Laserfiche WebLink
<br />M2559 <br /> <br />Alternative S, while all of the eligible rivers are recognized in Alternatives C through I. <br />These rivers will be managed to maintain their eligibility until a detailed suitability study is <br />completed. The second phase of river evaluation, suitability study, will be considered <br />when: <br /> <br />. strong local interest or support is demonstrated for wild and scenic designation, and <br />. Congress expresses interest in a specific river for Wild and Scenic designation, or <br />. a proposed project would alter the free-flowing character of a stream, such as <br />impoundment, or would affect the resources that made the stream eligible. <br /> <br />Wilderness. The Forest manages three areas as Wilderness and shares management <br />of five additional areas with adjacent national forests. About one-third of the Forest has <br />been designated by Congress as Wilderness. In addition to providing a resource for <br />recreation, these areas are also important for maintaining species diversity, protecting <br />threatened and endangered species, protecting watersheds, and providing for scientific <br />research and various social values. Alternatives analyzed in this forest plan revision vary <br />wilderness management by allocating different acreages to be managed as pristine <br />(Management Area 1.11), primitive (1.12) or semi-primitive (1.13). Pristine allocations <br />range from nine percent of the total area of Wilderness on the Forest in Alternative E, to <br />15 percent of the total area in Alternative I. Primitive allocations range from 84 percent of <br />the total area of Wilderness on the Forest in Alternative E, to 91 percent of the total area <br />in Alternative D. Semi-primitive allocations range from 0.3 percent of the total area of <br />Wilderness on the Forest in Alternative I, to six percent of the total area in Alternative E. <br /> <br />Timber Suitability/Allowable Sale Quantity <br /> <br />The identification of areas suitable and available for timber harvest is required in the <br />forest planning process (36 CFR 219.14). The allowable sale quantity (ASQ) is <br />determined from the analysis of suitable timber lands. There is a high level of public <br />interest in designation of land suitable for timber production and the resulting ASQ. With <br />increased public scrutiny of below-cost timber sales, the financial efficiency of the timber <br />program is also a key issue. <br /> <br />Figure 13 displays the lands that are suitable, including scheduled and unscheduled, for <br />timber production for each alternative. Alternatives F, Sand 0 have the largest amounts <br />of suitable timber lands. <br /> <br />Figure 14 displays the ASQ (full implementation level) and volume offer (constrained to <br />the experienced budget level) for sawtimber for the first decade of the Plan's imple- <br />mentation for each alternative. The full implementation level represents the funding of all <br />programs at a level one and one-half times as much as the experienced budget level <br />(the amount of funding that the Forest actually receives each year. shown here as the <br />average annual budget between 1995 and 1997). Alternative F provides the highest <br />ASQ and volume offered under the experienced budget level. <br /> <br />Figure 15 displays the net returns for the timber program for the first decade of the <br />Plan's implementation for each alternative. No alternative is below cost for timber <br />management. Alternative F generates the highest net returns. <br /> <br />-- 39 -- <br />