1. Phases 1 & 2 Units ACTIVITY PLANNED IMPLEMENTING COMMENTS
Vegetation Treatment
837 ACRES
469 Mechanical
368 Manual
523 ACRES
47 Mechanical
476 Manual
Sixty two percent of the Planned Acres (including 30% lodgepole pine unit acres that can be patch or clearcut, up to the 30% of potential aggregation acres in lodgepole pine units, mixed conifer unit acres, aspen unit acres, and meadows & shrublands unit acres) are being treated
Six units originally planned for mechanical treatment (2,3,4,39,42,45) are now being treated manually
Manual treatments will remove an anticipated 20-40% of existing basal area instead of the maximum allowed
Manual treatments will create more piles than mechanical treatments
Aggregations
153 potential acres
6 acres
Aggregations occur in unit 1, 4, and 75 which are all lodgepole pine treatment units
Two aggregations are aspen and one is Douglas-fir Mixed Conifer
All Mechanical treatments in Phase 2 are lodgepole pine units (Units 24, 26, 27,and 28).
All Mixed-conifer units in Phase 1 & 2 will now be treated manually

2. Breakdown of Lodgepole Pine Treatment Units with Aggregation Treatments
Total Unit Acres Planned
Treatable
Acres Planned
(30% of total unit acres)
Acres Being Implemented
(Patchcut/
Clearcut)
Percent of Unit Implemented
Acres of Aggregations Implemented in addition to Patchcut/ Clearcut
Percent of Aggregations Implemented in addition to Patchcut/ Clearcut
Total Acres of Unit Implemented
Total Percent of Unit Implemented with Aggregations 1 15
4.5
4.2
28%
2.1
14%
6.3
42% 4 64
19.2
8.2
13%
3.4 5%
11.6
18% 75 14
1.9
0.6 4%
2.5
Total 93
27.9
14.3
15%
6.1 7%
20.4
22%

3. Why Did Treatment Methods Change
Change in Treatment Methods (Mechanical to Manual)
Fieldwork identified ground conditions (e.g. steep slopes, rock) as unsuitable for mechanical treatments.
The reduced clearcut size and percentage of lodgepole pine treatment unit acreage to be treated, and reduced diameter cap limitations from the proposed action to final decision influenced the existing prescription and the economic feasibility to treat mechanically.
Consideration for adjacent units utilizing the same road system were evaluated and determined if it was economically feasible to complete road improvements for a “single” unit.
The inclusion of some of the MMG Avenza points focused areas of concern to be incorporated while still meeting some of the objectives of the project.
Decrease in Number of Acres Planned vs. Number of Acres Treated
Design Criteria and unit descriptions from the Decision Notice excluded certain areas (e.g. Rocky Knolls, Riparian Areas, Patchcut/Clearcut Buffers) from treatment.
Lodgepole pine treatment units had minimal acres of aggregations that were identified to be included into individual units acre totals
Changes in unit design, treatment method, and diameter caps from the proposed action to the final decision.
The inclusion of some of the MMG Avenza points into the unit design and prescription for individual units.