DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Tribal code
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Final Environmental Assessment for the proposed 13 Mile 2026 Forest Management
Project on the Colville Reservation, Ferry County, Washington
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs
ACTION: Notice of Availability
SUMMARY: This notice is to advise interested parties that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
as lead federal agency, with the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, has prepared a
final Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the 13
Mile 2026 Forest Management Project on the Colville Reservation, Ferry County, Washington.
This notice also announces the EA is now available in hard copy at the addresses below.
ADDRESSES: You may request a hard copy of the EA and FONSI by writing the BIA Colville
Agency, PO BOX 111, Nespelem, Washington, 99155.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randall Friedlander, BIA Colville Agency
Superintendent, at (509) 634-2316 and Chasity Swan, Colville Tribe Integrated Resource
Management (IRMP) Coordinator, at (509) 722-7656.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: The Colville Tribe, through contractual obligations to the
BIA, has proposed the 13 Mile 2026 Forest Management Project. The activities under the agency
proposed action to harvest approximately 15 million board feet of timber on approximately 1,820
acres of tribally owned lands within the San Poil District of the Colville Reservation in Ferry County,
Washington. The activities will occur under guidelines in the Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation Integrated Resource Management Plan (IRMP)(CTCR 2015) and associated Final
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)(CAR 2018).
Authority: This notice is published pursuant to 43 CFR 46.305 of the Department of Interior
Regulations (43 CFR Part 46), the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), and is in accordance with the exercise of
authority delegated to the Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs by 209 DM 8.
Digitally signed by RANDALL FRIEDLANDER
Date: 2026.03.10 15:07:24 -07'00'
Randall Friedlander
Colville Agency Superintendent
Bureau of Indian Affairs
U.S. Department of the Interior
Date
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
13 Mile Forest Management Project,
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Ferry County, Washington
After reviewing the Final Environmental Assessment (BIA-NWR-EA-26-11), I have concluded
that the Federal Action for the 13 Mile Forest Management Project will not significantly affect
the human environment. Therefore, in compliance with Section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as amended, preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement is not required.
Summary of Significance Evaluation (per DOI NEPA Procedures Section 1.2): The
following factors were used to determine that the Proposed Action does not constitute a major
federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment:
1. Duration of Effects:
Both short- and long-term effects were evaluated in Section 4 of the EA. While
construction impacts are short-term, operational impacts are long-term; neither duration
alone indicated significance. Road construction and use has been identified as having
both short and long term effects to water quality. All newly constructed roads will be
closed following project implementation. Mitigation has been developed for the loss and
reduction of wildlife habitat structures and functions to minimize impacts.
2. Beneficial and Adverse Effects:
The Proposed Action provides economic and forest health benefits; adverse effects (e.g.,
habitat disturbance, soil erosion) are mitigated and remain below significance thresholds.
3. Public Health and Safety:
Potential impacts to air quality, water quality, and cultural resources were assessed
(Section 4 of EA) and mitigations developed (Section 5 of EA). No significant health or
safety risks were identified.
4. Economic Effects:
The project will provide approximately $1.7 million dollars in stumpage income for the
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation. Planning and implementation of this
project would provide employment and business opportunities both locally and
regionally. The Forestry, logging and milling industry is a central part of the regional
economy.
5. Quality of Life:
The project enhances the forest health of the landscape and while short-term impacts may
temporarily impact wildlife and cultural plant populations, creating diversity across the
landscape enhances opportunities for the tribal population to hunt and gather without
adversely affecting cultural resources or public services. This project will provide much
needed road maintenance which enhances tribal member access for hunting and
gathering.
Conclusion:
Based on these considerations, the Bureau of Indian Affairs finds that the Proposed Action will
not result in significant environmental effects. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement is
not required.
Digitally signed by RANDALL FRIEDLANDER
Date: 2026.03.10 15:08:42 -07'00'
Randall Friedlander, Superintendent
Colville Agency
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Date
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation
propose the harvest of approximately 15 million board feet (MMBF) of timber from 1,820 acres
of tribal land in the San Poil District of the Colville Reservation.
Prepared by:
The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Colville Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian
Reservation.
Official Decision Maker: Randy Friedlander, Superintendent, Colville Agency, BIA
For further information:
Chasity Swan
IRMP Coordinator
PO BOX 150 Nespelem, WA 99155
(509) 722-7656
Chasity.Swan.bia@colvilletribes.com
March 9, 2026
BIA-NWR-EA-26-11
1
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Table of Contents
1.0 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................3
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Purpose and Need for Action ........................................................................................ 3
1.3 Issues, Concerns and Objectives ................................................................................... 4
1.4 Compliance with Other Codes and Regulations ........................................................... 5
1.5 Determination ............................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Public Involvement ....................................................................................................... 6
2.0 Alternatives Considered .......................................................................................6
2.1 General Discussion: Alternative Design ....................................................................... 6
2.2 Alternative A: No Action .............................................................................................. 6
2.3 Alternative B: Proposed Action .................................................................................... 7
3.0 Affected Environment ........................................................................................ 10
3.1 Forestry ....................................................................................................................... 10
3.2 Hydrology ................................................................................................................... 10
3.3 Fish and Wildlife......................................................................................................... 11
3.4 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................... 13
3.5 Range Management .................................................................................................... 15
4.0 Environmental Consequences ............................................................................. 16
4.1 Forestry ....................................................................................................................... 16
4.2 Hydrology ................................................................................................................... 17
4.3 Fish and Wildlife......................................................................................................... 23
4.4 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................... 25
4.5 Range Management .................................................................................................... 26
4.6 Air Quality .................................................................................................................. 28
4.7 Social and Economic Impacts ..................................................................................... 28
5.0 Mitigation for Resource Protection ..................................................................... 28
6.0 List of Preparers ................................................................................................. 34
7.0 Literature Cited .................................................................................................. 35
8.0 Appendices ........................................................................................................ 37
8.1 Project Maps and Activity Table ................................................................................ 38
8.2 Consultation ................................................................................................................ 46
8.3 Preliminary Transportation Analysis .......................................................................... 58
8.4 Technical Supplement: Prescription Descriptions ...................................................... 62
8.5 Army Corp of Engineers BMPs .................................................................................. 65
8.6 CTCR Holistic Goal and Desired Future Conditions.................................................. 67
2
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
1.0 Purpose and Need
1.1 Introduction
The 13 Mile Forest Management Project (13 Mile FMP) is bounded by 13 Mile Creek and the
reservation boundary on the north, 17-Mile Mountain in the east, 21-Mile Creek to the south and
the Sanpoil River to the west. Forest management activities would occur within the project
boundary of the Louie Creek WMU. The project area is approximately 22,436 acres.
The San Poil Forestry District of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation
(CTCR) proposes harvest of approximately 15 million board feet (MMBF) of timber on 1,820
acres, 3,194 acres of Pre-Commercial Thin (PCT), and 1,148 acres of artificial conifer
regeneration associated to post-harvest activities. Site preparation includes 1,063 acres of
machine pile and burn; 129 acres of broadcast burn and 249 acres of lop and scatter. Broadcast
burn units would require approximately 1.8 miles of fireline construction. The proposed harvest
would require approximately 2.13 miles of new road construction and 6.81 miles of road
reconstruction within the project area.
The federal action (40 CFR 1508.18) is the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approval of the 13
Mile FMP which triggers BIA’s National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) compliance
review of the project 42 USC § 4321- 4347) and associated regulations found in 40 CFR 15001508 (as amended) and 43 CFR 46.
This EA contains the minimum requirements found in 43 CFR 46.310 (a) including brief
discussions of the following:
(1) The proposal;
(2) The purpose and need for the proposal;
(3) The environmental impacts of the proposed action;
(4) The environmental impacts of the alternatives considered; and
(5) A list of agencies and persons consulted.
1.2 Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose of the action is to be able to implement the activities under the federal action to
meet the goals outline in the CTCR 2015 Integrated Resource Management Plan (IRMP)(CTCR
2015). The CTCR utilized consensus building process (Chadwick 1995) for gathering input from
the Tribal Membership to develop the Tribes Holistic Goal and Desired Future conditions
enacted by the Colville Business Council by Resolution 1996-23 (Section 8.6). The CTCR 2015
IRMP has set an annual harvest level of 77.1 million board feet (MMBF). This project would
contribute toward reaching this target volume. The IRMP sets goals and objectives to manage the
Reservation forestlands with management practices that integrate protection for water quality
and quantity, fish and wildlife, soils, vegetation, cultural resources, recreation and scenic beauty.
Forest Management also allows the tribe to maintain a sustainable forest products industry to
provide revenue for the CTCR and economic benefits for the people of the Reservation.
The 13 Mile Project Area contains timber stands that present a high risk of sustaining losses to
several forest insect and disease agents. Harvest of the stands with the most hazard for these
agents – either by: (1) removing the damaged & most susceptible trees or (2) by regenerating the
3
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
stand to trees of the most well adapted species, or (3) by some combination of 1 or 2 – would
reduce the risk of mortality loss.
A more detailed discussion of the forest health issues on the Colville Reservation and the need
for treatment can be reviewed in the 2023 CTCR Forest Management Plan (FMP).
Environmental impacts from the management of CTCR Natural Resources under the IRMP have
been analyzed in the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (CAR 2018).
Figure 1. 13 Mile Project Area on the Colville Indian Reservation.
1.3 Issues, Concerns and Objectives
The following are issues or concerns that the Interdisciplinary Team (3P Team) has identified as
being relevant to the discussion of the “no action” and the “proposed action” alternatives.
4
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Forestry Objectives
Capture the volume of dead and dying trees, provide income and employment for the CTCR.
Bring commercial forest acres into regulation.
Indicators:
a. Acres salvaged by each alternative
b. Estimated stumpage produced by each alternative
c. Estimated volume of timber harvested per alternative
Hydrology Objectives
To minimize erosion and sediment delivery to surface waters and prevent streambank/wetland
disturbance. Maintain ecological function of soils and prevent landslides.
Indicators:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Harvest proximity/adjacency to surface water
Acres likely experiencing increased hydrologic response
Acres likely experiencing increased sediment delivery to surface water
Road construction/use within 200ft of surface water
Acres likely experiencing increased soil loss to surface water
Slope stability and failure risk, soil burn severity
Proximity of known and identified mass wasting sites
Fish and Wildlife Objectives
To maintain and restore critical forest structure, old growth forests, deciduous stands and
wetlands. Ensure wildlife and fish habitat needs are maintained, including large woody debris.
Indicators:
a. Wetland and stream adjacency acres
b. Block size and adjacent acres
c. Road density, miles/square mile
d. Miles of road construction
e. Miles of stream adjacent road
1.4 Compliance with Other Codes and Regulations
This project is designed to be compliant with CTCR Forest Practices Code (208), CTC 4-9:
Hydraulic Project Permitting, 4-10: Water Resources Use and Permitting, the Endangered
Species Act, Clean Water Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Tribal Forest Protection Act,
National Indian Forest Resources and Management Act, National Historic Preservation Act,
Clean Air Act and other applicable Tribal and Federal Regulations.
1.5 Determination
The Colville Agency BIA Superintendent with the concurrence of the Colville Business Council
(CBC) would determine which alternative is selected for implementation.
a) To take no action (Alternative A).
b) To approve the proposed action (Alternative B).
5
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
c) To direct an additional alternative be created.
The BIA Superintendent would also determine whether the environmental consequences are
significant and prepare either a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or determine that
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would be required.
1.6 Public Involvement
In the process updating of the IRMP which provides goals and objectives to manage the Tribes’
natural resources a Colville Reservation Community survey was conducted to document the
priorities, preferences and concerns regarding the management of the Tribes’ natural resources
(Center for Applied Research [CAR] 2015). A total of 1,026 individuals participated.
Respondents indicated the forests provide essential revenue source (47%) and jobs (52%) for the
tribal membership and community. The strongest response on forest management (54%) was for
forest-wide thinning of insect and fire prone tree stands and to treat forest health issues. Many
community meetings were held to help shape the CTCR management strategy during the 2001
and 2015 IRMP planning processes.
The 13 Mile Forest Management Project was presented to the 3P Team in March of 2025. The
3P Team and public also had a field tour of the project area in June of 2025. This project is a part
of that 15-year plan for Forest Resource Management on the Reservation (CTCR 2015).
2.0 Alternatives Considered
2.1 General Discussion: Alternative Design
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ), the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the BIA have developed regulations that
require that a reasonable range of alternatives be considered in NEPA documentation, including
the “Proposed Action” and “No Action” alternatives.
For this project, Alternative A (No Action) is included to fulfill the requirements of NEPA and to
provide baseline values by which to measure the effects of other alternatives. For the purposes of
this document, “no action” means that no harvest or other resource manipulation would occur if
this alternative were adopted.
Alternative B (the Proposed Action) was constructed to fulfill the purpose and need. That is,
Alternative B was designed to:
•
•
•
•
•
Provide stumpage income for the Tribal Government of the Colville Tribes,
Provide employment for tribal members,
Provide opportunities for profit for tribally owned businesses,
Improve general forest health,
Expand forest regulation.
All alternatives are designed to meet all legal and procedural requirements to which the CTCR
and the BIA must adhere.
2.2 Alternative A: No Action
The “No Action Alternative” includes the BIA not approving the 13 Mile 2026 Project and/or the
BIA and Tribe not implementing activities under the project. Under this alternative no timber
6
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
harvest, road reconstruction, or other manipulation of resources would take place. Fuel reduction
treatments would not take place.
2.3 Alternative B: Proposed Action
The Proposed Action Alternative includes the BIA approving the 13 Mile Forest Management
Project and the BIA and CTCR implementing the activities under the proposal. This Alternative
does meet the Purpose and Need of the project.
This alternative was proposed by Forestry to meet forest health needs and provide volume for the
Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) of 77.1 MMBF outlined in the IRMP. Timber harvest of roughly
15 MMBF on approximately 1,820 acres, 3,194 acres of PCT, 1,148 acres of conifer tree
planting. There are an estimated 946 acres of machine pile and burn and 778 acres of broadcast
burn site preparation associated with the various silvicultural treatments (Section 8.4) this entry.
Table 1. Prescription Summary for Alternative B.
Presectiption
Pre-commercial Thin (PCT)
Commercial Treatment
Overstory Removal/Commercial Thin
(OSR/CT)
Regeneration Cut with Reserve Trees (RRT)
Regeneration Cut with Reserve
Trees/Commercial Thin (RRT/CT)
Seed Tree (ST)
Seed Tree/Commercial Thin (ST/CT)
Seed Tree/Overstory Removal (ST/OSR)
Seed Tree/Regeneration Cut with Reserve
Trees (ST/RRT)
Seed Tree/Shelterwood (ST/SW)
Shelterwood (SW)
Shelterwood/Seed Tree (SW/ST)
Post Harvest Treatment, Site Prep
Machine Pile and Burn (MPB)
Broadcast Burn (BB)
Regeneration
Tree Planting – artificial regeneration
Natural Regeneration
Total Non Commercial Treatment
Total Commercial Treatment
Total Post Harvest Treatment, Site Prep
Total Regeneration
Acres
3,194
258
170
148
563
97
45
169
139
178
54
946
778
129
1,300
3,194
1,820
1,724
1,353
The harvest system acres are shown in Table 2. The acres are estimated. Operational decisions
would be made on the ground to determine how each acre would be harvested. Generally, areas
over 39% slope would be tether logged, but there are small, steep inclusions that may be
harvested using a ground-based system such as tractor or forwarder and blocks averaging
between 40% and 70% harvested using tether/cable-assisted ground-based systems. Non7
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
commercial thinning units are not included in these estimates because no logging equipment
would be used for those treatments.
An additional category is included. Tether-Assisted/Ground Based harvest operations have
slopes from 0%-to-70% slope operability and both logging systems would be needed to facilitate
harvest in these blocks.
Table 2. Alternative B harvest systems.
Logging Method
Ground-Based
Tether-Assisted
Acres
1,553
267
Approximately 2.13 miles of new road construction, and 6.81 miles of reconstruction are
required to facilitate logging operations. Nearly 5.83 miles of fireline construction are required
for site preparation and prescribed broadcast burning activities. All fireline rehabilitation, new
construction and reconstruction proposed for closure would be closed upon completion of
harvest/burning operations, site preparation, and planting activities.
Table 3. Alternative B road abandonment, maintenance, new construction and reconstruction.
Activity
Abandonment
Maintenance
Reconstruction
New Construction
Miles
0.75
37.71
6.81
2.13
Definitions for activity:
• Abandonment: Leaving the road prism in a free-drain state which includes removal of all
crossing structures and crossdrains and blocked to highway vehicle access. Typically, the
road prism is crossed at frequent intervals with excavated drainage through the road
prism. Frequency increases with road grade.
• Maintenance: Includes brushing limits of at least 4-6 feet from running surface shoulders,
and reshaping for proper surface water drainage. This may include the addition of
ditchlines and crossdrains.
• Reconstruction: Necessary cutting and reshaping of existing road prisms that are either
deeply degraded or have older vegetation or trees growing in the running surface of the
road.
• Construction: New road prism construction which includes proper location, clearing and
grubbing limits, brushing limits and parameters for road width, grades, turn radii and
turnouts per the Forest Practice Code and Forestry specifications.
Road Closure Plan
All newly constructed roads would be closed following post-harvest activities in accordance with
forest practices 4-7-60 2(E). However, closure may be delayed allowing for planned Forest
Development Activities.
Other Project Design Features
There are many other project design features that are included in this alternative. These are
included to help protect other resources such as fish and wildlife, and riparian areas. Some of
these design features are outlined below. These design features would help mitigate most of the
8
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
issues and concerns raised by Fish and Wildlife, Soils and Hydrology. These design features
would make the project meet the standards of the IRMP and Forest Practices Code and help to
mitigate some of the potential negative impacts of the project.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
All newly constructed roads would be closed following implementation.
Scattered over-story trees would be left on all units to provide a future source of snags
and down woody debris.
Compliance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act), including
section 208 Water Quality Management Planning requirements (33 U.S.C . § 1288).
A combination of tethered and ground-based logging systems would be used, depending
on steepness of the units and road placement.
Summer and winter seasonal restrictions would be placed on units to protect the sensitive
ash cap soils from erosion. Summer would be dry soil conditions; winter restrictions
would require frozen ground and/or 2 feet of snow.
Archeological sites would be buffered and protected from logging damage.
Monitoring for specific wildlife species would occur and operational adjustments would
be made if needed.
Skid trails would be spaced at least 100 feet to reduce soil compaction and displacement.
When timber harvest takes place, Best Management Practices (BMP’s) outlined in the Colville
Confederated Tribes Forest Practices Handbook (208 Handbook), dated October 2006, would be
employed. Timber contract compliance by the Timber Sale Officer (TSO) would be the foremost
method ensuring that the BMP’s are followed and implemented. Proper maintenance of roads
and skid trails after logging operations would be implemented to reduce erosion. Designated skid
trails and tethered logging would help reduce impacts on the soil resources. Slash treatments, on
the ground and at the landings, would be either machine pile and burn, broadcast burn, lop and
scatter or left on site. The continual management of the stands including monitoring from initial
stand development to the maturity of the stand would be completed by various forestry staff such
as Silviculturists, Timber Sale Officers, and forest development staff. The monitoring would
ensure the individual stands are going down the anticipated pathway to the desired future
conditions.
Culverts would be replaced at certain locations depending on the necessity which would be
determined by the TSO’s, District Officer, the road engineer, or ETD NPS Management
Coordinator. Also, new culverts would be installed to allow the continual flow of water to
remain in the same established channel and accommodate the estimated discharge of a 100-year
flood event. Water sources would be identified on the FPA/HPA application as potential sites to
obtain water for road watering, dependent on approval from the Water Administrator. Calcium
chloride may be used on sections of road as an alternative to road watering.
Riparian Management Zones (RMZ) would be identified in the planning process using stream
classification maps and determined by Presales Department personnel during block boundary
layout. RMZ buffers would follow requirements of the Forest Practices Code (CTC 4-7), dated
October 2006. During implementation of road construction activities and logging operations,
some trees may need to be harvested, if they present a safety hazard.
9
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
3.0 Affected Environment
3.1 Forestry
General Discussion
The 13 Mile project is located approximately 20 miles north of Nespelem, WA, within the Upper
13 Mile Watershed Management Unit (WMU) and the Lower 13 Mile WMU. The Colville
Reservation boundary is the north boundary of the project area. The project area has common,
adjacent boundaries with the following Watershed Management Units: west of the Loony Creek;
northwest of the Upper Gold Creek; north of the following WMU’s: Clark Creek, Hayden Creek,
and Swimptkin Creek; northeast of the 13 Mile Creek; and east of Brown Pass Project Boundary.
Little Moses Mountain is part of the south boundary and a landmark of the 13 Mile Project
boundary. Crawfish Lake is a landmark, part of the north boundary of the project.
Forest Health
Past management practices of fire suppression, reduction in grazing, and single tree selection had
the cumulative effect of creating a forest that is very different ecologically than the historically.
Another aspect of forest health is that of direct damage to trees by insects, diseases, and parasitic
plants. The forest condition is described in detail in the 2023 CTCR Forest Management Plan
and 2015 IRMP. Please refer to that those plans to understand the forest health issues occurring
on the Colville Reservation.
The 13 Mile Project Area was last managed around 2011. Previous harvest history shows a mix
of intermediate cuts such as Commercial Thins and Improvement Cuts such as
Seedtree/Overstory removals and RRTs. Maintenance treatments are planned in some of these
same blocks this entry. The Tunk Block and Northstar Fires of 2015 had a major impact on the
project area.
3.2 Hydrology
Water Resources
Within the project area, there are 109.44 miles of streams and 162.74 acres of wetland. Within
treatment blocks, there are 2.36 miles of streams. The proposed project plan includes 446.98
acres of planned harvest activities within 200 ft. of hydrologic features. Harvest activities would
occur on 284.24 acres within 200 ft. of streams, and 211.34 acres within 200 ft. of wetlands.
Table 4. Hydrologic features within the 13 Mile Project Area footprint.
Hydrologic Feature
Potentially Affected Size
Mapped Streams
109.44 mi
Mapped Wetlands
162.74 ac
The present condition of the affected environment is variable across the project area. The
affected environment is influenced by the 13 Mile Project Area in the San Poil District of the
Colville Reservation located in northeastern Washington State. This project area contains the
entire Thirteenmile Creek, Seventeenmile Creek, and South Seventeenmile Creek WMUs, as
well as a portion of the Upper San Poil River WMU.
10
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
The 13 Mile project area is contained within the Upper San Poil River RMU; this drainage is not
influenced by any drainages on the Reservation but is influenced by activities north of the
Reservation border, including on private, state managed, and federal lands. The project area is
bounded to the east by South Seventeenmile Mountain, which forms the drainage divide between
the San Poil River drainage, and the Hall Creek drainage, which flows to the Columbia River.
The western boundary of the project area is the San Poil River, which flows north to south before
feeding the Columbia, and which is influenced by numerous minor drainages on the east and
west sides of the valley. To the south, the project area ends at the divide between the South
Seventeenmile Creek drainage and the Twentyone Mile Creek drainage.
In addition to direct impacts in, primarily, the Seventeenmile Creek watershed, landscape-scale
impacts from activity in the 13 Mile Project Area would be detected in the main stem of the San
Poil River. Generally, timber sales are active for five years after approval, resulting in five years
of direct impacts from timber harvest, though indirect impacts can last longer. In the past five
years (since 2020), two other green timber sales have occurred in the Upper San Poil River
RMU: Thirty Mile (2021), and a portion of McAllister Creek (2023). Additionally, 5,931 acres in
the Upper San Poil River RMU burned in 2021 Summit Trail fire, as well as multiple additional
minor (<100 acres) fires. The Summit Trail Fire was followed by 5,333 acres of proposed
salvage harvest within the Upper San Poil River RMU, though none within the 13 Mile project
area. The 13 Mile project area is located within Range Unit 2, which is not currently utilized.
Water resources in the project area include 109.44 miles of streams and 162.74 acres of
wetlands, as well as an unknown number of seeps and springs. Seventeenmile Creek is the major
watercourse through the project area, flowing east to west before joining the San Poil River.
South Seventeenmile Creek is a major, perennial tributary to Seventeenmile Creek. Thirteenmile
Creek is another major perennial tributary to the San Poil River; however, it initiates out of the
project area, within the national forest, flows into the project area, then crosses the northern
boundary of the Reservation again, before flowing into the San Poil. Other tributaries to
Seventeenmile and Thirteenmile Creeks include North Fork Seventeen Mile Creek and multiple
other type 3 streams, which are generally perennial and fish-bearing, and numerous type 4
streams, which are generally intermittent, high-gradient headwater streams. Seventeenmile and
Thirteenmile Creeks are both perennial and fish-bearing.
Water quality is monitored on Seventeenmile Creek above the confluence with the San Poil
River (Site ID: SEV049). Water quality monitoring and analysis from 2018-2023 identified no
exceedances of the standards outlined in Colville Tribal Code 4-8 Water Quality Standards
(Axthelm 2024).
3.3 Fish and Wildlife
Wildlife
The 13 Mile Project Area provides habitat and life cycle requirements for a variety of wildlife
species. Habitat components important for life requirements vary by species and guilds. Priority
and other wildlife species and habitats can be found in “Wildlife Management Program Goals
and Objectives” and “Fish and Wildlife Section of the CTCR IRMP” (CTCR 2015).
Fish
11
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Within the 13 Mile project area are several fish bearing streams, including Seventeenmile, South
Seventeenmile, and Thirteenmile creeks, as well as the mainstem Sanpoil River and several
smaller type 4 creeks. These streams are all part of the Sanpoil River basin, which flows into
Lake Roosevelt, and are an important and vital system for both resident and reintroduced
anadromous fish species. Fish species present in these streams are Redband Rainbow Trout
(Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri), Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), Mountain Whitefish
(Prosopium williamsoni), suckers (Catostomidae), native minnows (Leuciscidae), Sculpins
(Cottidae), and reintroduced Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha).
Additionally, the Lake Roosevelt drainage area is included in the Northeast Washington
Research Needs Area of the Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit for bull trout (S. confluentus; USFWS
2002). Bull trout Threatened and Endangered Species federal status is currently listed as
“threatened” while Washington State considers bull trout a candidate for listing. However, Bull
trout in the 13 Mile project area and surrounding areas are extremely rare and believed to be
extirpated. Historically, populations likely occurred in several tributaries to the Columbia River
above Grand Coulee Dam (Lake Roosevelt). However, currently no spawning populations exist
within the Northeast Washington Research Needs Area.
Since 2011, fewer than 25 bull trout have been documented in the mouths of tributaries to Lake
Roosevelt or in Lake Roosevelt/Columbia River itself. The majority of observations occur in the
north end of Lake Roosevelt near the Canadian border, with infrequent observations near mouths
of tributaries. In 2012, a single adult bull trout was documented in the lower Sanpoil River Arm
of Lake Roosevelt. Bull trout observation data within the Northeast Washington Research Needs
Area is not well tracked, is sporadic, and often anecdotal, although they are rarely encountered
during large-scale standardized fishery surveys. Bull trout present in the Northeast Washington
Research Needs Area likely derive from local populations in the Coeur d’Alene/Spokane River
or Pend Oreille River basins, or from tributaries to the Columbia River in Canada and have been
entrained over dams. While bull trout are rarely encountered in Lake Roosevelt, bull trout are
very unlikely to be impacted by activities within the project area.
Federally Threatened or Endangered Species
Federally Threatened or Endangered Species: Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) of 1973 as amended, and its implementing regulations found at 50 CFR 402,
require federal agencies to insure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such
agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or
threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat.
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668c), of 1940, as amended, and
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712), of 1918, as amended, prohibits anyone, without
a permit, from “Taking” eagles or any bird, including their parts, nests, or eggs. Within this Act,
eagles/nests/eggs/young are not to be “Disturbed” including agitated or bothered. Aerial surveys
have been conducted in the past by the Colville Tribe to identify eagle and raptor nests. All
known nests are buffered and have seasonal restrictions.
12
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Table 5. US-DOI-Fish and Wildlife Service: Official Species List.
Species
Canada Lynx
North American Wolverine
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Bull Trout
Monarch Butterfly
Suckley's Cuckoo Bumble Bee
WhiteBark Pine
Scientific Name
Status
Lynx canadensis
Threatened
Gulo gulo luscus
Threatened
Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Threatened
Salvelinus confluentus
Threatened
Danaus plexippus
Proposed Threatened
Bombus suckleyi
Proposed Endangered
Pinus albicaulis
Threatened
Information for Planning and Conservation was acquired from the United States Department of
Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (USDOI-FWS) for Endangered Species Act Species List. An
Official Species List from the United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
(USDOI-FWS), is included.
3.4 Cultural Resources
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) as amended, and its implementing
regulations found at 36 CFR Part 800, require federal agencies to identify cultural resources for
federal action. The significance of the resource must be evaluated using established criteria
outlined at 36 CFR 60.4. If a resource is determined to be a historic property, Section 106 of the
NHPA requires that effects of the undertaking on the resource be determined. A historic property
is “…any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure or object included in, or eligible
for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, including artifacts, records, and material
remains related to such a property…” (NHPA, 16 USC 470w, Sec. 301[5]).
“Cultural resources” include archaeological sites, standing structures, and locations or landforms
that are important to the identity of the indigenous people of the area (i.e., traditional cultural
properties [TCPs]). For more details on the affected cultural environment, please consult the
CCT Cultural Resource Management Plan (CCT 2007), the cultural resources overview for the
Colville Reservation (Gough 1990), and the FEIS for the IRMP (CAR 2018).
The 13 Mile Forestry Project is within the ancestral lands of the snpəʕʷílx (Sanpoil) Tribe, who
can identify their ancestry back over a thousand years in this area. The languages of the twelve
tribes comprising the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation have been grouped into
general Salishan and Sahaptian language families. The majority spoke the Interior Salish
languages of nxaɁamcín and nsləxcín, though the Sahaptian languages of the Nez Perce
(nímípuɁ) and Palus (palús) were also spoken. The language of the snpəʕʷílx is nsləxcín.
For the purposes of consultation with the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) under
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, theses timber treatment areas, roads, and
attendant landings shall be considered the Area of Potential Effect (APE).
There have been two previous surveys within and immediately adjacent to the 13 Mile Project
area (Gough 1990; Meyer 2006). These inquiries have resulted in the documentation of twelve
archaeological sites and one cemetery within or immediately adjacent to the 13 Mile project area.
A review of the Colville Confederated Tribes History/Archaeology (H/A) Program databases
resulted in the documentation of two Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs).
13
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
A search of Bureau of Land Management/General Land Office (BLM/GLO) records indicates
that there is one historic land patent and multiple historic trails in the northwestern portion of the
project area. Finally, an examination of Clair Hunt’s 1916 map of the South Half of the Colville
Indian Reservation determined there are no historic Indian allotments in the project area.
For the current project, a predictive model was used to select areas within the 13 Mile Project
area for a cultural resource survey. Three new cultural resources were identified and recorded.
Eighteen resources have been documented within the 13 Mile project area. Due to the proximity
to proposed treatment blocks and road, two of these sites are located within the APE of this
project. The remaining resources appear to be eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP) but are outside of the project APE and should not be affected by project
implementation.
All TCPs and archaeological sites must meet at least one of the following criteria to be
considered eligible for evaluation to the National Register: A) they must be associated with
events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history. B) They must be
associated with the lives of people significant to our past. C) They must embody the distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or they represent the work of a
master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable
entity whose components make individual distinction. D) They must have yielded, or be likely to
yield, information important in prehistory or history. Additionally, to be a “property” a TCP
must have tangible boundaries (36 CFR 60.4; Parker & King 1998).
Shannon and Moura (2007) have aptly observed that due to the unique nature of TCPs, the
standards identified above must also be evaluated with perception of Native American history.
When reviewing TCPs for continued use of at least 50 years, for instance, it must be recalled that
federal and state policies common in the 1800s restricted, regulated and denied access to
property to Tribal people which had previously been in their exclusive territory. Oftentimes,
Indian people may shift their area of use to adjacent or nearby locations if a previously utilized
property suddenly (and beyond Tribal control) became unavailable. Therefore, a location may
still retain value and continue to be a TCP when access is restored (Shannon & Moura 2007).
In pre-contact and historic times, the knowledge of these TCPs and their locations and use
provided people with a means for subsistence and important cultural items for personal use or
trade, cultural practices which continue to this day. Additionally, the nature of these sites and
their close proximity to other documented cultural resources, including pre-contact, historic and
additional TCP sites increases their potential to yield information important to the CTCR.
Oral history accounts of the region identify the general areas of Thirteen Mile Creek, Seventeen
Mile Creek and South Seventeen Mile Creek as possessing traditional value in addition to those
locations observed during the archaeological survey. It is the position of the CCT that “A place is
significant due to its location and the meaning assigned to it, not the language of the name by
which it is known. While recording place names in the original languages is of immeasurable
value, the places would continue to have meaning and significance regardless of the language
used to describe them (George 2011).
It is likely that cairns, rock alignments, talus pits and other rock features may be found
throughout the area. Pictographs are common in this region and have a high potential to be
present on the flats adjacent to streams and springs where people would have camped while
14
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
taking advantage of upland resources. Small pre-contact camps may be present on the upland
areas adjacent to springs or creeks, or in sheltered canyons. Evidence of early historic-period
occupation, logging and mining features and\or graves may be present within the project area, as
suggested by the presence of historic allotments. Picture trees (i.e., old growth pine trees with
anthropomorphic figures carved into them) are possible in this area, as well as more customary
peeled pines.
The project area is located within the Upper Sanpoil River watershed. Traditional religious use
of sweathouses perpetuate within the Upper Sanpoil River watershed, as do harvest of native
culturally significant plant species across the landscape. This area is the principle gathering
location for at least ten different plant species (Table 6) for consumption, construction, weaving
and religious purposes (Marker et al. 2012). Nine springs, which the CCT attribute significant
cultural value to, are documented within this watershed. Eleven locations within the watershed
have been documented as important areas for water-related resource use. Some of these areas
include West Fork, Twentyonemile Creek, Thirtymile Creek, Devil’s Elbow, Central Peak, the
Sanpoil River, and Twentythreemile Creek.
Table 6. Traditional Cultural Plants gathered within the Upper Sanpoil River Watershed (Marker et al.
2011).
Lichen,
Wild Mushrooms,
Sages,
Bryoria fremontii
Multiple Species
Artenusua spp
Huckleberry,
Serviceberry,
Wild thimbleberry,
Vaccinium spp
Amelanchier alnifolia
Rubus spp
Foamberry,
Woods strawberry,
Ponderosa Pine,
Shepherdia canadensis
Fragaria virgiana
Pinus ponderosa
Cedar,
Thuja plicata
3.5 Range Management
Range Program Operations
The “13 Mile” forest project area includes large portions of both the USGS Hydrologic Unit
(HUC) “17 Mile Creek” and the “21 Mile Creek” HUC. The “13 Mile Natural Resource Project”
proposed treatment blocks are dispersed throughout the forest project area and intersect with
parts of Range Unit 2. Range Unit 2 is a Range Unit currently permitted for livestock grazing,
with approximately 40 pairs of livestock permitted in the project area from May 1st to November
1st.
The 13 Mile Forest project area receives on average 16”-30” of precipitation per year with most
in the form of winter snow. The change in precipitation values generally follow the change in
elevation values from near 4600 ft at the most Western portion of the project area to 5500 ft at
the Eastern portion of the project area.
15
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
The NRCS database lists seven forest habitat types in the blocks proposed for treatment. The
four most occurring habitat types are listed in order below. The most notable shrub species listed
is common snowberry, mallow ninebark, oceanspray, and big huckleberry. Most common
understory grass species in this area is pinegrass with Idaho fescue, and blue wildrye also
present.
Douglas fir/pinegrass
Grand Fir/Twinflower
Subalpine Fir/Huckleberry
Douglas-fir/ninebark, pachistima
4.0 Environmental Consequences
Summary Table of Issues Indicators
Table 7. Summary table of issue indicators for goals and objectives.
Resource Issue
Issue Indicator
Alt. A
Alt. B
Vegetation Forest Health
/Timber
Acres Treated
0
Support of Tribal
Wood Processing
Timber Volume
for Processing
0
1,820 acres
3,194 acres PCT
1,353 acres Planting
15 MMBF
Tribal Income
Projected
Stumpage
$0
$1,700,000
4.1 Forestry
Impacts to Forestry Resources Alternative A: No Action
Under this alternative, no conifer trees would be harvested. No timber stumpage revenue would
be generated. No Forest Management Deduction (10%) funds would be generated. No logging
industry employment would be generated. No silvicultural treatments would be implemented.
Forest health issues and concerns could possibly worsen, and the desired objectives would not be
achieved in regards to desired future conditions. Overstocking of forest stands; predominance of
climax tree species, over mature trees, tree mortality, competing vegetation, forest insects and
diseases problems and other current forest conditions would continue to affect the overall forest
health. The potential forest site-productivity may never be achieved on some locations.
Forest roads would not be maintained and/or reconstructed, and potentially upgraded by culvert
installation and erosion control which would affect the access and use of resources by the
Colville Tribe and public. Under-sized culverts and plastic culverts would not be replaced.
Impacts to Forestry Resources Alternative B: Proposed Action
•
•
16
$1.7 million dollars of profit for the CTCR with a harvest of 15 MMBF
Forest health would improve, diseased trees would be lessened, and disease-resistant
species would be regenerated naturally and with planting.
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
•
•
•
Understory Douglas-fir, Subalpine/Grand Fir, Lodgepole Pine encroachment would be
piled and/or burned, reducing the likelihood of catastrophic fire and prepare site for
regeneration of desirable species.
Density would be reduced in overstocked stands, creating a healthier forest.
Desired Future Condition’s outlined in the IRMP would be met over time.
Some of the potential negative impacts that a timber sale may create, include the following:
Visual landscape changes or disturbances would occur. Man-made “signs” (ribbon, tags, paint)
are introduced into the area to guide the forest management. Noise and dust are created from
logging operations. Existing vegetation is temporarily disturbed, but their resiliency to
disturbances would allow them to come back. Skid trails and landings are created. Woody slash
material is created.
4.2 Hydrology
Impacts to Hydrology Resources Alternative A: No Action
The no action alternative would allow for the natural ecological process to continue. Stream
channel hydraulics and associated riparian vegetation would not be impacted by harvest related
activities. Effective ground cover and hydraulic roughness would remain, continuing to provide
overland flow attenuation and prevent nonpoint source pollutant delivery to downslope
watercourses. Retention of mature vegetation would continue to provide canopy interception and
reduced rain splash erosion. Infiltration would remain high, and rill and scour erosion would
remain minimal. Additionally, soil structure would be maintained in the current state. All
methods of timber harvest, ground- or cable-based, result in some amount of soil disturbance.
Soil compaction generally occurs in locations where machinery tracks have traveled (particularly
in wet conditions), while destruction of soil structure and subsequent sediment mobilization
generally occurs as a result of ground-based operation on steep slopes and a lack of traction.
Transport of trees by logging equipment also results in soil disturbance and transportation. These
effects would be avoided through the No Action Alternative, maintaining soil structure, density,
and productivity.
Road density would be maintained at the current level under the No Action Alternative. Existing
road density in almost all WMUs in the project area are higher than the desired condition
outlined in the IRMP (desired: 4.0 mi/mi2; current: Thirteenmile Creek: 4.31 mi/mi2,
Seventeenmile Creek: 4.09 mi/mi2, Upper San Poil River: 5.09 mi/mi2), but lower than the
density that would be achieved as a result of the preferred alternative. Road density in the South
Seventeenmile Creek is lower than the desired conditions outlined in the IRMP (3.7 mi/mi2); the
No Action Alternative would maintain this compliance with desired density. The No Action
Alternative would also not involve reconstruction of any existing roads, allowing existing
vegetative cover and stability to be maintained. Maintaining the lowest road density (i.e. the
existing condition) would provide the closest approximation of natural hydrologic conditions,
between the two scenarios. High road densities are detrimental to watershed hydrology primarily
due to the interception and diversion of water from natural flow paths. When water flowing
down a hillslope is intercepted by a road prism, ditch, blocked or undersized culvert, or other
infrastructure, that water is generally diverted or lost to evaporation, rather than continuing as
overland, shallow subsurface, or groundwater flow. As climate change advances, it becomes
increasingly important to retain water on the landscape. High road density contributes to the loss
17
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
of water on the landscape through decreased infiltration and increased evaporation, and each
additional road increases these effects.
Existing roads in the 13 Mile project area are maintained to various levels of stability. 211
existing segments, with a total length of 97.22 miles, were identified for review; segments were
selected for review if they were within or adjacent to swales, draws, wetlands, streams, or other
aquatic resources. Additionally, some segments had previously received restoration treatment,
and were identified to prevent unauthorized use. Under the No Action Alternative, none of these
segments would be reconstructed, and use would not increase. However, segments that have not
been maintained may continue to be at risk of failure, and crossings obstructing flow and fish
passage would continue to do so.
Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no changes to surface water, wetlands, or
floodplains, and no direct, indirect, short-term, long-term, or cumulative impacts to water
resources anticipated.
Impacts to Hydrology Resources Alternative B: Proposed Action
•
•
•
•
2.13 miles of new road construction, 6.81 miles of road reconstruction, and 37.71 miles
of road maintenance
0.83 miles of new construction, 3.51 miles of reconstruction, and 5.98 miles of
maintenance within 200 ft of hydrologic features
Harvest activities within 200 ft of streams – 284.24 ac
Harvest activities within 200 ft of wetlands – 211.34 ac
The proposed action would involve 1,754 acres of commercial timber harvest. Throughout the
project area, these activities overlap and abut streams and wetlands, with 446.98 acres of harvest
activities within 200 feet of wetlands and streams.
Harvest operations, including the use of heavy machinery to fell and skid timber, cause soil
compaction and erosion; additionally, as a result of decreased vegetation, interception,
infiltration and water use are decreased, and a greater volume of water occurs as overland flow.
This can result in great sediment transportation to downslope streams and wetlands, resulting in
decreased water quality. Additionally, harvest operations create linear features such as skid trails.
If oriented parallel to the slope, or located in swales and topographic low points, these linear
features channelize water, and lead to rill and gully erosion, sediment transportation, and road
failure. These effects can be minimized by locating skid trails perpendicular to slope direction,
and through the use of cable logging rather than ground-based harvest systems, particularly on
steeper slopes.
All road construction and use associated with proposed timber harvest activities would lead to
soil disturbance and loss as well as alteration of watershed hydrology (Hunner 2014).
Specifically, road miles within 200 ft. of surface water are statistically likely to deliver
sediment/erosion to surface water (Dubé et al 2004). Road reconstruction and new construction
effects on water quality, hydrologic processes, and aquatic habitat would be the longest-ongoing, longest-lasting, and highest-degree negative impacts resulting from the proposed action.
The use of heavy machinery to create and redo roads would result in immediate sediment
delivery to adjacent waterbodies.
Additionally, reconstruction results in soil compaction and disturbance, both of which are
significant causes of decreased soil health, eventual runoff channelization and continued erosive
18
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
losses. Repeated improper reconstruction procedures that fail to reincorporate disturbed material
into the road prism create linear features that channel water away from natural water features.
When these features are created adjacent to streams, heavy flow events can cause the relocation
of the active channel into the road prism, creating a safety hazard, and drastically altering the
natural hydrology of the area.
The impacts from the proposed project to the affected environment are multi-faceted. Harvest
impacts include alterations in flow paths due to skid trail creation and machinery operation;
reduced infiltration and increased erosion due to soil compaction from machinery operation;
increased sediment and nutrient delivery to surface waters; loss of wetland and riparian
vegetation; and potential delivery of herbicide to surface waters, among others.
Prior to initiation of harvest, calculation of exact miles of skid trails is not feasible. However,
impacts can be estimated through looking at the number of blocks and acreage of harvest
impacts. 1,744 acres, across 58 blocks, are proposed for ground based (tractor and cable assist)
harvest. Blocks range from approximately 500 to 3,000 feet in width oriented perpendicularly to
the hillslope. Assuming an average block width of approximately 1,500 feet (a conservative
estimation), with average skid trail spacing of 100 feet (as required by Colville Tribal Code 4-7
Forest Practices), more than 850 skid trails would be created in blocks prescribed for groundbased harvest. Using aerial imagery from late summer 2022, skid trail spacing in previous sales,
including Summit Trail salvage blocks in the Upper Lynx Creek WMU, was determined to be
closer to an average of roughly 50 foot spacing. With this knowledge, we can assume that skid
trail creation could be as much as double what is estimated above in ground-based harvest
blocks. Additionally, 301.14 acres of proposed ground-based harvest would occur within 200
feet of hydrologic features. The potential for sediment and nutrient delivery to surface water via
skid trail creation is elevated in these acres.
Tethered logging, which involves the use of a winch for assistance in machinery operation of
slopes, is proposed for 247.3 acres of blocks. Existing Tribal Code does not allow for operation
of ground-based harvest systems on slopes over 35% due to potential soil impacts, recognizing
the increased magnitude of machinery impacts as slope increases. However, tethered logging has
been adopted for use on slopes up to 70%, to increase efficiency and decrease costs of harvest.
Where any ground-based harvest system is used on vulnerable soils, the potential for compaction
and erosion is increased. When these factors are combined with steep slopes and proximity to
aquatic resources, the potential for sediment delivery and resource damage is significant. 9.97 of
these acres are located within 200 feet of hydrologic features (streams and wetlands), increasing
the potential for sediment delivery due to the combination of ground-based operation and steep
slopes.
Road development and use impacts include: alterations in flow paths due to the creation of linear
landscape features (roads) perpendicular to natural slopes; reduced infiltration and increased
erosion due to the creation of impervious or resistant surfaces; and increased transport of vehicle
associated contaminants (including 6PPD-q, hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide from exhaust,
etc.), among others.
Proposed reconstruction, new construction, and maintenance in the 13 Mile project area would
occur on 46.65 miles of road. 4.65 miles of reconstruction and new construction would occur
within 200 feet of hydrologic features. High road densities detrimentally affect water retention
on the landscape, creating interception points that redirect flow from reaching creeks, streams,
19
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
and wetlands. Abandonment and revegetation of roads can mitigate some of the effects of high
road density, improving infiltration and decreasing overland flow, but retention of road prisms,
nonnative roadbed material, and artificial crossing structures such as culverts would continue to
alter hillslope hydrology regardless of vegetation establishment. Additionally, studies have
shown that the chemical 6PPD-quinone, used in the manufacture of rubber tires, can cause acute
mortality in salmonids, including rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), found in streams across
the Colville Reservation. Roads in proximity to salmonid bearing waters may result in 6PPD-q
related effects.
Therefore, action in this area would have direct physical changes on the environment. The
Proposed Action alternative would have cumulative effects resulting from road construction and
timber harvest.
Surface Water:
The proposed alternative would generate sediment through the creation of skid trails, increase
overland flow through the removal of vegetation, and create interception points through the
construction and reconstruction of roads. A minimum of 21 new culverts would be installed
during this project, along with replacement of 3 existing culverts. Road miles and road density in
the project area would increase due to the 2.13 miles of new road construction.
Direct Impacts Short-Term
Timber harvest activities are likely to result in short term impacts to surface water quality
through the generation of sediment. Though turbidity has previously not been an issue in
Seventeenmile Creek, short term exceedances may occur due to timber harvest and use of heavy
machinery. Additionally, turbidity is often associated with dissolved oxygen and temperature.
Increased heating of surface water, particularly in headwaters and tributaries, is likely, due to
removal of vegetative cover. Blocks 324074 and 324098 are clustered around the confluence of
the North Fork Seventeenmile Creek and the main stem of Seventeenmile Creek; the cumulative
impact of these acres in this area specifically would likely impact stream temperature and
turbidity. Degradation of temperature, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity metrics would likely be
short term impacts of timber sale activities. Road construction and reconstruction is responsible
for interruption of natural landscape hydrology, creating diversion points perpendicular to
hillslopes. These diversions result in altered flow paths, increased evaporation, and increased
sedimentation. Short term water quality would likely decrease for these reasons as well. These
impacts would be sustained over the duration of the project, approximately five years.
Direct Impacts Long-Term
Long term impacts to surface water would continue until vegetation is established and disturbed
areas are stabilized. As skid trails and roads are seeded with herbaceous vegetation, soils would
become more stable, and water quality would gradually return to pre-harvest conditions. As
larger vegetation and trees establish, surface water quantity would decrease with increased
evapotranspiration. Depending on the duration and severity of impacts to natural hillslope
hydrology, flow paths may be permanently altered by the creation of skid trails and roads.
Additionally, roads would not be deconstructed at the conclusion of the sale. Therefore, road
density impacts on interception and diversion would persist, and road use would continue into
the foreseeable future. Crossing structures would also not be removed, and impacts from
improperly installed or sized structures would continue to impact water quality in the long term.
20
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Additionally, any road use over streams would continue to deliver sediment and contaminants to
the surface water at the crossing.
Cumulative Impacts
As discussed above, two other timber sales have occurred in the Upper San Poil River RMU in
the past 5 years. These timber sales have occurred outside of the 13 Mile WMU, but all
contribute to impacts on the water quality in the San Poil River. The 30 Mile timber sale
involved 3,308 acres of commercial timber harvest, while the McAllister sale included 1,208
acres in the Upper San Poil River RMU. The 13 Mile Sale would add an additional 1,754 acres
of timber harvest in the drainage. Additionally, 5,931 acres in the Upper San Poil River RMU
burned in 2021 Summit Trail fire, followed by 5,333 acres of proposed salvage harvest within
the Upper San Poil River RMU. Cumulatively, this is 11,603 acres of harvest in the past 5 years.
Each acre of timber harvest results in sediment generation, nutrient transport, and hydrologic
alteration.
Wetlands:
The proposed forestry activities would impact wetland ecosystems through soil disturbance,
hydrological alteration, and disruption of vegetative community. 211.34 acres of harvest
activities occur within 200 feet of wetlands. Forestry associated road work includes 0.30 miles of
new road construction, 1.21 miles of road reconstruction, and 1.52 miles of road maintenance
within 200 feet of wetlands.
Direct Impacts Short-Term
Extensive tree removal is indicated in the Seed Tree/Overstory Removal Rx Stand ID 328030
which contains a portion of E.SPU_534, a potential Type III, Freshwater Forested/Shrub
Wetland, associated with South Seventeen Mile Creek. Also along South Seventeen Mile Creek,
Stand ID 328053 (which does not have an Rx assigned as of 17 NOV 2025), infringes upon
potential Type III, Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland, E.SPU_647. Harvest activities at these
locations are predicted to contribute to short-term rise in local water tables which influence the
timing and seasonal persistence of surface water, interrupt pollutant processing capacity of the
wetlands, and disrupt growth habits of wetland vegetation.
Direct Impacts Long-Term
There are 0.3 miles of new road construction, 1.52 miles of reconstructed road, and 1.21 miles of
maintenance within 200 feet of wetlands within the project boundary. Two incidences (0.12
miles) of new road construction and three incidences (0.47 miles) of road reconstruction are
indicated within Wetland RMZ buffers. Over the long-term the construction and use of forestryrelated roads contributes to sedimentation in wetlands, aiding in nutrient and pollutant delivery
as well as degrading wetland function, water quality, and habitat.
Cumulative Impacts
Increased runoff and sedimentation associated with ground based harvest systems and road
construction, reconstruction, and forestry related road use are expected to have cumulative
systemic impacts to the wetlands adjacent to harvest blocks as well as the downstream wetlands
associated with Thirteenmile Creek, Seventeenmile Creek, and South Seventeenmile Creek. The
13 MILE 2026 Forestry Harvest Project would occur simultaneously with BIA Land Operations
grazing permits in Range Unit 2, and adjacent to Range Units 1 and 4. There are no grazing
21
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
controls identified for range practices along wetlands within the project boundary. Cattle impacts
including wetland soil disruption and biological impacts would be exacerbated by forest
practices contributing to excess sedimentation and nutrient inputs.
Floodplains:
NOAA mapping indicates minor areas of 100-year floodplain associated with South
Seventeenmile Creek, and Seventeenmile Creek. Larger areas of mapped floodplain occur along
the San Poil River, which is a higher order, valley bottom river. Blocks and roads proposed for
this project do not encroach on any 100-year floodplain areas.
Water Resource Impact Conclusions
Table 8. Water Resource Impact Summary from proposed action.
Water Resource
Type
Surface Water
Wetlands
Short-Term Direct
Impacts
Yes
Yes
Long-Term Direct
Impacts
Yes
Yes
Cumulative
Impacts
Yes
Yes
The project would result in short-term impacts to soil and surface water, particularly within the
top 12-24 inches. Long term impacts (after the conclusion of the project) would be minimal as
vegetation reestablishes and stabilizes slopes. However, the cumulative impact of the project, in
conjunction with previous timber sale impacts, would impact water quality and quantity
throughout the Upper San Poil River RMU. The Proposed Action would result in short term and
cumulative impacts to water resources including surface water and wetlands.
Resource Use Patterns
Transportation Networks:
The existing transportation network on the Reservation consists of nearly 10,000 miles of road
managed under multiple jurisdictions, maintained to varying degrees of stability. Within the San
Poil district, major travel corridors include State Route 21 (Washington State DOT), Cache
Creek Road (Okanogan County Public Works), and Bridge Creek Road (Ferry County Public
Works), among others (Colville Tribal DOT, BIA DOT, etc.). Additionally, the district contains
multiple thousands of miles of forest roads, which do not fall under any of the above
jurisdictions, and therefore do not receive any maintenance. These roads are primarily used for
timber harvesting, fire suppression, and member access for hunting, fishing, and gathering. In
addition to this multi-jurisdictional network, there are over 3,300 stream crossings.
Direct Impacts Short-Term
The 13 Mile timber sale project proposes the construction of 2.13 miles of new road, 6.81 miles
of reconstruction, and 37.71 miles of maintenance of existing forest road. The use of these roads
for timber sale operations would result in short-term impacts to the existing transportation
network through physical degradation of roads. Large vehicles carrying heavy machinery and
loads of logs cause road quality to deteriorate. This would occur throughout the life of the
project. However, due to the use of these roads, positive short-term impacts may occur in the
form of regular road grading and prevention of rill erosion.
Direct Impacts Long-Term
22
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
The existing roads network is not well maintained; creation of new roads and reconstruction of
existing roads would decrease the amount of maintenance that can be allocated to existing
segments, and cause road quality to deteriorate over time. Many of these road construction and
reconstruction segments would include culvert installations or replacements. These crossing
structures would not be removed at the conclusion of the project, which would result in long
term hydrologic alteration and potential failure points.
Cumulative Impacts
In addition to the 13 Mile timber sale, three other timber sales have occurred in the Upper San
Poil River RMU in the past five years. This results in cumulative stress on the existing and
proposed transportation network through the repetitive use of heavy machinery and large
vehicles.
Short- and long-term direct, and cumulative impacts to water resources have been identified with
the proposed 13 Mile Timber Sale project. Implementing the proposed action would result in
new and cumulative impacts to water quality and wetlands. Mitigation measures to attenuate
these impacts are outlined in Section 5.
4.3 Fish and Wildlife
Impacts to Fish and Wildlife Resources Alternative A: No Action
The “no action’ alternative would not have adverse effects on fish and wildlife habitat in the
project area. Leaving the timber intact would allow the area to follow natural succession patterns
and would benefit wildlife species both terrestrial and aquatic. Fires and/or insect/disease die offs
could affect the project area, but the timing and severity of these disturbances is not known.
Natural disturbances may even benefit fish and wildlife species by increasing habitat values.
Overstocked and diseased stands may show a decline in value for some species of wildlife.
Impacts to Fish and Wildlife Resources Alternative B: Proposed Action
The Proposed Action would have impacts on fish and wildlife species and habitat within the
project area. Removal of timber from the proposed acres could have negative impacts on wildlife
populations that use the habitat in the project area to meet their life requirements. Impacts to the
habitat within the project area could include but are not limited to: an increase in soil compaction
and ground disturbance, an increase in open road density, an increase and introduction of
noxious weeds, the creation of large openings, a decrease in water quality, degradation of
instream and riparian habitats, a reduction and loss of large diameter snags, future snags and
large diameter downed wood, a deterioration or loss of mature and old growth coniferous forest,
a loss of large diameter trees, a decline or loss of wildlife travel corridors, a decrease in hiding,
escape and thermal cover, and a reduction in canopy cover.
These changes to the habitat structures and functions within the project area could have effects
on a variety of wildlife species. The implementation of this project could decrease effective
wintering, calving and summer/fall range for resident and migrant big game species, reduce the
amount of suitable habitat for pileated and white headed woodpeckers, reduce the quality and
quantity of instream and riparian habitat and impact the ecological function of aspen stands
wetlands, seeps, and springs.
Some wildlife and habitats may benefit from the effects of timber management. Opening the
forest canopy would encourage the growth of shrubs and forbs. This increases the forage values
23
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
for big game species and other early seral species. These areas would be utilized as long as
nearby hiding/escape cover is retained.
Timber harvest would result in a loss and reduction of mature and old growth coniferous forest,
future and large diameter snags and large diameter downed wood. This would result in a loss of
functional habitat for those species that depend on late seral habitat components such as primary
and secondary cavity nesters, bats, and amphibians and reptiles.
Timber harvest would increase ground disturbance and allow for the establishment of noxious
weeds that would compete with native vegetation. The loss of native vegetation would reduce
habitat quality for desired wildlife species.
Timber harvest has the potential to impact the ecological function of aspen stands, wetlands,
springs, and seeps due to soil compaction, excessive ground disturbance, herbicide application,
inadequate riparian buffers and other ground and vegetation disturbances. Aspen stands may be
regenerated by the ground disturbance of logging practices and the removal of conifers from
suppressed stands.
Timber harvest activities near and adjacent to streams would reduce the quality and quantity of
instream and riparian habitat that provides important seasonal ranges, travel corridors and
breeding habitat to a high density and diversity of unique or dependent species. Increased
sediment delivery to streams would decrease water quality and affect amphibians and other
wildlife species that utilize those areas.
Effects of roads and skid trails on wildlife and their habitats include direct loss of habitat, habitat
fragmentation, road kill, increased hunting/poaching mortality, increased predation, road
avoidance, increased edge, and reduction in the suitability of habitat for use by wildlife (Demers
2006).
The CTCR IRMP states that total road density would be reduced to less than 4 mi/ mi2, with
open road density to be reduced to less than 1.5 mi/mi2 wherever feasible across the Reservation.
Roads not needed for future management activities would be closed, stabilized or obliterated. It
is the suggestion of the Fish and Wildlife Department that unnecessary segments and
reconstructed roads should be closed to adhere to the IRMP goal of 4.0 mi/mi2. All new roads
should be considered for closure to comply with the roads target.
Protection Measures
The proposed action of the 13 Mile Project falls within four of the Reservation WMUs which
includes. Thirteen Mile WMU, Seventeen Mile WMU, South Seventeen Mile WMU, and Upper
San Poil WMU. The CTCR IRMP states that total road density would be reduced to less than 4
mi/mi2, with open road density to be reduced to less than 1.5 mi/mi2 wherever feasible across the
Reservation. Road densities on the Reservation are calculated using the WMU boundaries; Table
9 depicts the road density for the affected WMU’s.
Table 9. Road Density by WMU.
24
WMU
Roads
(mi)
WMU
(ac)
WMU
(mi2)
Road
Density
(mi/mi2)
17 Mile Creek
South 17 Mile
138.29
44.51
13418
4502
20.97
7.03
6.5947
6.3314
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Creek
Upper San Poil
River
13 Mile Creek
227.13
9.09
23066
1081
36.04
1.69
6.3022
5.3787
Currently all of the WMU’s are above the IRMP road density objective. This road density layout
is an overestimation of the current road system within the project area. It is unknown if all the
roads are drivable, non-drivable, or closed. Alternative B is recommending 2.13 miles of new
construction and 6.81 miles of reconstruction. Road closure locations are located in Appendix B.
These are approximate locations and field verified locations will need to be determined by staff
from the Wildlife and Forestry Departments. The Alternative B new road density is in in Table
10.
Table 10. Alternative B Road Density.
Proposed
WMU
New Rd
(mi)
17 Mile Creek
138.29
0.32
South 17 Mile Creek 44.51
0.87
Upper San Poil River 227.13
0.94
13 Mile Creek
9.09
0
Roads
(mi)
Proposed
Total Rd
Recon Rd
(mi)
(mi)
1.82
138.61
2.28
45.38
2.38
228.07
0.33
9.09
WMU
(mi2)
20.97
7.03
36.04
1.69
Road
Density
(mi/mi2)
6.6099
6.4552
6.3282
5.3787
Federally Threatened and Endangered Species
The BIA and Tribal wildlife biologist determined that the proposed actions and associated
activities would ‘May affect, but would not likely adversely affect’ Canadian Lynx and “No
Effect” for the other 5 listed species within the project area.
Resource Use Patterns
Hunting, Fishing, Gathering
“The Tribes regulate the harvest of wildlife resources within the aboriginal territory of the
Colville Tribes. In regulating wildlife and recreation resources of the Reservation, tribal
members are afforded the greatest possible freedom to use and enjoy these resources, consistent
with the preservation and improvement of these resources for future generations. Wildlife found
on the Reservation may be taken only at such times, in such places, and in such a manner as
provided by tribal law” (CTCR 2015).
4.4 Cultural Resources
Impacts to Cultural Resources Alternative A: No Action
Although there may be a number of direct and indirect effects to the Reservation’s resources
from the implementation of Alternative A, it is important to recognize that cultural resources are,
for the most part, non-renewable resources. The ‘No Action’ alternative would have a number of
various effects to the known cultural resources identified within the project area.
The historic exclusion of fire on the Reservation has resulted with an overabundance of
vegetation. Although Alternative A would leave the timber intact and allow for natural
succession patterns; overstocked and diseased stands have increased ladder fuels which must be
addressed by current management practices.
25
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Potential impacts of Alternative A include vegetation encroachment to sites which exhibit
surface features. This encroachment may reduce visibility of the site, potentially affecting its
integrity and increasing the likelihood of adverse effects to it from wildland or prescribed fire.
Invasive non-native plant species within this area would likely perpetuate and increase,
competing with native plant species of traditional and cultural significance. The ‘No Action’
alternative may also cause physical damage to sites from snags or trees falling upon them,
dismantling, destroying or otherwise impacting surface features. Fallen trees may also expose
buried subsurface cultural materials, which otherwise would have remained intact.
Impacts to Cultural Resources Alternative B: Proposed Action
There are currently twelve archaeological sites, two TCPs and one cemetery recorded in the 13
Mile APE. Although there has been no official determination of National or Colville Register
eligibility for these sites, all eighteen appear to be eligible. These sites may be considered
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, as described in 36 CFR Part 60.4. The
‘Proposed Action’ would result in No Adverse Effect to these sites as long as the prescriptions
remain the same and that ground disturbance stays to minimum.
4.5 Range Management
Impacts to Range Resources Alternative A: No Action
This alternative would have no disturbance impact on the current plant community condition.
The No Action Alternative, being a management decision, would also not address the forest
health concerns identified in the proposal. Degraded forest plant communities would remain in a
degraded state.
Impacts to Range Resources for Alternative B: Proposed Action
Harvest disturbance within forested plant communities often benefits plant community health by
reducing potential for disease, insects, and wildfire effects. Reducing canopy densities can also
release understory plants that have been suppressed by overstocked conditions. Desirable natural
understory plants are usually adept at recovery with the type of soil disturbance that normally
occurs with harvest. Areas of concern may be landings, skid trails, roads, and pile burning sites,
all areas where activity may create highly disturbed soil conditions or a change in soil fertility
properties. The potential of increased soil disturbance in these areas may hinder the recovery of
desirable understory plants and increase the possibility of establishing new invasive and noxious
weed populations.
The annual precipitation for the blocks in this proposal is 16” to 30” annually. This broad range
of average annual precipitation can cause variable potential for the rapid recovery of forest native
understory species. Areas of high soil disturbance in the lower end of the precipitation range can
be slow in recovering naturally allowing more competitive invasive noxious weed populations
the opportunity to become established. Once established many invasive and noxious weeds can
outcompete the natural vegetation. If highly competitive undesirable plants become established,
they are often hard to eliminate. New patches of persistent competitive invasive weeds also
provide a future seed source for further spread in the area.
The most common forest habitat type represented in the project blocks is Douglas-fir with
pinegrass as the component understory grass species. Pinegrass is also very common in the other
habitat types represented in the treatment blocks. Pinegrass is a resilient species and should
26
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
naturally recover except where the soil profile has been highly mixed. Also common in this area
is Idaho fescue, Columbia brome, and blue wildrye. If seeding should be determined to be
needed to assist in recovery Idaho fescue and Columbia brome should be considered for a seed
mix depending on the forest habitat type targeted.
Post treatment monitoring of understory recovery should occur. If monitoring determines a need,
inputs in the form of native plant seeding and/or herbicide treatment should be considered to
assist in the recovery. Intermediate wheatgrass and Siberian wheatgrass should not be used for
ground cover as they are nonnative, persistent, and highly competitive. These nonnative species
although classified as forage plants seem to be less preferred to wildlife and livestock. Grazing
animals would go to the more preferred native plants first increasing the grazing pressure on
those plants. If something is needed to quickly provide ground cover, there are alternatives to
consider that are less competitive and do not persist for more than a couple years. These
alternatives may also provide a nurse crop benefit to native plants that germinate from native
seed planted. If the project manager determines a need for herbicide treatment and/or seeding the
Land Operations department can offer suggestions for herbicide treatment and seed mix if
assistance is needed.
Range Program Operations
Within forest project areas grazing is a secondary land use but is important to CTCR livestock
owners for success in their economic venture. Grazing can also provide positive impacts by
reducing accumulated fuel and reinvigorating grasses. Rangeland structural resources such as
fences, watering facilities, and cattle guards are an important component to the sustainable
stewardship of land designated for grazing and are very expensive to replace. The proposed
treatment blocks for this project are located within the Eastern portion of Range Unit 2. The
Range Programs infrastructure GIS layer indicates very few structural assets associated with RU
2 that would likely be encountered during this project. Fences and cattle guards are of particular
concern. CTCR Range Program asks that when range infrastructure is encountered such as cattle
guards, watering facilities, and fences they be avoided as much as possible. If range
infrastructure is damaged during project activity the project proponent would be responsible for
notifying the Range Program and seeing that damage is repaired in a timely manner. If cattle
guards are located on roads that need to be used for heavy traffic, they should be assessed for the
ability to handle the weight of large trucks and equipment. The Range Program can assist with
that if contacted in a timely manner. If it is determined the cattle guard does not meet
specifications for the anticipated weight of the traffic, and there is no way to bypass it, the cattle
guard may need to be temporarily removed. If this is the case it is essential the Range Program
be notified 48 hours prior to the removal. The removed cattle guard would be reinstalled by the
proponent of the project unless other arrangements are made with the CTCR Range Program.
The impacted Range Unit 2 has approximately 40 pairs of livestock permitted on it. Range Unit
fences and cattle guards need to remain functional, with any gates closed and damage to fences
quickly repaired. The Range Program needs to be notified if an infrastructure problem becomes
apparent. The Range Program would also be notified when burning occurs in the forest project
area before the turnout date of May 1st so the Range program can move livestock to an area on
the range unit that would not be affected.
Noxious Species
27
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Logging and related activities can introduce new invasive species to a site via uncleaned
equipment and soil disturbing activities or cause currently present invasive species to spread
more rapidly. In order to insure the action would not contribute to the introduction, continued
existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area,
or promote the introduction, growth, or expansion of the range of such species, cleaning
equipment prior to using on site, washing equipment in a centralized area, re-seeding heavily
disturbed sites such as skid trails and landings is required. Monitoring of understory recovery
should occur and if monitoring determines a need, inputs in the form of native plant seeding
and/or herbicide treatment should be considered to assist recovery, giving a competitive
advantage to desired plant species. If the project manager determines a need for herbicide
treatment and/or seeding the Land Operations department can offer suggestions for herbicide
treatment and seed mix if assistance is needed.
4.6 Air Quality
Impacts to Air Resources for Alternative B: Proposed Action
Timber harvesting, a critical component of forest management, significantly influences air
quality, particularly through the emission of particulate matter (PM). PM, a blend of solid
particles and liquid droplets, permeates the air, originating from both natural and human-made
sources.
4.7 Social and Economic Impacts
The median household income on the Reservation according to the 2010 US Census was $35,
534. The CTCR’s natural resource management plays an important role in the local regional
economy on and off the Reservation. The Forestry, logging and milling industry accounts for
20% of the working population in the Region of Okanogan and Ferry Counties (CAR 2018). The
CTCR itself is the single largest employer in both Ferry County and Okanogan County (CAR
2019). The communities benefit from the CTCR Natural Resource Management not only directly
through employment but also the social programs funded directly from Tribal expenditure of
funds generated through Timber Harvest. More detailed discussion of the population dynamics
and social and economic impacts of CTCR’s natural resource management can be found in the
CTCR IRMP FEIS (CAR 2018).
5.0 Mitigation for Resource Protection
Soil and Water
Operators must ensure that all Best Management Practices (BMP) and standards for timber
harvest identified in Colville Tribal Code (CTC) Chapter 4-7: Forest Practices are followed in
order to minimize hydrologic disturbance resulting from actions taken under this alternative.
During road construction and reconstruction Planners and Operators must ensure that new/reconstructed roads meet the BMPs and standards for roads identified in CTC Chapter 4-7: Forest
Practices, and CTC Chapter 4-9 Hydraulic Projects if doing any culvert/bridge work. By meeting
these BMPs Planners and Operators would minimize the water quality, hydrologic process, and
aquatic habitat degradation associated with roads as a result of the actions taken under this
alternative. The transportation plan developed by the consultant incorporated input from the
Environmental Trust Department regarding stream adjacent roads, new road locations, and
culvert sizing and placement. The San Poil Forest Roads Engineer should continue to work with
28
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
the Watershed Restoration Program to remove any unnecessary road construction, and determine
where roads can be closed or decommissioned to reduce road density.
A preliminary transportation memo was distributed on 2/5/24 identifying roads that should not
be used due to stream or wetland adjacency. These segments were then field verified, and
adjustments were made accordingly.
A layer was also provided of all restored roads within the project area, including
decommissioning, closure, and permanent abandonment. In the original preliminary
transportation memo, the following was stated: “The Environmental Trust Department has
completed several projects in and around this timber sale area, including the 2018 Upper Sanpoil
River Watershed Restoration Project, 2019 Upper San Poil East Restoration Project, and 2023
San Poil Valley Road Improvements Project. 16 road segments included in the 2018, 2019, and
2023 projects are within the 13 Mile sale area; these roads have been decommissioned or
permanently abandoned and are not available for use.”
A layer of proposed tank traps was developed through coordination with CTCR Fish and
Wildlife, in an effort to reduce road density in the area, which contains mitigations developed by
ETD. Additionally, the project proponent coordinated with ETD to identify improperly mapped
wetlands and adjust block boundaries to reflect on the ground conditions. In other instances
where mapping does not align with on the ground conditions, field conditions should be adhered
to for wetland and stream buffering.
Planners and Operators should develop practices that would effectively mitigate for increased
road surface erosion. Such practices should include a plan for permanent road decommissioning
to meet the IRMP objectives and comply with CTC Forest Practices Code.
Upon completion of harvest or haul operations the following maintenance & monitoring actions
shall be performed:
● Clear all drainage improvements of obstructions
● Stabilize or remove unstable material and forest debris with potential to block drainage
improvements
● Repair or replace all damaged drainage improvements to fully restore their function
● Leave road surface in a condition that would prevent subsequent erosion, and keep runoff
within natural drainages, by outsloping, removing berms from the outside of roads,
providing drain dips, waterbars, rolling grade or other methods
Per Colville Confederated Tribes Law and Order Code [CCT 4-7-67(e)] Riparian Management
Zone buffers are required for wetlands. No harvest activities, movement of equipment or
vehicles, nor staging of materials or waste, should occur within the wetland or wetland RMZ
buffer. Wetland ecosystem presence and extent have been derived from National Wetlands
Inventory (NWI) data. NWI mapping is a service of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is
conducted via remote sensing techniques which require field verification for jurisdictional
purposes. The project proponent is responsible for assuring all wetlands are properly buffered
based on ground conditions.
Table 11. Wetland RMZ requirements.
Stand ID
29
Wetland
Location
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
CCT Water
Type
RMZ
(applied to each side of wetland)
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
328030
E.SPU_534
eastern edge of block
III
100 feet
328053
E.SPU_647
northern edge of block
III
100 feet
326045
E.SPU_429
southern edge of block
III
100 feet
326080
E.SPU_435
eastern edge of block
III
100 feet
326070
E.SPU_456
northern portion of block
IV
50 feet
325202
E.SPU_459
southern portion of block
III
100 feet
325248
E.SPU_459
northern portion of block
III
100 feet
325249
E.SPU_459
northwestern edge of block
III
100 feet
326094
E.SPU_460
eastern edge of block
I
150 feet
326305
E.SPU_460
western edge of block
I
150 feet
326089
E.SPU_460
southern edge of block
I
150 feet
326078
E.SPU_460
southeastern edge of block
I
150 feet
325916
E.SPU_462
eastern edge of block
III
100 feet
325916
E.SPU_463
northern portion of block
III
100 feet
325238
E.SPU_465
eastern edge of block
III
100 feet
326304
E.SPU_556 northwestern portion of block
III
100 feet
326046
E.HAL_272
eastern edge of block
III
100 feet
326034
E.HAL_272
western edge of block
III
100 feet
Fish and Wildlife
The 13 Mile Timber Project is partially located within the Kettle Crest. This area includes
foraging and denning habitat for Canada Lynx. Due to the sensitivity of this wildlife species
during the spring months the Wildlife department is recommending seasonal mitigations (April –
July) to reduce the impact of harvest activities. Block numbers for timber harvest and precommercial thin with seasonal mitigations are found in Table 1. The wildlife department prefers
lop and scatter within Canada lynx habitat but with the forestry department moving to more of
mastication PCT it has been agreed to use mastication which promotes 12’ tree spacing and
targeting 300 stems to the acre. PCT blocks that have portions under 4000 ft may have those
parts thinned at any time of the year.
Table 12. Block Seasonal Restrictions.
Harvest Blocks
Comp
Block
No Entry
1
325
214 April - July
2
325
253 April - July
3
325
207 April - July
30
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
4
326
Comp
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
31
325
325
325
325
325
325
325
325
325
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
326
97 April - July
PCT Blocks
Block
No Entry
4 April - July
209 April - July
222 April - July
235 April - July
245 April - July
247 April - July
252 April - July
254 April - July
257 April - July
2 April - July
7 April - July
11 April - July
13 April - July
14 April - July
26 April - July
33 April - July
34 April - July
35 April - July
37 April - July
38 April - July
40 April - July
42 April - July
43 April - July
44 April - July
53 April - July
57 April - July
59 April - July
65 April - July
70 April - July
74 April - July
76 April - July
82 April - July
83 April - July
85 April - July
88 April - July
89 April - July
90 April - July
93 April - July
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
39
40
326
326
304 April - July
315 April - July
Large blocks that reduce habitat and cover requirements for big game species would need
wildlife reserve patches to provide cover within 600 feet of all treatment areas. The blocks
requiring reserve patches are listed below in Table 13. Block 328001 would have a wildlife
corridor extending the RMZ through the block to allow for connectivity, location is in Appendix
A.
Table 13. Wildlife Reserve Patch Blocks.
Wildlife Reserve Patch
Comp
Block
# of Patches
1
323
23
2
323
45
3
324
69
4
324
74 x3
5
325
16 x3
Mitigating for the loss and reduction of habitat structures and functions discussed above would
minimize the negative impacts to wildlife habitats and species in the 13 Mile project area. The
following mitigation efforts are requested by the Wildlife Department in the case that Alternative
B “proposed action” is chosen and implemented.
• If at any time during harvest a bald or golden eagle nest is found, cease work within .25
miles of nest and contact the District Biologist; all timber harvest is prohibited within 660
feet of active bald eagle nests (Klock 2001).
• If at any time during harvest a Northern goshawk, great gray owl or other raptor nest
and/or territory are thought to be found, cease work within 750 feet and please contact the
District Biologist.
• Significant wildlife sightings should be reported to the District Biologist for assessment
and review.
• All lynx tracks, sightings, or dens should be reported to the District Biologist for
immediate assessment and review.
• Fawning/calving habitat: all areas of deciduous trees within wet areas and draws should
be protected from disturbances.
• Wildlife corridors should be set up to allow for natural movement between seasonal and
daily habitats.
• Blocks that are scheduled to be cable logged need to have their reserve patches and/or
wildlife travel corridors set up in a way that would provide habitat for wildlife while still
allowing the operation of a cable system to be operational.
• Snags in harvest units should be retained in clumps with their associated understory
vegetation intact to ensure their retention after site preparation. Green leave trees would
be identified and retained as future snags in all areas. The majority of large diameter trees
should be left standing
• All native fruit bearing shrub and tree species should be protected and retained.
• Leaving more than the required 2 snags per acre would help mitigate some of the losses
of large woody debris and recruitment trees.
32
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In areas where large blocks of timber would be treated under the burn RX prescription
visual shields should be left to provide cover and escape routes for wildlife. This would
reduce fragmentation of the habitat and decrease the vulnerability of big game to legal
and illegal harvest. These areas would act as wildlife corridors and should be setup to
allow for natural movement between seasonal and daily habitats.
Blocks that have a burn RX work being done either in conjunction or independently from
timber harvest need to ensure that all large woody debris targets are being met. In
addition in blocks that are piled a minimum of 2-3 piles per acre need to be left on site
and not burned.
All large diameter woody debris should be left on the ground to provide habitat for a
wide range of species.
All wetlands should be protected with maximum RMZ lengths and should all be
protected from equipment entry. RMZs should be measured out from the edge of the
riparian vegetation instead of from the ordinary high water mark.
Culverts should be placed at a gradient of less than 2% unless the terrain and profile of
the stream that doesn’t allow for it. All culverts should be fortified at the entry to the
culvert as well as the outlet to prevent erosion near the placement of the pipe. Culverts
should be countersunk to allow deep enough water for fish to pass through and fill
material should be placed in culvert to mimic the natural stream components and help
juvenile fish get up the stream channel.
Implementation of bank stabilization, sediment traps and road surface improvements are
encouraged to decrease risk of sediment delivery and runoff into surrounding watersheds.
To reduce soil compaction and ground disturbances seasonal restrictions and slash mats
should be used to protect sensitive and/or highly erodible soils.
Areas where there is considerable soil disturbance should be planted with native seed to
reduce encroachment and establishment of noxious weeds, ie landings and highly
disturbed skid trails.
With the construction of new roads, cut banks should be kept to a minimum due to the
tendency of water to rise to the surface when there is an interruption of the hydrologic
environment. Water seeping out of cut banks leads to erosion of road surfaces and
ultimately sediment delivery to streams.
In order to reduce disturbance, harassment and increased hunting pressure, all roads that
are not considered main access routes should be closed and decommissioned following
the project. Multilayered cover should be left along roads with high vehicular use.
Minimize the amount of use on stream adjacent roads and prioritize them for permanent
closure.
Infrastructure (culverts/bridges) should allow for passage of all life stages of fish, and for
water, sediment, and wood/debris during 100 year flow events.
Cultural Resources
The Tribal Archaeologist would brief the Timber Sale Officer (TSO) and others working in the
13 Mile Forestry Project area regarding the steps taken to identify and report cultural resources.
If resources are found, the TSO shall ensure that all work stops in the vicinity of the find, that
steps are taken to protect the find, and that the Tribal Archaeologist is called immediately. No
work shall resume until the THPO has approved a management plan.
33
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Range Operations
Within forest project areas grazing is a secondary land use but is important to CTCR livestock
owners for success in their economic venture. Grazing can also provide positive impacts by
reducing accumulated fuel and reinvigorating grasses. Rangeland structural resources such as
fences, watering facilities, and cattle guards are an important component to the sustainable
stewardship of land designated for grazing and are very expensive to replace. The proposed
treatment blocks for this project are located within the Northern portion of Range Unit 2. The
Range Programs infrastructure GIS layer indicates quite a few structural assets associated with
RU 5 that would likely be encountered during this project. Fences and cattle guards are of
particular concern. CTCR Range Program asks that when range infrastructure is encountered
such as cattle guards, watering facilities, and fences they be avoided as much as possible. If
range infrastructure is damaged during project activity the project proponent would be
responsible for notifying the Range Program and seeing that damage is repaired in a timely
manner. If cattle guards are located on roads that need to be used for heavy traffic, they should
be assessed for the ability to handle the weight of large trucks and equipment. The Range
Program can assist with that if contacted in a timely manner. If it is determined the cattle guard
does not meet specifications for the anticipated weight of the traffic, and there is no way to
bypass it, the cattle guard may need to be temporarily removed. If this is the case it is essential
the Range Program be notified 48 hours prior to the removal. The removed cattle guard would be
reinstalled by the proponent of the project unless other arrangements are made with the CTCR
Range Program.
The impacted Range Unit 2 has approximately 300 head of livestock permitted on it. Range Unit
fences need to remain functional, with any gates closed and damage to fences quickly repaired.
The Range Program needs to be notified if an infrastructure problem becomes apparent. The
Range Program would also be notified when burning occurs in the forest project area before the
turnout date of May 15th so the Range program can move livestock to an area on the range unit
that would not be affected.
6.0 List of Preparers
Name
Malcolm Vollmer & Marc LeClair
Mason Bruce & Girard Natural Resource
Consultants
Ossian Laspa
Bryan Jones
Jessica Utt, Brandton Harvey
Charlotte Axthelm
Stacy King
Guy Moura
Amanda Hoke
Chasity Swan
34
Contributions
Forestry
Wildlife
Fish
Range/Noxious Weeds
Hydrology
Wetlands
History/Archaeology
History/Archaeology
Editor
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
7.0 Literature Cited
Axthelm, Charlotte. 2024. Water Quality Assessment Report for the Confederated Tribes of the
Colville Reservation 2018-2023. Technical. Nespelem, WA. CTCR.
Brady, Nyle C., and R. R. Weil. 1996. The Nature and Properties of Soils. 11th ed. Upper Saddle
River, New Jersey 07458: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2018. General Land Office Patent Records. Available
online at http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/Center for Applied Research, Inc.
(2014) Resource Assessment, Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, 2015
Integrated Resource Management Plan.
Center for Applied Research, Inc (CAR). 2018. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, 2015 Integrated Resource
Management Plan.
Center for Applied Research, Inc (CAR). 2015. Results of the 2014 Colville Reservation
Community Survey.
Colville Confederated Tribes. 2023. Forest Practices Handbook. Colville Tribal Code
Chapter 4-7 Forest Practices. Nespelem, WA. 89 pp.
Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT). 2007. Cultural Resource Management Plan of the
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation. Prepared by the CCT
History/Archaeology Program. Nespelem, WA.
Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT). 2003. Range Management Plan 2003-2007.
Colville Confederated Tribes (2010). CCT Chapter 4-8 Water Quality Standards. Available
from:
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/572d09c54c2f85ddda868946/t/5824a1774402431a6
8a34e9d/1478795640147/4-8-Waterqualitystandards.pdf
CTCR. 2015. Integrated Resource Management Plan 2015. Prepared by The Center for Applied
Research, Inc.
CTCR. 2023. Forest Management Plan for the Colville Indian Reservation. Prepared by Jeremy
Hunt. Approved June 23, 2023.
Davis, K.P. and D.T. Mason. 1966. Forest management: regulation and valuation. McGraw-Hill
Book Company. San Francisco.
Demers, Dinah. 2006. Fish, Wildlife and Roads. Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation, Nespelem, WA.
Dubé, K., Megahan, W., McCalmon, M. 2004. Washington road surface erosion model prepared
for the Washington Department of Natural Resources. Olympia, WA.
Gough, Stan. 1990. A Cultural Resources Overview, Sampling Survey, and Management Plan,
Colville Indian Reservation, Okanogan and Ferry Counties, Washington. Eastern
Washington University Reports in Archaeology and History 100-74. Archaeological and
Historical Services. Cheney, WA.
Hunner, Walt. 2014. Hydrology Report. Technical. Nespelem, WA: CTCR.
Hunt, Clair. 1916. Diminished Colville Indian Reservation (map). General Land Office,
Department of the Interior.
35
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Klock, Glen O. 2000. Colville Indian Reservation: Integrated Resource Management Plan 20002014: Final Environmental Impact Statement. Western Resources Analysis, Inc.
Wenatchee, WA.
Klock, Glen O. 2001. Colville Indian Reservation: Record of Decision and Plan for Integrated
Resources Management. Western Resources Analysis, Inc. Wenatchee, WA.
Mason, Bruce, and Girard, Inc. April 8, 2025. Project Proposal Form: 13 Mile Timber Sale 2026
PPF. Nespelem, WA. BIA
Marker, D., R. Thomon, T. Bosworth, T. Li and C. Tornow. 2012 Upper Columbia River Site
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study Tribal Consumption and Resource Use
Survey. Final Draft Report. Prepared for the US Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10. Westat. Rockville, MD.
Meyer, Jon. 2006. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the 13 Mile Forest Management
Project. On file at the Colville Tribes History/Archaeology Program. Nespelem, WA.
Shannon, D. & G. Moura. 2007. Chief Joseph Dam and Rufus Woods Lake Traditional Cultural
Property Research 2006 Technical Report. Prepared for the United States Army Corps of
Engineers, Seattle District. Prepared by CCT History/Archaeology Program. Nespelem,
WA.
Stevens, William. 1991. Direction of silviculture Colville Reservation. Memo, US Bureau of
Indian Affairs. Nespelem, WA.
Society of American Foresters. 1998. The dictionary of Forestry. Helms, J.A. editor. The society
of American foresters. Bethesda MD.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Chapter 23, Northeast Washington Recovery Unit,
Washington. 73 p. In: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus)
Draft Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon.
36
13 MILE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
8.0 Appendices
8.1 Project Maps and Activity Table
37
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
38
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Forest Activities Table
Acres
Harvest
Method
42
TETH/SKID
26
TETH/SKID
29
TETH/SKID
34
SKID
43
SKID
37
SKID
21
SKID
7
TETH/SKID
17
SKID
37
SKID
28
SKID
23
SKID
31
SKID
23
SKID
31
SKID
STAND_ID
323023a
323023b
323023c
323030
323037a
323037b
323039
323040
323045a
323045b
323056
324011
324043
324058a
324058b
39
Est.
PostHarvest
Rx
Harvest
Regenation
Vol.
Treatment
(Mmbf)
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
677
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
416
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
469
SW
L&S
Natural
259
150 TPA
RRT
BB
PP; 150
TPA WL
471
150 TPA
RRT
BB
PP; 150
TPA WL
400
SW
L&S
Natural
198
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
98
150 TPA
RRT
BB
PP; 150
TPA WL
141
150 TPA
RRT
BB
PP; 150
TPA WL
305
150 TPA
ST/RRT
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
373
OR/CT
191
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
657
150 TPA
ST/OR
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
358
150 TPA
ST/OR
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
495
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Acres
Harvest
Method
18
SKID
32
SKID
36
SKID
20
SKID
42
SKID
44
46
42
45
40
40
SKID
SKID
SKID
SKID
SKID
SKID
34
SKID
10
TETH/SKID
28
SKID
40
SKID
19
31
SKID
SKID
34
SKID
43
SKID
STAND_ID
324069a
324069b
324069c
324069d
324069e
324074a
324074b
324074c
324074d
324074e
324074f
324080
324081
324096a
324096b
324098a
324098b
325016a
325016b
40
Est.
PostHarvest
Rx
Harvest
Regenation
Vol.
Treatment
(Mmbf)
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
168
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
310
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
337
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
192
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
393
OR/CT
226
OR/CT
242
OR/CT
232
OR/CT
250
OR/CT
230
OR/CT
220
150 TPA
ST/RRT
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
318
150 TPA
ST/SW
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
105
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
417
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
586
SW
L&S
Natural
167
SW
L&S
Natural
267
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
373
150 TPA
ST
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
473
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Acres
Harvest
Method
Rx
30
SKID
ST
39
SKID
ST
41
SKID
ST
38
SKID
ST
36
TETH
ST/OR
44
6
SKID
SKID
CT
CT
42
TETH/SKID
ST/OR
45
8
SKID
SKID
SW
CT
37
SKID
ST
43
SKID
ST
27
SKID
ST
28
SKID
OR/ST
17
SKID
OR/ST
43
TETH
SW
26
SKID
ST
STAND_ID
325016c
325016d
325016e
325016f
325207
325208a
325208b
325214
325253
326097
328001a
328001b
328001c
328030a
328030b
328033
328045
41
Est.
PostHarvest
Harvest
Regenation
Vol.
Treatment
(Mmbf)
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
334
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
409
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
426
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
419
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
416
616
78
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
791
L&S
Natural
659
47
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
668
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
773
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
497
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
260
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
154
L&S
Natural
263
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
253
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Acres
Harvest
Method
Rx
20
SKID
ST/SW
22
SKID
ST/SW
36
SKID
ST/CT
39
SKID
ST/CT
22
SKID
ST/CT
23
27
SKID
SKID
SW
SW
STAND_ID
328053
328071
328079a
328079b
328079c
328080a
328080b
Est.
PostHarvest
Harvest
Regenation
Vol.
Treatment
(Mmbf)
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
168
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
127
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
332
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
360
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
209
L&S
Natural
462
L&S
Natural
537
150 TPA
MPB
PP; 150
TPA WL
98
20,373
6
SKID
ST
338844
1820
Totals
*BB - Broadcast Burn
*L&S - Lop and scatter undesirable understory
regeneration.
*MPB - Machine pile and burn.
*Species for regeneration; WL - Western Larch and PP Ponderosa Pine.
42
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
13 Mile Haul Revision Map
43
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
13 Mile Wildlife Corridors
44
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
13 Mile Fish and Wildlife Road Tank Traps
45
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
8.2 Consultation
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
46
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
ESA Section 7 Consultation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
47
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
48
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
49
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
50
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
51
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
52
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
53
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
54
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
55
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
56
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
57
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
8.3 Preliminary Transportation Analysis
58
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
59
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
60
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
Consultation was initiated by the Watershed Analyst on February 5, 2024 when the preliminary
transportation analysis memo was distributed. To supplement the consultation the following
resources and individuals were consulted during the preparation of this document:
Stacy King, CTCR Wetlands Specialist, Nespelem, WA.
Joseph Ezell, CTCR Restoration Program Manager, Nespelem, WA.
61
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
8.4 Technical Supplement: Prescription Descriptions
The following silvicultural treatments pertain to density management in combination with insect and
disease preventative management and forest protection: Seed Tree / Overstory Removal (ST/OR), and
Pre-commercial Thinning (PCT). Density management is a preventative treatment to help reduce the risk
of potential bark beetle infestation and improves the overall health of individual trees by reducing the
competition for limited resources such water and nutrients. Bark Beetle activity including western pine
beetle, mountain pine beetle, pine engraver beetle, and Douglas-fir beetles is present and typically occurs
on overly dense stands of conifers, and sometimes after some kind of natural or man-made disturbance.
At preferred stocking levels, the individual conifer trees are more vigorous and able to fight off bark
beetle attacks with their natural defenses. In addition, density management treatments will help to reduce
the risk of a wildfire becoming a catastrophic disturbance; by reducing the amount of ladder fuels present
and the potential of a wildfire moving into the crowns of the trees. Stands with high densities are prone to
insect attacks and increased mortality.
This section is supplemental information regarding the prescriptions for cutting of timber treatments. It
does not contain site specific information on the project area, but it does give a background regarding the
various prescriptions prescribed in each block. A detailed stand prescription for every unit is available at
the Omak-Nespelem Forestry District Office.
Seed Tree/Overstory Removal (ST/OR) is a combination of a regeneration method and an intermediate
treatment. ST/OR blocks contain a mixture of desirable tree species, of various ages, with manageable
levels of insects and diseases. These stands contain stocking levels of non-commercial sized trees (i.e.
seedlings, saplings, and pole sized) of a species that are desirable to manage. Typical concerns include
overstocking of non-commercial sized trees, over mature trees, dwarf mistletoe in the overstory trees, and
under-stocked areas that could allow the encroachment of non-native species (i.e. noxious weeds). The
DFC of a ST/OR block is a naturally regenerated stand of healthy, desirable seral species such as
ponderosa pine and/or western larch at the desirable stocking level. This is achieved by maintaining and
protecting the established regeneration during logging operations, removing overstory trees with dwarf
mistletoe, and by leaving overstory trees for a seed source to regenerate the under-stocked areas. After a
stand has been regenerated naturally or artificially, an Overstory Removal treatment may be prescribed to
remove the remaining overstory trees, especially if dwarf mistletoe is present. Typically, after the
Overstory Removal is completed, a pre-commercial thinning will be implemented to thin the stand to the
desired stocking level (150 to 300 trees per acre). There will be 5 to 15 trees per acre left to provide a
seed source, depending on how much of the stand still needs to be regenerated.
Regeneration Cut with Reserve Trees (RRT) The blocks contain undesirable tree species, of various
ages, with unmanageable levels of forest insects and disease problems. Typical concerns include: overly
dense stands, predominance of climax tree species, over mature tree ages, impending tree mortality due to
forest insect and disease problems, high severity of dwarf mistletoe in all conifer species, root-rot
diseases, defoliating insects, bark beetles, and competing vegetation. These blocks have serious health
and productivity concerns. The (DFC) of a RRT block is an artificially regenerated stand of healthy, seral
tree species. This is achieved by harvesting most of the commercial-sized trees, slashing and/or weeding
all remaining, undesirable trees especially if the advance regeneration is showing sign of insect and
disease problems such as dwarf mistletoe, implementing site preparation (broadcast burning or excavator
scarification) and planting ponderosa pine and/or western larch seedlings. Ten years after the
implementation of the site preparation and planting, the desired stocking for the stand would be at least
300 trees per acre or supplemental planting of conifers would need to occur.
Seed Tree (ST) is a regeneration method treatment. Seed Tree blocks are similar to RRT’s, except they
have enough healthy over-story trees of ponderosa pine and western larch to provide a seed source for
natural regeneration. ST blocks contain a majority of undesirable tree species, of various ages, with some
62
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
type of need to initiate the initial stand development stage with natural regeneration. Typical concerns
include: the age of the stand, species composition of the stand, insufficient stocking level of the stand, and
unmanageable levels of insect and disease problems such as high severity of dwarf mistletoe in all conifer
species, root-rot diseases, defoliating insects, bark beetles, and competing vegetation. There are a
sufficient number of seral, tree species within the block that can left on site to produce seed for natural
regeneration of seedlings. These blocks have serious health and productivity concerns. The DFC of a ST
block is a naturally regenerated stand of healthy, seral tree species such as ponderosa pine or western
larch. This is achieved by retaining specific seed trees, approximately 7-15 trees per acre, to remain on
site, harvesting all other trees of commercial size. Follow logging operations with a slashing and/or
weeding if feasible of all remaining, non-commercial trees, especially if the advance regeneration is
showing symptoms of insect and disease problems such as dwarf mistletoe. Next, some type of site
preparation (broadcast burning or excavator scarification) will need to be implemented, to prepare the site
for the establishment of natural regeneration. Potentially some artificial regeneration may be implemented
in a ST block to speed up occupancy of the site and supplement the desired natural regeneration. Ten
years after the implementation of the site preparation, the desired stocking for the stand would be at least
300 trees per acre or supplemental planting of conifers will need to occur. When the stand has been
adequately regenerated to desired levels approximately 5 to 20 years, an Overstory Removal may be
implemented at any time, especially if the overstory trees are showing symptoms of insect & disease
problems such as dwarf mistletoe.
Shelterwood (SW) Blocks contain a mix of undesirable and desirable tree species, of various ages with
some type of need to initiate the initial stand development of natural regeneration such as the age of the
stand, species composition of the stand, insufficient stocking level of the stand, and insect and disease
problems. Typically, there is a large number of the preferred seral, tree species on-site to provide both a
seed source and shelter for initial stand development. Some underlying concerns such as harshness of the
site (dry and rocky), the need to provide shade and shelter (i.e. micro-environment) for stand development
of seedlings, aesthetic appeal, and the desire to utilize the existing stand as much as possible necessitate
the requirement to leave a larger number of trees per acre compared to a “ST” treatment. The (DFC) of a
“SW” block is a naturally regenerated stand of healthy, seral tree species. This is achieved by retaining
specific seed and shade trees, approximately 12-30 trees per acre, to remain on site, harvesting all other
trees of commercial size, slashing and/or weeding all remaining especially if the advance regeneration is
showing sign of insect and disease problems such as dwarf mistletoe, undesirable trees and implementing
site preparation to the site to prepare the ground for the establishment of natural regeneration. This is
achieved by selecting certain seed trees and shelter trees to remain on site, harvesting all others of
commercial size, slashing all remaining, undesirable trees, and broadcast burning the site to prepare the
ground for natural regeneration. Ten years after the implementation of the site preparation, the desired
stocking for the stand would be at least 300 trees per acre or supplemental planting of conifers would
need to occur.
Commercial Thin (CT) Commercial Thin (CT) is an intermediate treatment. CT blocks contain desirable
tree species, of a manageable age (i.e., 60-120 years) with manageable levels of insects and disease
problems. A typical concern is overstocking. The overstocking of stands lead to low tree vigor,
suppressed growth, higher susceptibility to insect and disease potential problems, and other immediate
and long-term health and productivity concerns. The desired future condition (DFC) of a commercial
thinning is a healthy stand of desired tree species, growing at desired stocking levels of 60 to 80 Basal
Area depending on the site. This is achieved by thinning or harvesting the stand to the desired stocking
levels. These prescriptions are used for harvesting trees in order to redistribute and maximize growth
potential on desirable trees, and to benefit the residual stand quality.
Improvement Cut (IC) An Improvement Cut is a combination of a regeneration method and an
intermediate treatment. IC blocks contain a mix of undesirable and desirable tree species of multiple-ages
63
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
that need a variety of silvicultural treatments to address the typical concerns such as overly dense stands,
predominance of climax tree species, over mature trees, impending tree mortality due to forest insect and
disease problems, high severity of dwarf mistletoe in all conifer species, root-rot diseases, defoliating
insects, bark beetles, and competing vegetation. Typically, an IC treatment occurs on stands that have
clumps of multiple-age classes of ponderosa pine with low severity of dwarf mistletoe. For example some
areas of the stand may have clumps that need density management similar to Commercial Thin, while an
area containing openings with established advanced regeneration of a preferred seral species can be
managed like an Overstory Removal to release the natural regeneration, and another area dominated by
Douglas-fir with unmanageable dwarf mistletoe with scattered, large sawtimber of ponderosa pine and
western larch could be managed similar to a Seed Tree or Shelterwood treatment. In other words, these
stands are very variable and diverse in different age-classes and structures (3 or more layers). The stand
could have trees that range from 5 to 150 years old. It would not be feasible to break each type of
treatment into small blocks because the stand’s high variability occurs in small patches or clumps. The
Desired Future Condition (DFC) for this type of stand is to manage the saplings, poles, and small
sawtimber with a density management regime (i.e., Commercial Thin), and to retain seed trees to
regenerate any natural or created openings with natural regeneration of a preferred, seral species.
Eventually the stand should look more even aged, after the openings are naturally regenerated and an
Overstory Removal has been implemented to remove the large seed trees.
Pre-commercial Thin (PCT) is a cutting of non-merchantable sized trees to favor preferred conifer
species and phenotypically superior trees, at a determined spacing guideline such as 12 to 16 foot spacing.
At preferred stocking levels, the individual conifer trees are more vigorous and able to combat insect and
disease problems with their natural defenses. This treatment does not yield trees of commercial value.
Thinning the stand increases individual tree growth. This creates larger diameter trees than a non-thinned
stand, and subsequently improves merchantability and value.
Site Preparation Techniques
Typically, Regeneration Method Treatments (RRT, ST, and SW) on tractor logging ground will have
Excavator/Scarification/Pile for site preparation which will involve pile burning afterwards. Some of the
Excavator/Scarification/Pile objectives are: 1) to reduce the amount of hazardous ladder fuels, 2) reduce
vegetative competition for artificial and natural seedlings, 3) to scarify the duff layer down to bare
mineral soil, to create a seed bed for natural regeneration of ponderosa pine and western larch, 4) to create
a planting spot for artificial regeneration. Mechanical site preparation also allows for the protection of
existing regeneration. Periodic underburning on a 7-to-15-year return interval is also part of the longrange DFC for the lower elevations of the project area, especially the areas dominated by ponderosa pine
and western larch.
64
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
8.5 Army Corp of Engineers Best Management Practicess
65
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
66
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
8.6 CTCR Holistic Goal and Desired Future Conditions
67
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
68
13 MILE 2026 FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT
BIA-NWR-CTCR-EA-26-11
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.