Chapter 3 - Scenic Resource SCENIC RESOURCES Introduction The Spotted Bear Ranger District is a destination point for outdoor recreation activities and offers a variety of recreation opportunities: driving for pleasure, boating, rafting, fishing, camping, and hunting. Information Sources Information used to evaluate the scenery resource was based on site visits, aerial photos, and satellite imagery. Analysis Area The analysis area for the scenic resource is the project area described in Chapter 1. Affected Environment/Existing Condition Introduction The analysis for this project used the visual management system developed by the U.S. Forest Service in: Landscape Aesthetics - A Handbook for Scenery Management Number 701 (1995). It is used to analyze and evaluate the visual resource. This system replaces The Visual Management System Handbook Number 462 (USDA Forest Service 1974). This newer system provides for the evaluation of physical features of the landscape called "scenic attractiveness classes" (formerly - "variety classes") together with the levels of concern people have regarding scenery. This information is synthesized to develop Scenic Integrity Levels" (SILs). Scenic integrity is defined as the state of naturalness, or conversely, the state of alteration. The Flathead Forest Plan established Visual Quality Objectives (VQOs) for each management area (MA). The previously mentioned Handbook 701 provides for a crosswalk between the two levels, shown in Table 3-105 below. This is necessary to be able to use the most current handbook for scenery management while ensuring consistency with the Forest Plan regarding visual management. Table 3-105. Comparison of Scenic Integrity Levels to Visual Quality Objectives. Scenic Integrity Level Very High High Moderate Low Very Low Visual Quality Objective Preservation Retention Partial Retention Maximum 3-273
Chapter 3 Scenic Resource Very High (Similar to VQO of Preservation) This refers to landscapes where the valued landscape character is intact with only minute if any deviations. The existing landscape character and sense of place is expressed at the highest possible level. High (Similar to VQO of Retention) This refers to landscapes where the valued landscape character appears intact. Deviations may be present but must repeat form, line, color, texture, and pattern common to the character so completely that they are not evident. Moderate (Similar to VQO of Partial Retention) This refers to landscapes where the valued landscape character "appears slightly altered. Noticeable deviations must remain visually subordinate to the landscape character being viewed. Low (Similar to VQO of ) This refers to landscapes where the valued landscape character "appears moderately altered. Deviations begin to dominate the valued landscape character being viewed but they borrow valued attributes such as size, shape, edge effect and pattern of natural openings, and vegetative type changes outside the landscape being viewed. They should be compatible or complementary to the landscape character. Very Low (Similar to VQO of Maximum ) This refers to landscapes where the valued landscape character "appears heavily altered." Deviations may strongly dominate the landscape character. They may not be appropriate in shape, edge effect, or patterns. However, deviations must be shaped and blended with landforms so that elements such as unnatural edges or landings do not dominate the composition. The VQO for each MA affected by the proposed activities is displayed in Table 3-106 below. Table 3-106. Management Areas and Associated SILs, VQOs. Management Area SIL VQO 13 Low 15E Low / Very Low / Maximum Existing Condition Glaciation has been the primary land forming process that has shaped the project area. Slopes are generally gentle to moderate and range between 10 to 50 percent slope where most of the treatments are proposed. The higher elevations are often steeper, glaciated breaklands. Elevation in the area ranges from about 3,600 feet at the shore of Hungry Horse Reservoir, to over 7,000 feet on many of the ridgetops. In the immediate area outside the project area, excluding wilderness, past timber harvest activity patterns have produced a mixture of light-to-moderate managed areas to other areas that have remained relatively natural. Please see the Existing Condition portion of the Vegetation section for more detail information on past harvesting. Vegetation ranges from spruce in the lower, moist areas to subalpine fir at higher elevations with areas of Douglas fir and ponderosa pine on drier slopes. 3-274
Chapter 3 - Scenic Resource The landscape character of the project area is intermittent canopy cover due to the intensity of the fire with stands of single-storied trees 60 to over 100 feet tall. Based on the intensity of the fire, past timber harvest and roads are evident in some locations. Most of the project area is not easily accessed by the public because most roads have yearlong motorized access restrictions. However, the area is popular with hunters and does receive walkin use. Horseback riding is also popular in the area. The South Fork of the Flathead River and Spotted Bear River attract visitors to float, fish, and camp. Many travel through the project area using the main roads to access the Bob Marshall and Great Bear Wilderness areas as well as Spotted Bear Ranger Station. Environmental Consequences Introduction This section describes the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the proposed treatments on the scenery resource. Often using viewpoints is helpful when analyzing the impacts to scenic resources. This project area is very long and narrow with few locations that would allow for viewing many units at one time. Therefore, the viewpoint approach was not used. Rather, the units are categorized and described in a qualitative sense with visual impacts being described from what a visitor might see from a road, trail, or river. Salvage harvesting can affect forest scenic quality by changing the line or texture in a given viewing area. The degree of visibility of these events (i.e. visual impact) depends on the interaction of certain elements to the viewer, such as slope and aspect of the land, surrounding landscape, and frequency and duration of view. The effects of the proposed actions to these elements were reviewed and a determination was made on whether the Action Alternatives met the assigned VQO. The following effects indicator categories were used to qualitatively analyze impacts of the alternatives on scenic quality. A high impact would have these outcomes: A large number of people highly sensitive to their surroundings see the vegetation changes in foreground and middle ground views; or The proposed changes dominate the view and/or appear un-natural or chaotic. Vegetation clearing presents obvious line contrasts from adjoining forested areas. The area is officially recognized for its scenic or recreational values. A moderate impact would have these outcomes: The modifications would be visible to large numbers of people but it is not a dominant element in the landscape because: forest management activities are commonplace in the area; views are partially screened; large segments of change may be visible for a short time; and/or most views are in middle ground or background viewing distance. The modifications would change the prevailing land/vegetation patterns but be visible to few people or for short periods of time. A low impact would have the following outcome: 3-275
Chapter 3 Scenic Resource Few viewers would see the area because it is isolated, screened or seen at a background distance; existing conditions have already established impacts. If road construction is planned the road cuts, fills and clearing would not significantly detract from the setting. Views would be short-lived or of short duration and the visually sensitive resource would be minimally affected. No impact would have no visual changes. Each of the action alternatives involves prescriptions and management activities that would result in a change from the existing character of the project area. Proposed treatment units are categorized by the assigned VQO based on the MA location of the unit, shown in Table 3-107. The entire unit or a portion may be assigned. Table 3-107. Visual Quality Objective of the Treatment Units. Alternative 2 VQO Units 2, 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, portion of 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 112, 127, 128, 129, 130, portion of 131, 137, and 138 / Maximum VQO / Maximum 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 22, portion of 23, 106, 110, portion 131, 133, 134, and 135 Alternative 3 Units 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 112, 127, 128, 129, 130, portion of 131, 137, and 138 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 106, 110, portion of 131, 134, and 135 In addition to having fewer units than Alternative 2, Alternative 3 also has one unit that is smaller than in the other action alternative. This unit is unit 24 (86 acres in Alternative 3 versus 191 acres in Alternative 2). Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative) Direct and Indirect Effects Dead and dying trees would be found throughout the project area as a result of the 2015 fire. Since none of the proposed actions, including salvage harvest and road related proposals, would take place under this alternative there would be no impact to scenic quality. Cumulative Effects Since there are no impacts to scenic quality under this alternative, there would be no past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions that would have cumulative effects. 3-276
Chapter 3 - Scenic Resource Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Direct and Indirect Effects Tree Harvesting Tree harvesting would create some changes to views within the project area. Openings in stands of tree trunks of various sizes resulting from logging may be visible. The proposed treatments would be spread throughout the project area. Structure of the forest for stands that would be harvested would change from dense stands of burned trees to stands with more openings and occasional snags. Delineation between the dense stands of trees and openings with occasional snags may be noticeable until new vegetation is established and/or burned dead trees outside of the harvest units falls over. All of the units proposed would meet the modification or maximum modification VQOs established in the Forest Plan. Units that are near an open road or easily viewed from an open road would be considered to have a moderate impact to scenic quality several years following harvest. These include units 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 16, 18, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 106, 110, 112, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 135, and 137. This equates to 842 acres of moderate impacts to scenic quality. Units not near an open road or easily viewed from one would have a low impact to scenic quality several years following harvest. This includes units 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 22, 27, 28, 29, 133, 134, and 138. This equates to 509 acres of low impacts to scenic quality. There are some units that are adjacent to a trail or have a trail through them. These include units 1, 2, 8, and 134. Due to the fewer numbers of viewers on the trails than on the roads, the proximity of these units to trails would not change the impact of the salvage treatment in these units to scenic quality. Effects from temporary road construction of the new temporary road would be visible in the short term where soil disturbance is visible; after brush, grass, and forbs are established in the disturbed sites, effects would not be noticeable. While the soil disturbance would be visible, due to the flat topography of the location of the temporary road and the reduced vegetation surrounding the temporary road due to the fire, this would be a low impact to 0.8 miles of scenic quality. The temporary road would be rehabilitated following project treatments (refer to Design Features for treatment of temporary roads in Chapter 2). Often jump up roads are used to access a landing area near an open road. These are short temporary roads that allow access into the units. These would also be short term visual impacts as jump up roads are rehabilitated and/or revegetated when project activities are complete. Landings may also be visible in many of the units near open roads. Landings tend to be highly disturbed areas, but are also rehabilitated following project completion, thus resulting in a short term visual impact. Rehabilitation of jump up roads and landings often includes seeding of grasses and regeneration of trees. Effects from temporary use of the existing road templates would be even less evident than the effects from the creation of the new temporary roads. Temporary roads on existing templates, and the new system roads that would be stored following harvest, already have existing road templates and thus would have less soil disturbance associated with them. Due to this, the impacts of use of these roads to scenic quality would be low impacts to 4.5 miles. There would be limited impacts to scenic quality from hazard tree felling along roads and trails because only the occasional tree would be removed and thus hazard tree felling would have low impacts alongside the limited number of hazard trees felled. 3-277
Chapter 3 Scenic Resource Alternative 3 Direct and Indirect Effects The effects of the actions included in Alternative 3 would be identical to the effects described in Chapter 2 except that the acres and miles impacted would be fewer due to the acres and miles of actions proposed in Alternative 3 being less than what is proposed in Alternative 2. The effects to scenic quality from actions in Alternative 3 include: 609 acres of moderate impacts to scenic quality and 225 acres of low impacts to scenic quality from harvest units; 0.31 miles of low impacts to scenic quality from new temporary road construction; and 1.34 miles of low impacts to scenic quality from temporary roads on existing templates. Alternatives 2 (Proposed Action) and 3 Cumulative Effects Past timber harvest activity patterns have produced a mixture of light to moderate managed areas; however, in all alternatives the fire burned trees will fall creating openings that will be indistinguishable from openings created by past management activity. Thus, the cumulative effects to scenic quality from the actions for all alternatives would be the same as direct and indirect effects described above. Existing road templates were an impact to scenic quality and would remain a low impact to scenic quality under Alternatives 2 or 3. Regulatory Framework and Consistency The project would meet Forest Plan standards for scenery. 3-278