Laserfiche WebLink
<br />n '~j'" >: / !. <br />r)..){IJ':i1 <br /> <br />urban develDpment. FragmentatiDn is expected tD remain relatively CDnstant in all <br />alternatives and be most pronounced as the result of management activities on <br />private lands adjacent to NFS lands. <br /> <br />. PerforatiDn refers tD holes within otherwise contiguDus blocks of habitat. An example <br />would be a clearcut (or group of clearcuts) surrounded by forest. Perforation will <br />result from road construction, timber management and ski-based resorts. <br />Alternatives Band F have the most pDtential to increase perforation of forest stands. <br />Alternatives I. E and C, in that order, have the least amount of land allocated to <br />management areas that would increase perforation. <br /> <br />Under the biDdiversity tDpic, the DEIS also reviewed the status of the Forest's various <br />physical and biolDgical resources: <br /> <br />Soils. Standards and guidelines will maintain or improve the existing soil resource <br />conditions in all alternatives. <br /> <br />Watersheds. Standards and guidelines will maintain or improve the existing condition of <br />watershed resources in all alternatives. <br /> <br />Air resources. Management activities will not significantly affect the quality of air <br />resources in any alternative. <br /> <br />Mineral and energy resources. Adequate opportunities for the private development of <br />mineral and energy resources will be maintained in all alternatives. <br /> <br />Forested vegetation. Management activities are not expected to significantly change <br />the percentage or distribution of different tree species in any alternative. Changes to <br />structural stages (the developmental stages of tree stands in terms of tree size, age and <br />canopy closure) will be the most significant in Alternatives F and B, which allocate the <br />most acres to timber sales, expansion of ski resorts, and road building. Alternatives I, E <br />and C have the least amount of lands allocated to these uses and are expected to <br />undergo the least change. <br /> <br />. The average size and shape of forest patches are expected to change the most in <br />alternatives that do not stress managing within HRV conditions. Alternatives D and <br />C both stress the HRV, while Alternatives F and B do not require HRV to be a <br />management cDnsideration. <br /> <br />. Inventoried Did growth is protected in all alternatives and is not expected to be <br />affected. More existing stands will age and acquire Did-growth characteristics under <br />Alternatives I, E and C, which contain less timber management, road construction, <br />and ski-based resort allocations than Alternatives Band F. The acreage and <br />distributiDn Df late-successiDnal fDrest (mature and Did-growth fDrest) are expected <br />to follow trends similar to old growth. Late-successional forest acreage and <br />distributiDn, including old growth, are expected to increase significantly across the <br />FDrest in all alternatives. <br /> <br />Rangeland vegetation. About 95 percent of the non.forested vegetation on the Forest is <br />considered to be within or moving towards desired conditions. This is expected to remain <br />fairly constant in all alternatives. No significant changes to the distribution or composition <br />of rangeland vegetatiDn are expected. <br /> <br />-- 24 - <br />