The Gifford Pinchot National Forest proposes to reduce the risk (threat) of large stand-replacing fire through preventive strategies. The area affected by the proposal includes a 19,700-acre portion of the Gifford Pinchot National Forest, known as the Gotchen Planning Area, which includes the Gotchen Late Successional Reserve (LSR) and Matrix lands to the south and east of the LSR.

This area is located on the east slopes of the Cascade Range, within the White Salmon Watershed, south of Mt. Adams and east of the White Salmon River. The action is needed, because of the present risk of losing late-successional function from large-scale ecological disturbances (ongoing defoliation caused by insect and disease activity), and the threat of losing habitat from large, stand-replacing fires.

Forest management actions over the past century, including wildfire suppression and selective logging, have dramatically changed the forested landscape from its historical condition, or reference condition to a landscape dominated by dense, multi-layered stands and concentrations of down wood material. Defoliation from elevated insect and disease activity is impacting late successional habitat in two primary ways. First, the budworm defoliation and resultant tree mortality is affecting fuel loading. Second, within the Gotchen Planning Area approximately 76% of the forest currently provides suitable habitat for the northern spotted owl. The decline and loss of suitable habitat is directly affecting owl populations within the LSR. It is an indication that the late-successional forest stands within the Gotchen area have lost desired function as habitat for other late-successional dependent species.

These issues led the agency to develop alternatives to the proposed action including:

• Alternative A – No Action
• Alternative B – Shaded fuelbreaks are the centerpiece of this alternative. Risk reduction treatments would be implemented across 1,684 acres, including 1,139 acres within the LSR. Shaded fuelbreaks are strategically located along existing roads to “compartmentalize” large blocks of forest that have heavy fuel loads. Additional stands that complement the Shaded Fuelbreaks are treated to reduce stand densities and fuel loads to break up the continuity and arrangement of the stands and fuel beds. In general, the Proposed Action takes a somewhat conservative approach in reducing the understory grand fir within the areas in the LSR hardest-hit by the spruce budworm. This alternative includes 7.5 miles of temporary road construction or reconstruction.
• Alternative C - (The Preferred Alternative) - The emphasis of this alternative is to reduce fire risk and improve late-successional function and resiliency by directly treating fuels and reducing understory density in high-risk areas. This alternative treats a total of 2,220 acres, of which 1,701 acres are within the LSR and 98 acres are within riparian habitat. From a fuels-management perspective, this alternative utilizes a more “traditionalist” approach by directly modifying vegetation and fuel profiles in areas of high fire hazard and high stand densities. Alternative C includes 4.3 miles of temporary road construction or reconstruction.
• Alternative D – This alternative emphasizes treatment of ground and ladder fuels to minimize the spread of fire by treating a total of 1,645 acres, 1,100 within the LSR. Impacts to suitable owl habitat are minimized by restricting live tree removal within proposed fuelbreaks to 10” dbh, or less thereby maintaining overstory canopy cover near current levels. Treatment within riparian habitat is limited to removal of hazard-prone trees less than 6” dbh. Alternative D includes 4.1 miles of temporary road construction or reconstruction.

  All action alternatives include 24.8 miles of road closure or decommissioning within the LSR and Matrix. Specifically, the road management proposals would reduce road density, decrease maintenance costs, reduce impacts to water quality, minimize conflicts with wildlife, and reduce vehicular access to roads not essential for fire suppression.

  In addition, all of the action alternatives include a 10-acre quaking aspen restoration project at Gotchen Creek Guard Station. Quaking aspen historically occupied more of this landscape, but have been out-competed by conifers.

Based upon the effects of the alternatives, the responsible official will decide:

• Whether or not to remove the dead and dying timber from the Gotchen Matrix
• Whether or not to implement risk-reduction activities within the Gotchen LSR
• Whether or not to implement road-related actions—decommissioning, or closing
• Whether or not to implement the quaking aspen restoration project

If the District Ranger decides to implement any of the above, the decisions on the activity type, location, priority, timing and sequencing will be made and documented in the Record of Decision (ROD).