975 7,094 25,644 24,441 66,154 Complex Highway 97 42 1 40 46,901 10,762 2,207 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A 12,832 3,909 26,030 7,858 1,487 518 12,285 19,500 1, 193 21,411 440 1,974 282 564,000 20 11 35 lcicle 47 6, 136 8,435 4,324 3,949 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 47 101,880 17,564 127.387 5,280 5,280 O O O O 234,547 3.866 1,305 4,383 1,412 419 106 2,823 1,981 12,242 803 . 483 138,000 6,136 8,961 1,236 6,558 22,891 U.S. 2 East 228 5, 188 17,491 4,700 8,031 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 228 484,020 26, 192 123,089 8,608 8,608 610 610 O O 616,327 7.977 2,740 5,580 1.826 1,076 365 4,931 3,532 17,473 1,752 3,840 108 875 125 250,000 610 13,138 10,888 11,002 35,638 U.S. 2 West 52 14,972 42, 113 7,100 5,511 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 52 43. 110 59,787 270,773 8,673 8,673 1,236 1,236 O O 323,792 24,489 12,765 9,462 5,206 7,764 3,707 21,678 3,797 24,236 6,901 § 1,029 147 558,600 11,779 11,137 12,956 33,876 69,748 TOTAL 2,020 70.825 200,571 63.4 11 35.344 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,020 2, 176,268 296.917 1.763,780 62,413 60,869 10,821 9,946 O O 4,010,863 90,111 36,469 86,125 32,632 21,456 8,808 77,909 23,043 151,436 22,289 73,655 1,045 8,414 1,202 3,088,000 59 137 134 11 341 27,500 97,901 104,581 142,189 372,171 Wilderness N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24,485 367,275 35,636 178,180 2,788 5,576 330,451 165.226 716,257 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15,796 414 : 161 358 519 393,360 Nason Ridge 42 O 11,754 4,153 4,365 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 42 56,790 15,907 89,401 4,365 4,365 O O O O 150,556 2.910 1,061 9,485 3,381 142 50 4,492 7,637 1,584 : 462 132,000 1 i O tegory IV — Forest Service candidates for disposal. tegory V – Additional intensive study needed to determine priority of ownership. O 41,194 50,672 13,376 O 105,242 43,872 26,504 5,870 76,246 12,282 27,169 20,601 60,052 13,142 50,391 12,675 76,208 27,223 15,697 345 43,265 13,082 20,915 13,547 6,621 54,165 O 24,241 50,370 8,127 6,813 89,551 O 195,395 263,209 63,257 13,434 535,295 393,360 393,360 393,360 6,379 10, 183 3,752 20,314 8,199 11,250 3,815 23,264 Table 7 (Continued). Short Term Annual Benefits and Costs (1980-2000)' — Alternative A. Annual Nondollar Benefits (MRVD's) Roaded Natural Recreation Semi-Primitive Motorized Rec. Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized Rec. Primitive Recreation Developed Camping Annual Dollar Benefits Timber Receipts (M $) Campground Receipts (M $) Annual Dollar Cost (M $) Timber Sale Preparation, Ad- ministration & Regeneration Dispersed Recreation Management Developed Campground, Construction & Maintenance Road Construction, Reconstruction, Maintenance Trail Construction, Reconstruction, Maintenance Middle Fork 612.2 0.0 63.2 1.5 8.5 265.7 6.8 |-90 199.7 7.1 0.0 647 646.2 0.0 69.9 2.1 59.3 212.0 7.0 Kachess 132.5 20.5 9. 1 2020 970.5 40.4 115.3 4.6 191.2 174.0 20.0 Teanaway Highway 97 50.2 11.5 9.1 28.9 260.2 0.0 61.7 4.7 27.3 80.0 21.7 Resource Complex 205.5 12.6 0.2 42.5 258.4 6.0 91.8 4.3 36.3 203.9 10.0 'Benefits and cost which do not change between alternatives are not useful in comparing alter- natives. Therefore, such items are not included in this table. For example, RVD's of developed skiing. are not included. lcicle 158.8 0.6 101.9 47.6 0.0 25.7 1.6 100.0 53.0 5.0 U.S. 2 East 102.9 13.5 198.3 11.2 44.6 2.5 69.7 83.8 5.2 U.S. 2 West 236.4 20.7 3.6 43. 1,699.0 0.0 181.5 4.9 39.5 255.1 14.5 TOTAL 1,278.4 100.4 26.2 5702 4,692.4 57.6 653.7 26.2 531.8 1,327.5 90.2 70 Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative B Soils The physical and chemical properties of soil in this Alternative would be impacted where logging and road building take place. Generally, these effects WOuld be lowest of the five alternatives. Visuals This Alternative would have the greatest positive long term effect on the visual resource. About 20 per- cent of the management unit would be managed in a natural condition (see Figure 17 lands listed as preservation). Over half of the existing evidence of human activities would be mitigated and subor. dinated to the natural landscape. A natural appearing environment would be provided for all existing Scenic rivers and highways. Few Wilderness modifications would occur and activities within view from the Wilderness would be managed to reduce Visual impacts. Water Timber harvest would increase the runoff of water an estimated 13,194 acre feet per year Over and above a fully forested management unit in Alternative B. Road density in this Alternative would increase from the existing 1.4 miles per square mile to 1.6. The in- creased roading and attendant harvest would slightly increase pollutants such as sediment, turbidity, temperature, debris and nutrients. Transportation For the most part, roads are considered irretrievable Commitments of resources. Alternative B would ultimately commit 6,608 acres of land to roads. This Constitutes 1.8 percent of the national forest lands in the management unit. Approximately 59 percent of the total area would be accessible for day use when the entire transportation System for Alternative B is in place and under management. Recreation use is expected to follow the pattern for extended and day use shown on (Figure 13). Focal points within the day use areas would have potential for heavy use. Reduced road standards, road closures and obliteration reduce the areas Cur- rently available for day users. These displaced users Would likely make greater demands on similar areas that remain easily accessible. For example, those day users denied access to Lake Dorothy may increase demand on the Trout-Copper Lake areas. This Alternative would make 24 percent of the Wilderness available to the average day user. The following roads of major issue will be obliterated (Service Level E) in this Alternative. On the Allocation Map these are shown as trails. West Fork Miller Road — 4 miles East Fork Miller Road — 4 miles Taylor River Road — 3 miles Cooper River Road — 3 miles Fish Lake Road — 1 V2 miles Recreation This Alternative would provide opportunities for ap- proximately 4.3 million recreation visitor-days (RVD) of use. This would be approximately 159,000 annual RVD's more than the Alternative D (current situation extended), and would result in the median amount of recreation opportunity within the management unit. It would result in a broad recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) providing the greatest opportunity for “primitive” recreation. A description of the pro- Cedure used to calculate recreation outputs is available as a special report to the DEIS. Even though it would provide the least opportunity for “roaded natural” recreation opportunities, it would exceed anticipated need. It would meet the an- ticipated demand for “semi-primitive motorized” recreation opportunities only during the early years of the implementation period. With new campground development, it would meet the anticipated need for “rural" opportunities. Expected need for “semi- primitive non-motorized” recreation opportunities would not be met. Even though this Alternative pro- vides the greatest opportunity for “primitive” recrea- tion, expected need would not be met on the management unit. Wilderness This Alternative would result in the lowest bio- physical impact on the Wilderness. It would provide the least amount of access thus the greatest oppor- tunity for Solitude. The trail system would be smaller than all but Alternative E. The trail system in this Alternative would be maintained at the lowest Ser- vice Levels. The general carrying capacity for the Wilderness would be approximately 397,000 RVD's annually, which is approximately 156,000 RVD's less than Alternative D (current situation extended). A description of the procedure used to calculate Wilderness recreation outputs is available as a Special report to this DEIS. Based on a predicted 7 percent annual increase in use and assuming proper distribution of visitors, the area could be expected to meet recreation needs through the early 1980's. In anticipation of soon reaching the area's carrying capacity, permits would be required to limit use. This would be the least costly alternative to implement. Cultural Since Alternative B would call for a relatively small number of ground disturbing activities, it would pro- duce a moderate to low risk of impact on cultural resources (see Table 8). This Alternative would have the lowest potential for impacts. A full range of management and interpretive opportunities is pos- Sible. Conflicts between cultural resources and timber harvesting would be greatest in the I-90, Kachess, and Highway 97 Complexes. Timber harvesting along Highway 97 could disturb potential archaeological ſeSOUrCeS. The emphasis on recreation in Alternative B would be compatible with known and suspected cultural properties, although some impacts could result from trail construction. Continued bike access to a poten- tially significant historic site in the Kachess Complex may result in vandalism unless protective measures were developed. Under Alternative B, recreational impacts on cultural Sites in the Wilderness would diminish as a result of the low user density, lack of additional trail access, minimal trail maintenance, minimal road access to the Wilderness boundary, limited horse use and high level of restrictions on visitors. Alternative B would permit a balanced funding and labor program for inventory, evaluation and mitiga- tion and the management protection and interpreta- tion of Cultural resources. Since timber harvesting and road construction are Concentrated in existing areas of harvest, Alternative B provides greater latitude for the protective manage- ment of American Indian religious sites. Minerals All areas identified as having recreational mining op- portunities (see Figure 6) would be maintained. Ac- cess would be maintained to all currently identified areas except those in the Middle Fork Snoqualmie River. The Snoqualmie River area is currently ac- Cessable by vehicle; however in this Alternative, mineral collectors would be required to hike 9 to 13 miles. Special management would not be prescribed 71 --º - - ----- º - ** "... - - - ---nº dº - - - * "Tº | Extended Stay Areas lve º - - º -º- - - - --> -- º --- º - - - - Figure 13. Recreational Use Patterns B. Alternat Table 8. Potential for Adverse Impacts on Known and Potential Cultural Sltes — Alternative B. Resource Complex Middle I-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway loicle U.S. 2 U.S. 2 Total Fork 97 East West Snoqualmie ----------------- number of sites — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Known sites' High O O O 1 O O O O O Medium 6 11 9 2 13 2 4 9 56 Low 8 16 14 18 9 7 12 17 101 Potential Cultural - - - - Sites' Low Medium Medium Low High Medium Medium Medium Low Potential for Adverse Impact H – High level of impact from timber harvesting, road construction, recreational development, increased accessibility and ORV use. Timber harvesting is intensive, utilizing full range of silvicultural practices. M – Moderate level of impact from land modifying activities. Timber harvesting may involve constraints in type of logging systems used. Road construction does not directly impact sites, but increased access poses threats to unprotected sites. Recreational use includes bikes, horses and hikers. L – Low level of impact from land modifying activities. No commercial forest land allocated for timber harvesting. Recreational use confined to horse and hiker. == for any of the inventoried areas to assure their pro- tection or continued use by the public. Aggregate materials, once removed and placed upon roads, would be considered an irreversible Commit- ment of resources. Alternative B would ultimately re- quire 2,408,200 cubic yards of common materials. Commercial mineral deposits and related mining aC- tivities are not affected by nor do they affect this Alternative. Lands This Alternative would provide the widest opportuni- ty to manage important resources and permit reduc- tion of rights-of-way needs, improve access and reduce land line location needs. Land adjustment Costs, either by purchase or exchange may be high In this Alternative. Wildlife The diversity of the forest environment would likely be low in this Alternative compared with the others because of the low level of timber harvest. The effect of this would be lower wildlife diversity and abun- dance on areas that have low natural plant diversity. The exception would be wildlife dependent on old growth trees. These species would be favored by this Alternative. Wood Fiber This Alternative would result in 114,714 acres of regulated commercial forest land programmed for harvest. If selected, this Alternative would produce an annual potential yield of 44.4 million board feet under long term assumptions. Under short term assumptions the potential yield would be about 18 million board feet. The short term output would be 49 percent below Alternative D making this the lowest of al the alternatives in wood fiber produc- tion. This Alternative would have the most negative impact on the local timber economy in terms of employment, production and income. Range The Swauk and Corral-Fortune Creek Allotments would be maintained and available for use at an Op- timum level for forage output. The Wildhorse- Whitepine Allotment would be available for use with alternate year grazing, but would be evaluated for possible termination. The Stafford Creek Allotments would be available for use by a reduced number of livestock. The reduction results from phasing out of unsuitable portions of the Allotment. This Alternative would make 1,441 animal unit months (AUM) of forage available for use. This would be a reduction of 18 commercial AUM's from Alter- native D (current situation extended). The second highest amount of commercial forage would be made available. Economy For an extensive analysis of economic considera- tions see Economic discussion at the end of this Section. Table 9 is a summary of acreage and long term benefits of implementing Alternative B. 73 Table 9. Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex — Alternative B. Middle Fork |-90 Management Unit Allocations Developed Site (aCreS) 50 1,301 Special Area (acres) O 1,075 General Forest (acres) 916 12,771 Scenic Forest (acres) 1,615 8,382 Dispersed Recreation (acres) 18,954 7,941 Wilderness Use Zones Transition (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Semi-Primitive (aCreS) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Primitive (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Trailless (aCreS) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A TOTAL (RVD's) N/A N/A Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Rural (acres) 50 1,301 (RVD's) 80,280 1,290,780 Roaded Natural (acres) 2,531 21,565 (RVD's) 51,044 202,273 Semi-Primitive Motorized (acres) 14,325 8,604 (RVD's) 14,325 8,604 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized (acres) 857 O (RVD's) 857 O Primitive (acres) 3,772 O (RVD's) 1,886 O TOTAL (RVD's) 148,392 1,501,657 Wood Fiber Production Standard (acres) 3.18 387 (MBF) 172 155 Special (acres) 1,886 13,774 (MBF) 1,066 5,815 Marginal (acres) 56 2,034 (MBF) 23 729 TOTAL Regulated (MBF) 1,261 6,699 Unregulated (acres) 15,118 4,685 Unproductive (acres) 4,157 10,590 Water Annual Water Flow Increase due to Timber Harvest (acre ff.) 325 2,116 Grazing Commercial Range (acres) O O Available Forage (AUM's) O O Roads Acres 203 910 Miles 29 130 Aggregate Material (Cubic Yos) 110,200 494,000 Trails Hiker only (Miles) 17 23 Horse (Miles) 15 8 Bike (Miles) O O 4x4 (Miles) O O TOTAL (Miles) 32 31 Visual Quality Preservation (Acres) 4,629 946 Retention (Acres) 13,458 16,655 Partial Retention (Acres) 1,928 13,195 Modification (Acres) 1,520 674 TOTAL (Acres) 21,535 31,470 Land Ownership' Category (Acres) O O Category || (Acres) 34,955 25,726 Category ill (Acres) 1,816 22,545 Category IV (Acres) O 5,576 Category V (Acres) O O TOTAL (Acres) 36,771 53,847 'Acres does not include Keechelus, Kachess, and Cle Elum Lakes. Category I — Forest Service retain or acquire as directed by Congress. Category II — Forest Service retain or acquire as needed for administration or special designation. Category III – Neutral (management the same regardless of ownership). Kachess 427 7,058 15,102 10, 194 31,902 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 427 362,205 25,296 383,268 26,332 26,332 3,872 3,872 8,756 4,378 780,055 489 179 19,141 6,558 1,230 427 7,164 18,927 24,896 2,312 20,467 233 1,442 206 412,000 38 74 O O 112 Teanaway 22 40,357 8,571 3,158 14,046 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 22 22,032 12,886 57,672 16,512 12,636 4,557 3,456 32,177 12,204 108,000 666 220 8,020 2,577 24 2,821 19,995 37,405 895 18,780 261 420 120,000 100 104 Resource Complex Highway 97 87 2,018 30,364 10,692 16,891 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 87 155,858 42,229 198,887 16,533 16,533 1 11 111 1,092 546 371,935 4,427 1,396 26,064 7,798 1,275 438 9,632 9,056 19,230 1,051 14,812 425 1,638 234 468,000 12 11 31 Icicle 134 6,838 2,843 3,707 9,369 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 134 289,800 8,264 98,926 13,811 13,811 46 46 636 3.18 402,901 O O 5,003 1,708 O O 1,708 5,718 12,170 724 : 392 112,000 1 i U.S. 2 East 262 5, 188 6,542 6,455 17, 191 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 262 557,460 16,234 93,589 17.465 17,465 1,619 1,619 58 29 670,162 755 270 8, 160 2,746 17 4 3,020 9,377 17,329 1,833 3,840 108 693 99 198,000 U.S. 2 West 67 18,937 24,685 7,492 18,567 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 67 72,810 35,519 202,251 29,749 29,749 4,413 4,413 309,223 4,470 2,310 20,999 11,336 2,660 1,329 14,975 17,583 24,036 3,938 TOTAL 2350 81,471 101,794 51,695 134,861 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,350 2,831,225 164,524 1,287,910 143,331 139,455 15,475 14,374 46,491 19,361 4,292,325 11,512 4,702 103,047 39,604 7,340 2,974 47,280 100,459 149,813 13,194 57,899 1,027 6,608 944 2,408,200 116 254 10 11 391 Wilderness N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6,788 101,820 10,061 50,305 37,939 75,878 338,572 169,286 397,289 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15,796 4.14 : Nason Ridge 52 O 6,864 2,903 10,495 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,402 78,390 174,291 64,553 153,826 10,495 15,475 O 46,491 O 153,438 7,650 2,653 2,653 5,132 7,532 2,026 : 1 Category IV — Forest Service candidates for disposal. Category V – Additional intensive study needed to determine priority of ownership. 12,628 30,292 19,956 1,807 64,683 O 75,752 25,054 4,436 O 105,242 37,827 16,929 11,104 66,154 64,345 11,463 438 76,246 1,203 19,089 31,749 8,011 60,052 31,823 38,181 6,204 O 76,208 4,908 17,100 883 22,891 37,671 5,465 129 43,265 1,677 23,287 10,412 262 35,638 38,446 9,826 5,893 54,165 79,562 155,236 116,196 21,177 372,171 O 362,518 144,273 28,504 O 535,295 12,499 7,815 20,314 14,634 8,172 458 23,264 74 Table 9. (Continued) Short Term Annual Benefits and Costs (1980-2000) — Alternative B. Annual Nondollar Benefits (MRVD's) Roaded Natural Recreation Semi-Primitive Motorized Rec. Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized Rec. Primitive Recreation Developed Camping Annual Dollar Benefits Timber Receipts (M $) Campground Receipts (M $) Annual Dollar Cost (M $) Timber Sale Preparation, Ad- ministration & Regeneration Dispersed Recreation Management Developed Campground, Construction & Maintenance Road Construction, Reconstruction Maintenance Trail Construction, Reconstruction Maintenance Middle Fork % i : 67.2 0.0 7.2 1.5 103.0 22.9 8.5 |-90 202.8 8.4 0.0 768 287.0 2.4 33.7 2.1 89.8 208.3 6.0 Kachess 132.5 22.8 10.0 2859 335.8 57.2 42.5 4.6 422.2 70.2 35.9 Teanaway Highway 97 49.4 11.5 8.8 383 62.2 0.0 15.5 4.7 53.2 18.4 17.2 Resource Complex 192.9 15.8 0.3 101.9 145.6 6.0 52.8 4.3 161.5 112.8 8.1 'Benefits and cost which do not change between alternatives are not useful in comparing alter- natives. Therefore, such items are not included in this table. For example, RVD's of developed skiing are not included. lcicle 149.7 9.6 0.6 2003 19.5 19.7 11.2 1.6 325.5 19.5 2.9 U.S. 2 East 94.9 14.7 1.9 116.6 65.2 11.2 15.4 2.5 160.9 33.8 5.7 U.S. 2 West 220.2 25.3 4.3 53.7 630.3 0.0 70.9 4.9 79.0 94.2 16.8 TOTAL 1,195.5 117.8 28.0 927.4 1,612.8 96.5 249.2 26.2 1,395.1 580.1 101.1 75 76 Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative C Soils The physical and chemical properties of Soil would be impacted where logging and road building take place, but the effect would generally be low in this Alternative relative to the OtherS. Visuals This Alternative would have nearly the same result as Alternative B except for a reduction in areas managed for unique Scenic value. Wilderness im- pacts would be somewhat higher due to increases in trails and access. Visual quality along scenic rivers and highways would be maintained. Water Timber harvest in Alternative C would increase the run-off of water an estimated additional 16,692 acre feet of water per year over and above a fully forested management unit. Roads also adversly affect water quality. Road den- sity would increase from the existing 1.4 miles per square mile to 1.69 miles per square mile. The in- creased roading and attendant harvest would slightly increase pollutants such as sediment, turbidity, temperature, debris and nutrients. Transportation For the most part, constructed roads are considered irretrievable commitments of resources. Alternative C would ultimately commit 6,874 acres of land to roads. This constitutes 1.8 percent of the national forest lands in the management unit. Approximately 66 percent of the total area would be accessible for day use when the entire transportation System for Alternative C is in place and under management. Recreation use would be expected to follow the pattern for extended and day use (Figure 14). Focal points within the day use areas would have potential for heavy use. Some very popular areas would require extended travel: for example Deer, Bear, and Dorothy Lakes, Dingford Creek, Spectacle, Escondido and Waptus Lakes. There would be an increase in day use opportunities in the Mt. Index-Crosby Mountain, and Red Mountain areas. This Alternative would make 33 percent of the Wilderness available to the average day user. The following roads of major issue will be obliterated (Service Level E) in this Alternative. On the Allocation Map these are shown as trails. West Fork Miller Road — 4 miles Taylor River Road — 3 miles Fish Lake Road — 1 /2 miles Recreation Opportunity for approximately 4.5 million recreation visitor-days (RVD) of use would be provided. This is approximately 391,000 annual RVD's more than the present situation extended, and would provide for the highest total recreation opportunity within the management unit. A description of the procedure us- ed to calculate recreation outputs is available as a special report to the DEIS. It would result in the broadest recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) of any alternative and would exceed anticipated need for “roaded natural” recreation opportunities. It would meet anticipated need for “semi-primitive motorized” recreation opportunities only during the early years of the plan implementation period. With new campground development, it would exceed the anticipated need for “rural” opportunities. Expected need for “semi-primitive nonmotorized” and “primitive” opportunities would not be met in the management unit. Wilderness This Alternative would result in the second highest bio-physical impact on the Wilderness. Of the five alternatives, this one would provided for the median amount of recreation opportunity with the second lowest opportunity for Solitude. The second largest number of miles of trail at the greatest variety of Service Levels would be Constructed and maintained. The general carrying capacity for the Wilderness would be approximately 552,000 RVD's annually which is approximately 1,500 RVD's less than Alternative D (current situation extended). A descrip- tion of the procedure used to calculate Wilderness recreation outputs is available as a special report to the DEIS. Based on a predicted 7 percent annual in- crease in use and assuming proper distribution of visitors, the area managed under this Alternative could be expected to meet recreation needs until the late 1980's. Permits would not be required, thus necessitating intensive management as well as a great deal of user awareness and cooperation. This would be the second most costly alternative to implement. Cultural Since Alternative C would create a relatively small number of ground disturbing activities, it would pre- Sent a moderate to low risk impact to cultural resources (see Table 10). A full range of management and interpretive opportunities would be possible. However, because of motorized recreational use pro- posed, there would be potential for adverse effects from vehicles and vandalism. Of particular concern is the Teanaway Complex, where recommended 4 x 4 wheel drive and bike use may impinge upon archaeological and historic sites. Recreational use may also affect cultural values in the Kachess and loicle Resource Complexes, where proposed trail construction would encourage public use of previously isolated areas. Proposed trail development, however, may in many cases blend compatibly with the management of cultural resources. Proposed trails in the Stevens Pass Historic District would provide access and an opportunity for interpretation. Other examples would be development of a hiker trail along the old Blewett Pass wagon road, as well as those 4 X 4 wheel and bike routes mentioned above. Potential conflicts between Cultural resources and timber harveting would be greatest in the I-90 and Highway 97 Complexes. Highway 97 has a high potential for archaeological resources. Land distur- bance and increased access could result in damage or loss of scientific data thus requiring projects to be designed for protection of cultural sites. In the I-90 Complex, two cultural sites also fall within an area designated for timber harvesting and would re- quire protective measures. Alternative C would allow a more equitable division of funding and labor between project related inven- tory, evaluation and mitigation, and the management, protection and interpretation of cultural resources. Since timber harvesting and road construction would be concentrated in existing areas of harvest, Alter- native C provides greater latitude for the manage- ment of American Indian religious sites. Minerals All areas identified as having recreational mining op- portunities (see Figure 6) would be maintained for recreational use. Current or improved access would be maintained to all identified recreational mining collecting areas. The Red Top Agate Beds would be designated as a Recreation Area withdrawn from mineral entry to assure its continued recreational use by the public. Aggregate materials, once removed and placed upon roads, would be Considered an irreversible commit- ment of resources. Alternative C would ultimately re- quire 2,489,600 cubic yards of common materials. Commercial mineral deposits and related mining ac- tivities would not be affected by nor affect this Alternative. Figure 14. Recreational Use Patterns Alternative C. T Day Use Areas | Extended Stay Areas ------- * - --- - #. - **** *-ºn-dº * † - º, - - - ----------- ---------- --- - - - º- º ------- -----> J. – Table 10. Potential for Adverse Impacts on Known and Potential Cultural Sites — Alternative C. Resource Complex Middle I-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway Icicle U.S. 2 U.S. 2 Total 97 Fork Snoqualmie Known sites' High O O 2 Medium 5 11 12 Low 9 16 9 Potential Cultural Sites' Low Potential for Adverse Impact East West 1 O O 1 4 12 2 3 9 63 9 7 13 16 91 Medium Medium Medium High Low Medium Medium H – High level of impact from timber harvesting, road construction, recreational development, increased ac- cessibility and ORV use. Timber harvesting is intensive, utilizing full range of silvicultural practices. M – Moderate level of impact from land modifying activities. Timber harvesting may involve constraints in type of logging systems used. Road construction does not directly impact sites, but increased access poses threats to unprotected sites. Recreational use includes bikes, horses and hikers. L – Low level of impact from land modifying activities. No commercial forest land allocated for timber harvesting. Recreational use confined to horse and hiker. Lands The largest amount of land would be acquired in this Alternative. The widest opportunity for Forest Service resource management and public enjoyment would be provided. Consolidation of ownership would reduce rights-of-way needed, improve public access and reduce the cost of land line location. Land adjustment costs would be higher than any Other alternative. Wildlife The diversity of the forest environment would likely be as low in this Alternative, as in Alternative B. The long term effect of this would be lower wildlife diver. sity and abundance because of low natural plant diversity. This effect would be felt most in the Middle Fork Snoqualmie, I-90, Kachess, Highway 97 and U.S. 2 West resource complexes. All of these have low natural diversity. Animal species which would benefit most from Alternative C are those that are dependent on old growth trees. Wood Fiber This Alternative would result in 118,976 acres of regulated commercial forest land programmed for harvest. If selected this Alternative would produce an annual potential yield of 45.6 million board feet under long term assumptions. Under short term assumptions the potential yield would be about 21.6 million board feet. The short term output would be 38.8 percent below that which could be produced under Alternative D, whereas, the long term output would be 36 percent below Alternative D. Wood fiber production in this Alternative would rank fourth Compared to all the other alternatives. This Alternative would reduce employment, production and income in the local timber economy. Range The Corral-Fortune Creek Allotment would be maintain- ed and available for use at its optimum potential for forage outputs. The Swauk Allotment would be main- tained and available for use at a reduced forage out- put. The reduction would be from 600 animal unit months (AUM's) to 400 AUM's, due to additional visual management constraints along major travel Corridors. The Stafford Creek Allotments would be available for use by a reduced number of livestock. The reduction results from phasing out of unsuitable portions of the Allotment. The Wildhorse-Whitepine Allotment would be available for use with alternate year grazing, but would be evaluated for possible elimination at a later date. This Alternative would make 1,241 AUM's of commer- cial forage available for use. This would be a reduc- tion of 218 AUM's from Alternative D (current situa- tion extended). The Alternative would make the lowest amount of commercial forage available and provide the highest amount of forage to wildlife and recreational livestock. Economy For an extensive analysis of econommic considera- tions see Economic discussion at the end of this Section. Table 11 is a summary of acreages and long term benefits of implementing Alternative B. 78 Table 11. Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative c. Middle Fork |-90 Management Unit Allocations Developed Site (acres) 118 1,577 Special Area (acres) O 1,075 General Forest (acres) 1,472 2,812 Scenic Forest (acres) 1,755 18,268 Dispersed Recreation (acres) 18,190 7,738 Wilderness Use Zones Transition (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Semi-Primitive (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Primitive (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A Trailless (acres) N/A N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A TOTAL (RVD's) N/A N/A Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Rural (acres) 118 1,577 (RVD's) 80,280 1,290,780 Roaded Natural (acres) 3,227 21,492 (RVD's) 52,418 202,350 Semi-Primitive Motorized (acres) 13,561 8,401 (RVD's) 13,561 8,401 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized (acres) 857 O (RVD's) 857 O Primitive (acres) 3,772 O (RVD's) 1,886 O TOTAL (RVD's) 149,002 1,501,531 Wood Fiber Production Standard (acres) 420 245 (MBF) 216 97 Special (acres) 2,297 13,657 (MBF) 1,303 5,795 Marginal (acres) 197 2,029 (MBF) 88 752 TOTAL Regulated (MBF) 1,607 6,644 Unregulated (acres) 14,472 4,965 Unproductive (acres) 4,149 10,574 Water Annual Water Flow Increase due to Timber Harvest (acre ft) 695 2,552 Grazing Commercial Range (acres) 0 O Available Forage (AUM's) O O Roads Acres 203 910 Miles 29 130 Aggregate Material (Cubic Yos) 110,200 494,000 Trails Hiker only (Miles) 1 10 Horse (Miles) 33 20 Bike (Miles) 0 O 4x4 (Miles) O O TOTAL (Miles) 34 30 Visual Quality Preservation (Acres) 4,629 946 Retention (Acres) 8,868 15,821 Partial Retention (Acres) 6,137 14,029 Modification (Acres) 1,901 674 TOTAL (Acres) 21,535 31,470 land Ownership' Category I (Acres) 0 O Category II (Acres) 33,146 46,864 Category III (Acres) 3,625 5,210 Category IV (Acres) O 1,773 Category V (Acres) O O TOTAL (Acres) 36,771 53,847 T- 'Acres does not include Keechelus, Kachess, and Cle Elum Lakes. tegory ! — Forest Service retain or acquire as directed by Congress. Category II — Forest Service retain or acquire as needed for administration or special designation. Category Ill — Neutral (management the same regardless of ownership). - Sategory IV — Forest Service candidates for disposal. tegory V – Additional intensive study needed to determine priority of ownership. |Kachess 1,221 12,978 12,489 12,179 25,816 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A 1,221 362,205 24,746 389,414 30,639 30,639 8,077 8,077 O O 790,335 525 192 17,744 6,118 1,377 481 6,791 20,149 24,888 3,457 20,467 233 1,428 204 408,000 13 67 14 10 104 8,077 29,462 24,188 2,956 64,683 O 84,143 21,099 O O 105,242 Resource Teanaway 32 47,171 5,924 6,691 6,336 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 32 22,032 14,511 80,744 45,975 45,975 5,636 5,636 O O 154,387 1,642 568 7,820 2,470 68 24 3,062 19,206 37,418 1,277 18,780 261 434 62 124,000 51 116 7,245 32,075 25,220 1,614 66,154 68,383 7,863 76,246 Complex Highway 97 87 2,418 11,377 37,161 9,009 N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 87 155,858 49,858 376,280 10,107 10,107 O O O O 542,245 4,963 1,548 29,398 8,761 1,275 439 10,748 5,048 19,368 1,053 14,812 225 1,827 261 522,000 15 27 51 19,050 32,916 solos? 56,615 15,234 4,359 76,208 lcicle 529 6,838 1,270 5,249 9,005 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 529 289,800 8,233 93,559 13,447 13,447 256 256 425 213 397,275 O O 4,703 1,609 O O 1,609 6,030 12,158 719 378 108,000 14 16 4,908 10,742 7,241 22,891 42,395 870 O 43,265 U.S. 2 East 282 5,188 2,316 13,639 14,213 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 282 557,460 19,192 100,028 14,487 14,487 1,639 1,639 38 19 673,633 809 289 9,593 3,163 17 4 3,456 7,830 17,389 2,334 3,840 108 763 109 218,000 i 1,677 16,503 17,196 35,638 37,661 4,482 5,608 6,414 54,165 U.S. 2 West 434 18,937 9,179 22,734 18,464 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 434 72,810 35,255 208,954 29,646 29,646 4,413 4,413 O O 315,823 5,929 3,109 19,075 10,298 2,656 1,328 14,735 18,020 24,068 4,605 O O 931 133 505,400 15,744 17,252 24,720 12,032 69,748 68,210 12,540 6713 89,551 TOTAL 4,280 94,605 46,839 117,676 108,771 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4,280 2,831,225 176,514 1,503,747 166,263 166,263 20,878 20,878 4,235 2,118 4,524,231 14,533 6,019 104,287 39,517 7,619 3,116 48,652 95,720 150,012 16,692 57,899 827 6,874 982 2,489,600 92 202 85 71 450 43,226 149,773 151,647 27,525 372,171 O 437,417 70,923 13,828 13,127 535,295 Wilderness N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15,273 229,095 23,030 115,150 20,364 40,728 334,693 167,347 552,320 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A N/A N/A N/A 15,796 414 : Nason Ridge 52 3,823 5,944 10,495 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A 20,314 16,512 3462 23,264 79 Table 11 (Continued). Short Term Annual Benefits and Costs (1980-2000) — Alternative C. Resource Complex Middle Fork |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 lcicle U.S. East U.S. West TOTAL Annual Nondollar Benefits (MRVD's) Roaded Natural Recreation 149.9 202.8 132.5 50.2 212.6 148.0 96.6 221.7 1,214.3 Semi-Primitive Motorized Rec. 9.6 8.4 23.7 11.5 14.4 9.5 14.3 25.3 116.7 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized Rec. 2.1 0.0 10.9 9.1 0.2 0.6 1.9 4.3 29.1 Primitive Recreation 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Developed Camping 42.9 76.8 285.9 38.3 101.9 200.3 116.6 58.7 921.4 Annual Dollar Benefits Timber Receipts (M $) 86.0 266.5 300.3 88.9 178.1 20.1 74.8 908.0 1,922.7 Campground Receipts (M $) 0.0 2.4 57.2 0.0 6.0 19.7 11.2 0.0 96.5 Annual Dollar Cost (M $) Timber Sale Preparation, Administration & Regeneration 9.2 31.7 38.0 22.0 64.6 11.6 18.2 100.8 296.1 Dispersed Recreation - Management 1.5 2.1 4.6 4.7 4.3 1.6 2.5 4.9 26.2 Developed Campground, Construction & Maintenance 103.0 89.8 422.2 53.2 161.5 325.5 160.9 79.0 1,395.1 Road Construction, Reconstruction Maintenance 48.6 104.3 69.3 24.1 164.3 36.3 52.8 105.4 605.1 Trail Construction, Re- construction Maintenance 9.2 5.1 28.7 34.3 24.8 15.0 7.4 40.2 164.7 "Benefits and cost which do not change between alternatives are not useful in comparing alter- natives. Therefore, such items are not included in this table. For example, RVD's of developed skiing are not included. Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative D. (Current Situation Extended) Soils Damages to the physical and chemical properties of Soil where logging and road building occurs would be moderate in this Alternative compared to the Others. Visuals Extension of the existing situation would result in timber harvest and road building activities on an ad- ditional 5 percent of the management unit with no additional management for unique visual values. Areas in which human activity dominates the natural landscape would increase but would shift to less, Sensitive areas over the long term. Visual quality in the Wilderness would be affected by easier access and projected increased day use. Water Timber harvest would increase the run-off of water in this Alternative by an estimated additional 20,866 acre feet of water per year over and above a fully forested management unit. Roads also adversly affect water quality. Road den- Sity would increase from the existing 1.4 miles per Square mile to 2.0 miles per square mile. The in- creased road building and attendant harvest would moderately affect water quality with pollutants such as sediment, turbidity, temperature, debris and nutrients. Transportation For the most part, roads are considered irretrievable Commitments of resources. Alternative D would ultimately commit 8,211 acres of land to roads. This Constitutes 2.2 percent of the national forest lands in the management unit. Approximately 70 percent of the total area would be accessible for day use when the entire transportation System for Alternative D is in place and under management. Recreation use would be expected to follow the pattern for extended and day use shown On Figure 15. Focal points within the day use area would have potential for heavy use. This use pattern represents the 1979 management situation modified by existing transportation plans including the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Draft Trail Management Plan and the ORV plans for both Forests. Alternative D would make 43 percent of the Wilderness available to the average day user. No roads of major issue have been identified for obliteration in this Alternative. Recreation Opportunities for approximately 4.1 million recrea- tion visitor-days (RVD) of use would be provided resulting in the second lowest total recreation oppor. tunity within the management unit. A description of the procedure used to calculate recreation outputs is available as a Special report to the DEIS. It would result in the most narrow recreation opportunity spectrum of all alternatives. Most of the oppor. tunities provided would be “rural” and “roaded natural". It would exceed anticipated need for “roaded natural" recreation opportunities. It would meet anticipated need for “semi-primitive motorized” recreation opportunities only during the early years of the plan implementation period. It would not meet the anticipated need for “rural” and would result in the elimination of “semi-primitive nonmotorized” and “primitive” opportunities in the management unit. Wilderness Of the five alternatives, this would result in the median bio-physical impact on the Wilderness. It would also provide the second highest total amount of recreation opportunity with moderate Oppor- tunities for Solitude. Of the five alternatives, this would provide the median number of miles of trail at a moderate variety of Service Levels. The general car- rying capacity for the Wilderness would be approxi- mately 554,000 RVD's. A description of the procedure used to Calculate Wilderness recreation outputs is available as a special report to the DEIS. Based on a predicted 7 percent annual increase in use and assuming proper distribution of visitors, the area Could be expected to meet recreation needs until the late 1980's. Permits would be required in heavily used areas. This would be the median in cost of implementation. Cultural Alternative D would have a moderate to high poten- tial for adverse impact to cultural resources (see Table 12). Logging operations, road construction and increased access have the potential for affecting un- discovered cultural sites and their environmental set- ting. Damage to sites could reduce management options for interpretation and scientific research. Conflicts between cultural resources and timber harvesting would be greatest in the Middle Fork, I-90, Kachess, Highway 97 and U.S. 2 West Resource Complexes. Proposed road construction in the Middle Fork Complex would be a concern for poten- tial National Register historic property. In the I-90 Complex, two potentially significant sites would be of concern if timber harvesting were to take place. The amount of proposed road construc- tion in the I-90 and Kachess Complexes would in- crease the probability of conflicts with presently unidentified cultural sites. Two known National Register sites would fall within or immediately adja- cent to general forest allocations in the Highway 97 Complex. In addition, much of a proposed National Historic District would be allocated to general forest. Furthermore, timber harvesting and road construc- tion along the ridges and stream courses in the Highway 97 Complex may affect archaeological resources if they are present. Recreational use in Alternative D would be generally Compatible with known and suspected cultural properties. However, the extent of the area open to bike use, particularly in the Teanaway Complex, could have secondary effects (vandalism). New trail construction in the Kachess Complex may impact identified archaeological resources. Allocation of the Stevens Pass Historic District to Special Area would provide additional management protection. Proposed trail construction within the district would provide management options for inter- pretation. This Alternative substantially increases the oppor- tunities for discovery of previously unidentified sites because of the increased field reconnaissance. Under Alternative D, recreational impacts on cultural sites in the Wilderness would increase as public use increases. Potential impacts would be produced by trail Construction and additional road access to the Wilderness boundary. Alternative D would necessitate programming of a high level of funding for inventory and mitigation at the expense of management and interpretation. The potential impact of Alternative D to traditional Indian religious sites may be high. The allocation of large areas to timber harvesting, particularly in presently unroaded localities, may alter the character of traditional religious areas or resources. Minerals All areas identified as having recreational mining op- portunities (see Figure 6) would be maintained. Cur- rent or improved access would be maintained to all identified areas. Special management would not be prescribed for any of the areas to assure their pro- tection or continued availability for public use. 81 Figure 15. Recreational Use Patterns Alternative D. [T] Day Use Areas | Extended Stay Areas Table 12. Potential for Adverse Impacts on Known and Potential Cutural Sites – Alternative D. Resource Complex Middle I-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway leicle U.S. 2 U.S. 2 Total Fork 97 East West Snoqualmie Known sites' High 6 O 1 Medium 5 14 15 Low 3 13 7 Potential Cultural Sites' Low "Potential for Adverse Impact 2 O O 1 10 15 3 4 12 73 5 6 12 13 75 Medium Medium Medium High Low Medium Medium H – High level of impact from timber harvesting, road construction, recreational development, increased accessibility and ORV use. Timber harvesting is intensive, utilizing full range of silvicultural practices. M – Moderate level of impact from land modifying activities. Timber harvesting may involve constraints in type of logging systems used. Road construction does not directly impact sites, but increased access poses threats to unprotected sites. Recreational use includes bikes, horses and hikers. L – Low level of impact from land modifying activities. No commercial forest land allocated for timber harvesting. Recreational use confined to horse and hiker. Aggregate materials, once removed and placed upon roads, would be considered an irreversible commit- ment of resources. Alternative D would ultimately re- quire 2,999,400 cubic yards of common materials. Commercial mineral deposits and related mining ac- tivities would not be affected by nor affect this Alternative. Lands There would be significant improvement of Forest Service management because land ownership con- sideration would be uncertain in this Alternative. This is caused by large areas classified as Category Ill land. Decisions would depend on offers made by private land owners. Minor administrative benefits might be realized and access improved. Short term Cost would remain at the current level, but ad- ministrative costs might be significant because of unnecessary land line surveys on property which will later be consolidated. Wildlife The diversity of the forest environment in this Alternative would be relatively balanced between old growth and managed forest conditions. The old growth forest in the management unit, plus that in the Wilderness, would favor wildlife dependent on old growth for their existence. This would be balanced by timber harvest areas which would in- crease natural plant diversity, thus causing an in- crease in animal diversity and abundance. Wood Fiber Alternative D would result in 172,077 acres of regulated commercial forest land programmed for harvest. By extending current management direction into the future, an annual potential yield of 67.3 million board feet under long term assumptions would be produced. Under short term assumptions the potential yield would be about 35.3 million board feet, which falls short of the average 10 year harvest of 39.7 million board feet by 11.1 percent. Wood fiber production in this Alternative would rank second compared to the other alternatives. The long term output exceeds demand by 16 percent while the short term output falls short of demand by 39.1 per- cent. This Alternative would sustain the local timber economy in terms of employment, production and in- COme at current levels. Range All four existing commercial grazing allotments would be maintained and available for use at their capability for forage. This Alternative would make 1,459 animal unit months (AUM's) of commercial forage available for use. This along with Alternative A would be the highest potential output of commercial forage. Economy For an extensive analysis of economic considera. tions see the economic discussion at the end of this Section. Table 13 is a summary of acreage and long term benefits of implementing Alternative D. 83 Table 13. Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative D. Resource Complex ſwiddle Fork |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 lcicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Wilderness Nason Ridge Management Unit Allocations Developed Site (acres) 10 1,281 338 22 42 47 228 52 2,020 N/A 42 Special Area (acres) O 129 7,058 39,900 140 6,838 5,188 16,439 75,692 N/A O General Forest (acres) 13,949 17,912 43,235 21,255 46,840 11,724 17,684 43,703 216,302 N/A 7,187 Scenic Forest (acres) 7,576 12,148 12,678 4,977 13,030 4,282 12,538 9,554 76,783 N/A 8,720 Dispersed Recreation (acres) O O 1,374 O O O O O 1,374 N/A 4,365 Wilderness Use Zones Transition (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13,333 N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A M/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 199,995 N/A Semi-Primitive (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 33,697 N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 168,485 N/A Primitive (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8,121 N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A N/A N/A N/A 16,242 N/A Trailless (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 338,209 N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 169,105 N/A TOTAL (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A 553,827 N/A Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Rural (acres) 10 1,281 338 22 42 47 228 52 2,020 N/A 42 (RVD's) 9,000 1,267,515 202,005 28,890 42,458 101,880 484,020 43,110 2,178,878 N/A 56,790 Roaded Natural (acres) 21,525 30,189 55,707 27,025 60,010 17,720 33,424 54,424 300,024 N/A 15,907 (RVD's) 105,489 244,810 541,249 109,334 266,178 150,451 193,074 273,586 1,884,171 N/A 89,401 Semi-Primitive Motorized (acres) O O 8,638 39,107 O 4,775 1,986 10,900 65,406 N/A 4,365 (RVD's) O O 8,638 39,107 O 4,775 1,986 10,900 65,406 N/A 4,365 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized (acres) O O O O O 81 O 4,372 4,453 N/A O (RVD's) O O O O O 81 O 4,372 4,453 N/A O Primitive (acres) O O O O O 268 0 O 268 N/A O * (RVD's) O O O O O 134 O O 134 N/A O TOTAL (RVD's) 114,489 1,512,325 751,892 177,331 308,636 257,321 679,080 331,968 4,133,042 |N/A 150,556 Wood Fiber Production Standard (acres) 2,461 598 4,118 3,901 7,024 O 171 11,996 30,269 N/A O (MBF) 1,298 238 1,504 1,287 2,155 O 59 6,397 12,938 N.A O Special (acres) 11,563 16,720 26,923 12,925 31,993 7,596 13,863 20,225 141,808 N/A 12,443 (MBF) 6,335 7,033 9,425 4,166 9,634 2,524 4,546 10,652 54,315 N/A 4,379 Marginal (acres) 3,024 2,990 4,563 224 1,499 354 1,412 7,703 21,769 N/A 137 (MBF) 1,349 1,133 1,538 56 521 102 486 3,682 8,867 |N/A 43 TOTAL Regulated (MBF) 8,982 8,404 12,467 5,509 12,310 2,626 5,091 20,731 76,120 N/A 4,422 Unregulated (acres) 10 456 2,288 11,550 42 2,717 2,731 5,588 25,382 N/A 130 Unproductive (acres) 4,477 10,706 26,791 37,554 19,494 12,224 17,461 24,236 152,943 N/A 7,604 Water Annual Water Flow Increase due to Timber Harvest (acre ſt) 2,478 3,001 3,772 922 1,194 771 2,436 6,342 20,916 0 2,172 Grazing Commercial Range (acres) 0 O 20,467 27,937 21,411 0 3,840 O 73,655 15,796 O Available Forage (AUM's) O O 233 264 440 O 108 O 1,045 414 O Roads Acres 511 1,015 1,785 588 1,967 469 861 1,015 8,211 O 434 Miles 73 145 255 84 281 67 123 145 1,173 O 62 Aggregate Material (Cubic Yos) 277,400 551,000 510,000 168,000 562,000 134,000 246,000 551,000 2,999,400 O 124,000 Trails Hiker only (Miles) 1 12 15 1 3 2 2 18 54 98 1 Horse (Miles) 10 18 26 32 1 17 29 3 136 357 5 Bike (Miles) 17 O 57 70 18 O 5 O 167 0 4 4x4 (Miles) O O O O 10 O O O 10 O O TOTAL (Miles) 28 30 93 103 32 19 33 21 367 455 10 Visual Quality |Preservation (Acres) O O O O O 4,616 O 13,173 17,789 393,360 O Retention (Acres) 8,785 16,308 20,946 8,351 14,648 11,034 17,984 13,220 111,276 O 10,036 Partial Retention (Acres) 9,034 14,420 36,097 36,536 34,410 7,241 17,392 26,294 181,424 O 10,278 Modification (Acres) 3,716 742 7,640 21,267 10,994 O 262 17,061 61,682 O O TOTAL (Acres) 21,535 31,470 64,683 66,154 60,052 22,891 35,638 69,748 372,171 393,360 20,314 Land Ownership' Category I (Acres) O O O O O O O O O 393,360 0 Category ll (Acres) 10,005 21,006 34,983 51,622 15,703 19,527 16,364 25,793 195,003 O 12,966 Category III (Acres) 26,766 30,201 70,259 24,624 52,868 23,046 21,401 55,159 304,324 O 6,523 Category IV (Acres) O 2,640 O O 7,637 692 9,702 1,740 22,411 O 3,775 Category V (Acres) O O O O O O 6,698 6,859 13,557 O O TOTAL (Acres) 36,771 53,847 105,242 76,246 76,208 43,265 54,165 89,551 535,295 393,360 23,264 'Acres does not include Keechelus, Kachess, and Cle Elum Lakes. Category I — Forest Service retain or acquire as directed by Congress. Category II — Forest Service retain or acquire as needed for administration or special designation. Category III – Neutral (management the same regardless of ownership). Category IV — Forest Service candidates for disposal. Category V – Additional intensive study needed to determine priority of ownership. Table 13 (Continued). Short Term Annual Benefits and Costs (1980-2000) — Alternative D. Resource Complex Middle Fork |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 Icicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Annual Nondollar Benefits (MRVD's) Roaded Natural Recreation 195.1 213.9 132.5 50.2 203.7 169.0 117.8 241.0 1,323.2 Semi-Primitive Motorized Rec. 6.6 6.5 18.9 11.5 12.1 6.6 11.9 18.8 92.9 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized Rec. 1.9 0.0 9.1 8.7 0.2 0.6 1.5 3.3 25.3 Primitive Recreation 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 Developed Camping 9.0 64.7 202.0 28.9 42.5 101.9 78.1 43.1 570.2 A t #...."; 514.4 365.1 703.0 146.5 230.5 29.4 100.0 1,220.7 3,309.6 Campground Receipts (M $) 0.0 0.0 40.4 0.0 6.0 0.0 11.2 0.0 57.6 Annual Dollar Cost (M $) Timber Sale Preparation, Ad- ministration & Regeneration 54." 42.5 86.9 35.8 83.0 17.5 24.1 134.0 477.9 Di & º - 1.5 2.1 4.6 4.7 4.3 1.6 2.5 4.9 26.2 Developed Campground, 3. & Rºnce 8.5 59.3 191.2 53.2 36.3 100.0 69.7 39.5 557.7 Road Construction, Fº Maintenance 220.2 173.6 182.0 68.8 202.5 53.2 79.4 158.4 1,138.1 Trail Construction, Reconstruction Maintenance 5.5 4.9 26.2 27.4 9.8 3.6 6.3 11.2 94.9 'Benefits and cost which do not change between alternatives are not useful in comparing alter. natives. Therefore, such items are not included in this table. For example, RVD's of developed skiing are not included. Effects Unique to Implementing Alternative E Soils Management activities in this Alternative would cause several types of soil impacts. Physical Soil im- pacts include compaction, displacement, puddling, surface erosion and mass failure. Chemical Soil im- pacts are those which degrade the Soils by causing a deficiency in soil nutrients or by causing an un- favorable ratio between nutrients. Often the physical and chemical soil impacts are interrelated and most are related to road Construction and timber harvest. Visuals Timber harvesting activities would dominate 4 per- cent more land within the management unit than the 1979 situation but would occur on less sensitive lands. Areas in which evidence of human activities now dominate the natural landscape would be restored to a more natural appearance. Unique scenic and recreation values would be preserved on 7 percent of the management unit. Wilderness im- pacts would not be expected to decrease the visual quality from that which now exists. Water It is estimated that timber harvest in this Alternative would produce an additional 17,846 acre feet of water per year over and above a fully forested management unit. Roads also affect water quality. Road density would increase from the existing 1.4 miles per square mile to 2 miles per square mile. The increased roading and attendant harvest would moderately increase pollutants such as sediment, turbidity, temperature, debris and nutrients. Transportation For the most part, roads are considered irretrievable Commitments of resources. Alternative E would ultimately commit 8,141 acres of land to roads, which represents 2.2 percent of the national forest lands in the management unit. Approximately 65 percent of the total area would be accessible for day use when the entire transportation system for Alternative E is in place and under management. This Alternative would be very close to the 1979 situation. There would be improved trail ac- cess in the Index area. The Pratt River road system (which would be necessary for timber management) would be closed to recreation passenger car traffic. There would be reduced road access in the upper Cle Elum River and Cooper River, increased 4 x 4 access in the Van Epps Pass and Teanaway and reduced horse use in the Chiwaukum and Snow Creek Area. Recreation use would be expected to follow the pat- tern for extended and day use shown on Figure 16. Focal points within the day use areas would have potential for heavy use. This Alternative would make 29 percent of the Wilderness available to the average day user. The following roads of major issue will be obliterated (Service Level E) in this Alternative. On the Allocation Map these are shown as trails. West Fork Miller Road — 31/2 miles Taylor River Road — 5 miles Fish Lake Road — 1 /2 miles Beverly Creek Road — 1 mile Recreation Opportunities for approximately 4.5 million recrea- tion visitor-days (RVD) of use would provide approxi- mately 384,000 RVD's more than Alternative D (pre- Sent situation extended). This would provide the se- cond highest total recreation opportunity within the management unit. A description of the procedure used to calculate recreation OutputS is available as a special report to the DEIS. It would result in a recrea- tion opportunity spectrum that is nearly all “rural” and “roaded natural” and “semi-primitive motorized”. It would exceed anticipated need for “roaded natural” recreation opportunities. It would meet an- ticipated need for “semi-primitive motorized” recrea- tion opportunities only during the early years of the implementation period. It would meet the anticipated need for “rural” opportunities. Even though this Alternative provides the greatest opportunity for “semi-primitive nonmotorized” opportunities, it would not meet expected need in the management unit. Very little “primitive” opportunities would be provided; thus, expected demand would not be met in the management unit. Wilderness This Alternative would result in the second lowest bio-physical impact on the Wilderness. Total recrea- tion opportunity would be second least among alter- natives and this would provide the second highest opportunity for Solitude. The fewest trails would be constructed. Trails would be maintained at the second greatest variety of Service Levels. The general carrying capacity for the Wilderness would be approximately 535,000 RVD's annually, which would be approximate- ly 19,000 RVD's less than Alternative D (current situation extended). A description of the procedure used to calculate Wilderness recreation outputs is available as a special report to this DEIS. Based on a predicted 7 percent annual increase in use and assuming proper distribution of visitors, the area Could be expected to meet recreation needs until the late 1980's. Permits would be required in heavily used areas. This would be less expensive to imple- ment than all but Alternative B. Cultural Under Alternative E, there would be a moderate to high potential for adverse impact to cultural resources (see Table 14). Logging operations, road construction, increased access and motorized recrea- tion could affect cultural sites and their environmen- tal setting. Potential conflicts between Cultural resources and timber harvesting would be greatest on sites in the Middle Fork, Kachess, Highway 97 and U.S. 2 West Resource Complexes. Proposed road construction in the Middle Fork Complex could affect a probable National Register historic property. The extent and location of proposed road construction and timber harvesting in the Kachess Complex would increase the probability of impact on presently unidentified Cultural Sites. Two known National Register sites would be located adjacent to the general forest allocation in the Highway 97 Complex. These would require protec- tion. In addition, timber harvesting and road con- struction along the ridges and stream courses could potentially impact unknown archaeological resources. In the I-90 Complex, timber harvesting could damage two potentially significant cultural sites unless protective measures were taken. Recreation use (4x4 and bike) in Alternative E in the Teanaway Complex, may result in conflict where there is overlap with historic sites. In the Kachess Complex, new trail construction may impact known archaeological resources. Allocation of the Stevens Pass Historic District to Special Area would give added management protec- tion to the historic values. Proposed trail construc- tion would enhance the management options for in- terpretation. This Alternative would substantially increase the op- portunities for discovery of previously unidentified sites because of the increase in field recon- naissance. Road construction would improve access to sites and increase the possibility of vandalism. The construction of trails to presently inaccessible areas, additional road access to the Wilderness boundary and minimal law enforcement within the Wilderness could pose a threat to cultural sites if they were not given protective management. Figure 16. Recreational Use Patterns Alternative E. [T] Day Use Areas | Extended Stay Areas - ow- º- - * - --- - --- --- Table 14. Potential for Adverse Impacts on Known and Potential Cultural Sites — Alternative E. Resource Complex Middle |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway leicle U.S. 2 U.S. 2 Total Fork 97 East West Snoqualmie Known sites' High 4 O 2 O 1 O O 1 8 Medium 5 7 12 10 14 3 4 10 65 Low 5 20 9 11 7 6 12 15 85 Potential Cultural Sites' Low "Potential for Adverse Impact Medium Medium Medium High Low Medium Medium H – High level of impact from timber harvesting, road construction, recreational development, increased accessibility and ORV use. Timber harvesting is intensive, utilizing full range of silvicultural practices. M – Moderate level of impact from land modifying activities. Timber harvesting may involve Constraints in type of logging systems used. Road construction does not directly impact sites, but increased access poses threats to unprotected sites. Recreational use includes bikes, horses and hikers. L – Low level of impact from land modifying activities. No commercial forest land allocated for timber harvesting. Recreational use confined to horse and hiker. Alternative E would result in the necessity of pro- gramming a high level of funding for inventory and mitigation, at the expense of management and inter- pretation. The impact of Alternative E to traditional Indian religious sites may be high if impacts are not mitigated or accidental damage occurs to these sites. Preliminary contacts with American Indian groups to identify traditional religious use areas, though not wholly successful, have indicated that certain forested habitats may be used as spirit quest localities, as storage areas for ceremonial equip- ment, and as Sources of ceremonial or medicinal materials. Minerals All areas identified as having recreational mining op- portunities (see Figure 6) would be maintained. Cur- rent or improved access would be maintained to all identified areas. The Red Top Agate beds would be designated a Recreation Area withdrawn from mineral entry to assure their continued recreational use by the public. Aggregate materials, once removed and placed upon roads, would be considered an irreversible commit- ment of resources. Alternative E would ultimately re- quire 2,970,400 cubic yards of common materials. Commercial mineral deposits and related mining ac- tivities would not be affected by, nor affect this Alternative. Lands This Alternative would provide for private land development in areas determined to be suitable. Ad- ministrative benefits can be substantially improved. Access, land line location and right-of-way needs would be improved. Administrative costs should be materially reduced. Land adjustment costs would be somewhat higher than the current situation. Wildlife The diversity of the forest environment in this Alternative, as in Alternative D, would be relatively balanced between old growth and managed forest Conditions. The short and long term effects would be positive. The old growth forest in the management unit plus that in the Wilderness would favor wildlife dependent on old growth forests. This would be balanced by timber harvest areas which would in- crease the natural plant diversity, and enhance wildlife diversity and abundance. Wood Fiber Alternative E would result in 156,400 acres of regulated commercial forest land programmed for harvest. If selected, this Alternative would produce an annual potential yield of 61.0 million board feet under long term assumptions. Under short term assumptions, the potential yield would be about 29.7 million board feet. The short term output would be 15.9 percent below that which could be produced under Alternative D, the Current situation extended. The long term output would be 13 percent below Alternative D. Wood fiber production in this Alter- native would rank third among alternatives. The Corral-Fortune Creek Allotment would be main- tained and available for use at its optimum potential for forage output. The Swauk Allotment would be maintained and available for use at a reduced forage availability. The reduction results from visual management constraints along the Highway 97 visual corridor. The Wildhorse-Whitepine Allotment would be available for use with alternate year grazing, but would be evaluated for possible elimination. The Stafford Creek Allotments would be available for use by a reduced number of livestock. The reduction results from phasing out of unsuitable portions of the Allotment. This Alternative would make 1,421 animal unit months (AUM) of forage available for use. This would be a reduction of 38 AUM's from Alternative D and would produce the Second lowest amount of com- mercial forage. Economy For an extensive analysis of economic considera- tions see Economic discussion at the end of this Section. Table 15 is a summary of acreage and long term benefits of implementing Alternative E. Table 15. Acreage Summary and Annual Long Term Benefits by Resource Complex – Alternative E. Resource complex Middle Fork |-90 kachess Teanaway Highway 97 !cicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Wilderness Nason Ridge Management Unit Allocations Developed Site (acres) 50 1,301 427 22 87 134 262 67 2,350 N/A 52 Special Area (acres) O 3,864 10,623 44,726 2,580 6,838 10,558 16,790 95,979 N/A 4,506 General Forest (acres) 4,997 14,396 24,480 13,496 41,983 1,072 11,617 24,781 136,822 N/A 5,255 Scenic Forest (acres) 9,638 8,811 18,280 6,544 12,569 6,388 8,743 11,998 82,971 N/A 8,219 Dispersed Recreation (acres) 6,850 3,098 10,873 1,366 2,833 8,459 4,458 16,112 54,049 N/A 2,282 Wilderness Use Zones Transition (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12,242 N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A |N/A N/A N/A 183,630 N/A Semi-Primitive (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 32,242 N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 161,210 N/A Primitive (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10,182 N/A (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20,364 N/A Trailless (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 338,694 N/A TOTAL (RVD's) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 534,551 N/A Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Rural (acres) 50 1,301 427 22 87 134 262 67 2,350 N/A 52 (RVD's) 80,280 1,290,780 362,205 28,890 155,858 289,800 557,460 72,810 2,838,083 N/A 78,390 Roaded Natural (acres) 14,635 24,968 42,895 20,741 57,101 9,481 24,764 40,683 235,268 N/A 13,474 (RVD's) 92,286 207,986 475,418 84,999 253,074 92,523 117,653 220,761 1,544,700 N/A 79,985 Semi-Primitive Motorized (acres) 6,850 5,201 20,549 39,901 2,864 12,331 10,612 24,516 122,824 N/A 6,788 (RVD's) 6,850 5,201 20,549 39,901 2,864 12,331 10,612 24,516 122,824 N/A 6,788 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized (acres) O O 812 5,490 O 519 O 4,482 11,303 N/A O (RVD's) O O 812 5,490 O 519 O 4,482 11,303 N/A O Primitive (acres) O O O O O 426 O O 426 N/A O (RVD's) O O O O O 213 O O 213 N/A O TOTAL (RVD's) 179,416 1,503,967 858,984 159,280 411,796 395,386 685,725 322,569 4,517,123 N/A 165,163 Wood Fiber Production Standard (acres) 2,133 915 5,149 3,147 5,661 O 140 7,031 24,176 N/A O (MBF) 1,129 353 1,865 974 1,735 O 49 3,680 9,785 N/A O Special (acres) 9,223 15,617 25,199 9,975 32,008 6,214 12,659 21,624 132,519 N/A 10,650 (MBF) 5,168 6,592 8,808 3,258 9,615 2,073 4,184 11,671 51,369 N/A O Marginal (acres) 1,051 2,112 3,303 68 1,492 188 584 3,465 12,263 N/A 3,710 (MBF) 477 771 1,154 24 513 55 185 1,722 4,901 N/A O TOTAL Regulated (MBF) 6,774 7,716 11,827 4,256 11,863 2,128 4,418 17,073 66,055 N/A 3,710 Unregulated (acres) 4,643 2,140 5,761 15,440 1,397 4,295 4,794 13,432 51,902 N/A 2,060 Unproductive (acres) 4,485 10,686 25,271 37,524 19,494 12,194 17,461 24,196 151,311 |N/A 7,604 Water Annual Water Flow Increase due to Timber Harvest (acre ft) 1,931 2,785 3,614 711 1,093 593 2,156 4,963 17,846 0 1,794 °. O O 20,467 18,780 14.812 O 3,840 O 57,899 15,796 O ſmmercial Rande (acres) º e ſº g ſº e Kºi....” (AUM's) O O 233 261 405 O 108 O 1,007 414 O Ro . 518 1,015 1,827 553 1,967 427 861 973 8,141 O 434 Miles 74 145 261 79 281 61 123 139 1,163 O 62 Aggregate Material (Cubic Yos) 281,200 551,000 522,000 158,000 562,000 122,000 246,000 528,200 2,970,400 O 124,000 Trails Hiker onl (Miles) 1 19 19 2 3 4 11 35 94 137 1 ºny (Miles) 27 13 23 24 1 15 13 4 120 314 8 Bike (Miles) O O 52 67 17 O 5 O 141 O 6 4x4 (Miles) 0 O 9 14 11 O O O 34 O 0 TOTAL (Miles) 20 32 103 107 32 19 29 39 339 451 15 Visual Quality 4,834 5,370 13,524 30,976 Pres Acres 0 946 812 5,490 O p p 393,360 4,506 gº." º: 8,813 15,904 20,602 9,480 15,568 10,816 12,407 11,325 104,915 O 4,101 Partial Retention (Acres) 8,508 13,495 *:::: ; *:::: *: "; ; 180,192 O 11,707 Modifi Acres 4,214 1,125 p º ſº 9 56,088 O O fºllon {*:: 21,535 31,470 64,683 66,154 60,052 22,891 35,638 69,748 372,171 393,360 20,314 land Ownership' O O 0 tegory I Acres 0 O O O 0 O 393,360 O 3. | º: 24,101 25,459 63,061 58,647 20,081 40,787 24,713 45,469 302,318 O 16,110 Category III (Acres) 12,670 25,745 41,295 17,599 49,996 2,165 18,334 35,893 203,697 O 6,753 Category IV (Acres) 0 2,643 * § º: sº § º 15,997 O 401 Cate A O O p º 13,283 O O rºw *::::: 36,771 53,847 105,242 76,246 76,208 43,265 54,165 89,551 535,295 393,360 23,264 T--— 'Acres does not include Keechelus, Kachess, and Cle Elum Lakes. tegory I — Forest Service retain or acquire as directed by Congress. Sategory II — Forest Service retain or acquire as needed for administration or special designation. tegory III — Neutral (management the same regardless of ownership). Category IV — Forest Service candidates for disposal. tegory V – Additional intensive study needed to determine priority of ownership. Table 15 (Continued). Short Term Annual Benefits and Costs (1980-2000)" — Alternative E. Resource Complex Middle Fork |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 Icicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Annual Nondollar Benefits (MRVD's) Roaded Natural Recreation 174.4 204.6 132.5 50.2 201.8 146.9 101.4 223.9 1,235.7 Semi-Primitive Motorized Rec. 8.1 7.7 21.5 11.5 12.8 9.3 13.8 24.2 108.9 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized Rec. 1.9 0.0 9.3 9.1 0.2 0.7 1.5 4.3 27.0 Primitive Recreation 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 Developed Camping 42.9 76.8 285.9 38.3 101.9 200.3 116.6 58.7 921.4 Annual Dollar Benefits Timber Receipts (M $) 379.4 354.4 633.4 139.2 2O7.6 21.8 94.9 908.2 2,738.9 Campground Receipts (M $) 0.0 2.4 57.2 0.0 6.0 19.7 11.2 0.0 96.5 Annual Dollar Cost (M $) Timber Sale Preparation, Administration & Regeneration 39.7 41.3 77.8 33.4 75.0 12.8 23.0 99.2 402.2 Dispersed Recreation Management 1.5 2.1 4.6 4.7 4.3 1.6 2.5 4.9 26.2 Developed Campground, Construction & Maintenance 103.0 89.8 422.2 53.2 161.5 325.5 160.9 79.0 1,395.1 Road Construction, Reconstruction Maintenance 224, 1 173.6 182.6 59.4 202.5 4.1.8 79.4 151.2 1,114.6 Trail Construction, Reconstruction Maintenance 4.1 7.2 27.4 26.9 9.9 11.2 5.9 30.4 123.0 'Benefits and cost which do not change between alternatives are not useful in comparing alter- natives. Therefore, such items are not included in this table. For example, RVD's of developed skiing. are not included. Summary of Effects of All Alternatives A comparison of the five management alternatives follows. Table 16 shows acreage and long term benefits of implementing each alternative. Recreation Alternative B, C and E would all meet expected de- mand for developed sites (land in the “rural” recrea- tion opportunity spectrum class) over the next 20 years. In C, the amount of land allocated to developed sites and “rural” would exceed demand through 2000. The alternative would retain potential Sites for development beyond the planning period. Only sites currently developed would be maintained in A and D, thus expected demand would not be met. Alternative D would provide the greatest amount of “roaded natural” ROS class resulting from the large amount of land allocated to General Forest. Alter- native B would provide the least amount of “roaded natural,” but even in this Alternative, supply would exceed long term expected demand. Alternatives C, D and E would provide moderate amounts of this ROS class (all in excess of expected demand). Alternative C would provide the greatest opportunity for “semi-primitive motorized” recreation because Of road development on adjacent lands allocated to General Forest and the large number of trails open to motorized travel. Alternatives B and E would pro- vide moderate amounts of this class and Alternatives A and D only traces. All alternatives would meet ex- pected short term demand in this class but none would meet long term demand. Alternative B would provide the greatest opportunity for both “semi-primitive nonmotorized” and “primitive” ROS classes. Alternatives C and E would provide fewer opportunities than B. Alternative A would provide very little and Alternative D would pro- vide none. Expected demand for these opportunities would not be met in any alternative. Some demand, however, would be accommodated in the adjacent Wilderness. Alternative B would result in the broadest recreation opportunity spectrum based on lands allocated to the various ROS classes. Alternative C would result in the broadest recreation opportunity spectrum based on activities occurring within the various ROS classes on roads, trails and unaccessed lands. It would also closely meet ex- pected recreation needs. Table 16. Summary of Acres and Annual Long Term Benefits for Each Alternative. Alternative A B C D Management Unit Allocations' Developed Site (acres) 2,020 2,350 4,280 2,020 Special Area (acres) 70,825 81,471 94,605 75,692 General Forest (acres) 200,571 101,794 46,839 216,302 Scenic Forest (acres) 63.41 1 51,695 117,676 76.783 Dispersed Recreation (acres) 35,344 134,861 108,771 1,374 Wilderness Use Zones? Transition (aCreS) 24,485 6,788 15,273 13,333 (RVD's) 367,275 101,820 229,095 199,995 Semi-Primitive (acres) 35,636 10,061 23,030 33,697 (RVD's) 178,180 50,305 115,150 168,485 Primitive (acres) 2,788 37,939 20,364 8,121 (RVD's) 5,576 75,878 40,728 16,242 Trailless (acres) 330,451 338,572 334,693 338,209 (RVD's) 165,226 169,286 167,347 169,105 TOTAL (RVD's) 716,257 397,289 552,320 553,827 Recreation Opportunity Spectrunn' Rural (acres) 2,020 2,350 4,280 2,020 (RVD's) 2,176,268 2,831,225 2,831,225 2,178.878 Roaded Natural (acres) 296,917 164,524 176,514 300,024 (RVD's) 1.763,780 1,287,910 1,503,747 1,884,171 Semi-Primitive Motorized (acres) 62,413 143,331 166,263 65,406 (RVD's) 60,869 139,455 166,263 65,406 Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized (acres) 10,821 15,475 20,878 4,453 (RVD's) 9,946 14,374 20,878 4,453 Primitive (acres) O 46,491 4,235 268 (RVD's) O 19,361 2,118 134 TOTAL (RVD's) 4,010,863 4,292,325 4,524,231 4,133,042 Recreation Day-Use Areas" Management unit (acres) 509,288 465,389 493,715 488,973 Wilderness (acres) 135,719 93,968 128,593 167,725 TOTAL (acres) 645,007 559,357 622,308 656,698 Trails" Hiker only (Miles) 220 305 202 152 Horse (Miles) 495 517 576 493 Bike (Miles) 134 . 10 85 167 4x4 (Miles) 11 11 71 10 TOTAL (Miles) 860 843 934 822 E 2,350 95,979 136,822 82,971 54,049 12,242 183,630 32,242 161,210 10, 182 20,364 338,694 169,347 534,551 2,350 2,838,083 235,268 1,544,700 122,824 122,824 11,303 11,303 426 213 4,517,123 493,767 114,083 607,850 231 434 141 1979 Mgt. Situation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 309,800 2,020 2,178,878 190,141 1,619,837 139,359 139,359 38,942 38,942 1,709 855 3,977,871 491,373 170,765 662,138 132 533 140 34 840 11 816 91 Table 16. (Continued) Alternatives A and D would result in the most narrow recreation opportunity spectrums and meet expected Alternative 1979 Mgt. recreation needs the least. Alternative E would pro- A B C D E Situation vide a moderate opportunity spectrum and would ac- commodate future demand to a greater extent than Wood Fiber Production' Alternatives A and D. Standard (acres) 90,111 11,512 14,533 30,269 24,176 30,269 (MBF) 36,469 4,702 6,019 12,938 9,785 8,900 G Special (acres) 86,125 103,047 104,287 141,808 132,519 141,808 Visual (MBF) 32,632 39,604 39,517 54,315 51,369 34,400 Alternative plans for the management of the Alpine Marginal (acres) 21,456 7,340 7,619 21,769 12,263 21,769 Lakes Area would vary in their ability to meet recom- (MBF) 8,808 2,974 3,116 8,867 4,901 6 mended visual quality objectives (VQO's). Also, with TOTAL Regulated (MBF) 77,909 47,280 48,652 76,120 66,055 7 shifting recreation use and different transportation were developed, estimates were made as to what Water' VQO's could be achieved, and what rehabilitation Annual Water Flow Increase - would be required. Figure 17 shows a comparison of due to Timber Harvest (acre ft) 22,289 13,194 16,692 20,916 17,846 8 recommended and achievable VQO's. Alternative A with its high wood fiber production would be the Range” only alternative in which the achievable VQO is not Commercial Grazing (acres) 89,451 73,695 73,695 89,451 73,695 89,451 expected to be as high as recommended objectives. Available Forage (AUM's) 1,459 1,441 1,241 1,459 1,421 1,459 The Figure also shows the percent of each VQO Roads' which would require rehabilitation to restore visual Acres 8,414 6,608 6,874 8,211 8,141 5,656 impacts to the recommended visual level. Rehabilita- Miles 1,202 944 982 1,173 1,163 808 tion would be greatest in Alternative A which places Aggregate Material (Cubic Yos) 3,088,000 2,408,200 2,489,600 2,999,400 2,970,400 N/A the majority of those areas in the lower modification VQO. Visual Quality” 20,860 472,922 436,586 41 1,149 424,336 41 1,149 Preservation (Acres) 420, y y 9 y y ives B and C would provide the largest area Retention (Acres) 97,901 155,236 149,773 111,276 104,915 111,276 º º j. Partial Retention (Acres) 104,581 116,196 151,647 181,424 180,192 181,424 favorable long term visual quality. Alternative A Modification (Acres) 142,189 21,177 27,525 61,682 56,088 61,682 would produce the most adverse effect, both short º and long term by allowing obvious visual impacts. Land Ownership” Alternative E would result in a slightly higher Category I (Acres) 393,360 393,360 393,360 393,360 393,360 N/A positive effect than D by managing for more acres of Category || (Acres) 195,395 362,518 437,417 195,003 302,218 N/A unique visual opportuntites in a natural Condition. Category III (Acres) 263,209 144,273 70,923 *::::: *; N/A Category V (Acres) 13,434 O 13,127 13,557 13,283 N/A Scenic Rivers and Highway corridors would include a 'Figures cover Forest Service Lands in the management unit. *Figures cover all lands in the WIlderness and Intended Wilderness. *Figures cover Forest Service lands in the management unit and all lands in the Wilderness and Intended Wilderness. “Figures cover all lands in the Alpine Lakes Area. *Figures cover Forest Service lands in the management unit, Wilderness and Intended Wilderness. *The marginal component was not calculated for the 1979 management situation. The relatively small acreage in this class is available for harvest under certain circumstances, but it is not figured into the programmed allowable harvest. Totals for each Alternative included standard, special and marginal timber components. Totals for the 1979 management situa- tion include only the standard and special timber components. "Insufficient records to calculate 1979 management situation. variety of land use activities in all alternatives. Cer- tain visual quality Standards would be established that timber harvesting or other modification activities would seek to achieve. All alternatives except A would have a potential favorable effect on the future opportunity along Scenic Rivers and Highways. Alter- native A would lower VQO's in the middleground distance views seen from Scenic Highways and Rivers. Alternative A would be the only alternative to have an "Area includes all lands in the Alpine Lakes area except 11,860 acres in Keechelus, Kachess and Cle Elum Lakes. adverse effect on Scenic Area opportunities. Alter- natives E and B would have the most favorable Category I — Forest Service retain or acquire as directed by Congress. effects, due to a larger allocation to Scenic Area. Category II — Forest Service retain or acquire as needed for administration or special designation. Category III – Neutral (management the same regardless of ownership). The future visual condition in the Alpine Lakes can be predicted based on achievable VQO's. Table 17 compares the types of landscape that could be ex- pected, on a long term basis, to exist in the Alpine Lakes management unit under each alternative. Category IV — Forest Service candidates for disposal. Category V – Additional intensive study needed to determine priority of ownership. Figure 17. Visual Quality Objectives (V.O.O.) of Alternatives % of the management unit 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% P 0% P – Preservation R – Retention PR — Partial Retention M – Modification That portion of the recommended visual quality objective which is not expected to be achieved in Alternative A. Percent of V.O.O. Requiring Rehabilitation. Percent 15 PR 10 º º + Alternative M z ſ . Alternative * 2. M r Table 17. Predicted Visual Effects as a Percent of the Management Unit. Visual 1979 Condition Management Alternatives Class' Situation A B C D E ę & - ſº º tº e - - percent ———————— | 46 6 19 11 4 7 || 43 54 75 82 80 78 ||| 11 40 6 7 16 15 Nason Ridge | 45 O O O 0 22 || 45 77 100 100 100 78 ||| 12 23 O O 0 0 'Class I – Essentially unmodified natural environment. Class II — Subtle modifications in natural environments, evidence of humans apparent. Class Ill — Substantially modified environment, evidence of humans dominate the landscape. In all alternatives the amount of land in essentially unmodified natural condition (Class I) would be ex- pected to decrease substantially from the 1979 situa- tion. As unmodified environments decrease, the amount of land in Class Il “subtle modifications” would increase significantly. About 11 percent of the area is currently Class II (substantially modified). Alternatives A, D, and E would show increases in this category while Alternatives B and C would show decreases. 93 Wood Fiber Approximately 40 percent of land in the Alpine Lakes management unit is considered unproductive forest land, as defined by growth of less than 20 cubic feet per acre per year. Alternatives A and B occupy each end of the range of options offered in terms of timber management. In A, 90,000 acres or 24 percent of the management unit would be placed in the standard timber Com- ponent, where harvest can occur without special pro- visions for other resources. Twenty three percent would be in the special timber component, which subordinates harvest to other resource objectives. The smallest amount of standard and marginal timber components would be found in Alternative B. It also contains the largest amount of unregulated timberland, where harvest is not emphaized. Alternative C differs little from B, however in D (the current situation extended), the largest portion (38 percent) of the management unit would be placed in the special timber component. These are lands where specially designed treatment of the timber resource is required to achieve other resource objec- tives. Alternative D would also have 21 percent of the management unit about equally divided between the standard, marginal, and unregulated components. Thirty six percent of the land in Alternative E would be in the special component, 8,700 acres less than in Alternative D. The marginal timber component would be largest in E amounting to only 7 percent of the management unit. Timber in the standard component º be 2-3 percent more in E than in Alternatives B Oſ O. Figure 18 shows changes between alternatives in the amount of regulated acres, those upon which timber harvest is emphasized. They range from a decrease of 37 percent from the current situation extended in Alternative D to an increase of 2 percent in Alternative A. Figure 18. Acres Allocated to Regulated Harvest. 200 || – Current Situation Extended 180 140 – 100 80 60 40 20 A B C D E Alternative Figure 19 shows future potential wood fiber yields under each alternative compared with the average an- nual harvest from the management unit over the past 10 years. In each alternative long term yields (after 50 years) would be expected to be greater than short term. This is because old growth trees will still be harvested in the immediate future. Old growth trees grow very slowly and can even lose wood volume to insects or disease. The growth of younger, more vigorous trees which will replace them is much Figure 19. Comparison of Regulated Harvest with the Average Annual Harvest during past 10 years. A t e r n a ti we 75 - B C D E 60 — % 45 – % % % % % % 30 – % % % % # * | % º º § 0 % ſ º º aV. co : -- : a--15 — 30 — 45 – 60 L Short term yield–The yield during old growth conversion period for approxi- mately 50 years. à Long term yield–The yield after conversion of old growth to managed stand. Potential Annual Wood Fiber Yield, Short Term and Long Term 70 – == º º | | | | | -- º verage Annua g 50 – º Harvest Level" 0 t º | - L^ 3 40 21 ſº º O -H + H+ + > º L^ L^ 21 gº 5 30 – L^ 2^ 2. L^ E [21 21 21 tº E 21 || | | | | | | 20 – L^ L^ L^ 21 21 —lº 21 tº L^ Lº L^ 21 10 — L^ L^ L^ L^ º º L^ L^ O 2^ 2^ º A B C D Alternative 'computed over the last ten years. 94 faster. It is significant that in all alternatives poten- tial long term yields are greater than the average an- nual harvest during the last 10 years. The results are different during the short term. All alternatives except Alternative A show an expected decline in potential yields. The greatest difference is approximately 55 percent in Alternative B, followed closely by Alternative C with a 49 percent decline. Alternative A could produce an increase of 36 per- cent as a result of allocation of more commercial forest land to regulated harvest. Water The construction of roads and timber harvest can in- crease sediment and raise water temperature. Water quality disturbances of this nature would be greatest in Alternatives A and B. Alternatives D and E would have nearly the same potential as A for increasing sediment loads. Alternative C would have the greatest potential for pathogenic degradation because of management for higher levels of recrea: tion use. - Cultural Land modification poses the greatest potential im. pact to sites of cultural importance and the environ- ment around them. Road and trail construction and timber harvest or recreation can impact cultural SiteS directly. It also makes access easier, increasing the possibility of vandalism. Projects affecting flat Or gently sloping terrain, the edges of water courses, former stream or river terraces, ridgetops, saddles or springs are particulary critical. It is in such areas that most human activity, both historic and prehistoric, occurred. The effect of land modifications on cultural resources is not entirely negative. Field recon- naissance required by timber sales results in the discovery of cultural sites, as can the removal of understory and forest duff during a logging opera: tion. And while new or improved roads and trails in: crease the possibility of vandalism, they also facilitate interpretation and appreciation of the resource by a larger number of people. Alternative A would have the greatest potential for harm because of its timber harvest emphasis, Alternative B the least. Alternative D, the existing situation extended, would require additional management for the protection of cultural resources due to the unpredictable pat- tern of ownership (land adjustments would depend on the initiative of private owners). The effects bet- ween Alternatives C and E would not differ Significantly in terms of cultural resource manage- ment. Land Classification There is no change in Category I lands between alter- natives. This is the Wilderness and Intended Wilderness which Congress has directed the Forest Service to retain or acquire. The current plans to ac- quire these private lands, which is now under way will not be affected by these alternatives. Alternative E has been determined to provide the most favorable circumstances for reducing Forest Service administrative costs. It also provides for private land development and requires a relatively small increase in ownership adjustment cost to the Forest Service. Alternative D, the Current Situation extended, would result in the most adverse effect due to the uncer- tainty of future actions. Public use of many resources and consolidation could not be assured due to the dependence on offers made to the Forest Service by private land owners. Long term ad- ministrative cost could be significant due to rights- of-way and land line location. Alternative A would have the greatest administrative impact due to large blocks of private ownership within Forest Service boundaries. This Alternative leaves the future of many lands uncertain and depen- dent on private landowner iniative. Alternatives B and C would contribute to en- vironmental protection and consolidation efforts. Both, however, are relatively high in ownership ad- justment costs. Alternative C would be somewhat better because it provides suitable lands for private uses and development. Fire Wildfire frequency and intensity are affected by ac- tivities and Outputs associated with the various alter- natives. This Comparison assumes that the future effectiveness of prevention investment would remain the same as today. Alternative A would have the greatest potential for an increase in industrially caused fire since it would have the highest level of industrial activity. Alternatives D and E would have the next greatest potential, which would be about equal to the current level of risk. Alternatives B and C would have the lowest potential for industrial fires due to low levels of industrial activity. In all alter- natives, however, the annual frequency of industrial fires would be expected to remain near the existing level of one or two fires per year. Based on the types and levels of recreation activity, fire occurrence would be expected to be the highest, approximately 15 percent above current levels in Alternatives A and D due to higher emphasis on dispersed roaded recreation. Alternatives C and E should result in 10 percent fewer fires than the pre- sent. Burned acres from recreation fires should not be much different than present levels, even though the number of fires varies between alternatives. Con- tinuation of existing use restrictions would keep fire starts low during periods of high fire danger. The land use allocations in each alternative would result in differences in the potential wildfire inten- sity. Over the first 20 year period of the plan, Alternative A would result in the greatest increase in potential wildfire intensity due to conversion of closed canopy old growth to more open second growth. Alternatives D, E, C, and B would follow in that order. For the long term, however, the opposite would be true, since natural accumulations of dead debris occurring on areas not programmed for timber harvest would result in higher overall potential inten- sity. Managed stands would have less natural mor- tality from insect and disease, would be subject to Salvage removal of the mortality and in general have less dead material accumulation on the ground, thus reducing potential fire intensity over the nonharvested Stands. Because of fewer acres under intensive timber management, Alternatives B and C would have the highest potential wildfire intensity in the long term. Alternatives A, D, and E would have lower potential intensity fires since they include a greater portion of their area under intensive timber management. Protection costs would be closely correlated with the changes in wildfire intensity. As the potential fire in- tensity increases, the cost of insuring that a fire does not destroy expected benefits of the alternative also increases. Therefore, the same short term and . term relationships apply that were mentioned alo OVG. Air Quality Air Quality is affected by management activities and land uses associated with the various alternatives. Activities such as timber harvest, road construction and use and prescribed burning of logging residues would result in an annual generation of suspended particulates for Alternative A that would be 22 per- Cent higher than the current levels. Alternatives D and E would result in reductions from current levels of 11 percent and 27 percent respectively, while Alternatives B and C would be approximately 50 per- Cent lower. Suspended particulates from recreation road use and Camp fires, for all alternatives, would to be about the Same, within 10 percent of what is being generated under the 1979 situation. Visibility within the Wilderness would reflect the 95 same management factors described above. Alternative A would have the greatest impact with Alternatives D, E, B, and C, in that order. The contribution of wildfire smoke to the reduction of air quality is difficult to evaluate. Since there are no differences in number of large fires expected bet- ween alternatives, and the small fires Contribute little to the degradation of air quality, the effects of each alternative would be the Same. Economic and Social Affects Economic Efficiency Analysis The purpose of an economic efficiency analysis is to compare values of resource inputs (costs) required for an alternative with the values of resource outputs (benefits) resulting from the alternative. Ideally, all benefits and costs are stated in dollar terms, SO that the net difference or the ratio between total benefits and total costs can be Calculated. In the case of Alpine Lakes, many of the goods and services provided, such as dispersed recreation or visual quality, are not bought or sold; therefore tradi- tional measures of economic value, as measured by what people are willing to pay for those goods and services, are lacking. In the absense of such measures of benefit, a trade-Off Or Opportunity COSt analysis was conducted. Non-market benefits stated in physical or qualitative terms were compared to the costs of obtaining those benefits, including dollar benefits foregone. For example, suppose in Alternative B an additional visitor day of primitive recreation increased trail con- struction cost by $1, decreased road construction costs by $5 and decreased timber receipts by $10 when compared to Alternative A. The implied cost of the additional day of recreation in Alternative B is $6 (i.e. $10 + 1-5). By comparing these opportunity costs for certain non-market benefits in each alternative, we can arrive at measures of relative efficiency in providing these benefits. This analysis concentrates on the time period 1980-2000. Although benefits and costs will continue beyond that time period, the ability to assess them is limited. In addition, at the 10 percent discount rate used, economic costs and benefits become relatively insignificant beyond year 20. Given the relatively short time period used for this analysis, the benefits described will differ from the long term benefits displayed elsewhere in this Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Long term benefits of wood fiber production are greater than short term benefits. In the short term, the amount of wood fiber produced is based on the rate of harvest of existing old-growth forests. In the long term, these old growth forests will have been converted to younger, faster growing stands which yield greater amounts of wood fiber per year. The benefits described are intended as a basis for comparing alternatives, not as targets to be achieved. In practice, rates of timber harvest, road construction, etc., depend on the programming and budgeting process of the Wenatchee and Mt. Baker- Snoqualmie National Forests. Table 18 shows the annual benefits for the Alpine Lakes management unit. Table 19 displays the estimated costs of implementation of each alter- native. See Appendix F for an explanation of the economic analysis and additional economic informa- tion. % QWN 22, | | Z 96 Table 18. Short Term Average Annual Benefits and Costs in the Alpine Lakes Area (1980-2000). (Table 18 & 19 figures differ slightly because in table 18 they were discounted to pre- *ent value, then converted to annual equivalent.) Annual Nondollar Benefits (MRVD's) Roaded Natural Recreation Semi-Primitive Motorized Rec. Semi-Primitive Nonmotorized Rec. Primitive Recreation Developed Camping Annual Dollar Benefits Timber Receipts (M $) Campground Receipts (M $) Annual Dollar Cost (M $) Timber Sale Preparation, Administration & Regeneration Dispersed Recreation Management Developed Campground, Construction & Maintenance Road Construction, Reconstruction Maintenance Trail Construction, Reconstruction - Maintenance Employment (Person Years) Timber Dispersed Recreation Developed Recreation' TOTAL Employment Income (M $) Timber Dispersed Recreation Developed Recreation' TOTAL Income 1,278.4 100.4 26.2 5702 4,692.4 57.6 653.7 26.2 531.8 1,327.5 90.2 789.7 493.8 204.4 1,487.9 13,996.1 4,561.9 2,720.0 21,278.0 1,195.5 117.8 28.0 9214 1,612.8 96.5 249.2 26.2 1,395.1 580.1 101.1 274.2 475.0 325.3 1,074.5 4,955.6 4,379.6 4,404.8 13,740.0 Alternative C 1,214.3 116.7 29, 1 921.4 1,922.7 96.5 296.1 26.2 1,395.1 605. 1 164.7 330.7 485.1 325.3 1,141.1 6,004.2 4,439.2 4,404.8 14,848.2 1,323.2 92.9 25.3 5702 3,309.6 57.6 477.9 26.2 557.7 1,138.1 94.9 554.0 505.0 204.4 1,263.4 9,937.1 4,656.9 2,720.5 17,314.5 'Figures do not include developed (Alpine) skiing which does not change between alternatives. 1,235.7 108.9 27.0 921.4 2,738.9 96.5 402.2 26.2 1,395.1 1,114.6 123.0 461.9 483.5 325.3 1,270.7 8,289.9 4,465.6 4,404.8 17,160.3 97 Table 19. Tables 20 through 22 display the estimated trade-offs for “primitive” and “semi-primitive motorized and Short Term Implementation Costs in the Alpine Lakes Area (1980-2000). nonmotorized" recreation, developed camping, and visual management for each resource complex. Alternative D, the existing situation extended, is the Alternatives basis for Comparison in each table. A B C D E Several Conclusions can be drawn from these tables. Alternative A in Table 20 appears to provide addi- tional days of “primitive” and “semi-primitive motorized and nonmotorized" recreation at least cost per day in terms of timber receipts that are foregone. This may be explained, in part, by the allocation to unroaded recreation of many acres in Alternative A which are of marginal value for timber production or which are non-Commercial timberland. In Alternative D, those acres are allocated to General Forest and Management Unit Timber Sale Preparation, Administration & Regeneration' 701.1 265.8 3.17.2 511.7 381.0 Dispersed Recreation Management 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 Developed Campground Construction 0.0 655.5 655.5 0.0 655.5 managed for a “roaded natural” recreation ex- Administration, Maintenance 522.9 739.7 739.7 522.9 739.7 perience. Since those acres are not considered available for timber production in the short-term Road analysis, allocation to an unroaded recreation ex- Reconstruction 152.6 10.3 48.6 62.7 67.3 Alternatives E, C, and B, additional acres are Maintenance 169.1 139.9 145.9 159.9 160.9 allocated to unroaded recreation, many of which are subtractions from the land available for timber pro- Trails duction. Hence, the loss in timber receipts increases Construction 23.0 43.0 84.0 18.0 42.0 per recreation visitor day (RVD) gained. Differences Reconstruction 39.8 28.5 46.0 45.7 46.6 in cost per RVD between the alternatives and bet- Maintenance 27.4 29.8 34.7 26.2 26.8 Fire Suppression, Pre-suppression, & Prevention 677.0 677.0 677.0 677.0 677.0 Table 20. Wilderness e Net Dollar Benefits Foregone Per Dispersed Recreation Management 59.0 59.0 59.0 59.0 59.0 Additional Recreation Visitor Days of Trails - “Primitive” and “Semi-Primitive Motorized Construction 74.0 7.0 38.0 17.0 13.0 and Nonmotorized” Recreation Compared Reconstruction 33.4 33.4 33.4 32.8 32.8 to Alternative D." Maintenance 40.3 19.5 30.0 32.8 31.4 O Altern * > Alternative Other - Resource Complex A B C D E Planning & Other Resource Management 2,949.4 2,949.4 2,949.4 2,949.4 2,949.4 Middle Fork Overhead 650.0 611.4 629.6 605.7 679.5 Snoqualmie O 55 54 — 45 |-90 O 9 8 — 7 Total Implementation Costs— Kachess O 31 29 — 18 Management Unit and Wilderness $7,149.9 $6,725.4 $6,924.9 $6,662.6 $7,474.7 Teanaway O 34 15 — 12 Highway 97 O O 3 — 5 lcicle O O 0 — O "Includes landscape architect and cultural resource analysis costs. U.S. 2 East O O 0 — O U.S. 2 West O 43 24 — 43 Management Unit O 22 20 — 15 (average) "Dollar costs are the reduction in timber receipts minus reduction in road Costs attributed to alloca- tion of land to unroaded recreation. ween resource complexes can also be attributed to: (1) differences in allocation of land to Special Areas (such as Scenic Areas), which may not change the recreation opportunity spectrum significantly but do exclude timber production, (2) differences in the Volume per acre and the value per thousand board feet of acres allocated to unroaded recreation or (3) differences in the mix of the types of recreation within the unroaded recreation opportunities. The relatively large cost in Alternative B in the Teanaway Resource Complex results from allocating areas to “Semi-primitive motorized” recreation in excess of projected demand. Table 21 displays the loss of “roaded natural” visitor days attributed to increases in unroaded recreation. Alternative C displays the least cost by this criterion. Differences between alternatives and complexes are largely due to the RVD's per acre of “roaded natural" acres that are foregone, versus the “primitive” and “semi-primitive” acres gained. The more favorable the terrain, the more RVD's of “roaded natural” are foregone per acre. The more area devoted to “primitive” recreation, the fewer RVD's of unroaded recreation are gained per acre. The loss in dollars and RVD's of “roaded natural" recreation must both be considered in judging the relative efficiency of the alternatives in providing “primitive” and “semi-primitive motorized and non- motorized” recreation. &=-— Table 21. Recreation Visitor Days of “Roaded Natural” Recreation Foregone Per Addi- tional RVD of “Primitive” and “Semi- Primitive Motorized and Nonmotorized” Recreation. Alternative Resource Complex A B C D E Middle Fork Snoqualmie 13 1 |-90 24 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 lcicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West 5: 5 4 º 5 Management Unit (average) The 1980 draft Resource Planning Act (RPA) Alternative Program Directions assume a value of $10 for a recreation visitor day (RVD) of Wilderness recreation and $3 for general dispersed recreation types for Washington and Oregon. If the days of "roaded natural" recreation foregone are valued at $3 per day, then the total opportunity cost (including . lost timber receipts) per day of unroaded recreation gained exceeds $10 per day in most resource com. plexes in all alternatives. Acceptance of the RPA values would make allocation of additional lands to unroaded recreation difficult to justify on the basis of values to users alone. Alternative D would be the most efficient alternative with respect to unroaded recreation. Other alternatives could still be justified however, on the basis of additional benefits received which are not accounted for in this analysis (e.g., in- creased water quality or wildlife habitat). t Table 22 displays the costs attributed to visual management divided by the total recreation use (dispersed plus developed camping). Compared to Alternative D, the current situation extended, Alternative A has substantially relaxed the visual management objectives, resulting in the largest change in timber receipts attributable to visual management. For Alternative A, the ratio of that change to total recreation visitor days is expressed as a negative number in Table 22 to emphasize the decrease in visual management objectives and an in- crease in dollar receipts. The values listed in Table 22 may be interpreted as follows: If visitors to the Alpine Lakes management unit would not be willing to sacrifice the visual quality standards to move from Alternative D to Alternative A, even if paid $.50 per RVD, then D is more efficient than A. On the other hand, if visitors would pay an additional $.11 per RVD to obtain the increase in visual quality of Alternative B over Alternative D, then B is more efficient than D in terms of benefits and costs of visual quality. Table 23 displays the cost per additional recreation visitor day (RVD) of developed camping. Differences between Resource Complexes are primarily at- tributable to the length of the use season (the longer the season, the lower the cost per RVD), expected receipts and the value of the timber production foregone. Differences between Alternative C and Alternatives B and E are caused by recreation sites that will be developed in the future. Timber produc- Table 22. Dollar Change in Cost' in Visual Manage- ment Compared to Alternative D Per Visitor Day of Recreation. Alternative Resource Complex A B C D E Middle Fork Snoqualmie - 15 .01 .09 — .23 |-90 -.75 .28 .00 – .01 Kachess -.61 .09 .08 — .02 Teanaway -.64 .00 .00 — .00 Highway 97 -.06 .06 .00 – .04 lcicle -.03 .04 .00 — .00 U.S. 2 East -.37 .08 .03 — .02 U.S. 2 West -.99 .42 .18 — .02 Management Unit -.50 .11 .06 — .10 (average) 'Cost is the reduction of timber receipts due to a change in visual management, divided by sum of dispersed recreation and developed camping RVD's in the respective alternative. Numbers under Alter- native A are displayed as minuses, since timber receipts increase in that alternative, rather than decrease. Table 23. Dollar Cost Per Additional Developed Campground Recreation Visitor Day. Alternative' Resource Complex A, D B C E Middle Fork Snoqualmie — 2.79 2.98 2.81 |-90 — 2.52 4.46 2.52 Kachess — 2.79 3.14 2.77 Teanaway — 2.75 2.78 2.75 Highway 97 — 2.11 2.12 2.11 lcicle — 2.30 2.34 2.30 U.S. 2 East — 2.37 2.37 2.37 U.S. 2 West — 3.41 4.1.1 3.26 Management Unit — 2.54 2.73 2.51 (average) "No Change in cost or RVD's are found in Alter- natives A and D. It is assumed that under Alternative B, C, and E, the same campgrounds are developed Over the 20 year time span. Additional campgrounds are proposed in C, but not built in this time period. Costs include construction, maintenance, and ad- ministration of additional campsites minus expected Campground fees. 99 tion on these sites will be forgone. As in the case of unroaded recreation, the cost per RVD of developed camping is higher in the Resource Complexes west of the Cascades (Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest). Employment and Income Effects Table 24 gives the estimates of the income and employment effects of the management unit under each alternative. Employment and income effects are estimated only for benefits which change signifi- cantly between alternatives: timber harvest, dispers- ed recreation and developed camping. Effects of ac- tivities, such as developed skiing which do not change between alternatives, are not included. Employment and income resulting from timber harvest are assumed to occur in the county where milling takes place. Recreation related effects are estimated only for local expenditures in the vicinity of the recreation site. Impacts include both direct ef- fects of changes in benefit levels and the indirect or multiplier effects as changes influence the local economy. Alternative A results in the greatest overall employ- ment. Alternative D and E result in about 200 fewer jobs, Alternative C, 350 fewer and Alternative B, 400 fewer. In all alternatives, the number of jobs due to dispersed recreation activities does not vary substan- tially. The additional campgrounds proposed in B, C, and E add about 120 jobs. The majority of changes in employment are related to the levels of timber harvest. Table 24. Employment and Income Impacts By Alternative. Alternatives Benefits A B C D E –– Employment In Person Years —— Timber 789.7 274.2 330.7 554.0 461.9 Dispersed Recreation 493.8 475.0 485.1 505.0 483.5 Developed Camping 204.4 325.3 325.3 204.4 325.3 Total 1,487.9 1,074.5 1,141.1 1,263.4 1,270.7 — — income in Thousands of Dollars –– Timber 13,996.1 4,955.6 6,004.2 9,937.1 8,289.9 Dispersed Recreation 4,561.9 4,379.6 4,439.2 4,656.9 4,465.6 Developed Camping 2,720.0 4,404.8 4,404.8 2,720.5 4,404.8 Total 21,278.0 13,740.0 14,848.2 17,314.5 17,160.3 Changes in timber-related jobs occur primarily in the Puget Sound area, where most milling takes place. Economic sectors most affected are wood process- ing, logging, transportation, manufacturing and ser- vices. Occupations most affected include equipment operators, craftsmen, foremen, mechanics, and non- farm laborers. Changes in recreation related jobs are estimated to occur primarily in Kittitas and Chelan Counties, which receive a major share of the recreation. Sec- tors of the economy most affected include the retail trade sector, particularly service stations and restaurants, and the services sector, especially motels. Occupations most affected are service workers, clerks and mechanics. In general, income from timber harvest related jobs tends to be higher than occupations related to recreation use. That fact is reflected in the larger percentage differences in income than for employ- ment between alternatives. Effects On Minorities Table 25 gives a breakdown of the population by minority status in the influence zone surrounding Alpine Lakes. According to the 1970 Census, minori- ty workers in the eastside counties tended to be con- centrated in the service, clerical, farm worker, non- Table 25. Population by Minority Status (1977-78). Native Other County White Black American Asian Hispanic Races --------- percent — — — — — — — — — King Snohomish 92.6 3.1 0.9 3.0 2.2 0.3 Pierce 91.4 5.2 1.1 1.7 2.3 0.5 Chelan Kittitas 96.2 0.4 0.7 0.8 1.5 0.3 Yakima 94.2 0.0 4.1 0.7 11.3 0.5 Source: Labor Market Information for Affirmative Ac- tion Programs, 1978, Washington State Employment Security Department. Totals may not equal 100 per- cent due to double counting of Hispanics. farm laborer and professional occupations. On the WestSide, minorities tend to be concentrated in the Services, clerical, equipment operator and craftsman categories. As a Consequence of the small minority populations in the eastside counties, the numbers affected by recreation related job impacts are relatively insignifi- cant. Higher minority populations on the westside, plus higher concentration of minorities in equipment operator, craftsman and nonfarm laborer categories, should result in the highest minority employment in alternatives with the highest timber outputs. 100 Looking northwest through Aasgard P toward Colchuck Lake and Mountaineer Creek. Photo by U.S. Forest Service. -* * *…*- º Choosing a preferred alternative involves determining how well each alternative meets previously stated evaluation criteria. This section evaluates each alter- native against evaluation criteria displayed in the Evaluation Criteria section of this Draft Environmen- tal Impact Statement. This list is divided into physical, biological and human environment goals for achievements. These evaluation criteria were developed early in the planning process. Public review and comment from citizens and groups con- tributed to their development. Five alternatives for managing the Alpine Lakes Area were designed to meet demands for regional and national needs, while at the same time meeting political, financial, technical and legal test of feasibility. Each alternative is feasible. Legal authorization exists for proposed actions. Detrimen- tal social impacts are avoided and proposed actions are designed to benefit the many, rather than the few. The degrees of risk or uncertainty associated with various alternatives are held to a minimum. In general, proposed actions are designed to be feasi- ble under foreseeable budgets and personnel expec- tations. Alternatives were developed to insure meeting feasibility tests; however, care was taken to not prematurely foreclose options which might enhance environmental quality or have fewer detrimental effects. Each alternative presented contributes to the attain- ment of the management goals within the Alpine Lakes Area. However, some alternatives make more of a contribution than others. In order to determine the effect that each alternative management plan would have towards goal achievement, components were rated independently. Table 26 presents a comparison of alternatives. Each alternative is ranked for its contribution toward goal achievement. The evaluation is a relative ranking on a 1 to 5 number scale. A ranking of five (5) represents the greatest contribution which “most fully meets” goal achievement. A one (1) indicates the alternative which “least meets” goal achieve- ment. The other numbers indicate their relative rank between these extremes. An element of subjective judgement was inevitable in ranking alternatives, but every effort was made to draw upon objective rationale found on tables, figures or maps to support the rating given to each alternative. No attempt was made to place more importance on One goal over another, and no attempt was made to add the rankings together in order to determine a preferred alternative. Rather, more attention was given to determining which alternative consistently ranked well in its contribution toward goal achieve- ment. Table 26. Evaluation of Alternatives by Goals. Rating Schedule 5 – most fully meets goal 4 — 3 — 2 — ! – least fully meets goal GOALS Physical Environment 1. Enhance or maintain water quality at state and Federal standards. Enhance or maintain the quality of the air resource. Provide for the protection of the Soil resource. Provide for development and use of energy sources. Biological Environment 5. Provide for protection of threat- ened and endangered plants, plant communities and animals. Provide fish and wildlife habitat to insure diversity in species and habitat types. Maintain or increase areas for sustained timber production. Human Environment 8. 10. 11. Protect cultural, historical and archeological values. Contribute to Social and economic stability of local Communities. Provide a pleasing and natural looking forest environment. Maintain a high quality wilderness. Alternative A B C D E 1 5 4 2 3 12. Provide for a variety of high 2 4 5 1 3 quality, year-round forest recrea- tion opportunities to accomodate a wide variety of users. 13. Acquire or dispose of National 2 3 4 1 5 Forest land units where land ad- justment would have a significant positive effect on total public benefits. The following briefly indicates the rationale for rank- ing alternatives by each management goal. 103 104 Rationale For Ranking Alternatives Evaluation Criteria Alternative A Alternative B 1. Enhance or maintain water quality at state and federal standards. 1–Greatest potential for water quality degradation due to most intensive timber harvest activities, highest density of roads and greatest opportunity for dispersed roaded recreation activities. 5–Lowest potential for water quality degradation as a result of the least amount of timber harvest ac- tivities, lowest density of roads and emphasis on non-motorized recreation activities. 2. Enhance or maintain the quality of the air TOSOUTCO. 1—Greatest potential for air quality degradation as a result of the most intensive timber harvest activities with subsequent residue disposal (smoke) and the highest density of roads with potential for creating dust. 5–Most fully meets the management goal—lowest potential for air quality degradation as a result of the least amount of timber harvest and road construc- tion. 3. Provide for the protection of the soil resource. 1–Greatest potential for soil disturbance and displacement as a result of the most intensive timber harvest activities, highest density of roads and greatest opportunity for dispersed roaded recrea- tion activities. 5–Lowest potential for soil disturbance and displacement as a result of the least amount of timber harvest activities, lowest density of roads and trails and emphasis on non-motorized recreation activities. 4. Provide for development and use of energy SOUTCOS. 5–Greatest road density providing for the most ready access throughout the area for exploration, development and transport. It has the least amount of area with site modification restrictions. 1—Lowest road density allowing limited ready ac- cess throughout the area for exploration, develop- ment and transport. Has the greatest amount of area with site modification restrictions. 5. Provide for protection of threatened and en- dangered plants, plant communities and animals. 1–Presents greatest risk due to extensive road system, timber harvest and second highest amount of recreation. 5–Provides greatest protection from road building and timber harvest. Primitive forms of recreation is high, but this is not considered a high risk. 6. Provide fish and wildlife habitat to insure diversity in species and habitat types. 5–Provides the greatest opportunity for diversity and abundance of wildlife and habitat due to the high level of timber harvest. 1–Presents the least opportunity for diversity due to low level of timber harvest. 7. Maintain or increase areas for sustained timber production. 5–Provides the greatest long and short term timber production. This is the only alternative showing an increase of production in the short term over the 1979 management situation. 1—The greatest fall-down in timber production is found in this Alternative in the Short run, but it shows a slight increase in the long run when com- pared to the 1979 management situation. 8. Protect cultural, historical and archeological values. 1–Greatest potential for site disturbance resulting from timber harvest, road Construction and other modification activities. Increased access throughout the area creates the greatest potential for vandalism. 5–Provides the greatest opportunity for site protec- tion as a result of the least site disturbing activity and minimum access throughout the area. 9. Contribute to social and economic stability of local communities. 5–Has highest level of employment and income potential. . 1–Has lowest level of employment and income potential. 10. Provide a pleasing and natural appearing forest environment. 1–Would meet goal on 60% of management unit, 100% on Wilderness as measued by visual condition Class Ill. 5–Would meet goal on 94% of management unit, 100% on Wilderness as measured visual condition Class Ill. 11. Maintain a high quality Wilderness. 1–Provides the most ready road and trail access and provides opportunity for the greatest total number of visitor days of Wilderness recreation. It thus has the greatest potential for impact on the Wilderness ecosystem and provides the least oppor- tunity for solitude or a primitive and unconfined recreation experience. 5–Provides the most primitive road and trail access and opportunities for the fewest total number of visitor days of Wilderness recreation. Thus it has the least potential for impact on the Wilderness ecosystem and provides the greatest opportunity for solitude on a primitive and unconfined recreation experience. 12. Provide for a variety of high quality year-round forest recreation opportunities to accomodate a wide variety of users. 2–Provides for the Second narrowest recreation op- portunity spectrum and the lowest total number of recreation visitor days available. 4—Provides the second broadest recreation oppor- tunity spectrum and the third highest total number of recreation visitor days available. 13. Acquire or dispose of National Forest land units where land adjustment would have a significant positive effect on total public benefits. 2–Provides little environmental protection, many conflicts will Still exist. 3–Consolidates and protects many environmental resources, but at a very high Cost. Alternative C Alternative D Alternative E 4–Similar to Alternative B, but with slightly greater amount of timber harvest activities and density of roads. It has a much higher emphasis on dispersed roaded recreation activities. 2—Similar to Alternative A, but with slightly lower amount of timber harvest activities, density of roads and emphasis on roaded dispersed recreation activities. 3—Similar to Alternative A and D, but with slightly lower amount of timber harvest activities, density of roads and roaded recreation. 4–Similar to Alternative B, but with slightly higher potential for smoke and dust as a result of higher timber harvest and greater road density. 2—Similar to Alternative A, but with slightly lower potential for Smoke and dust as a result of lower timber harvest and lower road density. 3—Similar to Alternatives A and D, but with lower potential for smoke and dust generation. 4–Similar to Alternative B, but with higher potential for soil movement due to emphasis on motorized dispersed recreation. 2—Similar to Alternative A, but less resource modification would result in lower potential for soil movement. 3—Similar to Alternatives A and D, but less resource modification would result in lower potential for Soil movement. 2—Low road density provides limited access throughout the area. Emphasis on recreation and visual considerations restrict site modifications. 4–Similar to Alternative A, but has lower road density. 3—Similar to Alternatives A and D, but has lower road density. 2—Similar to Alternative B. 2—Similar to Alternative A, but not as much risk. 4–Similar to Alternative C, but not as much roading and timber harvest. Recreation is about the same. 3–Presents moderate risk from roads, timber harvest and recreation. 4–Similar to Alternative A, but not to same degree. 3—Provides a moderate opportunity for diversity. 2—This is similar to Alternative B, but shows slight improvement in production both in the short and long run. 4–While this Alternative has a fall-down in timber production in the Short run, it shows a substantial in- crease in production over the long run when com- pared to the 1979 management situation. 3—This Alternative is similar to D except the Short term timber fall-down is greater and the long term is a little less productive. 4—Similar to Alternative B, but the emphasis on dispersed roaded recreation increase potential for Vandalism. 2—Similar to Alternative A, but has less ready access throughout the area. 3—Similar to Alternatives A and D, but has ground disturbing activities and less ready access throughout the area. 2—This Alternative similar to B, but is slight Improvement. 4—Alternatives D and E are very similar. D gets higher rating because one additional job in timber generates greater income than one additional job in recreation, plus timber jobs tend to benefit local communities more. 3–Very similar to Alternative D. Total employment is greater than Alternative D; however, because employ- ment is generated in recreation activities, the total income generated is less. 4–Would meet goal on 93% of management unit, 100% on Wilderness as measured by visual condi- tion Class Ill. 2–Would meet goal on 84% of management unit, 100% on Wilderness as measured by visual condi- tion Class Ill. e 3—Would meet goal on 85% of management unit, 100% on Wilderness as measured by visual condi- tion Class Ill. 3—Similar to Alternative E, but has more improved road and trail access thus greater potential for im: pact on the Wilderness ecosystem. 2—Similar to Alternative A, but with slightly fewer roads and higher standard trails. 4–Provides the most road and high standard trail ac- cess throughout the management unit thus providing relief to the Wilderness. Also low standard trail ac- cess within the Wilderness results in low impact. 5–Provides the broadest recreation opportunity Spectrum and greatest total number of recreation Visitor days available. 1—Results in the narrowest recreation opportunity spectrum by providing no “primitive” or “semi- primitive non-motorized” opportunities. Also results in the second lowest total number of recreation visitor days available. 3–Provides the third broadest recreation opportunity Spectrum and the second highest total number of recreation visitor days available. 4—Consolidates and protects environmental resources at relatively high costs. Provides private development opportunity. 1–Provides some environmental protection. Con- flicts may still exist. Many areas left with administrative conflicts. 5–Protects environmental resource and opportunity to consolidate. Makes lands available for private development opportunity. 105 Looking northwest up the Cle Elum River Valley to Hyas Lake and Deception Pass with Mt. Daniel on the skyline. Photo by U.S. Forest Service. | While no evaluation process can be entirely free of subjectivity, the process used by the Forest Service to arrive at a preferred alternative management plan includes the following separate but interrelated steps: 1. Criteria for selecting a preferred alternative were established with public input before the alternatives were developed. 2. A range of viable alternatives for management were developed based upon goals of management, program objectives and tests of feasibility, with input from public and other agencies. 3. Alternatives were compared and the degree to which they satisfied the requirements of the pre- established goals was examined. The foremost con- sideration was not a strong showing in one or another area of special concern, but overall balance. ALTERNATIVE E EMERGED AS THE FOREST SERVICE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE. Below is a brief description of how the alternatives measured up against each other in the physical and biological realms and in terms of human activities. Physical Environment — Alternative B, which called for minimal modification of land in the management unit, received the highest potential rating followed closely by Alternative C. Alternative E avoided heavy impact on employment without imposing the exten- Sive alterations of A and D which emphasize road Construction and timber harvest. Thus Alternative E Strikes the best balance between protection and utilization. Biological Environment — Emphasis on timber management makes A the leading alternative in utilization of the biological resource. Alternative B which calls for the fewest new roads and the smallest timber harvest is superior in preserving the natural environment. Alternative C ranks the Same as B but strikes a better overall balance. Alternative E best accommodates wildlife dependent on vegetative diversity, while Alternative B best favors wildlife dependant on old growth ecosystems. Although Alternatives D and E are very close, E provides the º combination of diversity, utilization and protec- |On. Human Environment — Absolute judgements about the advantages and disadvantages of the various alternatives are impossible in this realm. What is desirable to people for whom the Alpine Lakes Area is a source of employment may be undesirable to those who consider it a place for recreation or intrin- Sically valuable because of its natural qualities. Alternatives A and B are furthest from meeting evaluation criteria because of their relatively limited emphasis. Alternative C provides the greatest recrea. tion variety. The Preferred Alternative ranks con- Sistently high in areas of primary public concern: recreation, Community stability, timber management, Scenic beauty and Wilderness protection. 109 - -- Looking northwest from the Davis Peak area up the Waptus River to waptus Lake and Dutch Miller Gap. Photo by U.S. Forest Service. º The Alpine Lakes Area has generated extensive public debate for over a decade. State Congressional Representatives, local leaders, corporate executives, Owners of mills, outdoor recreation groups, en- Vironmentalists, and thousands of individuals have all contributed to the process of determining the area's future. Many examples could be cited of provisions in the proposed alternatives that exist because of the in- itiative of concerned people. It was recommended that several additional lakes in the Wilderness be re- tained in a trailless condition after one of the longest established fishing organizations in the state expressed a desire for such action. Criteria for deter- mining timber productivity estimates were adjusted as a result of public comment. Public involvement was not intended to be an end in itself, but an on-going effort to understand and be responsive to the expectations of those who value the area. This learning process, hopefully, has moved in both directions creating a working relationship which can assist in the resolution of future manage- ment questions. Process Used Three primary methods were used to obtain public involvement between July of 1976 and the present: (1) The “Alpine Lakes Report” newsletter. (2) Open public meetings. (3) Discussions or field trips with various interest groups. Fourteen issues of the “Alpine Lakes Report,” Some including response forms, kept about 1,400 people or organizations informed during the planning process. Issues discussed included the planning team charter, planning procedures, the public involvement plan, an interim proposal to limit group size in the Wilderness and planning assumptions about future demands for goods and services. Each was accompanied by a news release and all public involvement events were widely publicized. Public meetings included open houses and workshops held in Bellevue, Seattle and Wenatchee. The public had an opportunity to ask questions and See the maps and other working documents used by the planning team to evaluate capability and Suitability of land in the Alpine Lakes Area to provide goods and services. Workshops were held to obtain recommendations for management of the Enchantments part of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness from people who use the area. More than 50 people attended these workshops held in June, 1979. Regular contact occurred between the planning team and members of Special interest groups such as sled-dog owners, rockhounders, backpackers, off- road vehicle users, Sawmill operators and floatplane pilots. Many recreation groups provided their own written plans for portions of the area which par. ticularly concerned them. The Alpine Lakes Protec- tion Society submitted suggestions for managing all resources in the area. More than 35 meetings including field trips have been held with groups so far, in addition to meetings with other public agencies, contacts with univer- sities, organizations and individuals, and briefings for legislators. Consultation The following is a partial list of groups and agencies consulted during planning: Groups and Individuals Alpine Lakes Protection Society Alpine Veneers Apple Country Snowmobile Club Backcountry Horsemen of Washington Burlington Northern Cascade Grotto of National Speleological Society Cascadians Central Washington Cascade Study Team Cle Elum Chamber of Commerce Cougar Lakes Alliance A.R. Grant, Mining Consultant Industrial Forestry Association L.C. Lloyd, Construction Mazamas Mountaineers National Campers and Hikers Association North Cascades Conservation Council North Cascades Snowmobile Association Northwest Mining Association Northwest Sled Dog Association Pacific Northwest Four Wheel Drive Association Pan Pacific Company Seaboard Lumber Company Seattle Audobon Society Sierra Club Stevens Pass, Inc. The Pack River Company Timber Purchasers Defense Fund Trailblazers U. S. Seaplane Pilots Northwest Washington Environmental Council Washington Native Plants Society Washington State Good Sams Washington State Hi-Lakers Washington State Mineral Council Washington State Snowmobile Association Western Environmental Trade ASSOCiation — Washington Western Forest Industries Association Weyerhaeuser Company Wilderness Society Yakima Indian Tribal Council Yakima River Group Sierra Club State of Washington Agencies College Forest Resources, University of Washington Department of Ecology Department of Natural Resources Department of Transportation Game Department Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Parks and Recreation Commission Washington Natural Heritage Program U.S. Government Agencies Bureau of Mines Bureau of Reclamation Geological Survey Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service Northeast Forest Experiment Station Pacific Northwest Forest & Range Experiment Station Rocky Mountain Forest & Range Experiment Station U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Counties Chelan County Commissioners Chelan County Planning Department Kittitas County Commissioners Kittitas County, Planning Department King County Commissioners King County, Engineering Department King County, Planning Department 113 peļļO ĐInļeuÐļļT Adams, Darius and Richard Haynes 1979. The 1980 softwood timber assessment market model: structures, projections, and policy simulations. (unpublished draft) Bassett, Patricia M. and Grover A. Choate 1974. Timber resource statistics for Washington. USDA, Forest Service Res. Bull. PNW-53 Bortleson, G. C. 1977. Preliminary water-quality characterization of lakes in Washi ſº Resources Investigations pp. 31, 77-94. shington, U.S. Geological Survey Water Dailey, Tom and Dave Redman 1975. Guidelines for roadless area Campsite Spacing to minimize im e * Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-35, 20p. 9 impact of human-related noises. USDA del Moral, R. 1978. High elevation vegetation of the Enchantment Lakes Basin, Washington, Can. J. Botany 57:1111-1130. Dethier, D. P. 1978. Earth-science information for planning and management of the Alpi tº Washington USGS, Seattle. Draft Study. 9 e Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area, Dethier, D. P., P. L. Heller, and S. A. Safioles 1979. Reconnaissance data on lakes in the Alpine Lakes Wildern g * report 79-1465.200. ess Area, Washington. USGS open-file Easterbrook, Dan J. and David A. Rohm 1970. Landforms of Washington, the geologic environment. Union Printing, Wash. Fay, S.C. and R.H. Walke 1977. The composting option for human waste disposal in the back e Research Note NE-246. p ackcountry. USDA, Forest Service Fox and Wooldridge 1974. Model development and systems analysis of the Yakima River Basin study. Univ. Wash. Report 17E. Gedney, Don R., Daniel D. Oswald, and Roger D. Fight Hº º projections of timber supply in the Pacific coast states. USDA Forest Service Res. Bull. Gilliam, R.J., D.P. Dethier, S.A. Safioles and P.L. Heller 1979. Preliminary evaluation of lake susceptibility to water-quality degradati Alpi e Area, Washington. USGS, Seattle Draft Study. Q y deg ion, Alpine Lakes Wilderness Grant, Alan Robert 1976. Report of evaluation: mineral resource analysis study on United States F e Washington. USDA, Forest Service R-6, 93 pp. y Orest Service land, State of Hanley, Thomas A. and Richard D. Taber 1979. Wildlife habitat relationship guidelines for the Alpine Lakes Wilderness and ma Univ. Wash. College For. Resources. 311 p. nagement areas. Hendee, John C. and Dale R. Potter 1975. Hunters and hunting: management implications of research. In. Proc. Southern Sta º Research, Applications Workshop. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Report SE-9 tes Recreation Lee, Roger D., James M. Symons and Gorden G. Robeck 1970. Watershed human-use level and water quality. Journal of American Water Works Assoc. 62(7). 117 Margalef, Ramon 1969. Diversity and stability: A practical proposal and a model of interdependence. In Diversity and Stability of Ecological Systems. Brookhaven Symp. Biol. 22. pp 25-37. Brookhaven Nat’l. Lab., Upton, NY Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission, Recreation Data Subcommittee 1976. A regional recreation data program for the northwest. 60 p. PNRBC, Vancouver, Washington. Petersen, Richard J. 1979. Wildlife habitats in managed forests of the Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service Handbook No. 553. (cited p. 43) Sando, Rodney W. 1978. Natural fire regimes and fire management — foundations for direction. Western Wildlands 4(4):34-45. Seattle Water Department 1978. Cedar-Tolt watershed management plan. Draft EIS. Seattle. 228 pp. Thomas, Jack Ward (Tech. Ed.) 1979. Wildlife habitats in managed forests the Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service Handbook No. 553. 512 p. USD] 1972. 1970 National Survey of fishing and hunting. Fish and Wildlife Service. Resource publ. 95. 108 p. USD] 1977. 1975 National Survey of hunting and fishing. Wildlife Associated Recreation. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1975. Logging roads and protection of water quality. EPA 91019-75-007 Region X Water Division. 313 p. U.S. Forest Service tº 1973. Snoqulamie Pass an intensive land classification study. Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forest, Seattle, WA U.S. Forest Service - 1979. BALD EAGLE biological unit management plan. Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Seattle, WA Varness, K.J., R.E. Pacha, and R.F. Lapen 1978. Effects of dispersed recreation activities on the microbiological quality of Forest surface water. Appl. Environ. Microbiology 36(1). Washington, State of 1978. Water quality standards for waters of the State. WAC. chap. 173-201. Washington, State of tº 1978. Washington State county population forecasts by age and sex: 1970-2005. Office of Financial Management. Washington, State of g 1979. Washington statewide outdoor recreation plan. Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation. Olympia. Wolcott, Ernest E. 1965. Lakes of Washington Western Washington, – Eastern Washington. 650 p. Dept. Ecology., Olympia, Washington. 118 Áuessolſ) Acre Foot — A water or sediment volume measure- ment term, equal to the amount of water which would cover an area of one acre to a depth of one foot. ADT – See Average Daily Traffic Alpine Lakes Area — Includes Congressionally designated Alpine Lakes Wilderness, Intended Wilderness, and surrounding Management Unit. Anadromous Fish — Species that migrate up rivers and streams to the place of birth to spawn. Includes Salmon and steelhead trout. Animal Unit Month (AUM) — An animal unit is con- Sidered to be a cow and calf, one thousand pounds of live weight. The quantity of forage consumed by the cow and calf in one month is an animal-unit- month of forage, abbreviated AUM. An animal-unit- equivalent is the equating of other classes of livestock to an AUM. Associated Stands — A group of coniferous trees in- cluding white fir, Douglas-fir, Engelmann Spruce, western hemlock, sugar pine, incense cedar and as minor elements, ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine. Average daily traffic (ADT) — The average 24-hour volume of traffic, being the total volume of traffic during a stated period divided by the number of days in that period. Unless otherwise stated, the period is One year. Background — The landscape beyond the middle ground i.e. landscapes usually greater than 5 miles from the observer. Biological Potential — The maximum amount of sus- tainable wood fiber obtainable by application of in- tensive management practices to acres classified as Commercial forest land. The needs of other forest USeS are not considered. Board Foot (Bd. Ft.) — A volume of solid wood, one foot square and one inch thick. Trees and logs are normally measured in board feet and totals are ex- pressed in thousands of board feet (MBF) or millions of board feet (MMBF). Capability — The potential of an area of land to pro- duce resources, supply goods and services, and allow resource uses under an assumed set of management practices and at a given level of management intensity. Capability depends upon Con- ditions such as climate, slope, landform, soils and geology, as well as the application of management practices, such as silviculture or protection from fire, In Sects and disease. CFL – See Commercial Forest Land. CFR – Code of Federal Regulations. It is the general and permanent rules of the Federal Government. Coefficients - The amount of (or consequence of) a resource or use that can be expected from one acre of land in one year under a certain management prescription. Commercial Forest Land — Productive forest land that is capable of growing continuous crops of in- dustrial wood and has the ability to produce at least 20 cubic feet per acre per year of industrial wood. Does not include productive forest land withdrawn from regulated and unregulated timber use, i.e., pro- ductive deferred and productive reserved. Also refer. red to as CFL. Component - A portion of the commercial forest land base which has management direction apart from other portions. Conversion Period — A period of time, starting with the present and ending when all elements of the Forest have been treated or have had the Opportunity to be treated. Usually this means that all acres scheduled for regeneration cutting have been harvested at least once. Cover - Vegetation used by animals for hiding (eva- Sion from humans) and climatic (thermal) relief. Cultural Resources — The remains of sites, struc- tures or objects used by humans in the past; historical or archaeological. DBH – Diameter Breast High or 4.5 feet above ground height. This is a standard height to measure treeS. Deferred Forest Land — Land that has been ad- ministratively identified for study as possible addi- tions to the Wilderness System or other withdrawal from timber utilization under authority granted in the Federal Code of Regulations. DEIS — Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Developed Recreation – Concentrated public use on a relatively small, distinctly defined portion of the National Forest used for traditional purposes such as camping, picnicking, downhill skiing, and other activities. Developed Site — A land allocation designation for managing forest environments substantially modified for Campgrounds, ski areas, administrative sites, etc. Dispersed Recreation – 1. A land allocation designa- tion for managing land primarily in an unroaded con- dition with emphasis on amenity values. 2. A general term for recreation use outside a developed recrea- tion site; includes such activities as Scenic driving, hunting, backpacking and recreation activities in primitive environments. Diversity — The distribution and abundance of dif- ferent plant and animal communities and Species within the area. Ecoclass – An identification system used in map- ping the characteristics of a land area. Community Type is a soil-vegetative type which is significantly different in its management characteristics from other soil-vegetative types. Ecosystem – An environment that contains living organisms and their interrelationships with each Other. EIS – Environmental Impact Statement. Empirical Yield Table — A table reflecting the stan- ding timber volumes today and what they would be in the future, if the timber stand were left to grow and not Cut. Endangered Species – Animal life forms (birds, fish, mammals, plants) found on the U.S. Department of the Interior ‘s list and published in the Federal Register. Their presence on the list implies that their Continued existence as a species is questionable. Even-Aged Management — The management of forest stands where trees have relatively the same age and the object of management is to perpetuate this condition. Even Flow — Maintaining a relatively constant Supply of timber from year to year. Experience Level 1 Recreation Development – A developed camp or picnic site with minimum site modification. Rustic or rudimentary improvements designed for the protection of the site rather than comfort of the user. Experience Level 2 Recreation Development – A developed camp or picnic site with little site modification. Rustic or rudimentary improvements designed for the protection of the site rather than Comfort of the user. Experience Level 3 Recreation Development – A developed camp or picnic site with moderate site modification. Facilities provided equally for protec- tion of site and comfort of users. 121 Experience Level 4 Recreation Development – A developed camp or picnic site with heavy modifica- tion. Some facilities are provided strictly for comfort and convenience of users but luxury facilities are not provided. Floodplain — The lowland and relatively flat areas joining inland and coastal waters, including debris cones and floodprone areas. Floodplains include at a minimum, that area subject to a 1 percent (100-year recurrence) or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Foreground – The landscape encompassed within approximatly 0-1/2 mile from the observer. 4 x 4 Route – A designated route for vehicles in ex- cess of 40 inches wide, but constructed and manag- ed as a recreation facility for 4 wheel drive vehicles. Synonymous with “Jeep Trail”. - FSM — Forest Service Manual. Fuel Break — A strategically located strip of land, usually 100 to 500 feet wide, that has had flammable vegetation removed so that fires burning into it can be more readily extinguished. Fuel Hazard – An accumulation of vegetative fuel that has a high risk of ignition or difficulty of sup- pression. General Forest — A land allocation designation for managing forest land for a variety of resource utiliza- tion activities. Habitat — The place where a plant or animal natural- ly or normally lives and grows. Habitat Edge — The geographical boundary between two habitats. Indicator Species — An animal which represents a group of animals with the same or similar habitat re- quirements. In each group, the indicator species is the most sensitive to habitat manipulation. Intended Wilderness — 86,426 acres designated by the Alpine Lakes Area Management Act to become part of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness upon acquistion of the private lands. Land Allocation – The mix of land use management activities occurring on the same piece of land. Land Capability — See Capability. Land Ownership Classification — The determination of the optimum land ownership pattern necessary to achieve objectives of Forest Service land manage- ment. Lands are classed as: Category I — retain or acquire as directed by Congress; Category II — Forest Service retain or acquire as needed for ad- ministration or special designation; Category III — neutral (management the same regardless of owner- Ship); Category IV — Forest Service candidate for disposal; Category V – additional intensive study needed to determine priority of ownership. Land Management Planning — The process of organizing the development and use of lands and their resources in a manner that will best meet the needs of people over time, while maintaining flexibili- ty for a dynamic combination of resources for the future. Land Ownership — See Land Classification. Land Suitability — See Suitability. M or m – The Roman numeral for 1,000. MAI — Mean Annual Increment. Refers to tree growth. Managed Yield Table — A table showing, for a given species on a given site, the progressive development of a managed stand at periodic intervals covering the greater part of its useful life. It usually includes average diameter, basal area, number of trees, and final yields, and may include volumes of thinnings depending on the level of management intensity pro- grammed for the stand. In management planning this is the way the stand is projected to grow under managed conditions. management unit – An area designated by the Alpine Lakes Area Management Act to provide for the management of all resources. Marginal Component – The portion of the regulated commercial forest land on which it is presently not feasible (economically or technologically) to manage for timber harvest because of Soil constraints, dif- ficulties in establishing tree regeneration or excessive development Costs. Maximum Modification – One of six measurable standards for the visual management of the land- scape. Land management activities can dominate the natural landscape to a greater extent than in the modification objective. This quality objective, however, was not used in the Alpine Lakes Area because it is limited to Variety Class “C” background or seldom Seen viewing areas. No Variety Class “C” exists within the Alpine Lakes Area. MBF – Thousand board feet. See board feet. Middle Ground — The landscape beyond the foreground but less than the background i.e. approxi- mately 1/2-5 from the observer. MMBF —One million board feet. See board foot. MMCF – One million cubic feet. New timber management plans express tree or log volume on a cubic foot basis because it is a truer representation of actual volume of wood fiber than board foot volume. Compared to board feet a cubic foot in a cube of wood 12 inches on all sides or its equivalent. Modification – One of six measurable standards for the visual management of the landscape. Manage- ment activities may visually dominate the original surrounding landscape but must borrow from natural- ly established form, line, Color and texture. A timber clearcut will be designed to take the slope of natural openings, logging slash will be disposed of, and cut and fill slopes on roads revegetated to reduce visual effect of the opening. Modern-Urban ROS Class – Areas characterized by substantially urbanized environment, although the background may have natural elements. Renewable resource modification and utilization practices are common. Vegetative cover is often exotic and manicured. Sights and Sounds of humans predomi- nant. Large numbers of visitors can be expected both on-site and in nearby areas. Multiple-Use — The practice of forestry which com- bines two or more objectives, such as production of wood, livestock, forage, wildlife habitats, landscape effects, recreation opportunities, and other resouſ CeS. Municipal-Supply Watershed — A municipal water- shed which provides water for human consumption where Forest Service management could have a significant effect upon the quality of water at the in- take point and that provides water utilized by a com- munity or any other public water system regularly serving at least 25 individuals at least 60 days out of the year or provides at least 15 service connections. NEPA — National Environmental Policy Act. A 1969 law directing Federal agencies to evaluate environmental impacts of proposed action. Non-Commercial Forest Land — See Unproductive Forest Land. Non-Forest Land – Land that has never supported forests and lands formerly forested but now developed for such non-forest uses as crops, im- proved pasture, and residential areas. 122 Objective — A future condition or result to be accomplished. Old Growth — Very old trees usually past physiological maturity. ORV (Off-Road Vehicle) — A motorized vehicle Capable of cross-country travel or travel on low-grade roads and trails; e.g., motorbikes, four-wheel drives, Snowmobiles, etc. Includes all-terrain vehicles (ATV's). PAOT – In recreation, PAOT means people at one time. Partial Retention — One of six measurable standards for the visual management of the landscape. Management activities may be evident to the viewer, but must remain visually subordinate to the surroun- ding landscapes. Mitigation of negative contrast must be accomplished as soon as possible, no longer than a year after completion of a project. The results of management activities, such as logging, may be evident to the forest viewer but must remain Subordinate to the characteristic landscape. Timber harvest units, for example, will be designed to blend unobtrusively into the landscape by manipulating size, shape and locations of the units. PCT – Pacific Crest Trail designated under authority of the National Recreation Trails Act of 1968. P.L. 90-543 – National Trails System Act of October 2, 1968. Plant Community — A group of plants that are distinct in land management limitations or oppor- tunities, that can be easily recognized on the ground and have limited variability in species Composition and productivity. Potential Yield – Sustainable output of wood fiber available after subtraction of wood fiber for other resource objectives from the biological potential. Also see biological potential. Prescribed Fires – Any fire which is permitted to burn within constraints in order to accomplish Specific resource objectives. Prescribed fires may result from either planned or unplanned ignitions but must meet pre-established criteria for fuel and weather conditions, topography and other variables. Preservation — One of six measurable standards for the visual management of the landscape. It allows only ecological changes. Management activities, ex- Cept for very low visual impact recreation facilities, are prohibited. This objective applies to specially Classified areas including Wilderness. Primitive ROS Class – Generally includes those areas out of sight and Sound of people's activities and greater than 3 miles from roads open to public travel. Opportunity exists for a high degree of in- teraction with the natural environment, challenge, risk and the opportunity to use outdoor skills. Because of the areas remoteness, users of these areas are normally required to stay overnight. Primitive Wilderness ROS Class — The second most primitive of the four Wilderness management zones. Areas usually extend along minor (Service Level C) travel routes and within 500 feet on either side. Con- centration of users is very low and with minimal evidence of other area users. Only essential facilities, restrictions and controls are present. Those provided are primarily for protection of the Wilderness Resource. Productive Forest Land — Forest land that is capable of growing continuous crops of commercial wood and has the ability to produce at least 20 cubic feet per acre per year of commercial wood. Includes productive deferred, productive reserved, and com- mercial forest land. Programmed Allowable Timber Harvest — That por- tion of the potential maximum timber yield that is Scheduled for harvest during a fiscal year. Factors that effect the amount include agency funding level, personnel available, markets, and multiple-use con- Straints imposed on sale scheduling. The unregulated timber component may also be program- med under certain circumstances. Recreation information Management (RIM) — A com- puter oriented system for the management of infor- mation about recreation places managed by the Forest Service, facilities that are placed on those places, and the use made of both by people. It fur- nishes current information on the identification, loca- tion, dimensions, Condition and recreation-use of each recreation site and area in the National Forest System. Recreation Mining — A transitory on-the-ground ac- tivity engaged in for the pleasure of finding a mineral such as gold or other mineral specimens. This activi- ty is non-commercial and is carried out for leisure time purposes (hobby) rather than to develop a valuable mineral deposit under provision of the min- ing laws. Normally independent of a mining claim. Recreation Opportunity — A relative measure of op- portunity available in Recreation Visitor Days. Not related to how much use actually occurs. Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) — Land delineations which identify a variety of recreation ex- periences in six classes along a continuum from primitive to modern-urban. Each class is defined in terms of the degree to which it satisfies certain recreation needs based on area size, the extent to which the natural environment has been modified, the type of facilities developed and the degree of outdoor skills needed to enjoy the area. The six classes are: (1) primitive—representing the most remote, undeveloped and inaccessible opportunities (2) semi-primitive non-motorized (3) semi-primitive motorized (4) roaded natural (5) rural and (6) modern- urban-representing the most developed, accessible and Convenience-oriented experience available. Recreation Visitor Days (RVD) — The recreational use of an area for a total of 12 hours by one person. An overnight stay usually results in two RVD. Regeneration — The renewal of a tree crop by natural Or artificial means. Regeneration Harvest – Removal of trees intended to encourage renewal or improvement of a tree crop. Regulated Timber Component — Timber harvested from those lands that will be or are organized on a Sustained-yield basis. Rehabilitation — One of six measurable standards for the visual management of the landscape. A short- term management objective used to restore land- scapes containing undesirable visual impacts to the desired visual quality level. Reserved Land – Area withdrawn from timber utiliza- tion by statute, administrative regulation, or by direc- tion in a land use plan. Resource Complex – A geograhic area (including lands within and contiguous to a National Forest) characterized by a particular pattern of topography, climate and land use, and established to provide a focus for planning activities in a small enough area to be workable and a large enough area to enable the planners to envision or predict the cause-and-effect relationships of management alternatives. Retention - One of six measurable standards for the visual management of the landscape. It provides for management activities which are not visually evi- dent. Management activities are permitted but the results of those activities on the natural landscape must not be evident by the average forest viewer. Any negative visual contrast produced by an activity must be mitigated. This may be accomplished, for example, by revegetation or by painting structures to blend into a natural setting. Clearings would be designed to appear as natural openings. 123 Revegetation — Introduction of plants by nature or humans (e.g., tree planting or grass seeding). Research Natural Areas (RNA's) – Designated areas of land, usually over 300 acres in size, with characteristics of scientific or educational interest about the ecological processes which will be of value for observation and research on plant and animal succession, habitat requirements of species, insect and fungus depradations, Soil microbiology, phenology, and related phenomena. RIM – See Recreation Information Management. Road – Any continuous set of parallel wheel tracks retaining the characteristics of a travelway for vehicles with four wheels over 40 inches wide. Roaded Natural ROS Class — Include areas less than % mile from roads open to public travel railroads, major power lines and within resource modification areas. Areas in this class vary in size from 100 to over 2,000 acres and are characterized by predominately natural environments, with moderate evidence of sights and sounds of humans. Such evidence usually harmonize with the natural environ- ment. Concentration of users is moderate to low. Rock Hounding — A recreational activity related to recreation mining for the purpose of obtaining non- metallic specimens as raw material for rock cutting, polishing or related activity. ROS — See Recreation Opportunity Spectrum. Rotation — The period of years required to establish and grow tree crops to a specific size or condition of maturity. Rural ROS Class — Includes those areas within Small communities, developed campgrounds, developed ski areas, and administrative sites. The areas are generally smaller than 500 acres in size and are characterized by substantially modified natural environments. Modifications are primarily to enhance Specific recreation activities. Sights and Sounds of humans are readily evident. Concentration of users, is moderate to high. RVD – See Recreation Visitor Day Scenic Forest – A land allocation designation for managing areas to retain or enhance viewing and recreation experiences. Sedimentation — The deposition of suspended mat- ter carried by water. Seen Area — Total area observed and may be measured in terms of foreground, middle ground and background. See foreground, middle ground and background. Semi-primitive Nonmotorized ROS Class – Generally includes those areas greater than % mile and less than 3 miles from system roads and ORV trails open to public travel. Limited opportunity exists for isola- tion from the sight and sounds of humans. Oppor- tunity exists for a high degree of interaction with the natural environment. A moderate challenge and risk factor and the opportunity to use outdoor skills are factors in this environment. Semi-primitive Motorized ROS Class — includes areas greater than 1/4 mile from roads. Areas are generally larger than 500 acres in size and Characterized by a predominantly unmodified natural environment with minimum evidence of sights and Sounds of humans. Concentration of users is normal- ly low. Road access is not maintained in these areas. Semi-primitive Wilderness ROS Class — The second least primitive of the four Wilderness zones. Areas are usually adjacent to minor trailheads and extend along secondary (Service Level B) travel routes and 500 feet on either side. Concentration of users is low but there is often evidence of other area users. The areas are managed in such a way that minimum con- trols, restrictions, and facilities are present. Those provided are primarily for protection of the Wilderness resource and user Safety. Seral – The stages that follow one another in ecological succession. Service level — Refers to management direction or use of roads and trails. For roads, five service levels are identified based upon expected traffic, type of vehicles, speed, travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, Safety, driving comfort, conve- nience, operating costs and environmental impact. For trails, four service levels refer to hiker, bike, horse and 4x4 routes. See Appendix A, Access Management Direction for further discussion. Share cost (cost share) - Joint planning, construc- ting, reconstructing, improving, maintaining, and using of a road System partly owned or administered by the Forest Service and partly by private owner- ship. Each party bears the proportion of the cost at- tributable to the anticipated benefits. Silviculture – The science and art of growing and tending forest crops by controlling the establish- ment, composition, distribution and representation of tree Species, age and/or size classes. Silvicultural practices include tree harvesting with the intent to establish a new forest, using genetically improved trees, precommercial and commercial thinning to in- Crease growth rate, fertilization and control of destructive animals, disease, or brush. Site Index – A measure of the relative productive capacity of an area for growing wood. Measurement of site index is based on height of the dominant trees in a stand at a given age. SMU – Streamside Management Units. Areas of land adjacent to streams that are managed in such a manner as to protect and enhance the aquatic habitat and water quality. Snag – A non-living standing tree. The interior of the snag may be Sound or rotted. Solitude – A recreational experience in which people may enjoy the Surroundings in a natural set- ting generally undisturbed by unnatural sounds or sights. Special Areas – A land allocation designation for managing unique features of an area. Special Component – The portion of the regulated commercial forest land that needs specially design- ed treatment of the timber resource to achieve land- scape or other key resource objectives. Standard Component – The portion of the regulated commercial forest land on which crops of commer- cial wood can be grown and harvested with adequate protection of the forest resources under the usual provisions of the timber sale contract. Streamside Management Zone — The stream and an adjacent area of varying width where practices that affect water quality and other aquatic resources are modified as necessary to meet the objectives for each class of stream. Suitability – The appropriateness of applying certain resource management practices to a particular area of land as determined by an analysis of the economic and environmental consequences and the alternative uses foregone. A unit of land may be suitable for a variety of individual or combined management practices. Sustained Yield – The achievement and maintenance in perpetuity of a high level annual or regular periodic output of the various renewable resources of the National Forests without impair- ment of the productivity of the land. Trail - Any continuous defined pathway developed by design or by use of persons, domestic livestock, or vehicles with a width of 40 inches or less. 124 Trailless Wilderness ROS Class — The most primitive of the four Wilderness management zones. Areas are greater than 500 feet from system trails. Concentration of users is very low. In these areas the natural processes and conditions have not and will not be measurably affected by the actions of users. No facilities are provided. Transition Wilderness ROS Class — The least primitive of the four Wilderness management zones. Areas are usually adjacent to major trailheads where the user makes the transition from motorized to foot Or horseback travel and is first introduced to the Wilderness. They normally extend from the boundary inward along primary (Service Level A) travel routes up to 3 miles and 500 feet on either side of the travel route. Day use is often predominant or equally mixed with destination travelers using the interior of the Wilderness. Unproductive Forest Land — Forest land of such low site quality that it is generally not capable of produc- ing 20 cubic feet per acre per year of industrial wood products. Synonymous with noncommercial forest land. Unregulated Timber Component – Commercial forest land that will not be organized for timber pro- duction under sustained yield principles. Area in- cludes experimental forests, recreation and ad- ministrative sites, special interest areas, and isolated tracts of commercial forest land so completely remote from manufacturing centers that sustained harvest is impractical. Visual Absorption Capability (VAC) - The relative measure of the physical ability of a tract of land to withstand management manipulations without adversely affecting its visual character. High VAC suggests that greater landscape modification is possible while meeting visual objectives. The pro- cess used in determining VAC is based on four physical factors: slope; vegetative pattern and screening ability; the ability of a site to recover of resiliency; and soil color contrast. Visual Management System (VMS) — A framework with criteria for identification and classification of the visual resource. Provides measurable standards for management. Visitor Day — See Recreation Visitor Day. Visual Quality Objectives (VQO) — Measurable stan- dards for the visual management of the landscape. Except for preservation which allows only ecological changes each objective describes a different degree of acceptable alteration of the natural landscape bas- ed upon the importance of aesthetics. See Preserva- tion, Retention, Partial Retention, Modification and Maximum Modification. Visual Resource – The composite of basic terrain, geologic features, water features, vegetative pat- terns, and land use effects that typify a land unit and influence the visual appeal the unit may have for visitors. Wetlands – Areas that are inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency sufficient to support a prevalence of vegetation or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as slough, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mud flats, and natural ponds. Wilderness — Congressionally designated area under authority of the Wilderness Act of 1964, Public Law 88-577. Wilderness ROS — Land delineations within the Wilderness which identify a variety of management schemes and experiences in four classes along a continuum from trailless to transition. Each class is defined in terms of the degree to which it satisfies certain recreation needs based on area size, the ex- tent to which the natural environment has been modified, the type of facilities developed and the degree of outdoor skills needed to enjoy the area. The four classes are: (1) trailless, representing the most remote, undeveloped and inaccessible oppor- tunities; (2) primitive (3) semi-primitive (4) transition, the most developed, accessible and convenience- oriented experience available within the Wilderness. Wildfires — Fires which do not conform to the predetermined criteria of a prescribed fire or those which would not meet any specified resource objec- tive. They are suppressed. Working Circle — A major subdivision of the forest comprised of similar timber types with comparable silvicultural management and rotation to harvest. It is a unit of forest land on which the potential yields and programmed allowable harvest is calculated. 125 XĐpul Air Quality 18, 37, 95, 144 Allocation (See Land Allocation Areas) Alpine Lakes Wilderness Designation 3, 6, 14, 209-211 Impacts 65, 71, 76, 81, 86 Management 4, 5, 15, 29, 33, 37, 43, 45, 48, 49, 53, 57, 61, 69, 74, 79, 84, 89, 150-186 Enchantment Core 4, 15, 16, 45, 50, 53, 57, 61 Alternatives Development 4, 41 Description 44-62 Effects 65-100 Evaluation 4, 37, 41, 103-106 ldentification of preferred — 4, 109 Burlington Northern 24 Cities 14, 23, 198 Climate 12 Commercial Guides and Outfitters 45, 49, 53, 57, 61, 155 Counties 33, 34, 195, 196, 197, 198, 200 Cultural Resources Inventory 25, 26, 193 Impacts 67, 71, 73, 76, 78, 81, 86, 95 Management 37, 138, 161-162, 193 Economics Costs 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 97, 98 Employment 34, 37, 97, 100, 196-197 Commodity Output 33, 34, 69, 74, 79, 84, 89, 97 Payments to counties 25, 97 Impacts 68, 73, 78, 83, 88, 96 Energy 31, 33, 37 Employment (See Economics) Endangered Species (See Fish & Wildlife – Special Interest) Evaluation (See Alternatives) Fire History 17, 24 Management 17, 46, 50, 53, 57, 61, 95, 139-143, 162-163 Fish & Wildlife Description 14, 19, 20, 34, 170-177, 202 Special Interest 21, 34, 37, 179, 201, 203 Management 4, 5, 20, 34, 37, 144-145, 156-157 Impacts 67, 73, 76, 78, 83, 88 Floatplanes 45, 49, 54, 57, 61, 155, 156 Forest Service 24, 25, 27 Geology 11 History 3, 22-26 Hºlocation Areas 41, 48, 52, 56, 59, 69, 74, 79, Land Ownership 5, 6, 33, 37, 44, 46, 54, 57, 67, 69, 71, 73, 74,76, 79, 83, 84, 88, 89, 95, 144 Lakes 25, 33, 170-177 Laws Alpine Lakes Area Management Act of 1976 ii, 3, 209-211 Wilderness Act of 1964 14, 15, 165-168 Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act 25 National Forest Management Act of 1976 25 National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 193 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 193 Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 193 Endangered Species Act of 1973 21 Executive Orders 11988 and 11990 (Water Quality) 133 Executive Order 11593 (Cultural Resources) 193 Safe Drinking Water Act 134 National Trails System Act of 1968 45, 49, 53, 56, 60 Mineral Resources 23, 25, 29, 45, 67, 71, 76, 81, 88, 159 Minorities 100 Native Americans 3, 22, 23, 193 Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail 28, 33, 153, 154, 155 Pack River Company 24 Population 33, 100, 195 Public Involvement 4, 113 Range 21, 23, 25, 45, 46, 49, 50, 54, 57, 61, 68, 69, 73, 74, 78, 79, 83, 84, 88, 89, 146, 163 Recreation General 15, 24, 28, 29, 32 Recreation Opportunity Spectrum 32-34, 45, 49, 53, 57, 60, 65, 69-71, 74-76, 79-81, 84-86, 89-91, 97.99, 104, 105, 136-138, 199, 200 Management 5, 32, 33, 34, 37, 45, 48, 52, 56, 59, 138 Impacts 65, 71, 76, 81, 86, 91, 97, 98, 99 Resource Complexes 6, 7, 69, 74, 79, 84, 89, 98, 99, 198, 200, 201, 205, 208 (See Alternative Maps) Riparian Zones 20, 133 Rivers 13, 14 Roads (See Transportation) Service Level (See Transportation) Soils 12, 37, 65, 71, 76, 81, 86, 158, 179 Special Areas 5, 26, 41, 44, 48, 52, 56,59, 146-147 Timber Species 18, 19, 31 129 Management 5, 24, 31, 32, 34, 37, 46, 52, 54, 57, 145-146, 205-206 Impacts 68,73, 76, 83, 88, 93, 94, 198-200, 207-208 Volume (harvest levels) 31, 69, 74, 79, 84, 89, 198-199, 205, 206 Transportation Trails 5, 28, 44, 45, 48, 52, 56, 59, 69, 74, 79, 84, 89, 135, 153 Railroads 23, 24, 25, 26 § § Roads 5, 24, 26, 27, 44, 52, 56, 59, 69, 74, 79, 84, 89, A Yºº 134 § º - //* Service Levels (See Alternative Maps) 134-135, 180 - / / 2 // Impacts 65, 71, 76, 81, 86 // ' /// % Sº Vegetation ºl, Y-c Species 17, 18, 201 § 9/Zizzº Z. Z, Special Interest 19, 179, 201 2% Wilderness Management 157 22 º Visual Resources Existing Conditions 12, 13 Visual Management System 12, 185, 187-189 Management 44, 48, 52, 56, 59, 133, 162 Impacts 65, 69, 71, 74, 76, 79, 81, 84, 86, 89, 92, 93 Water * . Quality 14, 34, 37, 133, 191 Irrigation 14 Municipal Supply 14, 133 Impacts 65, 71, 76, 81, 86, 95 Management 133, 158 Weyerhaeuser Company 24 Wilderness (See Alpine Lakes Wilderness) Wildlife (See Fish & Wildlife) 130 Looking northwest across the head of Ingalls Creek to Mt. Stuart and Stuart Pass. Photo by U.S. Forest Service. Appendix A Management Direction Common The following management direction applies to all alternatives considered in this Draft Environmental impact Statement (DEIS). For additional direction, see Alternatives Considered and the maps included with this DEIS. Visual Quality All projects will meet established visual quality ob: jectives. Maintain or enhance scenic quality Cºnsis, tent with the requirements of “primitive” and “semi- primitive nonmotorized” recreation and special areas. Visual management guidelines included in Appendix C will be used by project planners to measure possi- ble visual impacts and select landscaping strategies to mitigate adverse impacts. If a proposed develop. ment or activity exceeds these guidelines, judgments will have to be made about project feasiblity and whether mitigative measures would be sufficient to meet visual quality objectives. Develop corridor (viewshed) plans to assure that developments and uses will meet established visual quality objectives. These plans will be prepared first for the areas that can be seen from Interstate 90 and Highway 2. The next priority would be Scenic Forest allocations where timber management is proposed in areas of limited Visual Absorption Capability, par- ticularly land adjacent to Sensitivity Level I roads. Schedule timber harvest to maintain desired timber size and succession and describe the process by which negative visual impacts will be minimized and enhancement opportunities exploited. Continue coordination with State Parks and Recrea- tion Commission and Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service (HCRS) concerning the State Scenic Rivers and Nationwide Rivers inventory pro- grams. Rivers and their immediate environs, which are State Scenic or recommended for study as addi- tions to the national system of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, shall be preserved in as natural a condi- tion as practical. Overuse, which tends to downgrade their natural condition, shall be discouraged. Com- mercial uses which substantially interfere with ac- tivities of the general public will be limited (an exam- ple would be to limit commercial rafting access). to All Alternatives Rivers currently inventoried as possible additions to the National System by HCRS are: 1. Icicle Creek from Eight Mile Campground downstream approximately 19 miles. 2. Middle Fork Snoqualmie River from its source to four miles upstream from its confluence with the South Fork Snoqualmie River. 3. Wenatchee River from Lake Wenatchee downstream to the Columbia River. 4. State Scenic Rivers: Skykomish River to junction of the Tye River. Beckler River upstream from Skykomish River eight miles. Tye River from Skykomish to Tye Lake. Coordination with State Highway Commission for the management of State Scenic and Recreational Highway System roads will be continued. Interstate 90, State Highways 97 and 2 corridors within the management unit will be managed for the maintenance and enhancement of natural beauty, historic sites and viewpoints. Specific attention will be given to: 1. Exit and entrance roadways providing access to Scenic observation points, rest areas and Forest Service facilities. 2. Uniform signs and markers designating features and facilities, both State and Forest Service. Water Management of the riparian zone or streamside management unit (SMU): Forest Service land management policy in and near streams is covered in Forest Service Manual 8223, Management Zones. Further mitigating measures are Stated in Section XII(C.3.c.) following. Protection of floodplains and wetlands Floodplains and wetlands are defined in Forest Ser- vice Manual 2520, Interim Directive No. 10 under 2527.05, Emergency Directive No. 9, Executive Order 11988 and 11990. When the defined situations are en- Countered in the course of project planning, floodplains and wetlands shall be protected and managed in accordance with I.D. No. 10. Mitigating measures for timber management The measures discussed here exceed the state law governing logging practices (Washington Forest Practice Rules and Regulations, 7-16-76, WAC Title 222), except where reference is to see WAC 222. Full suspension logging systems will be used when cutting in areas of high headwall failure potential Cannot be avoided. Fills for log landings will be compacted in layers when necessary to prevent mass failure and road fill compaction will be treated according to WAC 122. Large quantities of debris on the edges or sides of landings wil not be allowed to remain through the wet season, where this material could cause debris avalanches. Stream crossings will be designed to prevent failure by being unobstructable or armored to allow overtopping. Large quantities of debris on the edges or sides of landings will not be allowed to remain through the wet season, where this material could cause debris avalanches. Stream crossings will be designed to prevent failure by being unobstructable or armored to allow overtop- ping. Water Quality In addition to measures under floodplains, lateral drainages on roads with ditches, will be spaced close enough to prevent ditch erosion and erosion of the Soil below the outlet of the drainage structure. Stream crossings will be protected by an intercep- ting lateral drainage just “up ditch” from the cross- ing so the intercepted ditch water will be discharged onto an infiltration area. An alternative would be to pave the ditch if the cutbanks can be prevented from raveling. 133 Roads which are chronic sediment sources will be rehabilitated. Cutting of shade vegetation along streams will be controlled to meet water temperature objectives. The potential for blowdown or damage of stream vegeta- tion will be assessed before harvesting in or adja- cent to special streamside management unit timber Classes. Debris will be disposed of in a manner which will prevent its entry or reentry into the stream. The impact on the nutrient balance of receiving waters will be assessed before project approval. Receiving lakes will be monitored for total nutrients and nutrient balance before and after initial applica- tions and before any subsequent applications in the tributary basin. Recreation High concentration of campers at undeveloped sites along streams has been shown to increase bacteria counts in those streams. If necessary, measures will be taken to either provide sanitary facilities or to pre- vent the concentration from occurring. Horses are also of concern because of bacteria. A horse has a much greater potential for stream Con- tamination than a human, due to the indiscriminate droppings directly into streams. Also, trails used by horses must be designed to remain firm and dry. If horse travel becomes excessive, or if the trail is in- adequately designed, it may become trenched and muddy. Water bars may be broken down. Water caught and channeled by the damaged trail could carry the horse droppings, sediment and turbidity in- to receiving streams. Such deteriorated trail condi- tions would also increase the contamination from big game animals attracted to the trails. If soil and water monitoring determines horse-caused trail deterioration to be contributing to environmental damage, then horse use must be modified or discon- tinued until the trail can be rebuilt or maintained to handle such traffic. Municipal Water Supply Drinking water standards in the “Safe Drinking Water Act” (PL 93-5-23) are for treated water and are the legal responsibility of the purveyor of the water. The Forest Service is required to provide raw water from national forest land which is capable of meeting safe drinking water standards after treatment. Relative to silvicultural practices and water quality standards, the legal obligation that the Forest Service has on all watersheds, including municipal supply, is to conduct activities in accordance with best management practices as defined in WAC 222. If the selected land management plan will not meet the needs or desires of a municipality, an informal agreement on procedural matters may be approved by the Forest Supervisor and properly authorized officials of the municipality. The informal agreement (memorandum of understanding) shall clearly state the general responsibilities, cooperative relation- ships, dates of periodic meetings and review, the methods of communication and exchanges of infor- mation (FSM 2543.21). The Regional Office will review the document before it is signed. When the memorandum of understanding deals with restrictions of use not identified in this plan, such as additional restrictions on recreation, timber harvesting, grazing or regulations on Sanitation or entry, it must be approved by the Regional Forester (FSM 2543.22). When the municipality feels the need for restriction beyond the bounds of multiple use, a formal agree: ment signed by the Chief of the Forest Service will be required (Regulation CFR 251.9 – FSM 2543.22). This agreement will clearly and specifically identify the kinds of uses to be restricted, the nature and the extent of the restriction, the Special protective measures which may be necessary or desirable, the assistance to be given to the Forest Service in the enforcement and the payments, if any, which shall be made to compensate the United States for losses of revenue resulting from the restrictions (Series 1000 Organization and Management FSM 678 Amendment 35). - Access Management Direction Roads The traditional analysis support by transportation planners insures that alternative land use plans are feasible and cost effective from the standpoint of transportation needs and mobility (7712.1 FSM 9/78 Amend. 32). More specific access management direc- tion, however, has been provided for the Alpine Lakes Area. There are approximately 1,250 miles of road within the management unit. The construction and management of any road is a management con- cern and a potential public issue. In the long con- troversy over Alpine Lakes, the public has expressed concern for approximately 80 individual roads. This concern has generally focused upon how the existing systems affect access to the Wilderness. In order to resolve problems that result from this situa- tion, management direction, in the form of Service Levels, is shown for each of these roads on the Land Allocation Map for each alternative. The locations on the maps are corridors, not precise locations. Five Service Levels have been identified that range from obliteration to optimum operating conditions for high volume mixed traffic. A Service Level is a Combina- tion of operating conditions that are ultimately ex- pected to occur on a given road segment. It is based upon the effects of a number of factors which in- clude average daily traffic, traffic mix, speed, travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort, convenience, operating costs and impacts on lands being accessed. In practice, specific levels are determined and recommended for individual road segments for each land management plan or alternative. The Service Level for the Selected alternative will become the basis for subsequent project design. Project plan- ning and design will determine maintenance levels, road geometric standards, surface type, cost-share agreements, special use permits and subsequent traffic rules and road regulations. Although the public may desire to have this more specific information at this time, it requires more precise project planning. The objective of any plan- ning process is to assist the decision maker by pro- gressively eliminating alternatives until the appropriate project design becomes apparent. If road standards were stated now, a key part of the evalua- tion process required during the design phase would be eliminated. Alternatives that would provide for the desired Service Level at a lower cost to the public could be prematurely ruled out. With this approach, subsequent planning will only consider those alter- natives that provide the Service Level identified for the selected land use alternative. The Forest Service has no jurisdiction over state and county road systems. The Service Levels shown are intended to illustrate how the management of National Forest lands would affect state and county road systems. The Service Levels for the selected alternative will serve as the basis of cooperative road agreements with these agencies. Management direc- tion for five Service Levels for roads within the management unit follow. Service Level A This Level will ultimately require a combination of standard, Surface type, maintenance and manage- ment necessary to provide ideal forest road traffic operating conditions and a minimum of traffic-related environmental impacts. Vehicles should be able to operate with a minimum of conflict at the design speed of the road. The road should provide maximum mobility and travel efficiency for a wide variety of vehicles. The road surface should be constructed and maintained to provide a Smooth, dust-controlled gravel or paved surface. These facilities are of primary importance for the transportation of resources and resource users. They provide key 134 access to large or popular land areas and are in- tended to be open and maintained for public recrea- tion travel during the snow-free season. They are often a continuation of the State Or County road systems and the transition will be a consideration in their design. However, the roads should only be wide enough for safe and leisurely passage of vehicles traveling at moderate speeds. High speeds (+ 40 MPH) detract from the recreational value of forest roads. The roads should avoid long tangents and the appearance of high speed commercial transportation routeS. Roads designated to be managed for Service Level A are, or have potential to be, double-lane roads. Service Level B This Level will require a combination of standard, surface type, maintenance and management necessary to provide operating conditions that are more restricted than Service Level A and may pro- duce some traffic conflicts. For example, logging trucks may slow other traffic during periods of fre- quent timber transport or when recreational traffic is heavy. When use conflicts arise, the roads may be temporarily closed to certain users. Less considera. tion will be given to user comfort and mobility than with Service Level A. During the snow free season, these roads are open and maintained for moderate use levels (100 average daily traffic or less). This traf- fic volume is generally within the safe and efficient capacity of a high standard single lane road. Service Level B roads are frequently surfaced with dust- abated gravel, but routes may be paved for environmental or economic purposes. Service Level C ſº This Service Level will ultimately require a combina- tion of operating conditions that will attract only low use levels. Comfort and convience will not be a dominant consideration. Dust will be controlled only when it produces a safety hazard or an environmen- tal problem. Wheel ruts may be present in the road- way and there may be sections of rough or unstable running surface. Because safety conditions with dif. ferent types of vehicles on the road may be marginal, these roads may be closed for extended periods to some types of vehicles or users. Level C roads may also be closed when conditions would make them impassable without serious structural or environmen- tal damage. Timber sales and sale volume should be appropriate to the Service Level. During periods * when these roads are open to the public, they will be signed to indicate that they may not be suitable for passenger car use. Service Level D These are roads which are closed to public recrea- tion travel by vehicles over 40 inches in width. The specific authority for closing roads on the forest development system is contained in 36 CFR 261.50. The closure of roads in this plan is intended to pro- tect or enhance national forest resources such as Wilderness, threatened or endangered species and their habitats, Cultural resources, soil and water quality. Temporary public access may be granted for seasonal activities such as firewood gathering or Christmas tree cutting. A resident or landowner cannot be denied access. Present mining laws dictate that a miner has a right- of-entry for lawful mineral exploration and develop- ment. Access and use of Forest Service roads can- not be denied for this type of activity (7731.41e FSM 9/78 Amend. 32). Service Level E This category prescribes the obliteration of a road. “Mine-to-market” public roads and roads in which the Forest Service has share cost partners will not be obliterated until the Forest Service acquires all necessary rights. A drainage pattern shall be restored and the road will be effectively blocked. Generally, natural processes will restore the road to a natural Condition. In those situations where climatic conditions, vegetation or persistent illegal public vehicle travel will not allow natural restora- tion, it may be necessary to rip, plow or scarify the road Surface and round the slopes to the approx- imate original contour. Where trails are intended to replace abandoned roads and permanent bridges exist, they can be in- Corporated into the trail system." They may be replaced with facilities more suited for trail use. Summer Trails and 4 x 4 Routes Transportation systems are undergoing constant development. The trails and 4x4 routes shown for each land use alternative represent what is expected to ultimately occur when the need arises and funds are available. The locations on the maps represent ridge and valley corridors in which trails and 4x4 routes are to be constructed, reconstructed or relocated. The mode of use (i.e. horse, bike, 4x4) will not change until trails have been reconstructed or determined adequate for that type of use. 4x4 routes are over 40 inches in width and will be inventoried and regulated as roads. A Service Level concept for trails and routes similar to that used for roads, has been developed and depends upon these major factors: 1. The ability of the accessed land to withstand Con- struction, reconstruction and maintanance. "This has occurred in all cases in all alternatives of this DEIS. On the Allocation Maps the obliterated roads are shown as trails. Obliterated roads are listed under the “Effects” of each alternative. 2. The ability of the accessed land to sustain the ex- pected amount and type of use. 3. How effectively impacts can be absorbed and op- portunities enhanced by management techniques such as permit systems, site hardening, public education and other strategies for adjusting the amount and pattern of travel. 4. The public's desires and expectations. In effect, the Service Level concept is intended to provide the recreationist with facilities that cover a full range of experiences. The recreationists can, therefore, choose the area and experience level they would like. They can have some assurance that their expecta- tions will be realized and that their experience will be pleasant. Four Service Levels and four travel modes (hiker, bike, horse, 4x4) have been identified. The service levels shown on the alternative land use plans are in- tended to apply to the mode of travel identified for that trail or route segment. 4x4 routes are available for bike, horse and hiker use. Bike trails are available for horse and hiker use. Horse trails are available for hiker use. Identified hiker trails are not available to the other modes of travel. Any trail or route in this plan may be temporarily or seasonally closed to enhance or protect resource values. Service Level A These will require a combination of standards, maintenance and management that would accom- modate heavy traffic for the entire use period. The route will blend into the natural features of the area. Users should not expect solitude. Socializing with others will be a part of the recreation experience and contact with others may be frequent to continuous. Visitors will be aware of being in a predictable situa- tion where outdoor skills are not needed. Trailheads will be easily accessed by automobile and comfort and convenience will be provided. In addition to recreation, informative (cultural and historical) and therapeutic (non-ambulatory or sight-impaired user) routes are included in this Service Level. Service Level B These will accommodate moderate use and will only modify natural conditions to the extent necessary to protect the environment and provide for visitors with limited experience and average physical ability. Users should expect to find opportunities to both Socialize and have a moderate degree of solitude dur- ing low use periods. Trailheads and facilities will be provided only for resource protection. Seperate, but not necessarily convenient, parking will be provided for trails accessed by road. Service Level C These will accommodate light and infrequent travel. Trails will be maintained only for resource protection 135 and special groups or individuals with experience in rugged mountain terrain. The trail, particularly at the start, should appear primitive. Modifications to the natural environment should be kept to an absolute minimum. The user should experience a moderate (during peak use periods) to high degree of Solitude from other individuals or small groups. The trail should provide the user with an opportunity for testing skills and experiencing a sensation of physical exertion and a feeling of accomplishment. 4x4 routes, as with other modes in this Service Level, will provide the most difficult challenge to the user but not at the expense of soil, water or other resources. The difficulty will be provided by obstacles or irregularities in the running surface, nar- row clearing or openings, short radius curves that re- quire repeated lock to lock turns and abrupt humps and sags in grade. Mud wallows will be located so that mud, soil and water returns to the wallow and are not carried or allowed to flow off site. Long sus- tained grades or combinations of grade and align- ment that will cause wheel spinning are to be avoid- ed. In order to reduce impact, routes should have design speeds of not more than five miles per hour. Stream crossings will be located and constructed to prevent bank cutting and approaches will be armored for a sufficient length to prevent soil or water from being carried into or out of the stream. Service Level D These will identify those trails that will be adan- doned in order to accomplish the land-use objectives of each alternative. If necessary, these trails would be restored to a natural condition. Recreation Recreation management direction common to all alternatives is divided into two parts. The first pro- vides direction for the recreation opportunity spec- trum classes as they occur in each alternative. The second provides for winter dispersed area recreation. Opportunity Spectrum Classes and- Direction Modern-Urban (MU) ROS Class Encounters and association with other individuals and groups are prevalent, as is the convenience of sites and opportunities. These factors are more im- portant than the setting of the physical environment. Opportunities for wildland challenges, risk taking and testing outdoor skills are minimal. These areas are characterized by a substantially urbanized environment, although the background may have natural elements. Timber management and other resource utilization practices are frequently evident. Vegetative cover is often imported and manicured. Soil protection is usually accomplished with hand surfacing and terracing. Sights and sounds of other people are constant. Large numbers of users can be expected both on-site and in nearby areas. A considerable number of facilities are de- signed for the use and convenience of large numbers of people and include electrical hookups and con- temporary sanitation services. Controls and regimen- tation are obvious and numerous. Facilities are pro- vided for special activities. Automobiles are fully accommodated and forms of mass transit are often available to carry people throughout the site. Management Direction This ROS Class is not present in the Alpine Lakes Area. Rural (R) ROS Class Encounters with individuals and groups are prevalent, as is the convenience of sites and oppor- tunities. These factors are generally more important than the setting of the physical environment although these sites are physically removed from the city. Opportunities for wildland challenges, risk tak- ing and testing of outdoor skills are generally unavailable, except for activities like downhill skiing. Small communities situated entirely within a forested environment are included in this category. This ROS Class appears as the developed site land allocation in all management alternatives. The areas in this class are generally smaller than 500 acres and are modified primarily to enhance specific recreation activities. Sights and sounds of man are continual and the concentration of users, is moderate to high. Recreation management is appropriate to developed facilities designed for use by large numbers of users often for specialized activities. The areas are readily accessible by automobile. Management Direction Landscape modification for recreation facilities and activities may be dominant in the foreground but must harmonize with the natural environment, pro- vide for user safety and convenience and meet the “modification” Visual Quality Objective (VQO). Opportunities and facilities for high quality scenic viewing experiences may be provided. Maps provide detailed information concerning: recreation opportunities, camping facilities and ser- vices provided, road and trail locations, trail stan- dards, land status, emergency services, travel restric- tions and directions for resource protection. Regulations and controls are the minimum necessary for resource protection, visitor satisfaction and safety, but the high density of use requires con- siderable regimentation. Provisions will be made to inform the public of necessary regulations. Recreation facilities are provided for user satisfac- tion and safety and consistent with resource pro- tection. Experience Level 3 and 4 day use sites and camp- grounds may be constructed. New day-use and overnight facilities may be developed only when adequate facilities are not pro- vided by other public agencies or by the private sec- tor. Developments will compliment facilities provided by other agencies and the private sector. Facilities will be provided for the handicapped and the disadvantaged. Service Level A trails may be provided within the areas. Trails will access adjacent “roaded natural” ROS Class lands for foot, horseback and handicapped USerS. Safe and convenient road access is provided to and through the area, compatible with the level of facility development. Additional guidelines are displayed in transportation management direction. Adequate signs (including directions and distances) are provided along major access roads to direct users to developed facilities. Signs may be used for user convenience and safety and for resource protec- tion. Information and education signs are for user awareness and enjoyment at Outstanding attractions, cultural features, special management areas, etc. Roaded Natural (RN) ROS Class Equal opportunities exist for encounters with others and opportunities for isolation from the sights and sounds of man. Opportunity exists for a high degree Of interaction with the natural environment. Challenge and risk are relatively low. Practice and testing of outdoor skills may be important. Oppor- tunities for both motorized and non-motorized forms of recreation are possible. This ROS Class occurs in General Forest and Scenic Forest land allocations. Areas in this Class vary in size from 100 to over 2,000 acres and are predominantly natural environment. Sights and sounds of people are encountered with moderate fre- quency and usually harmonizes with the natural en- vironment. Concentration of users is moderate to low. Recreation management emphasizes dispersed motorized and non-motorized activities. Both road and trail access are readily available. This is the most intensely used and extensively traveled class within the management unit. Management Direction Landscape modification for recreation facilities and activities may be prominent in the foreground but must remain harmonious with the natural landscape. The “partial retention” VQO applies in all Other distance zones. Only minimum standard facilities will be provided for Scenic viewing. Maps same as for Rural ROS Class. Few on-site controls and regulations are required because the density of use is low. Regulations and controls will be the minimum necessary for resource protection, visitor satisfaction and Safety. Recreation facilities are provided primarily for user Safety and resource protection. Experience Level 2 campgrounds may be maintained to Standard. New camping facilities will only be developed and maintained at Experience Level 1. Trail related facilities will be managed according to the transportation management direction. Develop road and trail access as prescribed by the transportation direction and visual management ob- jectives to disperse use. Concentration of users will generally not exceed 10 recreation visitor days of use per acre per year a low to moderate level. Specific capacities will be deter- mined on a site-by-site basis. Establish road, trail, and area closures to achieve ex- perience, safety and resource protection objectives. Secure and maintain recreation road and trail right- of-way over private land when necessary to meet management objectives. Provide adequate and safe stock, boat and snowmobile loading facilities and parking areas at trail heads and water access points to accommodate prescribed trail service levels and water management objectives. Provide signs at all recreation road and trail junc- tions and at all trailheads. Signs will indicate route numbers, distances and destinations. Provide minimum signing at facilities for conve- nience, safety and for resource protection. Some signs for user education and enjoyment will be provided at historic and cultural features, special management areas and other singular attractions. Semi-Primitive Motorized (SPIM) ROS Class Some opportunity exists for isolation from the sights and Sounds of people. A a high degree of interaction with the natural environment, moderate challenge and risk, and the chance to use outdoor skills are available. Motorized equipment is permitted in por- tions of the area. This ROS Class occurs in the Dispersed Recreation land allocation. Areas are generally larger than 500 acres and have predominantly unmodified natural en- vironments. A low incidence of the sights and Sounds of humans is produced by a light concentra- tion of users. The service level of roads may be per- mitted to decline. Trail access will accommodate both motorized and non-motorized travel. Management Direction The same direction as for “roaded natural” ROS Class will apply except: facilities will not be provided for Scenic viewing. Trails, however, will be routed to take advantage of viewing opportunities. Maps Same as for “Rural” ROS class. A minimum of on-site controls and regulations are required primarily for resource protection and user safety. Recreation facilities are limited to those needed primarily for user safety and resource protection. Experience Level 1 campgrounds may be con- Structed. New facilities will generally be limited to camp sites designation and rustic sanitation facilities for both user Convenience and resource protection at areas of heavy user concentration, such as lakes. Manage trail related facilities as prescribed in the transportation management direction. The direction for “roaded natural” ROS Class applies except that access will be managed for low concen- trations of users. A level of one recreation visitor day of use per acre per year should generally to be main- tained. Specific capacities may be determined on a Site-by-site basis. Motorized recreation equipment is permitted within portions of the area designated by the transportation management direction. Provide signs at all trail junctions and trailheads in- dicating routes, distances and destinations. Provide minimum additional signing for user convenience and, if needed, safety and resource protection. Semi-Primitive Non-motorized (SPINM) ROS Class Opportunity exists in the isolation from the sight and Sounds of man, but not as often as for “primitive” ROS Class. A high degree of interaction with the natural environment, a moderate challenge and risk and the opportunity to use outdoor skills are available in this environment. This ROS Class occurs in the Dispersed Recreation land allocation. Areas are generally larger than 2,000 acres characterized by an unmodified natural en- vironment free of evidences of sights (foreground and middle ground) and Sounds of man. The concen- tration of users is low. There is no road access and trail access is limited to non-motorized travel. Management Direction Landscape modification for recreation facilities and activities will remain subordinate and harmonious in foreground and inconspicuous in middle ground and background. Only minimum standard facilities will be provided for Scenic viewing. Maps same as for “rural” ROS class. 137 Same as for “semi-primitive motorized”. ROS Class. Same as for “roaded natural” ROS Class except that access will be for low concentrations of and motoriz- ed recreation equipment use is prohibited. Primitive (P) ROS Class Isolation from the sights and sounds of humans, the feeling of being part of the natural environment, and a high degree of challenge and risk are available in these areas and outdoor skills are required. This ROS class is included in the Dispersed Recrea- tion land allocation. Size and characteristics are similar to the “semi-primitive non-motorized”. ROS class, but lands in this class are generally more remote. Because of distances from road access, users are normally required to stay overnight. Management Direction Same direction as for the “semi-private non- motorized”. ROS class except facilities will not be provided for scenic viewing. Trails, however, will be routed to take advantage of viewing opportunities. Maps provide detailed information concerning recrea- tion opportunities, camping facilities and services provided, road and trail locations, trail standards, land status, emergency services, travel restrictions and directions for resource protection. Minimum on-site controls and regulations will be pro- vided primarily for resource protection and safety. Provide recreation facilities primarily for resource protection. Camping facilities will be limited to designated sites and primitive sanitation facilities where necessary to protect resources. Manage trail related facilities as prescribed in the transportation management direction. Same direction as for “roaded natural” ROS Class except that access will be for very low level of use. Motorized recreation equipment is prohibited. The level of use will generally not exceed one half recrea- tion visitor day per acre per year. Specific capacities may be determined on a site-by-site basis. Same as for “semi-primitive motorized”. ROS class. Management for Winter Recreation Each major recreational activity — skiing, Snowmobiling, etc. — will have areas designed and managed to accommodate them. Other activities may be limited or prohibited in these areas if they conflict with the primary activity or if overcrowding occurs. The opinion of users will be consulted. Each Ranger District will have a hazard evaluation system coordinated with the Regional system and available to the public. Patrol and safety may be provided through a com- bination of permittee and/or Nordic ski patrols. The Forest Service may provide leadership and training in such patrol activities. Management that may include, influence or be in- fluenced by private property will require joint plan- ning and special coordination with the property owner(s). Different skill levels of users will be considered when designing trails and related facilities. A spec- trum of opportunities for winter recreation (including primitive dispersed opportunities without facilities) will be maintained. Any development such as parking areas, groomed trails or staging areas will include sanitation facilities commensurate with those expected of the area. Commercial recreation use will be encouraged in areas where there is a demonstrated need or oppor- tunity which compliments and/or is not in conflict with use of the area by the general recreating public. National forest managers will coordinate with and support the Sno-Park and Snowmobile programs. Normally, provision for plowed parking will be made through these programs. Alpine ski area permittees will be required to in- tegrate winter dispersed recreation into their opera- tions if and when the opportunity and demand exists. Where a need for groomed trails is identified, such facilities will normally be provided through special use permit. The permittee may be allowed to charge fee of users. 4% º ** ~ L*-ºſ 7/7 . --- Rºs %\!!º & º%2. ºs- - Y. Nº º - º an º S. - --- tº-da wº L. S.A. A s: , ſº * * o - --~~ - L ~º- Nº. 2 - . . . Sº - º § tº Sºs \ sº e - Sº- º sº ~ - / Rºž Nº. Nº. #º/ºr \ ¥1"/ºffº/ *\\ }"; "ºft, Wilderness Much of the direction for management of Wilderness is set forth in law and subsequent Forest Service regulations and is not unique to the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. That management direction as it applies to the Alpine Lakes Wilderness can be found in Appendix B. Cultural To meet the objectives of this plan and historic preservation legislation, the following guidelines will be observed: A determination of significance will be made on each of the 200 identified cultural sites before any recom- mended project is implemented. Sites falling within or adjacent to a proposed project area, sites easily accessible to the public and those subject to van- dalism will be given priority. Inventory and consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) will precede each land disturbing activity. This involves a preliminary literature review, a field examination of the project area and a written summary. The project proposal and field findings will be submitted to SHPO for review. Written documentation of compliance will be displayed in the Environmental Assessment Report or the Environmental Impact Statement. Any new sites identified through the inventory will be subject to the same evaluation process. For any site within the project area determined eligi- ble for the National Register, a determination of the project effect will be developed in consultation with SHPO. If the project proposal is determined to have an adverse effect upon a significant cultural resource, mitigation alternatives will be considered. In descending order of desirability, these may in- clude: 1. Adjustment of the project boundaries to avoid the site altogether. 2. Adoption of methods or techniques that will minimize disturbance to the site and its environmen- tal setting. 3. Removal of the cultural (historic) property to another appropriate location after documentation of the property and the development of a management plan in keeping with the historic value and integrity of the property. 4. Mapping, photo documentation and scaled draw- ings of the cultural resource (historic properties only) before proceeding with project implementation. 138 5. Excavation of the archaeological site utilizing a professionally sound research design in keeping with the statewide research plan. Such excavation would be undertaken through contract meeting the guidelines specified in FSM 2361.29 and 36 CFR 66. Inventory independent of project activity will be pro- grammed each year to meet Forest Service target of 100 percent inventory of national forest lands by 1990 (FSM 2361.01). Priorities will be established on the basis of impending threats from natural pro- cesses, reported but unverified sites, known land use patterns, terrain features and vegetational cover. The inventory will be directed by an in-house cultural resource specialist or through contracts with in- dividuals, consultants or institutions meeting the professional standards established in 36 CFR 66. Costs programmed for contract work will average from two to four dollars an acre. Management plans will be developed for all known National Register sites in consultation with SHPO. Within the Alpine Lakes Area, this particularly ap- plies to the Stevens Pass Historic District and Salmon La Sac Guard Station. Efforts will be made to maintain and preserve the properties and keep the original historic integrity of the sites. Similar direction is applicable to cultural resources in the Wilderness. Although the intent of the Wilderness Act is to maintain a natural environment where the imprint of man's work will be substantially unnoticeable, the Act also recognizes that the Wilderness may contain features of scientific, educa- tional or historical value. The following steps incor- porate the directive of both Wilderness and historic preservation legislation: 1. Inventory and evaluation of all known cultural sites, with priorities established on the basis of pro- posed trail development, allocation of dispersed recreation areas, mineral exploration or any other planned developments permissable within the Wilderness. 2. Nomination of eligible sites to the National Register of Historic Places. 3. Development, in consultation with SHPO, of management plans for those cultural resources found eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. Management options vary depending upon the nature of the site and the type of mitigation strategy selected. Historic sites with surface remains can be preserved and protected through people management (directing public use away from the site) and with non-motorized maintenance, rehabilita- tion and restoration techniques. Natural deterioration may be appropriate, in some instances, after thorough recording and documentation of the site. Sites valuable for scientific and research purposes can be protected through management of public use and non-intrusive stabilization techniques. Excava- tion of sites for research purposes is possible if ground and native vegetation restoration, after data recovery is specified in the contract. All research will be conducted without motorized or mechanical access or equipment. 4. Interpretation of cultural resources in the Wilderness through brochures, maps and district displays after measures for their protection have been provided. Specific goals for inventory, cost projections, management strategies and interpretive plans for cultural resources within the Alpine Lakes Area will be specified in conjunction with the Forest Plans. Fire The direction for fire management activities involves two types of fires. The first, wildfires, includes all fires of such magnitude in locations that produce negative effects on expected outputs or public use. Under all alternatives, wildfires, due to their negative effects, will be suppressed. Suppression will be scaled to within the expected damages if the fire were permitted to burn. For each wildfire that escapes initial containment efforts, an analysis of alternative suppression tactics, including costs, will be completed. A comparison with damages expected under each will be made to determine the most COSt efficient method of suppression. The regional interpretation of the Wilderness Act does not consider human caused fires within the Wilderness to be natural occurances. They, therefore do not meet the expected criterion of “natural pro- cesses prevailing” and will be suppressed. The second type, prescribed fire, includes all fires, regardless of origin, which burn under intensities or in locations which contribute to the maintenance Or achievement of an objective. The specific fuels, weather and topographic condi- tions under which prescription fire may be used varies greatly across the Alpine Lakes Area. They are dependent on the expected outputs of the land allocation and the physical characteristics of the vegetation as it relates to effects of fire. The entire area has been mapped into one of three prescribed fire zones based on the compatibility of prescribed fire with the expected outputs of the area under the alternative being considered. Each zone has a specified maximum prescription fire intensity which can be tolerated to maintain the expected out- puts. The three zones are discussed below in terms of the response to prescription fire desired. Addi- tional information on the development of the zones is available as a special report to the DEIS. Zone l This includes all areas where the intensity of prescribed fires must not (1) reduce tree stocking below that necessary to maintain sustained timber harvest output levels; (2) reduce ground cover (her- baceous material, litter and duff) below that which is necessary to maintain water quantity and quality out- puts; or (3) reduce soil productivity. The outputs of the General Forest and Scenic Forest allocations can be maintained under intensity of prescription fires acceptable in Zone l. Zone || This includes those areas where a limited modifica- tion of the vegetation complex creates the vegetation diversity necessary to maintain the wildlife habitats and visual variety in the landscape required in the allocation. Sufficient ground vegetation, litter or duff Cover must be maintained to protect water quantity and quality. A prescribed fire must not detract from the users' experience level or jeopardize their safety. The Dispersed Recreation allocation requires a limited amount of prescription fire to maintain its suitability over the long run. Zone III This includes areas within the wilderness where the management objectives are to maintain natural pro- cesses. Extensive vegetation modification by natural 139 processes may occur, provided life or property values outside the areas are not threatened. The prin- ciple constraint on prescription fire intensity in this zone will be to insure, with a high degree of certain- ty, that the fire will be confined to the area intended to be treated. Within each of the mapped zones, there will be isolated areas where fires from unplanned ignitions will meet the prescribed fire intensity limits for the zones but would be damaging to improvements on the site. These fires will be suppressed as any wildfire. Developed recreation and administrative sites, special use improvements, cultural and historical sites and private properties are examples. Likewise it will be necessary to use prescription fire with intensities higher than those for the specified zone to accomplish certain site specific management objectives. These applications of prescription fire will be accomplished using controlled ignition pat- terns rather than random ignitions. The prescribed fire intensity of these projects is still constrained to the extent necessary to maintain the expected out- puts of the allocation. Examples might include the using of prescription fire of a Zone lll intensity in Zone I to prepare a planting site after timber harvest or using a Zone ll intensity fire to accomplish a wildfire habitat improvement project in the Zone l. It is essential that the boundaries between the dif- ferent prescribed fire use zones afford logical control opportunities. Where two zones with different prescription intensities interface, the most conser- vative prescription dominates and the boundary is adjusted to major topographic or vegetational breaks which insure isolation of each area. In Some cases, significant boundary adjustments would be required because of the uniformity of vegetation and topography. Additional information on how vegeta- tion was rated into different levels of flammility is available as a special report to the DEIS. More specific requirements are provided in Tables A-1 through A-4 which displays fire management direction. Table A-1. Fire Behavior Parameters Consistant With Prescription Fire Intensity Zones." Vegetation Type ponderosa pine ZOne all other forested ZOſleS alpine meadow ZOneS Fire Behavior Parameter Forward Rate of Spread Flame Length Fireline Intensity (energy release) Scorch Height Exposed Soil Forward Rate of Spread Flame Length Fireline Intensity (energy release) Scorch Height Exposed Soil Forward Rate of Spread Flame Length Fireline Intensity (energy release) Scorch Height Exposed Soil Intensity Zone | 3 chains/hr 3 ft 70 BTU'S/ Sec/ft 10 ft 10% 2 chains/hr 2 ft 40 BTU'S/ Sec/ft 8 ft 10% 3 chains/hr 3 ft 50 BTU'S/ Sec/ft N/A 10% Intensity Zone | 3-8 chains/hr 3-5 ft 70-150 BTU's/ Sec/ft 10-20 ft 10-25%. 25-40% 2-6 chains/hr 2-4 ft 40-120 BTU'S/ sec/ft sec/ft 8-16 ft 10-25% 3-8 chains/hr 3-5 ft 50-150 BTU'S/ sec/ft N/A 10-25% Intensity Zone ||| 8-12 chains/hr 5-6 ft 150-300 BTU'S/ Sec/ft 20-30 ft 6-12 chains/hr 4-6 ft 120-200 BTU'S/ 16-24 ft 25-40% 8-12 chains/hr 5-6 ft 150-300 BTU'S/ Sec/ft N/A 25-40% "These parameters are preliminary estimates and should be refined through field evaluation of actural fires. It is felt that they are conservative. 140 Table A-2. Fire Management Direction by Land Allocation Title DEVELOPED SITES GENERAL FOREST SCENIC FOREST DISPERSED RECREATION MAXIMUM FIRE SIZE Existing Sites — Supression efforts will be directed at confining all starts to the smallest possible size. Potential Sites – Fires within prescription intensity limits for the zone will be sup: pressed at the nearest natural breaks. All fires which exceed prescription will be sup: pressed at smallest size. Suppression efforts are directed to contain- ing individual starts within the size con- straints listed in Table A-3. The size constraints applicable to General Forest apply, but are constrained in the foreground so as not to dominate the land- scape as viewed from Scenic Forest roads or trails. Burned areas in foreground should be visible no longer than 1 minute from highways, 3 minutes from forest roads, and 15 minutes from trails with the Scenic Classification. The goal is no more than 10% of the seen area from principle viewing points shall be allowed to burn. MAXIMUM BURNED AREA PER DECADE BY WILDFIRE Accumulated burned area should not ex- ceed 5% of area for existing sites or 20% of area of proposed sites every decade. Maximum burned acreages per decade are included in Table A-4. Maximum burned acreages per decade are included in Table A-4. The maximum size of continuous burned areas in foreground are the same as for individual fires. The maximum burned area per decade should not involve more than 20% of the Seen area. FIRE CONTROL LINES AND MOP-UP Evidence of control activities must be obliterated after the fire is mopped up. Mop-up will not unnecessarily disturb the surface. Disturbed areas will be revegetated with native vegetation No Constraints on the types of fireline used as long as Visual Resource Management objectives are considered. Disturbed areas will be stabilized and seed- ed to minimize surface soil movement. Fer- tilizer will be utilized to augment vegetation establishment. Evidence of control activities must be obliterated after mop-up in those areas viewed directly from Scenic Forest roads and trails. Disturbed areas will be revegetated with natural vegetation in foreground. Other areas will be seeded, fer- tilized or otherwise stabilized. Control activities will utilize natural topographic or vegetation breaks wherever possible. Firelines will be the minimum to contain the fire. Stabilization will be limited to minimizing off-site effects. USE OF MECHANIZED EQUIPMENT Evidence of mechanized equipment use will be removed or obliterated after the fire is suppressed. Tractors will be restricted to slopes less than 40% or on areas where soil compac- tion or surface disturbance would be in- tolerable. (See Soil Resource Inventory for Specific soils). Evidence of the use of mechanized equip- ment as viewed from Scenic Forest roads and trails will be obliterated. Use of tractors in immediate foreground from Scenic Forest roads and trails will re- quire line officer approval. The full range of firefighting equipment may be utilized. No new road access will be developed to move firefighting equipment. Firelines will be stabilized and made im- passable for wheeled vehicles. USE OF FIRE RETARDANTS Ground applied colorless retardent or with fugetive color are preferred. Aerially applied retardant should not be used except in cases of life or public safety is involved. Retardants may be used on fires which ex- ceed prescribed intensity levels and threaten size limitation goals. There are no restrictions on the type or kind of retardant used. + The General Forest direction is applicable except that water or colorless retardant should be used in the foreground as viewed from Scenic Forest roads. Retardant may be utilized to contain any fire which exceeds the prescribed intensity levels and threatens acreage limitations or adjacent allocations. USE OF HELICOPTERS Helicopters may be utilized to move fire suppression resources but no new landing sites will be constructed. No limitations on the use of helicopters. Helispot construction will meet all safety requirements and will be maintained as part of the transportation system. The only limitation on the use of helicopters is that no new landing sites will be constructed in the foreground as viewed from Scenic Forest roads and trails. Helicopters may be used on all fires where the decision to supress is made. Natural openings will be utilized as much as possi- ble. Clearing for new sites will be the minimum to use the facility safely. Helispots are considered temporary improvements. LEVEL OF PRE-ATTACK IMPROVEMENT Fire protection needs will be designed for each site. Helispots will be prelocated; water systems will accommodate fire needs; and access roads will accommodate fire fighting equipment. Helispots will be located to provide access to all areas of Class Ill flammability areas within 30 minutes walk from landing sites. In Class II flamability areas within 60 minutes walk, and in Class I flammability within 120 minutes. Fuel breaks may be utilized in Class II flamability and above areas. Tanker fills will be spaced to provide 30 minutes spacing along roads. The General Forest direction applies except that improvements will not dominate the foreground when viewed from Scenic Forest roads and trails. Pre-attack improvements will be limited to those needed to confine fires to this Alloca- tion. Fuel breaks will not be accessible to wheeled vehicles. 141 Table A-2. (Continued) Fire Management Direction by Land Allocation Title DEVELOPED SITES GENERAL FOREST SCENIC FOREST DISPERSED RECREATION PRESCRIBED FIRE WITH CONTROLLED IGNITION Prescribed burning should be limited to that material which cannot be utilized by the users of the site. Evidence of prescribed burning must be removed before the next Occupancy SeaSOn begins. Low intensity fire may be used to control surface fuel buildup for fire protection pur- poses. The full range of prescribed burning ap- plication is available except when soil pro- ductivity is threatened. Utilization is encouraged over disposal by burning of residues resulting from manage- ment practices. Most cost effective methods will be utiliz- ed. Evidence of prescribed burning be removed within one season in the foreground as viewed from Scenic Forest roads and trails All direction for General Forest applies. Prescribed burning will be limited to vegetation manipulation for fire protection, wildlife habitat improvement, or special fire Studies. Debris from construction and maintenance activities may be burned if utilization is not feasable. Project size will be limited so as not to dominate the landscape. FUELS MANAGEMENT Fuel loadings will be modified to a level which insures creeping intensities that af- ford reasonable opportunities for control of accidental fires. Reduce fuel loadings from management ac- tivities such that the projected fires inten- sities do not exceed Level Vll flammability as measured five years after Creation. In addition to the direction for General Forest, those residues from management activities in the foreground from Scenic Forest roads and trails will be removed or disposed of consistent with Visual Resource Management timing guidelines. Fuels management activities will be limited to modifying potential fire intensity along boundaries of areas with more restrictive fire management objectives to permit reasonable opportunities for containment. Table A-3. Maximum Individual Size for Wildfires in General Forest and Scenic Forest Allocation. Fire Character Class' Vegetational Stand Development Zone Stage | | ||| IV + - = = - - - - - - - * * * acres” — — — — — — — — — — — — — Ponderosa Pine Mature º * 150 75 Seedlings, Saplings & Poles * 100 50 25 Reforestation (slash) * 100 50 Douglas fir Mature * 300 100 50 Seedlings, Saplings & Poles * 100 50 25 Reforestation (slash) * 100 50 A|| Other Zones Mature * 200 100 50 Seedlings, Saplings & Poles º 100 50 25 Reforestation (slash) * 100 50 • Fires at these intensities are considered to be prescription fires and therefore have no maximum size constraints. | class I – Low level creeping fire; Class II – Low level spreading fire; Class Ill, T- Moderate intensity free spreading on ground; Class IV – high intensity fire spreading on ground; Class V very high intensity. * The acreage limits displayed in this table are estimates applicable in the interim until the Forest Plans are Com- pleted on the respective forests. 142 Table A-4. Figure A-1. Maximum Burn Area Per Decade for Wildfires in the General Forest and Scenic Forest Suppression Decision Matrix Allocations. Fire Character Class' Vegetational Stand Development Zone Stage | | ||| IV + Total * = ** = * * * * * *ms m = me acres” ------——————— All Zones Mature * 10,000 3,000 1,000 14,000 Seedlings, Saplings & Poles * 1,500 500 100 2,100 e e Reforestation (slash) * 15,000 3,500 1,500 20,000 Are fire weather and fire behavior forcasts NO suppress' favorable to meet * Fires at these intensities are considered to be prescription fires and therefore have no maximum size prescription objectives? COnStraints. 'Class I – Low level creeping fire; Class II — Low level spreading fire; Class III — Moderate intensity free spreading on ground; Class IV — high intensity fire spreading on ground; Class V very high intensity. Yes * The acreage limits displayed in this table are estimates applicable in the interim until the Forest Plans are Completed on the respective forests. Are smoke mgt. considerations NO Suppress' It is important to emphasize that before any unplan- Pre-attack inventories and planning will be ac- favorable? ned ignitions are allowed to burn under prescription Complished as outlined in R-6 Pre-attack Handbook without aggressive suppression, all º the 5109.15 for all areas. Yes prescribed fire intensity zone must be met; and an in- g dividual situation analysis must be made. In addition 9nly retardants which have been evaluated by the to the basic land area allocation and its accompany- Environmental Protection Agency for toxicity will be ing direction, the following specifics will be con- º º domestic watersheds and along anadromous Are suppression Sidered: |Sn Stream S. resources available NO Suppress' if needed to accomodate Season of year — (spring, summer, or fall) Vgetation type — (role of fire in ecosystem) Recent fire danger Forecast fire danger Smoke dispersion situation tº Specific location — topography and proximity to boundary e Availability of suppression forces should burning Conditions become unfavorable and require Sup- pression The information needed to make these decisions must be immediately available to avoid delays in taking suppression action. Figure A-1 is a suppres- Sion decision matrix which will be used to develop this process. These management directions are also common to all alternatives. All industrial operation or other activities with fire Starting potential will be regulated by existing Regional Forester restrictions. Annual fire protection programs will consist of prevention, detection, pre-suppression and fuels management activities in combinations which allow accomplishment of specified resource output objec- tives at the least cost. All prescribed burning will meet these conditions: The desired results or objectives must be establish- ed in quantitative terms, the weather and fuel moisture parameters must be such that the Objec- tives can be met and project accomplishment must be measured, monitored and evaluated. changed conditions? Yes Life, private property, cultural or historical Sites, or improvements are not threatened No-- suppress' Yes | Monitor |S Observed behavior as expected? – Yes No-º- Suppress' "When the suppression decision is made, the specific tactics applied will be limited to those which can contain the fire at the least cost under the fuel condi. tions; weather and fire location conditions present. Air Quality All smoke generating activities including managed wildfire under prescribed conditions will be consis- tent with the “Smoke Management Plan” ad- ministered by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Land Ownership Because approximately 30 percent of the land in the Alpine Lakes management unit is in private owner- ship, the need for cooperation between the Forest Service and individual land owners is obvious. The future need for homes and certain recreational facilities is expected to be met by the private sector, but other objectives — the protection of visual quality, wildlife enchancement, etc. — must be met by public land managers. Another reason for land ownership adjustment is the desire of public and private landowners to manage their lands more effi- ciently and at lower cost. Perfect agreement between administrators of the area and every land owner is unlikely but an effort is required to achieve the most harmonious relation- ship possible. To that end, public and private lands in the management unit were systematically inven- toried and classified. It became apparent as a result of this process that the exchange or purchase of Some lands would be desirable to enhance land management, protect certain values or avoid conflict. Such adjustments, however, would have to be studied and initiated by administrators of this management plan and this classification process is not, in itself, a land adjustment program. Land in the management unit was divided into five Categories guided by: 1. Land allocations determined by Capability and suitability analysis and proposed land uses and, 2. Forest Service policy as set forth in FSM 5530.3 having to do with distinct combinations of ownership patterns, intrinsic natural values and present and projected land uses. Legal subdivisions rather than Category boundaries may be used to facilitate future adjustments. Each alternative Contains a different mix of lands assigned to these categories. Category I National forest lands will be retained and non- national forest lands acquired as directed by Congress for a specific purpose as defined in legisla- tion, including all Wilderness and Intended Wilderness lands. Category II Priority is given for retaining national forest lands or acquisition on non-public lands. Criteria for acquisi- tion of non-public lands include: 1. Lands which have been allocated to primitive types of dispersed recreation. 2. All Special interest area allocations such as recreation, Scenic and geological areas. 3. Land which has been determined necessary for wildlife, visual or recreation needs. 4. Land which will improve the administrative situa- tion through consolidation. Category III Lands in this category are neutral in the sense that no special form of management is necessary to pro- tect public values. The Forest Service would give priority to acquiring lands in this category in some cases. In other situations, lands would be available for disposal. As a general rule, lands will be manag- ed in the same manner regardless of ownership. These lands include: 1. Relatively solid blocks of national forest lands which will not be breached through land adjustment. 2. Adjustment opportunities that improve wildlife habitat, recreation and visual quality will be given priority. 3. Improved ownership patterns through consolida- tion will be the major emphasis and will be con- ducted as the opportunity presents itself. 4. Winter range for deer and elk as recognized by mutual agreement with the State Game Department will be given priority for acquisition. Category IV These lands are classified as candidates for Forest Service disposal or private lands to remain private. Lands which may be available for exchange to acquire other lands of higher priority, include: 1. Isolated small parcels of land which are imprac- tical to manage. 2. Situations where higher and/or better use (more in- tensive) or development can be provided by the private sector. 3. Areas necessary for Community expansion or in- tensive agriculture opportunities exist. Category V These lands require an intensive study before priorities of ownership can be recommended. Following the above direction, lands within the Alpine Lakes have been classified and mapped for each alternative. Wildlife and Fish Cooperate with the State of Washington Department of Game in designing forest management programs to maintain viable wildlife populations and habitat diversity. Map Summer and winter ranges for deer, elk and goats on the project level. Create openings through timber harvest on summer range to produce large perimeter/area ratios and pro- vide the maximum possible habitat diversity consis- tent with other primary values. A maximum edge ef. fect may be accomplished by the following means: feathering the clearing boundary to minimize the lineal edge; designing the harvest area to create a narrow, winding opening instead of a compact block; leaving islands of vegetation within the opening to provide animal travel lanes and escape areas. Reduce potential barriers to movement of wildlife in big game summer and winter range. Reduce large concentrations of Slash to less than one and one-half feet in depth. USeing procedures in FSM-2630.3 map and evaluate all riparian zone habitat identifying all wildlife pre- sent. Set priorities on use of these wetlands where competition exists between wildlife, domestic livestock or other land use. Evaluate such habitat using procedure and parameters described in the Managing Riparian Ecosystems (Zones) for Fish and Wildlife in Eastern Oregon and Eastern Washington. Designate key forage areas within riparian zones. Manage for proportionate representation of timber stand age classes. All timber sale planning will address habitat for snag and cavity-dependent wildlife. Dead trees, both stan- ding and down, will be provided in sufficient numbers to maintain primary cavity excavators. Em- phasis for this direction shall be placed on areas ad- jacent to water and natural openings in the forest Canopy. Wildlife and fish population control shall be con- sidered on a case by case basis. Strict adhereance to FSM 2650 is required. 144 Cooperate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries and the State of Washington Department of Fisheries in establishing, maintaining or increasing anadromous fish popula- tion. Great gray Owl The following management direction pertains to Species of Special Interest: Spotted owl Verify or establish existence of such species in Alpine Lakes Area and the extent to which the area is used. Verification applies to species that have been seen in the Alpine Lakes Area. Establishment applies to species whose range is shown in the literature of the area. Develop project level management plans for Species that have been verified and established. Consult with State Game Department on priority of management directions and project planning. Add additional species to this list as they become known. Specific management direction: W i I d 1 if e Management Direction S p e c i e s White-headed 1. woodpecker Gray wolf 1. Verify existence in Alpine Lakes 2 Area and extent it uses area. 2. If verified, consult with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and develop Lewis' 1 management direction. Woodpecker 3. If verified, do not use Strychnine poison baits. Williamson's 1. 4. If found, map and describe Sapsucker critical habitat. 2 Wolverine 1. Verify existence in Alpine Lakes Area and extent it uses area. 2. Where found, limit human activi- Northern three- 1. ty including recreation. toed Woodpecker Fisher 1. Establish existence in Alpine Western bluebird 1. Lakes Area and extent it uses aſ ea. 2. Heather vole 1. Establish existence in Alpine Black swift 1. Lakes Area and extent it uses aſ ea. Peregrine falcon 1 Bald eagle 1. Follow direction contained in BALD EAGLE Biological Unit 2 Management Plan (U.S. Forest Service 1979) developed for the 3 Skykomish Ranger District. 2. Vérify existance in other por- tions of the Alpine Lakes Area Flammulated Owl 1. and extent it uses area. . Map and describe critical habitat. . Establish existence in Alpine Lakes Area and extent it uses area. . Give primary emphasis in Sec- tions 29,30, and 32 of T. 22 N., R. N.E. and Sections 2 and 3 of T. 21 N., R. 17 E. . Manage for old growth trees with dense and diverse canopy layers and undisturbed developed understory. . Avoid dense second growth, Clear cuts, open areas, disturbed forest for 300-500 feet around nest Sites. . Determine location of nest sites. . Verify existence in other areas of Alpine Lakes. Establish existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. Verify existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. . Manage for tree snags of 24 inches diameter for nesting. . Establish existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. Verify existance in Alpine Lakes Area and extent it uses area. . If present, manage for tree snags, downed logs and burned area.S. Establish existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. Verify existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. Manage for tree Snags. Establish existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. . Establish existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. . If found, manage to increase population. . If found, map and describe Critical habitat. Osprey 1. Verify existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. 2. Protect and monitor nesting sites. Tailed frog 1. Verify existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. Pacific giant Salamander 1. Verify existence in Alpine Lakes and extent it uses area. Timber Current national, regional and Forest direction will apply to the Alpine Lakes management unit. Regulated timber harvesting will continue in the Alpine Lakes Management under the authority of the 1963 Wenatchee and Snoqualmie Timber Manage- ment Plans as amended. Silvicultural practices will be prescribed through the project planning. Maintain a minimum growth rate of 15 rings per inch on the Wenatchee National Forest and 10 rings per inch on the Snoqualmie National Forest. This stan- dard will be used for determining Optimum Stocking levels. A 20 year re-entry cycle will be used in stands eligi- ble for stocking control. Tree regeneration for the Wenatchee National Forest is targeted at 4 years and Snoqualmie National Forest is 3 years. Stocking level control, Considering all other resource Opportunities, will be practiced on all commercial forest land. Current timber sale contract merchantability stan- dards will apply to the management unit. Tree harvest rotation periods shall be: Standard Component Wenatchee — 120 years Snoqualmie – 90 years Special Component Category 1 — 200 years Category 2 — 150 years Category 3 — 120 years Silvicultural cutting will apply in the following order of priority to maximize growth and minimize mor- tality: - 145 Major Losses — Stands where significant volume losses have occurred. Significant means any loss which would exceed the total growth in a 20 year cutting cycle. Endemic Losses Stands where endemic losses are occurring. Endemic losses are those which exceed the total growth for a 5-year action plan period over a manageable size area. Such stands should be scheduled for treatment within the 5-year action plan period. Predictable Losses — Stands where significant predictable losses will occur. Significant means any loss which would exceed the total growth in a 20 year cutting cycle. Scheduling should be before losses occur. Decadent – Decadent stands where net growth has declined to less than 30 rings per inch or where losses equal or exceed growth. Overstocked — Overstocked stands which will res- pond to stocking level control, may be any stand which would increase in increment if stocking is reduced. Mature — Other green mature stands with growth faster than 30 rings per inch. Range The following management direction applies within areas allocated to General Forest and Scenic Forest . Allocate available forage increases made possible through timber management activities to commercial grazing after wildlife needs are met. Do not allocate additional forage for commercial livestock use unless key areas (riparian and wetlands) are in an upward trend. Structural improvements will be compatible with the prescribed visual quality objectives. Utilize all available techniques, including herbicides and introduction of non-native plants to improve range condition. Take aggressive action to control noxious weeds, utilizing non-chemical control when possible. Provide protection to threatened or rare and en- dangered plant and animal species. Allotments outside the Alpine Lakes Area will be utilized, where possible, to allow alternate year use of allotments within the area. The following management direction applies within areas allocated to Dispersed Recreation and Special Areas. Allocate all available forage above wildlife needs to recreation Stock. Intensively manage forage for maintenance of an up- ward vegetative trend. Structural improvements will be rustic. Management techniques involving non-native plants and herbicides will only be used to protect values on adjacent lands. Special Areas The proposed boundaries and management direction for Special Areas unique to each alternative can be found on the Land Allocation (roads and trails) Map, resource maps which accompany each alternative and management direction listed for each alternative. The following instructions apply to all alternatives. Mt. Index Scenic Area — overnight developed campgrounds will not be located inside the area. Approach roads, trails, picnic areas and parking inside the area will be located to avoid disturbing scenic values. All activities within the area will be managed to meet the “preservation” visual quality objective. The area will be classified as a Special Interest Area (CFR 294.1). Tumwater Scenic Area — All management activities outside of the existing highway corridor (200300 feet either side of the highway center line) will preserve scenic qualities and managed to meet the “preservation" visual quality objectives. Over- night developed campgrounds, will not be located in- side the area or within the highway corridor. Picnic areas and parking will be limited to the highway cor- ridor and will be designed to be compatible with the scenic environment. Activities within the corridor shall harmonize with the landscape. The area will be classified as a Special Interest Area (CFR 294.1). Denny Creek Scenic Area — overnight developed camp grounds, picnic areas, approach roads and parking areas will be located outside the area. Trails will be located to harmonize with the scenic resource. The area will be classified as a Special Interest Area (CFR 294.1). Teanaway Recreation Area — will be designated a Special Interest Area (CFR 294.1) and managed principally for dispersed recreation in a substantially natural condition. No roads will be pro- vided or maintained for travel by motorized vehicles intended for highway use. ORV's and snowmobiles will be permitted in areas determined suitable. This area will be placed in the unregulated timber component. Stevens Pass Historic District – This area was classified a National Historic District in 1976 and placed on the National Register of Historic Places. The designation was made to protect and preserve a physical record of the remarkable engineering feats required to develop a railroad crossing of the Cascade Mountains. Visual, audible and atmospheric qualities will be preserved and historic information provided. Denny Creek Recreation Area — This area includes the Denny Creek Scenic Area, Asahel Curtis Recreation Area, Pacific Crest Trail, Denny Creek Trailhead, Franklin Falls Trail, Old Snoqualmie Pass Wagon Road, Denny Creek summer home tract, the Old Snoqualmie Pass Highway and Interstate 90 highway. The area will be managed principally for recreation use and be designated for special classification. The area will be managed to provide all appropriate facilities needed by the public to en- 146 joy the recreation resources contained within the area or adjacent areas. Asahel Curtis Recreation Area — This area was classified in 1949 as a Recreation Area. The area will be managed for public recreation use and closed to all other occupancy and use. Red Top Recreation Area — This area will be managed for recreation use and will be given special classification under CFR 294.1(b). The area will be managed to provide appropriate facilities needed by the public to enjoy the recreation resource contained within the area. See management direction unique to each alternative for additional in- formation. Liberty Historic District — This area was classified as a National Historic District and placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1974. Historic structures and remains associated with the mining community of Liberty will be protected and preserved and interpretation will be provided. Teanaway Research Natural Area – This area contains unique combinations of plant groups, landforms and geology. It will be preserved as nearly as possible in an undisturbed condition. Scientific study will be accommodated. Tumwater Botanical Area - The area was designated under 36 CFR 251.22 in 1971 to be managed as a near-natural area to protect plant species which occur there. Nason Ridge Recreation Area – Will be designated under 36 CFR 294.1 and managed prin- cipally for dispersed recreation in a substantially natural condition. It shall be roadless. Kachess Quiet Water Recreation Area — will be designated under 36 CFR 294.1 and . . managed principally for non-motorized recreation in a substantially natural roadless condition. Trails, Cam- ping and launching facilities will be designed to blend with the natural landscape. Blewett Historic District – This area has been proposed for nomination to the National - - - Register of Historic Places because of the signifi- cant role it played in the mining history of Washington State. National Register designation would provide direction for the preservation and pro- tection of the historic resources within the proposed district. Interpretation of these resources will ultimately be provided. Annette Lake Recreation Area – will be designated and managed principally for recreation in a substantially natural condition. The area will be roadless with no motorized vehicles permitted, ex- cept snowmobiles will be permitted where determin- ed suitable. The area and its environmental setting will be managed to avoid disturbing the scenic en- vironment. Trails and camping facilities will be designed to blend with the natural landscape. Plan Revision The Alpine Lakes Area Management Act of 1976 specifies that “the Secretary (of Agriculture) shall review the multiple-use plan from time to time and, with full public involvement, shall make any changes he deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act.” The Alpine Lakes Area Management Plan will main- tain its identity in the forest-wide plans now being developed by the Wenatchee and Mt. Baker- Snoqualmie National Forests. Revision of the Alpine Lakes Area Management Plan will be scheduled to coincide with that of the forest plans. Review of the plan will occur at least every five years and it will be revised 10 years after the forest plans are approved. Public demand or management needs may necessitate review or revision sooner. Currently there are numerous other functional plans in existance which guide management of the Alpine Lakes Area. They are typically detailed site specific plans beyond the scope of planning presented in this Environmental Impact Statement. After implementa- tion of the Alpine Area Management Plan, these ex- isting functional plans will be reviewed and revised as necessary to be in conformance with this plan. The Forest Supervisor may change proposed scheduling to respond to minor differences between planned annual budgets and appropriated funds. Such scheduled changes will be considered amend- ments to the plan, but generally will not require an Environmental Impact Statement. An EIS may be re- quired, however, if scheduling changes will result in significant adverse environmental impacts not taken into account in this Statement. 147 Appendix B Wilderness Management Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 Management Goal for the Alpine Lakes Wilderness150 Management Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Trails and Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 Signing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Land Occupancy and Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 Fish and Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Mining and Minerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 Collection of Resource and Use Information . . . . 159 Scientific Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 Cultural and Historical Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 Visuals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Fire Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Livestock Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 Exhibits A. Boundary Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 B. Wilderness Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 C. Management Action Program Outline . . . . . . . . . . 169 D. Wilderness Fisheries Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 E. Region-6 Wilderness Management Standards ... 178 F. Animals of Special Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 G. Sensitive Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 H. Soil and Vegetation Monitoring Methodology .. 179 l. Trail Service Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 J. Wilderness Management Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . 181 K. Suppression Decision Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 L. Trail Map and Wilderness Use Zones . . . . . . . . . . . 185 M. Lake Susceptibility to Water Quality Degradation 185 N. Visual Absorption Capability (VAC). . . . . . . . . . . . 185 O. Core Enchantment Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 P. Wilderness Ranger Areas of Responsibility. ... 185 Q. Fire Protection Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 149 Introduction The Alpine Lakes Wilderness straddles the Central Washington Cascade Mountain Range in portions of Chelan, King and Kittitas Counties. It is located approximately 40 miles east of Seattle and 30 miles west of Wenatchee, Washington. Fifty per cent of the State's 3,662,000 residents live within 70 miles of the Wilderness. Easy access to the area is provided by two principal highways: U.S. 2 over Stevens Pass along the northern boundary of the area and Interstate 90 over Snoqualmie Pass adjacent to the Southern boundary. See Exhibit A for the legal description of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. The unique Scenic values of the area were formally recognized by the Forest Service in 1946. At that time, the Pacific Northwest Regional Forester designated 256,000 acres as the Alpine Lakes Limited Area. That designation was made to protect the recreational values in a near natural Condition until studies could provide Sound management direc- tion and classification. On July 12, 1976, the 306,934 acre Alpine Lakes Wilderness was designated, with an additional 86,426 acres of land to be included after the acquisition of all private lands within the boundary. Throughout this plan, reference to the Alpine Lakes Wilderness will include all lands in the “Intended Wilderness”. The topography of the Wilderness is dominated by the rugged peaks of the Central Cascade Range, the Stuart Range, and portions of the Chiwaukum and Wenatchee Mountains. The highest mountain is Mt. Stuart, a glacier-carved granitic peak that rises to an elevation of 9,415 feet and is located 19 miles east of the Cascade Crest. Prominent peaks along the crest are Mt. Daniel (7,899 feet), Mt. Hinman (7,494 feet), Chimney Rock (7,727 feet) and Lemah Mountain (7,494 feet). In contrast to these rugged rock out- Crops, the valleys tend to be broad and gently slop- ing, the result of glacial scouring 12,000 years ago. Four major river drainages originate in the Alpine Lakes. The Snoqualmie and Skykomish Rivers flow westerly to form the Snohomish River which flows into Puget Sound. The Wenatchee and Yakima Rivers flow easterly to the Columbia River. Perhaps the most impressive character of the Wilderness is the occurrence of over 700 jewel-like lakes interspersed throughout the glacial cirque basins, high mountain meadows, Serrated peaks and deep valleys of the area. These lakes range in size from 257 acres (Lake Dorothy) to many unnamed tarns of less than an acre. Forests cover approximately 39 per cent of the Wilderness; scattered subalpine, open meadows, grassland and barren rocks about 58 per cent; water about 2 per cent; and glaciers and permanent Snowfields about I per cent. The vegetative com- munities vary from the dense stands of huge fir and hemlock in the western valleys to open, flower- covered meadows of the alpine zone and open ponderosa pine stands along the eastern boundary. In the western valleys, the upper fringes of the Western Hemlock or Coastal Forest Zone are characterized by dense stands of Douglas fir, western hemlock, western red cedar and grand fir. Soils tend to be quite deep and are often rather poor- ly drained. The upper elevation of this zone is about 3,000 feet. The Silver Fir or Canadian Zone is present on both Slopes of the Cascade Mountains, from 3,000 feet to approximately 5,000 feet. Towering stands of Douglas fir, grand fir and western hemlock grow at the lower elevations blending with Pacific silver fir, Englemann spruce, noble fir and mountain hemlock on higher lands. Soil characteristics vary greatly through this zone, but are generally deep and well drained. At elevations between 5,000 and 7,500 feet, the Mountain Hemlock or Hudsonian Life Zone is represented. This zone is characterized by open, scattered, often matted and deformed alpine fir, dwarf juniper and alpine larch. Scenic qualities of this zone are enhanced by the many mountain meadows. Summers are short and snow depths range to 20 feet. Soils tend to be shallow and rocky, with frost common each month of the year. The Sub-alpine Life Zone is present in the Alpine Lakes generally above 7,500 feet. Many areas within the zone remain snow-covered year-round with numerous small glaciers and permanent Snow fields present. Soils are very thin to nonexistent. Much of this zone is extremely fragile. The sparse vegetative Cover recuperates very slowly once damage occurs. The Cascade Mountain Range experiences con- trasting weather patterns. Moist marine air from the Pacific Ocean is uplifted as it moves east, causing the release of increasing amounts of moisture over the higher elevations. The western lowlands receive an average of 35 inches of rain annually and have mild moist winters and cool dry summers. Along the summit of the Cascades within the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, 30 foot Snow depths are often en- Countered. As the air continues east toward the Col- umbia River Basin, moisture decreases markedly with only 25 inches of precipitation annually at Leavenworth, adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Wilderness. The average mean temperature is about the same on both sides of the Cascades, but the moderating effects of the marine air are greater on the west side, resulting in less variation between Summer and winter extremes. On the east side, it is Common to have summer temperatures in the 90's and zero degree readings in the winter. The geologic history of the Cascade began 350 million years ago with repeated deposition of Sedimentary and volcanic rocks, accompanied by deformation, metamorphism, intrusion of granitic batholiths and mountain building. Uplift in relatively recent geologic time has given rise to the modern Cascade Range. Repeated alpine glaciation over the last one to two million years has produced the lakes and deep canyons found in the area today. This glaciation, along with the great variability of parent materials, has produced the complex soil patterns and dramatically Contrasting topographical features. Management Goal For the Alpine Lakes Wilderness The Alpine Lakes Wilderness is a distinct resource to be managed for the use and enjoyment of the American people in Such manner as will leave it unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as Wilderness. It will be administered so as to provide for the protection of the area, the preservation of its wilderness character and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding its use and enjoyment as Wilderness. Management Analysis Wilderness Use Zones The Alpine Lakes Wilderness has been divided into four management use zones to provide a variety of complementary physical and social settings. Management within each of the zones is in keeping with the Wilderness management goal and within the range of acceptable conditions identified in this plan. Figures J-1 to J-4, Exhibit J define and summarize the management guidelines for each of the zones. The location of each zone may be found on the map, Exhibit L. The map currently displays the zones as depicted on the preferred alternative of this Draft En- vironmental Impact Statement. The adopted map will be prepared after public review of this Statement and indicated changes are made. 150 Following are the acreages contained within each management zone: Transition — 12,242 acres Semi-primitive — 32,842 acres Primitive — 10,182 acres Trailless — 338,694 acres Carrying Capacity The maximum number of persons which a given zone or specific area can support for Wilderness recrea- tion depends on many factors. Some are physical characteristics of the land, the vegetative com- munities and animal species present, while others relate to the nature of the uses and users. The following are factors that simultaneously affect the Capacities. 1. The ability of the area and its resources to with- stand the physical impacts associated with outdoor recreation use. 2. The types of recreational uses which will be permitted. 3. The psychologically acceptable level of physical impact. 4. The capacity of uses and users to generate Sociological impacts. 5. The kinds and quality of wilderness experiences desired by visitors. 6. The ability of the managers to control use. The carrying capacities within the Alpine Lakes Wilderness have been calculated for each of the four use zones. In an average acre within each zone, the following estimated number of recreation visitor-days of use per year (coefficients) may be accommodated while maintaining the desired physical and Social setting: Transition — 15; Semi-primitive - 5, Primitive — 2; Trailless — 0.5. Using these coefficients, the carrying capacity for the Wilderness would be: Transition 183,630 RVD's Semi-primitive 161,210 RVD's Primitive 20,364 RVD's Trailless 169,347 RVD's Total 534,551 RVD's During plan implementation, the Wilderness managers must seek to gain an understanding of how the above factors affect both the Wilderness resource and users' experience. They must con- tinuously evaluate the Capacity of the zones and specific areas within the zones to absorb use, adjust the capacities to meet the objectives of this plan and use indirect management tools (i.e., user education) and direct management tools (i.e., mandatory permits to regulate use). Based on a 7 percent annual increase in use, the above carrying capacity estimates, adequate funding, and proper distribution of use, the Wilderness will be able to Satisfy all expected recreation needs until the late 1980's. After which additional management measures such as mandatory entrance permits may be needed. The following is management direction common to the Alpine Lakes Wilderness without specific reference to the four management zones. Administration Management Objectives To preserve the integrity of the Wilderness resource; to provide uniform and consistent administration by all ranger districts; to conduct necessary ad- ministrative activities most protective of the Wilderness resource and with minimal impact on and from adjacent non-Wilderness lands. Current Situation The Alpine Lakes Wilderness is jointly administered by the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests. It lies within the jurisdiction of six Ranger Districts: the Skykomish and North Bend Ranger Districts of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest on the west side of the Cascades and the Cle Elum, Ellensburg, Leavenworth and Lake Wenatchee Ranger Dictricts of the Wenatchee National Forest on the east side of the Cascades. Administrative responsibility for management of the area is shared among all six District Rangers. Because no plan currently exists, coordinated ad- ministration between the national forests and ranger districts is limited. Field work is conducted by seasonal Wilderness rangers responsible for enforcing policies and regulations, performing minor trail and other facility Construction and maintenance, conducting inven- tories and aiding visitors. Highly motivated, qualified, trained and experienced wilderness rangers will be essential to achieving the management objectives. Major facility construction and maintenance is per- formed by Forest Service trail crews and contractors. The Wilderness is surrounded by the Congressionally designated Alpine Lakes management unit. Manage- ment actions within this surrounding multiple use area have significant effects on the Wilderness resource. The most obvious effects relate to Scenic values and access. Because total resource manage- ment requires close coordination between the direc- tion for the management unit and the Wilderness management plan, both are being prepared simultaneously. Management Direction 1. Ranger District annual operating plans will be prepared, stating specific local actions needed to achieve operational objectives and to implement management policies and actions stated in this plan. 2. Key personnel from the Wenatchee and Mt. Baker. Snoqualmie National Forests will meet annually to insure uniform management and coordinate their respective operating plans and other management activities. Some items to be addressed include: Wilderness ranger uniforms and patrol areas, special regulations or restrictions, public information, trailhead information, receptionist training and changes in road access surrounding the Wilderness that may affect the patterns of use. 3. Two annual Wilderness ranger meetings will be held, one in the spring and one in the fall. a. The spring meeting, held prior to the beginning of the normal use season (approximately June 15), will be to train new Wilderness rangers for their specific duties, understanding of management objectives of this Wilderness and general Forest Service policies, including multiple use management principles and management activities for the field season. b. The fall meeting will be held prior to the termina- tion of employment of the seasonal Wilderness rangers (approximately September 30), to review the field Season accomplishments relative to the management objectives and to begin preparation of the next season's plans and budgets. 4. Aſ administrative activity will be conducted to minimize impacts on the Wilderness environment and the experience of users. Field projects will be Closely Supervised to insure consistency with the goal and objectives of this plan. All non-routine pro- jects will be described in the appropriate ranger districts' annual operating plan and will have an environmental assessment. 5. All administrative facilities will be temporary and Seasonal. They will be located away from main trails, popular sites and lakeshores. 151 6. Portable radios used by wilderness rangers will have common frequencies for improved communica- tion between all personnel on the two national forests. 7. Wilderness rangers will be competitively selected for desirable combinations of management knowledge, backcountry wilderness and other travel experience and skills, ability to meet and work with the public and commitment to the preservation of the Wilderness resource. 8. Following are the minimum wilderness ranger per- sonnel needs to implement the plan as proposed in the preferred alternative, draft Alpine Lakes Area Environmental Impact Statement. The general patrol areas to be covered by each are displayed on map Exhibit P. North Bend District — 4 Skykomish District — 4 Lake Wenatchee District – 0 (district's portion of the Wilderness covered by Leavenworth) Leavenworth District – 6 Ellensburg District – 0 (district's portion of the Wilderness covered by Leavenworth) Cle Elum District — 4 9. Wilderness management personnel will become familiar with the special problems, requirements and orientations of the various noncommercial user groups including horsemen, backpackers, climbers, hunters and fishermen. They will also become acquainted with the special problems of commercial users such as packers, guide services and outdoor leadership schools and restrictions on their activities. 10. Coordinated fiscal year Wilderness budget plan- ning will be done to assure that each ranger district's Wilderness management needs are recognized in recurrent funding. 11. A close working relationship will be maintained with all state, county and federal agencies as well as large private landowners that use or influence use of the wilderness to promote understanding of the pur- poses of wilderness. 12. Motorized equipment use for administrative pur- poses must be approved by the responsible line officer on a case-by-case basis. Since emergencies occur at unpredictable times, the chain of approval will be as follows: a. Forest Supervisor b. Deputy Forest Supervisor c. Acting Forest Supervisor (including District Ranger) Approval may be granted only for the following pur- poses and under the following conditions: fire sup- pression, health, safety and law enforcement, trail Construction, reconstruction and maintenance and other administrative use. Fire Suppression – District rangers may approve the use of motorized initial attack equipment such as helicopters, chainsaws and pumps as needed to meet the fire management objectives of this plan. Tractors and other equipment used for support activities will only be allowed with the approval of the appropriate line officer and then only on a case- by-case basis. Any approval will be limited to those Situations where: 1. The use of the specific equipment is essential to the quick, efficient management of fires during periods when suppression resources are limited, (i.e., equipment and/or manpower is needed for anticipated fires elsewhere in the region). 2. Speed is essential for delivering containment forces where fires threaten non-wilderness values or where aircraft landings are necessary to determine the need for control of a natural fire. 3. Motorized use will result in less damage than alternative methods. For example, helicopters might be used instead of large packstrings that may damage existing trails or necessitate development of new trails. Health, Safety and Law Enforcement — The Forest Supervisor may approve helicopters and other motorized equipment for use in search and rescue for lost, injured, ill or deceased persons, including their immediate accompanying family in certain situations. The Forest Supervisor may approve such use for law enforcement personnel when an emergency exists requiring speed not available by primitive means of transport. County sheriffs have primary responsibility for search and rescue activities within the Wilderness. Forest personnel will cooperate with sheriffs to assure that a reliable system for emergency action exists. Post-rescue critiques will be held with sheriffs to evaluate compliance with Wilderness objectives. Trail Construction, Reconstruction and Maintenance — Requests with an accompanying environmental analysis will be made to the Regional Forester for approval of motorized equipment for the following purposes: 1. Chainsaws, for construction or reconstruction of trails. When it is unavoidable to locate a minimum of %2 mile of the trail through stands of trees which exceed 16 inches DBH average, or one mile of trail through stands of trees of any size. 2. Rock drills, to facilitate blasting for restoration or construction of trails where their use will preserve the Wilderness resource more than alternative methods. 3. Helicopters, where their use will result in less damage and impact on the Wilderness environment than alternative methods, such as large pack strings for transporting materials. 4. Chainsaws and rock drills, during trail maintenance or restoration activities for removing unusually large windfalls, rocks or avalanche debris where use of handtools is not feasible or safe, and where failure to remove the obstacles will lead to detours that damage the Wilderness resource. During trail construction, reconstruction or heavy maintenance work periods, the public will be notified of personal risks (associated with wilderness travel) through publications and with hazard warning signs at appropriate trailheads and inside the Wilderness. Other Administrative Use — Requests with an accompanying environmental analysis will be made to the Forest Supervisor for approval of motorized equipment use for the following purposes: 1. To retrieve aircraft wrecks and other debris where damage to the Wilderness resource caused by ground removal would be unacceptable. 2. To conduct peridodic maintenance of existing water diversion facilities retained by the Icicle Irrigation District and the Leavenworth Federal Fish Hatchery. Ú/ Nº. Wºº, Sºº CºNºża- *ś - gºſº/º/N 2 º'M Ø\%: 152 Trails and Travel Management Objective To provide a range of challenges to Wilderness users through a spectrum of access opportunities, in- cluding cross-country travel and trails of varying dif- ficulty for horse and foot travel; to minimize physical and visual impacts upon the land, conflicts between users and concentrations of use harmful to the Wilderness resource. Current Situation Most of the trails on the east side of the Cascades in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness were established near the turn of the century by herdsmen moving sheep through the high mountain country to graze. These trails normally ran from alpine meadow to alpine meadow by the shortest route, circled lakes along their wet, fragile shores and crossed from drainage to drainage by going straight up and through low mountain passes. Many of the trails on the west side of the Cascades developed as scramble routes by fishermen as they climbed from lake to lake. Like sheep driveways, these trails followed the shortest path of least - resistance with little consideration given to scenic vistas, variety of hiking experiences or protection of the environment. Over the years, the Forest Service has maintained and expanded many of the sheepherder and fishermen trails for fire protection and other ad- ministrative purposes. Almost all of these trails re- main today. However, with increased use and longer seasons of use, the damage resulting from these poorly designed and improperly located trails is growing. The only major trail that has been constructed primarily for recreational purposes has been the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail. Much of the present trail system needs reconstruc- tion or relocation to adequately serve administrative and recreational use. Backpackers and climbers searching out new routes are creating informal ex- pansion of the trail system into new areas. Many of these informal way-trails will require future manage- ment to prevent damage. There are approximately 450 miles of Forest Service system trail in the Wilderness, with over 90 per cent open to both hiker and horse travel. There are 72 miles of the Pacific Crest Trail in the WilderneSS. This high standard trail is a major man-created fa- cility that attracts many persons who would not otherwise come to the Wilderness. º ºf a - - - * lºº ºu. . - - w 7 -- º - - º - - - º: --~~ 3. - £% * ſº sº ! º ſ // §4.”: - º There are several large areas without trail access where cross country trips of as long as a week are possible. These areas provide for a pristine wilderness experience, but they generally occur in extremely fragile alpine areas that are vulnerable to over use. These areas also provide the opportunities for observing wildlife, scientific study and cross- Country travel. Use, however, is taking its toll. Boot- Created trail treads are appearing, favorite camp Spots are becoming denuded and opportunities for Solitude are diminishing. If not managed, cross- Country travel and informal marking of routes will lead to the establishment of new trails, greatly reduc. ing the trailless challenge. Trails and routes within the Alpine Lakes are de- scribed in several guidebooks available through com: mercial Sources. This has had the effect of concen- trating use. Access to the Wilderness boundary varies from asphalt roads to a few low standard roads better suited for pickups and 4 x 4 type vehicles. There are 40 Wilderness trailheads. See map Exhibit L. Facilities vary from those having self-registration boxes, information and map boards, corrals, hitchracks, loading chutes and toilets, to some seldom-used entrances having only signs designating the Wilderness boundary and the restric- tion on the use of motorized equipment. A Service Level concept for management of the trail systems within the Wilderness has been used to ad- dress the issues of amount of use, numbers of en- Counters with other visitors and patterns of trail use. The designed service level depends upon these major factors: 1. The ability of the Wilderness to withstand facility Construction, reconstruction and maintenance. 2. The ability of individual areas to sustain the ex- pected amount and type of use. 3. The available management techniques to provide and manage facilities to minimize user impacts, while meeting desires and expectations (Examples include permits, site hardening, user education and changes in amounts and patterns of travel). Descriptions of the four Service Levels are found in Exhibit . The four Service Levels have been identified for all Wilderness trails and are displayed on map Exhibit L. The three trail Service Levels (A,B,C) relate closely to the “transition”, “semi-primitive” and “primitive” Wilderness Use Zones respectively. The manager can thus relate zone management direction to both areas and trails within areas. The users can, also, choose the trails, area and experience level they desire, with some assurance that their expectations will be realized. Management Direction 1. Trails will be designed, built, relocated, reconstructed and maintained to provide the level of service appropriate for the planned use (as shown on the map Exhibit L). These trails will comply with the objectives of this plan and the recommendations of the Wilderness Visual Absorption Capability (VAC) Inventory (see map Exhibit N). 2. Trails will be managed to maintain a balanced spectrum of travel opportunities according to dif- ficulty, mode of travel, distance and type of destina- tion. Standards for trail encounters within each of the four Wilderness Use Zones will be adhered to (see map Exhibit L, and standards Exhibit J). Trail segments that currently do not comply with the stan- dards include: (information to be included after final management alternative is selected). These 153 segments are listed in order of priority for meeting Service Level standards. All trails will have target dates for meeting standards. 3. Portions of the Wilderness without trails will be managed to remain trailless. 4. Priorities for annual trail maintenance will be specified in each ranger district annual work plan. Annual priorities will be based on weather, rate of snow melt, expected use and availability of per- Sonnel. Highest priority will be trails that open and receive use early and are known to pose hazards to users and have high potential for resource damage, (i.e., avalanche debris, rock Slides, extensive blowdowns, etc.). Second priority will be other trails that open and receive early use. Third priority will be placed on other Service Level A trails. 5. All Service Level A and B trails will be maintained annually. Service Level C trails will be maintained as needed to protect the Wilderness resource and meet the objective of the zone. 6. Trails will be reconstructed and rerouted to pro- tect the Wilderness resource and meet the objectives of each service level. Priorities will be identified in each ranger district annual work plan. Highest priority will be short segments posing hazards to users. Second priority will be short segments where use of the trail is causing resource damage. Third priority will be relocation of trails where cur- rent use is causing resource damage to adjacent areas away from the trail itself, (i.e., trails routed near fragile lake shores). Segments currently known to require rerouting include: Deep Lake, Deception Lakes, Pete Lake, Snow Lake (Sec. 19, T. 23 N., R. 11 E.), and Trout Lake (Sec. 31, T. 25 N., R. 12 E.). Fourth priority will be reconstruction of long sec- tions as needed to change existing trail standards to meet the objectives of the plan, (i.e., upgrading a trail currently maintained for hikers only to horse use). 7. The practice of placing temporary plastic ribbons, cairns or other devices by visitors to mark informal trails will be discouraged through visitor information. Such markers will be removed by Wilderness management personnel and their removal by other users will be encouraged. 8. Trail locations will not be marked using tree blazes. 9. Trail construction and maintenance activities will be accomplished with minimum impact on the Wilderness resource and on the experience of Wilderness users. 10. Stakes and ribbons used to identify trail con- struction or reconstruction locations or other ad- ministrative activity will be temporary and removed immediately after project completion. 11. Constructed bridges will be provided only on Service Levels A and B trails, and only when no other route or crossing is reasonably available (during the primary use period) for essential user Safety or to prevent resource damage. Such Construction will re- quire an environmental assessment and approval by the Regional Forester. 12. When possible, trail locations will avoid wet soils and meadows. Trail drainage structures will be Con- structed of natural materials and designed to minimize their visual obtrusiveness. Drainage struc- tures of non-native material will be replaced with native material as soon as practicable. 13. Existing trails no longer compatible with the ob- jectives of this plan will be abandoned and returned to as near a natural state as possible. These trails are shown on the map, Exhibit L. Adandoned trails will be monitored periodically. 14. Trailhead facilities will not exceed that required to protect the site and to accommodate the amount and type of use desired within that portion of the Wilderness. Wilderness access trailheads requiring improvement and/or expansion will be determined after completion of the Final Alpine Lakes Area Environmental Impact Statement. 15. When possible, through-trails will be routed away from areas of concentrated use, such as lakes and popular campsites, to avoid unnecessary visitor con- tacts and environmental impacts (also see direction item 6 above). |6. The Pacific Crest Trail will be maintained to the same standard as other Service Level A Wilderness trails and will be managed within the management standards of the “transition'' zone to minimize its effect on the Wilderness. Users of the trail within the Wilderness will be subject to the same restraints as other Wilderness visitors. 17. As user demands on the Wilderness increase and as cross-country travel becomes more popular, boot- built paths begin to occur in the “trailless” zone. These paths will not normally be upgraded to system trails. Upgrading may take place only if it has been determined, based on resource degredation stan- dards, that the path is causing unacceptable damage, user awareness and other reasonable measures have failed to prevent the unacceptable Social, physical or biological impacts of the path, or an environmental analysis has been prepared relating the trail effects to the goal and objectives of the plan, potential changes in use patterns, carrying capacities, the Wilderness VAC and user experiences. Signing Management Objective To provide signs where necessary to protect the Wilderness resource and for basic visitor protection and Orientation. Current Situation The presence of many existing signs conflicts with the goals of this plan to preserve the naturalness of the Wilderness resource. They were installed to pro- vide a high degree of visitor orientation and con- venience, an objective now considered inappropriate in WilderneSS. A wide variety of signs are present in the area: baked enamel metal signs and wood signs; signs with and without trail numbers and mileages; and signs with many destinations indicated. Present signing policy for the Wilderness specifies the use of rustic white oak signs with characters that are lightly charred to enhance their readability. Approximately 75 per cent of the existing signs in the Wilderness are of oak design. Currently, signs are mounted on trees whenever possible. Privately published maps, trail guides and U.S. Geological Survey maps currently supplement signs in providing information about destinations and distances. Management Direction 1. Rough-cut, unfinished white oak will be the stan- dard sign material in the Wilderness. Lettering will be routed and lightly scorched. The only exception will be the use of the standard metal logo on Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail signs. 2. All existing signs will be individually evaluated to determine if they meet the sign management objec- tive. Those that do not meet the objective and do not 154 require replacement will be removed. Signs that are needed to meet management objective, but are not of the current design will be replaced when the existing sign is no longer serviceable. The need for signs will be minimized by developing accurate map brochures and other user information systems. 3. Destination mileages will not be placed on signs within the Wilderness. 4. Signing needed for management and regulation of use (including site restoration areas, trail closures, directions to toilets) will be the minimum size possi- ble and will be installed to minimize both the physical impact of the signing system upon the Wilderness resource and the psychological impact on the user. Whenever possible, signs will be worded to have positive psychological impact to the Wilderness visitor (i.e. “Please Camp Elsewhere" rather than “No Camping”). 5. To facilitate permanent mounting and to minimize the visual impact, the white oak signs will be placed on trees or rocks wherever possible. 6. Signing standards for the Alpine Lakes Wilderness will generally be applied to the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail. The only exception will be the use of the Pacific Crest Trail logo to identify the trail at its junction with other arterial trails. Identification may be by use of the official logo placed on one tree in each direction along the trail from the junction, or on directional signs at the trails junction with arterial trails. 7. Signing at Wilderness trailheads may consist Of trail direction signs, Wilderness boundary signs and such essential official information displays such as fire prevention, regulations governing use of the Wilderness and suggested wilderness behavior. Trailhead signs may include destination mileages. 8. Direction signs at system trail junctions will be limited to two per trail junction with a maximum of two lines (destinations) per sign. 9. Signs will not be used for directions to “trailless” zones or nonsystem trails. 10. Wilderness boundary identification (including motorized equipment restrictions) will be posted at the 65 system trail entry points. 11. A standard Wilderness trailhead information signboard will be designed and installed at all Service Level A and B trailheads. 12. Wilderness boundary signs will be placed at other points along the boundary as needed when ac- tivities outside the boundary are planned or are likely to occur which would require boundary identification so as not to Conflict with Wilderness objectives. Recreation Management Objective To provide a spectrum of opportunities for primitive recreation featuring a natural Wilderness environ- ment, Solitude, physical and mental challenge and in- Spiration consistent with preservation of Wilderness values. Current Situation A wide variety of recreation opportunities is available. Over 700 lakes and many miles of streams provide both fishing and viewing opportunities. Numerous game animals including deer, elk, bear, mountain goat and grouse are both viewed and hunted. Non-game birds and animals abound in the area providing viewing and nature study oppor- tunities. The network of developed system trails affords opportunities primarily for summer hiking and horseback riding. Vast, rugged untrailed areas (approximately 71 per cent) offer a high degree of Solitude in which to pursue many different recrea- tional activities. In 1978, 309,800 visitor-days of use were recorded in the Wilderness, up from 259,000 in 1972 when records for the area were first compiled. The greatest increase in use has been recorded on the Pacific Crest Trail. In the past, recreation use has been concentrated in July, August and September with winter recreation use of the area very low. Recent improvements in Snowshoes and winter camping equipment, as well as the rapidly increasing popularity of Nordic skiing and ski mountaineering, have resulted in increased winter wilderness use. Additional increases can be expected as more people discover wilderness winter beauty and the many opportunities for solitude and unconfined recreation experiences. Prior to establishment of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness in 1976, several lakes within the area were frequented by floatplanes for both recreational and commercial purposes. Lakes with a history of use include:Waptus, Spade, Marmot, Colchuck, Chiwakum, Fisher, Otter, Big Hart, Angeline, Chet- wood, Copper, Hester, Snoqualmie, Dorothy, Snow, Caroline, Upper Tuscahatchie, Gold and Phillippa. Since establishment of the Wilderness, floatplane landing has been curtailed until final management direction concerning their use is developed in this plan. The Wilderness Act in Section 4(d)(1) States that the Secretary of Agriculture may allow Con- tinued landing of aircraft within Wilderness where there was a history of use prior to establishment of the area as Wilderness. Commercial outfitters and guides are required to ob- tain a special use permit for use of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. Currently there are 14 Special-use per- mits issued to commercial outfitter-guide enter- prises. The Wilderness currently has a party size limit of 12 persons or any combination of persons and livestock totaling 12. A special use permit is required for any party size in excess of the limit. Recreational use of the Wilderness is expected to in- Crease because of its proximity to and ease of access from heavy population centers. Use is pro- jected to increase at an average annual rate of 7 per- cent. This will result in an estimated demand for primitive recreation from the Wilderness at well over 1 million visitor days by the year 2000. The increase is expected to be greater as energy becomes more scarce or expensive, discouraging trips to more remote areas. The cumulative effect of thousands of recreational users is the greatest threat to the integrity of the Wilderness. Some areas show signs of physical deterioration due to excessive or inappropriate use. There has been considerable effort by the two National Forests by means of education, regulation and redirection to encourage behavior that minimizes physical harm to the Wilderness resource and distur- bances of the Wilderness experience of others. For most areas, behavior can be influenced by education, on-the-ground contact by Wilderness rangers and in- direct regulation, thus forestalling more direct regulation and limitation of use until the future. Management Direction 1. Where the Wilderness resource or its values are jeopardized, recreation use will be reduced, regulated or excluded based on the calculated carrying capa- city of each area. 2. General zone carrying capacities and acceptable levels of resource impact have been established. All areas will be managed within these standards (See Region 6, standards Exhibit E). Compliance with these Standards will be monitored. 3. Regulations limiting the number of visitors will be put into effect only after other reasonable measures to minimize impacts have failed. Non-regulatory management measures may include: improve, main- tain or lower standards of access roads, trailhead facilities and trails; advertise special attributes of the areas; identify the range of recreation opportunities 155 in surrounding areas; educate users to basic con- cepts of protecting the Wilderness ecosystems; ad- vise users of little-used areas and general patterns of use. Limitations on numbers of users will be applied to particular heavy use locations where carrying capacity levels are exceeded before they are applied to the entire Wilderness. Note: Depending on the final selected alternative, mandatory permits for the core Enchantment Area and more restrictive party size limitations may be added to this management direction after final approval of the Alpine Lakes Environmental Impact Statement. 4. If it becomes necessary to establish priorities for Wilderness visitation, highest priority will be given uses which (a) least alter the Wilderness environ- ment, and (b) are dependent upon the Wilderness en- vironment. Other users will be encouraged to visit. areas outside the Wilderness. 5. Improvements must be necessary for the protec- tion of the Wilderness resource and not for the con- venience of users. Authorized improvements will be designed and constructed of natural materials and designed to harmonize with the environment. Corrals will not be permitted for either public or commercial livestock. 6. Alternative management direction concerning the landing of floatplanes within the Wilderness is presented in the five alternatives (reference pages 45, 49, 54, 57 and 61). Management direction will be included in the final Wilderness Management Plan. Land Occupancy and Structures Management Objective To maintain the Wilderness free from facilities and Structures, except those necessary to protect the Wilderness resource. Management objectives set forth in this plan, and those exceptions permitted by section 4(d) of the Wilderness Act will be met. Current Situation The Alpine Lakes Wilderness contains rustic shelters at Tuscohatchie Lake, Sunday Creek, Lake Julius, Pete Lake, South Fork Chiwaukum, Eightmile Lake Trail, Hope Lake and Necklace Valley. Several addi- tional cabin remnants exist on mining claims but are not maintained. A fire lookout Structure is main- tained and periodically occupied on Granite Mountain. Water diversion structures exist on a number of lakes. A rock masonry dam between Upper and Lower Snow Lakes and a water diversion tunnel between Snow Lakes and Nada Lake are used and maintained by the National Fish Hatchery. A rock masonry dam is used and maintained by the loicle Irrigation District on Colchuck Lake. Dirt fill dams are used and maintained by the loicle Irrigation District on Upper and Lower Klonaqua Lakes and Square Lake. Drift fences to restrict recreational livestock are in use above Chiwaukum Lake, on the Waptus Lake and Jack Creek Trails and at Meadow Creek and Timothy Meadows Camps. Management Direction I. The Granite Mountain lookout administrative facility will be evaluated to determine if it is essen- tial for protection of the Wilderness resource. 2. If, after evaluation of the Granite Mountain Lookout, it is determined nonessential for ad- ministration of the Wilderness and not of historical siginificance, the structures will be removed and the site will be restored to as natural a Condition as practical. 3. All known structures will be evaluated for their historical significance. 4. After evaluation, any decision to maintain or aban- don but not remove structures which meet the criteria for the National Register Shall be preceded by the process outlined in 36 CFR 800 for comment by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Abandoned structures will be allowed to deteriorate naturally after following procedures outlined in 36 CFR 800. Any retained or maintained structure will be managed to have a minimum impact on the Wilderness resource. 5. If it is determined, after historical evaluation, that a structure is not of significance, it will be removed by a practical method compatible with the goals of this plan and the site will be restored to as natural a condition as is practical. 6. All drift fences will be removed and less obtrusive methods for constraining livestock, including hitch rails, hitch ropes and picketing methods, will be used. 7. No roads, powerlines, telephone lines, water flow maintenance Structures, reservoirs or other im- provements will be permitted, except as authorized under Section 4(d) and 5(a) of the Wilderness Act. 8. Current water diversions will not be expanded. They will continue to be maintained by primitive means unless an environmental analysis indicates that the work cannot be accomplished without motorized equipment. Use of motorized equipment will comply with direction described in Administration e.2. 9. Occupancy and structures and use of motorized and mechanized equipment related to legitimate mining prospects will be permitted to the extent re- quired by law and regulations. Every reasonable effort will be made through the operating plan to minimize their effect on the Wilderness resource. Fish and Wildlife Management Objective To provide habitat most conducive to a natural distribution and abundance of native species of fish and wildlife by allowing natural processes to shape habitat and interactions among species and to per- mit hunting and fishing in a manner consistent with the preservation of Wilderness values under the Wilderness Act (Section 4(d8). Current Situation Wilderness ecosystems provide habitat for many species of wildlife native to the Cascades, as well as several introduced species. The State of Washington has responsibility for establishing and administering regulations for the use of wildlife. The Forest Service has responsiblity for habitat management. Big game hunting is an important early fall recreational activity in the Wilderness. Many lake and stream fisheries exist within the Wilderness. Populations of several trout species, principally eastern brook, cutthroat and rainbow are present. Most of the mountain lakes were originally barren but have been stocked by the Department of Game and private fishing organizations. See Exhibit D for stocked lakes. Fish stocking, (which includes the use of helicopters) is a long-established practice in many lakes. As a result, no waters capable of sup- porting fish populations are known to be barren at this time. Fishing is heavy in readily accessible areas and is an important recreation experience for many visitorS. The human influence on the distribution and abun- dance of fish and wildlife populations affects the Wilderness resource. The general absence of fire is reducing the variety of habitat available for grazing or browsing animals; critical winter range is restricted because of human land use patterns out- side the Wilderness; and predator control on adja- cent lands affects predator-prey relationships within the Wilderness. Several threatened or endangered wildlife species 156 are reported to frequent areas within the Wilderness. These species are identified in Exhibit F. Management Direction 1. The Forest Service will continue to work closely with the Washington Department of Game in all aspects of fish and wildlife management. Forest recommendations will be predicated on need for pro- tection and maintenance of the Wilderness resource, including fish and wildlife and their respective habitats. Hunting, fishing and trapping will be per- mitted in accordance with State law under the same restrictions as other recreation use of the Wilderness (FSM 2320.3, item 3a(2) and 13). 2. Seasons and regulations that favor hunting and fishing as a part of a Wilderness recreation ex- perience will be favored. 3. Native animal species will be maintained, with special emphasis on the preservation of threatened or endangered species and their habitats (see Exhibit F for species of special interest). Wildlife may be re- established in the area if eliminated by the influence of man. 4. Study will be conducted to determine the presence and/or habitat needs of threatened or endangered wildlife species during planning of all projects. 5. Discarding of food or garbage that tends to alter the natural feeding behavior of wildlife will be . discouraged through visitor education or regulation. 6. Fish stocking will be allowed to continue where it is an established practice (CFR 293.6d and FSM 2323.35b) See Exhibit D for list of water bodies stocking records and stocking methods. A range of Wilderness fishing waters will be sought including naturally barren waters, water with only natural pro- ducing fisheries and waters with fish populations maintained by artificial stocking. Coordinated actions with the Washington Depart- ment of Game will be continued. Ranger district annual operating plans will address specific Coor- dination needs. 7. Fish stocking of individual water bodies will be limited to those methods used prior to establishment of the Wilderness. 8. Native species of fish will be favored in waters with a history of supporting such species. Waters known to contain native species are identified in the stocking inventory, Exhibit D. 9. Information contained in the fish stocking inven- tory will continue to be updated throughout the life of this plan. 10. Discharge of firearms outside of legally estab- lished hunting season will be discouraged in all areas. Discharge may be prohibited in high use areas with open terrain, rocks, water bodies or in areas where wildlife is threatened. The core Enchantment area is currently identified in the preferred alternative Alpine Lakes Area Draft Environmental Impact State- ment as the only area where discharge of firearms will be prohibited outside hunting season. Other areas may be included as the need becomes apparent. 11. Fire will be allowed to play a more natural role in maintaining habitat diversity to insure a natural abun- dance and distribution of native wildlife species. 12. The Special interest list of animals, Exhibit F, will be maintained and updated as additional information becomes available. Vegetation Management Objectives To maintain the system of natural processes that governs the distribution of plant communities and to ensure that natural biotic communities remain un- disturbed except by those natural processes (36 CFR 293.2a and FSM 2320.2, item 3). Current Situation Vegetation occurs in three zones characterized as alpine, subalpine and coniferous forest. These areas are essentially in a natural condition, unaffected by the works of humans, except for the exclusion of natural fire. Natural vegetative cover has been altered at heavy use areas, such as popular campsites and along portions of the trail system. Subalpine and alpine areas show the impact of human influence more than the coniferous forest. - . --- bº º 'º - ;:2 --- - -- ºn - - * * º &-Sºº Kaº-2 - - -> ºsſ/Z- Žº bºº 5% º ſºlſº --~ * > Z. º #º º - - - - - - - ==- –=-E = 7- – - T- --- - E 2 *E fº- - = - - -- - - - * - == ~ F. ~ * - - - - --- - = = - ~~~ _- - - = = <=~T _2 =>==~ > - Deadwood for camp fires is generally available except for the heavily used, higher elevation camp- sites, especially those located near lakes. Firewood will become increasingly scarce in some heavy use areas, especially in alpine and subalpine zones. The Wilderness contains several sensitive plant species. See Exhibit G for the current species list. Management plans intended for use by the two forests will contain maps depicting known locations of the plants. The use of trees has been limited to material for con- struction of trails, shelters, cabins and mining needs. Forage is used by wildlife, recreational livestock and Commercial livestock. Forage near heavy use areas is often overgrazed by recreation stock. There are extensive areas of dense forest, ice, rock and snow where forage is generally absent. Management Direction I. Non-native plant species will not be deliberately introduced. The possibility of accidental introduction through the use of pack and saddle stock will be minimized by prohibiting the use of hay and un- processed grain as supplemental feed and encourag- ing the use of processed, weed-free feeds, (i.e. pelletized rations). 2. Projects such as trail construction and campsite designation will provide for preservation of sensitive plant species, see Exhibit G for species of special in- terest. Consultation with the Washington Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural Heritage Program for recommended management is necessary when sensitive plants are found at a proposed pro- ject location. 3. The plants of special interest inventory, Exhibit G, will be maintained and updated as additional infor- mation becomes available. 4. Only dead and down material may be used for firewood. Camp fires will be prohibited at specific heavy use locations, if analysis indicates that it is being used faster than natural firewood accumula- tion. Camp fires may also be prohibited if use results in visual degredation from blackened rocks, etc. See the Visual Quality section for additional direction. Camp fires will be prohibited in the core Enchant- ment Area (see map Exhibit O for core location). Areas that will be monitored closely for possible future campfire exclusion include: Colchuck Lake, Tuck and Robin Lakes, Ridge and Gravel Lakes, Escondido Tarns area, Spectacle Lake, upper Necklace Valley, Rampart Ridge Area and Ladies Pass Area. 157 Water Management Objective To preserve water bodies and stream courses in a natural State with minimal modification or human caused contaminants. Current Situation Numerous high elevation lakes, glaciers and snowfields serve as natural reservoirs which are of great importance as a water source for surrounding lands. In an average year, the peak snow depth at higher elevations occurs about April 1. Snow accumulation is normally 55 to 60 per cent of the annual precipitation received at 4,000 feet. Thus, natural water storage occurs until late in the sum- mer, when it is needed most in the lower valleys. Water flowing from the Wilderness into west side rivers serves only minor agricultural and industrial needs of the Puget Sound population centers. Important water yield from the eastern slopes is presently utilized for irrigation and domestic pur- poses. Approximately 834 thousand acre feet of water is stored in the Keechelus, Kachess and Cle Elum reservoirs immediately adjacent to the Wilderness. These reservoirs have contributed substantially to the agricultural growth of the Yakima Valley since the late 1920's. The town of Leavenworth, the Leavenworth Federal Fish Hatchery and the Icicle Irrigation District all use water from Icicle Creek, which originates in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. The Irrigation District has installed regulating structures on four lakes within the Wilderness. They are Upper and Lower Klonaqua, Square and Colchuck Lakes. These structures are under special-use permit, except for the Lower Klonaqua Lake dam which is on land that is currently private. All the structures are relatively unimposing, constructed primarily of native materials substan- tially unnoticeable. Some structure maintenance is required. The Irrigation District has used helicopter access for this task in the past (See the Administra- tion section for management direction). The Leavenworth Federal Fish Hatchery maintains a diversion dam and water transmission facility between the Snow Lakes and Nada Lake. Three water resource inventory (Snow course) sites are maintained by the Soil Conservation Service within the Wilderness. They are located in Section 22, T. 23 N., R. 12 E.; Section 18, T. 23 N., R. 13 E.; Section 13, T. 23 N., R. 13 E. All courses are read from the air. Management Direction 1. Except as provided for in Section 4(d)(4) of the Wilderness Act, watersheds will not be altered or managed to provide increased water quantity, quality or timing of discharge. 2. Short-term weather modification activities which will produce only occasional, incidental, temporary or transitory changes in the weather with carryover effects on the ground lasting only a few days beyond the actual seeding period may be permitted. Long- term weather modification programs producing repeated or prolonged changes in the weather during any part of successive years and having substantial impacts on the Wilderness resource will not be permitted. Prior to any weather modification activity within the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, formal application must be filed and be approved by the Chief of the Forest Service. The proponents must, through an en- vironmental analysis accompanying their application, provide reasonable, scientifically supportable assurance that their activities will not produce per- manent or substantial changes in natural conditions, nor will they include any feature that might reasonably be expected to produce conditions in- compatible in appearance with the environment or reduce the values for which the Wilderness was Created. 3. Water yield measurements (including snow survey) will continue to be read from the air or from the ground by primitive means, except as provided for in FSM 2320, 2321.43a. 4. An ongoing program of monitoring throughout the area will determine whether livestock or humans are degrading water quality and gather baseline quality information. Monitoring will focus on heavy use areas with highest priority given the Snow Creek drainage on the Leavenworth Ranger District where a monitoring program will be developed and im- plemented. Other areas highly susceptible to pollu- tion are identified on the USGS map Appendix M. 5. Livestock and human use will be regulated to maintain existing water quality levels equal to or ex- ceeding Washington State Class AA and lake water quality standards. Any water body found to be below standard will be restored to the prescribed quality. See WAC 173-201-045 for standards. Soils Management Objective To insure that the rate of soil erosion will not noticeably exceed naturally occurring levels and to allow processes of soil formation to operate unaltered by human activity. Current Situation The extreme variability of parent materials and the effects of extensive glaciation has produced a com- plex distribution of soil types. Over 200 different soils have been identified in the area. Residual rock is frequently covered by or intimately mixed with glacial materials. Soils developed from glacial materials differ considerably, depending on whether they are derived from indurated till, loose outwash, morainal materials or from fine-textured lacustrine deposits. Soil temperature classes range from mesic to frigid. Soil resource inventory maps and general interpretations are available for the entire area. Most of the material is considered geologically recent and mountain slopes are long and very steep, so erosion and soil mantle Creep are active over much of the area. Also, portions of the area are covered by a layer of coarse pumice that is highly erosive by wind and water. Human activity adds to this background erosion by exposing soil along trails. Erosion rates are also in- creased in and around campsites and shelters by Compaction and trampling of vegetation. The use of pack and saddle stock compounds the problem, 158 especially in wet soil and meadows. Trail location and design techniques that reduce the impact of trails are available but have not always been used. Management Direction 1. Trail location will avoid areas with high erosion potential such as steep slopes, wet Soils and meadows where alternatives exist. Highly suscepti- ble areas are shown on the Wilderness Visual Absorption Capacity map (Exhibit N). 2. Camp areas will be located, relocated or closed to prevent erosion in excess of Region 6 standards (see Exhibit E). 3. Areas where accelerated Soil erosion is occurring due to human activity will be rehabilitated wherever possible using native species for revegetation. 4. Surface water runoff that Collects on trails, in ſº campsites or on other human-created alterations will be controlled to prevent accelerated erosion. 5. Abandoned trails will be rehabilitated iſ needed to prevent soil erosion or shorten recovery time. Mining and Minerals Management Objectives To assure the rights of mineral claimants as specified in the Wilderness Act, while insuring that their activities create the least possible impact upon the Wilderness resource. Current Situation The U.S. Geological Survey and the Bureau of Mines, Department of interior, conducted a field investiga: tion of the area from 1971 1973. The combined report of the two bureaus is published in two open file reports titled Mineral Resources of the Alpine Lakes Study Area, Chelan, King and Kittitas Counties, Washington and Mineral Resources of Additions to the Alpine Lakes Study Area, Chelan, King, and Kittitas Counties, Washington. The summary of these reports follows. County records indicate about 1,900 unpatented lode and placer claims and approximately 137 patented claims have been located within the area since the 1870's. Most prospects are near the edge of granitic masses along the west and south sides of the area. A record- ed total of about 500 tons of gold-silver-copper ore have been extracted from the Wilderness. Small amounts of copper and molydenum occur near Mineral Creek, On the east Side of Red Mountain near Snoqualmie Pass, and in the Gold Creek Valley. Small base metal deposits occur in the Van Epps Pass area. Of the several vein-type mineral deposits in the Alpine Lakes, the Dutch Miller mine in the Chain Lakes Basin near LaBohn Gap is the most promising. This Small, high-grade deposit is estimated to con- tain 3,500 tons of copper ore averaging over II per cent Copper and has potential for discovery of addi- tional Ore. Silver deposits present in the upper West Fork of the Miller River contain 9.71 to 15 ounces of silver per ton. Currently, these deposits are not economically minable, but they represent a potential silver reSOUrCe. Gold occurs in detectable amounts in many places in the area, but only the Lennox Mine in the Lennox Creek drainage has produced gold ore. The Wilderness has no known potential for combusti- ble fuels and only minor potential for fissionable fuels. Small non-economical iron deposits are present. Small lenticular bodies of marbleized limestone occur near Snoqualmie Pass. Granitic rock and sandstone, suitable for construc- tion and decorative stone, and sand and gravel are present, but these materials are more readily available at other localities outside the Wilderness. The Snoqualmie batholith in the southwest portion of the Wilderness may retain sufficient heat to be considered a source of geothermal energy. The only known hot springs occur at Goldmeyer on the Middle Fork Snoqualmie River near the boundary of the area. The primary effect of mining activity on the Wilderness has been past use of motorized vehicles by mining claimants for access between the Middle Fork Snoqualmie Road and claim areas in the Dutch Miller and LaBohn Gap areas. In addition, several Cabins and milling facilities have resulted in a con- siderable scattering of old mining equipment. The visual impact of this material is detrimental to the Wilderness resource. Under the Wilderness Act, the Alpine Lakes Wilderness will be withdrawn from mineral entry after December 31, 1983. Rights established prior to that date under mining law will remain subject to constraints on exploration and mining to protect sur- face resources. The U.S. Geological Survey indicates little mineral significance in this area. Management Direction I. Until December 31, 1983, the U.S. mining laws and all laws pertaining to mineral leasing are applicable in the Wilderness, as they were prior to classification under the 1964 Wilderness Act. Currently, mining ac- tivity is subject to regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture for the protection of the Wilderness character of the land. 2. The procedural requirements and intent of the National Environmental Policy Act will be followed in evaluating all requests for rights-of-way, tailing dumps, millsites or other mining-related land uses on º forest land (CFR 36, Parts 252.15 through .0). 3. A written plan of operations is required from all operators who will likely cause a significant distur- bance of surface resources by their prospecting or mining activites (See: FSM 2851.1 and FSM 2323.7). Activities generally prohibited within Wilderness, in- cluding the use of mechanized transport, aircraft or motorized equipment, shall be authorized only when proven essential in accordance with 36 CFR 252.15 (b). A prospecting operating plan, when approved by the forest supervisor, shall serve as authorization for such activities on mining claims in the Wilderness (See: FSM 2851.7 and FSM 2323.7). Collection of Resource and Use Information Management Objective To collect in a non-obtrusive manner consistent with the preservation of the Wilderness resource, resource and recreational use information necessary to: (a) gain information needed to achieve and monitor the attainment of the objectives of this plan and (b) acquire baseline knowledge needed to assess long-range natural changes and direct and indirect human influence on the Wilderness ecosystem. Current Situation A self-registration System supplemented by electric trail traffic counters is in effect in portions of the Wilderness. The system provides an estimate of visitations from 1975 to the present. Permanent photo points and quadrant transects are being established for baseline soil, vegetation and trail data needed to monitor use impacts. Vertical aerial photos are available in color, infrared 159 and black and white for the entire Wilderness, as are oblique black and white and color photographs. Earth satellite monitoring images are also available for the Wilderness. A comprehensive pilot study of the susceptibility of lakeshores to damage from users was conducted during the summer of 1978 by the U.S. Geological Survey. That study and related follow-up work rated the 300 largest lakes in the Wilderness for their relative ability to sustain near-Shore use. Management Direction 1. The collection of resource and use information will be annually Coordinated between all districts. 2. Site information concerning the location and amount of impacts on soil and vegetation resulting from recreational use will be collected, maintained and used in making future management decisions (See Exhibit H for methodology for recording and measuring impacts). The following are priorities and locations for assembling resource information: a. Vegetation and soil condition and trend informa- tion in heavily used camp areas along trails and at other impact areas, such as stock hitching areas, that appear to be near or below Region 6 standards for maximum acceptable degredation (See Exhibit E for standards.) Areas needing study at this time include: North Bend District—Talapus Lake, Pratt Lake, Melakwa Lake, Snow Lake (Section 19, T. 23 N., R. 11 E.), Snoqualmie/Deer/Bear Lakes. Cle Elum District—Ridge and Gravel Lakes, Spectacle Lake, Rachel Lake, Rampart Ridge Lakes, Pete Lake, Waptus Lake, Deep Lake, Michael Lake, Hyas Lake. Leavenworth District—The core Enchantment area, Colchuck Lake, Snow Lakes (Sections 17, T. 23 N., R. 17 E.), Nada Lake, Lake Mary. Lake Wenatchee District—Lake Julius, Lake Ethel. Skykomish District—Hope Lake, Lower Deception Lake, Trout Lake, Lake Dorothy. Baseline information will be collected from each site and will be updated and evaluated. Records will be maintained by each ranger district as a supplement to this plan. b. Vegetation and soil condition information in areas having high potential for resource degradation in the future. Specific areas will be identified by each ranger district in annual work plans. Probable areas of study will be included in the “transition” Use Zone along Service Level A trails and camp areas and all other camp areas frequented by livestock. C. Baseline vegetation and soil information will be collected using permanent transects in camps, trails and other areas that currently appear to be well within acceptable standards, but have some potential for future degradation. 3. Quantifiable information concerning the amount, season and pattern of recreation use will be col- lected and maintained (including information necessary for RIM reporting) for use in making future management decisions. The following are priorities for obtaining use information: Overall statistics re- quired for annual RIM reporting, trails accessing the heavily impacted sites as identified in direction item 2 above, and transition zone areas including the core Enchantment area. 4. University and other government researchers will be encouraged to conduct studies and collect addi- tional data to assess recreation impacts and aid in establishing and revising carrying capacities. This work shall be coordinated between the two national forests. 5. Monitor firewood supply and Compile impacts on the Wilderness resource as directed in the Vegetation Section. 6. Assemble information concerning wildlife and fish species composition, population, distribution and behavioral characteristics to determine the effects of Wilderness visitor density and distribution and to supplement the fish stocking inventory (see Exhibit D). 7. Monitor water quality as directed in the Water Section. 8. Complete cultural inventories as directed in the Cultural and Historic Section. 9. Maintain the special interest plants and animals inventories as directed in the vegetation and wildlife Sections. Scientific Study Management Objective To provide for and encourage scientific study that is dependent on a natural setting, that seeks to explain wilderness phenomena, and that is conducted in an unobtrusive manner consistent with preservation of the Wilderness resource. Current Situation The Alpine Lakes Wilderness provides opportunities for Scientific study and observation in a natural set- ting. Studies include: Hanley Thomas A., and Taber, Richard D. Wildlife Habitat Relationship Guidelines For the Alpine Lakes Wilderness & Management Areas Mt. Baker. Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, Seat- tle, Washington, 1979. Hendee, John C., Roger Clark and Thomas Dailey Fishing and Other Recreation Behavior at High Mountain Lakes in Washington State U.S.D.A., Forest Service Research Note PNW-304, Portland, Oregon, 1977. Dailey, Tom and Dave Redman Guidelines For Roadless Area Campsite Spacing to Minimize Impact of Human-Related Noises USDA General Technical Report PNW-35, Portland, Oregon, 1975. U.S.D.I., Geological Survey, Puget Sound Earth Sciences Applications Project Reconnaissance Data on Lakes in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area U.S.G.S. Open File Report 79-1405, Seattle, Washington, 1975. University of Washington The Alpine Lakes — Environmental Geology Dept. of Geological Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, 1972. Bergston, Clifford Some Physical and Biological Features of Eight Highland Lakes in the Wenatchee and Snoqualmie National Forests Unpublished Report on File, College of Fisheries, University of Washington, 1973. Hendee, John C, Roger N. Clark, Mack Hogness, Dan Wood and Russ Koch Code-A-Site: A System For In- ventory of Dispersed Recreational Sites in Roaded Areas, Backcountry, and Wilderness U.S.D.A. Forest Service Res. paper PNW-209, Portland, Oregon, 1976. Bostheson, G.C., Dion, N.P., McConnel, J.B., and Nelson, L.M. Reconnaissance Data on Lakes in Washington Washington Department of Ecology Water Supply Bulletin 43, V. 2, 1976. del Moral, Roger High Elevation Vegetation of the Enchantment Lakes Basin, Washington Ecology, 57: 520-530, 1979. Pratt, R.M. Geology of the Mount Stuart Area, Washington Ph.D. thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, 1958. 160 Dethier, David Earth Sciences Information For Plan- ning and Management in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area, Washington U.S.G.S. In-service Report, Seattle, Washington, 1978. Management Direction 1. Research projects require Chief of the Forest Service or Regional Forester approval (FSM 2323.9). Only those applications for research that are Wilderness dependent and compatible with the goals and objectives of this plan will be recommended for approval. Research activities that adversely affect the Wilderness resource, the experience of users or conflict with other Wilderness objectives will not be recommended. 2. Research that will help resolve Wilderness management problems will be given highest priority, encouragement and cooperation, as administrative time and funding permit. 3. Data collected for management purposes, such as use figures and ecological data, will be made available to scientists for research purposes. 4. All research projects which require public contact, specimen collecting or ground reference marking, or which require exemption from any regulations, will be conducted under a special-use permit. Communications Management Objective To make information about the Alpine Lakes - Wilderness, including management goals and objec- tives, available to all persons. To actively attempt to direct non-Wilderness use to alternative areas by orienting all public contact, Forest Service employees and users to this philosophy. To encourage user behavior which minimizes the im. pact on the resource and emphasize compliance with requirements or regulations. Current Situation The designation of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, development of new and improved access and exten- sive publicity have increased public awareness and interest in the area. As recreational use increases, more inquiries are received concerning the area and its management. Effective and timely information and education will be a key management tool in gain- ing public acceptance and support for management objectives. Information about the physical and biological characteristics of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness is available from a number of sources including scien- tific publications, college texts and popular books which discuss the plants, animals and geology of the region, as well as its human history. Route descriptions for trails and high routes are available from commercial sources, many of which include advice on camping, traveling techniques and procedures to reduce the user impact upon the resource. Information explaining the Forest Service philosophy and interpretation of wilderness is available in national forest wilderness publications. Recom- mended visitor behavior and use ethics are also included. There is currently no Forest Service map or publica- tion specifically addressing the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. However, each forest has recreation maps available each with portions of the Wilderness displayed. An interim map showing the newly com- pleted Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail route with Suggested campsites is currently available. Management Direction I. Wilderness rangers, receptionists and other Forest Service personnel who have contact with the public Concerning the Alpine Lakes Wilderness will be well acquainted with the wilderness philosophies, management goals and, insofar as possible, current Conditions within the Wilderness. In contacts, they will attempt to shift non-wilderness activities to alter. native areas, encourage suitable wilderness behavior and create additional awareness, understanding and appreciation of wilderness. The affect of contacts on the user's right to solitude or adventure will be minor. 2. Printed materials will contain information on wilderness management goals. Publishers and authors of trail, climbing and other informational books will be encouraged to include minimum im- pact messages in publications discussing the Alpine Lakes. Media contacts will be informed of new management goals and decisions, as well as wilderness philosophies pertaining to the Alpine Lakes. 3. An Alpine Lakes Wilderness map/brochure will be developed. Supplemental publications will be developed and existing publications revised periodically to keep them current with management decisions and conditions. 4. Only trails that receive maintenance and are con- sidered safe for use at the service level specified by this plan will be shown on Forest Service publica- tions. Publishers of maps and guidebooks will be encouraged to follow a similar policy. 5. Public involvement and user awareness programs will be used in solving management problems and to help gain acceptance of solutions among users. 6. Attempts will be made to continue and to escalate the involvement of schools, colleges and universities in ongoing volunteer programs. In cooperation with these institutions, students will be encouraged to assist managers in monitoring uses, collecting and evaluating data and educating visitors. sº º Nº ºff/º WISS, / | NS \\ Cultural and Historic Resources Management Objective To recognize that cultural resources within and relating to the Alpine Lakes Wilderness are a valuable, nonrenewable resource. To identify, evaluate, preserve, protect and enhance these resources in compliance with Federal and State laws and Forest Service policy. Current Situation A cultural resource Overview of the Wilderness is being prepared which includes a literature search of all relevant documentary materials and interviews with Indian tribal elders and knowledgeable local residents. In addition, records at the Washington State Office of Archeological Research Center (WARC) are being consulted. For thousands of years there have been movements of people into and across the Cascades in what is now the Wilderness. From late spring through fall, groups of Wenatchee, Skykomish, Snoqualmie and Kittitas Indians ranged throughout the high country in pursuit of food and household materials. Travel routes were well established by these tribes through Stevens and Snoqualmie Passes, immediately adja- cent to the Wilderness. The routes later encouraged 161 Commerce and communication between Puget Sound and the Interior Plateau. The migratory land use patterns by Indians continued with little disruption until the mid-nineteenth Century. Earliest Euro-American contact was tran- sitory, leaving few traces in the Wilderness. The discovery of placer gold as early as 1861 focused the attention of would-be miners into the eastern portions of the area. By 1890, mining camps were common. These developments account for a major proportion of the historic use of the Wilderness. Crude transportation networks connected these settlements to the Outside world. Construction of the Great Northern railroad through Stevens Pass in 1893 and the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul through Snoqualmie Pass in 1909 pro- vided the first, easy access to the lands surrounding the Wilderness. Homesteads appeared in the early 1900's. Sheep and cattle grazing from these homesteads became common in the alpine meadows. Over time, with population increases and improved access, ever increasing demands have been put on the resource. Prehistoric and historic land use patterns indicate a high probability of significant cultural resources within the Wilderness. Land management practices within the Wilderness have had few harmful impacts to potential cultural resources, leaving an invaluable but extremely fragile record of our heritage. Management Direction 1. Complete the cultural overview (in preparation) for the area. Make maps and descriptions accompanying that report a part of this plan. 2. Inventory and evaluate all known cultural sites. Establish priorities of inventory based on proposed trail development, recreation site development, potential mineral exploration or other land-disturbing developments within the Wilderness. 3. Nominate eligible sites to the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations will be submitted within two years of site evaluation. 4. Develop management plans, in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office, for those cultural resources eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Plans will be developed within five years of site designation. 5. Designated historic sites with surface remains will be protected and may be preserved through user management (relocation of public use away from the site). 6. If natural deterioration is determined to be the management prescription for a designated site, it will be allowed only after thorough recording and documentation is completed. 7. Interpretation of cultural resources in the Wilderness will be done through brochures and maps only after protection measures have been provided. 8. Signs will not be provided for on site interpre- tation. Visual Quality Management Objectives To develop facilities and conduct management activities to create acceptable visual Conditions in keeping with preservation of the Wilderness Character. Current Situation The unique visual character of the Wilderness is dominated by jewel-like lakes, Snowfields, alpine meadows many diverse vegetative Communities and landforms. The landscape remains in a natural condi- tion except for human activities along trail routes and at campsites. Visual quality within the Wilderness is impacted when man's activities alter unique form, line, color or texture of the characteristic landscape. Visual impacts have occur- red primarily through vegetative and soil distur- bances associated with improperly located camping areas and trails, as well as inappropriate use by both recreational and commercial livestock. Management Direction 1. Activities will be avoided whenever possible on low Visual Absorption Capability (VAC) areas in- cluding fragile alpine soils and vegetation and Variety Class A landscapes. See map Exhibit N for VAC map. 2. When possible, campsites and trails will be located to take advantage of vegetative and topographic screening. 3. Campsites and trails will generally be located to avoid moderate VAC areas. 4. When possible, campsites and heavily traveled trails (Service Level A and B) will be located away from key interest features (Scenic meadows, lake edges, streamsides, Cultural Sites, etc.) so as to not detract from focal interest points or the natural land- Scape. 5. No permanent structures (tent frames, benches, Shelves, corrals, drift fences, etc.) will be con- Structed to detract from the natural landscape. 6. Domination of the natural landscape by temporary human-made facilities will be minimized by reducing the obtrusiveness with natural form, line, color and texture. The design, location or relocation of these facilities will: a. Be located when feasible within coniferous forest (High VAC), Variety Class B areas. b. Avoid expanding areas of high color contrasts (due to soil displacement) by proper location, draining and grading of trails. c. Locate commercial and recreational livestock camps away from Scenic features, and out of foreground view from other camps or primary through-trails. Fire Management Management Objective To permit natural fires to exert their effects on the vegetative patterns within the Wilderness without en- dangering public Safety or values outside the Wilderness; to use Suppression techniques which result in the least possible evidence of human acti- vity; and to provide for a fire protection strategy which achieves the resource objectives at least cost. Current Situation For seventy-five years, suppression efforts have been directed at Controlling all fires at the smallest burned area using a full range of suppression resources in- cluding helicopters, air tankers, smokejumpers, ground crews, bulldozers and other power-driven equipment. Since the establishment of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, the control objective has been maintained but certain types of suppression resources have been modified to be consistent with the intent of the Wilderness Act. Activities have been limited to those with no long-term evidence of sup- pression effort, unless required for the firefighting crew safety. Motorized equipment such as helicopters and chainsaws are used if their impacts are less than those of the alternative methods available. Firelines are constructed only where necessary to contain the fire. They are returned to as near natural-appearing condition as possible after the fire is out. Trees are not cut unless necessary for controlling the fire or for crew safety. Some evidence of pre-Wilderness suppression activities is present. Success in fire prevention has been effective in reducing, if not eliminating, fire as an influence on 162 plant communities and vegetative patterns. It has also allowed accumulations of dead material and other flammable vegetation to develop to an extent that the potential intensity of a natural fire is higher than if man had not intervened in the natural fire patterns. The recent frequency of fire in the Wilderness is indicated in Table B-1. Table B-1. Alpine Lakes Wilderness Fires 1970 – 1979 Numbers of Acres Cause/Forest Fires Burned Lightning Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie 14 * 3 * Wenatchee 55 524 Smoking Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie 3 O Wenatchee 15 4 Campfires Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie 16 2 ºr ºr Wenatchee 70 103 * 1 fire was 510 acres ** 1 fire was 60 acres Management Direction 1. Naturally occurring fires will be permitted to burn in specific areas, if they meet the prescription parameters for the zone which insures that lands or values outside the Wilderness are not threatened. The map Exhibit K displays these prescription zones. 2. The suppression decision matrix found in Exhibit Q will be used to determine appropriate suppression actions on fires. These decisions will be documented when the fire starts and will be reviewed by the District Ranger periodically throughout the duration of the fire. The most cost-efficient tactics within the goals and objectives of this plan will be utilized. 3. Suppression actions will be applied in a manner which has the least impact on the Wilderness ſeSOUſCe. 4. A prevention program, consisting of education and enforcement activities, will be directed at maintain- ing a level of accidental fire occurrence not to exceed the current level of fires per year. 5. A public education program will be undertaken to explain the natural role of fire in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness ecosystems. 6. The program identified in management direction Item 5 will be undertaken before any prescription fire will be allowed within the Wilderness. 7. Prescribed fire with controlled ignition patterns may be utilized within the Wilderness to modify fuel loadings adjacent to the boundaries and to insure that higher intensity fires can be contained within their zones. 8. All smoke generating activities, including fires burning under prescription fire, will be constrained by the Smoke Management Plan administered by the Washington Department of Natural Resources. Livestock Use Management Objective To allow utilization of forage by recreation pack and Saddle stock to the extent it does not jeopardize Wilderness values. Current Situation Commercial — Approximately 13,000 acres of the Wildhorse Whitepine sheep and goat Allotment with a grazing capacity of 500 animal unit months (AUM) is located within the Wilderness on the Lake Wenat- chee Ranger District. The allotment is one of the oldest on the Wenatchee National Forest, having been established in 1907. It has received only periodic use throughout the years, with last use occurring in 1977. Irregular use has been a result of marginal forage production, poor access, late Snowmelt and the need for close flock supervision because of the area's high susceptability to resource damage and conflict with recreation use. Recreation — Historically, nearly half of the Wilderness visitors used pack and saddle stock. Nearly all of the use occurred east of the Cascades on the Wenatchee Forest where users found a dry climate, open terrain, readily available forage and trails most suited to livestock. The proportion of visitors using livestock has dropped substantially during the past decade, with current use less than 20 percent of the total. Vegetative and soil resource and visual damage has occurred due to overgrazing of small localized areas adjacent to popular campsites and lakes, early season grazing or grazing of wet meadows and im- proper tethering and stock handling techniques. Management Direction 1. Livestock use will be managed So that native plant species will be maintained with special emphasis on the preservation of threatened or endangered species. Areas known to have threatened or en- dangered species requiring protection can be found in Exhibit G. 2. Available forage will be used according to the folowing order of priority: wildlife, administrative livestock, recreation livestock, commercial packers. 3. Pack and saddle stock users will be required to rely on supplemental feed in areas where native forage is not able to recover and maintain its Com- position and vigor into the next growing season and where grazing would result in degradation of visual quality. Areas where grazing will be prohibited at this time include: the PCT area from Snoqualmie Pass to Upper Park Lake and the PCT area from the Lemah Creek drainage to the ridge south of Waptus Lake (Escondido Tarns area). Additional areas may be added if the above Conditions are found to occur. 4. Recreational livestock use will be regulated to the extent necessary to equal or exceed Washington State Class AA and lakewater quality Standards and to restore to state standards any water body found to be below standard. See the Water Section for addi- tional management direction. 5. The Wildhorse — Whitepine Commercial Range Allotment will be analyzed for final disposition. If it is determined to be impractical to Continue use, it will be terminated. 6. Livestock use on trails will be limited to those identified on the map Exhibit L as open. Trails iden- tified as open will be maintained for livestock use. 7. The public will be made clearly aware of trails open and closed to livestock use. Information will be available at adminstrative offices, trailheads, in infor- mation brochures and on all maps. 8. See the Land Occupancy and Structures section for management direction concerning livestock- related Structures. 9. Non-native plant species will not be deliberately introduced through livestock use. The possibility of accidental introduction will be minimized by pro- hibiting the use of hay and unprocessed grain as supplemental feed and encouraging the use of pro- cessed weed free feeds,(i.e. pelletized rations). 163 Wilderness Management Plan Exhibits Exhibit A. Boundary Description The description of the Wilderness boundary as cer- tified on July 2, 1979 is contained in 88 pages of text and displayed on 23 seperate U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute series quadrangle map sheets. Due to the size of the document, it has been excluded. The description will be included with each working copy of the Wilderness Management Plan and available for public inspection at each Forest Service administrative office involved in management of this Wilderness. "[/ →º /2 ***)', 'A º º ſ/ º \", º ſ? || º 4. % % ſ º ºyſ’ |ſ||/|\!\!/ º |W º É-a- (* º Ø re \ |4" * - º | ? 2\*%) Yº ſº & Mºſº | % Ill///; Nº. ſº 164 Exhibit B. Wilderness Act. Public Law 88-577 88th Congress, S. 4 September 3, 1964 2n 2ſt To establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SHORT TITLE º º * 9 Section 1. This Act may be cited as the “Wilderness Act”. WILDERNESS SYSTEM ESTAELISHED STATEMENT OF POLICY Sec. 2. (a) In order to assure that an increasing population, accom- panied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States and its posses- sions, leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. For this purpose there is hereby established a National Wilderness Preser- vation System to be composed of federally owned areas designated by Congress as “wilderness areas”, and these shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness; and no Federal lands . be designated as “wilderness areas” except as pro- vided for in this Act or by a subsequent Act... tº (b) The inclusion of an area in the National Wilderness Preservation System notwithstanding, the area shall continue to be managed by the Department and agency having jurisdiction thereover immediately before its inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. jº. shall be available for the payment of *. or salaries for the adminis- tration of the National Wilderness Preservation System as a separate unit norshaliany appropriations be available for additional personnel stated as being required solely for the purpose, of managing, or administering areas solely because they are included within the National Wilderness Preservation System. DEFINITION OF WILDERNESS (c) A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man; where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An ºrea of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of under veloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which, is Prº tected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally appears to have been affected : by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substanti ly unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and un- confined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geo- Wilderness Act. 78 STATs 890s 78 STAT, 891. Classification, Presidential recommendation to Congresse Congressional approvale Pub. Law 88-577 - 2 - September 3, 1964 ºl, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical V8, U10 NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM.–EXTENT OF SYSTEM Sec. 3. (a) All areas within the national forests classified at least 30 days before the effective date of this Act by the Secretary of Agricul- ture or the Chief of the Forest Service as “wilderness”, ãºff. OI’ “canoe” are hereby designated as wilderness areas. The Secretary of Agriculture shall— (1) Within one year after the effective date of this Act, file a map and legal description of each wilderness area with the In- terior and Insular Affairs Committees of the United States Senate and the House of Representatives, and such descriptions shall have the same force and effect as if included in this Act : Provided, however, That correction of clerical and typographical errors in such legal descriptions and maps may be made. (2) #. available to the public, records pertaining to said wilderness areas, including maps and legal descriptions, copies of regulations governing them, copies of public notices of, and re- ports submitted to Congress regarding pending additions, elimina- tions, or modifications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regulations pertaining to wilderness areas within their respective jurisdic- tions also shall be available to the public in the offices of regional foresters, national forest supervisors, and forest rangers. (b) The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten years after the enactment of this Act, review, as to its suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as wilderness, each area in the national forests classified on the effective date of this Act by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service as “primitive” and report his findings to the President. The President ji advise the United States Senate and House of Representatives of his recommendations with respect to the designation as “wilderness” or other reclassification of each area on which review has been completed, together with maps and a definition of boundaries. Such advice shall be given with respect to not less than one-third of all the areas now classified as “primitive” within three years after the enactment of this Act, not less than two-thirds within seven years after the enactment of this Act, and the remaining areas within ten years after the enactment of this Act. Each recommenda- tion of the President for designation as “wilderness” shall become 78 STAT's 8 78 STAT, 892, effective only if so º by an Act of Congress. Areas classified as “primitive” on the effective date of this Act shall continue to be administered under the rules and regulations affecting such areas on the effective date of this Act until Congress has determined otherwise. Any such area may be increased in size by the President at the time he submits his recommendations to the Congress by not more than five thousand acres with no more than one thousand two hundred and eighty acres of such increase in any one compact unit; if it is proposed to increase the size of any such area by more than five thousand acres or by more than one thousand two hundred and eighty acres in any one compact unit the increase in size shall not become effective until acted upon by Congress. Nothing herein contained shall limit the President in proposing, as part of his recommendations to Congress, the altera- tion of existing boundaries of primitive areas or recommending the addition of any contiguous area of national forest lands predominantly of wilderness value. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture may complete his review and delete such area as may be necessary, but not to exceed seven thousand acres, from the southern tip of the Gore Range-Eagles Nest Primitive Area, 165 September 3, 1964 - 3 - Pub. Law 88-577 Colorado, if the Secretary determines that such action is in the public interest. (c) Within ten years after the effective date of this Act the Secretary of the Interior shall review every roadless area of five thousand con- tiguous acres or more in the national parks, monuments and other units of the national park system and every such area of, and every roadless island within, the national wildlife refuges and game ranges, under his jurisdiction on the effective date of this Act and shall report to the resident his recommendation as to the suitability or nonsuitability of each such area or island for preservation as wilderness. The Presi- dent shall advise the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of his recommendation with respect to the designation as wilderness of each such area or island on which review has been completed, together with a map thereof and a definition of its boundaries. Such advice shall be given with respect to not less than one-third of the areas and islands to be reviewed under this subsection within three years after enactment of this Act, not less than two-thirds within seven years of enactment of this Act, and the remainder within ten years of enactment of this Act. A recommendation of the Presi- dent for designation as wilderness shall become effective only if so pro- vided by an Act of Congress. Nothing contained herein shall, by implication or otherwise, ºns: to lessen the present statutory authority of the Secretary of the Interior with respect to the mainte- nance of roadless areas within units of the national park system. (d) (1) The Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior shall, prior to submitting any recommendations to §e Presi- dent with respect to the suitability of any area for preservation as wilderness— (A) give such public notice of the proposed action as thev deem appropriate, including publication in the Federal Register and in a newspaper having general circulation in the area or areas in the vicinity of the affected land; (B) hold a public hearing or hearings at a location or locations convenient to the area affected. The hearings shall be announced through such means as the respective Secretaries involved deem appropriate, including notices in the Federal Register and in newspapers of general circulation in the area: Provided. That if the lands involved are located in more than one State, at least one lºſing shall be held in each State in which a portion of the land les; Report to President, Presidential recommendation to Congress, Congressional approval, Suitability, Publication in Federal Register. Hearings. Publication in Federal Register, 78 STAT e 892.4 (C) at least thirty days before the date of a hearing advise the Governor of each State and the governing board of each county, or in Alaska the borough, in which the lands are located, and Federal departments and agencies concerned, and invite such officials and Federal agencies to submit their views on the roposed action at the hearing or by no later than thirty days ...i. the date of the hearing. (2) Any views submitted to the appropriate Secretary under the provisions of (1) of this subsection with respect to any area shall be included with any recommendations to the President and to Congress with respect to such area. (e) Any modification or adjustment of boundaries of any wilder- ness area shall be recommended by the appropriate Secretary after public notice of such proposal and public hearing or hearings as provided in subsection § of this section. The proposed modification or adjustment shall then be recommended with map and description thereof to the President. The President shall advise the United States Senate and the House of Representatives of his recommenda- tions with respect to such modification or adjustment and such recom- 78 STAT, 893. Proposed modi- ficatione 16 USC 475. 16 USC 528–531e 16 USC 577-577.he 16 USC 5776-577he 16 USC 577d-l, 577g-l, 577h. 39 State 535, 16 USC 1 et seq. 4l State 1063, 49 Stat. 838, 78 STAT, 893, 78 STAT. 894. Pub. Law 88-577 - 4 - September 3, 1964 mendations shall become effective only in the same manner as pro- vided for in subsections (b) and (c) of this section. USE OF WILDERNESS AREAS SEc. 4. (a) The purposes of this Act are hereby declared to be within and supplemental to the purposes for which national forests and units of the national park and national wildlife refuge systems are estab- lished and administered and— (1) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to be in interference with the purpose for which national forests are established as set forth in the Act of June 4, 1897 (30 Stat. 11), and the Multiple- Use Sustained-Yield Act of June 12, 1960 (74 Stat. 215). (2) Nothing in this Act shall modify the restrictions and pro- visions of the sººn Act (Public Law 539, Seventy- first Congress, July 10, 1930; 46. Stat. 1020), the Thye-Blatnik Act (Public Law 733, Eightieth Congress, June 22, 1948; 62 Stat. 568), and the Humphrey-Thye-Blatnik-Andresen Act (Public Law 607, Eighty-fourth Congress, June 22, 1956: 70 Stat. 326); as applying to the Superior National Forest or the regulations of the § of Agriculture. (3) Nothing in this Act shall modify the statutory authorit under which units of the national park system are created. Further, the designation of any area of any park, monument, or other unit of the national park system as a wilderness area pursuant to this Act shall in no manner, lower the standards evolved for the use and º of such park, monument, or other unit of the national park system in accordance with the Act of August 25, 1916, the statutory authority under which the area was created, or any other Act of Congress which might pertain to or affect such area, including, but not limited to, the Act of June 8, 1906 (34 Stat. 225; 16 U.S.C. 432 et seq.); section 3(2) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(2)); and the Act of August 21, 1935 (49 Stat. 666; 16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.). (b) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, each agency admin- istering any area designated as wilderness shall be responsible for preserving the wilderness character of the area and shall so administer such area for such other purposes for which it may have been estab- lished as also to preserve its wilderness character. Except as other- wise provided in this Act, wilderness areas shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreational, Scenic, scientific, educational, conser- vation, and historical use. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN USES (c) Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the admin- istration of the area for the purpose of this Act (including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area), there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area. 166 September 3, 1964 - 5 - SIPECI.AI, I*ROVISIONS Pub. Law 88-577 (d) The following special provisions are hereby made: (1) Within wilderness areas designated by this Act the use of aircraft or motorboats, where these uses have already become estab- lished, may be permitted to continue subject to such restrictions as the Secretary of Agriculture deems desirable. . In addition, such meas- ures may be taken as may be necessary in the control of fire, insects, and diseases, subject to such conditions as the Secretary deems desirable. º (2) Nothing in this Act shall prevent within national forest wilder. ness areas any activity, including prospecting, for the purpose of gathering information about mineral or other resources, if such activity is carried on in a manner compatible with the preservation of the wilderness environment. Furthermore, in accordance with such pro- gram as the Secretary of the Interior shall develop and conduct in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, such areas shall be surveyed on a planned, º; basis consistent with the concept of wilderness preservation by the Geological Survey and the Bureau of Mines to determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present: and the results of such surveys shall be made available to the public and submitted to the President and Congress. te © - ſº (3) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Act, until mid- night December 31, 1983, the United States mining laws and all laws pertaining to mineral leasing shall, to the same extent as applicable rior to the effective date of this Act, extend to those national forest ands designated by this Act as “wilderness areas”; subject, however, to such reasonable regulations governing ingress and egress as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture consistent with the use of the land for mineral location and development and exploration, drilling, and production, and use of land for transmission lines, water- lines, telephone lines, or facilities necessary in ex loring, drilling, producing, mining, and processing operations, including where essen- tial the use of mechanized ground or air equipment and restoration as near as practicable of the surface of the land disturbed in performing prospecting, location, and, in oil and gas leasing, discovery work, exploration, drilling, and productions as soºn as they have served their purpose. Minin j lying within the boundaries of said wil- ãerness areas shall be held and used solely for *. processing operations and uses reasonably incident thereto; and hereafter, sub- ject to valid existing rights, all patents issued under the mining laws tº the tºnited States affecting national forest lands designated by Mineral leases, claims, etc. this Act as wilderness areas shall convey title to the mineral deposits within the claim, together with the right to cut and use so much of the mature timber ther from as may be needed in the extraction, removal, and beneficiation of the mineral deposits, if needed timber is not otherwise reasonably available, and if the timber is cut under sound principles of forest management, as defined by the national forest rules and regulations, but each such patent shall reserve to the United Sººji title in or to the surface of the lands and products thereof, and no use of the surface of the claim or the resources therefrom not reasonably required for carrying on mining 9. prospecting shall be allowed except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act: Provided, That, unless hereafter specifically authorized, no pºtent within wil- derness areas designated by this Act shall issue after December 31, 1983, except for the valid claims existing on or before December # 1983. Mining claims located after the effective date of this Act within the foundaries of wilderness areas designated by this Act shall,create no rights in excess of those rights which may be patented under the Water resources. 78 STAT. 895. 78 STAT. 896, 78 STAT. 894. 78 STAT. 895. Transfers, re- strict ion, Pub. Law 88-577 - 6 - September 3, 1964 provisions of this subsection. Mineral leases, permits, and licenses covering lands within national forest wilderness areas designated by this Act shall contain such reasonable stipulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture for the protection of the wilderness character of the land consistent with the use of the land for the pur- poses for which they are leased, permitted, or licensed. Subject to valid rights then existing, effective January 1, 1984, the minerals in lands designated by this Act as wilderness areas are withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the mining laws and from disposition § all laws pertaining to mineral leasing and all amendments thereto. (4) Within wilderness areas in the national forests designated b this Act, (1) the President may, within a specific area and in ... ance with such regulations as he may deem desirable, authorize prospecting for water resources, the establishment and maintenance of reservoirs, water-conservation works, power projects, transmission lines, and other facilities needed in the public interest, including the road construction and maintenance essential to development and use thereof, upon his determination that such use or uses in the specific area will better serve the interests of the United States and the people thereof than will its denial; and (2) the grazing of livestock, where established prior to the effective date of this Act, shall be permitted to continue subject to such reasonable regulations as are deemed necessary by the Secretary of Agriculture. (5) Other provisions of this Act to the contrary notwithstanding, the management of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area, formerly desig. nated as the Superior, Little Indian Sioux, and Caribou Roadless Areas, in the Superior National Forest. Minnesota, shall be in accord- ance with regulations established by the Secretary of Agriculture in accordance with the general purpose of maintaining, without unneces- sary restrictions on other uses, including that of timber, the primitive character of the area, particularly in the vicinity of lakes, streams, and portages: Provided. That nothing in this Act shall preclude the continuance within the area of any already established use of motorboats. (6) Commercial services may be performed within the wilderness areas designated by this Act to the extent necessary for activities which are proper for realizing the recreational or other wilderness purposes of the areas. (7) Nothing in this Act shall constitute an express or implied claim or denial on the part of the Federal Government as to exemption from State water laws. (8) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting the juris- diction or responsibilities of the several States with respect to wildlife and fish in the national forests. STATE AND PRIVATE LANDS WITH IN WILDERN ESS AREAS SEc. 5. (a) In any case where State-owned or privately owned land is completely surrounded by national forest lands within areas desig- nated by this Act as wilderness, such State or private owner shall be given such rights as may be necessary to assure adequate access to such State-owned or privately owned land by such State or private owner and their successors in interest, or the State-owned land or privately owned land shall be exchanged for federally owned land in the same State of approximately equal value under authorities avail- able to the Secretary of Agriculture: Provided, however, That the United States shall not transfer to a State or private owner any mineral interests unless the State or private owner relinquishes or 167 September 3, 1964 - 7 - Pub. Law 88-577 78 STAT. 896. causes to be relinquished to the United States the mineral interest in the surrounded land. (b) In any case where valid mining claims or other valid occu- pancies are wholly within a designated national forest wilderness area, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, by reasonable regulations consistent with the preservation of the area as wilderness, permit ingress and egress to such surrounded areas by means which have been or are being customarily enjoyed with respect to other such areas similarly situated. (c) Subject to the appropriation of funds by Congress, the Secre- Acquisition. tary of Agriculture is authorized to acquire privately owned land within the perimeter of any area designated by this Act as wilderness if (1) the owner concurs in such acquisition or (2) the acquisition is specifically authorized by Congress. GIFTS, BEQUESTs. AND CoNTRIBUTIONs ſ \\ \\ | \\ ill 'Wºw, Sec. 6. (a) The Secretary of Agriculture may accept gifts or bequests | | " A (t(\\\ M. “ºv' 'º' ºſu, of land within wilderness areas designated by this Act for preservation Wºll. * : * Wºwº - as wilderness. The Secretary of Agriculture may also accept gifts or *"Lº, º º - bequests of land adjacent to wilderness areas designated by this Act º 'º - º - - for preservation as wilderness if he has given sixty days advance notice . . . thereof to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Land accepted by the Secretary of Agriculture under this section shall become part of the wilderness area involved. Regula- tions with regard to any such land may be in accordance with such agreements, consistent with the policy of this Act, as are made at the time of such gift, or such conditions, consistent with such policy, as may be included in, and accepted with, such bequest. (b) The Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior is - … - " - . authorized to accept private contributions and gifts to be used to fur- ºffiº, ºf | . . . . Jºy - # , º, º iſºft ther the purposes of this Act. E. - º sº ...] ſºil rº tº: º - º: | | || . \\\\\º - w riº / º º- ANNUAL REPORTS º º ( Sec. 7. At the opening of each session of Congress, the Secretaries | of Agriculture and Interior shall jointly report to the President for - ſ º * transmission to Congress on the status of the wilderness system, includ- al Wº: º % ºf \\ , º' --. ing a list and descriptions of the areas in the system, regulations in effect, and other pertinent information, together with any recommenda- tions they may care to make. Approved September 3, 1964. * * | º | ſ - * tº Mº'ſ) ºf ". | º "...ºfs' * ". ſ º Sºlº LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: HOUSE REPORTS: No. 1538 accompanying H. R. 9070 (Comm. on Interior & Insular Affairs) and No. 1829 (Comm. of Conference). SENATE REPORT No. 109 (Comm. on Interior & Insular Affairs). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: Vol. 109 (1963): Apr. 4, 8, considered in Senate. Apr. 9, considered and passed Senate. Vol. 110 (1964): July 28, considered in House. July 30, considered and passed House, amended, in lieu of H. R. 9070. Aug. 20, House and Senate agreed to conference report. 168 Exhibit C. Management Action Program Outline. The Wilderness management plan text identifies numerous management objectives requiring target dates for implementation. They are scattered throughout the plan, however, and are not prioritized or in chronological order,and responsibilities are not identified. The following list is a summary of those actions. It - assumes the plan will be implemented by FY 1981, is dependent upon adequate annual funding and is Sub- ject to annual updating. Portions of specific projects may be completed during routine Ranger District work, thus preempting estimated implementation 8. Obtain and maintain recrea- tion use data, reference pages 155 and 160. 9. Maintain and continue to update the inventory of special plants, reference pages 157 and 160. 10. Maintain and continue to update the inventory of special animals, reference pages 157 and 160 11. Maintain and continue to update the fisheries inventory, references 157 and 160. 12. Monitor condition and trend on areas identified as most susceptible to vegetative and water quality degradation resulting from the use of livestock, reference page 163. Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Begin CY 1981 and continue dates. Target Date for Action ſtem Implementation 1. Prepare Ranger District Annually Annual Operating Plans, reference page 151. Plans will: A) Prioritize trail maintenance, reference page 154. B) Prioritize trail reconstruction and rerouting, reference page 154. C) loentify signs for replace- ment, reference page 155 D) Provide for coordination of resouce and use information collection between Ranger Districts, reference page 160. 2. Conduct annual interforest Annually management meeting, reference page 151. 3. Conduct biannual Biannually Wilderness Ranger meetings, reference page 151. 4. Develop baseline inventories Begin CY 1981 and monitor fuel wood and continue availability at sites most susceptible to resource degradation, reference pages 157 and 160. 5. Develop baseline inventories Begin CY 1981 and monitor water quality, and continue reference pages 158 and 160. 6. Develop baseline inventories Begin CY 1981 and monitor soil and vegetative and continue resource condition and trend, reference, page 160. 7. Replace non-standard style signs where required to meet management plan objectives, reference page 155. Begin CY 1981 and continue Responsibility District Rangers Forest Supervisors Forest Supervisors District Rangers District Rangers District Rangers District Rangers 13. Maintain trails for intended Service Level and type of use, reference pages 153 and 163. 14. Establish target completion dates for trails identified for Construction, reference page 154. 15. Control livestock grazing in areas identified as highly sus. ceptible to resource damage, reference page 163. 16. Post all trails that are closed to particular types of use, reference pages 154 and 163. 17. Develop and print a Wilderness map/brochure, reference page 161. 18. Design a standard Wilderness trailhead infor. mation signboard, reference page 155. 19. Evaluate Granite Mountain Lookout for its need as an administrative structure, reference page 156. 20. Install Wilderness boundary signs at all trail entry points, reference page 155. 21. Complete a cultural overview of the Wilderness, reference page 162. 22. Complete a Wilderness fire management plan, reference page 163. 23. Provide Wilderness Rangers with common frequency radio communication, reference page 152. Begin CY 1981 and continue CY 1981 CY 1981 CY 1982 CY 1982 CY 1982 CY 1983 CY 1983 CY 1982 CY 1983 CY 1983 24. Inventory and evaluate CY 1983 all existing signs to determine if each meets the management plan objectives, reference page District Rangers 155. District Rangers District Rangers 25. Install standard trailhead CY 1984 information signs at all Service Level A and other high use Wilderness trailheads, reference page 155. District Rangers District Rangers 26. Remove all livestock drift CY 1984 Cle Elum and fences, reference page 156. Leavenworth District Rangers District Rangers 27. Evaluate the Wildhorse- CY 1984 Lake Wenatchee Whitepine Commercial Grazing District Ranger District Rangers Allotment for final disposition, reference page 163. 28. Remove all signs that are CY 1985 District Rangers not in compliance with the ob- jectives of the management plan, reference page 155. District Rangers 29. Evaluate all known CY 1985 Forest Structures for their historical Supervisors significance, reference pages 156 and 160. Forest Supervisors & District Rangers Cle Elum District Ranger District Rangers ºf 3 \ * - |A T - - É |- w º : º, | 4 Fº: E ſº ºf: Tº #### ºl-3º - E==3; : º º- -§} Forest - Supervisors Bº - º == Forest º % iM Supervisors º | Sºº- \ D s º º, W North Bend District Ranger W i. | District Rangers * ſº W"WWI", " "...W. | | ºw nº W !" | \, ..." | Forest º ſ Supervisors º { Forest Supervisors District Rangers 169 Exhibit D. Wilderness Fisheries Inventory. MWRB — Mt. Whitney Rainbow CCRB – Cape Cod Rainbow GLDN – Golden Rainbow CT – Cutthroat HLCT — Henry Lake Cutthroat TLCT – Twin Lake Cutthroat RB – Rainbow North Bend Ranger District Anderson Lake Avalanche Lake (Lower Burnt Boot) Bear Lake Bear Lakes Bench Lake (Upper Paradise) Big Snow Lake Blazier Lake Boomerang Lake Cad Lake Chain Lakes Carole Lake Chair Peak Lake Charlie Brown Lake Cougar Lake Crawford Lake Crystal Lake Deer Lake Denney Lake (Evelyn) Derrick Lake Derrick Lake Pothole Dream Lake Edds Lake Elbow Lake Frozen Lake Gem Lake Goat Lake Gravel Lake Green Ridge Lake Hatchet Lake Hester Lake Hi-Low Lake Hi-Low Pothoſes Honey Lake Horseshoe Lake Horseshoe Lake lce Lake Iceberg Lake (Upper Burnt Boot) Island Lake Judy Lake Kaleetan Lake Lake Caroline Lake Isabella Lake Kanim Lake Kullakulla Lake Philippa Le Fay Lake Lennox Lake Little Cougar Lake (Goat Mt. Lake) Little Derrick Lake Little Kulla Lake EB – Eastern Brook KA — Kamloops Location i i e§* yyy9y9ygº 99yyyº99yyy99y99yyyyyyyyy9y9yyyy99y9 : : ; ; i i 10 E. 12 E. 11 E. 10 E. 10 E. 11 E. 10 E. 10 E. 10 E. 13 E. 11 E. 10 E. 11 E. 10 E. 12 E. 10 E. 11 E. 10 E. 10 E. 10 E. 11 E. 11 E. 10 E. 10 E. 10 E. 11 E. 11 E. 11 E. 10 E. . 11 E. 11 E. 11 E. 10 E. 11 E. 10 E. 10 E. 12 E. 10 E. 11 E. 10 E. 10 E. 9 E. 10 E. 10 E. ; Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. . 28 Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. 35 10 14 15 26 33 20 19 24 19 33 23 15 11 24 23 13 23 30 10 29 30 28 23 11 19 23 10 36 11 32 28 24 28 32 F –Fixed Wing Air Stocking R – Helicopter Stocking P – Pack Animal Stocking BP — Back Pack Stocking Species RB RB,CT,MWRB TLCT TLCT RB,CT,MWRB CT CT,RB, MWRB MWRB,RB CT,GRAY,GLDN, TLCT CT,GLDN CT,MWRB, TLCT RB,CT,MWRB, CT,MWRB RB,CT,MWRB CT,GLDN MWRB TLCT,MWRB KA RB,CT,CCRB CT, MWRB CT,RB, MWRB CT,RB, TLCT RB RB,CT,CCRB RB TLCT RB RB,CT,MWRB CT RB RB,CT CT,RB CT CT,RB RB,KA,CT,MWRB RB RB CT, GLDN CT,MWRB CT,RB, MWRB Stocking History 1967, 77 1953,61,65,68,71,76,77 1973 1954,68,76 1953,61,66,71,78 1958 1957,61,71,75 1970, 78 1947,59,65,68,73,74 1957,66,78 1970,73,74 1953,61,67,69,72,77 1954,61,65,73 1953,64,69,77 1952,60,66,68,78 1977 1973,78 1963 1958,6367,76 1960,77 1973 1947,62,70,71,78,79 1955,60,65,69,72,78 1951,68,70 1958,63,67,76,77 1972 1973 1957,67,77 1953,61,66,70,73,77 1957,60,67,77 1971 1945,62,66,70,76 1954,65,68,72,76 1957,58,66,68,73 1953,61,65,68,71,76 1954,63,70,77 1962,66,69,75 1956 1954,61,65,73 1950, 1960,63,66,71,77 Stocking Method F f 170 Wilderness Fisheries inventory. CT – Cutthroat HLCT — Henry Lake Cutthroat TLCT – Twin Lake Cutthroat RB – Rainbow North Bend Ranger District Little Mason Lake Little Pratt Lake Loch Katrine Lower Garfield Mt. Lake Lower Hardscrabble Lake Lower Lake Tuscohatche Lower Melakwa Lake Lower Paradise Lake Lower Wildcat Lake Lunker Lake Marten Lake Mason Lake Merlin Lake Middle Paradise Lake Mowich Lake My Lake Myrtle Lake Nimue Lake Nordrum Lake Olallie Lake Overcoat Lake Pothole Lake Pratt Lake Price Lake Quartz Lake Rainbow Lake Rock Lake Shamrock Lake Snoqualmie Lake Snoqualmie Lake Potholes (Lower) Snoqualmie Lake Potholes (Upper) Snow Lake Spider Lake Sunday Lake Talapus Lake Thompson lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake (2000' Snow Lk) Unnamed Lake (3000' Snow Lk) Unnamed Lake (NW of Hester) Unnamed Lake (S of Nimue) Unnamed Lake (SW of Big Snow) Unnamed Lakes Upper Garfield Mt. Lake Upper Hardscrabble Lake Upper Hester Lake Upper Lake Tuscohatche MWRB — Mt. Whitney Rainbow CCRB – Cape Cod Rainbow GLDN – Golden Rainbow E8 – Eastern Brook KA — Kamloops Location i § ź y999yy99yyy9yyyyy9yy99y9yyyy99 : 2 : : : R. Sec C . 32 . 35 . 24 . 24 . 35 . 25 . 15 . 12 . 27 . 15 . 26 . 22 . 27 . 20 . 34 . 31 29 16 . 21 . 22 . 19 . 30 . 30 19 . 21 14 . 33 20 27 . 26 . 35 . 24 36 f-Fixed Wing Air Stocking R - Helicopter Stocking P – Pack Animal Stocking BP — Back Pack Stocking Species MWRB CT,GLDN,RBMW CT,MWRB GRAY RB CT, KA,TLCT CT,RB CT,RB, MWRB RB RB, MWRB RB CT, KA,TLCT RB CT, TLCT,MWRB RB,CT,MWRB MWRB CT, TLCT RB,CT,MWRB RB RB, RB,CY CT,RB RB Brown RB CT,RB, MWRB RB RB RB, KA,CT, TLCT CT CT,RB RB,CT, KAM,MWRB RB RB, MWRB,CT GRAY,MWRB MWRB Stocking History Stocking Method 1978 1953,59,65,71,77 F 1957,78,78 1947 1953,61,69,70 1948,62,64,70,73 1954,69 1957,60,65,69,77 1953,61,69,73 1958,61,68,76,79 1967,77 1948,62,64,73,74 1951,61,66,71,79 1966,73,78 1957,61,63,68,73,79 1977 1954,60,65,69,77 1957,61,66,71,74,79 F 1966 1957,64,77 R 1953,61,65,72 F . 1955,67,73 1958 1979 1977 1956,57,61,63,65,68,73 F 1967,72,77 1967,72,77 1953,63,68,72,77 F 1938 1955,59,72 1958,63,68,72,77 F 1976 R 1945,47,57,73,78 1947,74 1977 171 Wilderness Fisheries Inventory. CT – Cutthroat HLCT — Henry Lake Cutthroat TLCT – Twin Lake Cutthroat RB – Rainbow North Bend Ranger District Upper Loch Katrine Upper Melakwa Lake Upper Wildcat Lake Williams Lake Windy Lake Skykomish Ranger District Al's Lake Alturas Lake Angeline Lake Azurite Lake Big Heart Lake Bonnie Lake Camp Robber Lake Cecil's Lake Charlie Lake #1 Charlie Lake #2 Charlie Lake #3 Chetwoot Lake Clarice Lake Cleveland Lake Cloudy Lake Coney Lake Copper Lake Crawford Lake Crystal Lake Deception Lakes Delta Lake Elelyn Lake (Elvin Lk) Emerald Lake Evans Lake Fisher Lake Foehn Lake Foolsgold Lake Francis Lake Glacier Lake Gold Lake Golden Lake Gouging Lake Gus's Lake Hinter Lake Jade Lake Jade Lake Jewel Lake June Lake La Bohn Lakes Lake Dorothy Lake Ilswoot Lake Lepul Little Chetwoot Little Heart Lake Little Myrtle Lake Little Plug Lake MWRB — Mt. Whitney Rainbow CCRB – Cape Cod Rainbow GLDN – Golden Rainbow EB — Eastern Brook KA — Kamloops Location i ; : i i eee yy9yyyyyy9yyyyy9yyyy9y9yyyyyyyy}yyy ; 4 Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 10 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 10 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 14 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. . 11 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 12 E. Sec. 11 E. Sec. 13 E. Sec. 25 25 11 23 F –Fixed Wing Air Stocking R – Helicopter Stocking P – Pack Animal Stocking BP — Back Pack Stocking Species Stocking History Stocking Method CT,RB 1947,65,72,76 F CT,RB 1954,69,74 - F CT 1958,70,74 F RB, MWRB 1969,1977 TLCT,RB 1971,75 CT, TLCT 1947,61,65,68,73 CT 1947,61,66 F CT,RB 1946,47,55,60,65,69,73 F CT,RB 1946,47,55,60,65,69,73 F GLDN, TLCT 1968,73 RB, TLCT 1969,74 CT,RB 1949,64,69,74 CT,RB 1947,64,69,74 CT,RB 1949,64,69,74 CT, TLCT 1953,65,68,72,77 F EB,RB 1955,65,72 F CT 1949 CT,RB 1966,71,75,78 RB, MWRB 1951,67,75 EB,RB, TLCT 1955,61,68,73 CT,GLDN 1957,66,68 CT,MW TLCT 1970,73,74 RB,CT 1951,61,66,69 RB,CT,MWRB 1955,60,65,73 TLCT 1971,78 RB,KA,MWRB 1948,63,74,79 CT,GLDN,RB, TLCT,HLCT 1955,60,65,69,71,79 F CT,GLDN 1957,74 TLCT 1973 KA,RB, TLCT 1962,69,74 R CT,RB 1954,69 F CT 1947,61,66 RB 1951 CT 1957 CT 1963,65,77 RB,CT 1939,51,79 F CT 1971,78 CT TLCT 1967,73,78 TLCT 1977 EB,RB, TLCT 1954,61,65,68,69,72,74,78 F RB,CT, TLCT 1953,66,68,72,77 F GLDN 1977 RB,CT 1957,61,68,73 F MWRB 1977 172 Wilderness Fisheries Inventory. CT – Cutthroat HLCT — Henry Lake Cutthroat TLCT – Twin Lake Cutthroat RB – Rainbow Skykomish Ranger District Locket Lake Lower Fisher Lake Lower Jewel Lake Lower Murphy Lake Lower Ptarmigan Lake Lower Tank Lake Malachite Lake Marlene Lake Marmot Lake Mary Lake Mig Lake Moira Lake Nazanne Lake No Name Lake Opal Lake Otter Lake Panorama Lake Pugsley lake Purvis Lake Rock Lake Smith Lake Spark Plug Lake Surprise Lake T'ahl Lake Terrace Lakes Top Lake Trico Lake (Basin Lk) Trout Lake Tumwater Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake (E of Big Snow) Unnamed Lake (E of Cecil Lk) Unnamed Lake (N of Gus Lk) Unnamed Lake (NE of Camp Robber) Unnamed Lake (NW of Decep. Pass) Unnamed Lake (S of Azurite Lk) Unnamed Lake (S of Azurite Lk) Unnamed Lake (S of Gold Lk) Unnamed Lake (SW of Gold Lk) Unnamed Lake (SW of Little Heart) MWRB — Mt. Whitney Rainbow CCRB – Cape Cod Rainbow GLDN – Golden Rainbow EB – Eastern Brook KA – Kamloops Location i ź 13 E. Sec. 7 12 E., Sec. 25 12 E. Sec. 22 13 E. Sec. 4 12 E. Sec. 25 13 E. Sec. 19 11 E. Sec. 36 11 E. Sec. 23 13 E. Sec. 31 12 E. Sec. 26 12 E. Sec. 36 11 E. Sec. 23 12 E. Sec. 1 13 E. Sec. 2 13 E. Sec. 17 12 E. Sec. 11 11 E. Sec. 25 11 E. Sec. 10 11 E. Sec. 26 11 E. Sec. 25 11 E. Sec. 32 13 E. Sec. 17 13 E. Sec. 16 13 E. Sec. 18 12 E. Sec. 36 11 E. Sec. 24 14 E. Sec. 5 yyyyy99y9y99yy99y9yy9y9yyy999 ! ; # Sec 3 1 : :; ! # C 1 5 * y9yyy999y9yyy9y9y9ypy9y : Species RB CT,RB CT,GLDN CT RB,CT,TLCT RB,KA,TLCT CT CT RB,CT RB,CT RB, MWRB CT, TLCT,RB RB, MWRB RB,CT, TLCT CT,GLDN CT CT,MWRB TLCT RB,CT MWRB RB CT TLCT,HLCT RB F -Fixed Wing Air Stocking R - Helicopter Stocking P- Pack Animal Stocking BP - Back Pack Stocking Stocking History Stocking Method 1939,53,69,76 R 1959,69 1946,59,60,64,68 F 1957 1957,1961,62,66,70,76 1948,63,77 1954,60,65,70,73 F 1954,67,78 F 1948,70,77 1948,62,64,67,76 1947,79 1966,71,75,78 1960,68 F 1970 1961 F 1943 1979 1970,79 1951,61,66,73 F 1957,78 1950, 1967,71,77 1972,79 1973 1958,62,64,69,70,72,73,76 F 1972,77 1977 1979 1976 173 Wilderness Fisheries inventory. CT – Cutthroat HLCT — Henry Lake Cutthroat TLCT – Twin Lake Cutthroat RB – Rainbow Skykomish Ranger District Unnamed Lake (W of Decpt. Pass) Unnamed Lake (W of Gus Lk) Unnamed Lake(4) Unnamed Lake Upper Jewel Lake Upper Murphy Lake Upper Ptarmigan Unnamed Tank Lake View Lake Cle Elum Ranger District Alaska Lake Beaver Puss Lakes Box Canyon Lake Chickamin Lake Circle Lake Deadhead Lake Deep Lake Deer Lakes Diamond Lake Escondido Lake Glacier Lake Goat Lake Gold Lake Hi Box Lake Hyas Lake Joe Lake Lake Ivanhoe Lake Laura Lake Lillian Lake Michael Lake Rebecca Lake Rowona Lake Terrence Lake Vicente Lemah Lake Lila Lake Lower Parks Lake Lower Robin Lake Margaret Lake Moonshine Lake Peggy's Pond Pete Lake Rachel Lake Rampart Lakes Ridge Lake Shovel Lake Spade Lake Spectacle Lake Squaw Lake Squitch Lake Stonesthrow Lake MWRB — Mt. Whitney Rainbow CCRB – Cape Cod Rainbow GLDN – Golden Rainbow EB – Eastern Brook KA — Kamloops Location Species T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 1 T. 24 N., R. 11 E. Sec. 13 T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 11 T. 25 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 26 T. 25 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 22 T. 25 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 10 RB,CT T. 25 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 36 CT T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 18 CT T. 24 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 12 CT, HLCT T. 23 N., R. 11 E. Sec. 25 CT T. 22 N., R. 11 E. Sec. 12 CT T. 22 N., R. 1 E. Sec. 10 RB,CT T. 23 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 14 T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 24 RB,CT T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 36 CT T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 30 RB,CT T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 30 RB T. 23 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 36 CT T. 23 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 09 CT,HLCT T. 23 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 23 CT,GT T. 23 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 20 CT,RB T. 22 N., R. 11 E. Sec. 12 RB T. 22 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 12 CT,RB T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 20 RB,EB T. 23 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 22 CT T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 32 CT T. 22 N., R. 11 E. Sec. 13 CT,RB T. 22 N., R. 11 E. Sec. 13 CT T. 23 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 22 RB T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 21 CT T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 21 CT T. 23 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 28 RB T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 25 CT T. 23 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 13 CT T. 22 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 3 CT,RB T. 23 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 25 RB,CT T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 9 RB,CT T. 22 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 22 T. 23 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 10 RB T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 19 CT T. 23 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 20 CT,RB,EB T. 22 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 10 CT T. 22 N., R. 11 E. Sec. 1 CT T. 23 N., R. 11 E. Sec. 23 RB,CT T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 27 CT T. 24 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 26 CT T. 23 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 23 CT T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 29 RB,CT T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 33 RB,CT T. 22 N., R. 12 E. Sec. 22 CT,RB F –Fixed Wing Air Stocking R – Helicopter Stocking P – Pack Animal Stocking BP — Back Pack Stocking Stocking History Stocking Method 1949,59,69 F 1954,61,7 F 1957 1962, 76 1952,53,61,66,68,70,72,74,76 BP,F 1967 BP 1937,41,48,58,67,71,76 P,BP 1949,77 P,F 1959,77 BP,F 1958,60,62, 64,68,70,72,75,77 F 1937,48,53 F 1956,58,60,62,64,66,68,70,72,75 F 1941,48,79 P.F 1949,59,66,78 P,BP 1935,41,51 1966,70,78,79 BP 1959,68,78 . BP 1963,64,66,67,68,69,70,74,76,77,79 F 1952,54,61,64,66,68,70,72,74,76 F 1963,72 F 1955,65,78 P,BP 1943,49,53,61,64,66,72,79 ,F 1963,64,65,66,67,68,70,72,75,79 F 1976 F 1968,76 1959,60,62,63,64,65,66,70,72,79 F 1941,65,67,70 P.F 1950 1955,62,68 1941,48,55,59,61,70,72,76 P.F 1949,51,55,62,65,74,76,77 P.F 1940,48 P 1953,59,61,64,66,72 P.F 1960,62,64,66,69,71,73,75,76,77 F 1948,52,55,58,61,64,66,68,71,73 P.F 1948,52,63,66,68,71,73 P.F 1952,64,72,77 BP 1950,53,62,66,70,74 F 1940,77 P,BP 1974 F 1937,41,51,54,72,77 P,F 1951,54,62,67 F 1966,68,71,73,79 F,BP 174 Wilderness Fisheries inventory. CT — Cutthroat HLCT — Henry Lake Cutthroat TLCT – Twin Lake Cutthroat RB – Rainbow Cle Elum Ranger District Summit Chief Lake Tuck Lake Tuck's Pond Twin Lakes Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake (NE of Alta Mt) Unnamed Lake (SE of Peggy's Pond) Unnamed Lake (SW of Peggy's Pond) Unnamed Lakes Unnamed Lake Upper Parks Lake Upper Robin Lake Venus Lake Waptus Lake Lake Wenatchee Ranger District Lake Donald Lake Ethel Lake Julius Loch Eileen Lower Grace Lake Upper Grace Lake Leavenworth Ranger District Bob's Lake (Little Klonaqua) Carrie Lake Cartes Lake Chiwaukum Beaver Ponds Chiwaukum Lake Coney Lake (Rat Lk) Cradle Lake Crystal Lake Cuitin Lake Cup Lake Doelle Lakes Eightmile Lake Enchantment Lake #1 (Naiad) Enchantment Lake #10 MWRB — Mt. Whitney Rainbow CCRB - Cape Cod Rainbow GLDN - Golden Rainbow EB – Eastern Brook KA — Kamloops Location Species i 13 E. Sec. 6 GT 14 E. Sec. 8 CT 14 E. Sec. 8 12 E. Sec. 22 RB,CT 14 E. Sec. 9 14 E. Sec. 16 13 E. Sec. 27 13 E. Sec. 31 14 E. Sec. 32 13 E. Sec. 20 13 E. Sec. 20 13 E. Sec. 26 13 E. Sec. 36 12 E. Sec. 14 12 E. Sec. 25 14 E. Sec. 8 14 E. Sec. 22 12 E. Sec. 34 14 E. Sec. 19 14 E. Sec. 19 13 E. Sec. 8 NE 13 E. Sec. 26 12 E. Sec. 26 RB,CT 14 E. Sec. 9 RB,CT 13 E. Sec. 23 CT 13 E. Sec. 12 RB,EB tº 99y999yyyyyy i2 e&g 9yyy9y999yy99y 26 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 19 RB,CT 26 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 18 RB,EB,CT 26 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 20 CT 26 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 19 CT 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 2 CT 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 1 CT 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 10 CT 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 23 25 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 21 26 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 33 26 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 29 CT",EB 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 1 CT 24 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 20 RB,CT 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 23 GT 25 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 25 RB,CT 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 36 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 5 CT 24 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 33 RB,CT*,MACK 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 13 CT,RB 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 14 GT F –Fixed Wing Air Stocking R – Helicopter Stocking P – Pack Animal Stocking BP – Back Pack Stocking Stocking History Stocking Method 1970 BP 1943,49,52,53,59,62 P.F 1940,45,60,62,63,65,67,73,79 P,F,BP 1941,48,55,59,61,70,72,76 P,F 1949,51,55,62,65,74,76,77 P.F 1977 F 1965,66,68,69,70,74,75,76,77,79 F 1940,50,59,64,74,79 P,F 1950,54,55,60,64,66,67,70,72,74 P,F 1941,42,46,48,55,67 P,F 1937,41,46,53,55,61,67,71,74,79 P.F 1936,59,61 P,BP 1936,59,61 P,BP 1972 F 1936,39,40,41,42,44,46 P,BP 1954,73 F,R 1942,46,53,65,70 P,F 1966 BP 1941,55,59.67,71 P,F 1941,54,61,76 P.F 1959,62,64,65,66,67,70,71,72,74,79 P.F 1953,61,66,74,79 (66) F(BP) 1960,66 F,BP 175 Wilderness Fisheries inventory. CT – Cutthroat HLCT — Henry Lake Cutthroat TLCT – Twin Lake Cutthroat MWRB — Mt. Whitney Rainbow CCRB – Cape Cod Rainbow GLDN – Golden Rainbow F –Fixed Wing Air Stocking R – Helicopter Stocking P – Pack Animal Stocking RB – Rainbow EB — Eastern Brook BP – Back Pack Stocking KA — Kamloops Name Location Species Stocking History Stocking Method Leavenworth Ranger District Enchantment Lake #2 T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 13 CT 1953,61,66,72,74,79 F Enchantment Lake #3 T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 13 CT 1953,61,66,72,74,79 F Enchantment Lake #4 T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 13 CT 1953,61,66,72,74,79 F Enchantment Lake #5 T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 14 CT 1953,61,66,72,74,79 F Enchantment Lake #6 & 7 T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 14 Enchantment Lake #8 T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 14 Enchantment Lake #9 T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 14 GT 1960,66 F,BP Granite Mt. Potholes T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 5 RB 1957,77 BP Grass Lake T. 25 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 12 Hart Lake T. 23 N., R. 17 E. Sec. 9 EB' Honour Lake T. 26 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 29 EB' Hope Lake T. 26 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 35 RB,EB,CT 1933,37,56,79 Horseshoe Lake T. 23 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 12 RB,CT 1941,79 P Intermittent Lake T. 25 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 27 Intermittent Lake T. 24 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 25 Intermittent Lake T. 24 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 16 Jack Lake T. 23 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 12 CT 1954 F Josephine Lake T. 26 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 25 RB,CT 1955,62,66,67,70,71,72,73,74,79 F Jung Frau Lake T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 5 CT 1957 Knox Lake T. 25 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 5 CT 1961,72,76,79 F Lake Alice T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 24 CT 1933,36,39,41,62,67 P.F Lake Augusta T. 25 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 22 RB,CT 1940,49,51,55,59,65,67,70,72,79 P.F Lake Brigham T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 13 CT 1933,36,39,41,42,44,71 P.F Lake Caroline T. 24 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 29 RB,CT 1940,47,51,53,54,60,66,70,73,79 P,BP,F Lake Charles T. 25 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 1 Lake Colchuck T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 10 RB,CT 1939,40,42,53,54,58,63,68,74,79 P.F Lake Earle T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 7 CT 1939, (est.) P Lake Edna T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 13 CT 1936,54 - P.F Lake Flora T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 13 RB,CT 1933,39,41,42,44,50,53,61,66,74 P.F Lake loa T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 28 CT 1934,36,37,51,55,71,79 P.F Lake Ingalls T. 23 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 23 RB,CT 1950,54,65,67,71,74 P.F Lake Lorraine T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 13 CT 1939,65,74 P.F Lake Margaret T. 25 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 15 RB,CT 1940,41,44,47,51,53,59,66,70,72 P.F Lake Mary T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 14 RB,CT 1941,56,59,66 P.F Lake Ruth T. 24 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 16 RB 1965,70 BP Lake Stuart T. 23 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 8 CT 1964,65,66,67,68,70,.71,72,74,79 P.F Lake Susan Jane T. 26 N., R. 13 E. Sec. 25 RB,CT 1941,51,61,63,67,70,72,77 P,BP Lake Sylvester T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 25 CT 1970,79 F Lake Victoria T. 24 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 16 RB,CT 1940,54,61,65,67,70,72,79 P.F Larch Lake T. 26 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 25 RB,CT 1941,42,46,47,53,54,60,64,65,66,74 P,F Leland Lake T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 4 CT 1939,41,46,55,59,67 P.F Little Caroline Lake T. 24 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 29 CT 1951,73 P,R Little Eightmile Lake T. 24 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 33 EB' Lower Big Jim Mt. Lake T. 25 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 14 CT 1951,64,71 F Lower Chain Lake T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 5 CT 1941,54,61,67 BP,F Lower French Potholes T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 15 Lower Jason Lake T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 29 CTs Lower Klonaqua Lake T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 3 RB,CT 1940,54,60,64,70 P,F Lower Lake Florence T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 23 CT 1938,41,55 P,F Lower Phoebe Lake T. 24 N., R. 14 E. Sec. 5 CTs Lower Snow Lake T. 23 N., R. 17 E. Sec. 17 EB' Mesa Lake T. 23 N., R. 17 E. Sec. 7 CT 1939 (est.) P Middle Chain Lake T. 25 N., R. 15 E. Sec. 5 CT 1941,54,61,67 BP,F Middle Jason Lake T. 26 N., R. 16 E. Sec. 30 CTs 176 Wilderness Fisheries inventory. CT – Cutthroat HLCT — Henry Lake Cutthroat TLCT – Twin Lake Cutthroat RB – Rainbow Leavenworth Ranger District Nada Lake (Hart) Seven Lakes Shield Lake Spirit Lake Sprite Lake Square Lake Swallow Lake #1 Swallow Lake #2 Swallow Lake #3 Swallow Lake #4 Swimming Deer Lake Thunder Mtn. Lakes Toketie Lake Trap Lake Trout Lake Turquoise Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed Lake Unnamed lake Upper Big Jim Mt. Lake Upper Chain Lake Upper French Potholes Upper Jason Lake Upper Klonaqua Lake Upper Lake Florence Upper Phoebe Lake Upper Snow Lake Wolverine Lake Welcome Lake MWRB — Mt. Whitney Rainbow CCRB - Cape Cod Rainbow GLDN - Golden Rainbow EB – Eastern Brook KA — Kamloops Location gºe* >e* 9yyyº9yyy9yyyy9y9yyy99999yy99yy99.y99 ::2 ; ; : && 9yyy9y9yyy99 17 E. 16 E. 16 E. 15 E. 14 E. 13 E. 13 E. 13 E. 13 E. 13 E. 14 E. 13 E. 17 E. 13 E. 15 E. 14 E. 15 E. 13 E. 13 E. 14 E. 14 E. 14 E. 14 E. 14 E. 14 E. 14 E. 14 E. 15 E. 15 E. 13 E. 15 E. 16 E. 16 E. 15 E. 13 E. 13 E. 16 E. 17 E. 16 E. 15 E. 14 E. 16 E. 14 E. 15 E. 14 E. 17 E. 13 E. 14 E. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. . 17 . 14 . 12 . 15 . 26 . 22 . 26 . 35 . 35 . 35 . 15 ... 10 . 24 . 36 . 35 . 27 O 24 35 36 16 20 23 27 26 12 7 14 5 16 31 3 14 5 17 22 2 1. Eastern Brook, self supporting —no record of planting date. 2. Mackinaw population self-supporting-EB prevail in outlet stream-no records of either plant. 3. Self-sustaining CT from Upper Lake plants. 4. Henry Lake Cutthroat obtained from National Marine Fisheries Service and stocked by Trailblazers club. Species EB' CT RB RB,CT CT CT HLCT* HLCT* CT RB,CT CT CT RB,CT CT HLCT4 HLCT* HLCT4 F –Fixed Wing Air Stocking R – Helicopter Stocking P – Pack Animal Stocking BP – Back Pack Stocking Stocking History 1939 (est.) 1937,52 1935,38,39,40,41,54,67,79 1935,36,66 1935,36,66 1979 1979 1970,72,77 1939,77 1939 1954,57,66,74 1942,45,46,51,55,62,65,66,70,72 1941,53,71,74 1979 1979 1979 1941,54,61,67 1953 1940, 1954,60,64,70 1938,41,51,71 1936,57.64 1940,41,46,79 1979 Stocking Method BP BP 177 Exhibit E. Region-6 Wilderness Management Standards. Title 2300 — Recreation Management 2320.2 – Objectives. Increased use of Wilderness is leading to unacceptable degradation of resources and loss of solitude in Wilderness areas throughout the Region. The downward trend has reached the point where specific areas of most Wilderness no longer meet the two primary goals which are to (1) re- tain a primeval character and preserve natural ecosystems for future generations, and (2) provide outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive experience. While much of the unacceptable change is subtle and takes place over time, the results are obvious: loss of vegetation at camp sites, multiple trails, excessive widening of trail treads, exposure of roots and killing of trees by horses, crowding at focal points and complete removal of snags and dead down material in localized areas. The key to meeting the goals of the Wilderness Act in future management lies in establishing specific and detailed objectives for logical management units of each Wilderness. Objectives must define, in measurable terms, the physical, biological, and social conditions which a manager seeks to attain. The basic intent of Wilderness management is nondegradation. However, any use will cause some change. Management objectives must spell out the acceptable limit of change. The following objectives define the basic conditions or range of conditions that are acceptable for management of Wildernesses in the Pacific Northwest Region: Soil Displacement of soil from human activity will be limited to a rate that closely approximates the natural process, excluding natural disasters. Soil compaction should not exceed limits which will prevent natural plant establishment and growth, except at some campsites (see vegetation), administrative facilities, and on designed trail tread. Water Maintain the natural quality of streams and lakes. There should be no measurable long term (more than 48 hours) degradation of water quality as a result of human's activity, including Forest Service administrative activity. Vegetation Maintain healthy, native vegetation in campsites. Some pristine areas should be managed for no loss of ground cover. At more heavily used areas, some loss of ground cover will be anticipated, but it should not exceed 400 square feet at any one site or 1 percent of any acre. There should be no loss of trees. There should be no long-term modification of natural plant succession as a result of human activities on areas outside accepted campsites, trails, and ad- ministrative sites. Acceptable modifications are those which will recover in one growing season. Dead standing (snags) and down vegetation should be managed to approximate natural conditions. All dead standing vegetation should be left in place unless it is an unacceptable hazard. Dead, down vegetation may be removed in amounts that can be replaced annually through natural accumulation. Vegetation impacts along trails will be confined to the planned location, and within the design specifications for construction. Wildlife Maintain historical natural animal populations, use patterns and species compositions. Social Setting Encounters with other groups while traveling should be managed to provide for experiences ranging from a maximum of one encounter per day to six per day. Provide camping solitude ranging from no camps visible or audible from another camp to a maximum of two camps visible and audible. Camps should be separated from other camps and set back from trails, meadows, lakes and streams at least 200 feet. Size of parties should range from a maximum 6-12 people and livestock combined. Exceptions for larger parties, not to exceed a total of 30 people and livestock combined, may be provided through the Wilderness Management Plan where objectives for a particular zone will accommodate them. In all cases, larger parties will be authorized by a special-use per- mit which defines route of travel, camping locations and other conditions necessary to meet Wilderness management objectives. Planning for management of the Wilderness must address all of the regionwide objectives. Any excep- tions to these objectives must be justified and documented with plans. Additional objectives that are specific to an individual Wilderness or portion thereof may be required. Most of the Wildernesses should be divided into zones to provide a variety of complimentary physical and social settings within the range of acceptable conditions defined by the regionwide objectives. From the user's standpoint, some zones should meet the exceptions of those seeking a primeval setting with a high degree of solitude and challenge. Others should meet the needs of those who want a wilderness experience with somewhat less solitude and challenge. 178 Exhibit F. Animals of Special Interest." The animals listed in this Exhibit are “Species of Special Interest” tentatively listed by the State Game Department. The most critical species are those listed as “threatened" or "endangered" On the Federal Register. One animal is listed as “threatened" and two are listed as “endangered". Other species deserve attention because their population numbers are declining, their population status is unknown, or the species has particular habitat requirements that are sensitive to forest management practices. A map showing the sites and areas for each identified species will be included in each field working copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. Common Name Gray Wolf Wolverine Fisher Heather vole Bald eagle Great gray owl Spotted owl Flammulated Owl White headed woodpecker Lewis woodpecker Williamsons sapsucker Northern three- toed woodpecker Western bluebird Black Swift Peregrine falcon Osprey Tailed frog Pacific giant Salamander • List subject to designation and revision by Regional Forester Scientific Name Canis lupus Gulo gulo Martes pennanti pacifica Phenacomys intermedius Haliaeetus leucocephalus Strix nebulosa nebulosa Strix occidentalis Otus flammeolus Picoides albolarvatus Asyndesmus lewis Sphyrapicus thyroideus Picoides tridactylus Sialia mexicana occidentalis Cypseloides niger Falco peregrinus Pandion haliaetus Ascaphus truei Dicamptodon ensatus Presence? + Special Interest Federal “Endangered" specie. Range needs verification. Population declining. Human activity may adversely affect Specie. Population declining. Few reported in Washington. Widely distributed, but sensitive to habitat disturbance. Federal “Threatened” specie. Utilize Skykomish River as feeding grounds and roosting sites in area. Occasional winter migrant. & Washington is extreme periphery of its range. Population declining with removal of old growth habitat. Population status unknown Population status unknown. Requires tree snags for nesting. Common in Washington. Needs tree snags for nesting. Uncommon summer resident of East Cascades. Fire suppression and insect control may effect adversely. Population declining west of Cascades but stable on east side. Population status unknown. Federal “Endangered” Specie. Population status unknown. Uncommon summer resident in Washington. Population status unknown. Population status unknown. * + indicates that the specie has been reported to be seen in the Alpine Lake Wilderness. e 2 indicates that the specie's natural range occurs in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, but no sightings of the specie have been reported in recent years. Exhibit G. Sensitive Plants." SCIENTIFIC NAME Castilleja parviflora var. Olympica Castilleja parviflora var. albida Claytonia megarhiza var. nivalis Cryptantha thompsonii Erigeron leibergii Eriogonum umbellatum var. hypoleium Geum rossii var. depressum Hackelia dissusa var. arida Lomatium cuspidatum Lomatium thompsonii Physaria alpestris Poa Curtifolia Sedum lanceolatum var.rupicolum Silene seelyi Valeriana Columbiana COMMON NAME Olympic Mtns. Paintbrush Magenta Paintbrush Wenatchee Claytonia Thompson's Crypthantha Leiberg's Fleabane Sulpher Eriogon Sieversia Rose Showy Stickweed Pointed-leaved Lomatium Thompson's Desert Parsley NO common name Little Mt. Bluegrass No common name Seely's Campion Wenatchee Valerian 'List Subject to designation and revision by Regional Forester. A map showing the sites and areas for each iden- tified species will be included in each field working copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. Exhibit H. Soil and Vegetative Monitoring Methodology. The methodology is available as a special report to this DEIS. It will be included in each field working copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. 179 Exhibit I. Trail Service Levels. Service Level A — Managed to accommodate heavy traffic for the entire use period. The trail blends into the natural features of the area and is easy to use. Users should not expect solitude. Socializing with others may be a part of the recreation experience and contact with others may be frequent to con- tinuous among users. It will be obvious to the users that they are in a predictable situation where they will not normally need to use advanced outdoor skills. Service Level B — Managed to accommodate moderate use for the majority of the use period. The trail only modifies natural conditions to protect the environment and provide for the user with limited outdoor experience and average physical ability. Users should expect to find opportunities to both socialize and have a moderate degree of solitude during low use periods. Service Level C — Managed to accommodate light and infrequent travel. Routes maintained only for resource protection and to provide use by special groups or individuals with experience in rugged mountain terrain. The modification of natural environ- ment will be minimal. During all seasons, the user should experience a moderate to high degree of solitude from other individuals or small groups. The route should provide the user with an opportunity for testing skills and experiencing physical exertion and a feeling of accomplishment. Service Level D — loentifies those trails to be aban- doned in order to accomplish the Wilderness management objectives. If necessary, these trails will be obliterated and the land restored to a natural condition through revegetation. 180 Exhibit J. J-1. Wilderness Management Guidelines, Transition Zone ZONE DESCRIPTION Area is characterized by predominantly un- modified natural environment. These zones usually are adjacent to major trailheads where the user makes the transition from motorized access to foot or horse travel and is first introduced to the Wilderness. They normally extend from the Wilderness boundary inward along primary travel routes up to 3 miles and 500 feet on either side of the travel route. An exception to the 3 mile criteria is the 72 miles of Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail. Day use of area often predominates or is equally mixed with destination travelers also using the interior of the WilderneSS. Experience Opportunity A feeling of vastness is important, but not essential. The user has the opportunity for a higher degree of interaction with the natural environment, often with low or moderate challange and risk. Opportunities for exploring and experiencing isolation contrast with adjacent, more developed areas Outside the WilderneSS. Concentration of day users is moderate to high at least 50 percent of the season. Visi- ble evidence of past use easily noticeable. The zone is managed to allow for less ex- perienced users to be introduced to Wilderness settings and practice use ethics. Facilities are provided for concen- trated use near established travel routes, to provide for protection of on-site and adja- cent resources and to provide necessary user safety (i.e., bridges, warning signs, etc.). PHYSICAL SETTING Site Modification People-caused changes will be within Region 6 Nondegradation Standards. Where possible, camping areas and trails will take advantage of vegetative and topographic Screening. Where possible, they will be located outside foreground view (200 ft.) from lakes, trails and key interest features. Visual Elements (form, line, color, texture) Trails, camp areas and other human ac- tivities may co-dominate the natural land- Scape in foreground viewing areas (100 ft.) but must be harmonious. Human activities will remain subordinate to natural land- Scape in middleground and background distances. Facilities Those essential for the protection of the Wilderness resource and user safety may Co-dominate natural landscape in foreground from trails and use areas. They will remain subordinate in foreground (200 ft.) from lakes and key interest features and will remain harmonious in middle ground and background distances. Materials Natural materials will dominate. Dimen- Sional and non-native materials are accep- table but should harmonize with the natural environment. SOCIAL SETTING Noise People-caused sound' rated at D'-10 are not heard on an average of more than 4 times per hour from a distance 1/4 mile within the ZOne. Encounters Encounters with other parties frequent as groups move to and from trailheads and along the PCT. No more than 7 encounters per day with other traveling groups during the entire use season. No more than 2 other camping parties visible from a camp- site. Group Size ſº Any combination of persons and recreation livestock not exceeding 12 (without written authorization). Camps Overnight camps within the zone only at designated sites or out of sight of trails. Designated sites will be shown on the Wilderness map and marked on the ground if necessary. Open fires may be banned or limited to designated sites within seen areas, foreground of lakes, streams, and trails. Limited toilet facilities are permissible at heavy use areas for resource protection and human Safety. Livestock Recreational stock is permitted except in camp areas. Stock is held overnight outside foreground of lakes and streams and out Of sight of camp areas and trails. Commercial stock is only permitted to e travel through the zone to and from permit- ted range. Pets Pets must be under reliable voice Control and/or physical restraint to protect both people and wildlife within the zone. "These people-caused noise levels are ex- pressed as D' values. D' = Level of detec- tability as measured by the System of Prediction of Accoustical Detectability (SPreAD) and associated guidelines. (Harrison, Clark, and Stankley. 1979). MANAGERIAL SETTING Off-Site Evidence of Control Management control necessary to protect the ecological and social elements throughout the Wilderness are strongly evi- dent outside the Wilderness, at trailheads and at boundary portals. Formal regula- tions, orders, and/or permits may be necessary to achive management objec- tives. Formal and informal user education programs may be initiated to inform users about what to expect and how to use the area for optimum benefit to all. Visual Information Systems actions are designed to help meet management objectives not to promote use. On-Site Evidence of Controls Frequent opportunity for visitor contact with Wilderness Rangers and other management personnel. Wilderness Rangers will attempt to contact 50 percent of the users during the normal use season. Signs Trailhead signs will be conspicuously placed to indicate names of destinations, directions and distances to major internal sites and areas. Signs within the Wilderness boundary will be placed at all trail junctions to indicate major destina- tions and direction. Numerous signs may be placed for administrative purposes and for user safety. Trails Service Level A trails will normally be con- structed, maintained and managed to ac- commodate heavy traffic for the entire use Season. The routes will blend into the natural features of the area, be safe and pleasant to use. It will be obvious to the users that they are in a safe and predic- table situation where they will not be called upon to use a high degree of outdoor skills. 181 J-2. Wilderness Management Guidelines, Semi-primitive Zone ZONE DESCRIPTION Area is characterized by predominantly un- modified natural environment of moderate to large size. Concentration of users is low, but there is often evidence of other area users. The zone is managed in Such a way that minimum on-site controls and restric- tions may be present but are subtle. Spacing of groups may be formalized to disperse use and provide low to moderate contacts with other groups or individuals. Experience Opportunity Moderate opportunities for exploring and experiencing isolation, from the sights and sounds of man, independence, closeness to nature, tranquility, and Self-reliance through the application of woodsmanship and primitive recreation skills. These oppor- tunities occur in a natural environment that mormally offers a moderate degree of challenge and risk. PHYSICAL SETTING Site Modification People-caused changes will be within Region 6 Non-degradation Standards. Camp- ing areas, where possible, will be located on sites within coniferous forest areas. Sites should be located to take advantage of topographic and vegetative screening. Outside of coniferous areas where no vegetative or topographic screening is available camps will be located, where possible, outside foreground view (200 ft.) from lakes, trails and key interest features. Site design (trails and camps) should re- main subordinate to the natural landscape. Visual Elements (form, line, color, texture) Human activities will remain subordinate in foreground distance zones (200-300 ft.) and will not be recognizable in middleground and background distances. Facilities Those necessary for protection of the Wilderness resource and user safety will re- main subordinate in foreground distance zones (200-300 ft.) from trails, lakes and key interest features. They should remain not evident and harmonious with natural land- scape in middle ground and background distances. Materials Natural materials will dominate. Dimen- sional and non-native materials may be us- ed but must remain not evident to the average user. SOCIAL SETTING Noise People-caused sound' rated at D’-5 bet- ween camps and are not heard on an average of more than 12 times per day by traveling groups. Encounters No more than 7 encounters per day with other traveling groups during 50 percent of the Season. No more than 1 other camping party visible from a campsite. Group Size Any combination of persons and recreation livestock not exceeding 12 (without written authorization). Camps: Camps located to meet sight and sound standards. Campsites may be designated by user awareness techniques, regulation and/or permit. Open fires may be banned or limited to designated sites. Limited primitive toilet facilities may be provided at heavy use areas for resource protection and human safety. Livestock Recreational stock is permitted except in camp areas. Stock is held overnight outside foreground of lakes and streams and out of Sight of Camp areas and trails. Commercial stock is only permitted to travel through the zone to and from permit- ted range. Pets Pets must be under reliable voice control and/or physical restraint to protect both people and wildlife within the zone. "People-caused noise levels as calculated by SPreAD. MANAGERIAL SETTING Off-Site Evidence of Control Management control necessary to protect the ecological and social elements throughout the Wilderness is strongly evident outside the Wilderness, at trailheads and at boundary portals. Formal regulations, orders, and/or permits may be necessary to achieve management objec- tives. Formal and informal user education programs may be initiated to inform users about what to expect and how to use the area for Optimum benefit to all. Visual Information System actions are designed to help meet management objectives not to promote use. On-Site Evidence of Controls High to moderate presence of Wilderness Rangers who contact an average of 30 per- cent of overnight users. Percent contact depends on outdoor skill level of typical user groups. Management and research technicians engaged in monitoring or pro- ject work, trail Crews, etc. will conform to established Social and ecological standards unless Specifically authorized otherwise. Work will be scheduled for low public use periods where feasible. Signs Within the zone, place the minimum number of signs necessary to protect the Wilderness resources, and for adminis- tration. A maximum of two directional signs with a maximum of two destinations per sign to be placed at trail junctions. Information about distances and attractions (i.e., lakes, meadows, cultural features etc.) will not be included. Signs may be used if necessary to direct users to designated campsites and toilets. Trails Service Level B trails will normally be con- structed, maintained and managed to ac- Commodate moderate use for the majority of the use season. The route will only modify natural conditions to the extent necessary to protect the environment and provide for Safe use by a user with limited experience, and average physical ability. 182 J-3. Wilderness Management Guidelines, Primitive Zone. ZONE DESCRIPTION Area is characterized by essentially un- modified natural environment. Concentra- tion of users is very low and evidence of other area users is minimal. The zone is managed to be essentially free from evidence of restrictions and controls. Spacing of groups is informal and dis- persed to minimize contacts with other groups or individuals. Experience Opportunity High opportunity for exploring and ex- periencing isolation from the sights and sounds of man, independence, closeness to nature, tranquility, and self-reliance through the application of primitive recrea: tion skills. These opportunities occur in an environment that offers a high degree of challenge and risk. PHYSICAL SETTING Site Modification People-caused changes are within Region 6 Non-degradation Standards. Camping areas where possible to be located on sites within coniferous forest areas. In all cases sites should be located to take advantage of topographic and vegetative Screening. Outside of coniferous areas where no vegetative or topographic screening is . available camps to be located where possi- ble outside foreground view (200 ft.) from lakes, trails, and key interest features. Location of trails and campsites should en- courage maximum dispersion of visitors. Visual Elements (form, line, color, texture) Human activities will remain not evident in foreground distances (200-300 ft.) and not recognizable in middleground and background. Facilities Very few facilities will be provided and only for resource protection. They should remain not evident in foreground distance from trails, lakes and key interest features and not recognizable in middleground and background. Materials Only native materials will be used. SOCIAL SETTING Noise People-caused sounds' rated at D'-1 be- tween camps are not heard on an average of more than 6 times per day by traveling grOupS. Encounters No more than 5 encounters with other traveling groups per day during 50 percent of the use Season. No more than 1 other camping party visible from a camp site. Group Size Any combination of persons and recreation livestock not exceeding 12 (without written authorization). Camps Users will be encouraged to locate camps to meet sight and sound standards. Camp- sites will not normally be designated. Open fires may be banned. Limited, primitive toilet facilities may be provided for resource protection and human safety. Livestock Grazing stock is permitted except in established camp areas. Recreation Stock is held overnight outside foreground of lakes and streams, away from Camp areas and out of sight of trails. Commercial stock is only permitted to travel through the zone to and from permit- ted range. Pets Pets must be under reliable voice Control and/or physical restraint to protect both people and wildlife within the zone. "People-caused noise levels as calculated by SPreAD. MANAGERIAL SETTING Off-Site Evidence of Control Management control necessary to protect the ecological and social elements throughout the Wilderness are evident out- side the Wilderness, at trailheads and at boundary portals. Formal regulations, orders, and/or permits may be necessary to achieve management objectives. Formal and informal user education programs may be initiated to inform users about what to expect and how to use the area for op- timum benefit to all. Visual Information System actions are designed to help meet management objectives, not to promote USe. On-Site Evidence of Controls Wilderness Rangers contact an average of 10 percent of the parties using the area during the normal use season. Wilderness administration groups will conform to party Size limitations, and where feasible work will be scheduled for low use periods. Signs Within the zone, provide minimum informa- tion necessary to protect Wilderness resource. A maximum of two directional Signs with a maximum of two destinations per sign to be placed at trail junctions. Distances and place name information will not be provided. Trails Service Level C trails will normally be con- structed, maintained and managed to accommodate light and infrequent travel. Routes will be maintained only for resource protection and to provide safe use by Special groups or individuals with ex- perience in rugged mountain terrain. The modification of natural environment would be minimal. The route should provide the user with an opportunity for testing skills and experiencing a sensation of physical exertion and a feeling of accomplishment. 183 J-4. Wilderness Management Guidelines, Trailless Zone. ZONE DESCRIPTION Area is characterized by an extensive un- modified natural environment. Natural pro- cesses and conditions are not measurably affected by the actions of users. The zone is managed to be as free as possible from the influence of human activities. Experience Opportunity Provides an outstanding opportunity for isolation and Solitude, free from evidence of human activities and with very infre- Quent encounters with users. The user has Outstanding opportunities to travel cross- Country utilizing a maximum degree of out- door skills, often in an environment that offers a very high degree of challenge and risk. PHYSICAL SETTING Management will be to sustain or enhance the natural ecosystems so that evidence of man will not be noticeable for more than one season. Adjacent areas and zones will be managed to protect the natural integrity Of the TRAILLESS zone. Site Modification g Limited to only those which are considered necessary for resource protection. Visual Elements (form, line, color, texture) Human activities will emulate those of the natural landscape. Use will be dispersed to preserve natural appearing color and texture of vegetation. Facilities None will be provided. SOCIAL SETTING Noise People-caused sounds' rated at D'-1 are audible between camps and not heard on an average of more than 2 times per day by traveling groups. Encounters Maintain the opportunity to travel with no more than the one encounter per day be- tween groups for a minimum of 50 percent of the Season and no more than two en- counters per day during the remainder of the use season. No other camping party visible from a campsite. Group Size Any Combination of persons and recreation livestock not exceeding 12 (without written authorization). Camps Overnight camps will be encouraged on ad- jacent PRIMITIVE or other zones when and where possible. Encourage users to camp not more than one night in one site within the zone. Open fires discouraged except in emergencies. Toilet facilities will not be provided. Livestock Recreational stock use is discouraged. Recreation stock will be held overnight out- Side the foreground of lakes and streams, away from camp areas, and out of sight of trails. Commercial stock is permitted. Grazing is allowed where and when compatible with other Wilderness uses and where damage does not occur to the Wilderness resource. Pets Pets must be under reliable voice control to protect wildlife within the zone. "People-caused noise levels as calculated by SPreAD. MANAGERIAL SETTING Off-Site Evidence of Control Management control necessary to protect the ecological and social elements throughout the Wilderness, is evident out- Side the Wilderness, at trailheads and at boundary portals. Formal regulations, orders, and/or permits may be necessary to achieve management objectives. Formal and informal user education programs may be initiated to inform users about what to expect and how to use the area for op- timum benefit to all. Visual Information System actions are designed to help meet management objectives, not to promote USe. On-Site Evidence of Controls Patrols and monitoring of conditions by Forest Service and other appropriate state and Federal agency personnel only as necessary to achieve management objectives. Scientific study and ecological monitoring actions will be Scheduled to meet social setting criteria. Signs Within the zone provide only minimum in- formation necessary to protect the resource. Signs may be placed in the other three use zones so as to minimize need for signs in TRAILLESS areas. 184 Exhibit K. Suppression Decision Matrix. This matrix can be found as Figure A-1 on page 143. It will be included in each field work copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. Exhibit L. Trails Map. This map is included as a portin of the information displayed on the allocation map for each of the five alternatives. The trails map for the selected manage- ment plan will be included in each field work copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. Exhibit M. Lake Susceptibility to Water Quality Degradation. This map is included in a yet unreleased U.S. Geological Survey publication. Upon release, it will be included in each field work copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. Exhibit N. Visual Asorbtion Capability (VAC) This map is drawn at 1 inch per mile scale and is available for viewing at the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Forest Supervisor's Office in Seattle. It will be in- cluded in each field work copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. Exhibit O. Core Enchantment Area. This map can be found as Figure 4 on page 16. It will be included in each field work copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. Exhibit P. Wilderness Ranger Areas of Responsibility --1. ,- * >, º & --- … * = - - - ... . . . . • -- f As ! -- * - ºn : n - - * Leavenworth ſl- ºr ---, * 2 Rangers ºr ºf -- * * * - ----- * }; --- I z = . – . . . . . . . / - - – --- * 4. - e. nº- * - - - ! 2 -- = . - - S- - - ~% *-- - - .** - * - - * * - º r"--- I -- º Skykomish 2’ >< - | | Skykomish 2 Rangers - - - * : |-- - º :- - º * - 1 - - “ Leavenworth - ~...~ * ~ -- ** 1 Ranger’ ------n • -º . , - " ". - E -- i. º -- - * - - `-- . . . Leavenworth, º Cle Elum 3 Rangers --. .."; - - - r-------. - 2 Rangers - - -T---, /* ~~ ~ - ** J _2 = - -- º * y ! * -- t - -- * º y - - “, \ - Tº º * * “: - -- T "… w - ,” **wa. *- -> * - -- - - <= i f^ f º - – a |------, Cle Elum * º - * ..., *-i- ºr T. 2 Rangers. -- ; f f 2,----" ~t North Bend, . . . - - f +-- - --- !" * º * - - *s, 2 Rangers." * ~ º -- - - - - Exhibit Q. Fire Protection Strategies. This map is included as a portion of the information provided for each of the five alternatives and can be found on pages 47, 51, 55, 58 and 62. The fire protec- tion strategy for the selected management plan will be included in each field work copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. 185 Since it was an effort to protect the rugged Splendor of the Central Cascades which resulted in the Alpine Lakes Management Act of 1976, management of the area's visual resource was necessarily a cen- tral consideration in the development of this document. Direction for visual quality management is contained in the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and in Forest Service Manual 2380. The latter reads, in part: “The visual resource will be inventoried, evaluated and managed as a fully integrated part of the National Forest System land management plan- ning and management process. This will be done with a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will ensure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts. The visual resources will be treated as an essential part of, and receive equal consideration with, the other resources of the land. Landscape management principles will be applied not only in especially sen- sitive areas or unusual circumstances, but routinely in all activities, and by all disciplines throughout the National Forest System.” National forest land will be managed to attain the highest possible visual quality commensurate with other activities which may occur under multiple use: sustained yield management. The visual inventory of the Alpine Lakes Area per- mits evaluation of the effects alternative land alloca- tions will have on forest landscapes. It is based on these four elements: 1. Existing visual condition measured in degrees of deviation from a natural appearing landscape. 2. Visual quality objectives (VQO): Measurable objec: tives which would be necessary to achieve a desired level of visual quality. 3. Visual absorption capability (VAC): A means of estimating a landscape's physical ability to absorb the impact of human activities. 4. Predicted visual condition: A predicted measure- ment of accomplishment which permits comparison Appendix C Visual Quality of the future visual condition of the landscape under each alternative with the existing visual situation. The Visual Quality Objective Map accompanying this DEIS shows the achievable visual objectives for alter- natives. Once the land management plan is approv- ed, the achievable visual quality objectives become management directions. Additional information about how visual quality ob- jectives were determined may be obtained as a special report to this DEIS. The visual quality objectives are: Preservation — allows only ecological changes. Management activities, except for very low visual im- pact recreation facilities, are prohibited. This objec- tive applies to specially classified areas including Wilderness. Retention — provides for management activities ... which are not visually evident. Management activities are permitted but the results of those activities on the natural landscape must not be evident by the average forest viewer. Any negative visual contrast produced by an activity must be mitigated. This may be accomplished, for example, by revegetation or by painting structures to blend into a natural setting. Clearings would be designed to appear as natural Openings. Partial Retention — Management activities must re- main visually subordinate to the surrounding land- Scapes. Mitigation of negative contrast must be ac- Complished as soon as possible, no longer than a year after completion of a project. The results of management activities, such as logging, may be evi- dent to the forest viewer but must remain subor- dinate to the characteristic landscape. Timber harvest units, for example, will be designed to blend unobtrusively into the landscape by manipulating size, shape and locations of the units. Modification – Management activities may visually dominate the original surrounding landscape but must borrow from naturally established form, line, color and texture. A timber clearcut will be designed to take the slope of natural openings, logging slash will be disposed of, and cut and fill slopes on roads revegetated to reduce visual effect of the opening. Rehabilitation — A short term management objective to restore landscapes containing undesirable visual impacts to the desired visual quality. Examples are unnatural cutting patterns, the absence of visual linkage between cutting units and roads and log lan- dings which produce unnatural lines. Remedies can include the creation of visual linkages, and feather- ing cutting unit edges to reduce line and color Con- traStS. Visual Absorption Capability The process used in determining VAC is based on four physical factors: 1) slope, 2) vegetative pattern and screening ability, 3) the ability of a site to recover or recoverability and 4) soil color contrast. The arithmetic formula to determine VAC is: Slope + vegetative pattern and screening + recoverability + soil color and contrast = VAC Some of the general premises used in VAC are: 1. As slope increases, VAC decreases. 2. As vegetative pattern and screening increase, VAC increases. 3. As site recoverability increases, VAC increases. 4. As Soil color and contrast become greater, VAC decreases. Additional information on criteria and values for each of the VAC factors may be obtained as a special report to this DEIS. A VAC map displays the final rating, which is an in- terpretation of the combined factors. The areas map- ped “high” are those with highest absorptive capability for visual change and the easiest, lowest cost areas in which to work from a visual standpoint. “Low” areas are those which will visually absorb lit- tle or no change and are the most difficult and costly for projects and visual objectives. With the selection of a preferred alternative, the resulting adopted Visual Quality Objectives will become management direction to be applied to subsequent projects. Results will be monitored. 187 Guidelines for meeting visual quality objectives are established by combining visual objectives with visual absorption capabilities of the landscape so that areas of similar visual significance and suita- bility can be identified (see Table C-1). Using this Table, the achievable visual quality objectives and the VAC maps, the forest land manager has a guide to assist in determining how to meet the visual ob- jectives. Table C-1 represents a method of identifying the activities or direction needed to meet any par- ticular visual quality objective based upon: 1) the nature of the activity, 2) physical capability of a land- scape, 3) visual significance. It should be noted that these are general guidelines to assist managers in providing the desired visual results. In many cases a site specific assessment will have to be made to determine if the guidelines are fully applicable to a specific landscape area. Wilderness Visual Analysis Visual management planning in the Wilderness does not have to contend with the multiple uses of forest land that occur in the management unit. Mitigation measures for timber harvest, road building and various other developments are not necessary. This advantage is offset, to some extent, by the very high expectations which visitors bring to a wilderness area. The most concerted effort to protect and enhance visual quality must be made in the Wilderness. There is a difference between an impact upon a natural area which is ecologically damaging and one which is considered visually undesirable. In wilderness, however, both problems are important. A process for identifying the potential for both was developed consistent with the Wilderness Act, Section 2 (c). It includes three steps: 1. Identify areas which are most vulnerable to visual degradation and the activities which are most likely to produce it. 2. Make wilderness managers aware of the visual resource management planning tool and how to use it. 3. Specify mitigation measures necessary to protect visual quality. The vulnerability of an area to visual degradation is determined by two factors, the characteristics of land involved and its intrinsic visual value or attrac- tiveness. Land characteristics include the ecoclass, slope and soil color contrast. The three ecoclasses present in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness are Alpine and Meadow Lands, Coniferous Forest Lands and Riparian Lands. Table C-1. Key Fg — Foreground Mg — Middleground Bg – Background Alpine Lakes Visual Analysis Variety Class A – Significant landscapes Variety Class B – Common landscapes VAC Low (L) Low ability to absorb activities VAC Mod (M) Moderate ability to absorb activities VAC High (H) High ability to absorb activities R – Retention PR – Partial Retention M – LAND CLASS DETERMINATION Modification VISUAL QUALITY OBJECTIVE/V.A.C. RATING Distance Zone Mg' Bg' Fgº Variety Class A B A B A Low R/L Mod HHHVH RM High || RJ- Mg? Bg? B A B (visual Management Guidelines | Retain or provide 10% of 24” – 36" DHB trees. —Cutting units must not expose more than 3% of seen area within one -- decade, not to exceed 15% at any one time.* - —Cutting units must not expose more than 5% of seen area within one --- decade, not to exceed 20% at any one time.* -> -> –Cutting units must not expose more than 7.5% of seen area within one decade, not to exceed 25% at any one time.* - - —Cutting units must not expose more than 40% of seen area at any one time." -> -> –Cutting units must not dominate natural patterns of form, line, color and - - - - - texture. —Cutting units may dominate natural patterns but must repeat natural form, line color, and texture. - - —Retain or provide diversity of understory size and species. - - —All ground disturbance to be returned to natural appearance. - - - —Stump height to be held to the minimum possible in visible areas. - - —Provide diversity of species and age classes. - - - - - - —Landings are to be located outside seen areas or rehabilitated after timber Sale. - -> - - - —Gravel, borrow and stockpile areas to be excluded from seen areas. • - –Roads must not dominate natural patterns of form, line, color, and texture within clearcut areas on year afer cutting. - - -> - - —Landscape design to accompany all intersections of system roads. • * —All cut and fill slopes to be revegetated with native plant species. • - —All cut and fill slopes to be revegetated. - - - - —Utility right-of-way clearing to conform with natural vegetative pattern. - - - - - - - —Overhead utility lines to be screened where possible; where seen transmission towers will be painted with naturally harmonious colors. -> - - - -> —Fire protection improvements must not dominate natural patterns of form, line, color, and texture. - - - - - —Bulldozers for fire suppression to require Forest Supervisor approval. - - - —Allow only intensity 1 and 2 fires and limit to 100 acres per start. • * —Fire management to be managed to enhance visual resources. • * - - - —Paint or stain all buildings naturally harmonious colors. • • \-Landscape architectural input required. • e - - - / * Percent per decade refers to seen area from a single viewer point. Percent at of a total viewshed Or travel Corridor. any one time refers to the seen area —T 188 Alpine and Meadow Lands are generally open with little ability to screen soil and vegetative disturbance or the presence of other wilderness visitors. Con- iferous Forest Lands are less susceptible to visual degradation because screening is plentiful and they are less fragile. Riparian land contains screening but carefully engineered, permanent trails are required to avoid compaction, mudholes and multiple trails. As slopes become steeper, disturbances to natural terrain become more conspicuous. Steeper slopes have an increased visible area even though vegetative cover may exist. The increased reflection of light emphasizes any alteration in color or texture. Soil color contrast is important because lighter colored soils, when unnaturally exposed, tend to stand out obtrusively. Human disturbances can be recognized over greater distances. The greatest con- trasts occur where subsurface materials are light or reddish and the vegetative cover is a dark blue-green. Soils were divided into dark, medium and light Colored classes. For planning purposes, visual attractiveness was determined by variety and the division of land into three Variety Classes was described in the "Visual" portion of “Affected Environment” in this Statement. The mapping of Variety Classes was done on a very broad basis. Many areas such as distinctive rock out- crops and waterfalls will have to be recognized and protected during project planning. All of these elements of land character and attrac- tiveness were incorporated onto maps. By using these maps, it will be possible for administrators to determine the impact of any activity in the Wilderness on the visual quality of land surrounding it. | . . . . | " " ...," | || º - - | .# | - - - - 1- º l, - | l | | º ſº | \, . . . . | | |||} | . | || | | | : | ſ" | | | ! º "A " . " | \\ | , - it "'ſº - ', .*.* ºf "" " ". | | | || "... . " . "in "lº ºl. º º | "I'll k "\\ "u, º “W h º '. º | !" | | || | tº all | Tº - * * * * * j §§§ º'º". ſº - º - º - - ` L - ºº:: Y º - U | * , , -- - ------" " -- Fºrmº. T - - -– WWIñº- - -- ~. `s º Wºº ſ Drºs. --> *mºnº-º-º- flººr. ºft ºTº º . . . . . . . . . . Nº Nº Nº. ''''' tº ſº *Tºº º º tº. º, ſº º º **-ºssºs - ******* - sº ºr 2: ... : ſº ºc- - - - ºº::sº - - º ſ ºº: º | NN § º SSS isºs --> SSºss- D. ſ sº N º L^º **Sº § 4& jºš º: C V. §§ º º: º º zº - wº La :/º º º # , , 189 Table D-1. Water Quality Compared to State Standards. Appendix D Water Fecal Coliform Turbidity Water Resource (Organisms/ (Turbidity temperature Complex 100 MI.) pH Units) (oC) Inean Tax- In(38ſ) Tºax. In 68liſh Tax. Middle Fork Snoqualmie 3.2 4.9 6.5 7.2 * --> :--> 15 |-90 8.8 49.0 5.6 8.3 2.0 16.0 20 Kachess 1.4 1.7 5.7 7.8 1.1 2.9 10 Teanaway 1.8 3.0 7.2 7.2 1.4 1.9 9 Highway 97 49.8 121.4 7.4 8.6 4.1 12.9 13 Icicle 7.6 gº 7.1 7.4 0.4 1.2 11 U.S. 2 East 3.9 2.5 6.6 6.9 1.1 2.0 5 U.S. 2 West 11.6 150.0 6.8 7.6 2.6 9.0 17 State Standard 50 with no 6.5 8.5 5 max. 16 more than above background [Tlax: 10% above level 100 Table D-2. Current Water Yields in the Alpine Lakes Area by Resource Complex. Resource Average Average Complex Average Yield Area Unit Flow Flow (Acre-feet) (MI”) Ftº/Sec/Miº Ftº/Sec Middle Fork Snoqualmie 207,055 33.7 8.48 286 |-90 240,358 49.2 6.72 331 Kachess 336,646 101.1 4.60 465 Teanaway 179,545 103.4 2.44 248 Highway 97 47,782 93.8 0.70 66 lcicle 83,981 35.8 3.23 116 U.S. 2 East 156,378 55.7 3.88 216 U.S. 2 West 579,900 109.0 7.35 801 TOTAL 1,831,644 581.7 4.35 2,530 Wilderness Westside 981,573 177 7.66 1,356 748,585 288 3.59 1,034 Nason Ridge 89,045 31.7 3.88 123 191 ---…--~~~~ ~~ +----- -- …º `----, |- – l º º \| Stevens Pass º - º Domerie --- ---- Timberlane Village [T] Municipal Watershed Precipitation Contour (lines connecting points of equal precipitation) Class I Streams Class || Streams Alpental Figure D-1. Water Resources Inventory. The sites, structures, objects and other physical rem- nants left by humans comprise cultural resources. They link to the origin of our national heritage and provide a fragile, irreplaceable record of past human life. As a non-renewable resource, Special considera- tion must be given to cultural artifacts in any plan- ning effort. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and Executive Order 11593, require that federal agencies identify, evaluate, preserve, protect and enhance the cultural resources present on the lands they ad- minister. In addition, the same responsibility of agen- cies applies to private lands when these landowner plans and programs involve federal cooperation or assistance (section 1 (3) EO 11593). Cultural proper- ties must be located and their significance evaluated by the criteria for enrollment in the National Register of Historic Places (36 C.F.R. Part 60.6). Fur- thermore, the federal agencies must consider the ef- fects of their undertakings on all significant cultural resources, and assure the development of measures to avoid or mitigate any adverse effects. It should be recognized that protection of a significant cultural property extends equally to protection of the en- vironmental setting, including the visual, audible and atmospheric qualities. Explanation of the - significance of this record — cultural resource inter- pretation — should constitute one of the main at- tractions in the Alpine Lakes Area and provide oppor- tunities for historical and scientific work by scholars. In addition, the Indian Religious Freedom Act (PL 95-341) of 1978 mandates federal agencies to pro- tect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express, and exercise their traditional religions. This includes access to traditional religious sites and the use and posses: sion of sacred objects. As part of land management planning, it becomes the obligation of the agency to attempt to gather background on traditional Indian religious uses of land or land-based resources. As part of the Alpine Lakes planning, an exhaustive search of all relevant documentary materials and in- terviews with Indian tribal elders and knowledgeable local residents was conducted. Informal contact was initially made with the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (SHPO) in June 1978. It was determined that the study area was Appendix E Cultural too large to handle through the usual “written re- quest for information”. The Forest Archaeologist Consequently visited the SHPO to examine relevant documents, maps and the State Register and State Inventory of Historic Places in December, 1978. Records at the Washington Archaeological Research Center were also consulted. The Forest Archaeologist supplemented the documents research with a site selective field inven- tory. By agreement with SHPO, formal consultation will be accomplished with the Forest Service filing of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and a Determination of Effect. The February 6, 1979 listing of the National Register of Historic Places lists four National Register properties in the Alpine Lakes Area: the Stevens Pass Historic District, the Salmon La Sac Guard Station, the Blewett Arrastra and the townsite of Liberty. Approximately 158 sites with historic value were identified through an overview and field survey. A listing of the sites, including maps indicating their geographic location and a keyed text describing their historical and/or archaeological significance, condi- tion, potential eligibility for the National Register and possible interpretive value is in preparation. However, since cultural sites are frequently subject to vandalism, relic collecting and other human- related degradation, all site locality information is ex- empt from the Freedom of Information Act. They are not available for public review. This plan considers management alternatives that call for different amounts of land disturbing ac- tivities. The presence or potential presence of Cultural properties included in or eligible for inclu- Sion in the National Register was taken into con- sideration and impact on the cultural resource was a significant factor in the evaluation of management alternatives. 193 Table F-l. Appendix F Social and Economic Projected Population of Counties Surrounding the Alpine Lakes Area (In Thousands). County King Pierce Snohomish TOTAL Westside County Chelan Kittitas Yakima TOTAL Eastside TOTAL 6 Counties Westside Cascades I975 1980 1990 1,150.0 1,210.6 |,459.8 4|4.2 435.3 498.0 263.7 307.3 390.4 1,827.9 1,953.2 2,348.2 Eastside Cascades 1975 1980 1990 40.5 44.2 48.2 25.7 26.0 27.0 |53.2 |60.4 |80.2 219.4 230.6 255.4 2,046.4 2,183.8 2,603.6 2000 1,628.6 541.0 441.3 2,610.9 2000 50.| 28. |9|..] 269.3 2,880.2 % increase 41.6 30.6 67.3 42.8 %. Increase 23.7 9.3 24.7 22.7 40.7 Source: Washington State County Population By Age & Sex, 1970-2005. Population, Enrollment, and Economic Studies Division, Washington State Office of Financial Management. June 1978. Table F-2. Age Distribution Forecast. Age Brackets 0-14 15-29 30-44 45-59 60-74 75 + Age Brackets 0-14 |5-29 30-44 45-59 60-74 75 + Source: Washington State County Population By Age & Sex, 1970-2005. Population, Enrollment, and Economic Studies Division, Washington State Office of Financial Management, June 1978. 1975 24.4 26.9 |8.6 |6.6 9.9 3.6 1975 25.4 25.5 |5.6 |6.3 |2.4 4.7 Westside Cascades 2000 1975-2000 (Percent of Total Population) (% Growth from present population) 22.6 31.8 21.3 |3. 24. 85.6 |7.8 52.6 9.6 38.6 5.6 |23.7 Eastside Cascades 2000 1975-2000 (Percent of Total Population) (% Growth from present population) 22.6 ||.8 21.2 5.2 21.9 77.2 |8. 40.] |0.5 5.3 5.7 53.5 195 Table F-3. Employment” and Payrolls for Westside Cascades Counties, 1977. County King Pierce Snohomish Total Total Total Wages Wages Wages Employment (Mill. $) Employment (Mill. $) | Employment (Mill. $) Employment 494,013 6,504.3 104,818 1,209.3 64,822 790.4 &= E = º º º º ºs º º ºs º-, º E tº sº tº gº tº º Eº percent — — — —––––––––––––––––- Agriculture, Forest, Fish 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.8 Mining 0.0 0.0 0.] 0.2 0.2 0.3 Construction 5.3 6.7 6.3 8.1 7.8 8.8 All Manufacturing 21.3 26.8 |9.6 26.0 33.2 43.0 Food & Kindred |.8 2. 2.4 3.0 |.4 |4. Apparel & Textile 0.8 0.5 C C C * -º Lumber & Wood |.3 |.7 5.4 7.0 6.5 8.] Paper & Allied 0.3 0.3 |.7 2.5 4.0e C Printing & Publishing |.3 |.3 |.0 |.3 C C Smelting C C |.7 2.5 gº Eºmº Metal Fabrication * * |. |.4 |.0 |.7 C C Machinery 1.2 |.4 C C |.4 |.8 Electronic Equipment C C C C |.8 2.0 Instruments C C C C |.9 2.] Transportation Equipment |0.0 |4.4 1.4 2.] |2.0 |7.3 Other Manufacuturing 3.4 3.6 4.9 5.9 8.3 |0.3 Transportation & Public Utilities 7.4e 9.9e 4.6 6.0 5.4e 6.3 Wholesale Trade 8.8 |0.8e e6.3 8.2 3.8e 4.2 Retail Trade |9.3 |2.2e 22.] 15.2 22.3 |4.4 Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 8.4 7.6e 5.7 5.3 4. 3.6 Services 20.] |5.6e 21.7 |6.4 |6.0 ||.6 Government 8.8 9.6e |2.9 |4.3 6.3 7.0 * Employment means personal service performed for wages except farm agricultural, some local government service, railroad employment and other minor exceptions including armed forces. C – Contained in other manufacturing class. e — Estimated from U.S. Bureau of Census, County Business Patterns, 1966. Table Source: Washington State Employment Security Department. 196 Table F-4 Employment” and Payrolls for Eastside Counties, 1977. Employment Agriculture, Forest, Fish Mining Construction All Manufacturing Food & Kindred Apparel & Other Lumber & Wood Paper & Allied Printing & Publishing Smelting Refining Stone, Clay, Glass Machinery Transportation Equipment Other Manufacuturing Transportation & Public Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Services Government Unclassified * Same as for Table 4. Chelan Wages Employment I7,689 |..] 5.2 0.4 2.3 2.9 |5.4 20.2 4.4 |8.8 9.8 C – Contained in other manufacturing class. e — Estimated from U.S. Bureau of Census, County Business Patterns, 1966. Total (Mill. $) 191.7 |.4 9.9 0.6 2.2 3.2 |2.4 |4.] 4.] |4.0 |4.0 County kittitas Total Wages Employment (Mill. $) 6,215 63. percent |.7 0.6 4.4 7.3 |4.0 19.8 8.0 |2.4 3.0 4.4 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.5 |.9 2.2 4.6 5.7 4.8 4.3 26.6 |6.2 3.] 2.5 15.9 8. 25.2 35.] 0.| 0.3 Table Source: Washington State Employment Security Department. Yakima Wages Employment 41,736 |3.6 22.5 4.2 2].] 6.6 Total (Mill. $) 423.8 14.2 |6.3 4.2 |6.6 8.8 197 Table F-5. Community Dependent on Lumber, Plywood and Shake/Shingle Mills. Mill Capacity' (BF18 hr. shift) King County *Snoqualmie Falls Enumclaw * North Bend Black Diamond Carnation Renton Seattle Redmond Preston Woodenville Fall City Pierce County Steilacoom Eatonville Tacoma Sumner Orting Buckley Gig Harbor Graham Spanaway Snohomish County Darrington Arlington Marysville Granite Falls Snohomish *Sultan Lake Stevens Gold Bar Monroe Everrett *Startup Chelan County Leavenworth * Peshastin Kittitas County * Roslyn * Cle Elum Ellensburg Thorp Yakima County Naches Yakima White Swan Population 1,210 4,800 1,585 1,070 642 29,300 490,000 19,860 4,600 940 156,500 4,670 1,700 3,054 2,147 1,047 2,800 4,820 795 4,970 1,295 1,270 542 2,730 52,000 1,435 1,000 1,725 12,800 700 52,250 300,000 320,000 50,000 30,000 5,000 90,000 155,000 4,000 40,000 133,000 10,000 70,000 15,000 2,290,600 50,000 15,000 15,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 235,000 380,000 395,000 45,000 147,000 35,000 25,000 10,000 40,000 176,000 20,000 20,000 130,000 130,000 70,000 50,000 10,000 60,000 365,000 80,000 • Heavy apparent dependence on timber processing and located near Alpine Lakes Area. • Mill capacities do not include pulp mills. Tacoma's pulp capacity is about 1,090 tons/day. Everett's is 901. Lockwood's Directory of Pulp and Paper Industry. Source: Population from Wash. State Pocket Data Book Mill Capacity from Post's 1979 Directory of Forest Products Industry And DNR's Forest Products Directory, 1978. Ratio Capacity/Population 247.9 66.7 31.5 28.0 7.8 3.1 0.3 0.2 15.2 16.0 14.6 10.7 8.8 4.9 4.7 224.5 135.7 81.9 56.6 29.6 27.0 19.7 18.5 14.6 3.4 13.9 130.0 40.6 3.9 85.7 7.0 Process Used to Develop Economic Analysis. Recent Forest Service analysis shows that the primary determinant of the level of allowable short- term timber harvest is the amount of timber available for harvest from slow growing mature and over mature tree stands and the restrictions placed on the rate of Converting these stands to young, vigoriously growing ones. Table F-6 lists the sum of the mature acres available for harvest in the Short term in each alternative. For each resource Complex and each alternative, the harvest level resulting from the maximum allowable conversion rate was calculated for the period 1980 to 2000 assuming clearcutting methods for the westside and the eastside high capability areas. Shelterwood and Selection harvesting were assumed for the eastside low capability areas. Table F-6. Average Annual Harvest 1980 – 2000. Alternative Resource Complex A B C D E tº- - - - - -º thousands board feet — — — — — — Middle Fork Snoqualmie 4.8 0.5 0.7 4.0 2.9 |-90 5.5 2.4 2.2 3.1 3.0 Kachess 8.9 3.1 2.7 6.4 5.8 Teanaway 4.6 1.1 1.6 2.6 2.5 Highway 97 6.9 3.8 4.7 6.1 5.5 Icicle 1.9 0.8 0.8 1.2 0.9 U.S. 2 East 3.4 1.1 1.3 1.7 1.6 U.S. 2 West 14.1 5.2 7.5 10.1 7.5 Total Management Unit 50.0 18.0 21.6 35.3 29.7 198 Table F-7 lists the potential average annual harvest resulting from the above simulation assumptions. Table F-7. Area of Mature Commercial Forest Land Available for Harvest." Alternative Resource D E Complex A B C = m, m = - * thousands board feet ------ Middle Fork Snoqualmie 10,662 1,664 2,037 10,192 7,132 |-90 10,435 9,441 9,231 11,209 10,791 Kachess 21,669 13,868 12,187 22,949 20,178 Teanaway 13,069 5,367 6,802 10,069 8,821 Highway 97 23,501 16,956 20,260 23,874 22,399 lcicle 5,484 3,890 4,034 5,950 4,478 U.S. 2 East 7,670 5,073 5,933 7,655 7,415 U.S. 2 West 21,871 13,506 17,229 21,109 15,114 Total Management Unit 9 114,361 69,765 77,713 113,007 96,328 This table does not include lands classified in the marginal timber component. such lands are presently uneconomical for harvest and therefore not included in this short term economic analysis. Stumpage returns, timber sale preparation, ad- ministration costs and planting costs were calculated for each year of the 20 year analysis period. These were summed and discounted at 10 percent, then converted to an annual equivalent. Road construction, reconstruction and maintenance for each resource complex in each alternative were estimated. The road system was assumed complete after 50 years which corresponds to the Conversion period for lands in the standard timber component. Over the 20 year analysis period, it was assumed that each year 2 percent of the proposed Construction and reconstruction was accomplished. By 2000, 40 percent of the proposed roads are expected to be constructed. Costs of construction, reconstruction and maintenance were estimated for each year of the 20 year analysis period, discounted at 10 percent, then converted to an annual equivalent. Trail construction, reconstruction and maintenance for each alternative and each resource Complex were estimated. It was assumed that the proposed trail system would reach full development by 2000. It was assumed that five percent of construction and reconstruction would be accomplished each year. Costs were calculated each year for 20 years. Each year's Costs were discounted at 10 percent, summed, then Converted to an annual equivalent. For each resource complex in each alternative, the acres for the four dispersed recreation opportunity Spectrum Classes (ROS) were tallied for the current situation and at full development. For each ROS Class, an estimate was made of the number of annual recreation visitor days per acre which could be supplied while maintaining the recreation ex- perience appropriate to the ROS class. It was assumed that the ultimate ROS configuration would be achieved when the road system was fully developed in 50 years. Acres and average RVD's per acre were adjusted over the 20 year analysis period to reflect the change from the current situation to the completed situation. Supply of recreation by ROS Class was calculated for each year. To estimate demand by ROS class, data on 1978 use was gathered by recreation activity in each resource Complex. Each activity was distributed to the appropriate ROS classes to arrive at current use. This figure was increased by 2.9 percent per year to project a 40 percent increase in local population' and a 30 percent increase in per capita participation in outdoor recreation by the year 2000”. Dispersed recreation use was estimated by compar- ing estimated supply with projected demand in each resource Complex and for each opportunity spec- trum. In most cases, as long as demand was less than supply, use was assumed to be equivalent to demand. When projected demand exceeded estimated supply, use was assumed to equal supply. In the Middle Fork Snoqualmie and loicle Resource Complexes the projected demand figures were judged to be too low, and use in all cases was assumed to equal supply. In some cases, projected demand for “primitive” and “semi-primitive” recreation exceeded supply in all years. Exceptions were the Middle Fork Snoqualmie Resource Complex, due to artifically low use in 1978, and the Teanaway Resource Complex, which had an excess of “semi-primitive motorized” and “semi- primitive non-motorized” in all years. I-90, U.S. 2 East, and U.S. 2 West showed a deficit in “roaded natural” recreation in most years and alternatives. 'Washington State Population Forecast, Office of Financial Management. *Regional Recreation Data Program for the Northwest Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission, in 1975. The Middle Fork Snoqualmie and loicle Complexes were assumed to have no Surplus, as mentioned above. The Highway 97 Complex showed a deficit in some alternatives, while Kachess and the Teanaway Complexes generally displayed a surplus of “roaded natural” opportuntities. Costs of dispersed recreation management were assumed to be a function of the acres to be managed. Since the total acres to be managed did not vary significantly between alternatives, dispersed recreation management costs were dropped from the trade-off analysis. For developed recreation, the trade-off analysis was Confined to developed camping, since that is the only developed recreation activity which changes significantly by alternative. The supply of developed Camping in RVD's per year in each alternative was calculated by the following formula: the PAOT (persons-at-one-time) capacity available, multipled by the number of days in the use season, multiplied by 2 (the number of RVD's per 24 hours), multiplied by 0.3 (effective capacity of campgrounds). It was assumed that the campgrounds proposed in Alternatives B and E would be built in 20 years, at an average rate of 5 percent per year. In Alternative C, it was assumed that the same development would take place in the first 10 years as in B and E. It is also assumed that the additional campgrounds proposed in C will not be built in the first 20 year period. The demand for developed camping and the “rural” ROS class were projected in the same fashion as the demand for dispersed recreation (i.e., a 2.9 percent increase per year over the 1978 use figures). In all cases, the projected Supply is less than demand. Therefore, use was assumed to be equal to the Supply. Costs associated with developed recreation are available as a Special report to this DEIS. For each of 20 years, the costs and expected receipts were calculated and discounted at 10 percent, then con- verted to an annual equivalent. For pay camp- grounds, receipts were estimated at $.20 per RVD, based on 1978 data. In the trade-off analysis, it was assumed that the change in timber receipts and road costs from Alternative D was due to withdrawal for unroaded recreation, developed campgrounds and changes in visual management. Changes in timber receipts and road costs due to developed campgrounds were assumed proportional to the acreage withdrawn for campgrounds. Changes due to unroaded recreation were assumed proportional to the remaining acreage withdrawals. In addition, changes in trail costs were 199 attributed to changes in acreage devoted to un- roaded recreation. Changes in timber receipts due to visual management were the changes in excess of those attributed to above acreage withdrawals. For example, if acreage withdrawals amount to 30 percent of the mature acres available for timber pro- duction in D, and timber receipts by 40 percent, than the difference (10 percent) is attributed to change in visual management. Impact Analysis The economic impact of changing timber harvest level and recreation use on local employment and in- come was estimated by using input-output models developed for the RARE II analysis. These models were based on 1972 data. Income was updated to 1979 levels using the Consumer Price Index. Input-output models were used for Chelan, Yakima, Kittitas, King, Pierce and Snohomish Counties com- bined. The impact of a change in harvest level in a resource complex was simulated by an increase in production levels of the milling sector in the county where the milling is assumed to take place. Table F-8 shows the log flows to mills assumed for each resource complex. To assess the impact of dispersed and developed recreation changes on employment or income, it was necessary to estimate the amount of the following activities: developed camping, dispersed camping, fishing, big game and small game hunting, appreciative use of wildlife, water recreation, skiing, picnicking, dispersed motorized and dispersed non- motorized recreation. Use figures for 1978 were used to calculate the proportion of dispersed and developed recreation falling onto each of the ac- tivities. Those proportions were assumed to remain COnStant over time. Based on expenditure studies gathered for the RARE ll analysis, the impact of each of these activities on local economics was estimated for each alternative and each resource complex. It was assumed that the county where the recreation took place received the economic impact. Estimated responses to changes in RVD's assume that all recreation expenditures measured are im- ported from outside the county. This is probably most appropriate to the eastside resource complexes which receive a great majority of their use from the Puget Sound area. For the westside counties, the im- pacts are probably overstated, since a decrease in expenditures on outdoor recreation in the county would be partially offset by increase in expenditure for other goods. Table F-8. Assumed Distribution of Harvest to Mills. County of Destination Resource County of Complex Harvest Chelan Kittitas Yakima King-Pierce-Snohomish -------------- percent — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Middle Fork Snoqualmie King - - - 100 |-90 West (Snoqualmie N.F.) King - - - 100 |-90 East (Wenatchee N.F.) Kittitas - 8 51 41 Kachess Kittitas - 8 51 41 Teanaway Kittitas - 8 51 41 Highway 97 Chelan, Kittitas 20 5 46 29 lcicle Chelan 90 - - 10 U.S. 2 East Chelan 90 - - 10 U.S. 2 West King - - - 100 SOURCE: Based on acreage of resource complex within the county and inter-county log flows described in the Washington Mill Survey 1976. º º Q// {{///£3%iº-2, % * w }\,' & º º Wºl | ?, ?, 7%//*/ % º?”, º,<> < ./X º” …" Zh. C A// - w *. - - -", *4) aſ://**** y ſ sº % %. A. *_{ſ ſ Ž º | L 200 Appendix G Wildlife and Plants Table G-1. Sensitive Plants Occurring in the Alpine Lakes Area.' SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME White Oregon Anemone Jessica's or Pullman Aster Tweedy's Reedgrass Olympic Mtns. Paintbrush Magenta Paintbrush Branching Chaenactis Thompson's Chaenactis Anemone oregana var. felix Aster jessicae amagrostis tweedyi Castilleja parviflora var. Olympica Castilleja parviflora var. albida Chaenactis ramosa Chaenactis thompsonii Table G-2. Acres of Wildlife Habitat Plant Community Groups. Plant Community Group Claytonia megarhiza var. nivalis Clematis occidentalis var. dissects Cryptantha thompsonii Delphinium multiplex Delphinium viridescens Douglasia laevigata var. laevigata Douglasia nivalis var. dentata Erigeron leibergii Eriogonum umbellatum var. hypoleium Gentiana douglasiana Geum rossii var. depressum Hackelia diffusa var. arida Hackelia Venusta Hydrophyllum capitatum var. thompsonii lliama longisepala Lathyrus nevadensis var. puniceus Lewisia tweedyi Lomatium cuspidatum Lomatium thompsonii Penstemon barrettiae Physaria alpestris Poa Curtifolia Sedum lanceolatum var. nesioticum Sedum lanceolatum var.nupicolum Sidalcea oregana var. calva Silene seelyi Talinum okanoganense Valeriana Columbiana Wenatchee Claytonia No common name Thompson's Crypthantha Kittitas Larkspur Wenatchee Larkspur Smooth Leaved Douglasia Snow Douglasia Leiberg's Fleabane Sulpher Eriogon Douglas gentian Sieversia Rose Sagebrush Stickweed Showy Stickweed Wooley Breeches Chelan Globe Mallow Nutall's peavine Tweedy's Lewisia Pointed-leaved Lomatium Thompson's Desert Parsley Barrett's Penstamen NO Common name Little Mt. Bluegrass NO Common name No Common name Oregon Sidalcea Seely's Campion Okanogan Talinum Wenatchee Valerian 'List subject to designation and revision by Regional Forester. A map showing the sites and areas for each identified species will be included in each working field copy of the final Wilderness Management Plan. Meadow” Deciduous" Cliffs Resource Riparian' Grass Forest, Rim Complex Water Alpine Conifer” Shrub Talus Total sºme eme sº ºne sºme sºme me me sºme smºº smºº sºme sº sºme eme * = * = * Acres -------— — — — — — — — — — — — Middle Fork 77 1,777 32,112 1,458 1,347 36,771 Snoqualmie |-90 4,216 “ 3,769 41,499 3,494 3,429 56,407 Kachess 10,678 “” 11,871 75,750 1,478 14,765 114,542 Teanaway 59 12,789 41,307 570 21,521 76,246 Highway-97 4.18 4,423 65,905 1,624 3,838 76,208 lcicle 421 3,660 35,482 1,338 2,364 43,265 U.S. 2 East 1,670 6,001 36,797 5,102 4,595 54,165 U.S. 2 West 955 8,402 68,703 7,406 4,085 89,551 Total 18,494 52,692 397,555 22,470 55,944 547,155 Per cent 3% 10% 73% 4% 10% 100% ºness 8,440 116,363 108,028 21,314 139,216 393,361 aSOſ) Ridge 498 3,061 16,563 1,023 2,119 23,261 * Includes 2,560 acres of reservoir ** Includes 9,300 acres of reservoir "Reproduces and feeds in or near water. Includes riparian deciduous, bare soil, stream, lake and reservoir ecoclass types. *Reproduces and feeds in or near the ground. Includes dry meadow, moist meadow, other grass dominant, sage-bitterbrush dominant, subalpine species and alpine meadows ecoclass types. Also includes log, old and dead tree habitat components. *Reproduces in coniferous trees; feeds everywhere. Includes Douglas fir dominant, hemlock-cedar, ponderosa pine, mixed Conifer, true fir, and lodgepole pine ecoclass types. “Reproduces in deciduous trees and bushes, feeds everywhere. Includes aspen, other brush and shrub dominant ecoclass types. *Reproduces and feeds in or near cliffs, rims, caves, and talus. Includes talus, cliff and rim ecoclass types. 201 Wildlife Vulnerability and Diversity Table G-3 is a tally of the number of wildlife species in each plant community group along with the relative vulnerability of species to habitat modifica- tion or loss. In general, the greater the number of plant communities or successional stages used by a wildlife specie, the lower is the measure of “vulnerability” of the specie (Hanley and Taber 1979). wildlife plant community map was drawn and used to estimate inherent diversity while the timber size Class map was used to estimate induced diversity. Together they reflect total diversity. Table G-4 shows the relative diversity for the resource complexes and Wilderness. Table G-3. Wildlife Vulnerability. Plant Number Vulnerability Community species Group' present High Medium Low 1 48 24 12 12 2 75 12 35 28 3 96 13 73 10 4 33 3 26 4 5 19 9 6 4 271 61 152 58 "See footnote in Table G-2 for descriptions of plant community groups. Diversity of forest ecosystems is recognized by many as a good measure of the welfare of wildlife (Margalef 1969, Thomas 1979). For example, where a Conifer forest and deciduous forest or two succes- Sional stages came together, the resulting “edge” usually creates a wildlife habitat richer than the ad- joining plant communities or successional stages. It is Forest Service policy to “provide for species diver- sity...” There are two types of edge, one of which is under the direct influence of a land manager. Inherent edge results from the meeting of two plant communities. This may come about because of change in soil type, topography, geomorphic differences, or changes in microclimate. For planning purposes, inherent edge is taken as given. induced edge results from the meeting of succes- sional stages within a plant community. This may oc- cur through management practices (logging, road building) or from natural phenomena (fire, disease, floods). These factors tend to shift plant com- munities toward earlier, less mature, Successional stages, thus creating edge and diversity for wildlife. The affected environment of the Alpine Lakes Area features both inherent and induced diversity. A Table G-4. Relative Wildlife Diversity in the Alpine Lakes Area.' Diversity Induced Edge Resource Inherent Edge (Man-Caused) Complex (Natural Diversity) Diversity Middle Fork Snoqualmie |Ow low |-90 low high Kachess |Ow high Teanaway medium medium Highway 97 low medium lcicle medium medium U.S. 2 East high (west, south, north) medium low (east) U.S. 2 West |Ow high (except low on western portion) Wilderness medium (except low in forested valleys and high elevation areas) N/A Nason Ridge medium high "Key to diversity measure: High — Four or five plant communities represented and mixed together throughout area. Four to five tree size classes represented and mixed together throughout area. Medium – Two or three plant communities dominate area in large segregated blocks or mixed together. Two or three tree size classes dominate area in large segregated blocks or mixed together. Low — Predominantly one plant Community. Predominantly one size Class. 202 Table G-5. Animals of Special Interest in the Alpine Lakes Area.' Common Name Gray Wolf Wolverine Fisher Heather vole Bald eagle Great gray owl Spotted owl Flammulated owl White headed woodpecker Lewis woodpeckers Williamsons sapsucker Northern three- toed woodpecker Western bluebird Black swift Peregrine falcon Osprey Tailed Frog Pacific giant Slamander 'List subject to designation and revision by Regional Forester. Scientific Name Canis lupus Gulo gulo Martes pennanti pacifica Phenacomys intermedius Haliaeetus leucocephalus Strix nebulosa nubulosa Strix occidentalis Otus flammeolus Picoides albolarvatus Asyndesmus lewis Sphyrapicus thyroideus Picoides tridactylus Sialia mexicana occidentalis Cypseloides niger Falco peregrinus Pandion haliaetus Ascaphus truei Dicamptodon ensatus Presence” + Special Interest Federal “Endangered" specie. Range needs verification. Population declining. Human activity including in Wilderness may adversely effect species. Population declining. Few reported in Washington. Widely distributed, but sensitive to habitat distur- bance. Federal “threatened” species. Utilize Skykomish River as feeding grounds and roost sites in area. Occasional winter migrant. Washington is extreme periphery of its range. Population declining with removal of old growth habitat. Population status unknown. Population status unknown. Requires tree snags for nesting. Common in Washington. Needs tree snags for nesting. Uncommon summer resident of East Cascades. Fire suppression and insect control may effect adversely. Population declining west of Cascades but stable On east side. Population status unknown. Federal “Endangered” specie. Population status unknown. Uncommon summer resident in Washington. Population status unknown. Population status unknown. * + indicates that the species has been reported seen in the Alpine Lakes Area. 2 indicates that the species natural range occurs in the Alpine Lakes, but no sightings have been reported in recent years. 203 Timber Capability Timber Capability is a measure of the land's in- herent, natural or intrinsic ability to grow stands of commercial forest timber. It is a function of soil, climate, and elevation. Capability does not take into account human activities, management decisions, policies, economic standards, regulations, or utiliza- tion practices. These factors were considered in the next stage during suitability analysis. From this lat- ter analysis, land available for harvest was displayed and used in developing alternatives. The system used to map timber capability in the Alpine Lakes management unit was based upon the Forest Service Soil Resources Inventory (SRI). The entire Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests were mapped into soil units. Units were dilineated by physical, climatic, and biological characteristics which also reflect different levels of timber productivity. There are several advantages to using this System. First, it provides relative timber productivity based upon soil. Soil is the basic component of timber growth. Second, it provides clues to why timber stands grow the way they do. The system shows, for example, whether a physical, climatic or biological factor is limiting or causing high productivity. Third, the mapping system exists for the entire manage- ment unit. Timber productivity mapping for Alpine Lakes was designed to be consistent with the level and detail of planning. Three levels of productivity were mapped. All levels represent commercial forest land as defin- ed by yields greater than 20 cubic feet per acre per year. The Soil Resource Inventory is particularly adaptable to this level of precision. Each Soil unit was rated to the degree it contributes to timber pro- ductivity. The reader must realize that under a generalized mapping system, inconsistency may ex- ist between maps and specific field points. Timber capability was rated separately for the Sno- qualmie and Wenatchee National Forests. There were two reasons for this. First, climate and soil dif- ferences exist between the east and west slopes of the Cascades. Second, because the soil resource in- ventory for each Forest was prepared independently, there were differences in terminology used. Therefore, factors used to determine timber produc- tivity were selected based upon: 1) the ability to in- Appendix H Timber fluence or differentiate between different levels of º º tº ſº tº timber productivity and 2) the abiltiy to delineate or Timber Suitability differentiate between soil units. Timber suitability is a measure of the desirability or appropriateness of using a land area primarily for The following are available as special reports to this wood fiber production. It differs from timber capabili- DEIS: ty which measures the land's inherent natural or in- trinsic ability to grow commercial forests. Suitability 1. Relationship between productivity class and site takes into account such things as accessibility, index. regeneration potential, existing facilities, unstable 2. Steps used to rate and map timber productivity. soils, and other factors. Four levels of suitability are 3. Timber productivity coefficients. used to show relative wood fiber production oppor- 4. Description of commercial tree species found in tunities as Compared to other established uses of the Alpine Lakes. the land. 5. Volume of biological and potential yield separated by forest. The capability factors and current activities used to analyze suitability fall into the following categories: Table H-1 shows the acres of timber capability for the eight resource complexes and Nason Ridge. 1. Activities which are fixed by laws, executive orders and regulations. Table H-1 Capability — National Forest Acreage Summary. Timber Productivity A B C Total Unproductive Total (High) (Medium) (Low) Commercial Lands National Forest Forest Resource Land Land Complex Middle Fork Snoqualmie 2,760 8,344 6,362 17,466 4,069 21,535 |-90 8,746 7,726 5,780 22,252 9,218 31,470 (Snoqualmie N.F.) 1,370 3,365 4,855 9,590 1,558 11,148 (Wenatchee N.F.) 7,376 4,361 925 12,662 7,660 20,322 Kachess 22,107 16,907 1,897 40,911 23,772 64,683 Teanaway 3,082 16,819 9,155 29,056 37,098 66,154 Highway 97 2,068 19,273 21,075 42,416 17,636 60,052 lcicle 1,768 6,008 3,125 10,901 11,990 22,891 U.S. 2 East 4,277 11,331 3,526 19,134 16,504 35,638 U.S. 2 West 9,550 16,963 21,217 47,730 22,018 69,748 Total 54,358 103,371 72,137 229,866 142,305 372,171 Nason Ridge 5,717 7,218 239 13,174 7,140 20,314 - 205 2. Factors which have economic limitations for wood fiber production. 3. Other activities or uses which have become established and where land commitments are ir- retrievable. 4. Other resources which would suffer irreversible damage under current timber management technology. The specific factors which apply to Alpine Lakes timber suitability were listed by their relative level of suitability. The four levels of suitability were: Unsuitable Noncommercial and non-forest land Inaccessible lands Unstable soils subject to irreversible damage Regeneration problems (not possible in 5 years) Powerlines Highways Railroads Existing ski areas Low Suitability Wildlife habitat for rare and endangered species Plant communities for rare and endangered species Land withdrawals and encumbrances Developed recreation sites and influence zones Class I and Il stream influence zones Cultural sites High risk road access on productivity level C timber capability lands Moderate Suitablity Municipal watersheds High risk road access on productivity level A and B timber capability lands Level C timber capability lands High Suitability Low and moderate risk road access on productivity level A and B timber capability lands. Timber Productivity Assumptions 1. The biological potential and potential yields pro- jected in this Environmental Statement reflect the ef- fects of a fully regulated forest with a balanced age class distribution. This approach was taken because: a. A calculation of a short term annual harvest level would not be statistically valid using the Small ran- dom sample of data available. b. The steady-state outputs show the true value and productivity of the land; what the land is capable of producing under a fully regulated state. c. Steady-state outputs allow comparison of alter- natives based on management technology rather than the inefficiencies and inconsistencies found in the natural development of the forests. d. Steady-state outputs are more easily understood and more readily acceptable by people outside the forestry and forest industry professions. These long term, steady-state yields do not reflect and are not analogous to the programmed allowable harvest which can actually be scheduled for the management unit. The actual potential yield will be calculated as part of the working circle scheduling models by timber management and forest planning. 2. All commercial forest land has the potential to res- pond to intensive management practice. 3. The defined timber classes will grow as predicted by managed yield tables. 4. The utilization standards for standing timber are seven-inch to four-inch top. 5. Potential yield from marginal lands is not available for harvesting until technologically feasible. 6. Age at first commercial harvest into managed stands is 40 years. 7. All reforestation backlog acres will be stocked. 8. A complete range of logging systems will be need- ed to harvest the regulated lands. Specific logging systems to be used will be determined through a feasibility analysis and project planning. | ºc-º 206 Table H-2. Timber Component Acreage Summary By Forest. Timber Component Alternative A B C D E Snoqualmie Forest Standard 33,494 4,969 6,416 14,745 9,451 Special 22,047 28,751 27,402 39,385 37,868 Marginal 11,933 3,128 3,317 11,834 4,902 Total CFL 67,474 36,830 37,135 65,964 52,221 Unregulated 4,529 36,000 35,872 6,169 19,736 Noncommercial 30,428 29,601 29,424 30,298 30,474 TOTAL 102,431 102,431 102,431 102,431 102,431 Wenatchee Forest Standard 56,617 6,543 8,117 15,524 14,725 Special 64,258 74,296 76,885 102,423 94,651 Marginal 9,471 4,212 4,302 9,712 7,361 Total CFL 130,398 85,051 89,304 127,659 116,737 Unregulated 18,514 64,459 59,848 19,213 32,224 Noncommercial 120,828 120,230 120,588 122,868 120,779 TOTAL 269,740 269,740 269,740 269,740 269,740 Total Management Unit 372,171 372,171 372,171 372,171 372,171 Table H-3. Volume Summary By Forest. Biological Potential % Potential Yield Difference Difference sm, sº me mº sºme smº gº thousand board feet Alternative A Snoqualmie Forest 35,242 34,850 392 1.1 Wenatchee Forest 43,991 43,059 932 2.1 TOTAL 79,233 77,909 1,324 1.7 Alternative B Snoqualmie Forest 21,913 19,536 398 1.8 Wenatchee Forest 28,813 27,744 1,069 3.7 TOTAL 50,726 47,280 1,467 2.9 Alternative C Snoqualmie Forest 20,059 19,693 366 1.8 Wenatchee Forest 29,927 28,959 968 3.2 TOTAL 49,986 48,652 1,334 2.7 Alternative D Snoqualmie Forest 34,662 34,118 544 1.6 Wenatchee Forest 43,122 42,002 1,120 2.6 TOTAL 77,784 76,120 1,664 2.1 Alternative E Snoqualmie Forest ; § 1 : % Wenatchee Forest $7,656 66,055 1,601 2.4 TOTAL Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D Alternative E Table H-4. Timber Size Classes in Each Resource Complex. Resource Complex Middle Fork Snoqualmie |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 Icicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Middle Fork Snoqualmie |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 lcicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Middle Fork Snoqualmie |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 lcicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Middle Fork Snoqualmie |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 lcicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Middle Fork Snoqualmie |-90 Kachess Teanaway Highway 97 Icicle U.S. 2 East U.S. 2 West TOTAL Mature 12,041 13,830 27,763 10,044 26,672 6,208 8,558 28,152 133,268 7,283 12,591 25,119 8,319 25,293 4,516 7,861 17,926 108,908 3,870 3,277 26,851 4,6011 1,684 3,759 6,407 13,176 1,590 6,265 5,603 43,095 4,780 1,499 4,760 4,267 13,276 1,848 5,048 8,231 43,709 Seedlings and Saplings 7.999 2,248 2,122 222 38 230 2,160 7,188 Reforestation 3,719 8,353 212 2,451 1,768 224 3,911 9,484 260 2,306 1,650 520 370 244 3,803 9,153 Total 126,439 17,048 20,308 35,604 17,050 40,516 7,950 15,446 39,924 193,846 12,407 18,644 33,651 13,190 39,161 6,402 13,383 32,120 168,958 208 Appendix I Alpine Lakes Area Management Act of 1976 Public Law 94-357 94th Congress, H. R. 7792 July 12, 1976 2n 2ſt To designate the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, Mount Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests. in the State of Washington. Be it enacted by the Senate and I/ouse of /representati res of the United States of .I merica in ('ongre” assembled. That this Act may be cited as the “Alpine Lakes Area Management Act of 1976". PIN 1) l No:S AN1) PU. It I* SFS Sec. 2. (a) The Congress finds that : v e (1) The Cascade Mountains of the State of Washington between Stevens Pass and Snoqualmie Pass, commonly known as the Alpine Lakes region, comprise an environment of timbered valleys rising to rugged, snowcovered mountains, dotted with over seven hundred la ;es. displaying unusual diversity of natural vegetation, and providing habitat for a variety of wildlife. . . e tº & (2) This region is abundant in its nultiple resources, including an abundant source of pure water, commercial forests, an outdoor labora- tory for scientific research and educational activities, and opportunities for great diversity of recreational use, and enjoyment during all sea: sons of the year, in particular for quality hunting, fishing, motorized recreation, skiing, picnicking, camping, rock collecting, nature study, backpacking, horseback riding, swimming, boating, mºuntain climb- ing, and many others, together with the ºpportunity for millions of persons traveling through the periphery of the area to enjoy its unique values. e e (b) I’urposes of this Act: In order tº provide for public outdoor recreation and use and for economic utilization of commercial forest lands, geological features, lakes, streams and other resources, in the Čentraſoasºnic Mountains of Washington State by present and future generations, there is hereby established. Subject tº valid ºxisting rights an Alpine Lakes Area, including an Alpine. Lakes Wilderness, an “Intended Wilderness” and a management unit. “olml?rising ill’l?roxi- mately nine hundred and twenty thousand acres; . Sºº. 3. (a) The Alpine Lakes Wilderness (hereinaftºr referred to as “the wilderness”), the “Intended Wilderness", and the peripheral area (hereinafter referred to as the “management limit '), shall com: prise the areas so depicted on the map entitled “Alpine Lakes Area.” and dated June 1976, which shall be on file and available for public inspection in the Office of the Chief. Forest Servicº. Department of Agriculture. Thé Secretary of Agriculture (hereinaftºr referred to as the “Secretary") shall, as soon as practicable after the enactment of this Act, publish in the Federal Register a detailed desºil'tion and map showing the boundaries of the wilderness, “Intended Wilderness”, and the management unit. & (b) The Secretary shall administer the Fede al landls in the man- agenient unit in accordance with the laws, rules, and regulatiºns appli- cable to the national forests in such a manner as to provide for the management of all of the resources of the management unit. 16 USC 1131 note. Additions, pub- lication in Fed- eral Register. Alpine Lakes Area Manage- ment Act of 1976. 16 USC 1 132 note. 16 USC 1132 note. 16 USC 1 132 note. 16 USC 1132. note. Description and map; publica- tion in Federal Register. Notice of classi- fication, pub- lication in Fed- eral Register. Administration. Pub. Law 94-357 - 2 – July 12, 1976 (c) The Federal lands designated as the Alpine Lakes Wilderness shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this Act and with the provisions of the Wilderness Act (78 Stat. 890), which- ever is the more restrictive. (d) Federal lands depicted on the map and legal description as “Intended Wilderness” shall become part of the Alpine Lakes Wilder- ness at such time as the adjacent non-Federal lands, interests or other property become wilderness according to the provisions of section 3(e) of this Act, at which times the Secretary shall file a map and legal description of such additions in the Federal Register. (e) Non-Federal lands depicted on the map and legal description as “Wilderness” and “Intended Wilderness” shall become part of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness when acquired by the Federal Government in conformance with the acquisition program required by section 4 of this Act. LAND ACQUISITION AN1) Ext"H.ANGE Sec. 4. (a) Within the boundaries of the wilderness and “Intended Wilderness”, the Secretary is authorized and directed to acquire with donated or appropriated funds, by gift, exchange, or otherwise, such non-Federal lands, interests, or any other property, in conformance with the provisions of section 4 of this Act: Procided, That any such lands, interests, or other property owned by or under the control of the State of Washington or any political subdivision thereof may be acquired only by donation or exchange. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or diminish the existing authority of the Secretary to acquire lands and interests therein within the Alpine Lakes Area in accordance with established law. Notwithstanding any other pro- vision of law, any Federal property located within the management unit may, with the concurrence of the agency having custody thereof. be transferred without consideration to the administrative jurisdic- tion of the Secretary for use by him in carrying out the purposes of this Act. The Secretary shall exercise caution in exchanging land so as not to impair substantially the programmed allowable timber har- vest of the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forest. .Amounts appropriated from the Land and Water Conservation Fund shall be available for the acquisition of lands and interest for the purposes of this Act. (b) In exercising his authority to acquire property by exchange. the Secretary may accept title to any non-Federal property located within the wilderness and “Intended Wilderness”, and convey to the owner of such property any national forest land within the State of Washington under the jurisdiction of the Secretary : Pro rided. That the Secretary may accept cash for or pay cash to the grantor in such an exchange in order to equalize minor differences in the values of the properties exchanged. (c) (1) As non-Federal lands and interests in the wilderness and “Intended Wilderness” are acquired, and as they become protectable and administerable as wilderness, the lands shall become part of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, and the Secretary shall publish from time to time a notice of such classification in the Federal legister. It is the intention of Congress that acquisition of the “Intended Wilderness” shall be completed no later than three years after the date of enactment of this Act. At any time after three years from the date of enactment July 12, 1976 - 3 - Pub. Law 94-357 of this Act, an action may be instituted by an owner, all of whose lands within the boundaries of the “Intended Wilderness” have been nuanaged in such a way so as not to become unsuitable or unmanage- able as wilderness (except for disturbance affecting a minor land arca and found by the Secretary to have resulted from strictly accidental and unintentional circumstances), against the United States in the district court for the district in which such lands are located, to require the Secretary to acquire immediately all of said owner's interest, in such lands, interests and property and to pay in accordance with this section 4 just compensation for such lands, interest, and property the plaintiff may have which are not yet acquired pursuant to this section 4. By Felbruary 1 of each year, the Secretary shall report in writing to the Committees on Interior and Insular Affairs of the United States IIouse of Representatives and the Senate, on the status of negotiations with private owners to effect exchanges and acquisition of non-Federal property. (2) The United States will pay just compensation to the owner of any lands and interests acquired by and pursuant to this Act. Such compensation shall be paid either: (A) by the Secretary of the Treasury from money appropriated pursuant to this Act from the Landl and Water Conservation Fund, or from any other funds avail- able for such use, upon certification to him by the Secretary, of the agreed negotiatel value of such property, or the valuation of the property awarded by judgment, including interest at the rate of 8 per centum per annum from the date of the acquisition of the property or the late of ſiling an action according to the provisions of section 4(c) (1) of this Act, whichever is earlier, to the date of payment there for: or (13) by the Secretary, if the owner of the land concurs, with any federally owned property available to him for purposes of exchange pursuant to subsection 4(b); or (C) by the ScCretary using any combination of such money or federally owned property. (3) Just compensation shall be the fair market value of the lands and interests acquired by and pursuant to this Act, and shall be deter- mined as of the date of acquisition: /’ro rideſ/, howre rer. That the fair narket value of those lands acquired from owners who, from the time of enactment of this Act to the time of acquisition of any such lands, have managed all lands within the “Intended Wilderness” under their ownership so as not to make such lands unsuitable or unmanageable as willerness (except for disturbance a ſecting a minor land area and found by the Secretary to have resulted from strictly accidental and unintentional circumstances), shall be the sum of (A) the value of such lands and interests at the date of acquisition, plus (13) any loss of value of timber from casualty, deterioration, disease, or other natural causes from January 1, 1976. to the late of acquisition, with all existing and lost or damaged timber valued at the highest of (i) its Imarket value on the date of acquisition, (ii) its market value on January ... 1976, or (iii) the mean average market value between those (lates: . I nº pro rided further. That nothing in this Act shall be decmed or construed to deny to owners of non-Federal lands, or to change their rights to access to such lands or to manage the same for any otherwise lawful purpose prior to acquisition thereof by the Secretary. For the purposes of this section, the owner of property is deſined as the holder of fee title unless said property is subject to an agreement of sale entered into prior to April 1, 1976. Report to con- gressional committees. Payments. Enchantment Area, study. 16 USC 1132 note. 16 USC 1132 note. 16 USC S28 note. Notice, pub- lication in Federal Reg- ister. Transmittal to President and Congress. Hunting and fishing. 16 USC 1 132 note. Pub. Law 94-357 - 4 - July 12, 1976 W’l LIXIERN }.SS M.V. N.V. (; EMI F. N'T PI.V. N. SEC. 5. In conjunction with the preparation of a wilderness manage- ment plan for the wilderness designated by this Act, the Secretary shall prepare a special study of the Enchantment Area of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, taking into consideration its especially fragile nature, its ease of accessibility, its unusual attractiveness, and its resultant heavy recreational usage. The study shall explore the feasi- bility and benefits of establishing special provisions for managing the lºnchantment Area to protect its fragile beauty. while still maintain- ing the availability of the entire area for projected recreational demand. MU’ L'I’II*I.F. U'S E 1"I,.\ N. SEc. 6. (a) Within two years of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Act and other applicable acts governing the administration of the National Forest system and with full public involvement required by this and other pertinent law, prepare, complete and begin to implement in accord- ance with the provision of subsection (b) a single multiple-use plan for the Federal lands in the management unit. (b) The management of the renewable resources will be in accord- ance with the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 215; 16 U.S.C. 528–531), with other applicable laws and regulations of the United States, and will be such to obtain multiple use and sustained yield of the several products and services obtained therefrom. (c) The Secretary shall publish a notice of such plan in the Federal Register and shall transmit it to the l’resident and to the United States House of Representatives and to the Senate. The completed plan will take effect and will be implemented no earlier than ninety calendar days and no later than one hundred and fifty calendar davs from the date of such transmittal. º (d) The resources of the management unit shall be managed in accordance with the provisions of the multiple-use plan until such time as the plan may be revised according to the provisions of this section. (e) The Secretary shall review the multiple-use plan from time to time and, with full public involvement, shall make any changes he deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act. (f) The Secretary shall permit and encourage the use of renewable esources within the management unit, and nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit the conduct of normal national forest pro- grams during the formulation of, nor to prohibit inclusion of such programs in the multiple-use plan required by this section. .\ U"I'l IORITI ES () F Ti I F. S.T.ATE OF W.A.S. Il NGTON SEc. 7. (a) The Secretary shall permit hunting and fishing on lands and waters under his jurisdiction in accordance with applicable Fed- eral and State laws. Except in emergencies. any regulations pursuant to this subsection shall be issued only after consultation with the fish and game departments of the State of Washington. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of these agencies. 210 July 12, 1976 - 5 - Pub. Law 94-357 (b) Nothing in this Act shall deprive the State of Washington or any political subdivisions thereof of its right to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction within the area or of its right to tax persons, corporations, franchises, or other non-Federal property, in or on lands and waters within the area. AU"TI IOIRIZ.ATION OF AI*I*IROPRIATIONS SEc. 8. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for the acquisi- tion of lands and interests to carry out the purposes of this Act, not more than $20,000,000 in fiscal year 1977, $17,000,000 in fiscal year 1978, and $20,000,000 in fiscal year 1979, such sums to remain āvailable until appropriated without fiscal year limitation. To prepare the multiple-use plan required by section 6 of this Act, there is authorized to be appropriated not more than $500,000. Appropriation requests by the President to implement the multiple-use plan shall express in qualitative and quantitative terms the most rapid and judicious manner and methods to achieve the purposes of this Act. Amounts appro- priated to carry out this Act shall be expended in accordance with the Budget Reform and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 297). Approved July 12, 1976. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: HOUSE REPORT No. 94-1154 (Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs). SENATE REPORT No. 94-1002 (Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs). CONGRESSIONAL REcoRD, Vol. 122 (1976): June 8, considered and passed House. June 29, considered and passed Senate. Table I-1. Acres for Wilderness, Intended Wilderness and Management Unit. Administrative Wilderness East Side-Wenatchee NF Cle Elum RD Ellensburg RD Leavenworth RD Lake Wenatchee RD Subtotal West Side-Mt. Baker- Snoqualmie NF North Bend RD Skykomish RD Subtotal Total Acres For Wilderness Intended Wilderness Parcel 1-Chiwaukum Lake Wenatchee RD Leavenworth RD Parcel 2-Eightmile Leavenworth RD Parcel 3-Snow Creek Leavenworth RD Parcel 4-Ingalls Creek Leavenworth RD Parcel 5-Waptus Cle Elum RD Parcel 6-Pratt Lake North Bend RD Parcel 7-Taylor River North Bend RD Parcel 8-Sunday Creek North Bend RD Parcel 9-Tunnel Creek Skykomish RD King 55,210 64,911 120,121 120,121 16,369 2,488 6,227 893 Total For Intended Wilderness 25,977 Management Unit East Side-Wenatchee NF Cle Elum RD Ellensburg RD Leavenworth RD Lake Wenatchee RD Subtotal West Side-Mt. Baker- Snoqualmie NF Snoqualmie NF North Bend RD Skykomish RD Sutotal Total For Management Unit Total for Area 99,564 45,332 144,896 144,896 290,994 Snohomish 3,238 3,238 3,238 3,238 Chelan 111,791 15,116 126,907 126,907 2,087 30,446 8,159 1,939 5,089 47,720 347 33,247 71,719 43,759 149,072 149,072 323,699 Kittitas 59,906 59,906 59,906 12,729 12,729 146,623 103,326 249,949 249,949 322,584 Total 59,906 111,791 15,116 186,813 55,210 64,911 120,121 306,934 2,087 30,446 8,159 1,939 5,089 12,729 16,369 2,488 6,227 893 86,426 146,970 136,573 71,719 43,759 399,021 99,564 48,570 148,134 547,155 940,515 211 Appendix J Acknowledgements Interdisciplinary Planning Team Members and Their Qualifications GARY A. MORRISON – Recreation and Wilderness Planner DALE R. POTTER – Team Leader Education Education 1969 1962 New York State Ranger School, SUNY, Syracuse 197| (General Forestry Major) 1968 BS, Forestry, University of loaho Job History (Timber Management Major) º 1965-197| 1970 MS, Forestry, University of Washington Outdoor Recreation Major) 1972 1974 PhD Candidate, Forestry, University of Washington (Outdoor Recreation and Sociology Major) 1973 Job History 1963-1967 Research Technician, Intermountain Forest Experiment Station, Boise, loaho 1974 Timber Management, Silviculture of Ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir research. 1970-1976 Research Forester, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range 1975 Experiment Station, Seattle, Washington Outdoor Recreation Research 1976 1976-present Supervisory Forester, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee National Forests, Seattle, Washington, Land Management Planning 1977-present Professional Societies BS, Earth Science, Montana State University, Geology Major, Range Management Minor MS, Forestry Candidate, University of Montana, Wildland Recreation Management Major Forestry Technician, Deerlodge National Forest at Philipsburg, Montana. Range and Wilderness Management Range Conservationist, Deerlodge National Forest, Philipsburg, Montana. Range Wildlife and Wilderness Management Geologist, Deerlodge National Forest Geological Field Inventory and Mapping District Recreation Officer, Los Padres National Forest, Montery, Big Sur, California, Recreation Planning and Management Resource Forester, Los Padres National Forest, King City, California Resource Assistant, Fremont National Forest, Silver Lake, Oregon, Range, Wildlife, Watershed and Recreation Management Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Recreation-Wilderness Planner. Professional Societies Society of American Foresters Wildlife Society American Forestry Association RICHARD BOWIE – Landscape Architect Education Education 1958-1960 1973 BLA, University of Oregon 1966-1977 Job History 1972-1973 western Engineering, Eugene, Oregon, Planning and Site Design Job History 1973-1976 URS, Ken R. white Company, Denver, Colorado and Honolulu, Hawaii 1967-1969 1976-1977 Modoc National Forest, Alturas, California, Forest Landscape Architect 1969-1972 1977-present Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Landscape Architect Planner 1972-1977 Professional Societies American Society of Landscape Architects 1977-present Society of American Foresters Society for Range Management LARRY LACABE - Transportation Engineer Attended Gonzaga University, Economics, Pre-Law, Business Administration Completed 288 hours of instruction on transportation planning, road design, construction, and maintenance, soils, and geology Surveying Technician, Naches-Tieton District, Snoqualmie National Forest Party Chief and Road Designer, Naches-Tieton District, Snoqualmie National Forest Transportation Planner, South Technical Center, Wenatchee National Forest Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Transportation Engineer Planner. 213 RICHARD W. CULBERTSON – Silviculturist Education 1957 1978 1979 Job History BS, Forest Management, University of Washington Ecosystem Management Short Course, Colorado State University Silviculture Institute II, University of Washington and Oregon State University (currently enrolled) 1957-1958 Olympic National Forest, District Presale Forester 1960-1963 Willamette National Forest, District Presale Forester 1963-1968 Mt. Hood National Forest, Timber Management Assistant, Other Resource Assistant 1968-1969 Cispus Job Corps Center, Work Programs Officer 1969-1975 Fremont National Forest, Assistant Timber Staff Officer 1975-1977 Gifford Pinchot National Forest, District Silviculturist 1977-present Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Planner Silviculturist Professional Societies Society of American Foresters American Forestry Association DAVID REDMAN – Cartographic Supervisor Education 1970 1976 Job History 1975 1977 1978 1978 1978 1979 BA Geography, University of Washington (Geography major, Forestry minor) Postgraduate work - 125 quarter hours, Geography, Forestry and Cartography, University of Washington Consultant to Okanogan, Siuslaw and Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forests on public involvment methods, analysed public responses and interpreted results. Outdoor Empire Publishing, Seattle, WA. Field Researcher, Cartographer and Graphic Artist for map books on fresh water recreation. Mt. Baker-Snopoualmie National Forest, Seattle, WA. Team Leader Cougar Lakes Public Impact Study. Northwest Research Group, Seattle, WA. Completed field research for book on “Backcountry Lakes of Washington.” Prepared maps, text and layout for printing. Wasatch National Forest, Salt Lake City, UT. Supervisor - RARE Il public input analysis. Southeast Community Development Association, Seattle, WA. Demographic mapping and graphic layout for public meetings. Professional Societies Association of American Geographers Disciplinary Specialists Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Sylvia Brucchi, Public Information Specialist James Brain, Fire Specialist Robert LaRock, Hydrologist Jamia Murray, NEPA Specialist James Schmidt, Economist Robert Snyder, Soil Scientist Wenatchee National Forest Phillip McColley, Soil Scientist Granville Rhodus, Watershed Specialist Merle Wischnofske, Wildlife Biologist Other Forest Service Specialists Susan Carter, Joint Forest Archaeologist Raymond Leonard, Recreation Project Leader, Northeast Forest Experiment Station Daniel Meschtner, Area Mining Engineer Clint Williams, Area Forest Ecologist Agency and University David Dethier, Geologist, US Geological Survey Tomas Hanley, Wildlife Biologist, University of Washington Richard Taber, Wildlife Ecologist, University of Washington Support Services Cartographic Jocelyn Calebaugh Yvonne Stull Paula James Nancy Curfman Gail Curry Cathy Cullinane Pat Huggins Editing Jack Berry Clerk Typist Joanne Stacy Forestry Technician Sue Jordan Scott Peterson Ann Fink Diana Fletcher Joann Rieche Carol Witten David Arnold Jack Allingham John Mitchell Word Processing Naomi Wiggins Cathy Schaible Connie Sadler Robert Larick Melanie Sako Louise Poppleton Marcia Merritt Kari HakansOn Typesetting Marga NewComb 214 List of Those Sent Environmental Statement With publication of this Draft Environmental Impact State- ment, the public will have an opportunity to view alter- natives in detail and to comment Specifically on them as well as the preferred alternative. Copies of this Draft Statement will be sent to Federal, State and County agencies, organizations and individuals listed below. Copies will be available to others upon re- Quest. Congressional Senator Henry M. Jackson Senator Warren G. Magnuson Representative Don Bonker Representative Norm Dicks Representative Tom Foley Representative Mike Lowry Representative Mike McCormack Representative Joel Pritchard Representative Al Swift Federal Agencies Action, Director Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Agriculture, U.S. Dept of Agricultural Research Service Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Office of Equal Opportunity Rural Electrification Administration Science and Education Administration State Conservation Service Commerce, U.S. Dept of Defense, U.S. Dept. of Deputy Assistant Secreatry of Defense, Energy Environment and Safety U.S.A.F., Dept. for Environment and Safety U.S. Navy, Environment Protection Division Economic Opportunity, Office of Energy, U.S. Dept of Appendix K List of Those Sent Environmental Statement Bonneville Power Administration Environmental Affairs, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Environmental Protection Agency, Region X Federal Energy Regulatory Commission General Services Administration Health and Human Services, U.S. Dept of Director, Office of Environmental Affairs Regional Environmental Officer Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Dept of, Regional Administrator X Interior, U.S. Dept of Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Mines Director, Environmental Protection Review U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service Interstate Commerce Commission Labor, U.S. Dept of National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Endowment for the Arts National Marine Fisheries Service Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission Small Business Administration Transportation, U.S. Dept of Assistant Secretary for Systems Development Federal Aviation Administration, Northwest Region Federal Highway Administraion, Region 10 Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Policy and Plans U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Water Resources Council State Agencies, Washington State Governor Dixy Lee Ray Financial Management Office, Policy Analysis Division (A-95 Clearinghouse) Fisheries, Dept of Game, Dept of Historic Preservation Officer Natural Resources, Dept of Transportation, Dept of Local Chelan County Board of Commissioners lcicle Irrigation District King County Council Kittitas County Board of Commissioners Puget Sound Council of Governments Snohomish County Board of Commissioners City of Cashmere City of Cle Elum City of Ellensburg City of Gold Bar City of Leavenworth City of Liberty City of North Bend City of Peshastin City of Ronald City of Roslyn City of Skykomish City of Wenatchee Organizations Alpine Lakes Protection Society Alpine Veneer American Plywood Association Apple Country Snowmobile Club Backcountry Horesemen of Washington Boise Cascade Corporation Burlington Northern Railroad, Lands Division Federation of Western Outdoor Clubs Friends of the Earth Hi Lakers ldaho Pine Timber Associates Industrial Forestry Association Institute of Environmental Studies, University of Washington Institute of Governmental Research, University of Washington The Mountaineers Mt. Cashmere Inc. Murray Pacific Corporation North Cascades Snowmobile Club Northwest Mining Association Northwest Motorcycle Association Northwest Sled Dog Association Northwest Timber Association Pacific Northwest 4-Wheel Drive Association Pack River Company Pan Pacific Trading Co. 215 Peshastin Forest Products Seattle Audubon Society Sierra Club Signpost Swauk Mining District clo Harry Hale, Liberty Timber Purchasers Defense Fund Trailblazers U.S. Seaplane Pilots Association Washington Environmental Council Washington Forest Protection Association Washington Mineral Council clo Robert Pattie Washington Motorcycle Association Washington Ski Touring Club Washington State Snowmobile Association Washington State Sportsmen's Council Wenatchee Sportsmen's Group Western Environmental Trade Association Western Forest Industries Association Western Forestry and Conservation Association Western States Forestry Task Force Western Wood Products Association Weyerhaeuser Company W.-l. Forest Products Incorporated The Wilderness Society Wildlife Management Institute 3 90 ||| OF MICHIGAN 15 O2523 2797 216 4 ºt OS/38 02–013–01 ser U. In THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN (‘’”; . V --> - C - - - - - DATE DUE JAN 22 2001