Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />npn3U <br />U J II <br /> <br />All alternatives differ in the level of timber sales offered. Alternative A <br />provides outputs adequate to meet a variety of resource needs. Alternative B <br />would increase harvests based on current plans. Alternative C would harvest <br />timber in excess of demand to provide additional water yield. Alternative D <br />would provide adequate timber to meet the maximum anticipated needs of in- <br />dustry. Alternatives E and F would generally maintain low levels of wood <br />fiber production. <br /> <br />\,ater yield will be increased above current levels in Alternatives A through <br />D as a result of vegetation management. The amount of increase is primarily <br />dependent upon the acreage of vegetation treated, the volume of timber har- <br />vested, and on the size, elevation, aspect, and topographic position of the <br />treatment area. The magnitude of the increase is less than three percent under <br />all alternatives except C which, is slightly greater than three percent. Alter- <br />natives E and F would decrease water yield slightly. <br /> <br />The demand for mineral exploration and development is expected to increase in <br />the future. Alternatives which provide increase in transportation will serve <br />these needs the best. Alternatives A, C, D, would provide the most increase. <br /> <br />Human resource programs are affected by agency budget opportunities rather <br />than resource management activities. There will be no significant impact from <br />any alternative on this program. <br /> <br />All alternatives will cause some effect on the soil resource. Alternatives <br />A, B, C, and D, which have the highest level of resource activity, have the <br />potential to have the greatest adverse affect on soils. Mitigation measures <br />required as. a result of project level planning will minimize these effects <br />and prevent a permanent loss of soil productivity. <br /> <br />All alternatives will result in a net increase in road mileage, ranging from <br />800 miles in Alternative F to 2,900 miles in Alternative C. The largest <br />increases occur in Alternatives A, C, and D. Trail mileage is affected in <br />the opposite way. In general, a lower emphasis on market outputs results in <br />more trail system mileage. Alternatives E, C, and B result in the most trail <br />mileage, although the increases will be low under all alternatives. <br /> <br />The potential for degradation of air quality from Forest related activities <br />is expected to be relatively short-term and localized. Mi t iga tion efforts <br />during activities, such as prescribed burning, are expected to minimize the <br />effects. The largest air quality problems will occur from fireplace and <br />vehicle emissions associated with residential development. Alternatives A, <br />B, and D will likely result in the highest level of this type of development. <br /> <br />The Forest has had a long history of insect infestation. A program is now <br />under way to control the latest epidemic. In the future tree mortality from <br />insects and disease is expected to be least under Alternatives C, A, D, and B <br />respectively since vegetation management programs are the highest. <br /> <br />Wildfire hazard will increase under all alternatives due to substantial in- <br />creases in Forest visitor use. The Forest will deal with this problem through <br />fuel treatment and fire protection programs. Alternatives A, B, C, and D will <br />have more emphasis on fuel reduction programs. <br /> <br />29 <br />