The proposed harvest in Section 4 consists of two harvest units that would generate 

 approximately 28 EC A. No SMZ harvest is proposed along Meadow Creek. The 

 ground-based unit 1 is located at least 200 feet from Meadow Creek and the terrain is 

 relatively flat. Therefore, it is unlikely that soil disturbed during the harvest operation 

 would be transported to the stream. 



The second unit proposed in Section 4 is a cable unit on 60% slope. SMZ harvest is 

 proposed along the class II SMZ in this unit, although no closer than 50 feet from the 

 stream. Due to slope, felling operations would restrict the use of mechanized equipment. 

 In addition, cable yarding typically results in less potential soil displacement than ground 

 based operations. By designing this harvest unit with cable harvest and no ground based 

 harvest methods, the risk of sediment disturbance and delivery to streams would be 

 minimized. 



The proposed harvest in Section 16 is contained in within 6 units that would generate 

 approximately 205 EC A in the Meadow Creek watershed. Five of the units within this 

 section propose SMZ harvest although no SMZ harvest is proposed within 50 feet of any 

 channel. All of the proposed SMZ harvest would utilize cable yarding and hand felling. 

 With the proposed harvest implemented using (1) no mechanized felling equipment 

 within 100 feet of any stream channel; (2) the SMZ law; and (3) all applicable Forestry 

 BMP's, the risk for sediment introduction into Meadow Creek from harvest practices 

 would be minimized. 



Other proposed activities that would occur near streams are associated with the road 

 construction and prescribed burning. Approximately 2.2 miles of new road construction 

 would be implemented as part of this proposal that would generate approximately 8 ECA. 

 Included in the proposed road construction would be at least three stream crossings. 

 Stream crossings would be installed using all applicable BMP's and during periods when 

 no water would be flowing in the streams to minimize sediment deliver. A short-term 

 increase in turbidity may result from these activities, but with mitigation no adverse 

 impacts to beneficial uses would result. A 124 permit (Montana Stream Protection Act) 

 would be obtained prior to work in any stream. In addition, a 3 1 8 permit (short term 

 turbidity increase) may be required by the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. 



Prescribed burning in Units 4,6,7 & 8 of Section 16 and Unit 2 of Section 4 is proposed 

 to promote regeneration. Hand line or excavator lines, if constructed, would present a 

 sediment source, although potential for transport to the streams would be low due to the 

 untouched vegetation between the control line and the stream. The vegetative filter 

 would be protected by: 1) whole tree harvesting to reduce slash levels in the SMZ; 2) 

 piling existing slash to reduce bum potential in the SMZ; or 3) installing hand or 

 excavator fire line to reduce the risk of fire entering the SMZ. 



By implementing this alternative as presented and in accordance with the SMZ law and 

 all applicable forestry BMP's, it is unlikely that adverse long-term impacts to water 

 quality and beneficial uses would result from the harvesting and road construction. 



43 



