UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management Burns District Office

Three Rivers Resource Area

Finding of No Significant Impact

DSL & Smyth Creek Fires Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Plans

Environmental Assessment

DOI-BLM-OR-B050-2012-0007-EA

INTRODUCTION

The Burns District Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) proposing to implement Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ESR) Plans on two fires located in northern Steens Mountain. Although the DSL and Smyth Creek Fires were separate fire incidents, they are located in the same geographic area, share similar resource values, and share equivalent ESR needs.

The DSL Fire (Fire Number GB9N) was a complex of four fires ignited by lightning on August 24, 2011 and was contained on August 27, 2011. The fire burned a total of 6,534 acres, comprising 1,860 acres of BLM-managed land, 3,714 acres of Department of State Land, and 960 acres of private land. The fire was located approximately 22 miles northeast of Diamond, OR in the northern Steens Mountain, bordered by Highway 78 to the north and East Steens Road to the east.

The Smyth Creek Fire (Fire Number GCR6) was a fire ignited by lightning on August 24, 2011 and was contained on September 1, 2011. The fire occurred within the Five Creeks Rangeland Restoration Project boundary and burned a total of 1,857 acres, comprising 1,833 acres of BLM-managed land and 25 acres of private land. The majority of the fire (1,032 acres) occurred in Unit 4 prescribed burn boundary of the Five Creeks Project; 7,614 acres were treated September 30, 2011. The fire was located approximately 6 miles northeast of Diamond, OR in the north Steens Mountain, bordered by Kiger Mustang Viewing Road to the west and Smyth Creek to the east.

SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

The Proposed Action is to implement the ESR plans for the DSL and Smyth Creek Fires, and apply select herbicides to noxious weeds within a project area encompassing both fire perimeters. Stabilization and rehabilitation treatments proposed under this project include applying herbicides (Imazapic, Chlorsulfuron, Clopyralid) to noxious weeds in particular medusahead rye within a treatment area encompassing 149,549 acres, aerially seed forage kochia on 260 acres infested by medusahead rye within the DSL fire perimeter, livestock grazing closures on burned portions of both fires, and monitoring both burned areas for noxious weeds and effectiveness of rehabilitation treatments.

 

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

Consideration of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) criteria for significance (40 CFR 1508.27), both with regard to context and intensity of impacts, is described below:

Context

The Proposed Action would occur in the northern Steens Mountain and would have local impacts on affected interests, lands, and resources similar to and within the scope of those described and considered in the Three Rivers Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (PRMP/FEIS), the 2004 Andrews Management Unit/Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area (AMU/CMPA) PRMP/FEIS, and the 2010 Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon FEIS. There would be no substantial broad societal or regional impacts not previously considered in these planning documents.

Intensity

The CEQ's ten considerations for evaluating intensity (severity of effect):

1. Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. The EA considered potential beneficial and adverse effects. Project Design Features were incorporated to reduce or eliminate impacts. None of the effects are beyond the range of effects analyzed in the three planning documents cited above.

Soils/Biological Soil Crusts (BSCs): The purpose in using forage kochia is to out-compete medusahead rye and cheatgrass, which would allow native vegetation time to reestablish, grow, and decrease bare ground. This species, if establishment is successful, would help stabilize soils and prevent erosion, while at the same time provide an interspace habitat for BSCs to reestablish and grow, however at a slow rate (years to decades). Studies have shown that reseeding after a fire, while causing disturbance to the BSCs which did not burn in the fire, helps prevent further loss and degradation. While there is no evidence that Plateau could cause an initial decrease or loss to BSCs, the potential for reestablishment is possible due to the suppression and/or eradication of medusahead rye and other invasive annual grasses. There is a greater threat for a complete loss of BSCs from not treating medusahead rye and allowing it to colonize the interspace habitat of BSCs.

Overall, while there might be impacts to soils and BSCs, the long term benefits of eradicating medusahead rye and cheatgrass far outweigh those impacts. Without these invasive annual grasses, soils and BSCs would have an opportunity to stabilize, regrow and reestablish, providing valuable nutrient cycling and water capture functions.

Grazing Management and Wild Horses: Seeded and naturally recovering areas would recover to desired perennial vegetation, subsequently maintaining or improving available forage for livestock and wild horses. There would be no direct impacts to wild horses

2

 

associated with the seeding on the DSL Fire as this area is located outside of the Herd Management Area (HMA) boundary. Aerial seeding, aerial herbicide application, and aerial weed monitoring could temporarily disturb horses due to the presence of aircraft within and adjacent to the HMA boundary, however these impacts would be temporary (minutes as the helicopter passes over) and would not result in long-term displacement from their habitat. Cattle would be removed for two growing seasons or longer depending on vegetative recovery.

Migratory Birds: Potential noise and visual disturbance associated with aerial seeding or aerial application of herbicides may cause temporary displacement or alter the activity level or behavior of some birds. However, treatments would occur at a time of year when most birds have migrated out of the area, and birds that remain are highly mobile and able to leave the immediate area. Disturbance effects would primarily be limited to the treated areas, where planes or helicopters would be flying closest to the ground. Disturbance effects from aerial seeding and spraying would be negligible on migratory bird populations due to the relatively small (nine percent) amount of area being treated within the burned areas, and the brief (few hours) amount of time required to spread the seed or apply the herbicide. Most migratory birds would return to the area or resume activity once seeding or spraying is complete.

Noxious Weeds: Establishing desirable vegetation would enhance the burned area’s resistance to noxious weeds. Effective use of the clean equipment Project Design Element would minimize the potential for project introduction of additional noxious and invasive weeds. A weed resistant, desirable plant community would contribute towards soil stability and upland community functionality. Where herbicide treatments are necessary, using these new products, either alone or in combination with currently available products, would provide the best tools available to ensure effective, timely management of the noxious weeds in this area. By controlling the noxious weeds, the potential for success of rehabilitation of the project area following the disturbances from the 2011 wildfires would be enhanced.

Special Status Species: Sage-grouse: Noise and visual disturbance associated with aerial seeding or aerial application of herbicides may cause temporary displacement or alter the activity level or behavior of some birds. Potential disturbance effects would be negligible on sage-grouse individuals and populations due to the relatively small (nine percent) amount of area being treated within the burns and the brief (few hours) amount of time required to carry out treatments.

Seeding (260 acres) would occur in lower elevation areas that contained Wyoming or low sagebrush plant communities prior to the wildfires, but also had a component of medusahead rye or cheatgrass. Using forage kochia associated with the emergency stabilization DSL Fire and Smyth Creek Fire Categorical Exclusions’ seed mixes that include native and desirable non-native plant species would improve the likelihood of successful establishment of a desirable plant species that can stabilize the soils and compete with invasive annuals and noxious weeds to help reduce the risk of increased fire frequency (Harrison et al. 2002). By helping break up the fuel source and reduce fire

3

 

 

frequency, forage kochia would facilitate the return of sagebrush plant communities, which is unlikely to occur in these areas without management intervention. Although forage kochia remains high in protein throughout the year, its value for sage-grouse forage is unknown. However, the sub-shrub growth form of forage kochia would provide additional structure for sage-grouse cover, especially in the first few years after the fire when grasses and forbs are the primary vegetative component.

Application of the proposed herbicides using Standard Operating Procedures (Appendix B) would not only improve the success of the seeding effort, it would help protect native plants that survived the fire. These native plants, especially sagebrush, provide a valuable seed source adapted to the local environment, which further reduces the time needed for the native plant community to recover (Leger 2008). Implementation of this alternative would result in maintenance or improvement of more acres of sage-grouse habitat compared to the No Action Alternative.

Upland Vegetation: This project was designed to establish a ground cover of desired perennial vegetation in those plant communities unlikely to recover naturally within both fires. Successful seeding of the Proposed Action would further decrease the potential transition to an annual grass dominated community, introduce a longer green period through the growing season, and provide more habitat values than an exotic annual grass community. In comparison to a medusahead rye or a cheatgrass dominated community, establishment of native and desirable non-native plant species would set the stage to a faster successional trajectory towards a native plant community.

Treating noxious weeds with additional herbicides would benefit upland vegetation by allowing the most effective chemical weed treatments in areas of vegetative disturbance. Treating noxious weeds in these areas would promote and maintain the abundance of native and desired introduced vegetation. Plateau (Imazapic) would be the only herbicide applied aerially and at a large scale of 100 acres or more to treat medusahead rye infestations. This herbicide has been shown to selectively treat medusahead rye and cheatgrass leaving desirable perennial vegetation unharmed (Davies and Sheley 2011). The other herbicides analyzed would be used at a small scale (spot treatments) and applied with ground equipment.

Wildlife: Potential noise and visual disturbance associated with aerial seeding or aerial application of herbicides may cause temporary displacement of some larger wildlife species, such as Rocky Mountain elk, or alter the activity level or behavior of animals in the area. Effects would primarily be limited to the treated areas, where planes or helicopters would be flying closest to the ground. Overall, disturbance effects from aerial seeding and spraying would be negligible on wildlife populations due to the relatively small (nine percent) amount of area being treated within the burned areas, and the brief (few hours) amount of time required to spread the seed or apply the herbicide. Most of the affected animals would return to the area or resume activity once seeding or spraying is complete.

4

 

Seeding (260 acres) would occur primarily in lower elevation Wyoming or low sagebrush plant communities with some medusahead rye or cheatgrass (or areas adjacent to sites with these annual grasses). Applying forage kochia seed would improve the likelihood of successful establishment of a desirable plant species that can compete with invasive annuals and noxious weeds and help reduce the risk of increased fire frequency (Harrison et al. 2002). By helping break up the fuel source and reduce fire frequency, forage kochia would facilitate the return of native grasses and shrubs, which is unlikely to occur in these areas without management intervention. Forage kochia is high in protein throughout the year, and has been successfully used to stabilize and improve mule deer winter range in Nevada (Clements et al. 1997). If the seeding is successful, the sub-shrub growth form of forage kochia would provide additional structure for wildlife cover, especially in the first few years after the fire.

2. Degree to which the Proposed Action affects public health and safety. No aspect of the Proposed Action or alternatives would have an effect on public health and safety beyond those analyzed in the2010 Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon FEIS (page 100-101, 348-350, 353).

3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. No unique characteristics are known to exist within the proposed Project Area.

4. The degree to which effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial. Controversy in this context means disagreement about the nature of the effects, not expressions of opposition to the Proposed Action or preference among the alternative. No unique or appreciable scientific controversy has been identified regarding the effects of the Proposed Action or alternatives beyond those analyzed in the2010 Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon FEIS.

5. Degree to which possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. The analysis has not shown there would be any unique or unknown risks to the human environment nor were any identified in the Three Rivers PRMP/FEIS or AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS, The Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon FEIS analyzed the use effects of the proposed chemicals and associated risks.

6. Degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant impacts or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. This project neither establishes a precedent nor represents a decision in principle about future actions. No long-term commitment of resources causing significant impacts was noted in the EA or FEISs.

7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. The environmental analysis did not reveal any cumulative effects beyond those analyzed in the afore mentioned environmental

5

 

documents. The EA described the current state of the environment (Affected Environment by Resource, Chapter III) which included the effects of past actions, and included analysis of reasonably foreseeable future actions identified in the project area.

8. Degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. There are no known features within the Project Area listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.

9. The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat. There are no known threatened or endangered species or their habitat affected by the Proposed Action or alternatives.

10. Whether an action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. The Proposed Action does not threaten to violate any law. The Proposed Action is in compliance with the Three Rivers and Steens Mountain CMPA Resource Management Plan (RMP)s/Record of Decision (ROD)s, which provide direction for the protection of the environment on public lands.

On the basis of the information contained in the EA and all other information available to me, it is my determination that:

1. The implementation of the Proposed Action or alternatives will not have significant environmental impacts beyond those already addressed in the Three Rivers PRMP/FEIS (September 1991); AMU/ CMPA PRMP/FEIS (2004), and the Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon FEIS (2010);

2. The Proposed Action and alternatives are in conformance with the Three Rivers ROD (September 1992); Steens Mountain CMPA RMP/ROD (2005), and the Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon ROD (2010);

3. There would be no adverse societal or regional impacts and no adverse impacts to affected interests; and

4. The environmental effects, together with the proposed Project Design Features, against the tests of significance found at 40 CFR 1508.27 do not constitute a major Federal action having a significant effect on the human environment.

6

 

Therefore, an EIS is not necessary and will not be prepared.

Richard Roy Date Three Rivers Resource Area Field Manager

Rhonda Karges Date Andrews/Steens Resource Area Field Manager

7

DSL AND SMYTH CREEK

FIRES

EMERGENCY

STABILIZATION AND

REHABILITATION PLANS

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

DOI-BLM-OR-B050-2012-0007-EA

Bureau of Land Management

Burns District Office

28910 Hwy 20 West

Hines, Oregon 97738

March 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I. Purpose and Need for Action ..........................................................................................1

A. Introduction..............................................................................................................1 B. Purpose and Need for Action...................................................................................2

C. Conformance with Land Use Plan ...........................................................................2

D. Consistency with other laws, regulations, and policies ...........................................4

E. Identification of Issues.............................................................................................5

Chapter II. Proposed Action and Alternative...................................................................................5

A. Alternative I: No Action ..........................................................................................5

B. Alternative II: Implementation of DSL and Smyth Creek Fires ESR plans

(Proposed Action) ....................................................................................................5

C. Project Design Elements ..........................................................................................7

D. Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in Detail ...............................................8

Chapter III. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ...........................................9

Resources and Issues Brought Forward for Analysis ........................................................11

A. Soils and Biological Soil Crusts ............................................................................11

B. Water Quality, Wetland/Riparian Zones, SSS-Fish ...............................................14

C. Vegetation ..............................................................................................................17

D. Noxious Weeds ......................................................................................................22

E. Livestock Grazing Management and Wild Horses ................................................26

F. Wildlife ..................................................................................................................28

G. Migratory Birds ......................................................................................................32

H. Special Status Species ............................................................................................36

I. Recreation ..............................................................................................................41

J. Cultural Heritage ....................................................................................................42

K. American Indian Traditional Practices ..................................................................44

L. Cumulative Impacts ...............................................................................................45

Chapter IV. Consultation and Coordination ..................................................................................46

A. List of Entities and/or Individuals Consulted ........................................................46

B. List of Preparers.....................................................................................................47

Chapter V. References ...................................................................................................................47

MAPS

A. DSL/Smyth Creek Fire Vicinity Map ....................................................................50

B1. DSL Fire Ownership Map......................................................................................51

B2. Smyth Creek Fire Ownership Map ........................................................................52

C1. DSL Fire Proposed Seeding Map ..........................................................................53

D. Proposed Herbicide Application with Identified Weed Sites Map ........................54

TABLES

Table 1. Resources Affected ..............................................................................................10

Table 2. Water Quality, Special Status Species – Aquatic and Wetland/Riparian Zones

Past, Present and RFFAs.....................................................................................16

Table 3. Upland Vegetation: Past and RFFAs within the Proposed Herbicide Application

Area.....................................................................................................................20

Table 4. Noxious Weed Distribution .................................................................................22

Table 5. Past Weed Treatments .........................................................................................23

Table 6. Herbicide Treatments in 2005 thru 2011 .............................................................23

APPENDICES

A-1. DSL ESR Plan

A-2. Smyth Creek ESR Plan

B. Standard Operating Procedures and Mitigation Measures

DSL and Smyth Creek Fires

Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation Plan

Environmental Assessment

DOI- BLM-OR-B050-2012-0007-EA

CHAPTER I: PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION

A. Introduction

The Burns District Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is proposing to implement Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ESR) Plans on two fires located in northern Steens Mountain (Map A). This Environmental Analysis of the DSL and Smyth Creek Fires ESR Plans analyzes potential impacts of proposed stabilization and rehabilitation of the burned areas on the human environment. Although the DSL and Smyth Creek Fires were separate fire incidents, they are located in the same geographic area, share similar resource values, and share equivalent ESR needs. As such, this Environmental Analysis will analyze the potential impacts of both ESR Plans.

The DSL Fire (Fire Number GB9N) was a complex of four fires ignited by lightning on August 24, 2011 and was contained on August 27, 2011. The fire burned a total of 6,534 acres, comprising 1,860 acres of BLM-managed land, 3,714 acres of Department of State Land, and 960 acres of private land. The fire was located approximately 22 miles northeast of Diamond, Oregon in the northern Steens Mountain, bordered by Highway 78 to the north and East Steens Road to the east (Map B-1).

The Smyth Creek Fire (Fire Number GCR6) was a fire ignited by lightning on August 24, 2011 and was contained on September 1, 2011. The fire occurred within the Five Creeks Rangeland Restoration Project boundary and burned a total of 1,857 acres, comprising 1,833 acres of BLM-managed land and 25 acres of private land. The majority of the fire, (1,032 acres) occurred in the Unit 4 prescribed burn boundary, 7,614 acres which were treated September 30, 2011. The fire was located approximately six miles northeast of Diamond, Oregon in the north Steens Mountain, bordered by the Kiger Mustang Viewing Road to the west and Smyth Creek to the east (Map B-2).

Both fires burned across low sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula), mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana), and Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis) plant communities with understories composed of various species of perennial grasses and forbs. The mountain big sagebrush plant communities burned receive higher annual precipitation, have high vegetative production, and were not experiencing any known noxious weed infestations prior to the fires. As a result, these areas are expected to recover with desired vegetation naturally following the burn. However, the invasive annual grasses medusahead rye (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) and cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) were present within and immediately adjacent to the

Drier Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities of both fires. Due to the presence of these annual grasses prior to the burn, it is expected these plant communities will not recover naturally with desired perennial vegetation.

B. Purpose and Need for Action

The primary concern within the areas burned by the DSL and Smyth Creek Wildfires is the expansion of medusahead rye into the Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities which are not expected to recover naturally. Due to the presence of medusahead rye infestations within and adjacent to these communities prior to the wildfires and the fact that these fires made site resources readily available for weed infestation, there exists a need to control medusahead rye and other noxious weeds, which would increase the potential for establishment of desirable plants. Also of concern is the potential for the introduction and establishment of new noxious weeds other than medusahead rye and/or the expansion of existing weed infestations (see noxious weed section for a list of weeds currently known to occur in the project area).

The purpose for the action is to suppress medusahead rye seed production within the burned areas and on adjacent lands to the burned areas. This would reduce the likelihood of seed transfer and new infestations within the fire perimeters.

The other purpose of the action is to establish a ground cover of desirable perennial vegetation in areas unlikely to recover naturally to:

1. Compete with medusahead rye and cheatgrass for available site resources to reduce the likelihood of the burned areas converting to invasive annual grass dominance.

2. Stabilize soils after the first growing season and reduce the potential for accelerated soil erosion associated with invasive annual grass communities.

3. Reduce the likelihood of these areas experiencing a reduced fire return interval associated with invasive annual grass communities.

4. Coexist with and promote reestablishment of native vegetation such as Wyoming big sagebrush.

5. Reduce the likelihood of new weed establishment or expansion of existing weed infestations.

C. Conformance with the Land Use Plans

The proposed action conforms to the following 1992 Three Rivers Resource Management Plan (RMP) direction which made fire rehabilitation related decisions under several resources.

2

Vegetation Program decision 1: “Maintain, restore, or enhance the diversity of plant communities and plant species in abundances and distributions, which prevent the loss of specific native plant community types or indigenous plant species within the RA.”

Vegetation Program management action 1.6: Use approved weed control methods to prevent or control noxious and invasive weeds.

Soil Management decision 1: “Prevent deterioration of soil resources by ensuring that BLM-administered lands are in stable or upward observed apparent trend categories …”

Soil Management decision 2: “Rehabilitate areas with specific localized soil erosion problems and reduce accelerated (human influenced) sediment delivery to fluvial systems.”

Special Status Species decisions 2: Maintain, restore, or enhance the habitat of candidate and other sensitive species.

Biological Diversity decision 3: “Maintain representative examples of the full spectrum of ecosystem’s biological communities, habitats and their ecological processes.”

The proposed action conforms to the following 2005 Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area (CMPA) RMP direction which made fire rehabilitation related decisions under several resources.

Wildland Fire Management goal 2: “Restore and maintain the integrity of ecosystems consistent with appropriate fire regimes and land uses.” Objective 2: “Assess burned areas for appropriate biological and physical rehabilitation activities.” Management Direction: “Burned areas will be evaluated for rehabilitation actions. A combination of mechanized and non-mechanized equipment will be used to rehabilitate areas altered by fire suppression activities. A mixture of native and introduced plant species will be considered for stabilization and rehabilitation projects based on site-specific conditions and species availability.”

Vegetation (Rangelands) goal 1: “Maintain, restore or improve the integrity of desirable vegetation communities including perennial native, and desirable introduced plant species. Provide for their continued existence and normal function in nutrient, water, and energy needs. Objective 3: “Rehabilitate plant communities that do not have the potential to meet the DRC through management.” Objective 4: “Increase species and structural diversity at the plant community and landscape levels in the big sagebrush communities.”

Soils and Biological Soil Crusts objective 1: “Manage mineral soil to limit accelerated erosion on critical sites, protect soil characteristics on noncritical sites, and maintain or improve existing infiltration and permeability rates.”

Grazing Management, Management Direction: “Areas burned by wildland fire will be rested for a minimum of two growing seasons before being reopened to grazing….”

3

The proposed action also conforms to the 2005 Burns Interagency Fire Zone Fire Management Plan (Burns FMP). The Burns FMP on Page 114 states that "Emergency stabilization and rehabilitation process for fires on the Burns District of the BLM would follow current Department of Interior and BLM guidance (IM-ID-2004-008) and the BLM Emergency Fire Rehabilitation Handbook, H-1742-1 (USDI 2002)." The proposed action is consistent with resource objectives of that plan and with other Federal, State, local, and tribal laws, regulations, policies, and plans to the maximum extent possible.

D. Consistency with other laws, regulations and policies

The proposed action would conform to the laws, executive orders, regulations, and policies listed below.

1. Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review. Coordination and consultation is ongoing with affected Tribes, Federal, and local agencies. A copy of the plan would be disseminated to all affected agencies.

2. Executive Order 13112, Invasive Species. To prevent the introduction of invasive species and provide for their control, and to minimize the economic, ecological and human health impacts that invasive species cause.

3. Burns District's Noxious Weed Management Program EA (OR-020-98-05)

4. 2010 Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon Record of Decision (ROD) (Oregon Veg. FEIS).

5. 2007 Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM lands in 17 Western States ROD (National Veg. FEIS).

6. Clean Water Act. All proposed treatments are in compliance with this Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 - 1376; Chapter 758; P.L. 845, June 30, 1948; 62 Stat. 1155). Long-term effects are considered beneficial to water quality.

7. The proposed action is consistent with other Federal, State, local, and tribal laws, regulations, policies, and plans to the maximum extent possible.

8. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2011. Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Strategy Assessment and Strategy for Oregon. Salem.

9. Native American Consultation

All tribes of federally recognized American Indians have off-reservation interests, and maintain an “inherently sovereign” status that requires that land managing agencies consult with tribes on a government-to-government basis over planned actions that may affect tribal interests. Tribal interests include: traditional cultural

4

practices, ethno-habitats, sacred sites, certain plant and animal resources, and socio-economic opportunities. A memorandum of understanding was signed in 2001 that outlines how consultation and coordination regarding resource management on BLM administered lands would occur between the BLM and the Burns Paiute tribe. The Burns Paiute tribe is consulted on all rehabilitation and stabilization projects on the Burns District. The Burns Paiute reservation is in Harney County immediately north of Burns. More than 120 tribal members live on the reservation. The DSL and Smyth Creek Fires lie within an area of interest identified by the Burns Paiute tribe.

E. Identification of Issues

There are three primary issues; 1) protect the soil from erosion, 2) establish desirable perennial vegetation, and 3) combat noxious weed establishment and/or expansion. The other issues are secondary effects of how well the soil is protected and how soon and what kinds of vegetation become established.

CHAPTER II: Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

A. Alternative I: No Action

The No Action Alternative is to let all portions of the burned areas recover on their own without management. Under the existing Burns District's Noxious Weed Management Program EA, the Burns District is not authorized to use the effective herbicides to treat medusahead rye and other noxious weeds analyzed in the Oregon Veg. FIES.

B. Alternative II (Proposed Action): Implement the DSL and Smyth Creek Fire ESR plans and apply herbicides to medusahead rye outside of the fire perimeters

The ESR plans for both fires are included in this document as Appendices A-1 & A-2. These plans contain detailed cost accounting for the treatments being proposed below.

1. Weed Monitoring: On the Burns District, standard operating procedure is that any areas burned by wildfire are monitored for at least two years post-fire. All BLM-managed lands within and adjacent to the burn perimeters of both The DSL and Smyth Creek fires would be surveyed for noxious weeds. Any weeds found would be treated using the most appropriate methods.

2. Herbicide Application: Where herbicide application is determined to be the most appropriate treatment for noxious weeds, use of herbicides would be in conformance with label instructions. Only treatments allowable on Oregon BLM lands in conformance with standard operating procedures and mitigation measures

5

would be used (Appendix B). Herbicides would be applied aerially or using ground-based sprayers. Herbicides, in addition to our currently authorized suite of products, to be used to treat noxious weeds include:

a. Imazapic (Plateau) at 6oz/acre (0.178 pounds/acre of active ingredient Imazapic) applied in the fall to treat head and cheatgrass. Application method would be by either low boom or aerial spray. Aerial spray treatments for medusahead rye would be used on infestations 100 acres or greater and/or on smaller infestations where ground equipment cannot access.

b. Chlorsulfuron (Telar XP) at 1.3 oz./acre (0.061 pounds/acre of active ingredient Chlorsulfuron) applied during the growing season to treat mustards and thistles. Application method would be treated using ground equipment with either low boom or spot sprayed.

c. Clopyralid (Transline) at 2/3 pt./acre (0.25 pounds/acre of active ingredient Clopyralid). Mixed with either:

i. 2,4D at 1qt/acre (0.95 pounds/acre of active ingredient 2,4D) to treat Canada thistle and knapweed during the bud to bloom stage, or

ii. Chlorsulfuron at 1.3 oz./acre applied during the growing season to treat Canada thistle and knapweeds.

iii. Application method would be treated using ground equipment with either low boom or spot sprayed.

Application of Imazapic would occur from late summer/early fall 2012 to reduce potential impacts to the establishment and survival of seeded species. Map D shows the treatment area proposed for herbicide application. Approximately 149,549 acres are contained within this treatment area (note-the private lands within this boundary would not be treated by BLM and the map and acreage does not depict riparian/wetland buffers described in Appendix B). The treatment area boundary shown on Map D was selected based on existing weed infestations within this boundary, roads and ways which travel through known weed infestations and to each fire, and wild horse, wildlife and livestock use patterns. All of these could act as vectors for transporting noxious weeds from existing weed sites to both burned areas. It is important to understand that this proposal is not to treat all acres within this boundary, but only treat areas of existing or new weed infestations.

Aerial Seeding: Approximately 260 acres of the DSL Fire would be aerial seeded using aircraft (fixed wing or helicopter) (Map C-1) to seed forage kochia at a rate of 2 pounds/acre. Aerial seeding would occur between winter 2013 and winter 2014, to reduce potential impacts to seedling emergence from Imazapic application during the fall of 2012.

a. Livestock Grazing Closures: All BLM-managed lands within the Smyth

6

Creek Fire perimeter and that portion of the DSL Fire proposed to be seeded (Map C-1) would be closed to livestock grazing during the growing season until seeded and native perennial species were present at a density of at least 5 plants/10 ft2 or until monitoring indicates resumption of livestock grazing would not negatively impact seeding success. Regardless of plant densities, the areas proposed for drill and aerial seeding would be closed to livestock grazing for at least the first two growing seasons to provide sufficient root development to hold seeded species in the soil prior to grazing.

Although no permanent fence (i.e. barbed-wire) is being proposed to keep livestock off of burned areas while providing access to the remaining unburned areas, temporary electric fence could be constructed and maintained by the livestock permittee to accomplish this.

b. Effectiveness Monitoring: Monitoring would be conducted through the three-year rehabilitation period on both fires. This would consist of monitoring plant density and cover at key areas across the burned and seeded area. Another monitoring site would be set up in burned, but not seeded locations. These two sites would be used for comparisons to the seeding treatments. This monitoring would show if the seeding was successful, the status of native plants, medusahead rye, and noxious weeds, and whether the soil surface is being protected.

C. Project Design Elements

1. Cultural Clearances: Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the lead Federal agency must take historic properties into account prior to implementing Federal Undertakings. Cultural resource inventories would be conducted on areas proposed for ground disturbing stabilization and rehabilitation treatments (fence construction, drill seeding, etc.). These inventories would be conducted prior to implementation of the proposed ground disturbing stabilization and rehabilitation treatments in order to identify and avoid any cultural resources needing protective measures.

Inventories would be in accordance with the State Protocol Agreement between the Oregon BLM and the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). All cultural resources would be recorded on agency approved site forms and plotted on maps. Resources, except those previously determined Not Eligible by the agency and SHPO, would be flagged for avoidance during stabilization and rehabilitation activities. Flagging would be removed as soon as possible after stabilization and rehabilitation treatments to minimize the potential for looting and vandalism.

2. Herbicide would not be used on any special status plant populations. 3. Herbicide use would conform to federally approved manufacturers' herbicide

7

labels as well as the streamside, wetland, and riparian habitat herbicide restrictions.

4. Appropriate mitigation measures contained in Table 2 of the Final Vegetation Management EIS and Environmental Report (ROD , October 2007), or its successor, would be utilized as a part of the project design.

5. The Burns Paiute Tribal Council would be notified in advance of any herbicide use so that individuals gathering roots in the area will know of the treatments and stay clear of sprayed areas. Colorant would be mixed with herbicides in order to provide a visual clue to tribal plant collectors.

6. All equipment would be washed prior to transport to the site and following completion of tasks on site. Washing would be done in locations identified by Burns District Weeds Specialist and may vary depending on type of machinery, transport method and tasks to be performed within the fire perimeter.

D. Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in Detail

Alternatives considered but not analyzed in detail would be 1) different native seed mixes that would exclude the use of desirable perennial non-natives such as crested wheatgrass and forage kochia and 2) exclude the use of specified herbicides in the proposed action developed to treat noxious weeds.

Analyzing alternatives that exclude desirable perennial non-natives would be ineffective because research and land management experience have found that crested wheatgrass and forage kochia are better able to establish and/or grow in the presence of invasive annual grasses that occur on ecological sites described as a Claypan or as a Droughty Loam with a precipitation of 12 inches or less. These vegetative communities are generally comprised of western juniper, Wyoming big sagebrush, low sagebrush, bluebunch wheatgrass, Thurber’s needle grass, and unfortunately invasive exotic annual grasses such as cheatgrass and medusahead rye. Past attempts to rehabilitate disturbed sites in Wyoming big sagebrush steppe using native species alone whether within crested wheatgrass seedings or declined native range by management and research have shown poor success (Hulet et al. 2010; James et al. 2011; Davies et al. in press). In most cases these invasive species establish or reestablish in disturbed sites and fill niches of Wyoming big sagebrush steppe species within three years following failed rehabilitation efforts (Morris et al. 2009; Hulet et al. 2010). This is the reason for using desirable nonnative species such as forage kochia and crested wheatgrass to aid in vegetative restoration, soil stabilization, diversification, wildlife habitat, and long-term suppression of these invasive species in degraded Wyoming big sagebrush ecological sites (Monaco et al. 2003; Clements et al. 1997; Davies et al. 2010; Davies et al. in press).

Analyzing alternatives that exclude specified herbicides in the proposed action would be ineffective because it has been found through research and trend monitoring that by allowing noxious weeds to grow and reproduce results in their spread and establishment of homogenous exotic weed plant communities. An example is an injunction that prevented the use of Imazapic to control medusahead rye, an invasive exotic annual

8

grass, which has now spread and established across the Burns District. The Burns District has trend and photographic monitoring data in conjunction with scientific research that shows the decline in native perennial and annual plant communities specific to Wyoming big sagebrush steppe (Davies 2010). Research has found that by treating noxious weeds such as medusahead rye with herbicides and revegetating the area with desirable plant species can significantly increase a plant community’s diversity, resilience to disturbance, and resistance to noxious weed spread and establishment (Davies 2010; Davies and Sheley 2011).

CHAPTER III: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT and ENVIRONMENT CONSEQUENCES

An interdisciplinary team (IDT) has reviewed and identified issues and resources affected by the alternatives. Table 1 summarizes the results of that review. Affected resources/issues are in bold.

This Environmental Consequences Section presents the potential changes to the environment resulting from implementation of the alternatives. This chapter describes all expected effects including direct, indirect, and cumulative on resources from enacting the proposed alternatives.

Direct and indirect effects plus past actions become part of the cumulative effects analysis; therefore, use of these words may not appear. The Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions (RFFAs) for this site are continued livestock grazing, wild horse management, weed treatments, road maintenance, recreation activities, and machine pile and burn of previously cut juniper (Five Creeks Rangeland Restoration Project); these are also relevant to cumulative effects and are discussed under each resource as applicable. In conjunction to past and RFFAs there are two rehabilitation projects as part of the ESR for both fires. These emergency stabilization projects include drill seeding 500 acres of the Smyth Creek Fire (DOI-BLM-OR-B050-2012-0011-CX) and aerial seeding 260 acres for the DSL Fire (DOI-OR-B070-2012-0016-CX). The emergency stabilization of the 500 acre Smyth Creek Fire project area was completed November 2011, which seeded perennial native plants (blue bunch wheatgrass, bottlebrush squirreltail, Sherman’s bluegrass, and Idaho fescue) and desirable non-native plants (smooth brome, dryland alfalfa, crested wheatgrass, forage kochia, and intermediate wheatgrass). The rehabilitation of the 260 acre DSL Fire emergency stabilization project area is scheduled for implementation starting February 2012, which will seed both bluebunch wheatgrass and crested wheatgrass. This rehabilitation project area is the same as the Proposed Action for the forage kochia seeding. The plant species selected for each emergency stabilization project area was because they are most likely to establish and persist in Wyoming big sagebrush ecological sites, and to compete with annual invasive grasses that include medusahead rye, cheatgrass, and Japanese brome.

Past and RFFAs vary under each resource because spatial and temporal scales address different variables such as wildlife set at a large scale versus upland vegetation set at a smaller scale where local management of the allotment has a direct affect.

9

StatusAffected, Not Affected or Not Present

Table 1: Resources Affected

Resources/Issues

–

If Not Affected, why? If Affected, Reference Applicable EA Chapter

Air Quality (Clean Air Act) Not Affected Potential impacts to air quality would not be measureable between any alternative.

American Indian Traditional Practices Affected

Analyzed in Chapt. 3

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)

Affected Analyzed in Chapt 3 (Kiger ACEC)

Cultural Resources Affected Analyzed in Chapt 3 Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898)

Not Affected

There are no low income or minority populations within the project area.

Flood Plains (Executive Order 13112)

Not Affected

According to the EO definition floodplains are not an issue.

Grazing Management Affected Analyzed in Chapt 3

Hazardous or Solid Waste Not present Migratory Birds (Executive Order 13186) Affected

Analyzed in Chapt 3

Noxious Weeds (Executive Order 13112) Affected

Analyzed in Chapt 3

Prime or Unique Farmlands Not Present Recreation Affected Analyzed in Chapt 3

Social and Economic Values Not Affected There would be no measurable affects to social or economic values.

Soils/Biological Crusts Affected Analyzed in Chapt 3 Upland Vegetation Affected Analyzed in Chapt 3

Visual Resources Not

Affected The impact to Visual Resources came from the wildfire. The goal of the alternatives is to assist vegetation recovery to blend in with surround views.

Threatened or Endangered (T/E) Species or Habitat

Fish Affected Redband trout are analyzed in Chapter 3, C.

Wildlife Not Present

Plants Not Present

BLM SSS and Habitat

Fish Affected Redband trout are analyzed in Chapt 3

Wildlife Affected Sage-grouse are analyzed in Chapt 3

Not Present

10

StatusAffected, Not Affected or Not Present

Table 1: Resources Affected

Resources/Issues

–

If Not Affected, why? If Affected, Reference Applicable EA Chapter

Plants Water Quality (Surface and Ground) Affected

Analyzed in Chapter 3, C.

Wetlands/Riparian Zones (Executive Order 11990) Affected

Analyzed in Chapter 3, C.

Wild and Scenic Rivers Not Present Wilderness/Wilderness Study Areas/ Wilderness Characteristics

Not Affected

The Smyth Creek and DSL Fires occurred outside of Wilderness/WSA’s. No ground disturbing activities are being proposed within Wilderness/WSA’s.

Wildlife Affected Analyzed in Chapt 3

Resources and Issues Brought Forward for Analysis.

A. Soils and Biological Soil Crusts

Affected Environment:

The two main soil associations associated with the fire rehabilitation and herbicide treatment are Ninemile-Westbutte-Carryback and Baconcamp-Clamp-Rock outcrop. Ninemile-Westbutte-Carryback soils are well drained, shallow and moderately deep soils that formed in residuum and colluvium and tend towards gravelly to very cobbly loams or stony to cobbly clays with areas of silty clay loam. They are found on plateaus, hills, and mountains that receive 12 to 16 inches of precipitation. Slopes range from 0 to 65 percent leading to a moderate hazard of water erosion. The associated native vegetation communities are mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata vaseyana) and low sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula) with needlegrass species (Achnatherum ssp) and Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis). The Baconcamp-Clamp-Rock outcrop series include very cobbly loam to loamy textures and consists of very shallow to moderately deep, well drained soils and have a moderate to high water erosion potential and low to moderate wind erosion potential. Soils are located on mountains, hills, and canyons with slopes of 3 to 80 percent. Associated native vegetation communities include mountain big sagebrush and low sagebrush with Idaho fescue and needlegrass species.

Other associations related with the proposed alternative include: Raz-Brace-Anawalt consisting of cobbly or stony loams that evolved on hills and tablelands. These soils are shallow to moderately deep, generally well drained, and have a low potential for wind erosion and low to moderate potential for water erosion; Reallis-Vergas-Lawen which consists of loamy to sandy loam textures and are well drained with slow to moderately

11

permeability resulting in a low to moderate risk of wind and water erosion. This association is found on alluvial fans, lake terraces and in depressions on plateaus and has slopes of 0 to 8 percent; Poujade-Ausmus-Swalesilver which consists of very fine sandy loams to ashy silt loams and are generally found on low lake terraces and depressions on plateaus with slopes ranging from 0 to 5 percent. These soils are susceptible to frequent ponding from November through May, depending on the annual precipitation; Felcher-Skedaddle association consists of very stony clay loams to very cobbly loams. This association is found on mountains, hills and plateaus with slopes of 4 to75 percent. Erosion potential is moderate for water and slight for wind; Fury-Skunkfarm-Housefield association consists of fine silty to fine loamy soils which are found in lake basins, floodplains, floodplain steps, in depressions on stream terraces and along drainageways. Slopes are generally zero to four percent. Ponding in this soil series is frequent with occasional flooding; and Spangenburg-Enko-Catlow consist of silty clay loams to very stony loams and can be found on slopes of 0 to 30 percent at elevations of 4,200 to 5,500 feet. This association has a high potential for wind erosion.

Biological soil crusts (BSCs) such as mosses, lichens, micro fungi, cyanobacteria, and algae play a role in a functioning ecosystem, and are one of at least twelve potential indicators used in evaluating watershed function for uplands. In addition to providing biological diversity, BSCs contribute to soil stability through increased resistance to erosion and nutrient cycling (BLM Technical Reference 1730-2).

Where native vegetation is dominant, BSCs are present and; conversely, where invasive, non-native species are present, BSCs are sparse or non-existent. Following wildfires, it has been documented that BSCs are reduced in abundance and occurrence (dependent on duration and intensity of the fire); however, when reseeded with native and/or noninvasive, non-native species, recovery and reestablishment will occur. When burned sites are invaded by non-native, invasive species such as medusahead rye, BSCs have been shown not to recover and reestablish (Hilty et. al. 2004).

Environmental Consequences

The Cumulative Effects Analysis Area (CEAA) for soils and BSCs is the fire perimeter for both fires, because their conditions on the burned area are now distinctly different from surrounding areas. The ongoing and RFFA impacts to soils and crusts on the BLM-managed land are invasive plant species, livestock grazing, and wild horse use on both fires. Impacts by livestock would be temporarily mitigated by removal for at least two growing seasons. Impacts by wild horses would not be mitigated and could result in trampling of BSCs and consumption of seedlings. Impacts by invasive species in particular annual grasses would inhibit any recovery of BSCs and establishment of desirable plant species. The emergency stabilization project areas for the 500 acre Smyth Creek Fire and 260 acre DSL Fire if successful will increase the potential for BSCs to re-establish and persist.

12

Dozer lines were created for fire suppression. Soil-disturbance can change soil characteristics in several ways such as pulverization, mixing of soil layers, hydrophobicity, and wind or water erosion. Changes in the soil characteristics can result in changes to vegetation communities. Cumulative impacts to soils may be shorter term, lasting until vegetation reestablishes, or may last for years, physical changes and erosion of surface horizons. After disturbance, BSCs can take anywhere from one year to 50+ years to recover depending on the species. Mosses and cyanobacteria are the first to recover and/or reestablish (approximately 1-5 years), while soil lichens take longer, sometimes more than 50 years and may not recover or reestablish at all.

Alternative I: No Action

Under this alternative, herbicide treatment would not take place allowing these sites to become susceptible to the conversion to annual grassland, specifically medusahead rye and cheatgrass. While the establishment of any vegetation initially has potential to stabilize soils, non-native invasive species would eventually cause degradation of both soils and BSCs. Invasive species can deplete soil nutrients decreasing site fertility and productivity. Studies have shown that post wildfire, BSCs do not develop or reestablish if an area converts to invasive exotic annual grasses (Hilty, et.al. 2004). Biological soil crusts inhabit the interspaces between bunchgrasses and shrubs in intact sagebrush ecosystems. Following disturbances to BSC, such as burning, medusahead rye can occupy the interspaces replacing BSCs and the values they provide.

Alternative II: Proposed Alternative

Under this alternative, herbicide treatments would occur in the burned areas. Very little is known at this time with regards to the effect of herbicides on BSCs. One study, using glyphosate, showed no impact to mosses after one application, however, effects after multiple applications are not known (BLM TR 1730-2, pg. 47), nor are the effects on all biological crust species. Regarding invasive annual grasses, studies have shown that the "invasion of exotic annual plants into perennial plant communities can pose a long-term threat to biological soil crusts, as the crust dominated interspace between perennial plants is often heavily invaded" (BLM TR 1730-2, pg. 47). While there could be an initial decrease or loss to BSCs as a result of applying Plateau, reestablishment in the future due to the suppression and/or eradication of medusahead rye is possible. There is a greater threat for a complete loss of BSCs from not treating and allowing it to colonize the interspace habitat of BSCs.

Overall, while there might be impacts to soils and BSCs, the long-term benefits of eradicating medusahead rye and cheatgrass far outweigh those impacts. Without these invasive annual grasses, soils and BSCs have an opportunity to stabilize, regrow and reestablish, providing valuable nutrient cycling and water capture functions.

13

B. Water Quality, Wetland/Riparian Zones, & Special Status Species & Habitat - Fish

Affected Environment The DSL and Smyth Creek Fires burned portions of Donner und Blitzen, Alvord Lake and Harney-Malheur Lakes subbasins. The herbicide application area includes 4,662 acres (.3%) of Upper Malheur subbasin; 66,770 acres (7%) of Harney-Malheur Lakes subbasin; 29,006 acres (6%) of Donner und Blitzen subbasin; and 49,109 acres (4%) of Alvord Lake subbasin.

Approximately 0.8 mile (4.8%) of Smyth Creek is within the Smyth Creek fire perimeter. With a few exceptions (less than 1 acre), the fire did not burn appreciably into the riparian zone. The remainder of the fire burned upslope of Smyth Creek, adjacent to the canyon rim above the creek. The section of Smyth Creek affected by the fire is predominately hill slope constrained in a moderate V-shaped valley floor. Gravel, cobble, and boulder are the primary stream substrates. Dominant vegetation is red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), mountain alder (Alnus incana), and Wood’s rose (Rosa woodsii). The DSL fire burned through sections of four ephemeral drainages on BLM-managed land.

Within the proposed project area, BLM manages 5.6 miles of intermittent canals, 102 miles of intermittent streams, and 13 miles of perennial streams. Of these streams, nine are considered habitat to Great Basin redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp.), a Bureau tracking species in Oregon. This species prefers cold, clear, fast-flowing water with clean cobbles and gravels. These trout are adapted to the dry, hot summers of eastern Oregon and can withstand short periods of time at peak water temperatures of 24.0 to 27.0 °C (75.0 to 80.0 °F), which would be lethal to most other trout (Bowers, et al., 1979). Water quality is monitored to assess whether the quality of the water resources are adequate for fish, recreation, drinking, agriculture, as well as other uses. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has established the water quality standards for the State of Oregon designed to protect the most sensitive of these multiple uses. In this case redband trout is designated as the most sensitive use and to which the standards are based upon. Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (1972) requires that water bodies that violate water quality standards, thereby failing to protect beneficial uses, be identified and placed on a 303(d) list. Of all the streams in the proposed project area, Smyth, Riddle, and Paul Creek, are on the 303(d) list for salmonid rearing.

Various methods of monitoring occur along 12 of the BLM-managed perennial streams and within the proposed project area. Methods include photo monitoring, Greenline, water temperature monitoring, and Proper Functioning Condition assessments. Less formal monitoring occurs regularly on the intermittent streams via site visits. Overall, the streams which flow through BLM-managed lands within this area are in good to excellent condition. There are portions functioning at risk or in a downward trend, but those reaches have been or are being addressed through juniper removal treatments, fencing projects, adjustments in grazing management and/or riparian plantings. The Five Creeks Rangeland Restoration Project has recently, in the past five years, applied juniper

14

removal treatments combined with prescribed burning treatments on many streams in the proposed project area. Another three to five years of monitoring following these treatments are expected to fully reveal their success.

Environmental Consequences

Effects Common to All Alternatives

For the purpose of this analysis, the CEAA for water quality, wetland/riparian areas, and special status species – fish extends to the sub-watershed level beyond the proposed project area to encompass Great Basin redband trout habitat elements (i.e. water quality and riparian condition) necessary to support healthy, productive and diverse populations. The CEAA includes all or portions of the following ten sub-watersheds; Camp Creek, Quail Creek – Folly Farm Flat, Squaw Creek, Paul Creek, Upper Riddle Creek, Headwaters Riddle Creek, Stonehouse Canyon, Little Kiger Creek, Smyth Creek, and Swamp Creek – Kiger Creek. Past, present and RFFAs in the CEAA that may contribute to cumulative effects to water quality, wetland/riparian areas and Redband trout include livestock grazing, wild horse grazing, fishing, wildfire, sediment load from road crossings, juniper cutting, prescribed burning, riparian planting, riparian exclosures, and rehabilitation seedings (see Table 2). Livestock grazing, wild horse grazing, fishing and wildfire are all activities expected to occur over the long term (more than 20 years). Sediment loading from road crossings is planned to be addressed and fixed as funding allows. We do not have current quantitative estimates through monitoring as to how much sediment is being delivered from these sources. Juniper cutting, prescribed burning and most of the rehabilitation seeding are associated with the Five Creeks Rangeland Restoration Project which is anticipated to continue for the next three to five years. This project incorporates various treatments of juniper cutting, followed by various prescribed burning treatments, then followed by rehabilitation seeding of areas previously occupied by phase III juniper1 or areas sterilized during prescribed burning treatments. Other seedings planned within the CEAA include both emergency stabilization projects Smyth Creek’s 500 acres (completed November 2011) and DSL’s 260 acres (planned for February 2012), and 300 acres of seeding native and desirable non-native seed to compete with medusahead rye. The proposed seeding for the 300 acres is included in the Happy Valley Allotment Management Plan/Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-OR-B050-2009-0053-EA. Planting of woody riparian species are planned along several of the BLM-managed perennial streams in the CEAA over the next two to three years. Several miles of Smyth Creek are currently excluded from livestock grazing. During fiscal year 2012, three additional miles of Smyth Creek are scheduled to be fenced. Each restoration project that has been or projected to be implemented includes juniper removal, seeding and planting of desirable plants, and changing livestock management along riparian areas improves watershed upland and riparian health, which results in increased water quality and instream structure.

1 Phase III Juniper: The final transitional stage of woodland succession. Trees are the dominant vegetation and the primary plant layer influencing ecological processes on the site.

15

Table 2 - Water Quality, Special Status Species – Aquatic, and Wetland/Riparian Zones Past,

Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions.

Action Past Actions Present Actions Future Actions Livestock Grazing similar to present 149,5481 acres same as past Wild Horse Grazing similar to present 71,4262 acres same as past Juniper Cutting 25,633 acres 3 N/A 1,401 acres Rx Burning 58,0644 acres N/A 7,294 acres Road Crossing Sediment Load

5 BLM, 4 Private

3 BLM, 4 Private

Plan to fix those on BLM.

Rehabilitation Seedings 11,230 acres 2,784 acres 3,222 acres Riparian Planting None known NA 6 miles Wildfires 27,138 acres N/A unknown 1 Total private and public land within the CEAA. A majority of these lands are known to be grazed by livestock.2 Total HMA acres within the CEAA. 3 Incorporates a combination of treatments including clear cutting, variable spaced cutting, cutting and hand/machine piling on BLM managed lands. There have been several thousand acres of juniper cut on private land within the CEAA. 4 A majority of these acres were burnt during Five Creeks Project Units 1, 2, 3 & 4 prescribed burns. However, these Five Creeks Project units overlap several hundred acres of Rx burns which occurred in the late 1990's through early 2000's and were included in this total.

Alternative I: No Action

Soils exposed after a fire are prone to erosion. If a large runoff event were to occur before ground cover re-establishes, there would be impairment to water quality from sediment. Wildfires also promote the spread of medusahead rye and other annual grasses. Medusahead rye then promotes greater fire return intervals because it is highly flammable and increases fuel loads across the landscape (D ’Antonio, 1992). Under the no action alternative, medusahead rye would increase in dominance in and around the fire perimeters. Effects of increased medusahead rye populations to water quality and riparian zones would occur from multiple, repeated wildfire disturbances occurring over a broad timeframe. As fire frequencies increase across the landscape, potential impacts to water quality from increased erosion and turbidity would occur more frequently.

Alternative II: Proposed Action

The herbicide application design features would minimize impacts to riparian vegetation and water quality. Impacts would be minimized in perennial and intermittent streams because they are protected by 10-foot (ground-hand), 25-foot (ground-vehicle), and 100foot (aerial) buffers (1991 Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands FEIS, p. 3-43). Impacts may occur, however, in ephemeral streams, which often do not have buffers. Herbicides applied directly to them usually are picked up in stream flow by the first storm large

16

enough to create flow in the channels. The 2007 National Vegetation FEIS pp. 4-28, Table 4-9 quantifies the off-site movement potential of the chemicals incorporated in the Proposed Action. Groundwater leaching potential of the four chemicals ranges from low to high while surface water runoff is low for all four chemicals. Even if a herbicide has runoff or leaching potential, the likelihood of it reaching a water body also depends on site characteristics. For example, if a persistent herbicide with a high potential for leaching to groundwater was used at a site with low annual precipitation, and the depth to groundwater was over 100 feet, the overall potential for that herbicide to reach groundwater before degrading would be quite low (2001 National Veg. FEIS, pp. 4-26). General site characteristics of the proposed project area coupled with current buffer protections help to minimize accidental direct application or drift at concentrations high enough to impair water quality.

Risk to non-target riparian vegetation associated with herbicide use would be minimized by the current stream buffering standards. Treatment accuracy increases as application methods change from aerial to boom (vehicle) to spot (hand), thus decreasing the risk for accidental direct spray or drift onto non-target species. As long as standard operating procedures for stream buffering and chemical application are followed there is no measurable risk to water resources and wetlands/riparian areas.

The proposed action aims to reduce upland erosion and sediment delivery caused or exacerbated by the DSL wildfire by seeding forage kochia into the burned area (DSL fire) then further protecting these areas with herbicide applications as needed. Thus, the Proposed Action, in general, would minimize negative effects to water quality and riparian zones from the wildfire by taking action to reduce erosion. Benefits to riparian and aquatic environments would occur from the upland treatments designed to stabilize soil, minimize rill and gully erosion, and protect streambanks. The sooner perennial vegetation is established and the denser it is, the smaller the chances of an erosion event.

The lasting effects from the Proposed Action and RFFAs include improved hydrologic function of the watershed as the site becomes re-vegetated with desirable species. Treatments for soil stabilization would protect water quality by minimizing erosion and post-fire sediment delivery to stream channels.

C. Vegetation

Affected Environment

DSL Fire

Upland vegetation within the DSL Fire is sagebrush steppe with an elevation range of 4,100 – 5,500 feet. Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities are the dominant vegetation type on lower elevation (typically less than 5,000 foot elevation) and drier areas of the fire. Prior to the fire, bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Thurber's needlegrass (Achnatherums thruberiana), Sandberg's bluegrass (Poa secunda),

17

basin wildrye (Leymus cinereus), and bottlebrush squirreltail (Elymus elymoides) were the common perennial grass species present in these communities.

The area proposed for Plateau treatment occurs within these Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities. This area was previously burned in 1996 during the Burnt Flat Fire. Approximately 33 acres (of the 260 acres proposed for seeding) were seeded with crested wheatgrass following the 1996 fire, and crested wheatgrass and Wyoming big sagebrush are the dominant plant species in these areas. Prior to the DSL Fire, cheatgrass and medusahead rye infestations existed in the portions of these plant communities not seeded following the 1996 fire. The soil survey indicates the proposed action would occur on the following two ecological sites:

South Slopes 8-12” PZ-R023XY300OR: The potential for this community based on annual production is 75 percent grass, 5 percent forbs, and 20 percent shrubs with 30-45 percent ground cover.

Swale 10-14” PZ-R023XY202OR: The potential for this community based on annual production is 85 percent grass, 5 percent forbs, and 10 percent shrubs with 70-85 percent ground cover.

Heavy medusahead rye and cheatgrass infestations exist on the same ecological sites outside of, but immediately adjacent to the area proposed for seeding in the DSL Fire. These areas were also burned during the 1996 Burnt Flat Fire and were never reseeded. The high composition of annual grass species in these areas indicates these plant communities have crossed an ecological threshold, in which a natural transition towards a historic climax plant community is unlikely.

Mountain big sagebrush plant communities are the dominant vegetation type at higher elevations (typically above 5,000 foot elevation) or on northern aspect areas of the fire. Prior to the fire, Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis) and bluebunch wheatgrass were the common perennial grass species present in these communities. Low sagebrush plant communities are present in areas of the fire containing shallow soils (less than 12 inches to restrictive layer).

Smyth Creek Fire

Upland vegetation within the Smyth Creek Fire is sagebrush steppe with an elevation range of 5,000 feet to 5,700 feet. Low sagebrush plant communities are the dominant vegetation on approximately 80 percent of the burned area due to shallow soils. Idaho fescue, bluebunch wheatgrass, and Sandberg’s bluegrass were the common perennial grass species prior to the fire. Cheatgrass was present in the lower elevation and drier portions of these plant communities, and has reduced the site potential by displacing native perennial grass and forb species. Approximately 500 acres of these areas were drill seeded with a seed mix of native and desired introduced species. The soil survey indicates the seeded area occurred on the Claypan 12-16 inches PZ ecological site

18

(R023XY216OR). The potential for this community based on annual production is 60 percent grass, 10 percent forbs, and 30 percent shrubs with 20-30 percent ground cover.

Mountain big sagebrush plant communities are the dominant vegetation type on the remaining portion of the Smyth Creek Fire perimeter. Prior to the fire, Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass were the dominant perennial grass species associated with these communities.

Environmental Consequences

For the purposes of this analysis, the CEAA for vegetation is the proposed herbicide application area (Map D), because application of the proposed herbicides and their effects on vegetation would be limited to this perimeter. Past, present, and reasonably RFFAs affecting vegetation within this are shown in Table 3 below. Wild horse and livestock grazing are other past, present and foreseeable actions within this area; however, there would not be cumulative impacts from livestock and wild horse use on BLM lands. The proposed action to seed forage kochia, provides the highest likelihood perennial vegetation would establish and persist to carry out ecological processes. In association with the proposed action are the seeded species selected for the emergency stabilization, which are perennial native and desirable non-native plants. If establishment is successful there would be green plants through much of the growing season. This breaks up the uniform fuel conditions created by annual grasses typically dry and flammable by the end of June. So even in poor production years, there would be plants present to protect the soil. While medusahead rye produces a dense ground cover in good years, following several years of poor production, the soil can be nearly bare. Sheet erosion occurs under the medusahead rye thatch layer. Although not equivalent to an intact sagebrush steppe community, the seeded species create more structure than a medusahead rye-dominated community. Successful seeding of the selected species would interrupt the transition to an annual-grass dominated community, introduce a longer green period through the growing season, provide more habitat values than an exotic annual grass community, and allow plant succession to occur. In comparison to a medusahead rye-dominated community, establishment of native and desirable non-native plants would be a stage on a faster successional trajectory towards a native plant community.

19

Table 3: Upland Vegetation: Past and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions within the

Proposed Herbicide Application Area

PAST ACTIONS FUTURE ACTIONS

ACTION ACRES SQ. MILES MILES ACRES SQ.

MILES MILES RATIO: Length to Area

Wildfires 27,139 42.4 UNK UNK RX Burns 58,065 90.7 7,294 11.4 Seedings 11,231 17.5 6,006 9.4 Open Roads 373.5 Closed Roads 4.5 Fences 230 24 Pipe Line 3.7 2.6

Alternative I: No Action

No areas of high burn intensity were documented in either fire, so natural vegetation recovery is expected on all big and low sagebrush plant communities. Unfortunately, in those plant communities containing cheatgrass and medusahead rye infestations prior to the fires, the first species expected to recover are these invasive annual grasses. Increased annual grass composition sets the stage for crossing an ecological threshold from sagebrush-steppe to an annual-grass dominated plant community in these areas. Without herbicide and seeding treatments, these areas are unlikely to recover to native perennial vegetation due to the competitive nature of these winter annual grasses.

The mountain big sagebrush and low sagebrush plant communities not experiencing annual grass infestations prior to the fire are expected to recover to native perennial vegetation naturally. However, if new weed infestations become established and are not treated with appropriate herbicides, these infestations can grow in size and replace native vegetation. These areas are especially susceptible to noxious weed establishment and spread the first two to three growing seasons following the fires or until desired vegetation fully occupy site resources.

Alternative II: Proposed Action

The Proposed Action was designed to reduce the rate of spread of invasive plant species, which would provide desired perennial vegetation the best opportunity to establish and survive in those plant communities unlikely to recover naturally within both fires.

The proposed action to seed forage kochia, provides the highest likelihood perennial vegetation would establish and persist to carry out ecological processes. Forage kochia has proven capable of establishing and persisting in the presence of medusahead rye and

20

cheatgrass (Monaco et al. 2003; Harrison et al. 2000). Many other species’ do not show this capability (Clements et al. 1997; James et al. 2011). Forage kochia has active growth through mid-summer. There would be green plants through much of the growing season. This breaks up the uniform fuel conditions created by annual grasses typically dry and flammable by the end of June.

The proposed herbicides and their impacts to vegetative communities are described below:

Imazapic: Treating with Plateau would have moderate risk to no risk to the health of upland vegetation (National Veg. FEIS pp. 4-49 and 53). Applications of 6oz/acre (0.178125 pounds/acre of active ingredient Imazapic) would be below the maximum rate of 0.1875 pounds/acre analyzed by the Oregon Veg. FEIS (CH 3, pp. 60) and National Veg. FEIS (Appendix C-9) authorized to treat infested sites (Oregon Veg. FEIS C-9). Risk to the health of terrestrial and Special Status plants at this application rate from direct spray would have moderate risk, offsite drift low risk (Special Status spp.) and no risk (terrestrial), surface runoff no risk, and wind erosion no risk. It has been observed that fall applications with 6oz/acre Plateau would further reduce the risk from moderate to low from direct spray on non-target plant species because these plants are dormant (Davies 2010; Davies and Sheley 2011). Plateau would reduce medusahead rye and allow existing native, desirable nonnative plants or seeded areas the opportunity to compete for available resources such as water, nitrogen and other nutrients, and reestablish the site once occupied by this invasive noxious weed.

Chlorsulfuron: A selective herbicide used on perennial broadleaf weeds. Accidental direct spray or spill poses a moderate to high risk to terrestrial plants and aquatic plants in streams (National Veg. FEIS 4-51). Drift of this herbicide presents low to moderate risk to typical non-target terrestrial plant species such as grasses and higher risk to sensitive terrestrial plant species such as legumes. Surface runoff of this herbicide poses no risk to terrestrial plants. This herbicide may be best used at low rates and spot applications on highly aggressive species and in areas where target plants are the dominant species (National Veg. FEIS 4-51).

Clopyralid: A selective herbicide most effectively used post-emergence for the control of broadleaf weeds. This product can affect susceptible broadleaf plants directly through foliage and indirectly by root uptake from treated soil. Direct spray poses a high risk to sensitive plant species such as legumes; direct spray also poses a low risk to tolerant species such as grasses for applications at the maximum application (Table 4-13 in the National Veg. FEIS pp. 4-57). Offsite drift from low-boom ground application may cause damage to sensitive plant species (National Veg. FEIS pp. 4-56).

Treating noxious weeds with these additional herbicides would benefit upland vegetation within the CEAA by promoting and maintaining the abundance of native and desired introduced vegetation.

21

D. Noxious Weeds

Affected Environment

The Burns District database currently lists 899 noxious weed sites totaling 2,391 acres within the DSL-Smyth Creek Fire Project Area. There have been 12 different noxious weed species documented in the project area. The numbers and acreages associated with each are displayed in Table 4 below:

Table 4: Noxious Weed Distribution Noxious Weed Species Number

of Sites Acres

Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) 474 291.7 Bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare) 227 348.95 Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium) 45 24.6 Musk thistle (Carduus nutans) 1 0.0007 Diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) 3 0.2 Spotted knapweed (Centaurea beibersteinii)

1 0.0008

Mediterranean sage (Salvia aethiopis) 1 0.0008 Perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium)

3 25.4

Whitetop (Cardaria draba) 27 12.9 Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) 17 3.03 Tansy Ragwort (Senecio jacobaea) 1 0.0006 Medusahead rye (Taeniatherum caput-medusae)

99 1682.2

Totals 899 2391.1

Approximately two-thirds of this area has been systematically surveyed and mapped for weeds as part of the landscape-scale Five Creeks Rangeland Restoration Project. Additional weed inventories have been conducted in association with various range improvement projects or prior year’s wildfire monitoring. The road network has been well inventoried. Treatments occur on a regular basis in this project area and surrounding areas. Many of the current weed sites occur along roads, riparian corridors, or water developments and have been treated. Medusahead rye infestations have been treated along roads to minimize opportunities for spread.

22

Table 5. Past Weed Treatments: Year Species Acres

Treated 2011 Canada, Scotch & Bull Thistles 18.67

Medusahead rye 6.9

2010 Medusahead rye 130 Canada, Scotch & Bull Thistles 8.3

White top .3 Diffuse knapweed 2.2

2009 Diffuse knapweed 0.12 Medusahead rye 5.1

Canada, Scotch & Bull Thistles 27.4

2008 Diffuse knapweed 0.8 Medusahead rye 29.4

2007 Medusahead rye 15

2006 Diffuse knapweed 0.16 Scotch thistle .1

2005 Perennial pepperweed 0.3 Diffuse knapweed .3

Scotch thistle 6.7

Table 6. Herbicide treatments in 2005 thru 2011 include the following: Species Herbicides Phenology Site Type Scotch, Canada, and Bull thistles; 2,4- Seedling-early bud Rangeland/ white top; perennial pepperweed; D/Dicamba Riparian/ROW field bindweed(incidental) Scotch, Canada, and Bull thistles; 2,4- Seedling-seed Rangeland/ROW diffuse & spotted knapweed; D/picloram shatter Mediterranean sage (incidental) Medusahead Glyphosate Seedling ROW/Rangeland

Environmental Consequences

Alternative I: No Action

Issues associated with medusahead rye are analyzed under E. Vegetation. The burned areas are also susceptible to invasion or increase of other noxious weeds. Once

23

established, noxious weeds are difficult and expensive to control or eliminate. An early seral plant community, such as a post-fire plant community, is much more susceptible to weed introduction and spread. The burned areas could also become a source of weed contamination for adjacent areas. The same weed vectors that transport noxious weeds into the burned area could distribute noxious weeds from the burn to other areas.

Alternative II: Proposed Action

The Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon ROD October 2010 (Oregon Veg. ROD), Vegetation Treatments on BLM Lands in 17 Western States ROD September 2007 (National Veg. ROD), and the March 1, 2011 Order Amending Injunction [Case No. 83-cv-6272-AA (US District Court)] provide new information that enable BLM districts in Oregon to utilize 13 new active ingredients for the treatment of noxious weeds, in addition to the 4 active ingredients currently available (2,4-D, dicamba, glyphosate, and picloram) under the Burns District's Noxious Weed Management Program EA (OR-020-98-05).

Under the proposed action, herbicide treatments within the project area could include the currently available herbicides plus the following new products: Plateau (Imazapic), Telar XP (chlorsulfuron), and Transline (clopyralid). The product to be used on individual infestations would be determined based on weed species, phenology, type of location, status of desirable vegetation present, and environmental conditions.

A discussion of the three new products follows:

Imazapic: Imazapic (specifically Plateau) is currently the best choice for the treatment of medusahead rye in Burns District. The Ecological Risk Assessments for Imazapic can be found in the Oregon Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides FEIS Table 3-12 (Volume 1. pp. 94) and Table 3-14 (Volume 1 pp. 96-97). The Ecological Risk Assessments for Imazapic can also be found in the National Veg. FEIS, Appendix C (pp. C-26,32,49,69, and 70). All applicable Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and Mitigating Measures from the Oregon Veg. ROD (Attachment A pp. 33-45) would be incorporated (see Appendix C).

Plateau applied in the fall at 6 oz./acre (0.178125 pounds/acre of active ingredient Imazapic) just below the maximum rate of 0.1875 pounds/acre analyzed by the Oregon Veg. FEIS (CH 3, pp. 60) and National Veg. FEIS (Appendix C-9) was selected to treat medusahead rye, because it has effective short-term residual control on this noxious weed. Additionally there would be low risk to perennial non-target vegetation during fall treatments at a rate of 6oz/acre (Davies 2010).

Imazapic would have moderate risk to no risk to the health of upland vegetation (Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States FEIS June 2007 [National Veg. FEIS] pp. 4-49 & 53). Applications of 6oz/acre would be below the maximum rate authorized to treat infested sites (Vegetation

24

Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon FEIS July 2010 [Oregon Veg. FEIS] C-9). Risk to the health of terrestrial and special stat