1

BOTANICAL BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION and ASSESMENT REPORT For The

CHARLIE PRESTON PROJECT

Idaho Panhandle National Forest

St. Joe Ranger District ________________________________________________

________________ ________________ ______ Kim Frymire, Botanist Date

2

Introduction The purpose of this evaluation is to assess and describe potential effects of the Charlie Preston Project on Threatened and Endangered (T and E) plants, and to determine whether any such species or habitat is likely to be affected by the alternatives. This evaluation was prepared in accordance with USDA Forest Service policy (FSM 2670.32 and FSM 2672.4). This document also serves as a biological evaluation for regional sensitive plants and forest species of concern (FSOC). Through out the document T and E plants, Sensitive plants, and FSOC plants will be referred to as TES plants. No Federally Listed Endangered plants are suspected and none were found. If any sites are found in the future that are deemed necessary to ensure species and population viability against a potential trend towards federal listing, those sites would be protected.

Forest Service direction (FSM 2672.1 and FSM 2672.43) requires that programs or activities be reviewed for potential effects on rare species and outlines policy, objectives and procedures. The Idaho Panhandle National Forest is directed by the forest plan to manage populations so as not to contribute to the need for listing under the Endangered Species Act (USDA 1987). The National Forest Management Act directs the Forest Service to review programs and activities to provide for diversity of plant communities.

ANALYSIS AREA and AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The project is located on the St. Joe Ranger District of the Idaho Panhandle National Forests. The Charlie Preston Project Area is located southeast of the town of Emida, Idaho in Benewah County and Latah County in portions of Township 43 and 44 North; Range 2 West, Boise Meridian. The analysis area for botanical resources includes the portion of the project area on National Forest System Lands. There are 6,560 acres of FS land and 824 acres of private land. Private land is included in the project area however we are not proposing any activity on private land. It was included in the project area due to the way we map compartment boundaries used to keep track of National Forest System lands.

Species and Habitat Descriptions Endangered Species There are no federally listed Endangered plant species suspected to occur in the Idaho Panhandle National Forests. Botanical surveys for the project area where conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010 for all areas in the project area were ground disturbance might occur and in many other portions of the project area.

3

Threatened Plant Species For the Charlie Preston Project area no Threatened Plant species are suspected to occur and none were found. Botanical surveys for the project area where conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010. Botanical surveys for the project area where conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010 for all areas in the project area were ground disturbance might occur and in many other portions of the project area. On February 11, 2009 the US Fish and Wildlife Service provided the Idaho Panhandle National Forests (IPNF) with the following list of plant species (FWS 1-9-09-SP-0035) which may be present in the Idaho Panhandle National Forest: water howellia (Howellia aquatilis A. Gray), and Spalding's catchfly (Silene spaldingii Wats.). A Threatened species is any that is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Water howellia (Howellia aquatilis) and Spalding’s catchfly (Silene spaldingii) are suspected on the St. Joe Ranger District. This means that these species are believed to have potential to occur on the St. Joe Ranger District. Water Howellia (Howellia aquatilis) - a member of the family Campanulaceae, has the potential to occur on the St. Joe Ranger District. According to the Conservation Strategy for Howellia aquatilis (USDA 1994), there are currently 110 known occurrences of the species; most occurrences are in Montana and Washington, with only one known occurrence in Idaho in Latah County. Water howellia occurred historically on the Forest, but is believed to have been extirpated. Water howellia is an annual aquatic species restricted to small, seasonal, pothole ponds or the quiet water of abandoned river oxbows. It occurs at elevations from 10 feet in Washington to 4,420 feet in Montana. The species reproduces only by seed. Fall drying of the wetland is required for seed germination, while spring submergence is required for the growth and subsequent flowering (USFW 1996). Germination usually occurs in October, presuming the plant's habitat has dried sufficiently to expose the seeds to oxygen. Because of this restrictive habitat requirement, population numbers in a given year are directly influenced by the extent of pond draw-down at the end of the previous growing season (USDA 1994). Habitat for water howellia does not occur within the affected environment of the Charlie Preston Project Area. District plant records and Idaho Department of Fish and Game Conservation Data Center (ICDC) Element Occurrence records were reviewed for known species locations. Spalding's catchfly (Silene spaldingii)- a member of the family Caryophyllaceae, is suspected to occur on the IPNF. It is currently known from 52 sites in west-central Idaho, northwestern Montana, eastern Oregon, eastern Washington, and British Columbia. The total number of individuals is around 16,500 (USDI 2001).

4

Spalding's catchfly is a long-lived perennial species, which reproduces only by seed (Lichthardt 1997). Individual plants often exhibit long periods of dormancy (one to three years) and may even experience dormancy within a growing season (Lesica 1997). Its habitat is primarily dry grassland habitats and grassland inclusions in ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir forest. Suitable habitat for this species is typically dominated by fescues (Festuca species), blue bunch wheat grass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), and other bunchgrasses, but also has a high density of forbs. Some sites may have shrub such as Symphoricapos albus, Physocarpus malvaceus, or Rosa spp. Soil types on which it has been found include loam, silty loam, granitic, loamy basaltic, and loess (USDI 2000). Soils in its habitat are characterized as deep to moderately deep. Habitat for Spalding's catchfly does not occur within the effected environment of the Charlie Preston Project Area. District plant records and Idaho Department of Fish and Game Conservation Data Center (ICDC) Element Occurrence records were reviewed for known species locations. Sensitive Species Sensitive species, as determined by the Regional Forester (USDA 2011) are those for which population viability is a concern. This can be indicated by a current or predicted downward trend in population numbers or suitable habitat which would reduce the species' existing distribution. Currently, the St. Joe Ranger District recognizes 26 plant species as Sensitive. Table 1 shows the Sensitive plant species by high potential rare plant habitat guild. A description of each high potential rare plant guild is located in Appendix A. High potential habitat is a filter for the likelihood of the presence of TES plants on the landscape. A habitat type may be classified as having a high potential for the presence of TES plants without the plants actually being present. See following discussion on methodology. District sensitive plant records and Idaho Department of Fish and Game Conservation Data Center (ICDC) Element Occurrence records where reviewed for existing sensitive plant location prior to project area surveys. Five occurrence of Buxbaumia viridis (Bug-On-A-Stick Moss) where found during project surveys. Surveys were conducted in the 2008, 2009, and 2010 field season by the St. Joe Ranger District Botanist and Botany Technicians. Field surveys are done for all plants not just those listed as TES, thus new additions in 2011 have been included in surveys. None of the additions in 2011 were found in the surveys. Botanical surveys for the project area where conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010 for all areas in the project area were ground disturbance might occur and in many other portions of the project area. Any occurrences discovered prior to project implementation would have mitigation measures designed by the District Botanist to ensure that species and population viability are maintained (see Design Features).

5

Table 1 - St. Joe Sensitive Plants by Rare Plant Habitat Guild (revised 2011)* Species Common Name Habitat Guild Asplenium trichomanes maidenhair spleenwort Rock seeps in moist/wet Blechnum spicant deerfern Moist/wet forest Botrychium ascendens upswept moonwort Wet forest Botrychium crenulatum dainty moonwort Wet forest Botrychium lanceolatum triangle moonwort Wet forest/moist forest Botrychium lineare (h) Slender moonwort Moist forest Botrychium minganense Mingan moonwort Wet forest/moist forest Botrychium montanum western goblin Wet forest Botrychium paradoxum paradox moonwort Wet forest/moist forest Botrychium pedunculosum stalked moonwort Wet forest Botrychium pinnatum northwestern moonwort Wet forest/moist forest Botrychium simplex least moonwort Wet forest/moist forest Buxbaumia aphylla leafless bug-on-a-stick moss Wet forest/moist forest Buxbaumia viridis Green bug-on-a-stick moss Wet forest/moist forest Cardamine constancei Constance's bittercress Deciduous riparian/ moist/wet forest Cypripedium fasciculatum clustered lady's slipper Moist/wet/dry forest Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens (S)

greater yellow lady’s slipper Moist/wet forest

Grindelia howellii Howell's gumweed Dry forest (St. Joe, basalt breaklands) Gimmia brittoniae Britton’s Grimmia Rock outcrops in moist forest Hookeria lucens (h) clear moss Wet forest Mimulus alsinoides chickweed monkeyflower Rock cliffs/seeps in wet/moist/dry forest Pinus albicaulis Whitebark pine subalpine Rhizomnium nudum Naked Mnium Wet/moist forest Thelypteris nevadensis Sierra woodfern Wet forest seeps Triantha occidentalis spp brevistyla sticky asphodel Subalpine peatlands Trichophorum alpinum Hudsons bullrush Deciduous riparian Waldsteinia idahoensis Idaho barren strawberry Moist and wet forest * based on Regional Forester's TES list 2011. (s)=suspected (h)=historical occurrence Species of Concern Species of concern, as determined by the Region One Planning Peer Group (Task Group 19 1997~updated IPNF Botanists 2011), are considered to be secure at the global, Regional, and state levels, but may be at risk at the Forest planning level. There are currently 27 recognized forest plant species of concern on the St. Joe Ranger District. These plant species and their associated high potential habitat guilds are shown in Table 2. A description of each high-potential rare plant guild is located in Appendix A. District sensitive plant records and Idaho Department of Fish and Game Conservation Data Center (ICDC) Element Occurrence records where reviewed for existing forest species of concern plant locations prior to project area surveys. Two occurrence of Taushia tenuissima (Lieberg's tauschia) where known from previous surveys on private land within the project area. Surveys were conducted in the 2008, 2009, and 2010 field season by the St. Joe Ranger District Botanist and Botany Technicians. Field surveys are done for all plants not just those listed as TES, thus new additions in 2011 have been included in surveys. None of the additions in 2011 were found in the surveys. Any occurrences discovered prior to project implementation would have mitigation measures designed by the District

6

Botanist to ensure that species and population viability are maintained (see Design Features). Table 2 - St. Joe Plant Species of Concern* (revised 2011)

Species Common Name Habitat Guild Arnica alpina var. tometosa Fuzzy arnica Subalpine Astragalus bourgovii Bourgeau's milkvetch Subalpine Botrychium lunaria Common moonwort Wet Forest/Moist Forest Botrychium michiganense Michigan moonwort Wet Forest/Moist Forest

Calochortus nitidus broad-fruit mariposa lily Dry Forest, Palouse Soils (St. Joe, St. Maries)

Carex californica California sedge Subalpine Cephalanthera austineae^ phantom orchid Moist/Wet Forest

Cetraria sepincola eyed ruffle lichen Deciduous Riparian, Peatland Cladonia transcendens transcending reindeer lichen Wet Forest Collema curtisporum Short-spored jelly lichen Deciduous riparian Corydalis caseana spp hastata Case's fitweed Wet Forest

(St. Maries, North Fk Clearwater) Dodecatheon dentatum white-flowered shooting star Wet Forest Ivesia tweedyi Tweedy’s ivesia Subalpine Lobaria hallii Hall's lung wort Deciduous Riparian Ludwigia polycarpa many-fruit false-loosestrife Peatland/aquatic Mimulus clivicola bank monkeyflower Dry Forests Orobanche pinorum Pine broomrape Dry Forest Platanthera orbiculata round-leaved orchid Moist/Wet Forest Pilophorus acicularis Devil's matchstick lichen Wet Forests Ribes sanguineum red-flowered current Moist forest Pilophorus clavatus Nail lichens Wet Forests Pinus albicaulis Whitebark pine Subalpine Sedum rupicolum lance-leaved sedum Subalpine Sphaerophorus globosus Christmas tree lichen Wet Forest Tauschia tenuissima Lieberg's tauschia Dry/Moist Forest, meadows Trientalis latifolia western starflower Deciduous Riparian/Moist/Wet Forest Vallisneria Americana wild celery Aquatic

* As directed by the Species of Concern Protocol (Region One Planning Peer Group, Task Group 19, March 1997), species of concern are considered to be secure at the global, Regional and state levels, but may be at risk at the Forest planning level. Species on this list will be surveyed for, documented and reported when found, and addressed in environmental documents (per NFMA) when viability within the planning unit is an issue. METHODOLOGY TES plant species can be assigned to one or more rare plant guilds, which are artificial groups based on similar habitat requirements and useful for the purpose of analysis (Mousseaux 1995). For the St. Joe Ranger District the rare plant guilds are: aquatic, deciduous riparian, peatlands, wet forest, moist forest, dry forest, and sub-alpine. Rock seeps and springs are another habitat that can support certain sensitive species, but they can occur across all guilds and are not identifiable at a coarse scale. High-potential deciduous riparian, aquatic, and peatland habitats do not occur within Charlie Preston Project area. A complete guild description is located in Appendix A.

7

The District stand database indicates the amount of highly suitable rare plant habitat that may be present in the project area based on current information regarding preferred habitat and successional state for species within the different guilds by stand. Known TES plant sites were evaluated using District sensitive plant records, surveys, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game Conservation Data Center (ICDC 2010 & 2009) Element Occurrence Records and additional occurrences where found during field surveys. On-the-ground surveys were used to verify habitat suitability if potential habitat was indicated. Botanical surveys for the Charlie Preston area were done in the 2008, 2009, and 2010 field seasons. Field surveys are done for all plants not just those listed as TES, thus new additions in 2011 have been included in surveys. None of the additions in 2011 were found in the surveys. In addition, site-specific information from timber stand examination records, aerial photographs, topographic position, personal knowledge, and professional judgment were used in analysis for Threatened plant species, Sensitive species, and Species of Concern potential habitats. No Federally Listed Endangered plants are suspected and none were found. If any sites are found in the future that are deemed necessary to ensure species recovery those sites would be protected as deemed appropriate by a zone botanist. The importance of a population is based on a variety of factors such as size of the population, number of known sites, ranking of the species, and sensitivity to disturbance. Cumulative effects to rare (TES) plant species and suitable habitat from proposed activities are generally described as very low, low, moderate, or high with the following definitions:

• very low = no measurable effect on individuals, populations or habitat • low = individuals, populations and/or habitat not likely affected • moderate = individuals and/or habitat may be affected, but populations

would not be affected, and habitat capability would not be reduced below a level which could support plant species over the long term

• high = populations would likely be affected and/or habitat capability may over the long term be reduced below a level which could support that plant species

Historic and Existing Condition The sub-basins of northern Idaho contain varied and diverse habitats and plant communities. Of the estimated 1,200 to 1,500 plant species known or thought to occur here, about ten percent are considered rare or uncommon. Coarse filter queries of the timber stands database (2010) indicate a total of approximately 4,887 acres of high-potential habitat within the project area (4,684 acres of moist forest, 75 acres of wet forest, 61 acres of dry forest, and 67 acres of subalpine). Theses queries were run before the database was shut down in 2010. Habitat types have not been re-evaluated since this time. This information is still current.

8

This equates to 74% of the analysis area. Field surveys done in 2008, 2009 and 2010 confirmed if the habitats actually supported TES plants. Past and ongoing activities within the project area and on adjacent public and private lands have led to habitat modification and fragmentation. Road construction, grazing, timber sales, recreational use, vehicular traffic, wildfires, mining, natural events, and a variety of other activities have all contributed to encroachment of weeds into the area and the localized reduction of native species diversity in sites where noxious weeds exist.

Large-scale timber harvests began in the mid-1880s, large-scale wildfires were first reported in the late 1880s through 1910, and grazing on the south half of the district began in the 1920s. Past wildland fires (both natural and human caused), have also contributed to habitat change and the encroachment of weeds. One large 132 acre fire burned in 2008, in the Hume Creek drainage and several small fires, all .5 acres or less, have burned in the project area. Extensive fires occurred in the 1920’s throughout the Charlie Preston project area. These fires and the associated activities (digging lines, creating roads, and other ground disturbance) contributed to the spread of weeds in the area. While the 1872 Mining Act prompted some interest in the area’s mineral resources, the discovery of gold and silver in the adjacent Coeur d’Alene River area in the early 1880s not only increased interest in mining, but also started the beginning of homesteading and furthered the need for timber. Horse-back riding, fishing, camping, hiking, ATV riding, and other recreational activities have been popular on the District for decades. Grazing on the Charlie Creek allotment which includes all of the Charlie Preston Project area began in 1951. Prior to 1950 non-permitted grazing occurred in the Charlie Creek draining including up to 4,000 annual unit months (AUM) of sheep and goats in the 1920s and 400 AUMs of cattle and 2,000-11,000 AUMs of sheep and goats in the 1940’s. By 1951 all sheep and goats were removed from in the area. Cattle have continued to use the Charlie Creek allotment from that time. The influx of grazing animals likely increased the amount of weeds as well as introduced new invasive plants to the area. Currently habitat types on the St. Joe Ranger District that have been heavily modified and/or are in short supply (dry forest w/ large trees, riparian, wet, and moist forest habitats) compared to historical conditions. These are the same habitats where most rare plant species can be found. The majority of the remaining riparian, and cedar wet and moist forest habitats to be found across the district are expected to remain stable due to mitigation requirements (USDA 1997: Integration of Forest Planning into Ecosystem Management: Toward a Forest Ecosystem Approach: An Assessment for the St. Joe Area page 54). Stable trends are also predicted for subalpine habitats which have remained nearly intact. Although xeric sites are also predicted to remain stable, they are often highly vulnerable to noxious weed invasion which would have a risk to rare plants.

9

Design Features The project would be implemented with the following resource protection measures:

A. If Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) species are discovered during project implementation, the site will be marked and buffered to decrease disturbance by a Forest Service botanist.

B. Known TES plant locations will be buffered as determined by the Forest Service botanist. These sites are to be excluded from harvest activities.

C. In unit 89 Fuels management activities will need to avoid placing grapple piles on TES plant sites by using the same buffers in place for timber activities.

D. If unit 89 has under burning or jackpot burning necessary post harvest

E. Activities the TES sites will be surrounded by a 10 foot fuel break.

Alternative A

No Action Under the No Action alternative, current management plans would continue to guide management of the project area. No activities would be planned in or near sensitive plant or FOSC locations, thus the no action alternative is of low risk.

Past and ongoing activities within the project area and on other lands have led to habitat modification and fragmentation in and around the project area. See Historic and Existing Condition above. Road construction, timber sales, recreational use, grazing, vehicular traffic, and natural events have all contributed to encroachment of weeds into the area and the localized reduction of native species diversity where weeds take over. Current and reasonably foreseeable activities within the project area include firewood collection; recreational use of roads, trails, and dispersed camping sites; road and trail maintenance, fire suppression, and grazing. These types of activities could result in new disturbed sites available for colonization by weeds, and it is possible they may introduce new species of weeds to the watershed.

Alternative B ACTIVITIES Timber Harvest The risk to sensitive plants and their habitat from timber harvest activities would be a moderate risk with design features for the Charlie Preston Project because

10

timber harvest may directly eliminate individual plants or populations through physical disturbance, damage, and/or eradicate soil mycorrhizae upon which many plant species depend. Some isolated individuals may be impacted by activities. Often, but not always, these individuals are part of a larger “meta-population” and are not deemed critical to population viability. Effects to TES plants from this project could occur indirectly. Canopy reduction could affect certain TES plants by changing light and moisture regimes. The effects threshold for canopy reduction has not been quantified for most TES plants, but is generally thought to be about 50 percent; below which effects could be minimal and above which effects could be evident. The higher the percent canopy removed, the greater the potential risk to TES plants in suitable habitat. The limited data and observations available indicate that many species in the moist and wet forest guilds are intolerant of major canopy removal (Lichthardt 1998; Greenlee 1997). According to Anderson et all (2007) harvesting affects plant diversity by altering microsites, fragmenting larger forested sites, and reducing the quantity of suitable substrate. The entire high- potential habitat to be harvested (Table 3) is in the moist forest guild. All other plant guilds that exist in the Charlie Preston Project Area are outside of harvest units. Therefore those plants within the moist forest guild are at the greatest risk to possible effects from harvest activities. The risk to plant species varies with treatments types (see Table 4) and amount of ground being disturbed. Total acres to be harvested in the project area are 1,546 acres of which 99% are in high potential habitat for TES plants using queries based on Mousseaux’s 1995 Idaho Panhandle National Forest TES Plant Habitat Guilds (see appendix A). In units proposed to be harvested under this alternative two small populations (aka sites or occurrences) of Buxbaumia viridis, a regional sensitive species are know to exist. Buxbaumia viridis, green bug-on-a-stick moss is a non-vascular plant. It should be noted that “non-vascular plants are especially sensitive to forest management” (Anderson et al 2007). Small populations are those having 50 or fewer individuals. Design Features include buffers around the populations to protect them from most impacts of harvest activities. Protection of any plant population in an activity area has some associated costs. Lesica and Allendorf (2010) speak to the importance of preserving small populations. “It is thought that small populations lose a large amount of genetic variability because of genetic drift and thus have reduced chance of long- term viability…….. small populations that occasionally undergo moderate levels of stress may be more appropriate for conservation than similar-sized populations in benign environments. We are not recommending that small populations be considered equivalent to larger ones for conservation purposes. Small populations are subject to loss of rare alleles, and this may be important for the long-term response to selection and survival of populations. Moreover, small populations are more prone to extinction from random environmental fluctuation.” In other words while a small population, such as those found in the Charlie Preston project area are not equal to the same

11

amount of genetic information found in much larger populations they should be protected for the potential unique genetic information they do have. Costs in this alternate are low as they are equivalent to the amount of merchandisable timber within the buffer. In at least one location buffers for other resource concerns overlap with buffers for TES plant sites. Table 3: Harvest with in High-Potential Habitats for TES Plants Acres Harvest Method 167 Clearcut with Reserve 1,048 Commercial Thinning 130 Over Story Removal 60 Seed Tree 31 Shelterwood 102 Shelterwood Final 1,538 TOTAL

Indirectly, changes in fuel loading, duff levels, moisture regime, light levels, soil movement within plant occurrences, and noxious weed invasion may impact TES plants and their habitat. Site preparation such as slash treatment associated with post harvest activities could also affect TES plants or habitat. While timber harvest has the potential to adversely affect rare plants, it may not always do so. Effects vary according to species, harvest method, and harvest prescription. Table 4: Treatment Type in all Habitats Treatment Acres % of Harvest Clearcut with reserve 90 6 Commercial Thin 1,134 73 Seed Tree 60 4 Shelterwood 31 2 Shelterwood Final 231 15 Total 1,546 100 Skyline yarding poses a moderate to high risk to killing or damaging TES plants depending on the amount of ground disturbance which could vary by weather conditions, slope, sediment type, and experience of the equipment operator. Skyline yarding has fewer indirect effects from compaction and repeated use of skid trails than tractor skidding. About 53% of the harvest would be done using skyline yarding. Detrimental disturbance is estimate at 2% (see Soils Report). Ground-based tractor skidding has a high risk to TES plants due to direct physical impacts, soil compaction, and soil displacement. Soils monitoring shows that up to about 13% detrimental impacts to soils may occur from ground-based skidding. Many of these areas have been previously disturbed from prior activities (old skid trails etc.). Eight percent of the harvest will occur using another ground based system, the track-line machine. These machines come in various sizes and can vary in their impact. The impact would be slightly less than other

12

ground based disturbances as the machine is smaller and is used primarily on ridge tops. Trees are lined up to the machine similar to the skyline method. Track-line would have a moderate risk. Table 5 displays the acres of each method per prescription in high potential habitat. About 39% of the harvest will be done with ground-based methods that will be at high risk to potential TES habitats the rest of the harvest will be in moderate to low risk. Design features to reduce ground disturbance (see Soils design features in EA), buffers to leave known TES plant sites protected, and riparian area buffers would reduce the amount of disturbance in these habitats, thus reducing the risk to TES plants. All harvest units have been surveyed for TES plants during seasons when TES plants found on the St. Joe Ranger district would be identifiable. Table 5 -Approximate Acres by Harvest Method Harvest Method Acres % of Harvest Skyline 813 53 Track-line Machine 131 8 Ground Based 602 39 If new threatened, endangered, sensitive, or forest species of concern plant occurrences are discovered during or prior to project implementation, the district Botanist would be notified so that measures could be taken to maintain population viability. Measures to protect population viability and habitat for all known and newly discovered occurrences would include altering or dropping proposed units from activity, modifying the proposed activity, or implementing buffers around plant occurrences. Contract provisions for protection of Endangered Species, and settlement for environmental cancellation would be included in all contracts.

Fuel Reduction and Site Preparation in Proposed Timber Harvest Units Most units have a variety of treatments proposed (see table 6). Not all of these treatments may be done in every unit. In order to best analyze the effects of the fuels treatments those with the highest risk to TES plants in each unit are used to estimate the effects for those units. Table 6 – Proposed Fuel Treatments in high potential habitats for TES plants.

Fuel Treatment in Harvest Units

Leave Tops, Lop

Broadcast Burn

Jackpot Burn

Under Burn

Yard Tops

Grapple Pile

Prescribed Fire

Approx. Acres 198 179 231 301 217 259 27

Risk to TES plants would be moderate for burning. Burning following harvest would consist of broadcast burning, under-burning, or jackpot burning. Prior to

13

burning, we may slash some residual non-merchantable trees to ensure a more continuous fuel bed. The effects of the burning would be patchy in nature, cleaning up areas where fuel concentrations exist and not burning in areas where fuels are minimal. Burning could occur in either spring or fall, as prescription parameters and burn windows permit. The potential impacts from burning would be lower for fall burning after plants have already flowered and seeded. According to Pyle and others (2010) “fires may directly kill most individuals of a species, the species may be capable of quickly reestablishing from seeds. Seed coat thickness and insulation qualities, embryo longevity, and density and location of seeds relative to lethal temperatures influence fire survival.” They also says that some plants, especially shrubs may not be killed by fire but rather re-sprout from the basal area. Observations in the field have shown re-sprouting of wildrose and gooseberry in areas where fire was actively present (smoldering) after those individual plants had been burned to the basal area less than 48 hours prior to the observation (wildland fire monitoring by botanist Kim Frymire 1998). Yarding, leaving, or lop and scattering limbs would have little to no additional effect beyond other harvest methods. Boundaries and ridges of those some units may be grapple-piled if slash loading against property boundaries poses a hazard. If these piles burn they would have localized areas of high intensity fire (heat) that would kill forbs growing in those areas. These sights are at high risk for soil damage, loss of microbes, nutrients, and fungi that may benefit rare plants. Tree Planting Tree planting is of no risk to TES plants because of the low amount of ground disturbance and the reduction of risk for invasive species spread by increasing native plants on the ground. Any effect on TES plants or their habitats would be considered beneficial over time as the canopy increases (indirect decrease of risk for weed invasion). Pocket Gopher Control Pocket gopher control presents a very low risk to TES plants because of the low amount of ground disturbance and lack of effect from the chemicals. Available research shows no consequential quantity of strychnine or zinc uptake in plants where similar treatments have taken place (see PF B-5). Creation of Snag and Potential Cavity Nesting Habitat Creating snags and potential cavity nesting habitat would pose no risk to TES plant species because there would be no ground disturbance.

14

Other Vegetation Treatments Biomass Removal Effects of biomass removal are considered under effects of timber harvest and fuel treatment and would have no additional risks to TES plant species. Biomass removal includes harvesting the wood product obtained from all or portions of trees including limbs, tops, and unmerchantable stems usually for energy production. Off-Site Ponderosa Pine Treatment Surveys did not locate any sensitive or FSOC plants at this time in the 82 acres of Unit 18 to be treated. All of unit 18 is within dry and moist high potential habitat for sensitive and FOSC plants. This prescribed burn is not expected to have high ground temperatures so soil and seeds beyond the duff layer would not be adversely affected because of the low amount of ground fuels. It is unlikely that sensitive or FOSC plants are in the unit; and if they do occur, the prescribed burn is unlikely to result in adverse effects. Some smaller trees would be slashed to increase ground fuels enough to carry flame. Trees would be planted where appropriate following the prescribed burn (see Tree Planting section above for effects). This prescribed burn is not expected to have high ground temperatures so soil and seeds beyond the duff layer would not be adversely affected because of the low amount of ground fuels.

“Plants avoid lethal temperatures more than they tolerate them. They avoid fire mortality by having perennating buds or seeds located adequate distances from lethal heat. Thus, parts of plants may experience lethal temperatures or even combust, but as long as some of the perennating tissue and critical vascular connections are protected from these temperatures the plant may survive. Seeds in the litter lay may be lost due to fire however those seeds lower in the soil profile may survive as the soil may act as an isolator. Many plants, particularly shrub species are capable of resprouting quickly from basal or root buds” (Pyke and others 2010).

Personal observations in the field have shown resprouting of wildrose and gooseberry in areas where fire was actively present (smoldering) after those individual plants had been burned to the basal area less than 48 hours prior to the observation (wildland fire monitoring by Kim Frymire, Botanist 1998). An indirect effect of burning would result from the addition of nitrogen to the soil, temporarily increasing plant growth. Often invasive/weedy species of plants gain the advantage of the localized nitrogen boost. Low or even mixed severity fire in suitable TES plant habitat can be beneficial to certain TES plants, yet detrimental

15

to others depending upon a variety of factors like fire intensity, the ability of the species to survive the event, and competition in early successional habitat. Roadside Fuel Reduction Treatments There are no known TES plant sites within the roadside fuel reduction treatment areas.

Roadside treatments include the removal of trees and shrubs by both hand cutting and mechanical removal. In areas where hand cutting occurs the risk for damaging soils is very low. Mechanical treatments disturb soils leading to pathways for invasion by noxious species that may crowd out native plants. Most of the machine cutting in this case would be used on roads thus limiting additional disturbance. The reduction of canopy cover in some stands will be limited, not approaching the canopy threshold of 50% thought to be the point at which TES plants are most likely to be affected (see timber harvest discussion). However in stands where the canopy is expected to have a retention post treatment (harvest/pre-scribed fire/road building) below 50% cover the cumulative effects of the additional treatment would be a high risk to TES plants. Approximately 1,434 acres would be expected to have less than 50% canopy cover. The biggest risk from the canopy reduction is the persistence of invasive weeds in these areas.

Roadside fuel reduction treatment in areas shown on the Treatment Units Map would include two different treatments for up to 120 acres: one within five feet of roads and one extending up to 100 feet from the roads. The area closest to the roads (within 5 feet of the edge of the cuts and fills) would be completely cleared of vegetation as part of road maintenance and to enhance the effectiveness of the fuel reductions that would extend up to 100 feet from the roads. The area beyond the five-foot road maintenance clearing would be thinned from below removing trees less than 6 inches d.b.h. and brush. Treatment would vary with cover type, canopy characteristics, fuel loading, aspect, slope, level of access. There would be a small decrease in canopy in some of the younger stands treated, but in the mature stands, the overstory would remain relatively intact. Methods to accomplish roadside fuel reduction include hand cutting, machine cutting with small grapple, mulching, or masticating head. Equipment would only be used on roads and would not be used off the road surface.

16

Fuel Reduction Near Bald Mountain Lookout The lopping and pilling would have little ground disturbance. Burning of slash piles may impact a few individuals but will not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species. Fuels reduction would have a high risk to TES Species of plants. While no TES plants were found in this unit at the time of surveys fire can, depending upon intensity of the fire, kill plants. Existing downed material would be lopped and piled to reduce fuel loads on 30acres. The area was thinned over 10 years ago. Slash from that activity is persisting and should be addressed to provide structure protection to Bald Mountain Lookout. Lopping and piling will be done by hand. An indirect effect of burning slash piles may result from the addition of nitrogen to the soil, temporarily increasing plant growth. Often invasive/weedy species of plants gain the advantage of the localized nitrogen boost. Pile burning would have localized areas of intensive fire. Other areas in the stand outside the piles will have no effects from burning. The piles themselves due to an increased risk for weed establishment and soil disturbance area a high risk. Personal-Use Firewood Removal After logging and biomass removal operations, gates on Roads 1950 and 1950C may be opened to allow the public to collect personal-use firewood. The public would be allowed to gather firewood except where prohibited as shown on maps and/or as posted (See EA design features). Firewood cutting would be excluded from the first 500 feet of Road 1950C, and the public would be notified of this with signs and maps. Sensitive plant species Buxbaumia viridis (green bug-on-a stick) can grow on down decaying wood. Most often the wood is at a decay class of 4 or greater. Wood at this state of decay is rarely collected for fire wood. However incidental removal could occur, but is unlikely with the design features. There is a chance of removal/damage of individuals of Buxbaumia viridis. The loss of some individuals would not cause a trend to federal listing. This species is globally ranked as a G4, “apparently secure” globally and a S2 with in the state of Idaho where it is considered to be threatened as there are 20 or fewer known sites. Additional occurrences of this species exist on the IPNF. Firewood cutting would be excluded from areas where know TES plant locations exist. Firewood cutting would be a low risk to TES plants.

Road Construction, Reconstruction, Storage, and Decommissioning Road construction: Botanical surveys in 2008, 2009, and 2010 found no occurrences of TES plants in areas proposed for road construction. Ground disturbance to create a new road bed would have a moderate risk for TES plant species due to the complete removal of vegetation at these sites. Approximately 4.5 miles of new system road construction would occur in high potential plant habitat. When timber harvest and associated activities are complete the newly constructed roads would be put into long-term storage (see

17

discussion below). The indirect effects of road construction would be an increase in the potential for the introduction and expansion of weed species, especially into newly accessible areas, and disturbance of established seed beds and soil. New road construction may directly eliminate individual plants or populations through physical disturbance and damage or eradicate soil mycorrhizae upon which many plant species depend. Indirectly, changes in fuel loading, duff levels, moisture regime, and light levels may impact TES plants and their habitat. Temporary road: Approximately 1.1 miles of temporary road would be created in high-potential habitat. A temporary road is a road constructed just for this project that would be obliterated when harvest operations are complete. The risk to TES plants would be the same as for road construction if the plants were in the area, see discussion above; however, no TES plants where found during field surveys on sites proposed for temporary road construction. Road reconstruction: Approximately 2.4 miles of road would be reconstructed to their approved traffic service level or would be improved to increase safety, operational efficiency or resource protection (improve drainage and improve water quality). For this project, reconstruction includes rebuilding roads to their original standards. Road drainage may be improved where needed. Spot reconstruction on some roads would also occur, where the primary disturbance is confined to a limited area, such as culvert installations, rebuilding a shoulder or addition of turnouts. Areas between the spots generally would need reconditioning (reshaping and processing the road surface and ditches and brushing the shoulders). The indirect effects of road reconstruction would be an increase in the potential for the introduction and expansion of weed species, especially into previously inaccessible areas, with increased access. There are no known TES plant sites in reconstruction areas. The overall improvements on the existing road bed would have a low risk for TES plant species. Long-term storage: Overall long-term storage would have a very low risk to TES plant species as these areas have been previously disturbed and have no known TES plants occurrences. Approximately 4.4 miles of road would be put into long-term storage because there is no foreseeable use for the road in the next 15 to 25 years, but the road may be needed at some future date. The road would be out-sloped and have the drainage structures removed. The roadbed may require light scarification, water bars, and/or decompaction. The road would be seeded and/or planted with native species as provided in the contract to establish a vegetative cover in the road prism. The beginning of roads that are not behind gates would be left in a condition to discourage public motorized use beyond dispersed camping sites. Long-term storage may eliminate motorized access while still permitting stock and pedestrian access. The reductions in vehicular access would result in a decreased potential for weed transport. Once the activities to put the road into storage are completed the risk dissipates.

18

Decommission with full or partial recontouring: Decommissioning would have a low risk to TES plant species as these areas have been previously disturbed and have no known TES plants occurrences. Once the activities to decommission the road are completed the risk dissipates. Approximately 0.6 miles of road would be decommissioned because they are not needed for management purposes. The road would be decompacted and major fills, embankments, and higher failure risk areas would be pulled up onto the roadbed and be stabilized. Drainage structures would be removed from stream channels, and the adjacent slopes would be restored to resemble natural conditions. Recontouring or partial pullback is based on site-specific conditions and could range from about 20 to 100 percent of the roads length. The road would be seeded and/or planted with native species as provided in the contract to establish a vegetative cover. The elimination of vehicular access (illegal) would result in a decreased potential for weed transport. Aquatic Improvements: Fish Migration Barrier Replacements: Five culverts which are fish migration barriers are located on Road 1954 and Road 1950. These culverts would be replaced to ensure aquatic organism passage. These sites have been previously disturbed by installation of culverts and the creation of roads. Ground disturbance caused from replacing the culverts would have a very low risk to TES plants. There are no known or suspected TES plant occurrences at these locations. Riparian Planting and Large Woody Debris Placement: The risk to TES plants is very low because there are no known or suspected TES plant occurrences along Preston and Charlie Creeks, and this activity would result in very limited ground disturbance. Large woody debris structures would be constructed in Preston Creek and Charlie Creek. Riparian conifers and shrubs would be planted in association with the woody debris structures and throughout the riparian zones where trees were removed to facilitate past logging and railroad activity. Planting would be done by hand or by spider-hoe and placement of structures would have limited ground disturbance.

Creation of Dispersed Camping Sites: The following areas would be left in conditions conducive for dispersed camping where feasible:

The beginning of newly constructed or reconstructed roads (system or temporary) at the junction of open, existing roads when the new road is stored or decommissioned.

Log landing areas on open roads.

These locations have ground disturbance analyzed under the effects of timber harvest and roads for the creation of the dispersed site.

19

Cumulative Effects Past and ongoing activities within the project area and on other lands have led to habitat modification and fragmentation in and around the project area. Road construction, timber sales, recreational use, grazing, vehicular traffic, and natural events have all contributed to encroachment of weeds into the area and the localized reduction of native species diversity where weeds take over. Current and reasonably foreseeable activities within the project area include firewood collection; recreational use of roads, trails, and dispersed camping sites; road and trail maintenance, fire suppression, and grazing. These types of activities could result in new disturbed sites available for colonization by weeds, and they do offer the possibility of introduction of new species of weeds to the watershed.

Over all the cumulative activities would not likely impact TES plant species present in the area. Individuals of Buxbaumia viridis (green bug-on-a stick) do have a risk of being impacted however this should not put the species as a whole at risk across the range of the species. The current habitat condition would be affected as canopy would be reduced in some areas. In some portions of the project area canopy will increase as disturbance is reduced were roads are put into long-term storage and decommissioned. This reduces the opportunities for weeds and may become habitat for TES plants. Other locations where new disturbance occurs will increase the opportunities for weeds to establish and reduce the niches for potential TES plant establishment.

Alternative C ACTIVITIES Timber Harvest The risk to TES plants and their habitat from timber harvest activities would be a moderate risk with design features for the Charlie Preston Project because timber harvest may directly eliminate individual plants or populations through physical disturbance, damage, and/or eradicate soil mycorrhizae upon which many plant species depend. Some isolated individuals may be impacted by activities. Often, but not always, these individuals are part of a larger “meta-population” and are not deemed critical to population viability. Effects to TES plants from this project could occur indirectly. Canopy reduction could affect certain TES plants by changing light and moisture regimes. The effects threshold for canopy reduction has not been quantified for most TES plants, but is generally thought to be about 50 percent; below which effects could be minimal and above which effects could be evident. The higher the percent canopy removed, the greater the potential risk to TES plants in suitable habitat. The limited data and observations available indicate that many species in the moist and wet forest guilds are intolerant of major canopy removal (Lichthardt 1998; Greenlee 1997). According to Anderson et all (2007) harvesting affects plant

20

diversity by altering microsites, fragmenting larger forested sites, and reducing the quantity of suitable substrate. The entire high-potential habitat to be harvested is in the moist forest guild which includes all 850 acres of the harvest (commercial thinning). All other plant guilds that exist in the Charlie Preston Project Area are outside of harvest units. Therefore those TES plants within the moist forest guild are at the greatest risk to possible effects from harvest activities. The risk to TES plant species varies with the amount of ground being disturbed. In units proposed to be harvested under this alternative two small populations (aka sites or occurrences) of Buxbaumia viridis, a regional sensitive species are know to exist. Buxbaumia viridis, green bug-on-a-stick moss is a non-vascular plant. It should be noted that “non-vascular plants are especially sensitive to forest management” (Anderson et al 2007). Small populations are those having 50 or fewer individuals. Design features include buffers around the populations to protect them from most impacts of harvest activities. Protection of any plant population in an activity area has some associated costs. Lesica and Allendorf (2010) speak to the importance of preserving small populations. “It is thought that small populations lose a large amount of genetic variability because of genetic drift and thus have reduced chance of long- term viability…….. small populations that occasionally undergo moderate levels of stress may be more appropriate for conservation than similar-sized populations in benign environments. We are not recommending that small populations be considered equivalent to larger ones for conservation purposes. Small populations are subject to loss of rare alleles, and this may be important for the long-term response to selection and survival of populations. Moreover, small populations are more prone to extinction from random environmental fluctuation.” In other words while a small population, such as those found in the Charlie Preston project area are not equal to the same amount of genetic information found in much larger populations they should be protected for the potential unique genetic information they do have. Costs in this alternate are low as they are equivalent to the amount of merchandisable timber with in the buffer. In at least one location buffers for other resource concerns overlap with buffers for TES plant sites. Indirectly, changes in fuel loading, duff levels, moisture regime, light levels, soil movement within plant occurrences, and noxious weed invasion may impact TES plants and their habitat. Site preparation such as slash treatment associated with post harvest activities could also affect TES plants or habitat. While timber harvest has the potential to adversely affect rare plants, it may not always do so. Effects vary according to species, harvest method, and harvest prescription. Skyline yarding poses a moderate to high risk to killing or damaging TES plants depending on the amount of ground disturbance which could vary by weather conditions, slope, sediment type, and experience of the equipment operator. Skyline yarding has fewer indirect effects from compaction and repeated use of

21

skid trails than tractor skidding. About 50% of the harvest would be done using skyline yarding. Detrimental disturbance is estimate at 2% (see Soils Report). Ground-based tractor skidding has a high risk to TES plants due to direct physical impacts, soil compaction, and soil displacement. Soils monitoring shows that up to about 13% detrimental impacts to soils may occur from ground-based skidding. Many of these areas have been previously disturbed from prior activities (old skid trails etc.). Nine percent of the harvest will occur using another ground based system, the track-line machine. These machines come in various sizes and can vary in their impact. The impact would be slightly less than other ground based disturbances as the machine is smaller and is used primarily on ridge tops. Trees are lined up to the machine similar to the skyline method. Track-line would have a moderate risk. Surveys done over three field season surveyed for TES plants found presence of TES plants design features for the unit with the occurrence of these plants would be buffered to protect the plants. Habitat for TES plants would be negatively affected. Table 7 displays the acres of each method per prescription in high potential habitat. About 41% of the harvest will be done with ground-based methods that will be at high risk to potential TES habitats the rest of the harvest will be in moderate to low risk. Design features to reduce ground disturbance (see Soils design features), buffers to leave known TES plant sites protected, and riparian area buffers would reduce the amount of disturbance in these habitats, thus reducing the risk to TES plants. All harvest units have been surveyed for TES plants during seasons when TES plants found on the St. Joe Ranger district would be identifiable. Table 7 -Approximate Acres by Harvest Method Harvest Method Acres % of Harvest Skyline 422 50 Track-line Machine 75 9 Ground Based 353 41 If new threatened, endangered, sensitive, or forest species of concern plants occurrences are discovered during or prior to project implementation, the district Botanist would be notified so that measures could be taken to maintain population viability. Measures to protect population viability and habitat for all known and newly discovered occurrences would include altering or dropping proposed units from activity, modifying the proposed activity, or implementing buffers around plant occurrences. Contract provisions for protection of Endangered Species, and settlement for environmental cancellation would be included in all contracts.

Fuel Reduction and Site Preparation in Proposed Timber Harvest Units Most units have a variety of treatments proposed. Not all of these treatments may be done in every unit. In order to best analyze the effects of the fuels

22

treatments those with the highest risk to TES plants in each unit are used to estimate the effects for those units. All 850 acres have the potential to have some type of burning as a tool for fuel reduction and or site preparation. Note that while all 850 acres could have burning as a tool it is unlikely that burning would be implemented on all 850 acres. Risk to TES plants would be moderate for burning because the effects of the burning would be patchy in nature, cleaning up areas where fuel concentrations exist and not burning in areas where fuels are minimal. Burning could occur in either spring or fall, as prescription parameters and burn windows permit. The potential impacts from burning would be lower for fall burning after plants have already flowered and seeded. Spring burning has the potential to negatively affect germination and or flowering of some plants. Invasive plants (weeds) can often take advantage of these conditions to become well established. According to Pyle and others (2010) “fires may directly kill most individuals of a species, the species may be capable of quickly reestablishing from seeds. Seed coat thickness and insulation qualities, embryo longevity, and density and location of seeds relative to lethal temperatures influence fire survival.” They also says that some plants, especially shrubs may not be killed by fire but rather re-sprout from the basal area. Observations in the field have shown re-sprouting of wildrose and gooseberry in areas where fire was actively present (smoldering) after those individual plants had been burned to the basal area less than 48 hours prior to the observation (wildland fire monitoring by botanist Kim Frymire 1998). Boundaries and ridges of those some units may be grapple-piled if slash loading against property boundaries poses a hazard. If these piles burn they would have localized areas of high intensity fire (heat) that would kill forbs that are present in those areas. These sights are at high risk for soil damage, loss of microbes, nutrients, and fungi that may benefit rare plants. Tree Planting Tree planting is of no risk to TES plants because of the low amount of ground disturbance and the reduction of risk for invasive species spread by increasing native plants on the ground. Any effect on TES plants or their habitats would be considered beneficial over time as the canopy increases (indirect decrease of risk for weed invasion). Pocket Gopher Control Pocket gopher control presents a very low risk to TES plants because of the low amount of ground disturbance and lack of effect from the chemicals. Available research shows no significant quantity of strychnine or zinc uptake in plants where similar treatments have taken place (see PF B-5).

23

Creation of Snag and Potential Cavity Nesting Habitat Creating snags and potential cavity nesting habitat would pose no risk to TES plant species because there would be no ground disturbance.

Other Vegetation Treatments Biomass Removal Effects of biomass removal are considered under effects of timber harvest and fuel treatment and would have no additional risks to TES plant species. Biomass removal includes harvesting the wood product obtained from all or portions of trees including limbs, tops, and unmerchantable stems usually for energy production. Off-Site Ponderosa Pine Treatment A few individuals may be lost from prescribed fire but it would not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to populations or species of rare plants because habitat would be negatively affected. Nitrogen release from burning may allow for weeds to become rapidly established with little canopy cover. Fuels reduction and off-site ponderosa pine treatment would have a moderate risk to TES species of plants. Approximately 82 acres in unit 18 would be prescribed burned with no timber harvest to reduce off-site ponderosa pine and prepare sites to plant early-seral, long-lived tree species. All of unit 18 is within dry and moist high potential habitat for TES plants. Some smaller trees would be slashed to increase ground fuels enough to carry flame. Trees would be planted where appropriate following the prescribed burn (see Tree Planting section above for effects). This prescribed burn is not expected to have high ground temperatures so soil and seeds beyond the duff layer would not be adversely affected because of the low amount of ground fuels.

“Plants avoid lethal temperatures more than they tolerate them. They avoid fire mortality by having perennating buds or seeds located adequate distances from lethal heat. Thus, parts of plants may experience lethal temperatures or even combust, but as long as some of the perennating tissue and critical vascular connections are protected from these temperatures the plant may survive. Seeds in the litter lay may be lost due to fire however those seeds lower in the soil profile may survive as the soil may act as an isolator. Many plants, particularly shrub species are capable of resprouting quickly from basal or root buds” (Pyke and others 2010).

Personal observations in the field have shown resprouting of wildrose and gooseberry in areas where fire was actively present (smoldering) after those

24

individual plants had been burned to the basal area less than 48 hours prior to the observation (wildland fire monitoring by Kim Frymire, Botanist 1998). An indirect effect of burning would result from the addition of nitrogen to the soil, temporarily increasing plant growth. Often invasive/weedy species of plants gain the advantage of the localized nitrogen boost. Low or even mixed severity fire in suitable TES plant habitat can be beneficial to certain TES plants, yet detrimental to others depending upon a variety of factors like fire intensity, the ability of the species to survive the event, and competition in early successional habitat. Roadside Fuel Reduction Treatments There are no known TES plant sites within the roadside fuel reduction treatment areas. If any TES plants are found during or prior to the treatment the site would be removed from treatment and surrounded by a buffer (see Design Feature A).

Roadside treatments include the removal of trees and shrubs by both hand cutting and mechanical removal. In areas where hand cutting occurs the risk for damaging soils is very low. Mechanical treatments disturb soils leading to pathways for invasion by noxious species that may crowd out native plants. Most of the machine cutting in this case would be used on roads thus limiting additional disturbance. The reduction of canopy cover in some stands will be limited, not approaching the canopy threshold of 50% thought to be the point at which TES plants are most likely to be affected (see timber harvest discussion). However in stands where the canopy is already close to or beyond a 50% reduction the cumulative effects of the additional treatment would be a high risk to TES plants. For all other road side areas including those along units the risk from roadside treatment would be moderate risk for TES plant species. In alternative C at least 703 acres would have canopy cover below 50%. This treatment will reduce the edges adjacent to the roadways to little or now canopy cover. Canopy reduction would increase the likelihood of invasive weeds persisting in these areas.

Roadside fuel reduction treatment in areas shown on the Treatment Units Map would include two different treatments: one within five feet of roads and one extending up to 100 feet from the roads. The area closest to the roads (within 5 feet of the edge of the cuts and fills) would be completely cleared of vegetation as part of road maintenance and to enhance the effectiveness of the fuel reductions that would extend up to 100 feet from the roads. The area beyond the five-foot road maintenance clearing would be thinned from below by removing trees less than 6 inches d.b.h. and brush. Treatment would vary with cover type, canopy characteristics, fuel loading, aspect, slope, level of access. There would be a small decrease in canopy in some of the younger stands treated, but in the mature stands, the overstory would remain relatively intact. Methods to accomplish roadside fuel reduction include hand cutting, machine cutting with small grapple, mulching, or masticating head. Equipment would only be used on roads and would not be used off the road surface.

25

Fuel Reduction Near Bald Mountain Lookout The lopping and pilling would have little ground disturbance. Burning of slash piles may impact a few individuals but will not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of the population or species because most of the work will be done by hand or with methods that have a small amount of soil disturbance. Fuels reduction would have a low to high risk to TES Species of plants. Existing downed material would be lopped and piled to reduce fuel loads on 30acres. The area was thinned over 10 years ago. Slash from that activity is persisting and should be addressed to provide structure protection to Bald Mountain Lookout. Lopping and piling will be done by hand. An indirect effect of burning slash piles may result from the addition of nitrogen to the soil, temporarily increasing plant growth. Often invasive/weedy species of plants gain the advantage of the localized nitrogen boost. Pile burning would have localized areas of intensive fire. Other areas in the stand outside the piles will have no effects from burning. The piles themselves due to an increased risk for weed establishment and soil disturbance area a high risk. Personal-Use Firewood Removal After logging and biomass removal operations, gates on Roads 1950 and 1950C may be opened to allow the public to collect personal-use firewood. The public would be allowed to gather firewood except where prohibited as shown on maps and/or as posted (See design features). Firewood cutting would be excluded from the first 500 feet of Road 1950C, and the public would be notified of this with signs and maps. Sensitive plant species Buxbaumia viridis (green bug-on-a stick) can grow on down decaying wood. Most often the wood is at a decay class of 4 or greater. Wood at this state of decay is rarely collected for fire wood. However incidental removal could occur, but is unlikely with the design features. There is a chance of removal/damage of individuals of Buxbaumia viridis. The loss of an individual would not cause a trend to federal listing. This species is globally ranked as a G4, “apparently secure” globally and a S2 with in the state of Idaho where it is considered to be threatened as there are 20 or fewer known sites. Additional occurrences of this species exist on the IPNF. Firewood cutting would be excluded from areas where known TES plant locations exist. Firewood cutting would be a low risk to TES plants.

Road Construction, Reconstruction, Storage, and Decommissioning Road construction: Botanical surveys in 2008, 2009, and 2010 found no occurrences of TES plants in areas proposed for road construction. Ground disturbance to create a new road bed would have a moderate risk for TES plant species if TES plants were in the area due to the complete removal of vegetation at these sites; however, no TES plants were found during field surveys, so risk to TES plants at these sites is low. Approximately 1.6 miles of new system road construction would occur in high potential plant habitat. When timber harvest and associated activities are

26

complete the newly constructed roads would be put into long-term storage (see discussion below). The indirect effects of road construction would be an increase in the potential for the introduction and expansion of weed species, especially into newly accessible areas, and disturbance of established seed beds and soil. New road construction may directly eliminate individual plants or populations through physical disturbance and damage or eradicate soil mycorrhizae upon which many plant species depend. Indirectly, changes in fuel loading, duff levels, moisture regime, and light levels may impact TES plants and their habitat if TES plants are in the area, but none were located during surveys. Temporary road: Approximately 0.4 miles of temporary road would be created in high-potential habitat. A temporary road is a road constructed just for this project that would be obliterated when harvest operations are complete. The risk to TES plants would be the same as for road construction if the plants were in the area (see discussion above); however, no TES plants were found during field surveys on sites proposed for temporary road construction. Road reconstruction: Approximately 0.7 miles of road would be reconstructed to their approved traffic service level or would be improved to increase safety, operational efficiency or resource protection (improve drainage and improve water quality). For this project, reconstruction includes rebuilding roads to their original standards. Road drainage may be improved where needed. Spot reconstruction on some roads would also occur, where the primary disturbance is confined to a limited area, such as culvert installations, rebuilding a shoulder or addition of turnouts. Areas between the spots generally would need reconditioning (reshaping and processing the road surface and ditches and brushing the shoulders). The indirect effects of road reconstruction would be an increase in the potential for the introduction and expansion of weed species, especially into previously inaccessible areas, with increased access. There are no known TES plant sites in reconstruction areas. The overall improvements on the existing road bed would have a low risk for TES plant species. Long-term storage: Overall long-term storage would have a very low risk to TES plant species because the sites have already been disturbed and no TES plants were located during surveys of these areas. Approximately 4.4 miles of road would be put into long-term storage because there is no foreseeable use for the road in the next 15 to 25 years, but the road may be needed at some future date. The road would be out-sloped and have the drainage structures removed. The roadbed may require light scarification, water bars, and/or decompaction. The road would be seeded and/or planted with native species as provided in the contract to establish a vegetative cover in the road prism. The beginning of roads that are not behind gates would be left in a condition to discourage public motorized use beyond dispersed camping sites. Long-term storage may eliminate motorized access while still permitting stock and pedestrian access. The reductions in vehicular access would result in a decreased potential for weed

27

transport. Once the activities to put the road into storage are completed the risk dissipates. Decommission with full or partial recontouring: Decommissioning would have a low risk to TES plant species as these areas have been previously disturbed and have no known TES plants occurrences. Once the activities to decommission the road are completed the risk dissipates. Approximately 0.6 miles of road would be decommissioned because they are not needed for management purposes. The road would be decompacted and major fills, embankments, and higher failure risk areas would be pulled up onto the roadbed and be stabilized. Drainage structures would be removed from stream channels, and the adjacent slopes would be restored to resemble natural conditions. Recontouring or partial pullback is based on site-specific conditions and could range from about 20 to 100 percent of the roads length. The road would be seeded and/or planted with native species as provided in the contract to establish a vegetative cover. The elimination of vehicular access (illegal) would result in a decreased potential for weed transport. Aquatic Improvements: Fish Migration Barrier Replacements: Five culverts which are fish migration barriers are located on Road 1954 and Road 1950. These culverts would be replaced to ensure aquatic organism passage. These sites have been previously disturbed by installation of culverts and the creation of roads. Ground disturbance caused from replacing the culverts would have a very low risk to TES plants becasue there are no known or suspected TES plant occurrences at these locations. Riparian Planting and Large Woody Debris Placement: The risk to TES plants is very low because there are no known or suspected TES plant occurrences along Preston and Charlie Creeks, and this activity would result in very limited ground disturbance. Large woody debris structures would be constructed in Preston Creek and Charlie Creek. Riparian conifers and shrubs would be planted in association with the woody debris structures and throughout the riparian zones where trees were removed to facilitate past logging and railroad activity. Planting would be done by hand or by spider-hoe and placement of structures would have limited ground disturbance.

Creation of Dispersed Camping Sites: The following areas would be left in conditions conducive for dispersed camping where feasible:

The beginning of newly constructed or reconstructed roads (system or temporary) at the junction of open, existing roads when the new road is stored or decommissioned.

28

Log landing areas on open roads.

These locations have ground disturbance analyzed under the effects of timber harvest and roads for the creation of the dispersed site.

Cumulative Effects Past and ongoing activities within the project area and on other lands have led to habitat modification and fragmentation in and around the project area. Road construction, timber sales, recreational use, grazing, vehicular traffic, and natural events have all contributed to encroachment of weeds into the area and the localized reduction of native species diversity where weeds take over. Current and reasonably foreseeable activities within the project area include firewood collection; recreational use of roads, trails, and dispersed camping sites; road and trail maintenance, fire suppression, and grazing. These types of activities could result in new disturbed sites available for colonization by weeds, and they do offer the possibility of introduction of new species of weeds to the watershed.

Over all the cumulative activities would not likely impact TES plant species present in the area. Individuals of Buxbaumia viridis (green bug-on-a stick) do have a risk of being impacted however this should not put the species as a whole at risk across the range of the species. The current habitat condition would be affected as canopy would be reduced in some areas. In some portions of the project area canopy will increase as disturbance is reduced were roads are put into long-term storage and decommissioned. This reduces the opportunities for weeds and may eventual become habitat for TES plants. Other locations where new disturbance occurs will increase the opportunities for weeds to establish and reduce the niches for potential TES plant establishment.

DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS Sensitive Species: Two occurrences of Buxbaumia viridis, Green bug-on-a-stick moss are known within the analysis area. Both are within activity areas and would be surrounded by a 50 foot or greater buffer. Impacts to habitat may occur but are not likely to trend towards Federal listing of the species because of the design features in place to protect these occurrences. The loss of individuals would not be great enough, at this time, to push the species into Federal listing as enough population exist across its range.

29

St. Joe Sensitive Plants by Rare Plant Habitat Guild (revised 2011)*

Species Common Name Habitat Guild A B C Asplenium trichomanes maidenhair spleenwort rock seeps in Moist/Wet Forest NI NI NI

Blechnum spicant

deerfern

Moist/Wet Forest

NI NI NI

Botrychium ascendens

upswept moonwort

Wet Forest

NI NI NI

Botrychium crenulatum dainty moonwort Wet Forest NI NI NI

Botrychium lanceolatum triangle moonwort Wet Forest/Moist Forest NI NI NI

Botrychium lineare Slender moonwort Moist Forest NI NI NI

Botrychium minganense Mingan moonwort Wet Forest/Moist Forest NI NI NI

Botrychium montanum western goblin Wet Forest NI NI NI

Botrychium paradoxum paradox moonwort Wet Forest/Moist Forest NI NI NI

Botrychium pedunculosum

stalked moonwort Wet Forest NI NI NI

Botrychium pinnatum northwestern moonwort Wet Forest/Moist Forest NI NI NI

Botrychium simplex least moonwort Wet Forest/Moist Forest NI NI NI

Buxbaumia aphylla leafless bug-on-a-stick moss

Wet Forest/Moist Forest NI NI NI

Buxbaumia viridis Green bug-on-a-stick moss

Wet Forest/Moist Forest

NI MI MI

Cardamine constancei Constance's bittercress Deciduous Riparian/Moist/Wet Forest

NI NI NI

Cypripedium fasciculatum

clustered lady's slipper

Moist/Wet/Dry Forest

NI NI NI

Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens (S)

greater yellow lady’s slipper Moist/wet forest NI NI NI

Grindelia howellii

Howell's gumweed

Dry Forest (basalt breaklands)

NI NI NI

Gimmia brittoniae Britton’s Grimmia Rock outcrops in Moist Forest NI NI NI

Hookeria lucens clear moss Wet Forest NI NI NI

Mimulus alsinoides

chickweed monkeyflower

rock cliffs/seeps in Wet/Moist/Dry Forest

NI NI NI

Rhizomnium nudum Naked Mnium Wet/Moist Forest NI NI NI

Thelypteris nevadensis Sierra woodfern Wet Forest Seeps NI NI NI

Triantha occidentalis spp brevistyla

sticky asphodel Subalpine Peatlands NI NI NI

Trichophorum alpinum Hudsons bullrush Deciduous riparian NI NI NI

Waldsteinia idahoensis

Idaho barren strawberry

Moist and Wet Forest

NI NI NI

NI-No Impact BI-Beneficial Impact MI- May impact individuals or habitat but will not likely contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species. WI-Will Impact individuals or habitat with a consequence that the action may contribute to a trend toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species.

30

Species of Concern Two occurrences Tauschia tenuissma, Leiberg’s tauschia are within the analysis area. All of these sites are outside of activity areas, on the boundary of the project area, and not on USFS lands. They will not be impacted by the project.

St. Joe Species of Concern* (revised January 2011)

Species Common Name Habitat Guild Impacts A Impact

s B Impacts C

Astragalus bourgovii Bourgeau's milkvetch Subalpine NI NI NI Calochortus nitidus broad-fruit mariposa lily Dry Forest, Palouse Soils NI NI NI Carex californica California sedge Subalpine NI NI NI

Carex hendersonii Henderson’s sedge Moist/Wet Forest NI NI NI

Cetraria sepincola eyed ruffle lichen Deciduous Riparian, Peatland

NI NI NI

Cladonia transcendens

transcending reindeer lichen

Wet Forest NI NI NI

Collema curtisporum Short-spored jelly lichen Deciduous riparian NI NI NI

Corydalis caseana spp hastata

Case's fitweed Wet Forest (St. Maries, North Fk Clearwater)

NI NI NI

Dodecatheon dentatum

white-flowered shooting star

Wet Forest NI NI NI

Eburophyton austiniae

phantom orchid Moist/Wet Forest NI NI NI

Lobaria hallii Hall's lung wort Deciduous Riparian NI NI NI

Ludwigia polycarpa many-fruit false-loosestrife Peatland/aquatic NI NI NI

Mimulus clivicola bank monkeyflower Dry Forests NI NI NI

Orobanche pinorum Pine broomrape Dry Forest NI NI NI

Romanzoffia sitchensis

Sitka mistmaiden Subalpine NI NI NI

Platanthera orbiculata

round-leaved orchid Moist/Wet Forest NI NI NI

Pilophorus acicularis Devil's matchstick lichen Wet Forests NI NI NI

Ribes sanguineum red-flowered current Moist forest NI NI NI

Sedum rupicolum lance-leaved sedum Subalpine NI NI NI

Sphaerophorus globosus

Christmas tree lichen Wet Forest NI NI NI

Tauschia tenuissima Lieberg's tauschia Dry/Moist Forest, meadows NI NI NI Trientalis latifolia western starflower Deciduous

Riparian/Moist/Wet Forest NI NI NI

Vallisneria i

wild celery Aquatic NI NI NI * As directed by the Species of Concern Protocol (Region One Planning Peer Group, Task Group 19, March 1997), species of concern are considered to be secure at the global, Regional and state levels, but may be

31

at risk at the Forest planning level. Species on this list will be surveyed for, documented and reported when found, and addressed in environmental documents (per NFMA) when viability within the planning unit is an issue. References: Anderson, H., Gale, M., Jurgensen, M., and Trettin C. 2007. Vascular and Non-vascular Plant community Response to Silviculture Practices and Resultant Microtopography Creation in a Forested Wetland. Wetlands. Vol. 27, No. 1. Pp 68-79.

Blake, J. and Ebrahimi, C. C. 1992. Species conservation strategy and monitor plan for Blechnum spicant. Idaho Panhandle National Forests and Clearwater National Forest. USDA Forest Service, Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho and Idaho Conservation Data Center, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho.

Crawford, R.C. 1980. Ecological investigations and management implications of six northern Idaho endemic plants on the proposed Endangered and Threatened lists. Masters Thesis, College of Forestry, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho.

Greenlee, J. 1997. Cypripedium fasciculatum Conservation Assessment. USDA Forest Service, Region 1. Lolo National Forest, Missoula Montana.

Idaho Conservation Data Center. 2010. Element Occurrence Records. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho.

Leonard, G. M. 1992. Memo dated May 15, 1992 from the Washington Office to Regional Foresters on Forest Health and Biological Evaluations, Washington Office Interpretation of FSM 2670. USDA Forest Service, Washington D.C.and

Lesica, P., and Allendorf, F., 2010. Are Small Populations of Plants Worth Preserving? Conservation Biology, Vol. 6, No. 1 (Mar., 1992), pp. 135-139. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2385860 Lesica, P., Yurkewycz, R., and Crone, E. 2006. Rare Plants Are Common Where You Find Them. American Journal of Botany, Vol. 93, No. 3, pp 454-459. Lichtardt, Jaunita. 1997. Monitoring of Rare Plant Populations on the Clearwater National Forest. Conservation Data Center, Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Mousseaux, Mark. 1995. Unpublished document. TES Plant Habitat Queries by TES Plant Guilds for the Idaho Panhandle National Forests. Pyke, David, Brooks, Matthew, and D’Antonio, Carla. 2010 Fire as a Restoration tool: A Decision framework for Predicting the Control or Enhancement of Plants Using Fire. Restoration Ecology, vol. 18, No. 3, pp.274-284.

32

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. Service Extends Endangered Species Protection to Rare Western Plant. News Release #01-16 USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Biannual Forest Wide Species List. FWS 1-9-07-SP-0035. February 11, 2009.

USDA Forest Service. 1987. Idaho Panhandle National Forests Forest Plan. Forest Service. Northern Region. 203 pp. USDA Forest Service. 2004. Regional Foresters Sensitive Plant List. Region 1, Missoula, MT.

33

BOTANICAL BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION and ASSESMENT REPORT For The

CHARLIE PRESTON PROJECT

Appendix A

St. Joe Ranger District Rare Plant Guild Descriptions: based on March 1999 Regional Forester's Species at Risk list

-Subalpine Plant Guild: Includes certain plant communities found at high elevation sites, generally above ca 5,000 feet, mostly on ridges, subalpine balds and parklands (green fescue and sedge communities), exposed rock-outcrops and the following high elevation communities: Abies bifolia (subalpine fir) krummholtz, Abies bifolia / Rhododendron albiflorum (subalpine fir/white rhododendron), Salix commutata (undergreen willow), Abies bifolia / Vaccinium scoparium (subalpine fir/grouse whortleberry), Abies bifolia / Luzula hitchcockii (subalpine fir/smooth woodrush), and Larix lyallii (subalpine larch) / Pinus albicaulis (whitebark pine) plant communities. It also includes the cool/moist and cool/dry phases of Abies bifolia / Menziesia ferruginea (subalpine fir / menziesia), Abies bifolia / Xerophyllum tenax (subalpine fir / beargrass), Tsuga mertensiana / Menziesia ferruginea (mt. hemlock / menziesia) and Tsuga mertensiana / Xerophyllum tenax (mt. hemlock / beargrass) plant communities. The rare species found in this guild are Buxbaumia aphylla (bug-on-a-stick moss) and Carex xerantica (dryland sedge). Cetraria subalpina (Iceland-moss lichen) is associated with menziesia in cold subalpine fir sites. -Wet Forest Guild: This guild is found in wet, generally riparian, often (not always) middle to late successional western redcedar and wet western hemlock plant communities, including most identified 'ancient cedar groves' found scattered throughout the northern sub-basins, generally at less than 4,000 feet. Plant communities within these systems that have a high potential to support rare plants include; Thuja plicata / Oplopanax horridum (cedar/devil's club), Thuja plicata / Athyrium filix-femina (cedar/ladyfern), Thuja plicata / Adiantum aleuticum (cedar/maidenhair fern), Tsuga heterophylla / Gymnocarpium dryopteris (western hemlock/oakfern) and Thuja plicata / Gymnocarpium dryopteris (cedar/oakfern) plant communities. Several species within this guild are rare coastal disjuncts such as Blechnum spicant (deerfern), Thelypteris nevadensis (sierra woodfern), Hookeria lucens (clear moss) and Carex hendersonii (Henderson's sedge). Sierra woodfern and clear moss are associated with seeps and "boggy" areas in wet cedar forests. Certain endemic or scattered rare species like the rare Botrychium species (moonworts), especially Botrychium montanum (western goblin), Botrychium minganense (Mingan moonwort), Botrychium pedunculosum (stalked moonwort), Botrychium paradoxum (paradox moonwort), and Botrychium ascendens (upswept moonwort), can be found in these communities on riparian benches or other shallow sloped microsites. The scattered species Cypripedium fasciculatum (clustered lady's slipper), and the Idaho endemics Cardamine constancei (Constance's bittercress) and Waldsteinia idahoensis (Idaho Barren strawberry) can occur in wet forest communities. Asplenium trichomanes (maidenhair spleenwort) and Mimulus alsinoides (chickweed monkey-flower) can also be found in seasonally wet rock seeps, and Buxbaumia viridis (green bug-on-a-stick moss) can be found on decomposing cedar

34

logs in wet forest habitat. Many of the Wet Forest Guild species can also be found in upslope in Moist forest guild habitats. -Moist Forest Guild: This guild is found in moist Thuja plicata (western redcedar) and Tsuga heterophylla (western hemlock) plant communities, generally in later successional states below 4,500 feet. A few species can also be found in moist Abies grandis / Asarum caudatum (grand fir / ginger) and Abies grandis / Clintonia uniflora (Grand fir / queencup beadlily) communities. Many members of the Wet Forest Guild can be found in these more mesic upland plant communities. This guild contains the following plant associations: Tsuga heterophylla / Asarum caudatum (hemlock/wild ginger), T. heterophylla / A. caudatum - Aralia nudicaulis (hemlock/ginger - wild sarsaparilla), T. heterophylla / Clintonia uniflora (hemlock / beadlily), T. heterophylla / C. uniflora / Aralia nudicaulis (hemlock / beadlily - wild sarsaparilla), T. heterophylla / C. uniflora / Menziesia ferruginea (hemlock / beadlily - fool's huckleberry), Thuja plicata / Asarum caudatum (cedar/ginger) and Thuja plicata / Clintonia uniflora (cedar/beadlily). Some of the rare species found in these communities occur in small moist microsites, like Asplenium trichomanes (maidenhair spleenwort) and Mimulus alsinoides (chickweed monkey-flower), which are found on seepy rock outcrops. Rare plant species such as the coastal disjuncts Blechnum spicant (deerfern) and Carex hendersonii (Henderson's sedge) are found in moist forest habitats. Certain regional endemic or scattered rare species like the Botrychium species. (moonworts), especially Botrychium minganense (Mingan moonwort), Botrychium lanceolatum (triangle moonwort) and Botrychium pinnatum (northwestern moonwort) can be found in shallow sloped microsites, and Cypripedium fasciculatum (clustered lady's slipper) and the Idaho endemic Cardamine constancei (Constance's bittercress) occur in these communities. Waldsteinia idahoensis (Idaho barren strawberry), an Idaho endemic, has also been found in dry Abies grandis / Clintonia uniflora (grand fir / beadlily) communities on the breaklands of the Coeur d'Alene River. -Dry Forest Guild: This guild encompasses dry, open sites in Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine), Pseudotsuga menziesii / Physocarpus malvaceus (Douglas-fir / ninebark), P. menziesii / Calamagrostis rubescens / Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (Douglas-fir / pinegrass - kinnikinnick), P. menziesii / Festuca idahoensis (Douglas-fir / Idaho fescue) or Agropyron spicatum [Elymus spicatus] (bluebunch wheatgrass) communities, generally less than 4500 feet. The Idaho endemic Grindelia howellii (Howell's gumweed) can be found in these dry communities on the St. Joe associated with basalt breaklands. Dry Douglas-fir and grand fir communities, Abies grandis / Physocarpus malvaceus (Grand fir / nine bark) and Abies grandis / Clintonia uniflora (grand fir / beadlily) also support populations of Cypripedium fasciculatum (clustered lady's slipper) on the Coeur d'Alene and St. Joe National Forests. Mimulus alsinoides (chickweed monkey-flower) can occur on seasonally seepy rock outcrops and moss mats in otherwise dry communities. -Deciduous Riparian Guild (broad-leaved deciduous) forests occur on islands and margins of lowland major rivers such as the lower Coeur d'Alene River, lower St. Joe River, and the St. Maries River. These forests are most commonly dominated by the cottonwood Populus trichocarpa (black cottonwood), with lesser amounts of introduced P. deltoides (plains cottonwood) and hybrid poplars (Populus trichocarpa X ?) planted for streambank stability. Cottonwood communities often are adjacent to shrub-carr communities and can form an indistinguishable mosaic. Collema curtisporum (short-spored jelly lichen), is a globally rare lichen found on large diameter (old) black

35

cottonwood. The rare Idaho endemic Cardamine constancei (Constance's bittercress) can be found in the transition zone between cottonwood and western redcedar communities on the Coeur d'Alene and St. Joe Rivers. Stands of P. tremuloides (quaking aspen) are also present and associated with higher gradient streams or moist seeps. Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), Betula papyrifera (paper birch) and Betula occidentalis (water birch) also occur as secondary components in lowland conifer dominated forests throughout northern Idaho. Alnus rubra (red alder), is an uncommon, but sometimes locally abundant, coastal disjunct, and can be a codominant in moist forests in lower elevation riparian zones along Coeur d'Alene Lake, the lower Coeur d'Alene River and the lower St. Joe River. It is also found in patches in drainages in the Little North Fork of the Clearwater River on the Idaho Panhandle National Forests. Channel bars along major rivers are frequently vegetated with Salix exigua (coyote willow) and young Populus trichocarpa (black cottonwood) seedlings. -Aquatic Guild: This guild occurs generally in littoral (< 2 meters) zones of vernal pools, small ponds and lakes throughout northern Idaho, generally at lower elevations. Potamogeton natans (floating-leaved pondweed), Myriophyllum species (water-milfoil), Utricularia species (bladderwort), and other Potamogeton species occur alone or in combination in shallow littoral zones. Nuphar polysepalum (yellow pond lily) and Brasenia shreberi (water-shield) are frequently present as monocultures in deeper littoral zones. A single population of the rare Nymphaea tetragona var. liebergii (pygmy waterlily) was historically known from Granite Lake and is believed to be extinct in Idaho. The listed threatened species Howellia aquatilis (water howellia) was historically known to occur near Spirit and Hoodoo Lakes and is believed to have been extirpated. Only one other population is known in Idaho near Harvard along the Palouse River; however, populations occur to the west in Spokane County, Washington. No other populations have been found to date in northern Idaho, even though high quality habitat exists. -Peatland Rare Plant Guild: Peatlands by definition are habitats whose soil substrate is composed of organic material; deposition of organic material exceeds decomposition. This guild can be divided into five distinct sub-guilds, each containing different communities and species, substrates, pH and abiotic processes. These five sub-guilds are Poor Fens, Intermediate/Rich Fens, Ombrotrophic Bogs, Paludified Forests and Shrub-carr. Peatland habitats are predominantly found in the northern three sub-basins (Priest, Kootenai and Pend Oreille); however, several lowland fens are known for the lower Coeur d'Alene (Twin Lakes, Hauser Lakes, Rose Lake, Hidden and Thompson lakes). Several Sphagnum-dominated subalpine peatlands have been found on the divide between the Clearwater and the St. Joe sub-basins. These systems are the oldest plant communities in northern Idaho and have changed little since the end of glaciation. The rare species Carex chordorrhiza (string-root sedge), Carex livida (pale sedge), Hypericum majus (large Canadian St. John's wort), Rhynchospora alba (white beakrush), Scheuchzeria palustris (pod grass) and Scirpus subterminalis (water clubrush) have been documented for lowland fens in the Coeur d'Alene sub-basin. Triantha occidentalis spp. brevistyla, a species only known on the Priest Lake District on the Idaho Panhandle, has been reported for a subalpine fen complex on the St. Joe; however, this sighting has not been verified.