are skewed toward old stands. Alternatives B and C would harvest a large portion of these old 

 stands and convert them to nonstocked for a short period of time, <5 years, and then to a 1-40 

 year old classification. 



In Section 8 there is an existing irrigation ditch, which is generating sediment delivery to Upper 

 Willow Creek. A plan to install a diversion structure on the ditch and to stabilize a deeply 

 incised gully is included in Alternatives B and C but not in D. These modifications were made to 

 reduce the potential for sediment transport to the creeks. 



Three different types of harvesting would be utilized on this project: 1) Removal of all the timber 

 to simulate a stand replacing fire. 2) Retention of all Douglas fir and ponderosa pine while 

 harvesting all of the lodgepole pine, to mimic a mixed severity fire occurrence, and; 3) The 

 reduction in stocking of second growth lodgepole pine stands to between 302 and 436 stems per 

 acre which would mimic low intensity ground fires. For additional information on land 

 treatments see Table 2- 1 . 



STATEWIDE FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ITS ROLE IN THE 

 ALTERNATIVES 



The SFLMP was adopted in 1996, providing guidance in the management of all State forested 

 lands. This EIS and its associated alternatives were developed through an interdisciplinary team 

 approach, which, facilitated the incorporation of the Plan philosophies into each alternative and 

 the proposed management activities, and mitigation's that may be involved. The hydrologic 

 condition of watersheds, elk security cover, and old growth were driving issues in the 

 development of the alternatives. 



DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 



Alternative A - No-Action Alternative 



Alternative A defers treatment in all sections within the project area at the present time. No 

 additional revenue over what is currently being collected would be generate for the Common 

 School Trust Account. No new roads would be built and no road improvements would be 

 completed. Current management activities such as fire suppression and grazing would continue. 

 Recreational uses such as hiking, hunting, and berry picking would also continue. Natural 

 events, including plant succession, tree blow down, insect and disease outbreaks, and wildfires 

 would continue to occur. The progression of cover types toward older less vigorous stands that 

 are farther from historic conditions would continue. Following the appropriate level of MEPA 

 review, timber harvesting or road building could be proposed and undertaken in the future. This 

 alternative would not correct erosion problems associated with the ditch/gully in Section 8. This 

 no-action alternative will be used as a baseline for comparing environmental consequences of the 

 other three action alternatives. 



28 



