agriculture northeast swift integrated resource management...

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest

Service

March 2010

For Information Contact: Desiree Johnston

Saco Ranger District

White Mountain National Forest

33 Kancamagus Highway

Conway, NH 03818

603-447-5448

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/white_mountain/projects/projects/

Northeast Swift Integrated Resource

Management Project Townships of Albany and Bartlett

Carroll County, New Hampshire

Scoping Report

Prepared By

Saco Ranger District,

White Mountain National Forest

Views of Bear Mountain from Middle Sister, Albany, New Hampshire

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its

programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and

where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual

orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an

individual‟s income is derived from any public assistance program (Not all prohibited

bases apply to all programs). Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for

communication or program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should

contact the USDA's TARGET Center at 202/720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write the USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights,

1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC, 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272

(voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). The USDA is an equal opportunity provider and

employer.

Printed on Recycled Paper

NE Swift Project Scoping Report 1

Introduction

Forest Plan Management Direction

The proposed project has its roots in the White Mountain National Forest‟s Land and Resource

Management Plan, also known as the Forest Plan. The Forest Plan was approved in 2005 after

several years of extensive environmental analysis and collaboration with the public. Thousands

of people representing a variety of interests, sciences, and specialties joined in the effort by way

of public meetings, discussions, document reviews and comments, and scientific study to create

what is now the 2005 Forest Plan. The Plan is a programmatic framework that documents the

agreed-upon balance of multiple uses that meet society‟s needs while protecting, restoring, and

enhancing our natural resources.

The 2005 Forest Plan established the goals, objectives, and vision of the desired conditions for

the White Mountain National Forest and guides current land management activities on the forest.

The land base of the Forest is divided into Habitat Management Units (HMU) that serve as a tool

to ensure that wildlife habitats are well distributed across the Forest. HMUs contain a variety of

habitat and land types in a mix of Management Areas (MAs) and provide a framework for

analyzing project impacts to wildlife habitat at a local scale. The Northeast Swift Integrated

Resource Management Project area consists of the Northeast Swift HMU.

The Forest Plan allocated land to Management Areas (MA) that emphasize particular goals,

objectives, and desired conditions. Each MA also has a set of standards and guidelines that set

parameters on activities to ensure protection of the character and resources of the land. The

11,000 acre Northeast Swift project area includes the following Management Area allocations:

MA 2.1: General Forest Management allows for a range of uses and activities, including

timber harvest, prescribed fire, roads, motorized recreation such as snowmobiling, and developed

areas such as campgrounds. MA 2.1 is described in the Forest Plan on pages 3-3 through 3-8.

MA 6.1: Semi-Primitive Recreation emphasizes non-motorized recreation, but allows

motorized trail use in winter. Development levels are kept low and scheduled commercial timber

harvest and new Forest Roads are not allowed. Prescribed fire may be used to maintain viability

of fire- adapted communities such as pine, oak, and oak-pine. MA 6.1 is described in the Forest

Plan on pages 3-19 through 3-22.

MA 8.5: Scenic Area recognizes an area‟s natural beauty. Rocky Gorge Scenic Area is managed

to meet the objectives for which it was designated. Rocky Gorge is a high use Day Use

recreation facility. MA 8.5 is described in the Forest Plan on pages 3-61 through 3-67.

Northeast Swift Project Area

The Northeast Swift project area is bounded by the Northeast Swift Habitat Management Unit

(HMU), which includes approximately 11,000 acres of National Forest lands located within the

Swift River watershed, in the towns of Albany and Bartlett, New Hampshire. Please refer to the

attached project vicinity map. Habitats within this area include a mix of northern hardwoods,

oak-pine, mixedwoods, and hemlock/spruce/fir softwood stands. Perennial and intermittent

streams, small seeps and wetlands occur within the area. The terrain is variable but ranges from

flat, to moderately steep, and includes several steep escarpments. Elevations range from 650 feet

at the Swift River to 3,196 feet at the crest of North Moat Mountain.


Developed Recreational opportunities within the project area include the Covered Bridge

Campground and interpretive area, Rocky Gorge, Nanamocomuck Nordic Ski Trail, Falls Pond

Trail, South Moat Trail, Boulder Loop Trail, and Bear Notch snowmobile trail. This area is also

popular for dispersed camping, sport climbing, and casual walking. The Swift River is a popular

location for fishing, swimming, wading and scenic viewing.

The Northeast Swift project is the result of collaborative planning efforts by the Forest Service to

manage public lands and implement the White Mountain National Forest Land and Resource

Management Plan (Forest Plan). District managers and the interdisciplinary team identified

several needs and opportunities in the Northeast Swift project area responsive to Forest Plan

direction. The project proposes activities located within MA 2.1 lands with the exception of the

prescribed fire proposed in both MA 2.1 and MA 6.1 lands. Proposed project activities are

designed to meet Forest Plan goals and objectives for these lands.

The project proposes a variety of management actions for wildlife habitat, recreation, forestry,

fisheries, watershed restoration, prescribed fire, and transportation system improvements.

Project activities are proposed in areas near Bear Notch Road and Passaconaway Road, along

sections of the Nanamacomuck ski trail and at the Covered Bridge Campground, along the Swift

River and existing roads, and in areas allocated in the Forest Plan to “General Forest

Management” (Management Area 2.1) and “Semi-Primitive Recreation” (Management Area

6.1).

Proposed Action (What Are We Proposing To Do?)

The proposed action for this project is designed to promote desired vegetative, terrestrial and

aquatic habitat conditions outlined in the Forest Plan; provide a wide range of recreational

opportunities; provide a sustained yield of high quality sawtimber and other forest products; and

manage the transportation system to meet administrative and public needs.

The Saco Ranger District, White Mountain National Forest proposes to implement the actions

outlined below, and shown on the attached maps, in the Northeast Swift Integrated Resource

Management Project.

Silvicultural treatments and associated timber harvest including harvesting an estimated 8

million board feet of timber from approximately 1,800 acres;

Pre-commercial thinning and release of about 200 acres of young timber stands;

Up to 950 acres of prescribed burning;

Stream habitat restoration and improvement activities including:

Felling and in stream placement of trees along approx. three miles of Cilley Brook and

two unnamed fish-bearing tributaries to the Swift River;

Stream bank stabilization (1) along a road segment adjacent to Douglas Brook, (2) at a

former crossing location on Cilley Brook, (3) along the Swift River adjacent to Deer

Brook Road, and (4) on an unnamed tributary to the Swift River south of

Passaconaway Road;


Recreation improvements including (1) relocating two short segments of the

Nanamocomuck Nordic ski trail and replacing up to 12 trail bridges, (2) constructing a

new trailhead parking lot on Bear Notch Road, and (3) forestry treatments aimed at

enhancing esthetics and public safety at Covered Bridge Campground;

Forest transportation system management activities including:

Constructing three new Forest Roads, totaling approximately 1 mile;

Reconstructing an estimated 5.2 miles of five existing Forest Roads (FSR 5174, 26B,

28, 28A, and 602);

Relocating two short sections of Deer Brook road near Covered Bridge;

Constructing a “driveway” less than 500 feet in length and placing landings at three

locations along Passaconaway road, one along Bear Notch Road and along Deer Brook

road to a new landing just west of Covered Bridge; and

Reclassifying two existing unclassified spur roads (5158 and 5164), each

approximately 800 feet in length.

In addition to the activities outlined, the Proposed Action for this project has incorporated a

variety of project design features to minimize impacts to air quality and public health from

prescribed burning, reduce adverse impacts to scenic quality from timber harvest activities,

protect cultural resource areas, minimize impacts to forest visitors recreating in the project area,

protect trail integrity and maintain high quality wildlife habitat features.

All proposed project activities are expected to be implemented within the next 3 to 5 years.

Funding for projects activities will be budget dependent and may be scheduled over time as

funds become available.

Silvicultural Treatments

The table below shows the silvicultural treatments to be employed to accomplish Forest Plan

objectives. Reserve patches of uncut trees would be retained in clearcuts, and protective buffers

around vernal pools, cultural artifacts, and nest trees are included in the listed acres. Please refer

to the attached list of proposed units, prescriptions and proposed season of operation for further

details.

The Proposed Action includes harvesting commercial timber from approximately 1,780 acres,

plus up to 200 acres of non-commercial treatments, in order to foster red oak, yellow birch, paper

birch, aspen and softwood establishment.

A 7 acre permanent Wildlife Opening (WLO) is proposed for unit 38 following harvest. Stumps

and large rocks would be removed from this permanent opening, and residual brush piled and

burned. This WLO would be maintained through future prescribed burning or mowing.


Proposed silvicultural treatments to meet habitat management objectives, improve forest

health, provide forest products, and maintain oak/pine communities

Silvicultural Treatment Estimated Acres

Even Aged – Final Harvest ---

Regeneration harvest

Northern hardwood regeneration (clearcut, patch cut)

Mixedwood Overstory Removal (OSR)

Seed Tree in hardwood (aspen/birch)

Establish one or two permanent Wildlife Openings

(WLO)

434

41

37

7

Even-Aged - Intermediate harvest ---

Thinning to maintain oak-pine and mixedwoods habitat

Thinning to maintain hardwood habitat

Thinning to maintain pine habitat

23

97

10

Uneven-Aged Regeneration harvest

(20% of each Unit would be treated = 195 acres) ---

Group Selection to regenerate softwood in softwood habitat 30

Group Selection to increase softwood in mixedwood habitat 724

Group Selection to maintain and regenerate hardwoods 80

Group Selection to regenerate and increase oak-pine 88

Uneven-Aged - Regeneration harvest ---

Single tree selection to maintain and regen mixedwood habitat

Single tree selection to maintain and regen hardwood habitat

Single tree with groups selection to maintain and regenerate

mixedwood habitat

84

49

84

Prescribed Understory burn

Underburn 6 oak/pine areas to meet landscape objectives 950

Pre-Commercial Treatment ---

Pre-Commercial Stand Improvement treatments to improve

success of uneven aged regeneration treatments 200

* Acres are approximate

Pre-commercial Stand Improvement Treatments

Following harvest, regeneration success (species composition) would be monitored in created

openings (clearcuts and groups) and small diameter undesirable competing species would be

removed to „release‟ desired hardwood and softwood trees and improve their success of

establishing. Non-commercial sized trees (<5” diameter at breast height) would be removed

using hand tools, chainsaws or mechanical methods. Selected young crop trees of primarily oak,

pine, paper birch and yellow birch would have woody vegetation removed around them.


Young, non-commercial residual trees (<5” diameter at breast height) would also be removed

from within clearcut and patch cut stands with chainsaws or mechanical methods if needed to

insure that desired regeneration habitat is created.

The goal of proposed non-commercial treatments is to establish oak, pine, quality hardwoods,

and softwood regeneration. These pre-commercial treatments would occur several years after

harvesting is complete.

In order to encourage oak, pine, quality northern hardwood and hemlock regeneration, soil

scarification would be encouraged during harvest activities (preferably summer, fall and prior to

frozen ground in winter) to create a mineral seed bed. Soil scarification would increase the

chances that oak and pine seedlings would germinate, establish, and out-compete less desirable

species. This is especially true in even-aged clearcut treatments where snow-free conditions

would encourage regeneration of a variety of native species from seed and discourages stump

sprouting of existing (cut) trees.

Prescribed Fire

Prescribed fire is an effective tool to mimic natural disturbance. Prescribed burning is proposed

in this project in order to the maintain the existing oak/pine habitat located within the HMU.

Approximately 950 acres within the Deer Brook and Big Brook drainages would be underburned

in this project with the intent of reducing understory sapling competition for existing oak

seedling/sapling/poles and providing a seed bed for oak regeneration. These underburns would

achieve light and spotty burn intensities (a mosaic pattern) in order to provide a light treatment to

duff layers and dense and competing understory vegetation. Areas proposed for prescribed

burning include some of the areas proposed for commercial harvest treatments. Subsequent

prescribed burns of the same areas may be required to further reduce competing hardwoods and

increase oak and pine regeneration. Prior to burning, qualified Forest personnel would develop a

burn plan and trained personnel would implement the burn. Firebreaks (both natural and human-

made) would be employed to contain the burn to the intended area.

Stream Habitat Improvement and Restoration

The proposed project includes creating pool habitat along about three miles of Cilley Brook and

two unnamed fish-bearing tributaries to the Swift River. Trees growing within about 75 feet of

these streams would be felled and placed at strategic locations in stream channels. Hand crews

using chain saws and hand tools would perform this work during snow-free periods of the year.

The following stream restoration projects are also proposed in this project:

Seed and place perforated mat along an abandoned road segment off Bear Notch Road

above the “gabions” where exposed soil is at risk of erosion.

Reinforce a short section of stream bank where an old skid trail crosses Cilley Brook

using large woody material.

Coordinate with the Town of Albany to replace the double culverts with a single larger

culvert on an unnamed tributary crossing Passaconaway Road.

Replace an older culvert with a larger culvert on FSR 209 at an unnamed perennial

tributary to the Swift River west of unit 67.


Restoration activities to stabilize streambanks are proposed in four locations: along an road

segment adjacent to Douglas Brook, at a former crossing location on Cilley Brook, along the

Swift River adjacent to Deer Brook Road, and on an unnamed tributary to the Swift River south

of Passaconaway Road. Stabilization will consist of establishing vegetation growth by seeding

or planting, and re-contouring artificially steep slopes if necessary. Some replacement of riprap

may be necessary along the Swift River. If disturbance extends to adjacent riparian areas,

natural materials such as large logs or rootwads will be placed to dissipate energy during high

flows. In each location, work is expected to cover less than one acre of ground.

Recreation

Covered Bridge Campground Management

Potentially hazardous (dead or dying) trees would be removed to provide a safe recreation setting.

Trail Management

The Nanamocomuck Nordic ski trail would receive two trail relocations totaling approximately

½ mile. The relocations would be designed to avoid wet areas that are problematic for skiers and

maintenance. Up to 12 bridges within the project area would be placed where existing bridges

are deteriorated and where “wet” crossings are causing resource concerns.

Bear Notch Trail Access Parking

A parking lot designed to handle ten vehicles with trailers would be constructed near Falls Pond

Road (Forest Road 209). This area currently receives year round use but has limited parking.

New year round parking would serve all current uses including hiking, Nordic skiing,

snowmobiling and mountain biking.

Transportation System Management

A preliminary roads analysis in the Northeast Swift HMU resulted in proposals to construct,

reconstruct and maintain roads to facilitate hauling of wood products and equipment. It also

identified roads that can be classified and others that can be decommissioned.

Proposed transportation system management activities in this project include the following:

Reconstruct approximately 0.8 miles of existing FSR 5174 leading west from Deer Brook

and construct an additional 0.4 miles of new road to a proposed landing west of Haskell

Brook. The alignment for both sections is on or parallel to the Nanamocomuck Ski Trail

for a distance of approximately 6000 feet. Retain permanently the bridges and culverts

along this segment where coincident with the Nanamocomuck Trail to provide for

improved Nordic, hiking and mountain biking uses and reduce the current resource issues

caused at wet crossings.

Extend FSR 209 easterly with approximately 3000 feet of new road construction to

access units 73 and 74. The road extension would reduce skidding distances for current

and future management of this portion of the project area.

Reconstruct approximately 0.2 miles of FSR 26B (east of Bear Notch road and Douglas

Brook. Perform maintenance on the remaining 0.35 miles of this road.


Reconstruct Deer Brook Road (FSR 28 - 1.9 miles), Deer Brook–Spur A (FSR 28A – for

approximately 0.75 miles), and Big Brook road (FSR 602 - 1.43 miles).

Move two short sections of Deer Brook road near Covered Bridge further from the Swift

River and stabilize the existing riprap along the river near Covered Bridge. Stabilize

additional road sections near Covered Bridge with erosion matting and vegetation

plantings.

Reclassify two existing unclassified spur roads (5158 and 5164) that access existing

landings adjacent to Bear Notch Road, each approximately 800 feet in length.

Construct a “driveway” less than 500 feet in length and place a landing at three locations

along Passaconaway road (for units 32,33,37), along Bear Notch Road for unit 51, and

along Deer Brook road to a new landing just west of Covered Bridge

Construct a new road approximately 750 feet in length to a proposed landing behind

South Moat Trailhead.

Perform road maintenance on Falls Pond road (FSR 209) (1.94 miles).

Install waterbars and remove temporary culverts and bridges on „opened‟ roads upon

completion of timber harvest and stream restoration projects. Previously closed roads

shall be returned to a closed status.

Decommission the following spur roads off Deer Brook, Big Brook, and Passaconaway

roads that exceed current and foreseeable access needs:

Forest Road 28 UNK1, an unclassified spur off the end of FSR 28, 0.2 miles

Forest Road 5426, an unclassified spur off the end of FSR 28A, 0.3 miles

Forest Road 602 UNK 1, an unclassified spur off the end of FSR 602, 0.4 miles

Forest Road 5245, 0.167 miles in length has an existing landing approximately 300

feet from Passaconaway road that will meet current and future management needs.

Convert to trail status Forest Road 5169, an unclassified road that is the Wenona trail.

Design Features

All actions in the Northeast Swift project have been designed to meet particular management

goals while protecting resources. Three types of protective measures are integrated into this

projects design: Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, State of New Hampshire Best

Management Practices, and Design features.

Design Features define how and/or where particular Forest Plan standards and guidelinesare

applied to the project. They may also be management activities not directly associated with

standards and guidelines but would be implemented on the ground to address site-specific safety,

social or resource needs. Design features are applied when and where a specific activity included

in the alternative ultimately selected by the District Ranger may have a social, physical or

biological effect.

Prescribed Burning and Air Quality

Local public and fire stations would be notified prior to ignition of prescribed burns.

Emphasize wildland fire practices for this project (LRMP, Forest-wide, Wildland Fire p

2-32 to 2-33) including a prescribed burn plan that is integrated with other activities

within the project to ensure that fire is used appropriately to achieve ecological objectives

and to protect resources.


Use best available smoke management practices to assure that prescribed fire would

not result in adverse affects on public health and safety, or visibility in Class 1

airsheds (FP 2-33, G-4).

Retain as much as practical the existing standing dead and down woody material

during fuel reduction activities unless they are a safety hazard (FP 2-33, G-3).

Minimize prescribed fire impacts by implementing Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics

as described in the Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations (FP 2-

33, G-2).

Cultural Resources

No harvesting or equipment would be allowed in cultural reserve areas. Known cultural

sites located in or near proposed activities would be protected by marked reserve areas.

Monitoring the implementation of reserve areas in past timber sale harvests indicates that

reserve areas are effective in protecting cultural sites.

Scenery Management

Remove logging slash when within 50 feet of hiking trails and Forest boundaries.

Consider foreground visual effects when implementing silvicultural prescriptions near

Nordic and hiking trails, Covered Bridge campground, and within 100 feet of a nearby

residence. Tree selection, skid trail location, and group opening size are examples of

considerations.

Mark the backside of trees within 100 feet of trails.

Recreation

Post safety information and speed limit signs along Bear Notch snowmobile trail during

winter harvest activity where one lane would be plowed for one winter season.

Post safety signs along trails informing hikers of harvest activities.

Prohibit log hauling on Deer Brook road on weekends and holidays during summer and

fall to minimize conflict with recreation use.

Limit the number of skidder crossings of trails to protect trail integrity.

Wildlife

Maintain wildlife habitat features by reserving individual wildlife trees, den trees, and

hemlock trees within hardwood stands. Exceptions to this include hazardous trees, trees

located in final harvest units, or where skid trails or landings cannot be moved because of

land features (USDA. Forest Service, 2005a. Wildlife, G-3, pg. 2-33, USDA. Forest

Service, 2005b).

Retain beech trees with abundant bear claw marks as a food source for wildlife.


Purpose and Need For Change (Why Are We Proposing These Activities?)

Fire Dependent Habitat Maintenance and Restoration

Oak-pine natural communities require periodic disturbance like fire to regenerate and

successfully compete with the more vigorous northern hardwood communities. Fire is beneficial

to oak-pine communities in several ways- fire removes accumulations of dead branches and

leaves from the forest floor to provide a seedbed; fire opens up the understory and mid canopy

layers increasing sunlight and warmth; and fire reduces the more vigorous shade tolerant

northern hardwoods that compete with oaks and pines for light and growing space. Red oak

(Quercus rubra), red pine (Pinus resinosa), and to a lesser extent white pine (Pinus strobus)

have all developed adaptations that help them survive a fire that will kill competing vegetation.

These natural communities are fire prone. The leaves and needles of oak and pine are resistant to

decay and compaction and therefore dry quickly and provide fuel during wildfires that can

exhibit rapid rates of spread and burn more than the usual 0.1 to 5 acres seen in other WMNF

habitat types. In the distant past, portions of the proposed project area experienced regular

wildfires and intensive logging that provided the disturbance needed for oak-pine to perpetuate.

Since the mid 1900‟s however, fire has been aggressively suppressed in these oak-pine

communities and intervals between timber harvests have increased.

These communities are important to retain because they are somewhat rare on this National

Forest and represent a community type that provides a unique habitat component in the

ecosystem. Oak acorns and pine seeds are an important food source for a variety of wildlife.

Species associated with oak-pine stands like blueberry, huckleberry, and grasses, also provide

food and cover for a wide variety of wildlife.

Oak-pine natural communities depend on fire to provide a seedbed for regeneration and to reduce

competition from fire susceptible northern hardwoods. Field observation and silvicultural

inventory data indicate that young oak and pine are not regenerating naturally. As natural

regeneration of oak/pine fails and regeneration of shade tolerant species (without the influence of

fire) occurs, followed by subsequent natural succession, the oak and pine community gradually

converts to a northern hardwood/hemlock community type.

Fire management is also important in oak-pine communities because of the relatively frequent

occurrence of wildfire in these stands. In one area of the proposed project, 10 wildfires have

occurred since the mid 1960‟s and were suppressed. As a result, fuel loads (material that will

burn) in some of the unburned areas have accumulated to unnaturally high levels. An

uncontrolled wildfire in these fuels would likely exhibit a rapid rate of spread and could

adversely impact local communities, timber resources, and the soils, wildlife, and air quality in

the area. Using prescribed fire and other fuel reduction methods in fire prone stands will reduce

the effects and intensity of the next wildfire in these stands.

The Project Area provides one of the best opportunities on the Saco District to perpetuate oak-

pine communities. Reintroducing controlled fire and fuels management to the portions of the

project area where these communities exist would provide the disturbance needed to retain these

valuable species on the landscape, and be a proactive method to reduce the effects of the next

wildfire.


Photo: Oak-pine communities rely on fires for regeneration. This charred snag is located in

the proposed project area, a reminder of a fire in 1946.

This project would achieve Forest Plan goals for wildland fire management by creating,

maintaining, or improving plant community composition by influencing the scale and pattern of

vegetation across the landscape, including changing successional patterns. The Forest Plan goal

for hazardous fuel load reduction would also be met (USDA. Forest Service, 2005a. pg. 1-19).

Vegetation

The purpose of vegetation management is to accomplish a variety of resource goals and

objectives for forest management, wildlife habitat, recreation management, riparian and aquatic

habitat and visual quality. Vegetative treatments (ie. shelterwood, overstory removal,

commercial thin, clearcut, group selection and single tree selection) provide a sustainable yield

of high quality forest products such as sawtimber. Forest vegetation management is used to

maintain or increase (tree) species diversity and structure within a given area.

Maintaining a diverse forest, removing diseased trees, and providing growing space for residual

trees through vegetation management techniques improves long-term forest health, vigor and

resistance to insects and disease.

Management of the vegetation also creates a diversity of wildlife habitats and moves stands

toward forest community types consistent with land capability. Vegetation management is used

in recreation areas to improve safety (ie. hazard tree removal in campgrounds). Improved

wildlife habitat means increased opportunities for wildlife to sustain or increase their

populations. This may lead to increased wildlife observation by forest visitors.


Commercial Treatments

Field examinations by resource specialists identified management opportunities that would

promote the desired conditions for healthy forests while providing a mix of sawtimber and pulp

volume for local markets. Throughout the Project Area, there are many hardwood and

mixedwood stands where past harvesting and ice storm related damage has resulted in dense

understories dominated by shade tolerant species such as beech and striped maple saplings.

Silvicultural treatments such as group selection (generally about ¼ acre to 2 acre openings)

would create small gaps in the overstory that would encourage regeneration of a diversity of

shade intolerant, intermediate and tolerant species (ie. white birch, yellow birch and sugar maple)

within the newly created open spaces (Leak et al., 1987). Smaller gaps (less than ½ acre) would

be utilized in hemlock and spruce/fir stands where regeneration is desirable or already exits.

Smaller groups are appropriate in these forest community types because they are intermediate in

shade tolerance (Lancaster, 1985, Frank et al., 1973).

Many of the proposed silvicultual treatments would continue treatment objectives that were

initiated in the past such as implementing a final harvest in even-aged treated stands and

perpetuating a diversity of age classes in uneven-aged stands. When proposing uneven-aged

treatments such as single tree selection, a range to tree ages are removed from a stand, allowing

for establishment of a new age class, and the subsequent structural components of the new

“thinned” but regenerating stand. In this way, economic value can be captured while releasing

existing regeneration and establishing new regeneration of young healthy trees that are “free to

grow”.

Maintaining oak and pine forests in some areas within Northeast Swift HMU requires release or

introduction of younger trees (regeneration) to promote younger age classes. By diversifying age

classes of oak and pine within the HMU, all stages of growth and vigor can be perpetuated and

thus minimize the exposure to natural disturbances (i.e. wind or insect defoliation). Both oak and

pine regeneration are disturbance oriented, requiring partial to full sunlight to obtain quick

growth necessary to compete with more shade tolerant species such as red maple, striped maple

and beech. Lack of openings which provide sunlight to the forest floor within oak and pine

stands is resulting in a species change to beech, red maple, striped maple and spruce/hemlock in

the understory of these stands. Singletree and group treatments would open up the forest canopy

for sunlight to reach the forest floor, encouraging oak and pine regeneration.

To address forest health, silvicultural treatment would occur in mature stands with a component

of high risk and poorly formed trees. We have observed many trees in stands proposed for

treatment that are affected by ice damage to crowns, insect damage, fungal infestations, bole

damage from past management, and from overstocking. Removing poorly formed, damaged and

overcrowded trees would provide residual trees the space needed to grow faster and remain

healthy.

The stands proposed for treatment have site-specific objectives and harvest prescriptions

designed to meet desired habitat conditions for wildlife and for the vigor, health and diversity of

vegetation resources. The harvest treatments and management objectives are described in the

attached table.


Pre-Commercial Treatments

One objective of the project is to establish and maintain oak and pine regeneration. Another

objective is to create uneven aged softwood and mixedwood stands. Both objectives can best be

met with follow-up treatments are considered and implemented. Proposed commercial treatments

using both even aged and uneven aged silviculture are designed to create conditions, along with

the prescribed burning, for the establishment of new regeneration to create desirable community

types and structure. In areas where competition for sunlight and resources threatens the

regeneration and establishment success of these treatments, additional hand thinning or “release”

would be needed. Release treatments would focus on reducing less desirable species in created

openings to allow the full array of desired tree species to regenerate and thrive. The “release”

would be designed to control the relative proportions of for example, red maple, striped maple

and beech saplings from out-competing the desirable species and thereby maintain a balance

within these community types. Desired species include red oak, white pine, hemlock, red spruce,

balsam fir, sugar maple, red maple, beech, white ash, paper birch and yellow birch.

Wildlife Habitat

Regional literature and experts indicate that maintaining populations of wildlife and plant species

native to northern New England means providing a wide variety of habitats across the landscape,

including various forest types, age classes, and non-forested openings. All of these forest habitat

types (softwoods, northern hardwood, mixedwoods etc.) and structural characteristics (mature

forest, pole stands, brushy openings etc) provide essential habitat for various wildlife species in

New England (DeGraaf and Yamasaki, 2001). The Forest Plan established Forest-wide habitat

composition and age-class goals and objectives that provide habitat diversity (USDA. Forest

Service 2005a. pages 1-20 and 1-21).

These goals and objectives are based on an interdisciplinary discussion about the natural history

and habitat requirements of the wildlife species that inhabit the Forest and the land capability and

disturbance patterns that influence forest habitat across the Forest. A detailed description of

wildlife natural history and the ecological perspective used during Forest Plan Revision to

develop habitat goals and objectives is available in “WMNF Ecological Approach” (USDA.

Forest Service, 2002b) and the Forest Plan FEIS (USDA. Forest Service 2005b, 3-73 through 3-

112 and 3-166 through 3- 207).

More specifically the objectives of wildlife habitat management across the Forest are to:

Manage forest composition for the broad habitat types of northern hardwood, mixed

hardwood-softwood, and spruce-fir forest, consistent with ecological land type

capability.

Maintain less common habitat types, such as aspen-birch, and oak-pine, where

ecologically feasible and desirable to provide for native and desired non-native

wildlife and plant species.

Maintain high quality mature forest and old forest habitats on a majority of the

forest

Provide regeneration age forest and open habitats to sustain biological diversity and

support species that prefer those habitats.


The Forest uses Habitat Management Units (HMUs) as a tool to ensure that there is a connection

between landscape-levels goals and objectives and project-level ecological conditions during

project development. Input from internal and external forestry and wildlife experts supported the

HMU approach as a reasonable way to help the forest achieve our habitat objectives. A more

detailed discussion of the role of HMUs in achieving the desired future condition is available in

the “Terrestrial Habitat Management Document” (USDA. Forest Service, 2007).

A review of the Northeast Swift HMU records, vegetation databases, and maps found differences

between the current distribution and abundance of forest types and age classes compared to the

ecological potential. Within this HMU, there is a lack of early-successional forest habitat (where

most trees are 0-9 years old) and an overabundance of mature habitat for all habitat types.

Northern hardwoods make up the most acres however this HMU has a good amount of softwood

and mixedwood. In addition, there is a good component of both hemlock and oak pine within the

HMU however no stands are listed as aspen/birch habitat and no permanent wildlife openings

exist.

Forest Plan goals include having a distribution of wildlife habitat types which closely match land

capability over most of the Forest. Forest records indicate differences between the current

distribution and abundance of forest types and age classes within the Northeast Swift HMU as

compared to the ecological potential of the area. As a result, the desired condition for this HMU

is to increase regeneration forest habitat, increase softwood habitat (spruce-fir and hemlock)

particularly where mixedwood stands indicate a strong softwood soil type, create permanent

wildlife openings, and where ecologically feasible, maintain or increase existing oak/pine, and

aspen-birch type.

Field reviews in the Northeast Swift project area found forested conditions where silvicultural

treatments could be used to meet some of the desired habitat goals for this HMU. These

treatments include (1) increasing regeneration forest habitat for all habitat types but especially

aspen-birch, (2) increasing the amount of softwood by favoring hemlock and spruce-fir within

mixedwood stands, (3) adding structural diversity and encouraging regeneration in existing

spruce-fir and hemlock, (4) maintain and if feasible increase oak/pine and hemlock, and (5)

create acres of permanent wildlife openings.

Regeneration Forest Habitat

Numerous scientific studies in the Northeast have found that a wide variety of wildlife use

regeneration forest habitat structure for all or part of their life (Chandler, 2006, Dettmers, 2003,

DeGraaf and Yamasaki, 2001, DeGraaf and Yamasaki, 2003, Fuller and DeStefano, 2003, King

et al., 2001, Litvaitis et al., 1999, Schlossberg et al., 2007, Thompson et al., 2001). This habitat

condition is ephemeral on the landscape as forests in the Northeast regenerate quickly and within

a decade or so the structural characteristics favorable for this suite of species no longer exist.

Changes in land use patterns across the Northeast have greatly reduce the availability of this

habitat resulting in declines in scrub/shrub birds that require this habitat structure for suitable

nesting habitat including chestnut-sided warbler, and magnolia warbler (Schlossberg et al.,

2007).

The goal in the Northeast Swift HMU is to increase forest regeneration within all forest types by

approximately 355 to 550 acres. Clearcut, patchcut, shelterwood harvest, seed tree harvest and in

some cases overstory removal harvests as well as creation of permanent wildlife openings would


create habitat structure (defined as regeneration forest habitat in Forest Plan glossary (USDA.

Forest Service. Glossary, page 23)) similar to natural disturbances in the Northeast caused by

wind or disease.

Mixedwood and Softwood Habitat

Mixedwood and softwood stand types are essential habitat components for a wide variety of

wildlife species‟ food and cover needs including golden-crowned kinglet, blackburnian warbler,

purple finch, deer mice, snowshoe hare, white-tailed deer, and American marten. Mixedwood

and softwood habitat is relatively well represented in the Northeast Swift HMU but not across

the Forest. This is due to past intensive harvest practices in the late 1800s and early 1900s that

favored northern hardwood regeneration on sites previously dominated by spruce/fir or hemlock.

One objective in the Northeast Swift HMU is to convert acres of mixedwood habitat existing on

softwood ELTs to softwood or if feasible to aspen-birch. Another objective would be to maintain

the existing acres of hemlock but initiate hemlock regeneration of this species wherever possible.

Removal of overtopping and competing hardwoods, and releasing existing softwood understory

trees and regeneration in these stands would increase the softwood component, and provide

desirable wildlife habitat (species components and structures).

In mixedwood and dense softwood stands (and pockets within stands), group selection and

singletree selection harvests are designed to improve habitat capability, species configuration,

and stand structure to benefit wildlife over time. Proposed treatments would increase

effectiveness of these essential habitats by establishing new regenerating trees, by providing

various structures used as hiding, nesting or cover habitat at various times of the year, and by

maintaining portions of the existing stand (tree species and canopy position) such that a variety

of structural components and forest species is maintained in the HMU.

Aspen-Birch

Aspen-birch is an early-successional habitat that is not as long-lived as other forest types and

thus will succeed to late successional habitat without frequent disturbance (DeGraaf et al., 2006).

Regeneration age-class aspen-birch provides high quality cover for many wildlife species

including ruffed grouse while mature aspen-birch is important for other species of wildlife such

as broad-winged hawk (DeGraaf et al., 2006). Clearcuts on certain soil types would regenerate

aspen-birch while group selection may perpetuate a component of aspen-birch as a small

inclusion in northern hardwood or spruce-fir habitat.

The goal of the Northeast Swift HMU is to increase the acres of aspen-birch. Currently only 22

acres are typed as aspen-birch within the HMU and these acres lie outside of MA 2.1 lands.

Paper birch does exist as a component of other forest types within the HMU. Treatments in

stands with a birch component include group selection, overstory removal and especially

clearcuts in an attempt to reestablish aspen-birch habitat in this HMU. Conversion to aspen-birch

where the ecological capability exists would reestablish this habitat type where none currently

exists at the stand level.


Oak-Pine

Oak/pine stands provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species associated with both softwoods

and northern hardwood. The oak component of this habitat, in combination with beech in

northern hardwood areas, also provides hard mast that is essential to a variety of wildlife species

that rely on a fall food component such as black bear and whitetail deer (DeGraaf et al., 2006).

Dry Brook and Big Brook watersheds contain a variety of stands that include hemlock, spruce-

fir, red oak, white and red pine, sugar and red maple, and yellow and paper birch. Hardwood

areas within the HMU contain American beech, red and sugar maple, red oak, yellow and paper

birch. Mature softwood and mixedwood habitat that offers structural variability and foraging

opportunities is necessary to provide thermal cover in winter for species such as white-tailed deer

(DeGraaf and Yamasaki, 2001). Surveys in this half of the HMU have repeatedly found deer

wintering in these areas.

A goal in the Northeast Swift HMU is to maintain the existing component of oak/pine.

Silvicultural treatments in this community type may be augmented by landscape level prescribed

fire. Approximately 950 acres that would benefit from prescribed burning are available in this

community type. Group selection and single tree selection harvests implemented in these stands

would have a goal of increasing oak and pine regeneration. Silvicultural treatments in oak/pine

would occur during the snow free seasons to allow for soil disturbance. This fosters germination

of oak acorns and increases the likelihood that oak and pine seedlings would germinate and out-

compete other species. While maintaining most of the mature red oak, the silvicultural

treatments are designed to increase other hardwood browse and softwood understory (wildlife

cover habitat) within these important deer wintering areas.

Permanent Wildlife Openings

There are no Permanent Wildlife Openings (WLO) in the Northeast Swift Habitat Management

Unit (HMU). Openings provide berries, grasses, and other low-growing vegetation used by a

wide variety of insects, birds, and mammals. One of the habitat objectives in the Forest Plan is to

maintain WLOs within each HMU at existing levels and increase the acreage where possible

(USDA. Forest Service, 2005a. pg. 1-20). To accomplish this objective, up to 20 acres of

permanent wildlife openings are needed.

Recreation

One of the recreation management goals of the Forest Plan is to provide a range of recreation

opportunities to help meet public demand for motorized, non-motorized, developed and

dispersed recreation. To help attain this goal and to define the purpose and need for action in the

Northeast Swift Analysis Area, information gathered from field reconnaissance and specialist

reviews was used. The proposed project would to maintain and improve recreation opportunities

within the project area including the Nanamocomuck Ski Trail, Boulder Loop trail,

snowmobiling and mountain biking from the trailheads along Bear Notch Road, managing

vegetation at Covered Bridge Campground, and maintaining dispersed recreation opportunities

within the project area.


Nanamocomuck Trail

There is a need to improve the brook crossings and to relocate at least two sections that are

persistently wet even in winter on this Nordic ski trail. This trail receives moderate levels of use

by mountain bikers in summer as well. Up to nine crossings within the project area are in need

of updated bridges to improve user safety.

Snowmobile and Nordic Ski Trail parking

There is a need to provide additional parking and turning space for winter trail users near the

winter road closure on Bear Notch Road. Currently parking is very limited at that location.

Developed Camping

There is a need to manage the forested area in and adjacent to Covered Bridge Campground to

eliminate potential hazard trees. Weakened trees within this high use campground and other trees

in the surrounding areas need thinning to protect public safety and maintain the stand in a healthy

condition. Expanding the capacity at Covered Bridge Campground is not proposed but is

foreseeable because it would help meet future public demand.

Riparian and Aquatic Habitat

Studies show that streams within old growth riparian forests have an abundance of down wood in

the channel, along with higher in-stream habitat diversity and more pools compared to streams

within second growth riparian forests (USDA. Forest Service, 2005b. pgs 3-60 and 3-61).

Portions of the White Mountains were intensively logged during the late 19th

century and logging

practices during this time disturbed riparian areas. While the forests have matured, and

sustainable forestry is now practiced, dead and down wood accumulations have still not reached

their potential (USDA. Forest Service, 2005b. pgs 3-60, 3-61, and 3-80). Monitoring of stream

habitats on the Forest has found that wild trout produccutivity is higher in streams with greater

than 30% pool habitat (unpublished White Mountain National Forest monitoring data).

There is a need for a stream restoration project that would improve fish habitat through the

addition of wood to some tributary brooks. This project would achieve a Forest Plan goal of

restoring and improving self-sustaining populations of eastern brook trout and their habitats

(USDA. Forest Service, 2005a. pg. 1-15).

Streambank Stabilization

Healthy riparian areas provide habitat diversity, filter sediments, dissipate energy associated with high

flows and protect stream banks from scour. When riparian areas are disturbed, these benefits are

diminished and stream banks may become unstable, potentially causing sedimentation. Field visits

identified a need to improve stability of streambanks and riparian areas disturbed by roads and stream

crossings, some of which are no longer in use.


Absence of pools reduces fish habitat in a typical brook (Photo: Wilson, 2008)

Stream Restoration

Wild brook trout depend on pools in cold-water streams to sustain them during drought periods. Pool

habitat in small tributaries have been shown to hold fish through drought periods. Field visits

identified a need to add in-stream wood to create pool habitat in three tributaries to the Swift River.

While current management of the riparian forests along these streams will eventually provide in-

stream wood, this process would take many decades. There is a need to accelerate wood loadings to

provide refuge during extreme drought conditions in these small tributaries to the Swift River. An

additional need is to monitor stream chemistry in these streams to determine the current condition and

to monitor changes resulting from these stream additions and to monitor any trends that may occur

from the cumulative activities in these sub-watersheds.


Down wood creates a pool in a tributary to the Swift River (Photo: Prout, 2009)

Transportation System

The Forest Transportation System is designed to provide safe and efficient transportation that

facilitates use and management of the Forest. Forest Plan goals include decommissioning roads

not needed to meet management objectives, as well as maintaining the roads needed for use and

management to meet Forest standards and the requirements of the Highway Transportation

Safety Act. It was determined during the 2005 Forest planning period, that the Forest would use

project level roads analysis in conjunction with environmental analysis to determine the final

disposition of the remaining miles of unclassified roads on the Forest. Decisions would be made

through project NEPA whether to add these roads to the Forest classified road system, or

permanently close and decommission them.

Concurrent with this environmental analysis, an analysis of the existing transportation system in

the Northeast Swift project area is being conducted to determine the transportation needs for

roads and trails for current and long-term management. Roads identified as needed to provide

access for long-term forest management activities would be maintained or improved, and

included in the Forest Transportation System. Roads not needed would be decommissioned.

With regard to trails, two segments of the Nanamocomuck need relocation to address resource

and safety concerns and to provide for multiple use of the trail corridor.


These decisions will be evaluated in a Roads Analysis to be completed for this project, and

documented in the eventual Decision Notice.

Decision to be Made

District Ranger Terry Miller is the Responsible Official who will be making a decision whether

or not to implement the proposed Northeast Swift Integrated Resource Management Project. At

this time, it is anticipated that the environmental analysis for the proposed will be documented in

an Environmental Assessment (EA). Following completion of the EA, the Responsible Official

will make a decision whether to implement the proposed activities described above, an

alternative design, or not implement any project at this time. It is expected that the decision

regarding implementation of this project will be made sometime in early 2011.


Proposed Silvicultural Treatments

Unit Compart/

Stand

For

Type

Est

Acres Treatment Objective

Harvest

Prescription Operating Season

1 59-26 M 28 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel S/F/W

2 59-2

H 10 Early Successional Clearcut S/F

3 59-2 M 7 Uneven aged / regen STS W

4 59-1 H 8 Early Successional Clearcut S/F

5 59-1 H 8 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel S/F


7 59-17 H 8 Early Successional Clearcut S/F/W



10 59-9 M 17 Uneven aged / regen STS F/W





15 61-19 M 11 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel (F/W)


17 61-31 M 8 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel W


19 61-11 M 13 Early Successional Clearcut W

20 61-12 H 17 Early Successional Clearcut W

21 62-33 H 19 Early Successional Clearcut S



24 62-22 H 1 Early Successional Patch Clearcut S



27 62-7 M 24 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel F/W



30 62-29 H 9 Early Successional Seed Tree F/W



33 62-1 M 46 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel F

34 62-5 M 5 Uneven aged / regen STS F

35 62-1 M 6 Growth,Vigor THIN F/W

36 62-1 M 9 Uneven aged / regen STS W


38 63-31 H 8 Early Successional Seed Tree S




43 63-27 H 10 Early Successional Seed Tree W


44 63-27 H 11 Uneven aged / regen STS W

45 63-47 M 61 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel S/F

46 63-17 S 10 Growth,Vigor THIN W


48 53-23 M 17 Growth,Vigor THIN F/W

49 53-15 M 3 Release softwood OSR W





56 53-5 M 7 Early Successional CC S/W


58 56-16 M 13 Uneven aged / regen STS S/F



61 56-24 H 62 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel S








69 57-20 M 30 Uneven aged / regen STS/GS F/W

70 57-23 M 23 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel Dry S/f/W



73 57-23 M 31 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel Dry S/F/W

74 57-15 H 26 Growth,Vigor THIN F/W

75 58-14 M 54 Uneven aged / regen STS/GS W

76 58-16 H 63 Growth, Vigor THIN F/W

77 58-3 H 8 Growth, Vigor THIN F/W



80 58-7 S 30 Uneven aged / regen Group Sel S/F/W


82 62-21 H 38 Uneven aged / regen STS W

83 58-21 M 18 Early Successional CC S

84 61-3, 19 M 30 Early Successional Clearcut S/F/W

85 61-39 M 12 Early Successional Clearcut W




89 57-10 H 13 Early Successional Seed tree S

Total 1779


Table KEY:

Harvest Method: the silvicultural prescription, or type of harvest proposed for a given Unit.

GS: Group Selection: small openings equal to or less than 2 acres, logically placed and

treating up to 20 percent of a Unit.

STS: Single Tree Selection, an uneven age management system that retains a representation

of existing species and ages of trees while reducing stand density to a specified square feet

basal area.

CC: Clearcut, a cut method that removes all trees except reserve patches and creates an

opening for regeneration of new trees.

Thin: Thinning a stand by removing merchantable trees to a specified square feet of basal

area.

OSR: Overstory removal: Mature trees are removed to release regeneration and young

saplings once it has become established, for example in a shelterwood final harvest.

Seed Tree: Retains a basal area of 20 square feet or less per acre.

For Type: Forest Type; represents the primary species composition of a Unit, expressed

either as M for mixedwood, H for hardwood, or S for softwood.

Treatment objective: harvest methods are designed (prescribed) to meet the Purpose and

Need for action based on Forest Plan objectives (HMU needs), and on analysis of stand

condition and site capabilities.

Operating Season: Time of year when harvest activities are allowed to occur. Activities may

occasionally occur outside these periods when soil conditions and other resource

considerations allow.

SFW: Summer, Fall, and Winter, F = Fall only, SF = summer and fall, W = winter. Dry

summer/fall means soil moistures are low in most of a given unit

agriculture northeast swift integrated resource management...

Documents