United States Department of Agriculture Bailey Butte Fire Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · 2017-09-19 · United States Department of Agriculture . Forest

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Bailey Butte Fire Project Environmental Assessment Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Ochoco National Forest, Crook and Wheeler Counties, Oregon

May 2015

For More Information Contact:

Marcy Anderson, Environmental Coordinator Lookout Mountain Ranger District

Ochoco National Forest 3160 NE 3rd Street

Prineville, OR 97754 Phone: 541-416-6500

Email: [email protected]

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication for program information (e.g. Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Contents Contents ............................................................................................................................................ i Changes between Draft and Final ................................................................................................. viii Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Proposed Project Location .......................................................................................................... 1 Planning Framework ....................................................................................................................... 1

Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan ................................................. 2 Management Direction and Regulatory Framework ................................................................... 3

Transportation ......................................................................................................................... 3 Geology and Minerals ............................................................................................................. 3 Soils ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Aquatic Habitats ...................................................................................................................... 5 Forest Residues (Fuels) ........................................................................................................... 9 Reforestation ......................................................................................................................... 10

Need for the Proposal .................................................................................................................... 10 Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation ................................................................................. 11

Scoping the Proposed Action .................................................................................................... 11 Circulation of the EA for Public Comment ............................................................................... 12 Government to Government Consultation ................................................................................ 12

Issues ............................................................................................................................................. 13 Key Issues ................................................................................................................................. 13 Analysis Issues .......................................................................................................................... 13

Mass Wasting ........................................................................................................................ 13 Soils ....................................................................................................................................... 14 Hydrology .............................................................................................................................. 14 Fisheries ................................................................................................................................. 14 Reforestation and Forest Stand Development ....................................................................... 15

Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action ................................................................................. 15 Alternative A – No Action ........................................................................................................ 15 Alternative B - Proposed Action ............................................................................................... 15 Alternative C ............................................................................................................................. 16 Project Design Criteria Common to All Action Alternatives ................................................... 17

Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................ 17 Sensitive Plants ...................................................................................................................... 18 Non-native Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds) ....................................................................... 18 Water Quality and Aquatic Habitats (Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas) ....................... 20 Soils and Geology ................................................................................................................. 30 Wildlife .................................................................................................................................. 30 Range/Minerals ..................................................................................................................... 33 Recreation .............................................................................................................................. 33 Visual/Scenic Resources ....................................................................................................... 34 Roads ..................................................................................................................................... 34 Fuels ...................................................................................................................................... 35

Monitoring ................................................................................................................................ 35 Emergency Situation Determination ......................................................................................... 35 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study .................................................. 36

Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action and Alternatives .................................................. 37 Cumulative Effects of Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions .............................. 37 Economics ................................................................................................................................. 39

i

Affected Environment ........................................................................................................... 39 Estimated Timber Volume .................................................................................................... 40 Environmental Effects ........................................................................................................... 40

Forest Vegetation ...................................................................................................................... 42 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 42 Analysis Methods .................................................................................................................. 42 Forest Vegetation and Early Seral Habitat ............................................................................ 42

Transportation ........................................................................................................................... 48 Existing Condition ................................................................................................................. 48 Environmental Effects ........................................................................................................... 51 Cumulative Effects ................................................................................................................ 53

Geology and Minerals ............................................................................................................... 54 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 54 Existing Condition ................................................................................................................. 54 Environmental Effects ........................................................................................................... 60

Soils ........................................................................................................................................... 66 Post Fire (Existing) Soil Condition ....................................................................................... 66 Environmental Effects ........................................................................................................... 66

Hydrology and Aquatic Species ................................................................................................ 72 Analysis Design ..................................................................................................................... 72 Existing Condition – Watershed, Water Quality, and Aquatic Habitat ................................. 87 Environmental Consequences – Watershed, Water Quality, and Aquatic Habitat .............. 104 Aquatic Management Indicator Species (MIS) Viability Analysis ..................................... 120

Wildlife ................................................................................................................................... 121 Management Indicator Species ............................................................................................ 123 Other Species Analyzed ...................................................................................................... 155 Federally Listed and Proposed Species ............................................................................... 165 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species ................................................................................. 166 Other Featured Species ........................................................................................................ 169

Botany ..................................................................................................................................... 175 Analysis Methods ................................................................................................................ 175 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 176 Sensitive Plant species ......................................................................................................... 177 Invasive Plant Species ......................................................................................................... 183

Fuels and Air Quality .............................................................................................................. 190 Range Resources ..................................................................................................................... 192

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 193 History of Grazing on Allotments ....................................................................................... 193 Current Management ........................................................................................................... 193 Existing Condition ............................................................................................................... 195 Enviromental Effects (Alternatives B and C) ...................................................................... 198 Cumulative Effects .............................................................................................................. 198

Recreation and Scenic Values ................................................................................................. 198 Recreation ............................................................................................................................ 198 Scenic Values ...................................................................................................................... 201

Evaluation of Wilderness Characteristics ............................................................................... 203 Effects to Wilderness Characteristics (all alternatives) ....................................................... 205 Cumulative Effects .............................................................................................................. 205

Climate Change ....................................................................................................................... 205 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 205 Existing Condition ............................................................................................................... 207

ii

Environmental Effects ......................................................................................................... 207 Other Disclosures ........................................................................................................................ 209

Civil Rights and Environmental Justice .................................................................................. 209 Congressionally Designated Areas ......................................................................................... 209 Prime Farm and Forest Lands and Wetlands .......................................................................... 209 Compliance with Forest Plan Direction .................................................................................. 209

PACFISH and INFISH ........................................................................................................ 209 Consistency with Wildlife Standards and Guidelines ......................................................... 211 Management Indicator Species ............................................................................................ 212

Compliance with Other Policies, Plans and Jurisdictions ....................................................... 212 National Forest Management Act ........................................................................................ 212 National Environmental Policy Act ..................................................................................... 213 National Historic Preservation Act ...................................................................................... 213 Endangered Species Act ...................................................................................................... 213 The Clean Water Act ........................................................................................................... 214 The Clean Air Act ............................................................................................................... 214 The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 .............................................................................. 215

Short-term uses of the human environment and the maintenance of long-term productivity . 215 Unavoidable Adverse Effects .................................................................................................. 215

Soils ..................................................................................................................................... 215 Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds) ........................................................................................ 215

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources ..................................................... 216 List of Preparers .......................................................................................................................... 217 References ................................................................................................................................... 218 Appendix 1: Biological Evaluations ........................................................................................... 230 Appendix 2: Recommendations for Grazing in Allotoments Affected by the Bailey Butte Fire 232 Appendix 3: Burn Severity vs. Vegetation Mortality in the Bailey Butte Fire of 2014; Photos 235 Appendix 4. Project maps........................................................................................................... 241

List of Tables

Table 1. Erosion hazard. ................................................................................................................. 5 Table 2. Riparian Management Objectives applicable to the Bailey Butte Project. Site-specific

objectives modify interim objectives. ...................................................................................... 6 Table 3. Interim objectives for pool frequency (PACFISH, USDA 1995). ................................... 7 Table 4. Width to depth ratio by channel type (Rosgen 1996). ...................................................... 7 Table 5. RHCA boundaries by stream class, as defined in INFISH and PACFISH. ...................... 8 Table 6. RHCA boundaries by stream class, as defined in PACFISH. ........................................ 20 Table 7. Best Management Practices (BMPs) applicable to the Bailey Butte Fire Project. ......... 22 Table 8. Recommended snag retention in the Bailey Butte Fire area. ......................................... 31 Table 9. Road rules for all action alternatives in the Bailey Butte Fire project. .......................... 35 Table 10. Projects and activities whose effects may overlap with the effects of the proposed

Bailey Butte Fire project activities in space and time. .......................................................... 37 Table 11. Population data in the Zone of Influence counties for the Bailey Butte Fire Project. ... 39 Table 12. Changes in civilian labor force in Central Oregon. ...................................................... 39 Table 13. Estimated timber volumes and appraisal values of the Bailey Butte Fire Project by

alternative. ............................................................................................................................. 40 Table 14. Vegetation mortality acres in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ................................ 44 Table 15. Early seral acres created by the Bailey Butte fire or past regeneration cutting. ........... 46

iii

Table 16. Historic Range of Variability and Existing Condition for grass/forb/shrubs in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ............................................................................................... 46

Table 17. Miles of road by maintenance level in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area. ................. 49 Table 18. Miles of road by surface type in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area. ........................... 50 Table 19. Road work scheduled as part of the Burned Area Emergency Response within the

Bailey Butte Fire perimeter. .................................................................................................. 50 Table 20. Haul road miles (Forest Service jurisdiction) by Maintenance Level for Alternative B

in the Bailey Butte Fire project. ............................................................................................ 52 Table 21. Road Construction Activity for Alternative B in the Bailey Butte Fire project. .......... 52 Table 22. Haul road miles (Forest Service jurisdiction) by Maintenance Level for Alternative C

in the Bailey Butte Fire project. ............................................................................................ 53 Table 23. Lithology in the Bailey Butte Fire Project area. ........................................................... 56 Table 24. Dormant and active landslide terrain in the Bailey Butte Fire Project area (acres). .... 58 Table 25. Alternative B harvest units on dormant landslide terrain. ............................................ 60 Table 26. Alternative B roadside salvage areas on dormant landslide terrain. ............................. 61 Table 27. Alternative B haul roads for roadside salvage and harvest units. ................................ 62 Table 28. Alternative C - roadside salvage units by dormant landslide terrain. ........................... 62 Table 29. Alternative C – haul roads for roadside salvage units. ................................................. 63 Table 30. Dormant landslide terrain within proposed logging system for each alternative (acres).

............................................................................................................................................... 65 Table 31. Unit-specific effects to soils. ........................................................................................ 68 Table 32. Baseline Conditions determined from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment

for steelhead for the John Day River Basin. .......................................................................... 74 Table 33. Criteria for habitat indicator condition rating. .............................................................. 74 Table 34. Primary Constituent Elements for Mid-Columbia River steelhead. ............................. 76 Table 35. Pre- and Post-fire Watershed Condition Framework ratings. ....................................... 77 Table 36. Aquatic species on the 2011 USFS Region 6 Regional Forester Special Status Species

list that occur or have potential habitat in the project area. ................................................... 85 Table 37. Hydrologic codes for the Bailey Butte Fire project. ..................................................... 87 Table 38. List of Streams in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area by watershed and subwatershed.

............................................................................................................................................... 87 Table 39. Stream Class Miles by Watershed and Subwatershed. Only streams in the project area

and stream miles within forest boundary are included in this table. ..................................... 88 Table 40. Miles of perennial and intermittent streams in the Bailey Butte Fire project area (does

not include ephemeral streams). ............................................................................................ 88 Table 41. Seven-day average maximum water temperatures in degrees celsius. ......................... 91 Table 42. Stream shade ratings - only streams within the project area are included in this table. 92 Table 43. Bank Stability within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ............................................. 93 Table 44. Percent surface fines in streams in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ........................ 94 Table 45. Sediment yield in Bailey Butte Fire project area. .......................................................... 95 Table 46. Large woody material frequency in surveyed streams. ................................................ 96 Table 47. Pool frequency by surveyed stream in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ................... 97 Table 48. The number of pools greater than 1 meter deep on major with Class I and II streams

within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. .............................................................................. 98 Table 49. Width to depth ratios within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ................................... 99 Table 50. Roads Densities by Subwatershed within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ............ 100 Table 51. Projection of existing condition EHA for Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek

Watersheds based on historic activities. .............................................................................. 100 Table 52. Aquatic species on the 2011 USFS Region 6 Regional Forester Special Status Species

list that may occur on the Ochoco National Forest. ............................................................ 104

iv

Table 53. Projection of EHA for Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds based on a combination of historic activities and Alternatives B and C. .............................................. 109

Table 54. Modeled Sediment Delivery from Alternative B. ...................................................... 110 Table 55. Modeled Sediment Delivery from Alternative C. ...................................................... 113 Table 56. HUC 6 subwatersheds affected by the Bailey Butte Fire. Percent of watersheds burned

are reported in parentheses. ................................................................................................. 114 Table 57. Projection of Cumulative EHA for Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds

based on a combination of historic activities, alternatives and future project activities. .... 119 Table 58. Tolerance Levels (Snag Density) and Percent of Landscape Expected to Meet 80%

Tolerance Levels for the ≥10 inch diameter group under the Reference Condition from DecAID. .............................................................................................................................. 126

Table 59. Acres with snag densities in excess of the 80% tolerance level (snag density) needed to meet the reference condition. .............................................................................................. 127

Table 60. Acres with snag densities in excess of the 80% tolerance level (snag density). ........ 128 Table 61. Queries for post fire area in PPDF Habitat Type. ..................................................... 131 Table 62. Queries for post fire area in EMC Habitat Types (EMC,MMC&LP). ....................... 131 Table 63. Queries for post fire area in all Habitat Types. .......................................................... 131 Table 64. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 10 inch dbh and greater snags in

recent post-fire Eastside Mixed Conifer DecAID Wildlife Habitat Type. .......................... 132 Table 65. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities rom various studies for 20 inch dbh

and greater snags in recent post-fire Eastside Mixed Conifer DecAID Wildlife Habitat Type. ............................................................................................................................................. 132

Table 66. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 10 inch dbh and greater snags in recent post-fire Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir DecAID Wildlife Habitat Type. .................................................................................................................................... 132

Table 67. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 20 inch dbh and greater snags in recent post-fire Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir DecAID Wildlife Habitat Type. .................................................................................................................................... 132

Table 68. Northern flicker habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area. ............... 133 Table 69. Northern flicker reproductive habitat within the Bailey Butte Fire Area and across the

Ochoco National Forest. ...................................................................................................... 134 Table 70. Lewis’s woodpecker habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area. ........ 135 Table 71. White-headed woodpecker habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area.

............................................................................................................................................. 137 Table 72. Black-backed woodpecker habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area.138 Table 73, ...................................................................................................................................... 138 Table 73. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 10 inch and

greater snags in Eastside Mixed Conifer Small and Medium Structure Classes. ................ 138 Table 74. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 20 inch and

greater snags in Eastside Mixed Conifer Small and Medium Structure Classes. ................ 139 Table 75. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 10 inch and

greater snags in Ponderosa Pine/Douglas Fir Small and Medium Structure Classes. ......... 139 Table 76. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 20 inch and

greater snags in Ponderosa Pine/Douglas Fir Small and Medium Structure Classes. ......... 139 Table 77. Pileated woodpecker reproductive habitat within the Bailey Butte Fire Area and across

the Ochoco National Forest. ................................................................................................ 140 Table 78. Snag Retention Guidelines Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Habitat Type. ...................... 141 Table 79. Snag Retention Guidelines Eastside Mixed Conifer Habitat Type. ............................ 141 Table 80. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies in recent stand

replacement fire areas in both Eastside Mixed Conifer and Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fire Habitat Types. ..................................................................................................................... 156

v

Table 81. Synthesized data for use of snag densities by cavity nesting birds from various studies in fire areas with mixed mortality, underburned and unburned stands in Eastside Mixed Conifer and Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Habitat Types. .................................................... 156

Table 82. Cavity Nesting Bird habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area. ......... 156 Table 83. Priority habitat features and associated focal species in the Landbird Conservation

Strategy. ............................................................................................................................... 158 Table 84. BCR 10 (Northern Rockies) BCC 2008 list of species. ............................................. 163 Table 85. Federally Listed and Proposed Species under the Endangered Species Act within the

Bailey Butte Fire project area. ............................................................................................. 165 Table 86. Regional Forester Sensitive Species occurring or potentially occurring on the Ochoco

National Forest. ................................................................................................................... 167 Table 87. R6 listed sensitive plant species documented within the Bailey Butte fire perimeter. 177 Table 88. Summary of proposed activities by action alternative and affected rare plant habitat.

............................................................................................................................................. 180 Table 89. Invasive plant sites on the Ochoco National Forest within the Bailey Butte Fire

perimeter associated with Soil Burn Severity Class. ........................................................... 185 Table 90. Invasive plant sites in proposed harvest units. ............................................................ 187 Table 91. Invasive plant sites in proposed roadside harvest units. ............................................. 187 Table 92. Calculated smoke emissions from a burned slash pile. .............................................. 192 Table 93. General allotment information. .................................................................................. 194 Table 94. Range improvements in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ....................................... 195 Table 95. Acres of fire severity by allotment. ............................................................................ 196 Table 96. PFC results for streams within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ............................ 197 Table 97. MIM results within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. .............................................. 197 Table 98. Developed recreation facilities in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ........................ 200 Table 99. Seven goals to address climate change taken from the Strategic Framework for

Responding to Climate Change (USFS 2008). .................................................................... 206 Table 100. Summary of biological evaluation for terrestrial wildlife and insects. ..................... 230 Table 101. Summary of biological evaluation for aquatic species. ............................................ 231

List of Figures

Figure 1. Level IV Ecological regions for Bailey Butte Fire Project. .......................................... 55 Figure 2. Lithology of Bailey Butte Fire Project area. ................................................................. 56 Figure 3. Active (Red) and Dormant (Yellow) Landslide terrain in project area and Mineral

Material Sources. ................................................................................................................... 58 Figure 4. Leaf and petrified wood fossils near Snowshoe Point, following the Bailey Butte Fire.

............................................................................................................................................... 59 Figure 5. Alternative B Proposed Harvest Units and Roadside Salvage Units displayed on Active

(Red) and Dormant (Yellow) Landslide Terrain. .................................................................. 61 Figure 6. Alternative C Roadside Salvage Units (grey), Active (Red) and Dormant Landslide

Terrain (Yellow). ................................................................................................................... 63 Figure 7. Bailey Butte Project Area fish distribution. .................................................................. 86 Figure 8. Map of ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type within the Bailey Butte Fire project

area. ..................................................................................................................................... 147 Figure 9. Map of eastside mixed conifer habitat type within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

............................................................................................................................................. 148 Figure 10. Four categories of basal area loss based on reflectance (from satellite imagery)

contained in the RAVG data for the Bailey Butte Fire project area. ................................... 149

vi

vii

Changes between Draft and Final A preliminary Environmental Assessment (EA) was circulated for public review between March 23, 2015, and April 22, 2015. Since that time, several changes have been made to the document prior to its finalization. While these changes don’t change the overall analysis, they do improve clarity and accuracy of the document; in some cases they reflect public comment or interagency consultation.

• Minor grammatical errors were corrected throughout the document.

• The EA that was circulated for public comment mistakenly stated that the project area contains critical habitat for Middle Columbia steelhead trout; this statement was located on EA page 203 (under “Endangered Species Act”). In fact, the nearest critical habitat for this listed species is .3 miles away from the project boundary.

• Due to the proximity of Middle Columbia River steelhead trout critical habitat to the Bailey Butte Fire Project area, the Biological Evaluation for aquatic species initially suggested that the action alternatives “May Affect but are not likely to Adversely Affect” Middle Columbia River steelhead trout. Stacey Forson, Supervisor of the Ochoco National Forest (ONF), initiated formal consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) and submitted a biological assessment (BA) for review on April 9, 2015. Since then there have been numerous phone conversations (04/16/15, 04/24/15 and 05/07/15) between NOAA Senior Fisheries Biologist Randy Tweten and ONF fisheries biologist Jennifer Mickelson regarding the effects of the project on Mid-Columbia River steelhead and its critical habitat. Based on these discussions and in agreement with NOAA Fisheries, the ONF changed the effects call from “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” to “No Effect.” Forest Supervisor Forson withdrew the BA and request for formal consultation via written communication on May 12, 2015; on May 13, 2015 the ONF received an email from Randy Tweten of NOAA Fisheries; Mr. Tweten indicated that the ONF’s decision to change the effects call was appropriate based on the following rationale described (described in the Forest Supervisor’s letter):

o No critical habitat is within the project area (the closest critical habitat is 0.3 miles from the project area).

o Modeled short-term sediment production for road use and skid trails is determined to be a small percentage of natural background in project subwatersheds (4% in Middle Bear Creek and 0% in West Branch Bridge Creek and Upper Marks Creek).

o Implementation of PDCs and BMPs would reduce sediment delivery to stream to less than the modeled amounts and help protect hydrology and aquatic species.

o Due to the need to quickly harvest fire-killed trees, the project is expected to be implemented during the summer of 2015 and during the instream work window for Mid-Columbia River steelhead, which means the critical time for steelhead protection will occur outside of project implementation.

o The proposed action is small in scale compared to the entire project area (300 acres of postfire salvage harvest and hazard tree removal along 19 miles of road, compared to a project area of approximately 7800 acres).

o Long-term improvements to hydrology and aquatic species and their habitat in the form of 6 miles of large wood placement and riparian planting will help improve conditions for Mid-Columbia River steelhead.

viii

o Streams in the project area have no documented occurrence of steelhead. The sizes of the streams in the Bailey Butte Fire project area are small and not suitable habitat for steelhead trout.

• In response to some comments, additional analysis was added to project Wildlife Specialist’s Report, and the “Wildlife” section of the final EA was updated to reflect this analysis.

• Discussion about the effects and effectiveness of post-harvest soil tillage was added to the “Soils” section.

• An appendix was added to display the differences between burn severity and vegetation mortality, and to display pictures of Heflin Creek, where riparian restoration activities are proposed.

• “Finding of No Significant Impact” was moved to the Decision Notice.

ix

Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Ochoco National Forest

Introduction The Ochoco National Forest is proposing to harvest fire-killed trees and mitigate roadside hazards on up to 900 acres within the 7,789-acre Bailey Butte Fire project area. These actions are proposed to be implemented on the Lookout Mountain Ranger District of the Ochoco National Forest.

The Bailey Butte Fire, part of the 2014 Waterman Complex, started from a lightning strike near Bailey Butte on July 14, 2014. The fire grew to about 10,272 acres, of which about 7,789 acres are on National Forest System (NFS) lands located on the Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Ochoco National Forest. The fire burned across the grand fir, Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine plant association groups over mixed (but often steep) terrain. Approximately 18.5% of the fire (24.4% of USFS managed land) occurred within the Ochoco Divide Research Natural Area (RNA). Elevations range from about 4,400 to 5,600 feet.

The fire was declared contained on July 27, 2014. Along with other post-fire recovery and restoration efforts, the Lookout Mountain Ranger District considered a salvage project to reduce hazards to human health and safety along road systems and recover the economic value of fire killed timber. At the beginning of project planning a decision was made to focus on roads that are open to the public or used for administrative access, and areas where slopes are 35% or less that can be accessed using the existing road system; areas within the RNA were not considered because the Ochoco Forest Plan doesn’t permit timber harvest in this management area. Initial reconnaissance by the Lookout Mountain Ranger District interdisciplinary team (IDT) identified fire-killed hazard trees along Forest road systems, and acreage off of the road system where fire-killed timber could be available for salvage harvest.

Through continued refinement by the IDT and following review by a Region Six Rapid Assessment Team on August 28, 2014, the Forest developed a proposed action that includes about 900 acres of timber salvage (about 11% of the burned acreage on Forest System land, and 9% of the total burned area).

We prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to determine whether implementation of postfire harvest and hazard tree mitigation may significantly affect the quality of the human environment and thereby require the preparation of an environmental impact statement. By preparing this EA, we are fulfilling agency policy and direction to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). For more details of the proposed action, see the Proposed Action and Alternatives section of this document.

Proposed Project Location The 7,789-acre project area is located on the Lookout Mountain Ranger District of the Ochoco National Forest; the entire area is within the National Forest System (see Appendix 3, Map 1). The project area overlaps the Middle Bear Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek and Upper Marks Creek subwatersheds.

Planning Framework Development of this environmental assessment follows the implementation regulations of the National Forest Management Act (NFMA); Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 219 (36 CFR 219); Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 200 (36 CFR 220); Council of Environmental Quality, Title 40; CFRs, Part 1500-1508, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Many federal

1

Bailey Butte Fire Project

and state laws, including the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Act (RPA), Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, and the Clean Air Act also guide planning and analysis.

Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan The Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) was approved in 1989, and has since been amended by several decisions. The Forest Plan, as amended, provides guidance for management activities on the Ochoco National Forest. The Forest Plan establishes goals, objectives, and desired future conditions, identifies management areas within the Forest, and provides standards and guidelines for each management area as well as Forest-wide standards and guidelines. This proposal is tiered to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Forest Plan, as amended.

The major Ochoco National Forest management areas in the project area include (see Appendix 3, Map 2):

Research Natural Area (MA-F5) 1,900 acres (including the 297-acre Old Growth area that is entirely within the RNA perimeter) – Research Natural Areas (RNAs) represent both common and unique forest and rangeland ecosystems in a natural state or as close to undisturbed as possible. The emphasis within RNAs is to allow natural processes to occur for research purposes and education (Forest Plan, p. 4-56).

Old Growth (MA-F6) 297 acres - Habitat will be provided for wildlife species dependent upon old-growth stands with pileated woodpecker as the management indicator species. The desired conditions for these areas are stands of mixed conifer and ponderosa pine with multi-layered canopy with shaded conditions and a large number of snags. Prescribed fire may be evident if natural fuels accumulate to dangerous levels, threatening the existence of the old-growth stand, or where vegetation manipulation is needed to maintain stand structure and species composition (Forest Plan, p. 4-58). Under standards and guidelines for the practice of Habitat Management, vegetative management will not be allowed, until further research is available on the needs of the dependent species (Forest Plan, p. 4-251). Under the standards and guidelines for the practice of Treatment of Natural Fuels, prescribed fire will normally not be applied in old growth, but where it can be supported by research, directives, and desired future condition, it might be utilized following appropriate analysis and NFMA/NEPA procedures (Forest Plan, p. 4-136). The Forest Plan (p. 4-58) also identifies that additional acres of pileated woodpecker “feeding areas” averaging 300 acres in size be located in areas adjacent to allocated old-growth stands.

Summit Historic Trail Visual Retention Corridor (MA-F7) 242 acres – The Summit Trail is a historic resource, and was found eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places in January 1987. The emphasis of this management area is to protect the existing integrity of the Summit Trail and enhance and interpret significant segments for public enjoyment and education. Pristine segments of the trail will be managed to protect, interpret and preserve their historic qualities (Forest Plan, p. 4-61).

Developed Recreation (MA-F13) 66 acres – The emphasis for these areas is to provide safe, healthful and aesthetic facilities for people to utilize while they are pursuing a variety of recreational experiences within a relatively natural outdoor setting (Forest Plan, p. 4-71).

Bandit Springs Recreation Area (MA-F16) 89 acres – The majority of the Bandit Springs Recreation Area lies outside the project area; it is between the Mill Creek Wilderness and US Highway 26. The emphasis is to provide dispersed, nonmotorized recreational opportunities within a setting where most management activities are generally not evident to the casual observer (Forest Plan, p. 4-76).

2


General Forest (MA-F22) 3,113 acres - The emphasis for this area is to produce timber and forage while meeting the Forest-wide standards and guidelines for all resources. In ponderosa pine stands, management will emphasize production of high-value (quality) timber (Forest Plan, p. 4-86).

General Forest Winter Range (MA-F21) 124 acres - The emphasis for this area is to manage for timber production with management activities designed and implemented to recognize big game habitat needs (Forest Plan, p. 4-84).

US Highway 26 Visual Corridors (MA-F25) 2,256 acres - The emphasis in this area is to maintain and enhance the scenery for travelers along US Highway 26 (Forest Plan, p. 4-93).

Riparian Areas (MA-15) – Riparian areas include land adjacent to water, where plants that are dependent on a perpetual source of water occur. The emphasis in riparian areas is to manage streamside vegetation and habitat to maintain or improve water quality, and to meet temperature standards under the Clean Water Act (Forest Plan, p. 4-74).

Management Direction and Regulatory Framework

Transportation Desired Transportation System Conditions (Management Direction)

The desired condition is to provide a road system that is safe, affordable, has minimal ecological impacts, and meets immediate and projected long-term public and resource management needs.

The current direction for management of the road system is found in the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). According to the LRMP, the goal of the Forest’s transportation system is “to plan, design, operate, and maintain a safe and economical transportation system providing efficient access for the movement of people and materials involved in the use and protection of National Forest Lands.”

Geology and Minerals Mass Wasting (Landslides)

Addressing the potential for initiating slope movement through management activities and proposing mitigations through design elements and minimizing reactivation of landslide terrain within the units is in compliance with the soil mass wasting standards and guidelines in the Ochoco Forest Plan. Project design criteria that protect seeps, springs and riparian areas are in compliance with the Forest Plan, as amended.

Minerals

Responsible management of the material sources includes meeting NEPA requirements; developing and maintaining a long term management plan which includes management of invasive species, completing reclamation and proper site closure, as directed by the Forest Plan and the Integrated Noxious Weed management plans (USDA Forest Service 1989b and USDA Forest Service 1995b). Short term management plans are developed for each entry.

Soils The Ochoco Land and Resource Plan (p. 4-196) identifies the following standard and guideline for soil compaction and displacement.

Soil Compaction and Displacement: The threshold level of detrimental compaction is defined as any bulk density increase of 15% or more (for residual soils) and 20% or more for ash soils. Or any

3


macro pore space reduction of 40% or below 15%. These values are critical changes over the natural state in the top 12 inches.

“In order to maintain site productivity, all project activities will be planned to reduce soil compaction and displacement to the lowest reasonable level. Strive to reduce compaction and displacement to get as close to 90 percent of the total activity area (including permanent, rocked, and non-surface roads) remaining in a non-compacted/non-displaced condition, as realistically possible, one year after any land management activity. The minimum will be 80 percent of the total activity area. Existing areas exceeding these standards will be scheduled for rehabilitation as soon as possible. An activity area is the total area for which a ground disturbing activity is planned, for example, a unit for a timber sale, slash disposal project, or grazing allotment. The area would also include transportation systems within and directly adjacent to the project.”

On August 24, 1998, the Regional Forester issued a Region 6 supplement to the 2520 Forest Service Manual (R-6 Supplement No. 2500.98.1). This supplement clarifies direction for planning and implementing activities in areas where soil standards are exceeded from prior activities:

2520.3 – Policy. Design and implement management practices which maintain or improve soil and water quality. Emphasize protection over restoration.

When initiating new activities, design new activities that do not exceed detrimental soil conditions on more than 20 percent of an activity area. (This includes the permanent transportation system.)

The treatment units in this proposal have all had some prior level of timber harvest, most of which have had multiple harvest entries. Roads, skid trails and landings exist throughout these units.

In areas where less than 20 percent detrimental soil conditions exist from prior activities, the cumulative detrimental effect of the current activity following project implementation and restoration must not exceed 20 percent.

The above paragraph refers to multiple harvest entry units which are currently below 20 percent.

In areas where more than 20 percent detrimental soil conditions exist from prior activities, the cumulative detrimental effects from project implementation and restoration must at a minimum not exceed the conditions prior to the planned activity and should move toward a net improvement in soil quality.

The above paragraph applies to multiple entry harvest units which are currently above 20 percent detrimental disturbance.

2521.03.3 - Application of Soil Quality Standards.

Planning. Use soil quality standards to guide the selection and design of management practices and prescriptions on a watershed scale. Evaluate existing soil conditions on all ownerships within the watershed and consider cumulative effects with the addition of proposed actions on ecosystem sustainability and hydrologic function. On a planned activity area, evaluate existing soil conditions and design activities to meet soil quality standards. Document adjustments to management practices, soil conservation practices or restoration techniques necessary to meet threshold values for the affected soil properties and watershed conditions.

This standard is being met through individual unit assessments and mitigations such as tillage, or the requirement to stay on existing disturbance only.

4


Surface soil erosion: (ONF-FEIS 4-196)

Land management activities will be planned to achieve effective ground cover as disclosed in Table 1. Table 1. Erosion hazard.

Erosion Hazard Class

Minimum % effective ground cover, First Year

Minimum % effective ground cover, second year

Low 20-30 30-40 Moderate 30-40 40-50

Severe 50-60 60-75 Very Severe 60-75 75-90

Effective ground cover is defined as the basal area of perennial vegetation, plus litter and coarse fragments (greater than 2mm sizes), including tree crowns and shrubs that are in direct contact with the ground. Exceptions may occur where specific projects meet erosion control objectives without meeting the ground cover objectives stated above.

Aquatic Habitats

Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH) and Interim Strategies for Managing Anadromous Fish-producing Watersheds (PACFISH) In 1995 the Forest Service signed Decision Notices for the Inland Native Fish Strategy for the Intermountain, Northern, and Pacific Northwest Regions (USDA 1995; referred to as INFISH) and Interim Strategies for Managing Anadromous Fish-producing Watersheds in Eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and Portions of California (USDA 1995; referred to as PACFISH). PACFISH and INFISH provide interim management direction to protect habitat and populations of native anadromous and resident fish. Direction in INFISH applies only in watersheds without anadromous fish. Because the project area includes both an anadromous fish-producing watershed and a watershed with no anadromy, direction in PACFISH and INFISH will apply.

Riparian Management Objectives

INFISH and PACFISH established landscape-scale interim Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs) that would be applied to watersheds with resident native fish and andromous resident fish, respectively. RMOs describing good habitat were developed to describe desired condition for fish habitat. To meet RMOs, implementation of projects are designed to not “retard” the rate of recovery of habitat (INFISH p. A-6, PACFISH p. C-5). INFISH and PACFISH recognized that in many cases interim RMOs would not be met instantaneously, but would be achieved over time (INFISH A-2; PACFISH C-5). INFISH and PACFISH also state that interim RMOs may be modified to better reflect conditions that are attainable in a specific watershed or stream reach based on local geology, topography, climate, and potential vegetation. Modifications to RMOs are to be made during a watershed analysis or site-specific analysis to provide the ecological basis for the change. The rationale supporting those changes and the effects of those changes should be documented. The Marks Creek Watershed Analysis was conducted in 1998 and an updated list of resource objectives or “desired conditions” was developed. A preliminary watershed analysis was completed in 1994 for the Bridge Creek Watershed but the watershed analysis was never finalized. Although a watershed analysis was not completed for the Bridge Creek watershed, the preliminary analysis was created with the intent to be an abbreviated form of a watershed analysis, which included a list of resource objectives, or “desired outcomes.” Some of the objectives listed in the watershed analysis were used to modify RMOs for the project area. In some cases, RMOs were modified based on scientific literature that was more relevant to the project area than the literature used to develop INFISH and PACFISH interim objectives. The site-specific modifications to interim RMOs, the rationale for the

5


modifications, and effects of the modifications are listed in Table 2. Table 3 discloses interim objectives for pool frequency; Table 4 lists objectives for width-to-depth ratio. Table 2. Riparian Management Objectives applicable to the Bailey Butte Project. Site-specific objectives modify interim objectives.

Habitat Feature

Interim Objective from PACFISH and INFISH

Modified Site-specific Objective

Rationale for Modification

Effects of Modification

Water Temperature

no measurable increase in maximum water temperature; maximum water temperatures below 64 °F within migration and rearing habitats and below

60 °F within spawning habitats

N/A N/A N/A

Large Woody Material

>20 pieces per mile;

>12 inch diameter;

>35 foot length

>69 pieces/mile (Class I, II, III)

>12 inches diameter

>35 foot length1

modified using data from

undisturbed reference streams

in the Oregon Blue Mountain

Range (Cordova 1995)

project will manage for

greater amounts of large woody

material in streams than the

interim objective

>48 pieces/mile (Class IV)

>12 inches diameter

>35 foot length1

Pool Frequency

Varies by channel width; see Table 3 N/A N/A N/A

Bank Stability (Non-forested

systems) >80% stable

interim objective used, even though project

area is a forested system

this is a Forest Plan standard and

should also be applicable to

forested systems

modifying the RMO to include forest systems will now make

the bank stability RMO

applicable to the project area

Width/depth ratio

<10, mean wetted width divided by mean depth

varies by channel type; see Table 4

modified using channel type as a better indicator of natural width to

depth ratio (Rosgen 1996)

desired width to depth ratio by channel type will be more

site-specific and applicable to the project area than

the interim objective

Native Riparian

Vegetation No interim objective

increase riparian vegetation along streams; enhance

development of large hardwood and/or

conifers in riparian zones based on plant associations and site

potential

modified using site specific

objectives from the Marks Creek

Watershed Analysis and Bridge Creek Preliminary Watershed Analysis

project will manage for

desired understory vegetation

characteristics; where RMO

conflicts, interim RMO

are given priority over added RMO

6


Habitat Feature

Interim Objective from PACFISH and INFISH

Modified Site-specific Objective

Rationale for Modification

Effects of Modification

Fine Sediment No interim objective allow no more than a

10% increase in stream turbidity

this is a Forest Plan standard and

an important objective

adding RMO won’t change

how we manage, but emphasizes the importance of limiting fine

sediment 1Cordova (1995) doesn’t show results for large wood frequencies with the same size class as the interim objective (>12 inch diameter; >35 foot length). Instead, Cordova includes all pieces over 1 meter in length in a wood frequency by diameter table (Cordova, Table 16). For moderately constrained channel types (most similar to Class I, II, and III streams in the project area), there was a frequency of 69 pieces per mile for pieces greater than 12” diameter. For constrained channel types (most similar to Class IV streams in the project area), there was a frequency of 48 pieces per mile for pieces greater than 12” diameter. Separate length and diameter frequency distributions (Cordova, Figure 7) indicate that roughly 50% of all wood pieces were over 35 feet in length and 37% of all wood pieces were over 12” diameter. Based on personal communications with Cordova, diameter was tightly correlated to length (i.e. the larger diameter pieces were more likely to be greater in length). Therefore, we are making the assumption that most of the pieces over 12” diameter were over 35 feet in length. Although 69 and 48 pieces per mile aren’t an exact representation of the data, we feel it is a much better depiction of natural conditions than the interim objective of 20 pieces per mile.

Table 3. Interim objectives for pool frequency (PACFISH, USDA 1995). Wetted width

(feet) 10 20 25 50 75 100 125 150 200

Pools per mile 96 56 47 26 23 18 14 12 9 Table 4. Width to depth ratio by channel type (Rosgen 1996).

Channel Type A B C D DA E F G Width/Depth

Ratio <12 >12 >12 >40 <40 <12 >12 <12

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas

In addition to interim RMOs, INFISH and PACFISH also require the delineation of interim Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs), portions of watersheds where riparian-dependent resources receive primary emphasis, and management activities are subject to specific standards and guidelines. RHCAs include traditional riparian corridors, wetlands, intermittent streams, and other areas that help maintain the integrity of aquatic ecosystems by (1) influencing the delivery of coarse sediment, organic matter, and woody material to streams, (2) providing root strength for channel stability, (3) shading the stream, and (4) protecting water quality. RHCAs are defined as follows:

• Category 1 – Fish-bearing streams: The interim RHCA consists of the stream and the area on either side of the stream extending from the edges of the active stream channel to the top of the inner gorge, or to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, or to the outer edges of riparian vegetation, or to a distance equal to the height of two site potential trees, or 300-foot slope distance, whichever is greatest.

• Category 2 – Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams: The interim RHCA consists of the stream and the area on either side of the stream extending from the edges of the active stream channel to the top of the inner gorge, or to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, or to the outer edges of riparian vegetation, or to a distance equal to the height of one site potential tree, or 150-foot slope distance, whichever is greatest.

• Category 3 – Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than 1 acre: The interim RHCA consists of the body of water or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian

7


vegetation, or to the extent of the seasonally saturated soil, or to the extent of moderately and highly unstable areas, or to a distance equal to the height of one site potential tree, or 150-foot slope distance from the edge of the maximum pool elevation of constructed ponds and reservoirs or from the edge of the wetland, pond, or lake, whichever is greatest.

• Category 4 – Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than 1 acre, landslides, and landslide-prone areas: This category includes features with high variability in size and site-specific characteristics. At a minimum the interim RHCA must include (a) the extent of landslides and landslide-prone areas, (b) the intermittent stream channel and the area to the top of the inner gorge, (c) the intermittent stream channel or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, (d) the area from the edges of the stream channel, wetland, landslide, or landslide-prone area slope distance equal to the height of one-half site potential tree, or 50 feet slope distance, whichever is greatest.

RHCA boundaries for the project area are defined in Table 5. Stream category has been converted to stream class, which is a more commonly used term. Table 5. RHCA boundaries by stream class, as defined in INFISH and PACFISH.

Stream Class Description Width Each Side (feet)

I and II Fish-bearing streams 300

III Perennial (and select intermittent), non-fish bearing streams Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than 1 acre Unstable areas near water bodies

150

IV Intermittent streams Wetlands less than 1 acre Landslides and landslide-prone areas

50

INFISH and PACFISH Standards and Guidelines Applicable to Bailey Butte Fire project

Timber Management

• TM-1 (a-c): Where catastrophic events such as fire, flooding, volcanic, wind, or insect damage result in degraded riparian conditions, allow salvage and fuelwood cutting in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas only where present and future woody debris needs are met, where cutting would not retard or prevent attainment of other Riparian Management Objectives, and where adverse effects can be avoided to inland and anadromous native fish. For priority watersheds, complete watershed analysis prior to salvage cutting in RHCAs.

Roads Management

• RF-2 (a-f): For each existing or planned roads, meet the RMOs and avoid adverse effect to inland and anadromous native fish.

• RF-3 (a-c): Determine the influence of each road on the Riparian Management Objectives.

• RF-5: Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish-bearing streams.

General Riparian Area Management

• RA-2: Trees may be felled in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on site when needed to meet woody debris objectives.

8


Watershed and Habitat Restoration

• WR-1: Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the long-term ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserve the genetic integrity of native species, and contributes to attainment of the Riparian Management Objectives.

Fish and Wildlife Restoration

• FW-1: Design and implement fish and wildlife habitat restoration and enhancement actions in a manner that contributes to attainment of the RMOs.

Standards and Guidelines – Water Standards and guidelines state the bounds or constraints within which all practices are to be carried out in achieving the planned goals, objectives and desired future conditions. They are intended to supplement, but do not replace, policy direction found in Forest Service Manuals and Handbooks, and the Regional Guide for the Pacific Northwest Region. They also must comply with applicable State and Federal laws and regulations.

Temperature: The requirements for shade along streams will generally correspond to provisions for more than 80 percent of the surface shaded. Where this cannot be attained, 100 percent of the potential for shade is the standard.

Shade requirements may be reduced in cases where management is necessary to sustain a thrifty community of shade providing species over time, but activities may not result in an increase in temperatures above the limits specified (MA-F15 Riparian).

Turbidity: Allow no more than 10 percent cumulative increase in stream turbidity. Short-term (less than five days) deviations from this standard to accommodate emergency or other legitimate activities will comply with state requirements for notification and approval (MA-F15 Riparian).

Watershed Condition Framework The Watershed Condition Framework (WCF) was developed as a nationally consistent, science-based approach to classify the condition of all National Forest System (NFS) subwatersheds (Potyondy and Geier, 2010) as a means to consistently prioritize watersheds for improvement and track condition change over time. The WCF is a 6-step process, step 1 of which includes the classification of watershed condition using 24 watershed condition "attributes" to rate 12 watershed "indicators" and produce an overall Watershed Condition Class Rating. Within this context, the three watershed condition classes are directly related to the degree or level of watershed functionality and are classified as follows: Class 1 = Functioning Properly; Class 2 = Functioning at Risk; and Class 3 = Impaired Function. Watersheds are classified using attributes that quantify aquatic physical, aquatic biological, terrestrial physical, and terrestrial biological condition. Steps 2 and 3 of the WCF process include prioritization of watersheds for restoration and the development of watershed action plans outlining essential projects to improve watershed condition. Steps 4-6 include implementation of essential projects within priority watersheds, monitoring of watershed restoration efforts, and aggregation of program performance data for national reporting.

Forest Residues (Fuels) Guidance for desired levels of forest residues (fuels) is found in the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) 1989. The LRMP objectives for forest residues are to provide for natural levels consistent with vegetation community (ex. Ponderosa Pine or mixed conifer), stage of stand development, on-site nutrient cycling, diversity, and forest protection needs (fire risk). While

9


none of the management areas has specific direction regarding desired fuel levels after fire salvage, approximately 12 tons per acre represents the desired average residue condition (fuel loading) across the Forest (LRMP pg 4-14, 4-156).

Reforestation Congress has long emphasized restocking of under stocked National Forest land. The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) requires that “when trees are cut to achieve timber production objectives, the cuttings shall be made in such a way as to assure that the technology and knowledge exists to adequately restock the lands within 5 years after final harvest.”

Region 6 direction concerning reforestation on stands where fire has created an under-stocked condition varies depending on management objectives, but generally requires reforestation on all capable lands regardless of salvage. Salvage on Suitable lands, where permitted by the LRMP, that is driven all or in part by an objective to capture volume would comply with the NFMA five-year regeneration requirement to stock stands to levels consistent with management objectives. Salvage that is driven by other non-volume objectives should be reforested as quickly as practicable (to stocking levels consistent with management objectives). Where no salvage is done, capable lands should be reforested as quickly as practicable. Plans to reforest non-capable lands should be made after careful consideration of land management objectives and the likelihood of success.

Decision Framework The District Ranger, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Ochoco National Forest, is the responsible official for deciding the type and extent of management activities in the Bailey Butte Fire Project area. The responsible official can decide on several courses of action ranging from no action, to one of the action alternatives or a combination of treatments. The responsible official will also identify which mitigation measures will apply to project implementation.

The responsible official will consider the following factors in making his decision:

• How well does the alternative meet the project’s purpose and need?

• How well does the alternative respond to the issues, and have public comments been considered in the analysis?

• What are the likely environmental effects of the proposed actions, and in particular, the short and long-term effects to habitat of federally-listed threatened and endangered species?

Need for the Proposal Stands of economically valued species such as ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and grand fir were burned in the Bailey Butte Fire area. As time progresses these fire-killed trees lose economic value due to staining, insects, and checking (cracks in the wood that occur as the burned wood dries). By the late spring or early summer of 2015 up to 60% of the economic value of these trees could be lost. There is a need to expeditiously salvage fire killed trees. This action would help support the forest products industry and the local economy.

It is possible that many of the stands that experienced stand replacement fire will not have an adequate natural seed source to regenerate the forest to the desired future conditions. In these situations there is a need to plant trees in order to restore the desired forest conditions.

The Bailey Butte Fire burned across roads that are used by the public and by the Forest Service for administrative access. There is a need to improve safety along these roads for all Forest users.

10


The preliminary proposal was reviewed by the USFS Region Six Rapid Assessment Team in August of 2014. The review discussed potential issues associated with the project (e.g. sedimentation to streams) and what specific project design features and best management practices (BMP) to mitigate or reduce impacts to resources found in the project area. The Regional review team concurred that roadside hazard mitigation as well as limited salvage harvest in select units would meet the purpose and need for this project.

Forest management activities, including salvage of fire killed forests within the burned areas, are guided by the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended (Forest Plan). The Forest Plan establishes, among other decisions, management allocations that emphasize a variety of goods and services.

The purposes of this project within the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area are to:

• Harvest fire killed trees that have economic value.

• Reforest desired tree species (where natural, on-site, seed sources are lacking) in severely burned stands to aid in the accelerated development of forest conditions consistent with management plan objectives.

• Improve public, administrative and operational safety by abating (felling) hazard trees along public and administrative-use roads.

Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation Scoping the Proposed Action Public scoping was initiated in November of 2014; the project scoping package was mailed to 62 individuals, organizations and agencies, as follows: Alex Berlin Alex McDonald Andrew Brakora Barbara Smith Beth Ayers, Pacific Northwest 4-Wheel Drive Association Bodie Dowding, Interfor Pacific Brett Hodgson, Oregon Dept. Fish and Wildlife Calvin and Fran Carter Chandra LeGue, Oregon Wild Charles Burley, Burley and Associates, LLC Craig and Irene Flinton Craig Woodward Dan Bishop, D.R. Johnson Lumber Co. Darek Staab, Trout Unlimited Deborah L. Krause and Edward J. Honton Dennis Tooley Diane M. Cross Doug Heiken, Oregon Wild Ford Tannock Gary Cremer, Crown Pacific Ltd. Partnership Gayle Hunt, Central Oregon Wild Horse Coalition Gene Keane Gerald Keck Honorable Mike McCabe, Crook County Judge Irene Jerome, American Forest Resources Council Janine Blaeloch, Western Land Exchange Project Jerry Cordova, US Fish and Wildlife Service

Larry B. Blasing Larry Pennington, Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club Lori and Steve Ontko Marge Boyles Marilyn Miller Mark Malott Meriel Darzen, Sierra Club, Juniper Group Michael W. Templeton Mike Lunn, Crook County Natural Resources Planning Committee Ochoco Chapter, Oregon Hunters Association Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club Pam Hardy, Oregon Wild Pat Keys Paula Hood Phil Chang, Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council Prineville-Crook County Chamber of Commerce Randy and Mona Drake, Deschutes County 4-Wheelers Randy Tweten, NOAA Ray and Bonnie Sessler Rick Hall, Ponderosa Ranch Association S.J. and Jessie E. Quinney Natural Resources Research Library, College of Natural Resources, Utah State University Scott McCaulou, Deschutes Resource Conservancy Susan Jane M. Brown The Bend Bulletin Tim DeBoodt, County Extension Service Tim Messner

11


John Gary and Mary S. Isaacson John Morgan, Ochoco Lumber Company Karen Coulter, Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project Kenna Hoyser, East Cascades BCHO

Tim Unterwegner Vance Tong, Central Oregonian Zach Williams

Ten individuals and organizations expressed interest in the project. Responses to the scoping package indicated general support for the roadside hazard portion of the project. Opinions are mixed regarding general salvage; some commenters felt that general salvage is unnecessary to meet the purpose and need while other commenters expressed that they wanted to see many more acres of general salvage included with the project proposal.

Circulation of the EA for Public Comment The EA was made available for a 30-day comment period, under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1500-1508) and the Project-Level Predecisional Administrative Review Process (“objection”) (36 CFR 218). The comment period was from March 23, 2015 through April 22, 2015. A legal notice announcing the comment period was published in The Bulletin, the newspaper of record, on March 23, 2015.

Comments were received from the following: Richard Hutto (Professor Emeritus, Biology and Wildlife Biology, Division of Biological Sciences, University of Montana), Ralph Osterling (President, Ralph Osterling Consultants, Inc.), Dick Artley, Glenn Burleigh, Susan Carroll, Chris Humphreys (Wheeler County Sheriff), Rick Brewer (Butte Timberlands LLC), Craig Woodward, Irene Jerome (American Forest Resources Council), Wheeler County Commissioners, Crook County Commissioners, Larry Blasing, Laurie Solomon, Karen Coulter (Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project), Pam Hardy (Oregon Wild) and Greg Castleberry. The project ID team and the Responsible Official considered all comments; a document detailing comments and responses was prepared and is included in the project record; the document will be included as an appendix to the Decision Notice.

Government to Government Consultation The Forest Service consulted the Klamath Tribes, the Burns Paiute Tribes, and the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation in November of 2014 and again in April of 2015. None of the Tribes provided comments during the consultation process.

Project Record This environmental assessment herby incorporates by reference the project record (40 CFR 1502.21). The project record contains the specialists’ reports and other technical documentation used to support the analysis and conclusions in this environmental assessment. A summary of the specialists’ reports in adequate detail to support the decision rationale and appendices provide supporting documentation for the effects analysis are contained in this environmental assessment.

Incorporating these specialists’ reports and the project record implement the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations that agencies should reduce NEPA paperwork (40 CFR 1500.4), that the document shall be “analytic rather than encyclopedic,” and that the document “shall be kept concise and no longer than absolutely necessary” (40 CFR 1502.0). The objective is to furnish adequate site-specific information to demonstrate a reasoned consideration of the environmental effects of the alternatives without repeating detailed analysis and background information available elsewhere. The project record is available for review at the Ochoco National Forest office, 3160 NE 3rd Street, Prineville, Oregon, Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding holidays.

12


Issues The Forest Service separated the issues into two groups: key issues and non-key issues. Key issues were defined as issues identified during public scoping that suggested an alternative to meeting the purpose and need for action. Non-key issues were identified as those:

• Outside the scope of the proposed action; • Already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher-level decision; • Irrelevant to the decision to be made; • Conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence; or • Routine analysis issues that would be discussed in the effects analysis section of the

environmental assessment.

A list of scoping comments and their consideration is included in the project record, which is located at the Ochoco National Forest, Prineville, Oregon.

Key Issues The Forest Service identified two topics raised during scoping that would generate the creation of an additional action alternative to the proposed action.

Key Issue 1: Logging will negatively impact a variety of resources, and internal forest sale units are not necessary to meet the purpose and need.

Scoping comments suggested that the potential impacts of salvage logging in “internal forest sale units” could outweigh the benefits, and that the proposed roadside hazard removal alone would be sufficient to meet the project’s purpose and need. Alternative C was developed in part to address this scoping comment; the measure would be the ability of each alternative to meet the purpose and need, including estimated volume of available timber and anticipated appraisal value.

Key Issue 2: Temporary roads are often re-used later and so become de facto system roads.

Scoping comments suggested that temporary road building is not desirable due to the potential for longer-term impacts on soils and other forest resources, if the temporary roads continue to be used by motorized vehicles. Alternative C was developed in part to address this scoping comment; the measure would be the number of miles of temporary roads needed to implement each alternative.

Analysis Issues In addition to the Key Issues, other environmental components will be addressed in the effects analysis section of this document as a way to compare alternatives, though they did not result in differing design elements between alternatives. These analysis issues are important for providing the responsible official with complete information about the effects of the project.

Mass Wasting Issue: Portions of Dodds, Heflin, O’Kelly, Crystal and West Branch Bridge Creeks within Upper Marks, West Branch Bridge Creek and Middle Bear Creek sub-watersheds are underlain by dormant landslide terrain. When there is a change in the ground water flow through the unstable terrain, the potential is increased for slope movement. Rapid shallow debris flows and deeper rotational slides can result, altering the vegetation potential and possibly releasing sediment into the stream systems, depending on proximity to the riparian areas.

Measure: Effects of the alternatives on the landslide terrain will be measured by acres/miles of dormant landslide terrain and mapped landslide debris (Qls).

13


Soils Issue: The action alternatives have the potential to increase the amount and distribution of soil disturbance within individual activity areas proposed for mechanical timber salvage treatments. Soil disturbance from ground-based equipment operations along with the removal of trees from activity areas may also result in increased accelerated soil erosion and affect both short and long term soil plant nutrient capacity by salvaging fire killed trees in the project area.

Measure: Measures used to address project effects include changes in extent of soil disturbance following proposed fire salvage treatments within individual activity areas proposed for mechanical treatments.

Hydrology Issue: The action alternatives have the potential to affect water quality, water yield, peak flows, and hydrologic function and condition by salvaging fire killed trees in the project area. Specifically, actions could affect sedimentation, stream temperature, water yield, and waterbody condition.

Measure: Measures used to address project effects include road miles within 100 and 300 feet of streams and within RHCAs; equivalent harvest acres (EHA); and modeled sediment delivered to streams from skid trails, haul routes and temporary roads.

Fisheries Issue: The action alternatives have the potential to increase sediment delivery to streams from slope erosion and routing runoff from skid trails and roads to streams by salvaging fire killed trees in the project area. Specifically, salvage actions could concentrate runoff and increase sedimentation delivery to Dodds, West Branch Bridge, and Marks Creek, and reduce spawning and rearing habitat quality for redband trout and steelhead trout.

Measure: To measure effects to fish habitat, modeled sediment delivery using Disturbed WEPP and Netmap will be used to quantify sediment delivered to stream channels from skid trails in harvest units and increased sedimentation from haul route traffic. The estimated tons of sediment produced from proposed activities by subwatershed will then be compared to existing conditions to help assess magnitude of impacts to fish and fish habitat in the project area.

Botany Issue: The action alternatives have the potential to affect Sensitive plant species. Ground based equipment can crush or uproot plants, displace and compact soil damaging roots or bulbs, and introduce invasive plant species.

Measure: Probability of detrimental impacts to plants as estimated by amount (acres) and degree of ground disturbance in populations or suitable habitat.

Issue: Ground disturbance and salvage logging can introduce and create more habitats for invasive plants. Action alternatives have project design criteria to prevent introduction and spread of invasive plants and minimize the spread of existing invasive populations. Equipment cleaning clauses are required. Ground disturbance will be minimized by measures which project soil, Sensitive plants, and Riparian areas.

Measure: Risk of weed spread is estimated by amount (acres) degree of disturbance and proximity to existing invasive plant infestation, and its method of dispersal.

14


Reforestation and Forest Stand Development Issue: The action alternatives have the potential to affect the amount of early seral forest across the landscape. Harvesting of fire killed trees and subsequent reforestation (planting) may cause natural forest succession to be altered.

Measure: Measures used to address project effects include the amount of deviation from the historic range of variability of early seral habitat in each of the action alternatives.

Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action The proposed action and following alternatives were considered:

Alternative A – No Action Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, provides a baseline of current, post-fire conditions against which to compare the effects of the two action alternatives. In the No Action Alternative, none of the salvage, roadside hazard removal, or other project activities associated with the action alternatives would take place.

Alternative B - Proposed Action The Lookout Mountain Ranger District proposes to salvage log up to 300 acres in 11 harvest units. Units would be harvested using ground-based logging systems. Fire killed trees of all species would be felled and removed from harvest units. Incidental live trees may need to be felled for construction of landings, temporary roads or skid trails; however, the number of actual live trees that would need to be felled is anticipated to be very low.

Hazard or “danger” trees (both green and dead) located along about 19 miles of Forest Roads would be abated (felled); felled trees of merchantable size would be removed if allowed by the land management allocations in which they are located. “Danger trees” include those that are projected to have high mortality within 3-5 years. Because of the intensity of the fire and the existing condition of the stand there are green pine trees that are extremely catfaced and are likely to become hazards within 3-5 years. Estimates of “danger” trees in areas identified for roadside hazard abatement range from 10% - 40% of the identified area. Roadside hazard identification would rely on best available science, including Scott et al (2002) “Factors Affecting Survival of Fire Injured Trees: A Rating System for Determining Relative Probability of Survival of Conifers in the Blue and Wallowa Mountains” and Toupin et al (2008) “Field Guide for Danger Tree Identification and Response.”

The total timber volume associated with Alternative B is 4.0 million board feet (mmbf).

The proposed action does not require any new road construction; temporary roads would be required in some locations.

Snag retention is required for all harvest units. Retention levels would be developed for wildlife focal species and their prey base based on the best available science and Forest Plan standards and guidelines.

Reforestation would occur on about 886 acres within and outside of the harvest units. Species mix would reflect the composition of the original stand(s).

Additional actions are included with the proposed action. These activities are proposed in the Heflin, Clover, O’Kelly and Camp Creek drainages where burn severity was high and fire effects to riparian areas, including consumption of large woody material and mortality of riparian vegetation, are likely to be severe; they are proposed in order to improve instream aquatic habitat that was degraded by the

15


Bailey Butte fire, promote plant growth, recover stream banks, and improve shade conditions more quickly. Restoration activities in these drainages will be analyzed as similar actions because, while they do not directly relate to the project’s purpose and need, they are similar to the proposed activities and are located in the same project area. The proposed restoration activities are:

• Six miles of directional tree felling into streams to replace large woody material, and • Six miles of planting of riparian vegetation.

These activities are proposed to be implemented at the following locations:

• 2.5 miles of Heflin Creek, from the forest boundary to headwaters • 1.3 miles of tributary to Heflin Creek, from confluence of Heflin Creek to headwaters • miles of Clover Creek, from the forest boundary to headwaters • miles of O’Kelly Creek, from forest boundary to ¼ mile upstream of Road #2600-611 • 0.5 miles of tributary to Camp Creek, from forest boundary to Road #2210

As a connected action, about 14 miles of Maintenance Level (ML) 1 roads would be opened for use as haul routes; these roads would be closed and returned to ML 1 management after harvest activities are implemented. In addition, implementation of Alternative B would require the construction of .7 miles of temporary roads; these temporary roads would be obliterated after harvest activities are implemented.

Maps 3 and 5 (Appendix 3) display the activities proposed in Alternative B.

It is anticipated that harvest activities would be completed in 2015. Reforestation is anticipated to be implemented in 2017; riparian restoration activities would take place in 2015 or later.

Alternative C Alternative C was developed in response to public comments made during the scoping period; a commenter suggested that the projects purpose and need could be met by limiting postfire harvest to mitigation of roadside hazards. Some commenters were also concerned about use of temporary roads for access to salvage harvest units. Therefore, harvest in Alternative C is limited to the merchantable-sized trees that would be felled along the 19 miles of roads where hazard mitigation has been identified as a need in the project area. “Danger trees” include those that are projected to have high mortality within 3-5 years. Because of the intensity of the fire and the existing condition of the stand there are green pine trees that are extremely catfaced and are likely to become hazards within 3-5 years. Estimates of “danger” trees in areas identified for roadside hazard abatement range from 10% - 40% of the identified area. Roadside hazard identification would rely on best available science, including Scott et al (2002) “Factors Affecting Survival of Fire Injured Trees: A Rating System for Determining Relative Probability of Survival of Conifers in the Blue and Wallowa Mountains” and Toupin et al (2008) “Field Guide for Danger Tree Identification and Response.” Volume is estimated to be about 3.8 mmbf.

Reforestation would occur on about 886 acres within and outside of the harvest units. Species mix would reflect the composition of the original stand(s).

Additional actions are included with Alternative C. These activities are proposed in the Heflin, Clover, O’Kelly and Camp Creek drainages where burn severity was high and fire effects to riparian areas, including consumption of large woody material and mortality of riparian vegetation, are likely to be severe; they are proposed in order to improve instream aquatic habitat that was degraded by the Bailey Butte fire, promote plant growth, recover stream banks, and improve shade conditions more quickly. Restoration activities in these drainages will be analyzed as similar actions because, while they do not directly relate to the project’s purpose and need, they are similar to the proposed activities and are located in the same project area. The proposed restoration activities are:

16


• Six miles of directional tree felling into streams to replace large woody material, and • Six miles of planting of riparian vegetation.

These activities are proposed to be implemented at the following locations:

• 2.5 miles of Heflin Creek, from the forest boundary to headwaters • 1.3 miles of tributary to Heflin Creek, from confluence of Heflin Creek to headwaters • 1.0 miles of Clover Creek, from the forest boundary to headwaters • 1.0 miles of O’Kelly Creek, from forest boundary to ¼ mile upstream of Road #2600-611 • 0.5 miles of tributary to Camp Creek, from forest boundary to Road #2210

As a connected action, about 12 miles of Maintenance Level (ML) 1 roads would be opened for use as haul routes; these roads would be closed and returned to ML 1 management after harvest activities are implemented.

Maps 4 and 5 (Appendix 3) display the activities proposed in Alternative B.

It is anticipated that harvest activities would be completed in 2015. Reforestation is anticipated to be implemented in 2017; riparian restoration activities would take place in 2015 or later.

Project Design Criteria Common to All Action Alternatives

Cultural Resources • Coordination with the project archaeologist would take place for implementation of activities

that overlap with known sensitive cultural resource sites. Coordination would occur with the relevant specialists to ensure the protection of cultural sites and features to accomplish heritage objectives. Activities include road construction, maintenance and road closures, commercial harvest, noncommercial thinning and prescribed fire.

• If human remains or heritage resources (historic or prehistoric) are discovered during implementation, all activities within the immediate vicinity of the discovery area would cease until it is assessed by a professional archaeologist. Site specific mitigation would be determined and consultation with the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, Oregon State Police and local Tribal Governments, as appropriate, would occur prior to resuming ground disturbing activities.

• If historic stock driveway signs, General Land Office bearing trees, or physical remains of other historic features are found within treatment units, their location would be made known to the project archaeologist for recording. After recording, project activities would continue.

• Establishment of staging areas for motorized vehicles and equipment of any kind would not be permitted within known ground-based cultural resource sites.

Historic Summit Trail This National Register of Historic Places-identified travel route is managed as a historic travel corridor (Ochoco Forest LRMP) within a general border of six hundred feet (three hundred feet from the center of the road on both sides).

• Coordination with the project archaeologist would occur on a unit-by-unit basis for all proposed treatments within the Summit Trail corridor.

• Log-hauling over the historic road will, to the greatest extent possible, stay within the existing lens of the historic trail.

17


• No new vehicle staging areas will be permitted along the historic road; vehicles may park within existing landings or existing pull-offs or spur roads; exceptions may be considered on a case-by-case basis in coordination with the project archaeologist.

• The re-use of established log landings within foreground areas would be permitted. The establishment of new log landings adjacent to the road may be considered on a case-by-case basis in coordination with the project archaeologist.

• Stumps would not exceed eight inches in height in foreground areas.

• Trees with historic blazes, signs or telephone insulators would be left standing. If a blaze is on a hazard tree, the tree would be cut above the blaze.

• Logs will not be skidded across the Summit Trail.

• Blading, widening, installing culverts or modifying the road in any way will be coordinated with the project archaeologist. Adding gravel or rock to cap the road lens during project activities and the placement of barricades to close user created roads during post-project activities is permitted.

Sensitive Plants • No slash piling or ground-based equipment would be used within 50 feet of areas identified

as Peck’s lily (Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii) populations or sensitive riparian plant habitat. Exceptions would be reviewed by the botanist and hydrologist or fisheries biologist. Exceptions include:

o Pulling cable (winch lining) from an existing road; o Using existing roads as landings; o Lateral falling and riparian planting.

• No new roads would be constructed within 100 feet of sensitive plant population boundaries.

• Vehicles, including off-highway or all-terrain vehicles, would not be operated within areas identified as Peck’s lily populations or sensitive riparian plant habitat, except on existing roads.

• Layout of harvest treatment or pre-commercial thinning units near Peck’s lily populations or potential habitat would be coordinated with the district botanist. Associated units are 8, 11 and 12.

• Implementation of activities including pre-commercial thinning and layout of new road construction near other documented populations of sensitive plants will be coordinated with the botanist.

• Any new sensitive plant sites or habitat found during implementation would be protected similarly to known populations.

• If any new species or populations of sensitive plants are found during project implementation, these species would be considered as described in the policy guidelines found in FSM 2670, regardless of the date of sale or other contract.

Non-native Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds) • Conduct a non-native invasive plant identification workshop for Forest Service personnel

who would be preparing, implementing, and/or administering the proposed activities.

18


• Re-use of landings infested with non-native invasive plants would not occur, shade would be retained, and ignition during burning would be avoided within 100 feet of infestations. Avoid these areas for camps, staging, and parking areas. Exceptions may be made through coordination with the district weed coordinator. In addition, any new invasive plant infestations found during implementation would be managed similarly. Treatment units in or near non-native invasive plants include units #1, 3, 6, 7, 10 and 11 and all roadside units.

• To reduce the potential for transport or spread of non-native invasive plants by road construction or logging equipment, the timber sale contract would require provision BT6.35: (1) certification that equipment be clean of all plant or soil material that may result in the establishment or spread of non-native invasive plants; and (2) notification of location where equipment was most recently used. The Forest Service Timber Sale Administrator would certify that equipment is clean of plant and soil material before the equipment enters the project area. Cleaning shall occur off of Federal lands. Project-related activities that are implemented under a stewardship contract or other agreements would include an equivalent contract provision.

• Document all non-native invasive plant infestations identified during implementation by notifying the district noxious weed coordinator.

• To reduce the potential for non-native invasive plant spread through mineral material (i.e. gravel and rock) used on roads and landings, Ochoco NF material sources would be inspected to ensure materials are weed free. Additionally, the sale contract would include provisions requiring any material from other sources is inspected by the Forest Service and determined to be weed free.

• All equipment and vehicles used at mineral material sites would be cleaned and certified free of all plant or soil material that could contain invasive plant seed or plant parts prior to entrance onto the National Forest. Cleaning means removing all dirt, grease, debris, and materials that may harbor invasive plants and their seeds. This may require the use of a pressure hose. Cleaning would occur off of Federal lands.

• Water for watering roads or other activities would be obtained from weed free sites or by methods that reduce the risk of spreading invasive plant parts or seeds from infested areas near water sources. Fire engines and water tenders would avoid driving over invasive plants on the banks of water sources, or other measures taken, such as covering with clean mineral material, to reduce risk.

• To reduce erosion potential and reduce risk of non-native invasive plants, apply seed to roads that will be closed or decommissioned, primary skid trails, and log landing areas as part of the final sale contract work. Seed would be certified as “All States Noxious Weed Free” by an approved testing laboratory, such as the Oregon State University Seed Lab. Local native grasses such as Sandberg’s bluegrass (Poa secunda), blue wildrye (Elymus glaucus), red fescue (Festuca rubra), and bottlebrush squirreltail (Elymus elymoides) would be in the seed mix. Native forbs, such as yarrow (Achillea millefolium) would also be included in the mix if available. The seeding rate would be approximately 5-10 lbs/acre, depending on availability of species.

• Where feasible, retain desirable vegetation on road shoulders, cuts, fills, ditches, and drainages.

• A non-native invasive plant locator map would be included in the sale area map and project file to assist in avoidance and monitoring.

19


• Stream channel work identified by the hydrologist would be reviewed by the botanist prior to implementation.

Water Quality and Aquatic Habitats (Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas) Table 6 identifies RHCA boundaries that were applied during unit design for the Bailey Butte Fire project. The following Project Design Criteria (PDC) were developed to minimize environmental effects of the proposed activities to streams, wetlands, and RHCAs and would be used in all of the action alternatives. These PDCs comply with the standards and guides outlined in the Ochoco National Forest Plan, INFISH, and PACFISH, as well as requirements for protection of water quality in the State of Oregon in accordance with the Clean Water Act. Table 6. RHCA boundaries by stream class, as defined in PACFISH.

Stream Class Description Width Each Side

(feet) 1 and 2 Fish-bearing streams 300

3 Perennial (and select intermittent), non-fish bearing streams Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than 1 acre Unstable areas near waterbodies

150

4 Intermittent streams Wetlands less than 1 acre Landslides and landslide-prone areas

50

PACFISH uses the term stream category. These categories have been converted to stream class, which is a more commonly used term. These are only RHCA boundaries and do not indicate vegetation treatments within them.

Skid Trails, Landings, and Roads • Existing skid trails, landings, and temporary roads within RHCAs of Class 3 and 4

waterbodies, within wetland perimeters, and within 200 feet of Class 1 and 2 streams would not be used except after review by the fisheries biologist or hydrologist (BMP Plan-3; BMP AqEco-1; BMP Road-2; BMP Road-5; BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4; BMP Veg-6).

• Use of new and existing skid trails that cross streams would not be permitted; exceptions may be possible after review by the fisheries biologist or hydrologist (BMP Road-7).

• Skid trails and temporary roads would be designed to reduce the concentration of flows and to encourage the flow of water off of them (BMP Road-5; BMP Veg-4).

• Landings and main skid trails within 300 feet of landings would be scarified and seeded to increase infiltration and prevent surface erosion. Landings that are located on a gravel road or at turnouts that will remain open to traffic use would be exempt from the scarification and seeding requirements (BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4; BMP Veg-6).

• Temporary roads would be rehabilitated after completion of logging operations. Rehabilitation of temporary roads may include: berming the entrance, removal of culverts and associated fill, out-sloping the road surface, installation of water bars, removal of placed rock, re-vegetation of the road prism with native species, and scarification of compacted surfaces (BMP Road-5; BMP Road-6).

• Suspension of use would occur when road use is contributing to sediment detachment and transport (i.e. rutting 2 inches or deeper) or muddy ditch water to prevent siltation outside of the roadway (BMP Road-4; BMP Road-5).

• When consistent with other management actions, slash (where available) would be placed on landings, skid trails, temporary roads, and roads to be closed (BMP Road-5; BMP Road-6; BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4; BMP Veg-6).

20


• Dust abatement on haul roads within RHCAs would occur to reduce sediment (i.e. dust) entering streams. Water used for dust abatement would be obtained from sources identified in the May 1996 Ochoco National Forest Water Conservation Plan. Stream flow requirements are specified in the Plan (BMP Road-4).

• Maintenance of roads or temporary road development would not be done when soils are saturated or run-off occurs, to minimize erosion and sedimentation (BMP Road-4; Road-5).

• Native surfaced roads would be restricted from hauling when soils are saturated or run-off occurs, to minimize erosion and sedimentation (BMP Road-4).

• Ground-based equipment used for yarding, processing, fuel treatment, or other project activities would operate only when soils are relatively dry following the rainy season in the spring through the summer, or during the winter months when there is a continuous snow pack or when soils are frozen to a depth of six inches or greater. Operations would be suspended before rainfall or precipitation results in off-site movement of muddy water into drainage courses.

• Skid trails would be designated and approved prior to logging by the timber sale administrator and would be located on already disturbed areas where available. Where practical, skid trails would avoid ephemeral draws. Crossings would be perpendicular to ephemeral draws.

• Landings will be located at least 30 feet from ephemeral draws and outside of RHCAs (BMP Veg-6).

Other Activities • In-channel work on perennial streams would be accomplished in accordance with “Oregon

Guidelines for Timing of in-Water Work to protect Fish and Wildlife Resources, 2008.” For the project area, the timing for in-water work varies depending on in which river basin the activity is located. Activities located in streams that ultimately flow into the Lower John Day River have an in-water work period from July 15 to August 31 and activities located in streams that ultimately flow into the Crooked River have an in-water work period from July 1 to October 31 (BMP AqEco-2; BMP AqEco-4).

• Industrial camps would not be located in RHCAs (BMP Veg-3).

• Water sources used by project operations would be reconstructed or maintained as necessary to protect stream bank stability, riparian vegetation, and water quality (BMP WatUses-1).

• Water intakes must meet the following fish screen criteria (NMFS; BMP WatUses-3):

o Perforated plate: screen openings shall not exceed 3/32 inches (2.38 mm), measured in diameter.

o Profile bar: screen openings shall not exceed 0.0689 inches (1.75 mm) in width. o Woven wire: screen openings shall not exceed 3/32 inches (2.38 mm), measured

diagonally (e.g.: 6-14 mesh).

• To reduce ground-disturbance within RHCAs during noncommercial activities, use of off-highway vehicles would be restricted within RHCAs or on closed roads within RHCAs. Exceptions would be coordinated with the hydrologist or fisheries biologist (BMP AqEco-2; BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-3; BMP Veg-8).

21


• Mechanical treatment and ground-based equipment is not allowed within wetland perimeters (including seeps and springs), unless approved by a hydrologist or fisheries biologist (BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4; BMP Veg-8).

• Mechanical treatment and equipment is not allowed within 30 feet on either side of the center line of designated ephemeral draws, unless approved by a hydrologist or fisheries biologist. Crossing of designated ephemeral draws will be limited and approved by a hydrologist or fisheries biologist. If approved, crossings would be perpendicular to ephemeral draws (BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4; BMP Veg-8).

• Removal of trees within 30 feet on either side from the center line of hydrologically connected ephemeral channels as designated by the hydrologist is not allowed unless approved by a hydrologist or fisheries biologist (BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4).

Best Management Practices The Project Design Criteria (PDCs) for the Bailey Butte Fire Project were developed to comply with the National Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands (April, 2012). BMP implementation and effectiveness have been systematically monitored across National Forest Lands in California since 1992. From 2008-2010, randomized monitoring showed 91% of BMPs were implemented, and 80% of implemented BMPs were rated effective. BMPs for timber harvests, fuels treatments, and vegetation management were consistently highly effective, while BMPs for other activities, including roads, range management, recreation, and mining, were less effective (USDA Forest Service 2013). At sites where BMPs were not implemented or effective the monitoring program includes a strong feedback loop to take corrective action on non-compliance scenarios.

At the national scale, a consistent program to monitor BMP implementation and effectiveness has been in development for several years. Monitoring of BMP implementation and effectiveness using the national BMP protocols has taken place on the Deschutes National Forest since 2011. Monitoring results from vegetation management projects indicate that BMPs intended to minimize effects to water, aquatic and riparian resources were successfully implemented, and BMPs intended to minimize effects from landings and ground-based mechanical harvest were successfully implemented, including landing location, spacing of skid trails, and retention of cover (USDA Forest Service 2011, and 2012(a)). Additional project-level BMP monitoring has occurred as part of project implementation on the Ochoco National Forest. Monitoring results are cited throughout this report where they are applicable.

Table 7 summarizes the National Core BMPs that are applicable to the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area as well as their objectives and the applicable practices. Table 7. Best Management Practices (BMPs) applicable to the Bailey Butte Fire Project.

Title Activity Objective/Specific Practices

Plan-1 Forest and Grassland Planning

Use the land management planning and decision-making processes to incorporate direction for water quality management consistent with laws, regulation and policy into Forest and Grassland Plans.

Plan-2 Project Planning and Analysis

Use the project planning, environmental analysis and decision-making processes to incorporate water quality management BMPs into project design and implementation.

Plan-3 Aquatic Management Zone (AMZ) Planning

To maintain and improve or restore the condition of land around and adjacent to waterbodies in the context of the environment in which they are located recognizing their unique values and importance to water quality while implementing land and resource management activities.

22


Title Activity Objective/Specific Practices

AqEco-1 Aquatic Ecosystem Improvement and Restoration Planning

Reestablish and retain ecological resilience of aquatic ecosystems and associated resources to achieve sustainability and provide a broad range of ecosystem services.

AqEco-2 Operations in Aquatic Ecosystems

Avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts to water quality when working in aquatic ecosystems. • Use applicable practices of BMP Plan-2 (Project Planning and

Analysis) and BMP Plan-3 (AMZ Planning) when planning operations in aquatic ecosystems.

• Identify the aquatic and aquatic-dependent species that live in the waterbody, Aquatic Management Zone (AMZ), or on the floodplain and their life histories to determine protection strategies, such as timing of construction, sediment management, species relocation, and monitoring during construction.

• Coordinate stream channel, shoreline, lake, pond, and wetland activities with appropriate State and Federal agencies.

• Incorporate Clean Water Act (CWA) 404 permit requirements and other Federal, State, and local permits or requirements into the project design and plan.

• Use suitable measures to protect the waterbody when preparing the site for construction or maintenance activities.

• Clearly delineate the work zone. • Locate access and staging areas near the project site but outside

of work area boundaries, AMZs, wetlands, and sensitive soil areas.

• Refuel and service equipment only in designated staging areas (see BMP Road-10 [Equipment Refueling and Servicing]).

• Develop an erosion and sediment control plan to avoid or minimize downstream impacts using measures appropriate to the site and the proposed activity (see BMP Fac-2 [FacilityConstruction and Stormwater Control]).

• Prepare for unexpected failures of erosion control measures. • Consider needs for solid waste disposal and worksite

sanitation. • Consider using small, low ground pressure equipment, and

hand labor where practicable. • Ensure all equipment operated in or adjacent to the waterbody

is clean of aquatic invasive species, as well as oil and grease, and is well maintained.

• Use vegetable oil or other biodegradable hydraulic oil for heavy equipment hydraulics wherever practicable when operating in or near water.

• Schedule construction or maintenance operations in waterbodies to occur in the least critical periods to avoid or minimize adverse effects to sensitive aquatic and aquatic-dependent species that live in or near the waterbody.

• Avoid scheduling instream work during the spawning or migration seasons of resident or migratory fish and other important life history phases of sensitive species that could be affected by the project.

• Avoid scheduling instream work during periods that could be interrupted by high flows.

• Consider the growing season and dormant season for vegetation when scheduling activities within or near the

23


Title Activity Objective/Specific Practices waterbody to minimize the period of time that the land would remain exposed, thereby reducing erosion risks and length of time when aesthetics are poor.

• Use suitable measures to protect the waterbody when clearing the site.

• Clearly delineate the geographic limits of the area to be cleared.

• Use suitable drainage measures to improve the workability of wet sites.

• Avoid or minimize unacceptable damage to existing vegetation, especially plants that are stabilizing the bank of the waterbody.

• Use suitable measures to avoid or minimize impacts to the waterbody when implementing construction and maintenance activities.

• Minimize heavy equipment entry into or crossing water as is practicable.

• Conduct operations during dry periods. • Stage construction operations as needed to limit the extent of

disturbed areas without installed stabilization measures. • Promptly install and appropriately maintain erosion control

measures. • Promptly install and appropriately maintain spill prevention

and containment measures. • Promptly rehabilitate or stabilize disturbed areas as needed

following construction or maintenance activities. • Stockpile and protect topsoil for reuse in site revegetation. • Minimize bank and riparian area excavation during

construction to the extent practicable. • Keep excavated materials out of the waterbody. • Use only clean, suitable materials that are free of toxins and

invasive species for fill. • Properly compact fills to avoid or minimize erosion. • Balance cuts and fills to minimize disposal needs. • Remove all project debris from the waterbody in a manner that

will cause the least disturbance. • Identify suitable areas offsite or away from waterbodies for

disposal sites before beginning operations. • Contour site to disperse runoff, minimize erosion, stabilize

slopes, and provide a favorable environment for plant growth. • Use suitable species and establishment techniques to revegetate

the site in compliance with local direction and requirements per FSM 2070 and FSM 2080 for vegetation ecology and prevention and control of invasive species.

• Use suitable measures to divert or partition channelized flow around the site or to dewater the site as needed to the extent practicable.

• Remove aquatic organisms from the construction area before dewatering and prevent organisms from returning to the site during construction.

• Return clean flows to channel or waterbody downstream of the activity.

• Restore flows to their natural stream course as soon as practicable after construction or before seasonal closures.

• Inspect the work site at suitable regular intervals during and after construction or maintenance activities to check on quality

24


Title Activity Objective/Specific Practices of the work and materials and identify need for mid-project corrections.

• Consider short- and long-term maintenance needs and unit capabilities when designing the project.

• Develop a strategy for providing emergency maintenance when needed.

• Include implementation and effectiveness monitoring to evaluate success of the project in meeting design objectives and avoiding or minimizing unacceptable impacts to water quality.

• Consider long-term management of the site and nearby areas to promote project success.

• Use suitable measures to limit human, vehicle, and livestock access to site as needed to allow for recovery of vegetation.

AqEco-4

Stream Channels and Shorelines

Design and implement stream channel and lake shoreline projects in a manner that increases the potential for success in meeting project objectives and avoids, minimizes or mitigates adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources. • Determine need to control channel grade to avoid or minimize

erosion of channel bed and banks before selecting measures for bank stabilization or protection.

• Avoid changing channel alignment unless the change is to reconstruct the channel to a stable meander geometry consistent with stream type.

• Design instream and streambank stabilization and protection measures suitable to channel alignment.

• Include suitable measures to protect against erosion around the edges of stabilization structures.

• Choose vegetation appropriate to the site to provide streambank stabilization and protection adequate to achieve project objectives.

• Use vegetation species and establishment methods suitable to the project site and objectives, consistent with local direction and requirements per FSM 2070 and FSM 2080 for vegetation ecology and prevention and control of invasive species.

Road-1

Travel Management Planning and Analysis

Use the travel management planning and analysis processes to develop measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources during road management activities.

Road-2

Road Location and Design

Locate and design roads to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources. • Locate roads as far from waterbodies as is practicable to

achieve access objectives, with a minimum number of crossings and connections between the road and the waterbody.

• Avoid sensitive areas such as riparian areas, wetlands, meadows, bogs, and fens, to the extent practicable.

• Provide an AMZ of suitable width between the road and a waterbody to maintain desired conditions, goals, and objectives for structure, function, and processes of the AMZ and associated waterbody when a road must parallel a waterbody (See BMP Plan-3 [AMZ Planning]).

• Relocate existing routes or segments that are causing, or have the potential to cause, adverse effects to soil, water quality, and riparian resources, to the extent practicable.

• Obliterate the existing road or segment after the relocated

25


Title Activity Objective/Specific Practices section is completed (see BMP Road-6 [Road Storage and Decommissioning]).

• Design a post-construction site vegetation plan, including short- and long-term objectives, using suitable species and establishment techniques to revegetate the site in compliance with local direction and requirements per FSM 2070 and FSM 2080 for vegetation ecology and prevention and control of invasive species.

Road-4

Road Operations and Maintenance

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources by controlling road use and operations and providing adequate and appropriate maintenance to minimize sediment production and other pollutants during the useful life of the road. • Use suitable measures to avoid or minimize adverse effects to

soil, water quality, or riparian resources when proposed operations involve use of roads by traffic and during periods for which the road was not designed.

• Strengthen the road surface in areas where surfaces are vulnerable to movement such as corners and steep sections.

• Upgrade drainage structures to avoid, to the extent practicable, or minimize direct discharges into nearby waterbodies.

• Restrict use to low-ground-pressure vehicles or frozen ground conditions.

• Strengthen the road base if roads are tending to rut. • Adjust maintenance to handle the traffic while minimizing

excessive erosion and damage to the road surface. • Ensure that drainage features are fully functional on completion

of seasonal operations. • Shape road surfaces to drain as designed. • Construct or reconstruct drainage control structures as needed. • Ensure that ditches and culverts are clean and functioning. • Remove berms unless specifically designed for erosion control

purposes. • Consider potential for water quality effects from road damage

when granting permits for oversize or overweight loads. • Use suitable road surface stabilization practices and dust

abatement supplements on roads with high or heavy traffic use (See FSH 7709.56 and FSH 7709.59).

• Use applicable practices of Chemical Use Management Activities BMPs when chemicals are used in road operations.

Road-5 Temporary Roads

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources from the construction and use of temporary roads. • Schedule construction activities to avoid direct soil and water-

disturbance during periods of the year when heavy precipitation and runoff are likely to occur.

• Maintain erosion and storm-water controls as necessary to ensure proper and effective functioning.

• Use suitable measures in compliance with local direction to prevent and control invasive species.

• Use temporary crossings suitable for the expected uses and timing of use (See BMP Road-7[Stream Crossings]).

• Use applicable practices of BMP Road-6 (Road Storage and Decommissioning) to obliterate the temporary road and return the area to resource production after the access is no longer

26


Title Activity Objective/Specific Practices needed.

Road-6

Road Storage and Decommissioning

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources by storing closed roads not needed for at least one year (Intermittent Stored Service) and decommissioning unneeded roads in a hydrologically stable manner to eliminate hydrologic connectivity, restore natural flow patterns and minimize soil erosion. • Establish effective ground cover on disturbed sites to avoid or

minimize accelerated erosion and soil loss. • Evaluate all stream and waterbody crossings for potential for

failure or diversion of flow if left without treatment. • Remove culverts, fill material, and other structures that present

an unacceptable risk of failure or diversion. • Reshape the channel and streambanks at the crossing-site to

pass expected flows without scouring or ponding, minimize potential for undercutting or slumping of streambanks, and maintain continuation of channel dimensions and longitudinal profile through the crossing site.

Road-7 Stream Crossings

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources when constructing, reconstructing or maintaining temporary and permanent waterbody crossings.

Road-8

Snow Removal and Storage

Avoid or minimize erosion, sedimentation, and chemical pollution that may result from snow removal and storage activities. • Use existing standard contract language (C5.316# or similar)

for snow removal during winter logging operations to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality, and riparian resources.

Road-9

Parking and Staging Areas

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources when constructing and maintaining parking and staging areas.

Road-10

Equipment Refueling and Servicing

Avoid or minimize adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources from fuels, lubricants, cleaners and other harmful materials discharging into nearby surface waters or infiltrating through soils to contaminate groundwater resources during equipment refueling and servicing activities. • Allow temporary refueling and servicing only at approved

locations, located well away from the AMZ, groundwater recharge areas, and waterbodies.

Road-11

Road Storm-Damage Surveys

Monitor road conditions following storm events to: detect road failures; assess damage or potential damage to waterbodies, riparian resources, and watershed functions; determine the causes of the failures; and identify potential remedial actions at the damaged sites and preventative actions at similar sites.

Veg-1

Vegetation Management Planning

Use the applicable vegetation management planning processes to develop measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources during mechanical vegetation treatment activities.

Veg-2

Erosion Prevention and Control

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources by implementing measures to control surface erosion, gully formation, mass slope failure and resulting sediment movement before, during, and after mechanical vegetation treatments. • Operate equipment when soil compaction, displacement,

27


Title Activity Objective/Specific Practices erosion, and sediment runoff would be minimized.

Veg-3 Aquatic Management Zones

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources when conducting mechanical vegetation treatment activities in the AMZ. • Use mechanical vegetation treatments in the AMZ only when

suitable to achieve long-term AMZ-desired conditions and management objectives (see BMP Plan-3 [AMZ Planning]).

• Adjust operations in the AMZ to avoid, minimize, or mitigate detrimental soil impacts where they are occurring.

Veg-4

Ground-Based Skidding and Yarding Operations

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources during ground-based skidding and yarding operations by minimizing site disturbance and controlling the introduction of sediment, nutrients, and chemical pollutants to waterbodies. • Use ground-based yarding systems only where physical site

characteristics are suitable to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality, and riparian resources.

• Use local direction or requirements for slope, erosion potential, mass wasting potential, and other soil or site properties to determine areas suitable for ground-based yarding systems.

• Use existing roads and skid trail networks to the extent practicable.

• Create new roads and skid trail where re-use of existing ones would exacerbate soil, water quality, and riparian resource impacts.

• Design and locate skid trails and skidding operations to minimize soil disturbance to the extent practicable.

• Use suitable measures to stabilize and restore skid trails after use.

Veg-6 Landings

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources from the construction and use of log landings. • Minimize the size and number of landings as practicable to

accommodate safe, economical, and efficient operations. • Locate landings to limit the potential for pollutant delivery to

waterbodies. • Locate landings outside the AMZ and as far from waterbodies

as reasonably practicable based on travel routes and environmental considerations.

• Avoid locating landings near any type of likely flow or sediment transport conduit during storms, such as ephemeral channels and swales, where practicable.

• Locate landings to minimize the number of required skid roads. • Avoid locating landings on steep slopes or highly erodible

soils. • Avoid placing landings where skidding across drainage

bottoms is required. • Design roads and trail approaches to minimize overland flow

entering the landing. • Re-use existing landings where their location is compatible

with management objectives and water quality protection. • Use applicable practices of BMP Veg-2 (Erosion Prevention

and Control) to minimize and control erosion as needed during construction and use of log landings.

28


Title Activity Objective/Specific Practices • Install and maintain suitable temporary erosion control and

stabilization measures when the landing will be reused within the same year.

• Use applicable practices of BMP Fac-6 (Hazardous Materials) and BMP Road-10 (Equipment Refueling and Servicing) when managing fuels, chemicals, or other hazardous materials on the landing.

• Use suitable measures as needed to restore and stabilize landings after use.

• Remove all logging machinery refuse (e.g., tires, chains, chokers, cable, and miscellaneous discarded parts) and contaminated soil to a proper disposal site.

• Reshape the surface to promote dispersed drainage. • Install suitable drainage features. • Mitigate soil compaction to improve infiltration and

revegetation conditions. • Apply soil protective cover on disturbed areas where natural

revegetation is inadequate to prevent accelerated erosion before the next growing season.

• Use suitable measures to promote rapid revegetation. • Use suitable species and establishment techniques to cover or

revegetate disturbed areas in compliance with local direction and requirements per FSM 2070 and FSM 2080 for vegetation ecology and prevention and control of invasive species.

Veg-7 Winter Logging

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources from winter logging activities. • Consider using snow-roads and winter harvesting in areas with

high-water tables, sensitive riparian conditions, or other potentially significant soil erosion and compaction hazards.

• Use snow roads for single-entry harvests or temporary roads. • Conduct winter logging operations when the ground is frozen

or snow cover and depth is adequate to avoid or minimize unacceptable rutting or displacement of soil.

• Suspend winter operations if ground and snow conditions change such that unacceptable soil disturbance, compaction, displacement, or erosion becomes likely.

• Install and maintain suitable erosion control on skid trails before spring runoff (see BMP Veg-2[Erosion Prevention and Control]).

• Install erosion control measures during the dry season if needed.

Veg-8

Mechanical Site Treatment

Avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources by controlling the introduction of sediment, nutrients, chemical, or other pollutants to waterbodies during mechanical site treatment.

WatUses-1 Water Uses Planning

Use the applicable authorization and administrative planning processes to develop measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality and riparian resources during construction, operation, maintenance and restoration of water use infrastructure.

WatUses-3 Administrative Water Developments

Avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality, and riparian resources when developing and operating water sources for Forest Service administrative and resource management purposes.

29


Soils and Geology • For tractor logging units, the leading end of logs would be suspended during skidding to limit

soil displacement. Ground-based equipment would not be operated on slopes greater than 35 percent in tractor units. Winch lining will be required on slopes greater than 35 percent to minimize detrimental impacts (BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4).

• After harvest and grapple piling activities are completed, soil monitoring will evaluate the need for soil rehabilitation, such as tilling (BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4; BMP Veg-8).

• In units where detrimental soil conditions occur on less than 20 percent of the area, design activities so that detrimental soil conditions do not exceed 20 percent. This includes designating skid trails, landings, and roads (BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-4; BMP Veg-6; BMP Road-2).

• In units where detrimental soil conditions exceed 20 percent of the area, if tillable, allow no more than 5 percent increase over existing conditions and then till so that there is no net increase in the percentage of detrimental soil conditions. If tillage is not feasible, stay on existing disturbed areas and allow no increase in detrimental soil conditions (BMP Veg-2).

• Grapple piling equipment would remain on existing disturbed area to limit the amount of detrimental soil conditions. In undisturbed areas, grapple pile equipment would be allowed to make 1 or 2 passes to move between skid trails and other disturbed areas. Equipment would be limited to slopes less than 35 percent (BMP Veg-2; BMP Veg-8).

• Any evidence of recent landslide slope movement requires consultation with the geologist (BMP Veg-2).

Wildlife

Snag Retention Guidelines Snag retention guidelines were designed for the Bailey Butte Fire project using DecAID. DecAID is an advisory tool developed to help managers evaluate the impacts of forest conditions (existing conditions or conditions that would result from proposed activities) on wildlife that use snags and down wood. It is a summary, synthesis, and integration of current scientific knowledge about the sizes and amounts of snags and down wood used by cavity nesting birds in specific vegetation types in the West.

Design criteria for snag retention (variable retention) for treated areas are based on the best available science with regard to wildlife habitat requirements in burned stands outside of the high snag density areas. The focus of snag retention recommendations within salvage units is based on species that utilize stand replacing fire. Table 8 lists the recommended levels of snag retention in the harvest units to be responsive to species such as the Lewis’ and hairy woodpecker which are closely associated with post-fire habitats, to create habitats that are similar to sites found in the Saab et al. studies from 1994 to 1998 (Saab et al. 2002) and to achieve Forest Plan standards and guidelines.

30


Table 8. Recommended snag retention in the Bailey Butte Fire area. Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Habitat Type

Size Snags Per Acre 0-10” dbh Not included in harvest. 10-21” dbh 2 >21” dbh 2 Within harvest areas a minimum 4 snags per acre ( 2 over 20” dbh and 2 10”dbh or greater) would remain post treatment or the retention areas in harvest units will have a minimum of 20 snags per 5 acres in snag clumps. There may be some variation from unit to unit depending upon conditions resulting in some retention areas having more or less dispersed snag retention.

Eastside Mixed Conifer Habitat Type Size Snags Per Acre

0-10” dbh Not included in harvest. 10-21” dbh 3 * >21” dbh 3 ** Salvage Unit # 6 is exempt from these retention standards due to the majority of the unit being within striking distance of both a roadway and a fence line, where hazards to workers and the risk of loss of the new fence would be high as the snags fall. On Unit 6 retention will be in accordance to the retention standard to the extent that is possible, but the abatement of hazards along both the road and the fence will take precedence. *These three snags will be clumped within .1 acre of one of the > 21” retention snags. **These snags will be the largest ponderosa pine available on a per acre basis, favoring smaller pine over larger white-fir.

These guidelines provide habitat for species such as the Lewis’ woodpecker that prefer to nest in large snags associated with large openings, and have been shown to nest in logged areas more often than unlogged. In addition, these guidelines also provide habitat for species such as the hairy woodpecker that prefer higher density snag patches.

Goshawk • A 400-acre post fledging area has been established around the known nest site within the fire

perimeter that was not exposed to stand replacing fire mortality (Nature Creek PFA #9902). No management activities would occur inside the 30-acre nest stand. Activities within the post fledging area would be designed to protect overstory trees, large down wood, and large snags except when identified as roadside hazards. A very short segment of road 2600-452 falls within the mapped PFA, approximately ½ mile or more away from the historic nest location. No seasonal restriction is required due to distance from the known center of activity, and small scale of area to be treated (low intensity and short duration) within the PFA.

• There are no proposed salvage units (that are not roadside hazard areas) within the goshawk PFA. Within proposed salvage units the suitability as goshawk nesting habitat has been eliminated by high fire mortality. These areas may still contribute as foraging habitat for goshawks. To maintain habitat for prey species (as discussed in the MIS and landbird sections) snag and down log retention standards have been developed and are listed below (see Snags/Down Logs).

Bald Eagle, Golden Eagle and Osprey Nests There are no known nests within the Bailey Butte Project area for these species. If active eagle or osprey nests are discovered during implementation, efforts would be made to avoid further

31


disturbance during the nesting season. Site-specific measures would be determined by a wildlife biologist if a nest is discovered during implementation.

Other Raptors • No salvage activities would occur within 330 feet of known raptor nest sites. If active raptor

nests are discovered during project implementation, efforts would be made to avoid further disturbance during the nesting season and the tree would be designated with a wildlife tree marker and protected. Site-specific measures such as a buffer and seasonal restriction would be determined by a wildlife biologist.

Snags/Down Logs • Active cavity nest trees (or snags) located during project implementation would be designated

with a wildlife tree marker and protected. If the nest tree is determined to be a safety hazard coordination with the wildlife biologist would occur to determine if the hazard can be mitigated. Safety hazards would be identified by a qualified person, as defined by, and using the procedures provided in the interagency Field Guide for Danger Tree Identification and Response (Toupin et. al., 2005). If the hazard cannot be mitigated, felling of the tree would occur outside of the nesting season after the young have fledged. No felling would occur from April 1 to August 15 of any active cavity nest tree.

• Where available retain down logs that existed on the ground prior to the Bailey Butte Fire and subsequent hazard abatement. These include down logs in various states of decomposition that that were not consumed by the fire.

• Snag retention recommendations (see Table 8) apply to all general salvage units (except Unit 6, as noted in the table), but not to roadside hazard mitigation areas.

Deer and Elk • There are no proposed units in General Forest Winter Range; for this reason restrictions for

winter range are not required.

• Roadside hazard tree removal activities are not expected to affect elk use of calving areas due to immediate proximity to roads and the limited intensity and duration of the activity in any fixed location. The salvage units outside of the roadside hazard units include areas with high fire mortality and thus have reduced hiding cover. In addition, areas adjacent to the treatment areas and buffers along creeks will contribute to hiding cover for cows and calves to move into during the short duration of time that equipment is in each area. For these reasons seasonal restrictions for elk calving are not required.

• Activities within 0.25 mile of known elk wallows will be seasonally restricted from September 1 to October 15. This restriction would not apply to log haul on arterial or collector roads.

• To ensure that wildlife has secure areas during hunting seasons all roads that are closed to public access (roads that are displayed as not open on the Motor Vechicle Use Map) shall have signs posted daily for logging traffic only during harvest periods, and have all gates closed and locked at the end of each work day.

32


Range/Minerals • Mining claim markers, livestock fences, cattle guards, and other structural range

improvements would be protected and/or returned to their pre-activity condition if damaged during activities.

• Logging and road closure activities would be coordinated with permittees/mining claimants as needed. Efforts will be made to minimize conflicts between livestock use/sheep camps/mining activities and logging activities.

Recreation • Restrict commercial timber haul on the following holidays: Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor

Day, and also during the weekends of deer rifle hunting season. Restriction applies on the holiday date and/or contained within the weekend from Friday noon through Monday noon.

Dispersed Camping Sites • Forest Plan designated dispersed recreation sites located on existing landings may be reused

for log decks, piling slash, or storing road rock. Each site will be rehabilitated after use.

• Activities adjacent to dispersed recreation sites identified in the Forest Plan will be designed to retain visual screening within 50 feet.

• If a Forest Plan-identified dispersed recreation site is utilized as a landing, haul back or chipping of slash will be required of logging debris to ensure site returns back to its natural appearance.

Trails • Landings shall not be located on (but could be adjacent to) system trails.

• Yarding across trails is permitted on a case-by-case basis, with locations identified as needed to limit disturbance.

• Grapple piling is prohibited within 50 feet of trails; hand piling is allowed.

• After project-related activities are complete, disturbed sections of system trails will be reconstructed to the existing (pre-activity) condition within 2 months of activity or funds will be collected for reconstruction. This includes replacing any trail markers that are removed as a result of activities.

• Along system trails, if trees containing diamond or other trail markers are designated for removal, the trail markers will be moved to a nearby tree that is not designated for removal.

• Boundary tags, markers, and flagging along trails will be removed after completion of treatment activities.

• Trail segments adjacent to commercial harvest units will be posted as closed to the public during commercial tree felling operations for public safety; posting will occur at trailheads and other points of access.

• Activity-generated slash will be cleared from the trail for a minimum of four feet on each side.

33


Visual/Scenic Resources • Boundary tags, flagging, and markers would be removed from visual foreground areas in

treatment units after completion of activities.

• In Foreground areas or within 75 feet of the travel corridor, stumps would not exceed 8 inches in height.

• In Foreground retention areas, where practical, design and locate new skid trails and landings outside of visual foreground areas.

• Existing landings and skid trails within visual foreground areas may be reused, but not increased in size. When reusing existing landing within foreground areas, reduce potential landing size by using logging methods such as but not limited to; prohibiting whole tree yarding, hot loading or requiring slash to be hauled into the unit on haul-back.

• Landings in visual foreground areas will be reseeded or replanted.

Roads • Temporary road construction will be limited to sustained grades of 20% or less, allowing

short lengths of not more than 100 feet to not exceed 30%.

• New temporary roads will be located and designed to minimize the amount of cut and fill required.

• Temporary culvert installation will be allowed at non-complex stream crossings.

• Temporary roads will be decommissioned at the completion of commercial harvest activities.

• Roads across scablands would not be through-cut or trenched to prevent concentrating overland water flows. Drainage structures and leadoff ditches would be located to allow surface water to disperse on rocky areas, natural or constructed.

• All roads located on dormant landslide terrain would be reviewed by the geologist to check for stability. If unstable areas are identified, stabilization designs such as spot rock, geo-textile, realignment, or other engineered structures would be required.

• Haul roads which serve a multi-use purpose as winter recreation (snowmobile or Nordic) trails will be restricted for commercial use from December 1 to March 30. This restriction may be waived by the timber sale administrator if there is no snow suitable for snowmobiling or skiing.

• Dry season/frozen haul conditions would be required on native surface roads to reduce road damage.

• Table 9 summarizes the road rules that would apply to all action alternatives.

34


Table 9. Road rules for all action alternatives in the Bailey Butte Fire project.

Road Number

TERMINI Road Restrictions From To

27 US Highway 26 Grant Spring

Commercial use is prohibited on weekends from the end of rifle hunting season to April 1. A parking area shall be snow plowed at the jct. with Rd. 2700650, as designated on the ground, each time the road is plowed.

2210 Rd. 2210150 Forest Boundary Inadequate Base/Surfacing. Needs reconstruction.

2630 US Highway 26 2210

Inadequate turnouts and curve widening. Maximum safe capacity in any one (1) day is 50 loaded vehicles having three (3) or more axles. New permits or agreements to use this road as alternative haul routes will be subject to District Ranger approval with number of loads.

Fuels • Trees cut in salvage units would be hauled to landings with their branches and tops intact

(whole tree yarding). Branches and tops (slash) would be cut and piled, with one pile per landing and one landing per ten acres of harvest. The slash piles would be burned the first or second winter after harvest.

• When roadside hazard trees are cut and removed, slash would be left in place where each tree is cut, within 150-200 feet of the road, unless precluded by other Project Design Criteria.

Monitoring • Post-project surveys and monitoring of noxious weed infestations, including mineral sources,

would be conducted to identify new noxious weed infestations while they are small and more easily controlled.

• Occupancy and reproduction in mapped raptor territories would be monitored during and after project implementation.

Emergency Situation Determination As part of this project an Emergency Situation Determination (ESD) under 36 CFR 218 was requested for the Bailey Butte Fire Project. Deterioration agents, particularly checking, are expected to reduce the available volume of the salvage sale over time. By May 2015, the value of fire killed timber in the Bailey Butte project area is estimated to be reduced by 30%; the reduction in value would be even greater if the fire killed timber is not harvested until the late fall of 2015 or later.

An additional consideration is the health and safety of forest visitors using open roads within the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter, and Forest Service staff and forest industry workers working in the Bailey Butte Fire Project area. Traveling or working in forests where the majority of trees have been killed by fire is inherently dangerous. By delaying the sale date until the late summer of 2015 or later, there would be an increased risk to forest visitors, Forest Service staff, timber fallers and/or equipment operators in the project area. This is due to the ongoing deterioration of snags because of increased defect, weathering agents, over-wintering, and other environmental factors. Snags that would be felled in the spring and early summer of 2015 for timber harvest would have fewer defects and provide less relative risk to forest workers.

35


An ESD would expedite the time period in which this salvage sale could be offered to the public by allowing implementation of the project immediately after a decision on the project has been signed and published. This is expected to be in May of 2015.

On March 27, 2013, a final rule revising 36 CFR Part 218 was published in the Federal Register and became effective on that date. The new rule replaces the previous appeal rules defined in 36 CFR 215. The new rule provides the public an opportunity to comment and express concerns on projects during an objection period before decisions are made rather than after. The 36 CFR 218 objection period, however, does not apply to a project for which an ESD was requested and granted.

An ESD was requested from the USDA Forest Service Washington office; an ESD was granted by the Washington Office on April 28, 2015.

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study During the development of this project, the interdisciplinary team considered a variety of alternatives to the Proposed Action that were not developed for detailed analysis. The alternatives considered and the reasoning behind not developing them for detailed study is listed below:

• Salvage the entire 7,789- acre project area, not limiting salvage to roadside hazard mitigation and areas of high mortality with existing road access. While this alternative would accomplish the need for recovering economic value of the timber burned in the fire, it would not achieve the balance of sustainability between economic returns and ecological values that is an objective on the Ochoco National Forest. Such an alternative would require a considerable amount of temporary road construction, which is not consistent with management objectives for soils and sedimentation into the project area’s many streams. This alternative would also require forest plan amendments to allow timber harvest within the Research Natural Area and an Old Growth Management Area, which would not be consistent with Forest Plan objectives for those management areas. Therefore this alternative was eliminated from further consideration.

• Helicopter use to maximize salvage opportunities. The use of helicopters for salvage was considered by the Forest Service early in the planning process. This option would increase the accessible acreage for salvage with little or no road construction. Due to the extreme cost and safety risks involved with helicopter logging, local experience that suggests that helicopter sales are not economical on the Ochoco National Forest, and to be consistent with the management goals of the Ochoco Forest Plan, this alternative was eliminated from further consideration prior to the initial scoping process.

36


Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action and Alternatives This section summarizes the physical, biological, social and economic environments of the affected project area and the potential changes to those environments due to implementation of the alternatives. It also presents the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of alternatives presented in the chart above. The information presented in this chapter summarizes and cites the specialist’s reports that are found in the project analysis file (40 CFR 1502.21). Where noted, the specialist’s reports are incorporated by reference and are available at the Ochoco National Forest Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

Cumulative Effects of Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions The project IDT identified past, present, and reasonably foreseeable action that might have cumulative effects with the proposed action early in the analysis process. These actions are listed in Table 10. Each resource area considered different mixes of these actions, depending on the cumulative effects boundary for the resource area and the resources affected. Only those past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions are considered, and only if those action are expected to have environmental effects that accumulate with the other project effects.

Table 10 provides a listing of past, present, and foreseeable actions that have the potential to overlap the project area. Because a project appears in this table it does not necessarily mean it has an additive effect because it may not be applicable for all resources. If there is a past, present, or foreseeable effect, it is disclosed in the individual resource area in the environmental consequences section of this environmental assessment. Table 10. Projects and activities whose effects may overlap with the effects of the proposed Bailey Butte Fire project activities in space and time.

Project/ Activity Description Effects in the Bailey Butte Fire project

area Status

Nature (1984-2001)

Stand clear cut, PCT, reforestation

Approx. 528 acres of timber harvest and reforestation within and adjacent to burned area

Completed

Beaver Vegetation management (1989-1998)

The decision authorized a variety of activities, including clearcutting, pre-commercial thinning, reforestation

Approximately 592 acres were part of the timber harvest and reforestation activities within the Bailey Butte Project area.

Completed

Snowshoe (1989-2004)

Stand clearcut, overstory removal, salvage, PCT and reforestation and fuels trt

Approx.1100 acres were harvest for timber or associated activities, including fuels treatments and reforestation

Completed

Underdog (1993-1998)

Stand clearcut and reforestation

Approx 550 acres were harvested for timber and reforested Completed

Bandit II (2003-2004)

Pre-commercial thinning took place within the Bailey Butte Fire project area from 2003-2004 to reduce ladder fuels, remove competition for resources

221.17 total acres were pre-commercial thinned and resulted in a reduction in fuel loading, a more open understory.

Completed

37


Project/ Activity Description Effects in the Bailey Butte Fire project

area Status

Spears Vegetation Mgt. (2007-2012)

Commercial and Pre-commercial thinning, fuels treatment

Approx. 611 acres of treatment association with Veg management Completed

Deschutes and Ochoco Invasive Plants Treatment EIS (2012)

Decision authorized treatment of invasive plants using chemical, manual and cultural method, as well as “early detection/rapid response” (EDRR) treatments of new weed populations.

Weed treatment has been ongoing and will continue in the project area; treatments appear to be successful in limiting populations. If new populations are discovered in the project area, EDRR may be successful in limiting or eradicating them.

Implementation

Deschutes and Ochoco Travel Management EIS (2011)

Decision permits motorized travel only on designated routes.

Decision precludes off-highway vehicles from travelling cross-country in the project area. Effects from such travel are still evident in the project area, and some illegal off-road use is still occurring.

Implementation

Ongoing livestock grazing

The decisions reauthorized cattle grazing on allotments, which have acreage within the project area.

Cattle and sheep grazing occur within the Project area under several AMP’s. 1-3 years of rest are proposed in pastures that suffered moderate to severe veg mortality from fire

Implementation

Bailey Butte Wildfire suppression (2014)

Wildfire suppression activities include dozerlines, retardant drops, drafting sites, staging areas, safety zones,drop points, increased vehicular traffic

886 acres of moderate to severely burned acres, 15 miles of dozer and hand line, Rehab activities from fire suppression and BAER include dozer line rehab, seeding, road and culvert repair, hazard tree felling for safety

Implementation

BAER activities (2014-15)

Culvert cleaning and removal, catch basin reconditioning, waterbar construction and re-construction drain dip installations

BAER funded activities will occur within the fire perimeter focusing on emergency measures to reduce flooding, erosion, and provide for human safety such as hazard tree felling etc.

Implementation

Ochoco Summit Trail System project

Action alternatives propose designation of varying miles of trail for Class I, II, III and IV off-highway vehicles.

Implementation of this project could reduce recreation use of illegal off-road motorized travel within the project area.

Planning; decision anticipated in Fall 2015

Bear Creek Cluster AMPs (2015)

Planning document to reauthorize cattle grazing within the Bailey Butte Project Area

Cattle distribution is expected to improve; riparian condition is expected to improve in localized areas; standards and guidelines for condition of upland and riparian range are expected to be met.

Planning; decision anticipated in Winter 2015

38


Economics This section discusses economic considerations associated with the Bailey Butte Fire Project, and was written directly to this EA. There is no stand-alone socio-economic report.

Affected Environment This discussion focuses on the economy of Central Oregon counties in the immediate vicinity of the project area: Deschutes, Crook, Jefferson and Wheeler Counties. This is referred to as the Zone of Influence. Socioeconomic data presented in Table 11 and Table 12 were obtained from reports generated by the Economic Profile System – Human Dimensions Toolkit in March, 20151. Table 11 provides population data for the four counties considered in this discussion.

Table 11. Population data in the Zone of Influence counties for the Bailey Butte Fire Project.

County Population Change

2000-2013 2000 2013 Crook 19,182 20,894 1,712 Deschutes 116,566 165,954 49,388 Jefferson 19,113 21,145 2,032 Wheeler 1,546 1,381 -165

Future population projections are expected to mimic that of the past decade. Deschutes, Crook, and Jefferson Counties are expected to continue with growth, whereas the more rural Wheeler County is projected to grow quite slowly, if at all.

Table 12 summarizes the changes in the numbers of jobs (full and part-time) in the Zone of Influence, according to the Human Dimensions Toolkit reports.

Table 12. Changes in civilian labor force in Central Oregon.

County Civilian Labor Force Change 2000 2013 Crook 9,383 9,566 209 Deschutes 74,674 97,706 23,032 Jefferson 8,603 8,359 -244 Wheeler 730 1,126 396

The following information comes from a report generated by the “Economic Profile System-Human Dimensions Toolkit” in December, 2013. In Crook County, the three largest sectors were education, health care and social assistance (1,494), manufacturing (1,400), and retail trade (1,355). In Deschutes County the three largest sectors were education, health care, and social assistance (13,364), retail trade (9,219) and construction (8,539). In Jefferson County the three largest sectors were education, health care and social assistance (1,629), manufacturing (1,552), and retail trade (989). In Wheeler County the three largest sectors were arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and food (163), agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting and mining (110), and education, health care and social assistance (107). Overall, the number of jobs in most sectors has declined in recent years; in Deschutes County, however, jobs increased in all sectors.

According to the State of Oregon Employment Department’s website2, in January, 2015, the unemployment rate in Oregon as a whole was 6.3 percent. Unemployment rates in the individual counties were reported as:

• Crook, 10.1 percent;

1 www.headwaterseconomics.org/tools/eps-hdt. 2 www.qualityinfo.org/

39


• Deschutes, 7.1 percent; • Jefferson, 8.7 percent; • Wheeler, 6.9 percent.

Estimated Timber Volume Estimating value and volume loss of salvaged material is highly variable and dependent on tree species, tree diameter, season of fire, local insects and agents of decay, and time since tree death. Value loss occurs when lumber is reduced to a lesser grade or product due to decay such as blue stain. Volume loss occurs when the wood deteriorates to a point where it is no longer merchantable due to insects, decay, or checking. All volume loss translates directly to value loss, as product recovery is decreased (Lowell et al. 2010). Value of the proposed timber sale was estimated based on estimated timber volumes and current stumpage rates modified with post-fire value and volume reductions. Timber volume estimates were based on field visits by a presale forester.

The following values were estimated assuming that the timber sale can be awarded by June, 2015, and proposed harvest can be completed in the late summer or early fall of 2015. Timber value is estimated to be reduced from green timber values by 30%3. Revenue was estimated based on stumpage prices by species, size class, and volume provided by the Forest Appraiser for the Ochoco National Forest. Table 13 displays estimated volumes and estimated appraisal value of the alternatives. Table 13. Estimated timber volumes and appraisal values of the Bailey Butte Fire Project by alternative.

Alternative Estimated Volume (mmbf)

Estimated Appraisal Value

Alternative A 0 $0 Alternative B 4.0 $86,300 Alternative C 3.8 $81,985

Environmental Effects

Alternative A There would not be any activities implemented; therefore, no jobs would be created. As a result there would be no direct benefits to the local or regional economies. The No Action alternative would have negative effects to local and regional economies because forest product jobs would not be maintained. The ability to substitute this material from another source is questionable given the current availability of timber, especially from Federal lands.

An additional economic consideration is the cost of restoration activities, in particular the federally-mandated requirement to replant some of the more severely burned areas on National Forest System lands within the fire perimeter. The Forest would collect K-V funds from a successful salvage sale, and these would contribute toward essential reforestation and other projects. Currently, reforestation is planned to be accomplished in 2017. The No Action alternative would preclude collection of K-V funds, which could delay reforestation until funding is received from other sources. The proposed streamside stabilization and riparian vegetation planting would be funded by restoration dollars that the Forest would compete for against other regional priorities. If the No Action alternative is implemented, the Forest would likely have to ask for funding to accomplish the needed reforestation,

3 In the project scoping letter, the Ochoco National Forest indicated that timber value could be reduced by up to 60% by the late spring or early summer of 2015. Following additional field review and discussions with an appraisal and contract specialist familiar with Central Oregon timber salvage sales, the project ID team felt that estimating a 30% loss in value by the summer of 2015 would be more appropriate.

40


which is a higher priority than the other restoration activities that are proposed. This means the restoration activities would be of lower priority and may not get funded, resulting in additional resource damage to areas that were severely burned.

Alternatives B and C Timber harvest (lumber and wood products) would affect employment and income in three ways: (1) direct effects attributable to employment associated with the harvesting, transportation, and manufacturing; (2) indirect effects attributable to industries that supply materials, equipment, and services to these activities; and (3) induced effects attributable to personal spending by the owners, employees, families, and related industries.

Alternatives B and C propose commercial harvest activities and would contribute to the local, regional, and State economies. It is anticipated that the harvest activities would be implemented and completed in 2015; therefore, any related jobs would be of short duration. Given the major restructuring of the wood product industries over the past 10 to 15 years, it is likely that these would not be new jobs but jobs needed to maintain current levels of employment in the forest products industry. As noted under Alternative A, Crook County no longer has any primary manufacturing capacity. Over half of the direct jobs supported by the harvesting, transporting, and processing of timber are associated with the primary manufacturing. Although many of the logging activities may be associated with Crook County, the most likely location for processing is in either Grant or Deschutes County.

What was not estimated for this EA is the amount of restoration-related jobs that would be created by each action alternative. However, the Ochoco National Forest routinely accomplishes restoration work using service contracts. Because Alternatives B and C include additional restoration work associated with creeks within the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter, it is assumed that implementation of either alternative would result in the creation of several additional jobs for the duration of the restoration work.

Within the social context presented above, the action alternatives have the potential to bring in workers from the outside to perform logging and related activities. While the outside workforce is more likely to be racially diverse than the local resident population, the residents have worked effectively with and supported anticipated fluctuations in the workforce expected with the implementation of any of the action alternatives.

Alternative B would provide more wood products, and therefore more net income to the government, than Alternative C (see Table 13). As previously stated, the values displayed in Table 13 were estimated with the assumption that the timber sale auction would take place in June of 2015, and that harvest would be completed in the late summer and early fall of the same year. If the salvage sale auction is delayed into the fall of 2015, implementation of the harvest activities would likely not take place until the following spring or summer; in this case, the chance of receiving a no-bid sale are high due to the loss of value associated with deterioration of the fire-killed timber. If the Ochoco National Forest is unable to sell the fire-killed timber, social and economic effects would be similar to those discussed under Alternative A.

Cumulative Effects Overall, the economic influence from implementation of any of the alternatives is likely to be small within the economic context of the zone as a whole. Trends in employment indicate increased employment, primarily in construction, services, and trade. This would help ameliorate any adverse economic effects under Alternative A. Alternatives B and C, which provide commercial wood products in addition to economic activities associated with the other management activities, along with these same overall economic trends, would help strengthen local, particularly Crook’s, and

41


regional economies. In the context of larger economies, regional or State-wide scales, the amount lost under Alternative A, or the amount provided in Alternatives B or C, would not be measurable.

Forest Vegetation The following is a summary of the Forest Vegetation and Silvicultural Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

Introduction The Bailey Butte Fire Project area spans 7,789 acres of National Forest System lands at mid-elevations, dominated by Douglas-fir and dry grand fir plant associations. Existing stand conditions are a result of past treatments (mostly in the 1990s) and the Bailey Butte fire. The Bailey Butte fire burned at intensities that varied from a low-intensity underburn to high-intensity stand replacement. This section provides an overview of the forest vegetation component of the Bailey Butte Fire Project, including anticipated effects of considered alternatives on existing and future condition of forest vegetation.

The scope and scale of the effects analysis for these resource issues is limited to the proposed units during the time period of the project for direct and indirect effects, and the Bailey Butte fire, over the next 100 years for the cumulative effects analysis.

Analysis Methods In the immediate aftermath of a fire, Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) teams are provided with a Burned Area Reflectance Classification (BARC) map, a satellite-derived map of post-fire vegetation condition. BARC maps are made by comparing satellite near and mid infrared reflectance values before and after fire to determine where reflectance has changed the most, indicating higher vegetation mortality. After reconnaissance to ground truth the BARC mapping, potential salvage units were identified. These units were limited to areas with stand replacement mortality. Sampling was done to determine if the volume per acre and average piece size was adequate to assure a viable harvest entry.

Final proposed unit acres meet the following criteria:

• Should have more than 3,000 board feet per acre of merchantable saw timber. • Would be in stands that are mostly below 35% slope. • Should not require new road construction.

Early seral habitat analysis was conducted using the BARC data. The scope of the analysis included lands within the Bailey Butte fire that are under Forest Service ownership. PAG (Plant Association Group) data do not exist for the private lands within the fire perimeter. All lands that experienced stand replacement fire were moved into the early seral, early structural class classification.

Forest Vegetation and Early Seral Habitat

Existing Condition The Bailey Butte fire burned about 10,272 acres. Of that total, 7,789 acres are on National Forest land and the remaining 2,943 are on private land. The elevation ranges from about 3,900 feet to 5,400 feet above sea level.

Plant associations are a method of land classification based on the probable, or projected, plant community that will occupy a site given enough time and an absence of disturbance influences. The

42


plant associations for the entire Ochoco National Forest have been mapped using the classifications described in “Plant Associations of the Blue and Ochoco Mountains” (Johnson and Clausntizer 1992). The mapping was based on 1:12,000 aerial photography and intensive fieldwork. The Ochoco National Forest has defined eight plant association groups (PAGs) for upland forest and woodland sites. These groups contain plant associations of similar biophysical environments, productivity, and disturbance regimes. Given both the elevation gradient within the fire and topographical diversity within the burned area, five different plant association groups are represented. Generally PAGs provide a large-scale, coarse picture of vegetation patterns across the forest.

Forest Types

About 5,847 acres of the fire (within the project boundary) burned within the mixed conifer forest (both moist and dry mixed conifer PAGs) and approximately 1,200 acres burned within the Douglas-fir PAG, the remainder of the fire area included moist ponderosa pine, juniper woodland plant associations and non-forest.

Prior to the Bailey Butte fire, much of the mixed conifer forest types were typified by dense multi-storied stands with high fuel loads. The overstory was a mix of mostly large ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir with a midstory and understory of white fir. Insects and disease played a role in the development of these stands; with associated mortality creating sometimes heavy fuel loads. Moderate and high intensity fire is the primary stand replacement disturbance agent in these stands types. Approximately 2,080 acres, or 86%, of the total “stand-replacement” area within Bailey Butte fell into these two plant associations. In addition, in the 1990’s approximately 750 acres of mixed conifer stand types, within the fire area, were harvested and regenerated. About one third of these acres were severely burned in the Bailey Butte fire, leaving 500 acres in an “early seral” condition and a pole size structure.

The Douglas-fir and moist ponderosa pine stands are located at the lower elevations within the fire area. They represent about 20% of the total acres within the fire perimeter. Many of these stands had been treated with thinning and under burning in the last 20 years, leaving them in a healthier condition with lighter overall fuel loadings. Of the total acres of stand replacement fire within Bailey Butte, the stands in these two PAGs made up only 10%. Most of these stands fall into the “underburn” category.

Vegetation Mortality

Acres of vegetation mortality that occurred in the Bailey Butte Fire are summarized in Table 14.

Underburned: These areas generally received what would be compared to a low to severe underburn. Mortality in the overstory trees was generally less than 25%. Much of the understory vegetation was killed and 25 to 75% of the down woody debris is also gone. This level of burning may result in the loss of thin-barked species, such as white fir, young ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir. Older, thick-barked individual ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir are likely to survive the fire, if the fire moved through the area rapidly. Where the duff layer was thick and the speed at which the fire moved through the stands was slow, even older, larger trees may die due to cambial heating. It is expected that white fir not killed outright by the fire, but weakened, may continue to die from a variety of factors (fire effects, insects and disease) over the course of the next five years or more.

Mixed mortality: These areas experienced a mix of mortality, with between 25 and 75% of the overstory trees expected to die. The trees with the greatest chance of survival are the large ponderosa pine and some large Douglas-fir. Where duff consumption was complete and/or moderate to heavy fuel loadings existed prior to the fire, all understory and mid-story trees have been killed, as well as a portion of the overstory component. Pockets of trees did not experience underburning. Within these

43


pockets, if the heat moving through the stand was not enough to scorch the crowns, these trees may survive.

Stand Replacement: These areas received very high intensity fire that resulted in, for all practical purposes, a stand replacement event. In most areas, the over-story mortality is 100% but can be as low as 75%, especially on the edges of these areas. Most of these stands experienced complete consumption of needles and duff. Table 14. Vegetation mortality acres in the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Vegetation mortality Acres Percentage Underburned 1,014 13% Mixed mortality 4,349 56% Stand replacing 2,426 31%

Total 7,789 100%

Assessment of Tree Survival

Determining the level of damage sustained by trees post-fire is difficult due to the numerous factors that influence the survival of the tree, including:

• Tree species, age, and size • Season of fire • Fire intensity • Pre-fire tree vigor and growth rate • Site quality • Arrangement and distribution of fuel • Post-fire moisture conditions • Disease occurrence • Bark beetle pressure

In addition to the many variables listed above, overall mortality may be underestimated as there may be unseen damage occurring in the root zone or beneath the bark, making an accurate assessment very difficult. Trees of similar size and age may vary considerably in fire damage based on species (Ryan and Reinhardt 1988). Rather than using one uniform factor to determine tree mortality, each species will be evaluated on different factors and thresholds depending on current research and available science. Many studies find that most post-fire mortality occurs within the first couple of years after a fire, but may occur more than 5 years after the fire (Fowler et al. 2004, Filip et al. 2006). Trees that die several years after the fire may appear initially to have green crowns. However, as moisture stress occurs photosynthate may be able to keep the tree alive temporarily but these reserves will eventually run out and the tree will die (Filip et al. 2006). Mortality is imminent when there is a carbohydrate budget deficit, or when respiration exceeds photosynthesis. Mortality can also be accelerated by secondary agents, such as bark beetles and other pathogens, after trees have been weakened by fire.

Due to delayed mortality, assessment of the level of fire damage and prediction of imminent mortality in trees can be challenging. Numerous case studies and publications are available to assist in the evaluation of fire damage and the likelihood of tree survival. Scott and others (2002) developed guidelines relevant for the region in “Factors Affecting Survival of Fire Injured Trees: A Rating System for Determining Relative Probability of Survival of Conifers in the Blue and Wallowa Mountains.” These guidelines were developed after an extensive literature review and field observations taken from numerous wildfires. Each tree species has different guidelines based on their physiological differences in withstanding fire. Our marking guidelines would follow Scott et al. (2002) guidelines for all species except ponderosa pine, where, within units, any tree with live foliage

44


would be left. This modification would cause an additional pulse of ponderosa pine snags, as a portion of the trees with green needles will inevitably experience delayed mortality.

Within the roadside salvage units, the Danger Tree Identification Guide (Toupin et al. 2008) will be used to select trees with high imminent failure potential. For trees not falling into the “imminent failure potential” category but may be considered to fail within the next 3 to 5 years, the Scott’s guide will be used to evaluate for removal.

Early Seral Habitat

Early seral forest habitat is defined as “those ecosystems that occupy potentially forested sites in time and space between a stand-replacement disturbance and re-establishment of a closed forest canopy” (Swanson et al. 2011). These habitats can persist from decades to centuries depending on the successful establishment of a new cohort of trees. It is well recognized that these early seral ecosystems provide a multitude of beneficial functions and processes, such as complex food webs, nutrient cycling, and high structural complexity (Noss et al. 2006, Swanson et al. 2011).

Generally, in areas without ample seed source, with shrub competition, and without artificial reforestation, establishment of a closed canopy stand may take more than 100 years (Sessions et al. 2004, Swanson et al. 2011). With planting, this successional pathway would occur on a shorter time scale, about 25 to 50 years. Where planting occurs, early seral forests would still persist on the landscape for decades. Furthermore, many stand replacement areas within the fire will not be artificially regenerated, such as the Research Natural Area as well as other, non-suitable or low productivity lands. These areas will provide additional acres of early seral habitat on the landscape for longer temporal scales.

Desirable components of early seral habitats include species richness, biological legacies (such as snags and downed woody debris), and structural complexity. Persistence of biological legacies on the landscape is very important for ecosystem recovery and spatial heterogeneity (Noss et al. 2006, Swanson et al. 2011, Lindenmayer et al. 2004). Where socioeconomic considerations lead to post-fire logging, retention of snags, logs, and live trees is recommended to maintain structural complexity (Franklin et al. 2003, Swanson et al. 2011). Within the Bailey Butte Fire Project area, all live trees, except those roadside trees expected to fail within 3 to 5 years, would be retained, as well as snags as described in Table 8. All downed woody debris existing before the fire would be retained. Additionally, most recent downed wood is likely to be retained as well. Additional details on snag and downed woody debris retention can be found in the wildlife section of this report. Reforestation treatments within the Bailey Butte fire area would not include any herbicide treatments or other extensive site preparation methods to remove shrubs. The extent of vegetation removal would be confined to 2 square feet of scalping, or removal of existing competing vegetation, where a seedling is to be planted. Specific reforestation practices can be found in the reforestation issue section.

Vegetation management options are based on current vegetation conditions with the historic landscape patterns in mind. Historic vegetation is defined as what we believe existed prior to the early 1900s. Determination of HRV was made by using data from the early to mid-1900s as well as current vegetation information, knowledge of succession and an understanding of past disturbance regimes.

At the fire scale, the amount of early seral successional forest, occupied by grass, forbs, or shrubs is either within the historic range of variability (HRV) or above it for all plant association groups except moist pine and juniper woodland. Using the Burned Area Classification (BARC) data, the total amount of early seral condition within the fire area (Forest System lands only) was estimated to be 2,427 acres, or 31% of the burned area (see Table 15). There is an additional amount of grass/forb/shrub structure outside of the mapped stand replacement fire severity areas which would add to the total amount of E1 and most likely bring all PAGs to within or above HRV (see Table 16).

45


Table 15. Early seral acres created by the Bailey Butte fire or past regeneration cutting. Grass/forb/shrub

(acres) Sapling stage (acres) Total Acres

Forest Service 2,427 510 2,937 Private 516 0 516

Total 2,943 510 3,453

Table 16. Historic Range of Variability and Existing Condition for grass/forb/shrubs in the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

PAG Total Acres

HRV Low Acres

HRV High Acres

Existing Acres

MGF 2188 109 263 973 DGF 3659 73 256 1107 DF 1149 57 230 235 MP 355 18 89 16 JW 78 39 55 23 NF 361 0 0 73 Totals 7790 2427


Alternative A (no action)

Under Alternative A, forest vegetation would remain as described in the Existing Condition section above. Mechanical ground disturbance would not occur. Without salvage, the NFMA requirement for reforestation within 5 years, post-disturbance, does not apply. However, Regional Office direction is, that reforestation should occur as quickly as possible after stand replacing fire. The longer reforestation is delayed after the fire, the less chance the trees, either planted or seeded naturally, have of out-competing the shrub component. In places, post fire, the shrub component has maintained dominance for decades. Early seral habitat could persist for a century or more in some places of stand replacement fire, depending on the success of natural and artificial regeneration.

Alternatives B and C

Salvage of dead and dying trees, and subsequent reforestation, would have no impacts on existing forest vegetation and the development of early seral habitat under both Alternatives B and C. Mechanical ground disturbance would be limited to 20% or less, and would create no impacts on retained trees. Any live trees and trees with a likelihood of surviving would not be harvested. The use of guidelines for the assessment of tree survival based on the best available science would result in the removal of dead or dying trees only. Effects to any live trees remaining in the project area would be negligible for both alternatives.

There is concern that early seral habitat would be diminished or reduced beyond acceptable levels due to artificial reforestation (planting). Though artificial reforestation may speed up the successional process, these areas would not be considered a loss to early seral habitat. It may take from several decades to a century for these stands to develop into closed canopy forest depending on the success of seedling establishment. The current amount of early seral habitat across the Bailey Butte fire area is either within or above HRV. In both the moist grand fir and the dry grand fir PAGs, the amount in excess of HRV is notable. Landscapes are dynamic and stand disturbance will continue over time, across the fire area. Approximately 40% of the stand replacement acres are planned for planting, with the remaining areas being left to natural seeding. The acres of planting are expected to become established more rapidly than the naturally seeded acres, with some of the burned areas never achieving full stocking or a closed crown status. In addition, it would be expected, given fire return

46


intervals, that more disturbance will occur within the Bailey Butte fire area before crown closure is achieved, thus providing additional early seral habitat.

Cumulative Effects

The spatial and temporal bounds of this cumulative effects analysis are within the boundaries of the Bailey Butte fire area. The temporal period of 100 years for analysis is based on the literature suggesting that early seral habitat may persist for upwards of 100 years without artificial regeneration (Sessions et al. 2004, Swanson et al. 2011). Past vegetation management projects in the project area were accounted for in the description of current condition. Table 10 was reviewed for current and foreseeable vegetation management projects that may overlap the effects of the Bailey Butte Fire project in space and time; no such projects were identified.

Reforestation Stand replacement fire occurred on about 2,427 acres of Forest Service ground within the Bailey Butte fire area. The size of openings created varies from less than an acre to greater than 75 acres. It is expected that openings of 10 acres or less, depending on configuration, could seed in naturally to ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and/or western larch. It is also expected that grass and shrubs will become established and will dominate portions of the fire where stand replacement conditions occurred for up to 100 years, without artificial regeneration.

Natural and Artificial Regeneration

The most critical factor in establishment of natural seedlings in stand replacement areas is available seed source. In stand replacement areas, regeneration could be established from seed from adjacent stands, seed from surviving large trees, from existing cone/seed crop at the time of fire, or dissemination by other means such as wind. Studies on post-fire conifer regeneration are variable, likely due to the wide range of fire and site conditions (Donato et al. 2009).

Availability of seed, of all conifer species, is expected to be very low in stand replacement areas as most existing seeds were consumed by the fire and there is limited seed source within stands for future seed crops. Experience from previous fires on the district show that in blocks where all of the overstory was consumed, regeneration is very slow to occur, except as expected, along edges or around surviving overstory trees. In areas of low to mixed severity fire, regeneration occurs in waves and is at times very thick.

Ponderosa pine seed is not easily disseminated over a large area due to its large size and heavy weight. Most ponderosa pine seed falls within about 100 feet of the source and does not remain viable long after the initial year of dispersal (Agee 1996). Due to the early establishment of competing grasses and shrubs, even if a seed is disseminated across stand replacement areas in years following the fire, tree seedlings will be at a competitive disadvantage. Without active reforestation, desirable conifers have a small window for establishment amid rapidly growing shrubs (Shatford et al. 2007, Sessions et al. 2004). While scientific studies on natural vs. artificial post-fire regeneration are limited due to the unplanned nature of wildfire, existing studies largely conclude that the establishment of conifers after wildfire is highly variable (Shatford et al. 2007, Collins et al. 2011). Local monitoring and regional studies (Collins et al. 2011) indicate that white fir seedlings usually establish in much greater densities that other conifers.

Rationale for Reforestation

Reforestation is required to achieve management goals of the Ochoco National Forest Plan (LRMP), the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), and Regional Office direction.

47


Reforestation within the Bailey Butte Fire would be designed to meet scenic, wildlife and ecosystem goals as well as NFMA requirements. Species composition would be a mix of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch. It is expected that additional natural regeneration of white fir would become established and further contribute to species diversity. Planting density would be around 200 – 300 trees per acre, though mortality is expected to decrease this stocking level. Mortality of planted seedlings depends on many factors, including site conditions, competition, predation, subsequent fire, planting quality, vitality of seedlings before planting and events that change microsites (such as snags falling). Survival of 80% of the planted seedlings would yield a stocking level between 160 and 240 trees per acre.

Artificial reforestation would not preclude the attainment of complex forest structure in later seral stages. Early and mid-seral stands may exhibit simple, even-aged structure, but through disturbance and natural mortality, structural complexity would eventually arise.

Transportation The following is a summary of the Transportation Specialist’s Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

Existing Condition The Bailey Butte Fire Project area is accessed on US Highway 26 approximately 30 miles east of Prineville. The burned area encompasses land on both sides of Highway 26. Highway 26 will be the primary route of commercial access to the project area, all of the individual collector roads that provide access into the burned areas connect directly to Highway 26. In total, within the Bailey Butte fire boundary, there are approximately 65 miles of roads under Forest Service jurisdiction.

The majority of roads within the project area have been in existence for more than 40 years, with some additions having been constructed in the recent past. With few exceptions, the roads in this project area have been constructed for access to timber harvest areas.

The roads within the project area generally have a pattern of use common to roads in the Ochoco National Forest. Most roads see moderate public use and administrative traffic through the course of the spring with recreational traffic increasing through the summer. Peak use occurs in the late summer and fall with the commencement of deer and elk hunting seasons. Timber sale activity can contribute substantially to daily traffic values, but the pattern of such activity is usually isolated to one particular area at any given time.

Grazing allotments are located within the project area that also create a small usage component provided by permittee vehicles and isolated short term higher usage during spring and fall for transport of cattle in and out of the forest.

The anticipated future use patterns will most likely reflect current trends, with the majority of summer usage being comprised of recreational traffic with occasional isolated increases resulting from timber sale and cattle ranching activity, and large increases in late summer/fall traffic due to hunting activity.

The bulk of the roads within the project area do not generally serve any particular destinations. Rather, they provide access to areas of interest for various users. For land managers, these roads serve as access to areas where vegetative management activities are ongoing or planned. For hunters, they provide access to popular hunting areas.

Maintenance Levels and Road Surface Types Maintenance Levels define the degree of maintenance required for a specific road and the level of service which that road provides, consistent with road management objectives and maintenance

48


criteria (FSH 7709.58, Transportation System Maintenance Handbook). Table 17 discloses the miles of road by maintenance level in the Bailey Butte Fire project area; Table 18 displays miles of road by surface type. The five maintenance levels are defined as:

Maintenance Level 1: Assigned to intermittent service roads during the time they are closed to vehicular traffic. The closure period must exceed 1 year. Basic custodial maintenance is performed to keep damage to adjacent resource to an acceptable level and to perpetuate the road to facilitate future management activities. Emphasis is normally given to maintaining drainage facilities and runoff patterns. Planned road deterioration may occur at this level. Appropriate traffic management strategies are “prohibit” and “eliminate.” Roads receiving level 1 maintenance may be of any type, class or construction standard, and may be managed at any other maintenance level during the time they are open for traffic. However, while being maintained at level 1, they are physically closed to vehicular traffic, but may be open and suitable for non-motorized uses.

Maintenance Level 2: Assigned to roads open for use by high clearance vehicles. Passenger car traffic is not a consideration. Traffic is normally minor, usually consisting of one or a combination of administrative, permitted, dispersed recreation, or other specialized uses. Log haul may occur at this level. Appropriate traffic management strategies are either (1) discourage or prohibit passenger cars or (2) accept or discourage high clearance vehicles.

Maintenance Level 3: Assigned to roads open and maintained for travel by a prudent driver in a standard passenger car. User comfort and convenience are not considered priorities. Roads in this maintenance level are typically low speed, single lane with turnouts and spot surfacing. Some roads may be fully surfaced with either native or processed material. Appropriate traffic management strategies are either “encourage” or “accept” passenger cars. “Discourage” or “prohibit” strategies may be employed for certain classes of vehicles or users; unless otherwise specifically authorized, non-street-legal OHV use is prohibited.

Maintenance Level 4: Assigned to roads that provide a moderate degree of user comfort and convenience at moderate travel speeds. Most roads are double lane and aggregate surfaced. However, some roads may be single lane. Some roads may be paved and/or dust abated. The most appropriate traffic management strategy is “encourage” passenger cars. However, the “prohibit” strategy may apply to specific classes of vehicles or users at certain times; unless otherwise specifically authorized, non-street-legal OHV use is prohibited.

Maintenance Level 5: Assigned to roads that provide a high degree of user comfort and convenience. Normally, roads are double-lane, paved facilities. Some may be aggregate surfaced and dust abated. The appropriate traffic management strategy is “encourage,” except that, unless otherwise specifically authorized, non-street-legal OHV use is prohibited.

Table 17. Miles of road by maintenance level in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area.

Operational Maintenance Level Miles

M/L 1 (Closed) 31

M/L 2 (High Clearance Vehicles Allowed) 16

M/L 3 (Passenger Car Allowed; Low Speed) 12

M/L 4 (Passenger Car Accepted; Moderate Speed) 1

M/L 5 (Passenger Car Encouraged; High Speed) 5

49


Table 18. Miles of road by surface type in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area.

Road Management Objectives The existing management objectives for roads within the project area generally call for roads to be managed primarily for administrative and land management purposes. Most roads are only secondarily managed to facilitate public usage, and much of the public usage of local roads occurs during hunting season. Arterial and collector routes (the two and four digit roads) are generally managed to allow for a mix of commercial and public traffic.

With the exception of those roads providing access to dispersed campsites or recreational or permanent residences, the seven-digit roads are generally managed, when open, to be primarily used by high clearance vehicles. While passenger car operation is possible on some of these routes, no special consideration or effort is devoted to allowing their use. During periods of log hauling, these seven-digit roads are intended to be single-user facilities, given that their narrow travel ways and lack of frequent turnouts preclude opportunities to safely provide for mixed commercial and public traffic.

Recent Road Restoration Table 19 displays road work that is scheduled for completion as part of the Waterman Complex Burned Area Emergency Response.

Table 19. Road work scheduled as part of the Burned Area Emergency Response within the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter.

Road Work planned for completion of fall-2014 or summer 2015

2210 Clean 5 culverts, recondition 3 catch basins, excavate vented ford

2210-202 Culvert removal and install drain dip 2600 (US26)

ODOT is responsible for maintenance to this road. In 2014 after two major storms, multiple culverts, ditches and catch basins were cleaned.

2600-600 Clear vegetation from 19 culverts, clean 5 culverts, recondition 3 catch basins 2600-607 Clear vegetation from 2 culverts, clean 4 culverts, recondition 4 catch basins 2600-608 Clear vegetation from 1 culvert, clean 4 culverts, recondition 4 catch basins

2600-610 Remove undersized culvert, clear and remove vegetation from 5 culverts, excavate 8 water bars, clean 7 culverts, recondition 5 catch basins

2600-611 Remove 3 undersized culverts, clear and remove vegetation from 2 culverts, excavate 7 water bars, clean 5 culverts, recondition 5 catch basins

2600-622 Clear vegetation from 1 culvert, excavate 2 water bars, clean 4 culverts, recondition 2 catch basins

Surface Type Miles

Asphalt 5

Aggregate 14

Bituminous Surface Treatment 4

Improved Native Material 13

Native Material 29

50


Road Work planned for completion of fall-2014 or summer 2015

2600-623 Clear vegetation from 3 culverts, excavate 3 water bars, clean 5 culverts, recondition 5 catch basins

2600-624 Clear vegetation from 1 culvert, clean 2 culverts, recondition 2 catch basins

2600-630 Install gate, excavate vented ford, clear and remove vegetation from 12 culverts, excavate 11 water bars, clean 14 culverts, recondition 14 catch basins

2600-700 Clear vegetation from 14 culverts, excavate 3 water bars, clean 16 culverts, recondition 16 catch basins

2630 Clean 9 culverts, recondition 7 catch basins 2730-550 Install gate to effectively close the road, excavate 5 water bars 2730-560 Excavate 5 water bars 2730-600 Install gate to effectively close the road, excavate 6 water bars


Alternative A Under Alternative A, the existing road system would experience no changes in its current status and condition. Roads that are currently in custodial status (Maintenance Level 1) would remain closed and open roads would continue to provide access for recreational, commercial, and administrative functions in the same manner that they currently do. Open roads would receive no maintenance beyond that which is normally scheduled, which is generally devoted to the higher standard roads within the project area.

Effects Common to Action Alternatives As a function of use during harvest activities, road maintenance activities would be conducted on roads designated for use. As a direct effect, some roads that do not receive recurring maintenance, primarily low standard roads in the Maintenance Level (M/L) 2 category, would see some improvements in both safe drivability and in their ability to handle surface runoff and the resultant sediment. Native surface M/L 2 roads, as a result of use and infrequent blade maintenance, tend to develop shallow ruts in their wheel tracks, which can concentrate shallow flow and lead to increased sediment rates. Post-haul maintenance that would occur on these roads would restore flat road surfaces (without ruts) that would be capable of producing less sediment than their rutted counterparts; post-haul water-barring would also remove surface runoff from the erosive road surfaces.

The type of work that would be expected to be performed as maintenance in timber sale contracts includes:

• Brushing for improved sight distances • Removal of hazard trees • Blading and shaping of traveled way • Restoring existing surface drainage features, such as drain dips or outlet ditches • Cleaning culverts and ditches • Installing water bars after periods of haul

Dust abatement, primarily using water as the dust palliative, would be performed as necessary to maintain safe driving conditions. This would have a secondary effect of maintaining a relatively well-bonded road surface free of the segregated dry clay “flour” that can occur on native surface roads under heavy use conditions.

51


New road construction No new road construction is proposed as part of this project.

Reconstruction No road reconstruction is planned for this project.

Alternative B Commercial haul activities and other vegetative treatments proposed in Alternative B would result in the use of approximately 27 miles of system roads under Forest Service jurisdiction (Table 20). During the course of treatment activities, 14 miles of roads currently closed and in custodial status as M/L 1 roads would be opened. This would result in some short-term increase in open-road densities; however, not all roads would be opened at the same time and all would be closed at the end of treatment activities. The majority of maintenance work would be performed on the 21 miles of M/L 1 and 2 roads used for commercial activities (Table 21). Table 20. Haul road miles (Forest Service jurisdiction) by Maintenance Level for Alternative B in the Bailey Butte Fire project.

Operational Maintenance Level Length 1 – Basic Custodial Care (Closed) 14 2 – High Clearance Vehicles 7 3 – Suitable For Passenger Cars 5 4 – Moderate Degree of User Comfort 0 5 – High Degree of User Comfort 1

Table 21. Road Construction Activity for Alternative B in the Bailey Butte Fire project. Activity Length

Reconstruction 0 New Specified Road 0 Temporary Road on Existing Disturbance 0.5 New Temporary Road 0.2

Temporary roads Temporary road construction is sometimes required to facilitate the economical harvest of trees from a particular harvest unit. Within the project area, implementation of Alternative B would result in the construction of about .7 miles (1 acre) of temporary roads to aid in completing harvest activities, and would result in the temporary commitment of acreage to use as road beds.

Temporary road construction will be limited to sustained grades of 20% or less, allowing short lengths of not more than 100 feet to not exceed 30%. Temporary culvert installation will be allowed at non-complex stream crossings. These temporary roads would be built to low construction standards, with constraints of grade, curve radius, compaction, surfacing, and width being tailored to the minimum capabilities of the intended user vehicles. By doing so, they would be constructed in a manner that would minimize disturbance and impacts to adjacent resources.

Temporary roads, by their nature, are not intended for mixed vehicle use, nor are they intended to remain as identifiable facilities after the administrative need for them has ended. Temporary roads would be removed after completion of logging operations. Removal of temporary roads would include: berming the entrance, removal of culverts and associated fill, out-sloping the road surface,

52


installation of water bars, removal of placed rock, re-vegetation of the road prism with native species, and scarification of compacted surfaces when necessary.

Alternative C Under this alternative, 24 miles of system roads would be used for commercial haul activities and other vegetative treatment proposals (Table 22). No temporary road construction is proposed. Treatment activities would result in the opening of 12 miles of M/L 1 roads, resulting in a short-term increase in open road density, but – as with Alternative B – not all roads would be opened at the same time and all would be closed at the end of treatment activities. Under this Alternative, approximately 18 miles of M/L 1 and M/L 2 roads would receive increased maintenance effort, in particular the native surface roads. Table 22. Haul road miles (Forest Service jurisdiction) by Maintenance Level for Alternative C in the Bailey Butte Fire project.

Operational Maintenance Level Length 1 – Basic Custodial Care (Closed) 12 2 – High Clearance Vehicles 6 3 – Suitable For Passenger Cars 5 4 – Moderate Degree of User Comfort 0 5 – High Degree of User Comfort 1

Cumulative Effects The relatively moderate topography within the project area has led to a tradition of employing ground-based yarding systems to remove logs to landings. Temporary roads have customarily been constructed to provide access to those landings that were within the interior of units or otherwise not immediately adjacent to existing portions of the transportation system. Older temporary roads that had not revegetated were added to the transportation system in the late 1970s in response to a directive that all existing wheeltracks be inventoried. With the advent of the requirement in 1976 National Forest Management Act that temporary roads be revegetated within 10 years, more attention has been paid to improving circumstances for revegetation on compacted temporary road surfaces, and within the last decade they have been aggressively treated by decompaction with tractor-mounted winged subsoiling tools.

Under Alternative B there would be a very small amount (about 1 acre) of temporary roads constructed within the project area as individual units are harvested; these would contribute a minor amount of effects that overlap with the effects of untreated previous temporary roads in space and time; however, as these temporary roads receive post haul de-compaction treatments, erosion potential would decline. The productive capability would increase over time subsequent to de-compacting as subsidence returned the soil profile to a more natural ratio of macroporosity and microporosity. Alternative C would not contribute cumulative effects from temporary roads because no temporary roads would be built.

Road maintenance proposed under both action alternatives would be similar to the road work that has been or will be completed with the Bailey Butte BAER efforts, and would contribute to the beneficial effects of those activities.

53


Geology and Minerals The following is a summary of the Geology and Minerals Resource Specialist’s Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

Introduction The long term sustainability of forest ecosystems depends on the land stability and proper hydrogeologic function. The timber mortality, combined with the ground disturbing management activities like fire salvage indirectly affect land stability, when impacted by periodic rain-on-snow events. This analysis focuses on the geologic resource and potential changes in the lands stability in the 5-10 years following the fire.

Analysis Methods • Field observations of existing slope stability within activity areas proposed for fire salvage

under this project were conducted during the fall field season of 2014.

• The temporal scope of the analysis is defined as short term effects being changes to slope stability that would generally occur within 5 years or more. The analysis also considers the effectiveness and probable success of implementing project design criteria, mitigation measures, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) that are designed to avoid, minimize or reduce potentially adverse impacts to slope instability.

• An activity area is defined as “the total area of ground impacted activity and its feasible unit for sampling and evaluating” (US Forest Service, 1991). For this analysis, activity area boundaries are considered to be the smallest identified area where the potential effects of different management practices would occur. Where appropriate and relevant, the effects discussion is expanded to the planning area to provide additional context and intensity.

• Quantitative analysis, literature reviews, and professional judgment were used to evaluate the issue measure by comparing existing conditions to the anticipated conditions that would result from implementing the proposed actions.

Existing Condition The project area is within the Blue Mountain ecological region, Level IV. The project area is split between the South Slope Ochoco and North Slope Ochoco (see Figure 1). The South Slope Ochoco (39%) is characterized by less effective moisture, less ash depth overall and dissected montane terrain. Annual precipitation ranges from 15 to 33 inches per year. Elevation ranges from 2,920 feet to 5,840 feet. The North Slope Ochoco (61%) is characterized by more effective moisture, deeper ash depth and dissected montane terrain. Elevations range from 4,100 feet to 5,641. In this area, the annual precipitation ranges from 15 to 23 inches.

54


Figure 1. Level IV Ecological regions for Bailey Butte Fire Project.

Lithology The Bailey Butte Fire is underlain by Cretaceous (60 Million year old) conglomerates, Tertiary Clarno Formation (54-37 Million year old) volcanic clastic rocks, andesite flows and tuffaceous rocks (Table 23 and Figure 2) (Walker and MacLeod, 1991). Locally, the Clarno beds are known to contain plant fossils and petrified wood. The Clarno Formation underlies 97.3% of the burned area. The Cretaceous conglomerates underlie 1.9% and the remaining lithologies (Quaternary Landslide and John Day Formation) take up the remaining 0.8%.

The Quaternary Landslide and debris flow deposits (Qls) is composed of unconsolidated unstratified mixtures of fragments of adjacent bedrock. The largest slides and debris flows occur where thick sections of basalt and andesite flows overlie clayey tuffaceous rocks.

The geologic units (Tsfj) of the John Day Formation (middle Oligocene to early Miocene -- 32-25 Ma) consist of bedded tuff, lapilli tuff and tuffaceous sedimentary rocks. Direct deposition and reworking of the tuffs by wind, streams and sheet wash formed the volcanoclastic rocks (Swanson, 1969 and Walker, Peterson and Greene, 1967). The John Day Formation age rocks underlie the southwest corner of the project area.

55


The Tertiary Clarno Formation (FM) is represented by two units: Tct and Tca. The predominantly tuffaceous facies of Clarno FM (Tct) is located near Wildwood campground on the NE corner of the project area and the NW corner under Heflin and Dodds creek drainages. The larger unit (Tca) underlies the majority of the project area. This unit is primarily clastic rocks and andesite flows of mostly andesitic lava flows, dome, breccia and small intrusive masses and lesser basaltic to rhyolitic rocks. The volcanic rocks date 54-37 million years (MA) in age. Locally, the clastic beds are known to contain Eocene age plant fossils and petrified wood. The plant fossils tend to be reeds, alder and metasequoia, mostly shattered leaf/twig detritus.

The oldest rocks (Ks) are Cretaceous (60 MA) sedimentary rocks, primarily marine greywacke, subgraywacke, conglomerate and shale. Marine fossils are known to occur in the shales. These rocks are present in lower O’Kelly Creek. Table 23. Lithology in the Bailey Butte Fire Project area. Lithology Acres Percent Qls 22 0.3 Tsfj 36 0.5 Tca 6681 85.8 Tct 902 11.5 Ks 148 1.9 Total Acres 7,789

Figure 2. Lithology of Bailey Butte Fire Project area.

Mineral Material There are 3 mineral material sources in the project area (Map 3). All three are in General Forest and are mapped Clarno FM. Heflin MS (Rd 2600-700) and Snowshoe MS (Rd 2600-601) are in the Middle Bear subwatershed. Heflin MS, a tuff, has a population of medusahead. Snowshoe MS (rhyolite) has a population of houndstongue and is in Harvest Unit 1. Snowshoe Point MS is in West Branch Bridge Creek subwatershed on Rd 2600-608 and has a population of houndstongue. None of these material sources will be used for road maintenance or temporary roads. The mineral material

56


source for road maintenance and reconstruction will be McGinnis MS, located in T 12 S, R 19 E, Sec. 35, on Road 2600-350, outside the project boundary.

Locatable Mining Currently no locatable mining activity is documented within the project boundary, based on a search of the LR 2000 on February 10, 2015.

Landform - Landslide Terrain (Active and Dormant) The development of the scenic cliffs and spires are due to natural erosion processes. The mass wasting process includes the formation of talus slopes, deep seated landslides, slope creep, rock topple, debris flows and earthflows.

Based on air photo interpretation, the watershed has a blend of dormant and active landslide terrain (2,621 acres) composed of scarps and debris lobes (Table 24). Two small active landslides (3 and 13 acres in size) are located on midslopes, within larger dormant deep-seated landslide terrain, on the Clarno Formation (FM) and Cretaceous sedimentary unit. One active landslide (13 acres) is contained within a small draw on Rd 2210-160, which crosses the active landslide midslope in the Clarno FM. A 3-acre rotational active landslide is adjacent to Road 2210-202 in the headwaters of O’Kelly Creek, in a conglomerate Cretaceous unit. The majority of the project area (66%) is at a low to moderate risk for reactivation by management activities such as road construction or harvest, or by the continued weather pattern of higher precipitation. Sixteen acres are active landslide terrain. Approximately 34 percent of the project area is within mapped active and dormant landslide terrain crossing all five lithologies. The dormant landslide terrain extends across the entire planning area and should be considered to be at moderate risk for reactivation by management activities such as road construction or harvest, or by the continued weather pattern of higher precipitation.

The majority of the dormant landslides originate on Clarno Formation within the watershed. Perched ponds and springs are located along the benches nestled within the landslide scarps. When the dormant landslides were more active, they contributed a portion of the existing sediment currently occupying the flood plains of the stream courses. Based on limited stream surveys, there is evidence that the stretches of Dodds, Heflin, West Branch Bridge and O’Kelly Creeks with greater than 20 percent cutbank erosion are adjacent to the toes of dormant landslides.

A number of physical indicators help to evaluate the lands stability: percent of area in mapped landslide features (scarps, debris lobes), location of slump prone areas, location of existing slumps, existing roads in these slump areas and presence of leaning/pistol butt trees, seeps, springs, sag ponds or fresh tension cracks.

Massive rotational slump and earthflow landslides were the predominant land forming processes in the past. The dormant deep landslides, which shape the project area, were probably active throughout the past 1 million years. They were probably triggered by a combination of tectonic activity and high precipitation. They naturally adjust as the streams cut the toes of the landslide debris and as natural fires, insect and disease infestations removed vegetation, allowing increased precipitation to saturate the soils, increasing groundwater pressure (Mikulovsky & de la Fuente, 2012 and USGS, 2006). Numerous seeps and springs are present all across the project area, confirming the scrambled nature of the landform.

History has shown the land to be responsive to rain on snow events, especially below the 4,500-foot elevation. When the landslide debris and the shallow ash soils are saturated, there is potential for an increase in slope movement, which has resulted in debris flows and small rotational landslides within

57


the watershed. Above the 4500-foot elevation, the ground is generally still frozen and snow covered. Fewer debris flows and rotational slides occur in this region.

In summary, the active landslide terrain (15.86 acres) is 0.2 percent of the project area with a high risk for continued movement. Dormant landslide terrain (2604.67 acres) underlies 33.4 percent of the project area (Table 24, Figure 3) with a moderate risk for reactivation of movement. The majority of the project area is at low to moderate risk for mass wasting instability by management activities such as road construction or harvest, or by the continued weather pattern of higher precipitation. Table 24. Dormant and active landslide terrain in the Bailey Butte Fire Project area (acres).

Lithology Active Dormant Grand Total Qls 21.6 21.6 Tsfj 2.9 2.9 Tca 13.1 2014.3 2027.4 Tct 563.53 563.53 Ks 2.76 2.34 5.1

Grand Total 15.86 2604.67 2620.53

Figure 3. Active (Red) and Dormant (Yellow) Landslide terrain in project area and Mineral Material Sources.

Paleontology Resource Paleontological resources were addressed during the Waterman Complex BAER effort. The fossil leaves and petrified wood are in the 44-39 MA Clarno Formation. According to the John Day Fossil Beds NM paleobotanists, these leaf and wood collections represent a snapshot of what the upland forests looked like during the Eocene Epoch (see Figure 4).

58


Although the lithology which contains the leaf fossils and the petrified wood extends across the northern corner of the Bailey Butte fire on National Forest System land, the primary fossil collecting site on Rd 2600-700 was the focus for the monitoring. The area had a low to moderate severity burn. The actual fire effects were negligible to the petrified wood and leaf fossils.

For this deposit, it was determined that there would be a likely loss of paleontological resources due to the potential increased collecting following the increased exposure. Paleontological Resources do not fall within BAER Critical Values Table within the Forest Service Manual Direction. In the BAER report, the resource was identified as having a minor magnitude of consequences with a low risk, therefore no treatment was recommended. Yearly monitoring will continue on the site to document changes post fire with respect to collecting.

The action of removing the dead timber from the harvest units and roadside salvage units will not further disturb the leaf fossils or petrified wood beyond the current exposure from the fire.

Figure 4. Leaf and petrified wood fossils near Snowshoe Point, following the Bailey Butte Fire.

Water Sources

The Forest Water Conservation Plan (June, 1996) has been implemented to reduce impact on surface water sources. The water sources will be used for road construction, maintenance and fire suppression needs. In 1996, the Ochoco National Forest established a water well drilling program to reduce impact on surface water sources. Harpo Well (D1.1) is located just south of the analysis area on National Forest lands, Marks Creek Pumper Chance (D1.11) and Walton Lake MS (D1.3) are the water sources present in the vicinity of the project area.

Walton Lake Material Source (D1.3) is on Rd 2200-135 in T 13 S, R 22 E, Sec. 22 NW ¼. Walton Lake Material Source holds water year round. Past excavation in Walton Lake material source intersected springs, creating ponds in the excavated areas. Harpo Well (D1.1) is located on Rd 3350 in T 13 S, R 19 E, Sec. 30, NW 1/4. A holding pond has been constructed on the north side of the road. Marks Creek Pumper Chance (D1.11) is located on Rd 2630 at the culvert in T 12 S, R 19 E, Sec. 36, SW 1/4.

Harpo Well (T 13 S, R 19 E, Sec.30, NE1/4 SW1/4) is 80 feet deep with a static water level of 8 feet, estimated 10-65 gpm flow. The well location is on Road 3350, along Wildcat creek. A pump has been installed. The water will be piped across the road to the holding pond. The well was drilled to a depth of 450 feet. The actual water bearing strata is a coarse sand and gravel at 20-35 feet and a conglomerate from 35-70 feet. The well was filled with concrete from 80-450 feet and cased the upper 80 feet. The water bearing strata is in alluvium resting on the Clarno Formation. The Harpo well will be used as a water source for the project.

59



Alternative A Under this alternative, there would be no harvest of fire killed trees, reforestation of desired tree species, or improved public, administrative and operational safety by felling danger trees along commercial haul routes. Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, would allow the active and dormant landslide terrain to continue the natural process of erosion under the current precipitation pattern and fire impacts.

Alternative B For the Proposed Action, the combined treated acres for Harvest Units and Roadside Units is 801 acres. Within these acres, 257 acres are in dormant landslide terrain (32%) (Table 25,

Table 26 and Figure 5). The Harvest Select for the Harvest Units and single tree select for the Roadside Salvage Units will be logged by ground based systems.

Of the 71 dormant landslide terrain acres in the harvest units, 69 acres burned at low-moderate intensity (97%) and 1 acre burned at low intensity (1.5%) and 1 acre burned at moderate severity (1.5%). Of the 186 dormant landslide terrain acres in the Roadside Units, 116 acres (62%) burned at a low-moderate severity, 52 acres (28%) burned at low-high severity and 18 acres (10%) burned at low.

Units 4 and 5 have a slightly elevated risk for reactivation in the near future because they are below the 4500’ elevation transient snowline. The risk is moderated because they were burned with low to moderate severity, leaving live trees still evapotranspirating, reducing the groundwater pressure in the slopes. Table 25. Alternative B harvest units on dormant landslide terrain.

Unit Number

Dormant Landslide Terrain (acres) Total Unit Acres % unstable BARC Severity

1 1 35 3% Moderate 2 1 16 6% Low 3 8 8 100% Low-Moderate 4 18 18 100% Low-Moderate 5 18 18 100% Low-Moderate 6 21 31 68% Low-Moderate 7 0 14 8 0 18 9 0 18

10 4 14 29% Low-Moderate 11 0 38

Total Acres 71 228 31%

60


Table 26. Alternative B roadside salvage areas on dormant landslide terrain. Roadside Salvage

Location Dormant Landslide

Terrain (acres) Unit Acres % Unstable BARC Severity

2210 18 82 22% Low 2600-452 0 13 2600-600 28 60 47% Low-Moderate 2600-607 0 29 2600-608 9 14 64% Low-Moderate 2600-610 6 35 17% Low-Moderate 2600-623 4 39 10% Low-Moderate 2600-630 29 80 36% Low-High 2600-650 4 9 44% Low-Moderate 2600-700 0 33 2630 5 68 7% Low-Moderate 2630-013 22 32 69% Low-Moderate 2630-016 23 29 79% Low-High 2730-550 38 50 76% Low-Moderate Total Acres 186 573 32%

Figure 5. Alternative B Proposed Harvest Units and Roadside Salvage Units displayed on Active (Red) and Dormant (Yellow) Landslide Terrain.

The haul roads for Alternative B (Table 27) propose using 9.73 miles (35%) on a combination of active and dormant landslide terrain, out of the total 27 miles. The roads will be bladed, erosion will be managed and culverts maintained. With the exception of the active terrain, it’s unlikely that there will be any reactivation of the dormant landslide terrain where the roads pass through the terrain

61


because the roadside drainage has been cleaned out following the fire. The active terrain will be monitored for continued activity. Table 27. Alternative B haul roads for roadside salvage and harvest units.

Operational Maintenance Level Active Dormant Total Miles % of Road on

Unstable Terrain 1-Basic Custodial Care

(Closed) 6.77 14 48%

2- High Clearance 0.03 1.47 7 22% (Active and Dormant)

3- Suitable for Passenger Cars 1.46 5 29% 4- Moderate Degree of User

Comfort 0

5- High Degree of User Comfort 1

TOTAL MILES 0.03 9.7 27 35%

The road system had been established on the unstable terrain. The storm proofing and BAER work for these systems have protected the majority of the immediate potential stability issues. The selected tree of the hazard trees through the roadside salvage units will not increase or jeopardize the road stability.

Alternative C Alternative C proposed roadside harvest of 573 acres with 168 acres in dormant landslide terrain (29%) (Table 28 and Figure 6). Of the 186 dormant landslide terrain acres in the Roadside Units, 116 acres (62%) burned at a low-moderate intensity, 52 acres (28%) burned at low-high intensity and 18 acres (10%) burned at low.

The road system had been established on the unstable terrain. The storm proofing and BAER work for these systems have protected the majority of the immediate potential stability issues. The selected tree of the hazard trees through the roadside salvage units will not increase or jeopardize the road stability. Table 28. Alternative C - roadside salvage units by dormant landslide terrain.

Roadside Salvage Unit Dormant Unit Acres % Unstable BARC Severity

2210 18 82 22% Low 2600-452 0 13 2600-600 27 60 45% Low-Moderate 2600-607 0 29 2600-608 9 14 64% Low-Moderate 2600-610 6 35 17% Low-Moderate 2600-623 4 39 10% Low-Moderate 2600-630 29 80 36% Low-High 2600-650 0 9 Low-Moderate 2600-700 0 33 2630 5 68 7% Low-Moderate 2630-013 22 32 69% Low-Moderate 2630-016 23 29 79% Low-High 2730-550 38 50 76% Low-Moderate

62


Roadside Salvage Unit Dormant Unit Acres % Unstable BARC Severity

Total Acres 186 573 32%

Figure 6. Alternative C Roadside Salvage Units (grey), Active (Red) and Dormant Landslide Terrain (Yellow).

The haul roads for Alternative C (Table 29) propose using 8.19 miles (34%) on a combination of active and dormant landslide terrain, out of the total 24 miles. The roads will be bladed, erosion will be managed and culverts maintained. With the exception of the active terrain, it’s unlikely that there will be any reactivation of the dormant landslide terrain where the roads pass. The active terrain will be monitored for continued activity. Table 29. Alternative C – haul roads for roadside salvage units.

Operational Maintenance Level Active Dormant Total Miles % of Road on Unstable Terrain

1-Basic Custodial Care (Closed) 5.10 12 45%

2- High Clearance 0.03 1.59 6 26% (active and dormant landslide terrain)

3- Suitable for Passenger Cars 1.46 5 29% 5- High Degree of User Comfort 1

TOTAL MILES 0.03 8.16 24 34%

Alternative C will only remove trees within the road buffers. The roads have been storm proofed following the fire, were originally constructed with adequate culvert relief pipes and moderate surfacing. Since no additional temporary spurs will be required for access, there will be minimal

63


effect on the amount of potential reactivation of dormant landslide terrain as a result of the salvage operation.

Effects Common to Alternatives B and C For direct effects, the use of ground-based harvest equipment will not increase the potential for reactivation of the dormant landslide terrain because it will not compact the ground to the extent that it changes subsurface groundwater flow. Using the design criteria to buffer seeps and springs found within the units, will also protect from potential reactivation of dormant landslide terrain. For all the units in the action alternatives, the primary concern from a mass wasting standpoint is for those units on dormant landslide terrain and underlain by mapped landslide debris. The Clarno Formation, John Day Formation and mapped landslide debris underlie the Bailey Butte salvage units. Landslide terrain tends to develop unusual subsurface drainage patterns. The intensity and style of management activity on landslide terrain, in the vicinity of seeps and springs, could potentially change the drainage pattern, possibly increasing the risk for instability.

Under Alternative B (Proposed Action) and Alternative C, indirect effects to the geologic resource would include potential reactivation of dormant landslide terrain within the salvage units and roadside buffers. This has the potential to happen whether the timber is salvaged or not.

Following wildfire or harvest, tree root strength begins to diminish 5 to 10 years after the event (Mikulovsky and de la Fuente, 2012 and USGS, 2006). Once the roots have decayed, they no longer give strength to the soil. If the area is subjected to a rain-on-snow event, the likelihood of a shallow rapid landslide increases. If new growth can re-establish roots, both providing evapotranspiration and soil strength, potential for shallow slope movement will decrease. The lack of evapotranspiration following wildfire leaves more groundwater in the soil, which in turn, increases flow in the seeps and springs in the hummocky topography. This was observed in the same terrain to the east following 2006 Maxwell and 2008 Bridge Creek Fires.

The tree mortality is based on the fire severity. At present, evapotranspiration has decreased with the dead and dying trees. The potential for pockets of dormant landslide terrain reactivating is increasing with the additional groundwater retained in the slopes. The timing of regeneration which increases evapotranspiration and develops root strength that holds shallow soil in place is an unknown. The reactivation of the deep-seated rotational landslides can potentially occur 5 to 10 years after the fire in areas burned with moderate to high severity, as ground reacts to changed subsurface groundwater flow (Mikulovsky and de la Fuente, 2012 and USGS, 2006). This has been observed in the 2006 Maxwell Fire in Bridge Creek Wilderness. A small section (1.5 acres) of dormant landslide terrain reactivated in the summer of 2012, 6 years following the fire (Gordon, 2014). There is a longer term potential reactivation of dormant landslide terrain that reaches beyond the harvest effects.

If there is a rain-on-snow event, coinciding with the 5-10 year root strength loss, before new roots take over, there is potential for reactivation. There are 2,620 acres of dormant and active landslide terrain in the project area. Alternative B proposes activity on 257 acres of dormant landslide terrain which is less than 10% of the project area dormant landslide terrain. Alternative C proposes activity on 186 acres of dormant landslide terrain which is less than 7% of the project area dormant landslide terrain.

For the most part, the effects of the proposed salvage in the harvest units would mimic the effects of harvest thinning; harvest thinning does not generally alter groundwater movement measurably, except in the vicinity of seeps and springs because a component of live trees remains on the slopes. The treatment would not normally reduce the amount of water taken up by the trees through evapo-transpiration substantially. More aggressive prescriptions have been known to reduce the amount of evapo-transpiration which leaves more groundwater in the slope, increasing groundwater pressure,

64


which has the potential to increase instability. Depending on the fire severity and expected mortality, the ground may mimic more intensive treatments in small areas.

The acres of dormant landslide terrain are fairly equally spread across the watershed. The affected area varies slightly based on the proposed managed acres for each alternative (see Table 30). Tractor logging systems tend to compact the soil, changing groundwater flow patterns, potentially altering slope stability. Alternative B proposes commercial harvest management of more acres located in dormant landslide terrain than Alternative C. Table 30. Dormant landslide terrain within proposed logging system for each alternative (acres).

Logging System Alternative B Alternative C Tractor (Harvest/Roadside) 801 573 Total Treated Acres within Dormant Landslide Terrain 257 186

Total Treated Salvage Acres 801 573 Percent of Treated Acres within Dormant Landslide Terrain 32% 32%

Those units located on the upper slopes of dormant landslide scarps have a slightly increased potential for reactivating the landslide debris on the lower slopes when combined with a higher precipitation or a rain on snow event like the forest experienced in 1997, due to the potential increase flow of groundwater to the lower slopes. None of the proposed harvest units in dormant landslide terrain are located on the upper headscarps.

Although the haul roads pass through some of the active landslide terrain, none of the proposed harvest units or roadside salvage units are in active terrain. Of the 2,605 acres of dormant landslide terrain within the project boundary, Alternative B proposes activity in 257 acres (10%) and Alternative C proposes activity in 186 acres (7%). Alternatives B and C treat the same percentage of dormant landslide terrain within the total harvest acres (32%). Alternative C has fewer acres underlain by dormant landslide terrain.

Through the design elements and mitigation, the units identified will have seeps and springs buffered and any evidence of recent motion evaluated by the geologist. The tractor method used to harvest those units does have a tendency to compact the ground. The units, generally located on the steeper slopes (greater than 25%), may have a slightly increased risk for indirectly destabilizing the lower slopes if there should be a continued weather pattern of higher precipitation. There may be small areas in units with slopes greater than 25%. If there is any evidence of recent slope movement, the geologist should be consulted.

Conclusion

For mass wasting (landslide terrain), the difference between the two action alternatives is minor. Alternative C treats 71 less acres in dormant landslide terrain. Alternative C has 1.5 mile of haul road less in dormant landslide terrain but the same length on active landslide terrain.

Cumulative Effects The past prescription underburns and reforestation following the older commercial harvest within the dormant landslide terrain within the project boundary are all leading toward increased stability of the deep-seated landslide terrain as groundwater pressures are reduced with increased evapotranspiration as vegetation recovers. The majority of the moderate to highest severity burn underlain by deep-seated landslides, with the potential to reactivate will not have fire killed trees removed. If the weather pattern stays similar, based on field observations of the Maxwell and Bridge Creek burns in the same terrain, there will be insignificant change.

65


The Ochoco Summit Trail System project proposes trail that does cross through dormant landslide terrain that was burned at a moderate to low severity. Currently the project includes a phased implementation, which would delay trail construction within the Bailey Butte fire perimeter; therefor, there should be no impacts to the landslide terrain. The proposed routes across the dormant landslide terrain are located on the closed roads proposed for roadside salvage in both alternatives. In addition to improving long term safety, the natural regeneration of vegetation will increase evapotranspiration, ultimately reducing groundwater pressure and lowering the risk for slope movement.

Soils The following is a summary of the Soils Specialist’s Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

The Soil Resource Inventory landtypes were classified by slope class, surface texture and rock content to generate a slope erosion hazard map for the forest. Individual treatment units have been mapped as to erosion hazard class and are used in site specific unit by unit analysis.

Post Fire (Existing) Soil Condition Soil Burn Severity and Hydrophobicity

Soil burn severity is generally defined according to guidelines summarized in the Field Guide for Mapping Post-Fire Soil Burn Severity (Parsons et al., 2010). Soil burn severity within the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter is a complex, patchy mosaic of unburned, low, and moderate burn severities. Some isolated patches of high burn severity are present, but are not of great extent. Soil burn severity was estimated using the Burned Area Reflectance Classification (BARC) map. The BAER Team validated the soil burn severity mapping via aerial reconnaissance and on-the-ground field visits.

Of the approximately 7,750 acres that burned on Forest Service lands, roughly 2,315 acres (30%) fall within the moderate burn severity class. Only 100 acres (~1%) fall within the high burn severity class. Most areas where landscape treatments are proposed are within the moderate soil burn severity category and occur on landscape locations with moderate to high erosion hazard.

Hydrophobic soil conditions are widespread within the fire area, but the amount that is fire-induced as opposed to that which is naturally-occurring is difficult to resolve. The fine ash cap soils present throughout the Ochoco tend to form hydrophobic vesicular soil crusts at the organic-mineral interface. Most sites that were visited during field reconnaissance exhibited some degree of hydrophobicity (even the unburned sites). It is likely that the fire increased the extent or severity of hydrophobicity within the fire perimeter, and that surface erosion potential is increased as a result. It is estimated that 70% of the soils within the fire perimeter exhibit some degree of hydrophobicity and as discussed above, much of this is natural and NOT fire induced. Only 111 acres of high severity conditions (high fire-induced hydrophobicity) were mapped in this fire area.


Alternative A This alternative proposes no management actions that would affect the soil resource in the short term. Existing natural processes would continue. No soil restoration tillage would be performed. Recovery of existing soil (compaction) would occur through natural processes. These processes include frost heaving in the top 4 to 6 inches of soil and biopedoturbation (soil disturbance by organisms such as rodents, insects, arthropods and various worms). These natural processes can take 10 to 50 years or more to fully restore damaged ash soils, while clayey residual soils may recover in 1-2 years due to

66


shrinking and swelling actions. Fuels reductions have occurred via the Bailey Butte wildfire thereby increasing the risk of oxidation and mineralization of nutrients such as nitrogen and potassium. Fuels buildup due to anthropic fire control in the past 100 years has possibly resulted in increased fire intensity and severity which can reduce site productivity. (Harvey Et al. 1991). For the Bailey Butte fire: 1,221 acres (12%) are in the Unburned/Very Low Severity category, 6,108 acres (59%) are in the Low Severity Category; 2,832 acres (28%) are in the Moderate Severity Category and 111 acres (1%) is in the High Severity Category. No road decommissioning would occur. This alternative would comply with the regional soil standards in the short term but may exceed regional standards and guidelines in the long term if stands are re-burned by wildfire again after current dead trees topple (large percentage will come down in 3 to 5 years) (Shank 2004).

Alternatives B and C Implementation of either action alternative would comply with the regional soil standards, as described in Table 31. The majority of the project area in either alternative would be outside the implementation units; effects over the majority of the project area would be as described under Alternative A under either action alternative.

Specific practices have been developed to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects of the salvage logging and associated activities on soil, water quality and riparian resources that may result from excessive soil disturbance as well as inputs of ash, sediment, nutrients and debris (see the section titled “Project Design Criteria” in this EA). The Project Design Criteria were developed to comply with the National Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands (April, 2012).

Explanation of Terms and Assumptions used in Table 31.

EXISTING SOIL DISTURBANCE: This column refers to the estimated level of existing detrimental ground disturbance in each individual unit. These units are largely multiple entry units that have varying degrees of detrimental compaction and displacement from prior entries.

POST TREATMENT ESTIMATE: This estimate is from predicted amount of detrimental ground disturbance due to the treatments from this entry which, in this case, are largely thin from below commercial thinning stand prescriptions with several sanitation harvest units likely to produce similar disturbance as the thin from below as they have scattered mistletoe infected trees. Mostly the disturbance from this proposal will be restricted to existing roads, landings and skid trails. When additional access is needed there will be some additional ground disturbance depending on whether the unit can be tilled. If, in some units, specific skid trails need to be relocated due to poor initial placement, then they are re-located and the additional disturbance is documented here.

TILLAGE POTENTIAL: This was based on slope, local on-site knowledge by the Forest Soil Scientist and District Silviculturalist, Tillage Suitability Guidelines (J. David), and the Soil Resource Inventory of the Ochoco National Forest (Paulson 1977). Low potential means that there may be too much rock, too much slope or that the soil is too shallow or too clayey (smectitic clay soils will decompact themselves with every annual wet/dry cycle by expanding and contracting.) Besides not benefiting from tillage of the clay they will produce heavy clods which make traffic and planting difficult. Tillage potential categories on a unit by unit basis are as follows: low equals 0 to 25 percent tillable, moderate equals 25 to 50 percent, and high equals greater than 50 percent.

POST TILLAGE ESTIMATES: This is an estimate of what the post tillage detrimental soil condition estimate will be. The tillage (either shallow scarification or deeper sub-soiling or ripping) will help restore soil functions especially in regards to water infiltration and soil aeration.

67


Tillage operations will be as per normal timber harvest contract which specifies scarification of main skid trails from 300 feet leading into landings and in the landings themselves. Temporary roads will also be scarified. Harvest contract tillage typically treats 3 to 4 percent of treatment unit acreage. Table 31. Unit-specific effects to soils.

Unit Alt. B Acres

Alt. C Acres

Existing Soil Disturbance

(%)

Tillage Potential

Tillage Estimate (acres)

Post Activity Soil

Disturbance (%)

Unit-specific Analysis

1 36 0 20 - 30 Low 1 27

Stay on existing disturbance (skid trails,landings and roads). Meets standard.

2 16 0 20 - 30 Low 0.5 27 Stay on existing disurbance. Meets standard.

3 10 0 20 - 30 Low to mod 0.35 27 Stay on existing disurbance. Meets standard.

4 18 0 20 - 30 Moderate 0.6 27 Stay on existing disurbance. Meets standard.

5 19 0 20 - 30 Mod - high 0.7 27 Stay on existing disurbance. Meets standard.


7 15 0 20 - 30 Moderate 0.5 Stay on existing disurbance. Meets standard.

8 6 0 20 - 30 High 0.2 27

Stay on existing disurbance (skid trails, landings and roads). Meets standard.


10 9 0 20 – 30 Mod- high 0.3 27

Stay on existing disturbance, no net increase over 30%. Meets standard.

11 5 0 20 - 30 High 0.2 27

Stay on existing disturbance, no net increase. Meets standard.

12 18 0 20 - 30 Low 0.6 27


13 11 0 30 - 40 Moderate 0.4 27

Stay on existing disturbance, no net increase. Till 1 acre. Meets standard.

14 15 0 20 - 30 Moderate 0.5 27

Stay on existing trails, no net increase over 30%. Flatter in eastern 2/3. Meets standard

68


Unit Alt. B Acres

Alt. C Acres


(%)

Tillage Potential


Post Activity Soil

Disturbance (%)


15 38 0 20 - 30 Low 1.3 27

Stay on existing disturbance, no net increase. Steeper in southern 1/5 th. Meets standard.

16 14 0 20 - 30 Low 0.5 27

Stay on existing trails, no net increase over 30%. Meets standard.

17 20 0 20 - 30 Moderate 0.6 27

Stay on existing disturbance, no net increase. Meets S&Gs.

2210000

73 acres 2.43 miles

73 acres 2.43 miles 30-40 Moderate 2.6 30-40

Stay on existing disturbance (skid trails, landings and roads), no net increase. Meets S&Gs.

2600450

2.2 ac 0.06 mi

2.2 ac 0.06 mi 30-40 High 0.08 30-40


2600452

14 ac 0.38 mi

14 ac 0.38 mi 30-40 High 0.5 30-40


2600600

27 ac 1.7 7mi

27 ac 1.77 mi 30-40 High 0.06 40-50


2600607

30 ac 0.84 mi

30 ac 0.84 mi 30-40 Low 1.1 30-40


2600608

15 ac 0.41 mi

15 ac 0.41 mi 30-40 Low 0.5 30-40


2600610

36 ac 1.21 mi

36 ac 1.21 mi 30-40 High 1.3 30-40


2600622

11 ac 0.29 mi

11 ac 0.29 mi 30-40 Low 0.4 30-40


2600623

40 ac 0.89 mi

40 ac 0.89 mi 30-40 Low 1.4 30-40


2600630

54 ac 2.34 mi

54 ac 2.34 mi 30-40 High 1.9 30-40

Stay on existing disturbance, no net increase.. Meets S&Gs.

69


Unit Alt. B Acres

Alt. C Acres


(%)

Tillage Potential


Post Activity Soil

Disturbance (%)


2600650

10 ac 0.27 mi

10 ac 0.27 mi 30-40 High 0.35 30-40

Stay on existing disturbance (skid trails, landings and roads), no net increase. Meets S&Gs.

2600700

25 ac 0.99 mi

25 ac 0.99 mi 30-40 High 0.9 30-40

Stay on existing trails, no net increase over 30%. Meets standard.

2630000

69 ac 1.91 mi

69 ac 1.91 mi 30-40 Mod- High 2.4 30-40


2630013

33 ac 0.90 mi

33 ac 0.90 mi 30-40 Low 1.2 30-40


2630016

30 ac 0.83 mi

30 ac 0.83 mi 30-40 Moderate 1.1 30-40


2730550

42 ac 1.67 mi

42 ac 1.67 mi 30-40 High 1.5 30-40


2730558 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 30-40 Moderate 30-40

Stay on existing disturbance, no net increase. Meets S&Gs.20 - 30

** Footnote: for roadside salvage the disturbance figures are higher because the units include the road prism and are only 90 feet wide (45 feet on each side). Therefore the relative contribution of the road is higher than an average treatment unit.

Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects to soils are considered within the actual treatment units. Effects of past and ongoing projects identified in Table 10 were incorporated into the discussion of existing condition, and summarized in Table 31. There are no reasonably foreseeable actions that would overlap with the effects of these proposed treatments in space or time; therefore, no cumulative effects were identified.

Soil Tillage Effects Tillage Treatment Effects: the main purpose of tillage is to decompact the soil such that there is an improvement in soil moisture and aeration. Resistance to root growth is lessened also. There are potential short term and long term effects of tillage. The long term (50 years or more) effects are largely beneficial due to the improved infiltration, percolation, aeration and lessened bulk density. Short term effects (2 to 10 years) may include increases in localized erosion potential before effective vegetative ground cover is established. This short term hazard will be reduced by the use of water bars and slash placement. After logging, tillage done the purchaser on the average timber sale comprises 3 to 4 percent of a particular harvest unit acreage; largely in landings and main skid trails leading in to the landings (150 to 300 feet out on the main trails).

Direct Effects of tillage: • Reduces bulk density and improves soil porosity, which improves water and air movement to

roots and soil flora and fauna.

70


• Increases numbers and distibution of mainly coarse pores, which improves water, air movement for soil flora and improves mobility for soil fauna.

• Improves root growth conditions.

• Reduces root penetration resistance, effective moisture depth and overall rooting depth.

• Disrupts macroaggregates.

• Can destabilize soils in short term (first growing season), which is one of the main reasons why contour tillage and discontinuous tillage are specified.

• Mixes and homogenizes soil and organic material, which can have positive and negative effects. Long term (yearly tillage such as in agricultural fields) tillage in the absence of organic matter additions has been shown to decrease soil organic matter. Short term forest tillage (once a decade or every several decades) has not been shown to decrease organic matter. In the case of increased surface organic matter such as we have in much of our area due to fire suppression, the incorporation of organic matter is likely to keep it from being rapidly volitalized and mineralized in high severity fire situations (Cochran and Hopkins, et al).

• Can invert topsoil-subsoil, which can have both positive and negative effects. In relatively organic matter poor substrates such as many of our volcanic ash soils this can add to the overall long term (50 years) nutrient reserves and cation exchange capacity (CEC).

• Provides seedbed for seedling establishment with reduced competition for seeded species.

• Can provide seedbed for noxious weeds including establishment of new populations and expansion of existing weed infestations.

• This is always a concern when soils are disturbed and exposed. Seeding success depends to a large degree on the water year in which they are planted. As pointed out by Dr. Lee Eddleman from the University of Oregon success can be more probable if the November and December precipitation is above “normal” (above average). Winter or spring planting (drilling) would be more successful under these conditions. Seeding on the Ochoco NF is usually accomplished in the fall because this period has been shown to be the most successful based on monitoring.

• Can provide short term nutrient pulse which may stimulate weed establishment and increase weed presence.

• This is always a potential risk with any tillage and even more so with deeper tillage such as plowing with mold board plows. (St. John, 1998)

Indirect Effects of tillage: • Improves water infiltration, transmission and retention, which improves conditions for roots

and soil flora/fauna.

• Improves soil aeration and redox potential.

• Can increase soil organic matter turnover (in agricultural fields with yearly tillage); in wildland settings with limited tillage this has not been shown to be true.

• Changes soil stuctural stability (aggregation).

• May result in short term (2 to 5 years) susceptibility to wind and water erosion.

• Changes thermal conductivity and diffusivity.

71


• Usually increases soil surface temperatures which is good for seed germination and plant establishment.

• Can change pH and other chemical properties (in field agriculture with regular tillage intensity).

• Usually a longer term effect under regular tillage operations.

TILLAGE EFFECTIVENESS DISCUSSION: Tillage effectiveness varies widely with soil texture, rock content, depth , water content and type of tillage implement used. Research indicates that some mechanical method to consistently ameliorate compacted soil conditions is desirable and feasible especially on coarse textured soils such as ash capped soils on the ONF (Geist and Froehlich 1994) For landings constructed on coarse and medium textures soils, the evidence thus far indicates that decompaction and decompaction plus topsoil recovery, respectively, appear to be sufficient to restore productivity. (Sanborn et al. 1999) Local monitoring in the past 22 years on tillage operations by Jim David, ONF Soil Scientist has shown that on average, the effectiveness of tillage using a forest cultivator or tractor mounted subsoiler, is about 70 percent for a single pass.

Hydrology and Aquatic Species The following is a summary of the Aquatics Resources Specialists’ Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

Analysis Design

Potential Issues Acknowledged but not Analyzed Physical Barriers/Fish Access Barrier

None of the proposed activities are associated with or would affect physical or fish access barriers. Therefore, physical barriers and fish access barriers will not be discussed further in this analysis.

Off-channel Habitat and Refugia

Extensive literature documents the influence of LWM on channel morphology in forested mountain streams, including the formation of off-channel habitat and refugia. In small channels, individual pieces of LWM trap sediment, cause local bed and bank scour, and create step pools with areas of low energy. In larger channels, LWM accumulations locally influence bed and bank scour, side channel development, bar stability, and island formation (Montgomery et al 1995). Channels without LWM can quickly evolve to very simple forms. Because of the strong relationship to LWM, analysis for LWM will reflect similar conditions for off-channel habitat and refugia.

Baseline conditions determined from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin for Middle Bear Creek and West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatersheds, in relation to off-channel habitat and refugia, are Functioning at Unacceptable Risk and Functioning Appropriately, respectively. Although implementation of the action alternatives will have a beneficial effect at the site scale where riparian treatments are proposed, the action alternatives not change baseline conditions at the subwatershed scale. The areas of treatment are a very small percentage of the entire subwatershed, so treatments have a negligible effect in terms of the baseline indicators for Mid-Columbia River steelhead and their critical habitat.

72


Floodplain Connectivity

There are no treatments designed to effect floodplain connectivity in the project area. Similar to off-channel habitat and refugia, floodplain connectivity is dependent on LWM. Because of the strong relationship to LWM, analysis for LWM will reflect similar conditions for floodplain connectivity.

The baseline conditions determined from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin, in relation to floodplain connectivity, for Middle Bear Creek and West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed are Functioning at Risk and Functioning Appropriately, respectively. Although implementation of the action alternatives will have a beneficial effect at the site scale where riparian treatments are proposed, the action alternatives will not change baseline conditions at the subwatershed scale. The areas of treatment are a very small percentage of the entire subwatershed, so treatments will have a negligible4 effect in terms of the baseline indicators for Mid-Columbia River steelhead and their critical habitat.

Stream Crossing Density

There are no new roads or temporary roads proposed which have a stream crossing, therefore stream crossing density, although displayed in the existing condition, will not be discussed further in this analysis.

Changes in Peak/Base flow, Drainage Network Increase, Disturbance History and Regime

Changes in peak/base flow, drainage network increase, and disturbance history and regime conditions are typically altered through anthropogenic changes such as road building, introduction of impervious surfaces, and resource extraction. Because of the strong relationship to road density and location and condition of Equivalent Harvest Acres, analysis for road densities and locations and EHA will reflect similar conditions for changes in peak/base flow, drainage network increase, disturbance history and regime.

The baseline conditions determined from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin for changes in peak/base flow, drainage network increase, and disturbance history and regime are listed in Table 32. Table 34 defines “properly functioning,” “functioning at risk” and “not properly functioning” for each of the baseline indicators analyzed for the Bailey Butte project. In concept, indicators in a watershed are “functioning appropriately” when they maintain strong and significant populations that are interconnected and promote recovery of a proposed or listed species or its critical habitat to a status that will provide self-sustaining and self-regulating populations. When the indicators are “functioning at risk,” they provide for the persistence of the species but in more isolated populations that may not promote recovery of a proposed or listed species or its habitat without active or passive restoration. “Functioning at unacceptable risk” suggests the proposed or listed species continues to be absent from historical context, or is rare or being maintained at a low population level; although the habitat may maintain the species at this low persistence level, active restoration is needed to begin recovery of the species.

The action alternatives for the Bailey Butte Fire project are not expected to change the baseline conditions determined for steelhead in respect to changes in peak/base flow, drainage network increase, and disturbance history and regime.

4 For the purposes of this document, the term “negligible” is defined as “the effects are so small that they are not measureable.”

73


Table 32. Baseline Conditions determined from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin.

Subwatershed Changes in Peak/Base Flow

Drainage Network Increase

Disturbance History

Disturbance Regime

Middle Bear Creek

Functioning at Risk

Functioning at Unacceptable Risk

Functioning at Unacceptable Risk

Functioning at Unacceptable

Risk

West Branch Bridge Creek

Functioning Appropriately on National Forest

Functioning Appropriately on National Forest

Functioning at Risk on National

Forest

Functioning Appropriately on National

Forest

Methods Table 33 lists all of the habitat indicators that will be analyzed and gives specific criteria that will determine how well each indicator is functioning at the watershed-scale. Some criteria were defined by the National Marine Fisheries Service in the Matrix of Pathways and Indicators (NMFS 1996), some criteria were established by the interim Riparian Management Objectives in INFISH and PACFISH, and some were modified based on site-specific conditions (Table 2). Table 33. Criteria for habitat indicator condition rating.

Pathway Habitat Indicator Properly

Functioning (PF)

Functioning at Risk

(FAR)

Not Properly Functioning

(NPF)

Water Quality

Water Temperature (RMO1) 50-57°F 57-64°F >64°F

Shade >80% stream shade 70-80% stream shade <70% stream shade

Bank Stability >90% stable 80-90% stable <80% stable

Fine Sediment/ Turbidity (RMO) <12% fines at surface 12-20% fines at

surface >20% fines at surface

Habitat Access

Physical Barriers (NMFS)

any man-made barriers present in watershed allow

upstream and downstream fish

passage at all flows

any man-made barriers present in watershed do not allow upstream

and/or downstream fish passage at base/low flows

any man-made barriers present in watershed do not allow upstream

and/or downstream fish passage at a range of flows

Habitat Elements

Large Woody Material (RMO)

>69 pieces/mile (Class I, II, III)

>12 inches diameter

>35 foot length

>48 pieces/mile (Class IV)

>12 inches diameter

>35 foot length

currently meets standards for good, but lacks potential

sources from riparian areas of

large wood recruitment to maintain that

standard

does not meet standards for

properly functioning and lacks potential

large wood recruitment

Pool Frequency meets pool frequency meets pool does not meet pool

74


Pathway Habitat Indicator Properly

Functioning (PF)

Functioning at Risk

(FAR)

Not Properly Functioning

(NPF) (RMO) stadards outlined in

Table 3 frequency

standards but large wood recruitment

inadequate to maintain pools

over time

frequency standards

Pool Quality (NMFS)

pools >1 meter deep with good cover and

cool water, minor reduction of pool volume by fine

sediment

few deeper pools (>1 meter) present

or inadequate cover/temperature, moderate reduction of pool volume by

fine sediment

no deep pools (>1 meter) and in

adequate cover/temperature, major reduction of

pool volume by fine sediment

Native Riparian Condition (NMFS)

riparian vegetation provides adequate

large wood recruitment, habitat

protection, and connectivity in all

subwatersheds; percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural

community/composition >50%

moderate loss of large wood

recruitment, habitat protection, and connectivity;

percent similarity of riparian

vegetation to the potential natural

community/composition 25-50%

riparian vegetation is fragmented, poorly

connected, or provides inadequate protection of habitat; percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural

community/composition <25%

Width/Depth Ratio varies by channel type; see Table 3

within one number of the width/depth ratio for channel type in Table 4

greater than one number outside of

width/depth ration for channel type in

Table 4

Watershed Condition

Road Density/ Location

<2 mi/mi², no valley bottom roads

2-3 mi/mi², some valley bottom

roads

>3 mi/mi², many valley bottom roads

Equivalent Harvest Acres (EHA)

<25% EHA (National Forest portion of the watershed) with no

concentration of disturbance in

unstable or potentially unstable

areas, and/or refugia, and/or riparian area

<25% EHA (National Forest

portion of the watershed) but

some disturbance concentrated in



>25% EHA (entire watershed) and

disturbance concentrated in



1RMO refers to habitat indicators that are also Riparian Management Objectives for the project. The criteria for condition ratings may have been modified (see Table 2).

Based on the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin, baseline watershed conditions will be used as a benchmark to compare and determine if proposed actions have affected Mid-Columbia River steelhead and their critical habitat. Diagnostic pathways/indicators are used to determine if a project is having an adverse effect on a listed species or if the project is moving along a particular pathway towards properly functioning condition. Using

75


available data or professional judgment, each pathway/indicator was rated as Functioning Appropriately, Functioning at Risk, or Functioning at Unacceptable Risk. Ratings determined for a pathway/indicator for the project area may be different than the rating determined in the biological assessment. The reason for differences is due to the area analyzed; the area analyzed in the biological assessment is based on an entire subwatershed whereas the existing conditions determined in this report only pertain to the Bailey Butte Fire project area. It should be noted that these baseline conditions were developed before the Bailey Butte Fire burned in these watersheds. We include a description of how each indicator has changed post-fire.

Because Mid-Columbia River steelhead critical habitat is located near the project area, this document will also address Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) for Mid-Columbia River steelhead. A PCE is a physical or biological feature that is essential to the conservation of a species and on which its designated or proposed critical habitat is based. Because the pathway/indicators are in close relation to PCEs, we will use baseline indicators for each subwatershed as a surrogate for PCEs. Table 34 below is the crosswalk for critical habitat PCEs and the Matrix of Pathways and Indicator crosswalk. Table 34. Primary Constituent Elements for Mid-Columbia River steelhead.

Primary Constituent Element Corresponding Pathway/Indicator Element Water Quality Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity, Chemical

Contamination/Nutrients Water Quantity Changes in Peak Flow/Base Flow, Drainage Network Increase Substrate Sediment/Turbidity, Substrate Embeddedness Floodplain Connectivity Off-Channel Habitat, Refugia Forage Large Woody Debris, Riparian Reserves Natural Cover Large Woody Debris, Pool Quality, Wetted Width/Max Depth

Ratio, Streambank Condition, Riparian Reserves Free of artificial obstructions Physical Barriers

Fire Effects

Wildfire is widely recognized as an important disturbance process throughout many western forests. Although wildfires in human terms have been perceived as a “threat” to the health of forest ecosystems and post-fire landscapes portrayed as “disasters,” ecologically wildfires are a vital disturbance process to forests. Western ecosystems evolved over many millennia in response to disturbances such as wildfires. As such, biota in these landscapes have adapted to, and often are dependent upon, the occurrence of fires.

The effects of wildfire to the landscape are constrained by fire size and intensity, post-fire weather, and physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of individual sites. The effects may be direct and immediate or indirect and sustained over an extended period (Yount and Nieme 1990). In landscapes altered by decades of resource extraction or fire suppression, fire effects may be more severe than in landscapes where natural biological integrity is relatively intact. Recovery of stream ecosystems from the effects of fire may be slower and potentially incomplete in areas where natural process have been degraded or impaired.

The effects of the Bailey Butte fire will be discussed within each habitat indicator. Because there is no data available post-fire of the project area, professional judgment and field observations were used to qualitatively assess the anticipated short-term and long-term effects of the fire.

Watershed Condition Framework

Each subwatershed within the Bailey Butte Fire project has been characterized as either Properly Functioning, Functioning at Risk or Impaired Function as directed through WCF. Each of the indicators to classify watershed condition has since been updated to include the effects of the Bailey

76


Butte Fire. These indicators and corresponding attributes will be discussed within each applicable habitat indicator for the project. Table 35 displays the overall rating for each subwatershed pre- and post-fire. Table 35. Pre- and Post-fire Watershed Condition Framework ratings.

Subwatershed 2011 WCF Rating 2015 WCF Rating Comments Upper Marks Creek Functioning at Risk Functioning at Risk Middle Bear Creek Functioning Properly Functioning at Risk Change in rating from

Bailey Butte Fire effects West Branch Bridge Creek

Functioning at Risk Functioning at Risk

Water Quality

Water Temperature

Aquatic species viability within the project area is limited by habitat quantity and quality, particularly water temperature. Temperatures have increased due to channelization and incision of stream channels, loss of riparian vegetation providing shade, removal of large woody material, a shift in dominant riparian vegetation type and removal of beavers. Redband trout typically have been found to be present in small- to medium- sized streams between 50oF (10oC) and 61oF (16oC), outside of this range they are less likely to be present (Meyer et al. 2010).

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has designated streams in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area for salmon and trout rearing and migration (ODEQ, Oregon Water Quality Standards Fish Use Maps, Figure 130A). West Branch Bridge Creek and Dodds Creek are designated for salmon and steelhead spawning (ODEQ, Oregon Water Quality Standards Fish Use Maps, Figure 130B). The state standards (340-041-0028, approved by EPA Mar 2004) say the seven-day-average maximum temperature of streams identified as having salmon and trout rearing and migration should not exceed 18.0ºC (64.4ºF). The state of Oregon assumes that waters meeting this standard will provide water temperatures suitable for tedband trout spawning. In addition, treatments have been designed to not measurably increase the 7-day moving average daily maximum water temperature on any adult holding habitat or spawning or rearing habitat in the project area.

Within the project area, Marks Creek (RM 0.0 to 17.1) is the only stream with assessed water quality impairments related to summer water temperature. Marks Creek is on Oregon's 2010 Section 303(d) List of “Water Quality Limited Waterbodies.” Heflin Creek and O’Kelly Creek are also listed as streams with “insufficient data, but potential concern.” The Oregon State Water Quality Standards states that the seven-day-average maximum temperature of a stream identified as having salmon and trout rearing and migration use, including the streams within the planning area, may not exceed 18.0 degrees Celsius (64.4 degrees Fahrenheit). No measurable increase in water temperature from management practices is allowed in these streams based on the Forest Plan.

In order to compare the proposed alternatives relative to stream temperatures in the Bailey Butte Fire Project area, monitored summer stream temperatures within and directly adjacent to the project boundary were compiled and 7-day-average maximum temperatures were determined for all sites. When all or most 7-day-average maximum temperatures fell between 50 and 57 degrees Fahrenheit, it was given a condition rating of Properly Functioning. If most sites’ 7-day average maximum temperatures ranged between 57 and 64 degrees Fahrenheit the condition was determined to be Functioning at Risk. Finally, if 7-day-average maximum temperatures consistently exceeded 64 degree Fahrenheit, then the existing condition was determined to be Not Properly Functioning.

77


Stream Shade

Reductions in solar input resulting from shading are a primary factor affecting stream temperature. The term “stream shade” often refers to all shade on any part of the stream that blocks solar input to the stream channel. Shade functions generally occur within 100-200 feet of the channel (Beschta et al. 1987). Stream shade is primarily a function of stream orientation, channel width, tree heights adjacent to the stream, and ground slope above the bankfull channel. Very little if any shade is provided to the stream from trees located on the north side of east-west trending streams (Zwieniecki and Newton 1999; Ice 2001).

As part of Level II and BLS stream inventory surveys, shade is measured with a Solar Pathfinder 2 above water surface at mid-channel. Shade is recorded for hardwoods (include alder, aspen, sage brush, current, snowberry, etc.) as well as overall shade that includes tree species and steep valleys. Shade values for a channel reach are determined by placing this instrument above the channel midpoint, reading areas across the curve that display a reflection of trees or other shading features, and summing the values for those shaded areas.

On the Ochoco National Forest, the Forest Plan standards and guidelines direct that at least 80 percent of stream surfaces should be shaded, or that 100 percent of potential shade levels should be present when 80 percent shade cannot be attained (e.g. open wet meadow areas). Stream shade comes from adjacent conifer forests, topographic shading in steep drainages, or riparian vegetation near the stream. Open meadow areas are common in the watersheds and have a low potential for meeting the 80 percent shade criteria due to the absence of bordering forest and hillsides. Sources of shade in open meadows generally include; sedges, rushes and other riparian vegetation that tends to flourish where the water table is high most of the year.

Existing condition of stream shade in Bailey Butte Fire project streams were compiled from stream surveys and rated as Properly Functioning, Functioning at Risk, or Not Properly Functioning. A Properly Functioning rating indicates that stream shade is meeting Forest Plan Standards (i.e. > 80 percent), a Functioning at Risk rating indicates stream shade estimates between 70 and 80 percent, and a Not Properly Functioning rating is associated with stream shade of less than 70 percent.

Bank Stability

Soil disturbance on ridges or side slopes may never affect water quality, but disturbance of a channel bed or bank is immediately reflected in downstream sediment levels. Unstable stream banks associated with mechanical disturbance (including trampling), loss of vegetative root strength, decreases in roughness associated with large woody material (LWM) and vegetation removal, or stream banks of incised streams are highly susceptible to changes in flow or sediment load. Not only does quantity of riparian vegetation have an effect on bank stability, but the value of the vegetation type can greatly influence root density and bank stability (Liquori and Jackson 2001). Bank erosion can account for most of the sediment load in a drainage system. If the discharge and/or the sediment load are substantially increased, the flow may erode the streambanks or deposit sediment to reach a new equilibrium. A high incidence of raw banks (i.e. cutbanks), headcuts, and/or braided channels (Rosgen channel type D) are indicative of unstable stream banks.

Environmental effects of unstable streambanks include increased turbidity and sediment yield, development of cutbanks, and changes in channel morphology. The result of these changes may result in water quality conditions that are lethal to aquatic organisms. Changes in channel morphology would primarily be seen with changes in entrenchment and width-to-depth ratios (Marcuson 1977, Duff 1979). Streams with unstable banks typically erode laterally (i.e. become wider and shallower), which increases the width to depth ratio.

To determine existing condition, the percent of stable bank was derived from measurements of cutbank (BLS and Level II over multiple years). Percent of stable banks were calculated by stream

78


survey to assess existing condition of each subwatershed relative to bank stability using Table 32 and given a rating of Not Properly functioning if banks were less than 80% stable, Functioning at Risk if banks were between 80 and 90% stable, and Properly Functioning if banks were greater than 90% stable.

Fine Sediment/Turbidity

Turbidity is the degree to which suspended material in the water impedes light penetration. Turbidity is expressed in Nephrometric Turbidity Units (NTUs). There can be a close correlation between turbidity and suspended sediment in a given stream, but the correlation can change as organic material increases over the summer or if the percent of sediment from different sources in the drainage changes. The correlation is poor in sediment-limited systems. Turbidity is not a good indicator of the amount of sediment being transported as bedload. Generally, turbidity levels between 25 to 50 NTU can result in reduced growth or emigration of salmonids (Sweka and Hartman 2001). Most measurable effects to aquatic life result from sediment instead of turbidity.

Current State water quality standards direct that turbidity levels should not exceed background levels by more than 10 percent. There is no quantitative standard for sediment in the current Oregon DEQ water quality rules. The Narrative Criteria section (340-041-0007-12), however, states that activities can not result in the formation of appreciable organic or inorganic deposits deleterious to fish or other aquatic life but this is more of an objective than a standard. The state appears to be using turbidity as a surrogate for sediment. Sources of suspended sediment in small forest streams include both internal and external sources (Gomi et al. 2005). Internal sources that frequently occur include channel substrate, sediment wedge, bank deposits, headward channel extension, soil subsurface erosion. Potential effects from timber harvest activities to internal sources include changes in flow response, channel roughness as a result of slash entrainment, substrate and sediment wedge. External sources of suspended sediment in small streams that frequently occur include slope surface erosion and bank erosion. Potential effects from timber harvest activities to external sources include road fill failures (mass movement), road surface, cut slope, fill, and ditch, slash burning, wind throw in riparian buffer, tree/wood death and decay, soil compaction and soil clearing by yarding (Gomi et al. 2005). Many studies have identified roads as the dominant source of erosion relative to other timber harvest activities (Gomi et al. 2005, Surfleet et al. 2011, Belt et al. 1992). Luce and Black found that little sediment was eroded from most road segments, but just a few road segments produce a large amount of the sediment (1999).

The amount of sediment actually delivered to the stream is the component of surface erosion that affects the aquatic species habitat. Magnitudes of sediment delivery are primarily controlled by overland flow characteristics and vegetative filtering (Croke and Hairsine, 2006). Sediment delivery to the stream channel is of a particular concern in semi-arid climates. Semi-arid climates, such as the climate found in Central Oregon, are expected to be elevated relative to other climates as a results of these climates having sufficient precipitation to drive erosion, but limited amounts of vegetation that stabilize hillslopes from erosion (Goode et al. 2012). Generally, vegetated filter strips between 200 to 300 feet from the stream are considered to be effective in controlling sediment that is not channelized depending upon the riparian buffer slope (Belt et al. 1992).

The numerous organisms forming the base of the aquatic food chain find shelter and habitat in the open spaces within stream gravel and cobble. Filling these spaces with sediment reduces the habitable volume of the stream. As sediment sources and delivery exceeds 20 percent of the total area on the substrate, deposits within the larger cobble material of the streambed produce an embedded channel, with consequent loss of aquatic habitat. Gravel embeddedness of less than 20 percent is essential to maintain a healthy salmonid population, particularly in those areas identified as potential or existing spawning areas (Bjornn and Reiser, 1991). If fine sediment exceeds 20 percent, the spaces

79


between the rocks in the substrate are filled and oxygenation of eggs is reduced. Reduced oxygenation results in reduced success of fish and frog eggs surviving.

Estimates of the percent of surface substrate which is composed of silt and organics were compiled from Level II Stream Inventory data. These data were then weighted by reach length and averaged by subwatershed. These weighted average fine sediment percentages were then compared to the criteria in Table 32 to determine whether the water quality in the streams in each subwatershed appear to be Properly Functioning, Function at Risk or Not Properly Functioning relative to fine sediment in streams.

Habitat Elements


Large woody material (LWM) is widely recognized as a major element in the physical and biological structure of forested stream ecosystems (McDade et al. 1990). LWM also affects the routing of other watershed products, particularly sediment, and their influence on ecosystems. By concentrating and dispersing hydraulic forces, LWM can greatly diversify physical conditions in streams and provide habitat for various species and age classes in aquatic communities (Lisle 2002). Native salmonids and other aquatic organisms have evolved in steam systems where LWM and fluvial processes develop and maintain suitable channel morphology for all or part of their life stages. LWM helps retain organic and inorganic particulate matter that is important for channel stability, biological diversity, and productivity. It also plays an important role in pool formation. Within the watershed, the majority of pools are formed and maintained by LWM.

For LWM frequency, INFISH and PACFISH gives an interim objective of at least 20 pieces per mile. The natural amount of LWM reflects differences in physical processes that shape valley floors and the subsequent successional stages of terrestrial plant communities on these geomorphic surfaces. These processes vary across broad spatial scales. Reference conditions for LWM have been documented in streams of unmanaged, mix conifer forests in the Oregon Blue Mountains (Cordova 1995), a physiographic province more similar to the watersheds within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. We will use LWM frequencies from this study, instead of the INFISH and PACFISH interim objective, as the standard for the Bailey Butte Fire project area watersheds.

On page 93 of Cordova (1995), Table 16 shows wood frequency by wood diameter for all pieces over one meter in length. The INFISH and PACFISH interim objective for wood frequency is based on wood over 12 inches in diameter and over 35 feet long. Because Cordova doesn’t give results for wood frequency with the same size class as the INFISH and PACFISH interim objective, the following assumptions were made:

• Cordova shows separate length and diameter frequency distributions (1995, Figure 7) that indicate roughly 50% of all wood pieces were over 35 feet in length and 37% of all wood pieces were over 12 inches in diameter.

• Based on personal communications with Cordova, diameter was tightly correlated to length (i.e. the larger diameter pieces were more likely to be greater in length).

• Therefore, we are making the assumption that most of the pieces over 12 inches in diameter were over 35 feet in length.

Based on these assumptions, we will use the wood frequencies given in Table 16 (Cordova 1995) as our Riparian Management Objective and the measure for Properly Functioning. In moderately constrained channel types (typical of Class I, II, and III streams in the project area) LWM frequencies greater than 69 pieces per mile is considered Properly Functioning; in constrained channel types (typical of Class IV streams in the project area) LWM frequencies greater than 48 pieces per mile are

80


considered Properly Functioning. Streams that currently meet LWM frequency standards for Properly Functioning, but lack potential sources of LWM recruitment to maintain that standard are considered Functioning at Risk. Streams that do not meet standards for Properly Functioning and lack potential LWM recruitment are considered Not Properly Functioning.

Pool Frequency and Quality

Pools can be either freely formed by the interaction of flow and sediment transport or forced by local obstructions, such as boulders and LWM, which cause flow convergence and turbulent velocity fluctuations that scour the channel bed. Extensive literature documents the influence of LWM on channel morphology in forested mountain streams. In small channels, individual pieces of LWM trap sediment, cause local bed and bank scour, and create step pools. In larger channels, LWM accumulations locally influence bed and bank scour, side channel development, bar stability, and island formation (Montgomery et al. 1995). Channels without LWM can quickly evolve to very simple forms. Moderately sized channels with gradients of about one to four percent are particularly prone to simplify, because they have a weak tendency to form bars and pools without exogenous structure (Montgomery and Buffington 1997). These conditions typify the fish-bearing streams in the project area. Pool depth and complexity are also a function of sediment routing. Large pulses of sediment moving through a stream system can restrict pool depth and ultimately limit habitat capability.

Pools provide critical habitat for salmonids and other aquatic species. Salmonid production is typically greatest in streams with a pool-to-riffle ratio of approximately 1: 1. Pools are inhabited throughout the year by adult and juvenile salmonids and are important as refuge from high flow or frozen conditions during the winter (Raleigh et al 1984). Pools differ in their ability to provide resting areas and cover; Lewis (1969) found that streams with deep, low velocity pools containing extensive cover had the most stable trout populations.

The frequency and volume of pools is dependent on stream gradient and drainage area, generally as stream size (order) increases, pools become larger but more infrequent. INFISH and PACFISH give interim objectives for pool frequency based on channel width (Table 3). These values are used as Riparian Management Objectives for the project and as condition criteria. Streams that meet pool frequency standards outlined in Table 32 are considered Properly Functioning. Streams that meet pool frequency standards but large wood recruitment is inadequate to maintain pools over time are considered Functioning at Risk. Streams that do not meet pool frequency standards are considered Not Properly Functioning.

Based on the Matrix of Pathways and Indictors developed by NMFS (1996), pool quality is considered Properly Functioning if there are numerous pools greater than one meter deep with good cover and cool water and only minor reduction of pool volume by fine sediment. Streams with only a few pools greater than one meter deep or inadequate cover or cool temperatures, and a moderate reduction of pool volume by fine sediment are considered Functioning at Risk. Streams with no pools greater than one meter deep and inadequate cover or cool temperatures, and a major reduction of pool volume by fine sediment are considered Not Properly Functioning.

Native Riparian Condition

Interactions between riparian forests and streams influence the biological community and physical conditions found in each system. Streams influence forest conditions that create riparian forest communities different from upland forests in species composition and structure, and conversely, riparian forests influence stream conditions (Meleason et al. 2003). Interactions between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems include modification of microclimate, alteration of nutrient inputs from uplands, contribution of organic material to steams and floodplains, and retention of those inputs (Gregory et al. 1991). Allochthonous inputs (organic matter from outside the channel – i.e. litterfall,

81


LWM, etc.) are critical to stream ecosystem function. Coniferous, deciduous, shrub, and herbaceous litterfall are important drivers of stream productivity. Also, terrestrial insects, which are an important component in the diet of salmonids, occur in higher abundance in deciduous forests. In small, fish-bearing streams, terrestrial invertebrates can account for about half of the diet of salmonids during the summer and fall. Openings in the canopy may increase primary productivity, biomass, and diversity of aquatic invertebrates, and thus biomass of fish. However, excess light and temperature may lead to blooms of filamentous green algae, which can depress invertebrate stocks.

This organic material must also be retained within a stream to serve as either nutritional resources or habitat for most aquatic organisms. LWM along with smaller branches trap organic material in transport, making it available for consumption by the biological community.

Riparian plant communities reflect complex disturbance histories – floods, wildfires, wind, and insect and disease outbreaks – and therefore exhibit a high degree of structural and compositional diversity (Gregory et al. 1991). Thus, allochthonous inputs to streams are also highly variable and governed by different recruitment processes – mortality, bank erosion and landsliding. Depending on which process is dominant, the source distance of LWM and other allochthonous inputs to the stream varies greatly.

Protection of riparian source areas that deliver allochthonous material to streams has been a major component of National Forest Plans, including the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. During the last couple of decades, riparian protection in the form of prescriptive uniform no-treatment (or minimal treatment) buffers has been the prevailing paradigm in watershed management. The uniform buffer concept is widely used because of its simplicity in regulation and compliance, but uniform buffers are generally not designed to account for riparian functions that are naturally variable including wood loading, thermal loading, biological productivity, aquatic habitat quality, wildlife use and wildfire risk. Uniform buffers, therefore, may not effectively provide protection based on ecological processes, and may not address other restoration needs such as accelerated recovery of young, dense forest stands to ones with old forest structure or increased susceptibility of riparian forests to wildfire, insects and disease outbreaks that may occur due to altered fire regimes or changing climate.

Because of high physiographic variation along riparian areas, tailoring riparian management to site-specific conditions may more effectively protect ecological processes. For example, larger protective buffers could be targeted in areas that are currently well-functioning riparian and stream systems, and smaller protective buffers could be targeted in areas that are poorly-functioning and could benefit from restorative management activities. Based on the Matrix of Pathways and Indictors developed by NMFS (1996), riparian vegetation that provides adequate large wood recruitment, habitat protection, and connectivity in all subwatersheds, and percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural community/composition is greater than 50% is considered Properly Functioning. A moderate loss of large wood recruitment, habitat protection, and connectivity, and percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural community/composition is 25-50% is considered Functioning at Risk. Riparian vegetation that is fragmented, poorly connected, or provides inadequate protection of habitat and percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural community/composition is less than 25% is considered Not Properly Functioning.

Width/Depth Ratio

Width/Depth ratio is the ratio of the bankfull surface width to the mean bankfull depth of the channel. This ratio is important to the understanding of the distribution of flows within the channel and their ability to move sediment (Rosgen 1996). This is one of the most sensitive indicators to changes in channel stability as a result of disturbance to riparian vegetation, channels or watersheds. As width/depth ratios increase, the channel becomes wider and shallower, resulting in higher bank

82


erosion. Increased sediment supply from increased bank erosion then results in a loss in the capability of the channel to transport the same amount of sediment, further accelerating bank erosion.

Ideally, to determine whether a stream channel is properly functioning relative to its width/depth ratio, reference reaches within the same channel types and hydro-physiographic regions should be surveyed to determine appropriate ranges. Identifying these reference reach sites and collecting the reference reach data is an intensive process; therefore, this data is unavailable for the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Watershed. In absence of this reference reach data, width/depth ratios used by Rosgen for classification of primary stream types were used to assess whether the surveyed stream channels within the Bailey Butte Fire Timber Salvage Area were Properly Functioning, Functioning at Risk, or Not Properly Functioning (Table 4).

Watershed Condition

Road Density/Location

Roads are a major source of erosion and stream sedimentation on forested lands. Roads can increase erosion rates and turbidity three orders of magnitude greater than the undisturbed forest condition (Grace 2003). Sediment eroded from the road prism can be delivered to a forest stream, resulting in increased turbidity, sediment loads, and degraded habitat for fish. Research has shown that roads have the greatest effect on erosion relative to other forest management practices (Megahan and King 2004; Surfleet et al 2011).

Roads have the potential to increase the drainage density of a stream network by intercepting runoff at stream crossings or by channelizing flow that would otherwise be sheet flow or groundwater flow (Wemple at al. 1996; Jones et al. 2000; Takken et al. 2006). By increasing the drainage density and providing a more direct route to stream channels, roads in effect can decrease the time it takes for the precipitation, in the form of runoff, to enter the stream channel and potentially resulting in increased peak flows (La March and Lettenmaier 2001; Storck et al. 1998; Woldie et al. 2009). Areas with high road densities, high drainage densities, and a high density of stream crossings typically result in higher connectivity of the road and stream network. The effects of roads (or trails) on increased peak flows is expected to be greatest downstream of areas with a high density of stream crossings (Jones et al., 2000).

In order to address potential effects of increased drainage densities within the Bailey Butte Fire project, the existing condition and alternative conditions of road densities, number miles of streams within 300 feet, within 100 feet, within RHCAs, and stream crossing densities were estimated as directed by the 2012 Region 6 letter of direction to determine baseline conditions for projects which may affect ESA listed species.

Road Density

Road densities were determined for the existing condition by estimating the total miles of Operational Maintenance Level 1-5 Roads within the analysis subwatershed and dividing this length by the total drainage area of the subwatershed in square miles. These values for road densities were then given a rating of low, moderate, or high. Low for road densities <2 miles per square mile, moderate for 2-3 miles per square mile), and high for > 3 miles per square mile. Closed roads (Level I) were included in the analysis, since road closures typically consist of installing a blockage of some sort at the road entrance to prevent use rather than stabilized hydrologically. Closed roads, therefore, can still contribute sediment to stream channels (Elliot 2000).

Road Location

The location of the road relative to the stream channel is also an important factor that affects whether sediment is actually delivered to the stream. Roads further from the stream typically have longer

83


hillslopes and therefore longer overland flowpaths between the road and the stream (Croke and Hairsine 2006). Long hillslopes typically mean a higher likelihood that the vegetated hillslope will induce infiltration or dissipate overland flow resulting in sediment deposition on the hillslope and less sediment delivery to the stream.

Among the other parameters evaluated was the length of stream with roads within 300 feet and 100 feet. Roads within these stream buffers affect sediment delivery potential and large woody material recruitment potential, thus aquatic habitat. The 300 feet buffer was used based on a review of a large body of research on sediment delivery distances (Belt et al. 1992). The review concluded that sediment within 300 feet of a waterbody has the potential to be delivered to the water body despite the presence of vegetation buffers. The 100 feet buffer was used based on the average maximum height of the tree species most commonly found in riparian areas on the Ochoco National Forest. Mature trees within 100 feet of a stream have the potential of falling into the stream, and thus being recruited as large woody material. Buffers of 300 feet and 100 feet were calculated using GIS. GIS estimates may not be totally accurate because the road and stream layers are not entirely accurate at those distances and GIS does not account for slope distance. However, using GIS is still an effective way to quantify road proximity to streams.

In order to incorporate road location in the existing condition and effects analysis, mapped road locations relative to the stream channel were considered along with road densities to assess watershed condition relative to roads.

Equivalent Harvest Acres (EHA)

The Ochoco National Forest developed a formula to depict how much of the area in a watershed could be in an “Equivalent Harvest” condition and not cause a cumulative increase in water yield that would adversely affect channel condition in average or above average runoff years; his method is discussed in further detail in Appendix B of the Aquatic Resources Specialists’ Report (project file, Ochoco National Forest, Prineville, OR). The Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines indicate a threshold of 25% for the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed and 25% for the Bridge Creek Watershed; however, the hydrology report for the Marks Creek Watershed Analysis recommended a reduced threshold of 25% (this would apply to Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed). EHA conditions exceeding 25% indicate that the watershed may not be properly functioning relative to water yield and needs to be field validated; conditions lower than 25% indicate either a functioning at risk or a properly functioning condition relative to water yield. If some of the disturbances, including roads, are concentrated in unstable or potentially unstable areas (e.g. landslide terrain), refugia, or riparian areas, then the watershed is considered to be functioning at risk. Availability of information related to historic timber harvest activity is limited to within the Ochoco National Forest, so only those portions of the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed were used to calculate EHA.

Aquatic Species

Project activities have the potential to affect aquatic species through modification of habitat that may affect a species’ population size and distribution, growth and survival, life history diversity and isolation, and persistence and genetic integrity. The analysis design for evaluating modification of habitat has previously been explained. Once effects to habitat have been analyzed, the potential effects to each species will be discussed and an effects determination will be made. The species that are present in the project area or have potential habitat in the project area are listed in Table 36. Figure 7 shows the proximity of the project boundary to listed species.

84


Table 36. Aquatic species on the 2011 USFS Region 6 Regional Forester Special Status Species list that occur or have potential habitat in the project area.

Species

Evolutionarily Significant Unit or Distinct Population

Segment

Listing Category

Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Middle Columbia River Critical Habitat, March 2005;

Ochoco NF Management Indicator Species Redband trout

(Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp.)

Malheur Lakes Sensitive in Oregon; Ochoco NF Management Indicator Species

Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) Outside Great Basin Sensitive in Oregon

85


Figure 7. Bailey Butte Project Area fish distribution.

86


Existing Condition – Watershed, Water Quality, and Aquatic Habitat

Watersheds The Bailey Butte Fire project Area includes portions of two watersheds (Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek) and three subwatersheds. These three subwatersheds were analyzed as part of this report: Middle Bear Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek, and Upper Marks Creek. Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUC), which break drainage systems into progressively smaller areas, and drainage names within the project area are listed in Table 37. Table 37. Hydrologic codes for the Bailey Butte Fire project.

Field Area Name Hydrologic Unit Code 1st Region Pacific Northwest 17 2nd Sub-region Middle Columbia River 1707 3rd River Basin John Day 170702 4th Sub-basin Lower John Day 17070204 5th Watershed Bridge Creek 1707020403 6th Subwatershed Middle Bear Creek 170702040305 West Branch Bridge Creek 170702040302 3rd River Basin Deschutes 170703 4th Sub-basin Lower Crooked 17070305 5th Watershed Upper Ochoco Creek 1707030502 6th Subwatershed Upper Marks Creek 170703050203

Streams

Table 38 lists the named streams by watershed and subwatershed within the Bailey Butte Fire project Area. Streams within the Bailey Butte Fire project Area have a dendritic drainage pattern with approximately 110 miles of mapped streams with defined channels (Class I – IV) within the analysis subwatersheds (Table 39). There are approximately 37 miles of fish bearing streams (Class I-II) within the analysis subwatersheds. Table 39 lists the lengths of streams by stream class within the project area summarized by watershed and subwatershed. Table 38. List of Streams in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area by watershed and subwatershed.

Bridge Creek Watershed Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed

Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed Upper Marks Creek

Subwatershed

Dodds Creek O’Kelly Creek Nature Creek West Branch Bridge Creek Marks Creek

Heflin Creek Camp Creek Carroll Creek Crystal Creek Clover Creek

For the purposes of this analysis, only Class I, II, III, or IV streams are considered functional streams. Class V (or IX) streams are ephemeral draws that do not have established beds and banks and often are covered with vegetation. Ephemeral streams do not routinely transport sediment.

87


Table 39. Stream Class Miles by Watershed and Subwatershed. Only streams in the project area and stream miles within forest boundary are included in this table.

Watershed Subwatershed Class I Class II Class III Class IV Total Bridge Creek Middle Bear

Creek 1.4 3.5 3.0 6.5 14.4

West Branch Bridge Creek 0.3 1.9 7.6 7.3 17.1

Upper Ochoco Creek

Upper Marks Creek 8.7 21.2 16.7 32.3 78.9

Total Stream Miles 10.4 26.6 27.3 46.1 110.4

The perennial streams equate to Forest Service Class I through Class III streams. Class I and II streams may, however, be intermittent if they are used by fish part of the year. Flow regime (i.e. perennial and intermittent) characteristics for the subwatersheds in the project area are summarized in Table 40. Streams in the Bailey Butte Fire project area are primarily perennial and intermittent streams. Table 40. Miles of perennial and intermittent streams in the Bailey Butte Fire project area (does not include ephemeral streams).

Watershed Subwatershed Perennial Intermittent Total

Bridge Creek

Middle Bear Creek 7.9 6.5 14.4

West Branch Bridge 9.8 7.3 17.1

Upper Ochoco Creek

Upper Marks Creek 46.6 32.3 78.9

Total Stream Miles 64.3 46.1 110.4

Aquatic Species Middle Columbia River Steelhead Trout Critical Habitat (Threatened)

Critical habitat is designated approximately 1.5 miles downstream of the project area along West Branch Bridge Creek and 0.3 miles downstream of the project area along Dodds Creek.

Based on the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead in the John Day River basin, subpopulation size for the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed and West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed were determined to be Functioning at Risk and Unknown-Functioning at Risk, respectively. Other characteristics analyzed in the assessment in relation to subpopulation were growth and survival, life history diversity, and persistence and genetic integrity which were all rated as Functioning at Risk and/or unknown for both subwatersheds.

Redband Trout (Sensitive)

Historically, redband trout may have occupied more aquatic habitat within the watershed analysis area than presently. Road densities, livestock grazing, timber harvest, and mining have contributed to a reduction in suitable habitat and increased fish passage barriers. Non-passable irrigation diversions and dams on the Crooked River contribute to fragmentation of native redband trout populations. This further increases risk for localized extinctions and can limit the long-term sustainability of these native trout populations.

Redband trout typically inhabit cooler, well-oxygenated water that is less than 70°F, although they tolerate a wider range of water temperatures (from 32°F up to 80°F) better than many other salmonid

88


species (Wydoski and Whitney 1979). Current research indicates that redband trout have developed phenotypic traits that allow them to tolerate marginal trout habitats in the high desert areas of Oregon (Rodnick et. al. 2004, Gamperl et. al. 2002). Despite various phenotypic traits, the preferred temperature for optimum metabolic performance in redband is 55.4°F (Gamperl et al., 2002) and the upper lethal temperature limits are 84.7-85.1°F, very similar to temperature profiles observed in most other Oncorhynchus species (Rodnick et. al., 2004).

Redband trout typically spawn between March and the end of June depending on water temperatures and timing of spring runoff. Egg deposition occurs in stream areas that have adequate water depth and velocity and appropriate sized gravels for redd construction. Water temperatures influence the number of days eggs incubate in the gravel before fry emergence. During the fry and parr life stages, redband trout are often observed along stream margins in slower waters. Adults are most often observed in pools near large wood or available cover. Food sources for young and adults include aquatic insects, amphipods, fish and eggs and adults may also eat crustaceans when they are available (Wydoski and Whitney 1979).

There is little life history information for the population in Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Watershed. Redband trout inhabit perennial streams in the Upper Marks, West Branch Bridge, and Middle Bear Creek Subwatersheds within this project area.

Columbia Spotted Frog

Historically the Columbia spotted frog was found at elevations ranging from near sea level to 7,370 feet. Their range extended from southeast Alaska through British Columbia, eastern Washington and Oregon to northeast California and eastward to western Montana and Wyoming, and northern Utah. Columbia spotted frogs have been found throughout the Ochoco National Forest and are present within the project area.

Columbia spotted frogs are highly aquatic, thus they are generally found in close proximity to water in riparian habitat. In winter months, the frogs burrow into mud in wet meadows or in streams. They breed in shallow water areas such as stream margins or pond edges, flooded meadows, or in pools of water formed by snow melt from early March through the end of May. Timing of breeding is dependent on snowmelt and rising water temperatures. After hatching, the larval stage (tadpole) remains in the water until metamorphosis into the adult form. Adults utilize both water habitat and nearby riparian areas for foraging and refuge needs.

The causes of decline are not fully understood, but like most amphibians a major threat is the destruction, fragmentation and degradation of streams and wetlands. Land use activities have initiated or accelerated the channel incision process, which has changed the hydrologic function of meadow systems (USFWS 2011). These changes in the hydrology of meadows, mainly the lowering of the water table, can cause the vegetation communities to shift from wet meadow communities to dry upland plant communities. The loss of meadow complexes reduces the available habitat for Columbia spotted frogs. Natural fluctuations in environmental conditions (e.g., drought) tend to exacerbate the adverse effects of land use activities (USFWS 2011). Improvements in stream and wetland hydrology and riparian plant communities would improve Columbia spotted frog habitat.

Formal Columbia spotted frog surveys have not been conducted, but frog sightings have occurred in the project area. Vegetation preferred by frogs such as sedges, willows, and alders is limited, but available along some of the streams in the project area. There is no information about their population size, distribution, growth, survival, life history diversity and isolation, or persistence in the Upper Marks Creek, Middle Bear Creek, and West Branch Bridge Subwatersheds.

Other Species Observed

89


Dace, bridge lip suckers, and hatchery rainbow trout have been observed within the project area from past stream inventory and fish surveys. Dace were observed in Crystal Creek in 2003 and Marks Creek in 1992. Bridge lip suckers were observed in Marks Creek in 1992. Hatchery rainbow trout were observed in Marks Creek, Dodds Creek and Heflin Creek in 1992. None of these species are listed as TES.

Bailey Butte Fire

Mortality in aquatics species has been reported in many studies as a direct effect of fire. A study in Yellowstone National Park following the fires of 1988 reported dead salmonids in three streams (Gresswell 1999). It is unclear as to the cause of fire-related fish mortalities, but fatalities are generally associated with more intense fires (Gresswell 1999). No fish mortality was identified during the Bailey Butte fire, but there may have been site-specific mortality of aquatic species where burn severity was high in RHCAs.

Although mortality can be expected from fires, studies have shown that fires do not always lead to extirpation and that populations do rebound to pre-fire status. Minshall and Brock (1991) also reported in the study following the 1988 fires observations of live fish in the fire-effected streams, suggesting that mortality was not uniform or that surviving individuals migrated into these streams soon after the fire.

Water Quality Water Temperature

The only project area stream listed on Oregon’s 303 (d) list as impaired relative to stream temperature is Marks Creek. Heflin Creek and O’Kelly Creek are also listed as streams with “insufficient data, but potential concern.” These consistent instances of stream temperature thresholds and the 303(d) listing of for Mark Creeks indicate that streams within Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed within the vicinity of the project are Functioning at Risk relative to stream temperature. Overall, based on observed stream temperature data collected before the Bailey Butte wildfire (see Table 41), temperatures appeared to be Properly Functioning in the Middle Bear Creek and West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatersheds. Temperatures exceeded the state stream temperature threshold of 18.0°C only at one site: Crystal Creek near the confluence of Marks Creek. The rating from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment, in relation to stream temperature, for West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed is similar and rated as Functioning Appropriately on National Forest administered lands. However, the stream temperature rating for Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed was rated as Functioning at Risk.

Impaired stream temperatures are likely a result of a combination of factors. These factors include grazing in riparian areas, impaired wetland and meadow conditions, historic land use practices and incised channels disconnected from their floodplains. Over time, as a result of historic land use practices, many riparian areas on the East slope of the Cascade Mountains have shifted from shrub dominated to coniferous forest dominated. This has resulted in less root strength, resulting in reduced bank stability and wider streams, which ultimately results in increased stream temperatures (Liquori and Jackson 2001).

Bailey Butte fire will likely have short-term adverse effects to stream temperatures due to a reduction of streamside vegetation and associated increase in insolation. One study conducted by Amaranthus et al. (in Gresswell 1999) reported that maximum water temperature increased by 3.3-10.0°C at intensively burned sites one year after a fire in southwestern Oregon. Over time with the expected increase and recovery in streamside vegetation, stream temperatures are expected to return to the pre-fire condition similar to those shown in Table 41. It is possible long-term that riparian encroachment

90


by conifers will be slowed and riparian shade producing vegetation can reestablish in the fire area, which may improve shade and subsequently water temperatures from pre-fire conditions. Table 41. Seven-day average maximum water temperatures in degrees celsius.

Site Name Start Date Stop Date 7-Day Average Maximum Temperature

Condition Rating #7 Day Averages

Calculated # <13.8°C # 13.8°C – 17.8°C # > 17.8 °C

West Branch Bridge Creek, at Forest Boundary

7/08/1994 9/22/1994 71 34 37 0 FAR 6/14/1995 9/05/1995 79 54 25 0 FAR 6/19/1996 10/15/1996 113 91 22 0 PF 6/13/2003 9/30/2003 104 40 64 0 FAR 6/24/2013 6/11/2014 347 308 39 0 PF

Crystal Creek, near confluence with Marks Creek

6/12/1996 10/08/1996 113 31 38 44 NPF 5/24/1997 9/19/1997 113 5 44 63 NPF 6/15/2001 9/17/2001 89 25 46 18 FAR 7/03/2002 10/14/2002 98 71 27 0 FAR 6/03/2003 9/16/2003 100 78 9 13 FAR 6/19/2004 10/07/2004 105 32 31 42 NPF

Dodds Creek, upstream of confluence with Heflin Creek

5/26/1995 9/21/1995 113 91 22 0 PF 6/05/1996 9/26/1996 108 108 0 0 PF 5/31/2012 12/31/2012 209 209 0 0 PF 1/1/2013 6/05/2013 150 150 0 0 PF

6/06/2013 6/11/2014 365 363 2 0 PF Marks Creek, near confluence with Nature Creek

5/25/1995 7/18/1995 49 26 23 0 FAR

4/11/1997 6/17/1997 60 41 19 0 FAR

O’Kelly Creek, near Forest Boundary

6/14/1995 9/10/1995 83 83 0 0 PF

Stream shade Table 42 summarizes stream survey data in the project area in relation to percent shade and given a rating of Not Properly Functioning, Functioning at Risk, or Properly Functioning. Refer to the Methods section for definitions of ratings for stream shade.

Overall, stream shade did not meet or exceed 80% on any of the surveyed stream reaches in Bridge Creek and Marks Creek Watersheds, except the West Branch Bridge tributary which was approximately one mile long surveyed in 1997 using BLS. Stream surface shading was below the 70 percent shade level on approximately 45 percent, 0 percent, and 100 percent of the stream reaches surveyed in the Middle Bear Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek, and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds, respectively. Shade is particularly lacking along Crystal Creek and the upper reaches of Marks Creek. Standards are almost being met in the upper reach of Dodds Creek. No data were available for Carroll Creek, Clover Creek, O’Kelly Creek and Camp Creek. However, the data used to reference conditions in these creeks show that shade standards are most likely being met.

Average of all three subwatersheds in Middle Bear Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek and Marks Creek met the criteria of Not Properly Functioning from Table 32. A variety of factors may be influencing shade numbers that are considered to be not properly functioning, including grazing of hardwoods in riparian areas, encroachment of conifers in meadow and riparian areas that shade out hardwoods, and past riparian harvest that removed much of the overstory shade.

The Bailey Butte fire caused reduced streamside vegetation as well as removal of overstory canopy. The effects of the fire will be more severe in areas which experienced moderate to high intensity fire. Minimal or no effects will likely be found in low intensity burned areas. Because stream shade is dependent on overstory canopy and streamside vegetation, stream shade will be reduced in areas that

91


experienced moderate to high intensity fire. Over time reestablishment of streamside vegetation and overstory canopy is expected, returning shade to pre-fire conditions. It is also possible that the fire will invigorate decadent hardwood species in the burn perimeter, which could lead to an long-term benefit in terms of shade compared to pre-fire conditions.

Table 42. Stream shade ratings - only streams within the project area are included in this table.

Watershed Subwatershed Stream Name Reach & Survey Method

Year Total Shade (%)

Hardwood Shade (%) Rating

Bridge Creek

Middle Bear Creek

Dodds Creek

1 – LII 1989 78.0 - FAR 1 – BLS 1992 60.5 - NPF 2 – BLS 1992 74.8 - FAR 3 – BLS 1992 63.3 - NPF 4 – BLS 1992 63.1 - NPF 5 – BLS 1992 72.0 - FAR 6 – BLS 1992 71.4 - FAR 7 – BLS 1992 64.6 - NPF 8 – BLS 1992 51.5 - NPF

Heflin Creek 1 – BLS 1992 69.3 - NPF Heflin Trib. 1 – BLS 1992 71.5 - FAR

West Branch Bridge Creek*

West Branch Bridge 1 – BLS 1997 79 11.9 FAR

West Branch Bridge Creek Trib. 1

1 – BLS 1997 70.6 10.3 FAR

West Branch Bridge Creek Trib. 2

1 – BLS 1997 80.3 17.9 PF

Upper Marks Creek

Nature Creek 1- BLS 1995 52.3 20.4 NPF

Upper Ochoco Creek

Nature Creek Trib. 1 – BLS 1995 60.6 0.6 NPF

Marks Creek 1 – BLS 1992 31 - NPF Marks Creek

2 – BLS 1992 14 - NPF

Crystal Creek 1 – LII 2003 44.7 16.2 NPF Crystal Creek 2 – LII 2003 38.3 11.7 NPF

*The locations of these surveys are not within or downstream the project area. Because there is no data for the project area within West Branch Bridge Creek subwatershed, this data will be used to supplement data not available. Field visits have verified that the stream reaches surveyed are similar to the stream reaches within the West Branch Bridge Creek subwatershed project area.

Bank Stability Spawning habitat has been adversely affected by the introduction of fine sediment from bank erosion in the project area watersheds. Sedimentation degrades spawning gravels and spawning success. Channel stability and the ability of the channel to transport the flows and sediment load of its watershed effectively is another important component of quality salmonid habitat.

45% of the surveyed streams met Forest Plan Standards for bank stability (<20% cutbank). Stream reaches that are Not Properly Functioning include reach 1 of Dodds Creek, Camp Creek, and Nature Creek (see Table 43). Similarly, streambank condition (bank stability) determined from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin rated as Functioning Appropriately on National Forest for the West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed. However, Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed was determined to be Functioning at Risk.

92


One possible explanation for why stream reaches are either not properly functioning or functioning at risk relative to bank stability may be a result of historic land use practices resulting in a shift in riparian vegetation types. A shift from shrub dominated to coniferous forested dominated riparian vegetation, likely resulted in decreased root strength and therefore decreased bank stability.

Erosional processes and soil properties were affected by the Bailey Butte fire (see Bailey Butte BAER Soils Report 2014). The scale and magnitude of the effects are related to the size and severity of the fire; topography, and size of the stream system; amount and timing of post-fire rainfall events (Gresswell 1999). Erosional processes were also increased due to the reduction of hillslope and streamside vegetation from the Bailey Butte fire. In moderate and high burn severity areas of the fire, the near total consumption of surface organics, high tree mortality, poorly-cohesive soil types, extent of hydrophobic soils and expected timing and intensity of rain events has the potential to erode both hillslopes and streambanks. The combination of these effects post-fire will likely reduce the amount of stable banks within the project area. However, with the reestablishment of riparian vegetation, it is expected that bank stability will return to pre-fire conditions. Table 43. Bank Stability within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Watershed Subwatershed Stream Name

Reach & Survey Method

Year Stable Banks (%) Rating

Bridge Creek

Middle Bear Creek

Dodds Creek

1 – LII 2011 67 NPF 1 – BLS 1992 76 NPF 2 – BLS 1992 83 FAR 3 –BLS 1992 90 FAR 4 – BLS 1992 97 PF 5 – BLS 1992 85 FAR 6 – BLS 1992 95 PF 7 – BLS 1992 99 PF 9 – BLS 1992 100 PF

Dodds Creek Trib. 3

1 – BLS 1992 99 PF 2 – BLS 1992 99 PF 3 – BLS 1992 100 PF

Heflin Creek 1 – BLS 1992 91 PF


West Branch Bridge* 1 – LII 2013 85 FAR

Camp Creek MIMS 2014 12 NPF

Upper Ochoco Creek Upper Marks Creek

Crystal Creek 1 – LII 2003 92 PF 2 – LII 2003 87 FAR

Nature Creek MIMS 2014 34 NPF

Marks Creek 1 – BLS 1992 90 PF 3 – BLS 1992 65 NPF


Fine Sediment/Turbidity Fine sediment consisting of silts and organics are relatively high in all project streams where percent surface fines (<2 mm) were collected. None of the streams surveyed are “Properly Functioning”, meaning that percent surface fines were all greater than 12% fines at surface as recommended by INFISH and PACFISH . In fact, 100% of stream reaches surveyed had percent surface fines that are “Not Properly Functioning,” i.e. over 20% fines at the surface (see Table 44). It should be noted that high percent fines may also be influenced by more anthropogenic activities, including natural process such as the dominant watershed geology and stream channel type. In addition, this analysis should be qualified base on the limited data available and the limited extent of that data.

Fine sediment/turbidity baseline condition from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead was rated as Functioning at Risk and Functioning Appropriately on National Forest

93


Administered lands for the Middle Bear Creek and West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatersheds, respectively. Difference in rating for the West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed is because the Biological Assessment conclusion for fine sediment was based on channel substrate, average percent cut-bank and riparian condition due to the lack of quantitative data. As mentioned previously, the analysis for fine sediment for the Bailey Butte Fire project is based on stream survey data, which is very limited.

Substrate embeddedness baseline conditions were also determined in the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin. Fine sediment in the form of silts, clays, and organics can deposit in the interstices of gravels resulting in spawning gravel embeddedness. Although substrate embeddedness is not analyzed in this project it is reflective of fine sediment conditions. Therefore, it is anticipated that fine sediment conditions will be similar to substrate embeddedness conditions. Similar to the conclusions made for fine sediment from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin, the assessment determined that Middle Bear Creek and West Branch Bridge Creek are Functioning at Risk and Functioning Appropriately on National Forest administered lands, respectively. Table 44. Percent surface fines in streams in the Bailey Butte Fire project area.



Year Surface Fines (%) Rating

Bridge Creek

Middle Bear Creek Dodds Creek 1 – LII 2011 44 NPF

West Branch Bridge


1 – LII 2013 37 NPF

Camp Creek MIMS 2014 68 NPF

Upper Ochoco Creek

Upper Marks Creek

Crystal Creek

1 – LII 2003 29 NPF 2 – LII 2003 45 NPF

Nature Creek MIMS 2014 95 NPF


A large percentage of the existing road networks within all project subwatersheds are located within 300 feet of perennial and intermittent streams. The largest percentages were seen in Dodds Creek (43% of road miles within 300 feet), West Branch Bridge Creek (35% of road miles within 300 feet) and Heflin Creek (20% of road miles within 300 feet).

Modeling using Disturbed WEPP is one way to conceptualize potential hillslope erosion. Disturbed WEPP was used to estimate potential hillslope erosion and sedimentation yield to compare between different management scenarios, burn severities, ground cover, and slope in the Bailey Butte burned area. WEPP is a physically-based soil erosion model that provides estimates of soil erosion and sediment yield considering specific soil, climate, ground cover, and topographic conditions. It was developed by an interagency group of scientists including the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Forest Service, and Natural Resources Conservation Service; and the U.S. Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management and Geological Survey (Elliot et al., 2010).

Sediment delivery to streams in the project area from existing roads was estimated using the Road WEPP tool in TerrainWorks (i.e. Netmap). TerrainWorks consists of a set of tools and a database of natural resources data needed to run the tools for resource management purposes. One of the

94


applications included in TerrainWorks is a tool that utilizes geospatial information, including digital elevation models, to assist with running Road WEPP at a landscape scale. Resultant sediment delivery estimates indicate the current sediment delivery to streams from the existing road network is a magnitude higher in the West Branch Bridge Creek and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds relative to the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed (Table 20).

Accurately predicting erosion is difficult and subject to large errors from various sources because of highly complex processes including spatial variation in slope, soil, and vegetative conditions, and uncertainty in precipitation (Walling 1988). Therefore, applying hillslope estimates across landscapes and watersheds generalizes actual rates of erosion that may occur. WEPP-modeled sediment yield scenarios for the first year following the Bailey Butte Fire are shown Table 45. Table 45. Sediment yield in Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Subwatershed (ONF portion)

Pre-Fire Hillslope Sediment Yield

(tons)1

Post-Fire Hillslope Additional Sediment

Yield (tons)2

Existing Roads Sediment Yield

(tons)3

Total Sediment Yield – Existing

Condition (tons)

West Branch Bridge Creek 44 237 113 394

Middle Bear Creek 14 116 13 143 Upper Marks Creek 52 2 121 175 1Modeled using Web Interface Disturbed WEPP 2Modeled as part of the BAER analysis using ERMIT by Eric Nicita, Soil Scientist, additional sediment yield was estimated as the difference between pre- and post-fire sediment yield 3Modeled using ArcMap Netmap Tool (TerrainWorks)

Much of the soil and organic debris washed from forests after wildfire ends up in nearby drainages. Once assimilated in aquatic systems, small inorganic materials are considered sediment. Inorganic materials smaller than a quarter inch in diameter are classified as fine sediment. Short-term effects of the Bailey Butte fire will likely increase surface fines due to erosional processes after the fire. Areas where a large proportion of the drainage is burned in a single event are most susceptible to erosional processes. The WCF rating for “Water Quality Problems” after the fire, which includes fine sediment as part of the analysis, did not change for the Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed which was rated Functioning at Risk. Ratings for Middle Bear Creek and West Branch Bridge Subwatersheds, however, did change to Functioning at Risk. However over time, establishment of riparian vegetation and overstory canopy will result in streams returning to the pre-fire conditions.

Habitat Elements Large Woody Material

Stream inventory surveys have been conducted on a large portion of the streams in Marks Creek, Crystal Creek, Dodds Creek, and Heflin Creek. However, there is no large woody material frequency data for West Branch Bridge Creek, O’Kelly Creek, Clover Creek, Carroll Creek, and Camp Creek in or downstream of the project area. Table 46 provides large woody material (LWM) frequencies for surveyed streams in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. Because the standard is greater than 48 pieces per mile on Class IV streams and 69 pieces per mile on Class I, II, and III streams, this indicator is considered Not Properly Functioning for 78% of the stream reaches surveyed in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. Large wood numbers are especially low in the Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed.

Baseline condition in relation to large wood, determined from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin, is rated as Functioning at Risk and Functioning Appropriately on National Forest administered lands for the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed and West Branch Bridge Subwatershed, respectively.

95


In some cases, fires result in a substantial increase in the amount of woody material entering the system. The effects post-fire on the accumulation of woody material depends on the pre-fire vegetation and severity of the fire. In extreme cases where fire consumes a large proportion of the vegetation (including instream woody material jams) or water yield is substantially increased, woody material input may decline until vegetation development is enough to provide new sources of wood. The short-term effects of the Bailey Butte fire based on the ratings from Watershed Condition Framework, indicate West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed and Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed did not experience a significant effect from the fire and remained rated as Properly Functioning and Functioning at Risk, respectively. However, Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed did result in a change in rating to Functioning at Risk. As vegetation becomes more established in the future, the expectation is LWM will return to or exceed pre-fire conditions. Table 46. Large woody material frequency in surveyed streams.



Year LWD/Mile Rating

Bridge Creek

Middle Bear Creek

Dodds Creek

1 – LII 1989 18.06 NPF 1 – LII 2011 7.23 NPF

1 – BLS 1992 0 NPF 2 – BLS 1992 31.7 NPF 3 – BLS 1992 21.1 NPF 4 – BLS 1992 68 NPF 5 – BLS 1992 36.6 NPF 6 – BLS 1992 167 PF 7 – BLS 1992 195 PF 8 – BLS 1992 132 PF

Heflin Creek 1 – BLS 1992 37 NPF


West Branch*

Bridge Creek

1 – BLS 1997 90 PF

1 – LII 2013 9 NPF


Trib. 1* 1 – BLS 1997 32 NPF


Trib. 2* 1 – BLS 1997 32 NPF

Upper Ochoco Creek

Upper Marks Creek

Nature Creek 1 – BLS 1995 26.4 NPF Nature Creek

Trib. 1 – BLS 1995 158.4 PF

Marks Creek 1 – LII 1992 0 NPF 2 – LII 1992 0 NPF

Crystal Creek

1 – BLS 1992 5.3 NPF 2 – BLS 1992 31.7 NPF 1 – LII 2003 0.87 NPF 2 – LII 2003 0 NPF

*The locations of these surveys are not within or downstream the project area. Because there is no data for the project area within West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed, this data will be used to supplement data not available. Field visits have verified that the stream reaches surveyed are similar to the stream reaches within the West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed project area.


Pools are lacking in the Bailey Butte Fire project area due to a loss of stream features that would normally contribute to scouring of the stream bed to form pools. Removal of large wood near streams for timber harvest and removal of debris jams directly interacting with stream flows combined with the reduction of beaver in project watersheds have contributed to much lower pool frequencies in these watersheds.

96


Stream survey data on pools per mile are shown in Table 47, and given a condition rating accordingly. Similar to wood frequency ratings, no data are available for Heflin Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek, O’Kelly Creek, Caroll Creek, and Clover Creek pertaining to pool frequency within or downstream of the project area. The pool frequency indicator is considered Not Properly Functioning for 85% of the stream reaches surveyed in the Bailey Butte Fire project area and there appears to be a general correlation between low large wood numbers and low pool frequency. However, large wood numbers were very high in Nature Creek Tributary but pool frequencies were rated as Not Properly Functioning in 1995 surveys. Similarly, the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin determined baseline conditions for pool frequency to be Functioning at Unacceptable Risk for the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed. However, baseline conditions were determined to be Functioning Appropriately on the National Forest for West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed. Table 47. Pool frequency by surveyed stream in the Bailey Butte Fire project area.


Year Average Pools/Mile Rating*

Bridge Creek

Middle Bear Creek Dodds Creek 1 – LII 1989 26 NPF

1 – LII 2011 16 NPF



1 – BLS 1997 37 NPF 1 – LII 2013 6 NPF


Trib. 1** 1 – BLS 1997 53 NPF


Trib. 2** 1 – BLS 1997 132 PF

Camp Creek MIMS 2014 191 PF

Upper Ochoco Creek

Upper Marks Creek

Nature Creek 1 – BLS 1995 53 NPF Nature Creek

Trib. 1 – BLS 1995 32 NPF

Marks Creek 1 – LII 1992 21 NPF 2 – LII 1992 38 NPF

Crystal Creek 1 – LII 2003 44 NPF 2 – LII 2003 18 NPF

*Stream survey information indicates that all stream reaches surveyed for pools were within the 10 feet wetted width category, so objective pools/mile = 96. ** The locations of these surveys are not within or downstream the project area. Because there is no data for the project area within West Branch Bridge Creek subwatershed, this data will be used to supplement data not available. Field visits have verified that the stream reaches surveyed are similar to the stream reaches within the West Branch Bridge Creek subwatershed project area.

Pool quality is a function of depth; deeper pools tend to have colder temperatures and better rearing habitat for fry and juveniles. The standard for pool quality is numerous pools greater than one meter deep with good cover and cool water.

Table 48 shows the number of pools greater than one meter deep on major streams within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. No streams in the project area were “Properly Functioning” in terms of pool quality. Stream surveys in Marks Creek indicated that there are a few pools in survey reaches that are of good quality, but not enough to consider these reaches to be “Functioning Appropriately.” Pools in the project area, based on survey data, are lacking in number and in quality. Similarly, the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin determined baseline condition for pool quality as Functioning at Unacceptable Risk for the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed. However, West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed was rated as Functioning Appropriately.

97


Table 48. The number of pools greater than 1 meter deep on major with Class I and II streams within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.


Year Pools >1 Meter Deep Rating

Bridge Creek Middle Bear Creek Dodds Creek

1 – LII 1989 0 NPF

1 – LII 2011 0 NPF


West Branch Bridge 1 – LII 2013 0 NPF

Upper Ochoco Creek Upper Marks Creek

Marks Creek 1 – LII 1992 1 FAR

2 – LII 1992 0 NPF

Crystal Creek 1 – LII 2003 0 NPF

2 – LII 2003 0 NPF

Large wood in streams is important because it controls channel morphology, sediment transport and water routing (Gresswell 1999). After wildfires, large wood may persist in stream channels through the period of forest reestablishment (Gresswell 1999). Because of this, pool formation usually increases. The Watershed Condition Framework rating for large wood is mentioned in the previous large woody material section and is expected to have direct correlation with the short-term effects of the Bailey Butte fire on pool quantity and quality. It is expected that pool quantity and quality remain similar to pre-fire conditions in West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed and Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed. However, there will most likely be a decrease in pools in the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed post-fire. Over time as vegetation becomes reestablished it is expected that pool quantity and quality return to pre-fire conditions or exceed, especially in areas where conditions are expected to have minimal impact from the Bailey Butte fire.

Native Riparian Condition

Native riparian vegetation is limited in areas due to floodplain disconnection and cattle grazing. The effects of Bailey Butte fire has negatively impacted riparian vegetation in areas with moderate to high intensity fire. Watershed Condition Framework ratings for riparian vegetation post-fire for all three subwatersheds has remained the same as pre-fire conditions; all three subwatersheds are rated as Functioning at Risk. The reason for a no change in ratings is that the effects of the fire are localized whereas the Watershed Condition Framework rates the entire subwatershed as a whole. It will take many years to recover native riparian vegetation in the fire area. Riparian Reserves (riparian condition) baseline conditions for steelhead in the Middle Bear Creek and West Branch Bridge Subwatersheds are Functioning at Risk and Functioning Appropriately on National Forest, respectively.

Width-to-Depth Ratios

Table 49 shows width/ratios for streams in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed based on stream surveys in the vicinity of the project area. Condition ratings are based on Rosgen (1996) instead of the criteria developed by NMFS. Most of the streams have average width/depth ratios that are considered Properly Functioning; however, stream reaches were not evaluated on a site-specific basis relative to a reference reach. Width/ratio baseline condition from the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin was rated as Functioning Appropriately on National Forest for the West Branch Bridge Subwatershed. However, Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed was rated as Functioning at Risk.

The effects from Bailey Butte fire will vary within each subwatershed depending on the severity of the fire. Riparian areas that experienced high fire severity will experience, in the short-term, an

98


increase in width/depth ratios due to the removal of riparian vegetation and roughness from large woody material. In the long-term, as vegetation reestablishes and LWM is accumulated, width/ratios are expected to return to pre-fire conditions. Table 49. Width to depth ratios within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.



Year Width/Depth Ratio Rating

Bridge Creek

Middle Bear Creek

Dodds Creek

1 – LII 1989 4 PF 1 – LII 2011 9 PF



1 – LII 2013 10 PF

Upper Ochoco Creek

Upper Marks Creek

Crystal Creek 1 – LII 2003 9 NPF

Nature Creek 1 – BLS 1995 5 PF

Nature Creek Trib. 1 – BLS 1995 3 PF

Marks Creek

1 – LII 1992 8 NPF 2 – LII 1992 9 NPF

Watershed Condition Road Density/Location

Based on a combination of Ochoco National Forest road and stream network layers, currently within the Middle Bear Creek, West Branch Creek, and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds there are a total of approximately 25, 49, and 109 miles of road, respectively. Of these total road miles, 70 percent of the road miles in Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed are located within 300 feet of intermittent or perennial stream channels; majority of which is Highway 26. Approximately, 26 percent of the roads within the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed and approximately 65 percent of roads within the West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed are located within 300 feet of streams. These road miles do not include unauthorized off-highway vehicle (OHV) trails, some historic logging roads, and some private farm roads, the sum of which could increase both road miles and road densities above these estimates.

Road densities (Table 50) were estimated for Middle Bear Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek, and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds to be approximately 4.0, 6.2, and 3.2 miles per square mile, respectively. Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed has lower road densities compared with the other two subwatersheds. Overall densities of open and closed roads indicate that all subwatersheds within the Bailey Butte Fire project are Not Properly Functioning; additionally, it should be noted that road miles and densities reflected in this report do not include all roads within the subwatershed, including private and historic logging roads. Road density and location baseline conditions determined in the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin are Functioning at Risk and Functioning Appropriately on National Forest for the Middle Bear Creek and West Branch Bridge Subwatersheds.

The Bailey Butte fire had no effects to road densities and locations because no new roads were constructed during the fire.

99


Table 50. Roads Densities by Subwatershed within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Subwatershed Roads

within 300 ft. (miles)

Roads within 100 ft. (miles)

Total Road Density

(miles/sq. mile)

# of Stream

Crossings

Miles of Road within RHCA

Rating

Middle Bear Creek 6.7 1.8 4.0 13 2.3 NPF

West Branch Bridge Creek 31.7 7.1 6.2 29 3.6 NPF

Upper Marks Creek 76.1 16.5 3.2 150 30.7 NPF

Equivalent Harvest Acres (EHA) As outlined in the Forest Plan, Equivalent Harvest Acres (EHA) should be estimated at the watershed scale to determine whether harvest activities could increase water yields to a point that exceeds an allowable threshold. Overall, the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds within the Ochoco National Forest Boundary are meeting the Forest Plan standards. Based upon the magnitude of roads and road densities in the vicinity of streams, as well as the presence of dormant landslide terrain (see the Geology section in this EA), the existing condition for both watersheds is considered to be Functioning at Risk. Two recent wildfires within the past ten years, Bailey Butte and Bridge Creek Fires, have elevated the EHA of the Bridge Creek Watershed almost up to the 25% threshold; however, limited commercial and pre-commercial thinning has maintained the EHA below the Forest Plan threshold (Table 51). Increased streamflows in Heflin Creek from storm events in August 2014 were observed after the Bailey Butte Wildfire that anecdotally confirmed predicted increased flows that were estimated in the Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) Hydrology Report (2014). In the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed, smaller wildfires in combination with limited commercial and pre-commercial thinning in the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed have maintained an EHA well below the 25% threshold from the Forest Plan. Table 51. Projection of existing condition EHA for Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds based on historic activities.

Calendar Year Bridge Creek Watershed Existing Condition EHA (%)

Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed Existing Condition EHA (%)

2015 22.1% 12.5% 2016 21.6% 12.2% 2017 21.2% 11.9% 2018 20.7% 11.5% 2019 20.1% 11.2% 2020 19.5% 10.9% 2021 18.5% 10.7% 2022 17.6% 10.4% 2023 16.8% 10.1% 2024 16.2% 9.8% 2025 15.5% 9.6%

Aquatic Species

Management Indicator Species

Within the Wildlife and Fish Standards and Guidelines, the Forest Plan lists rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) – both resident (Redband trout) and anadromous (steelhead trout) – and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) as aquatic Management Indicator Species (MIS). Direction in the Forest Plan for MIS is as follows:

100


• Determine if the species’ use of the area is incidental or if it is essential habitat. If it is determined to be essential habitat protect it from adverse modifications through curtailment of conflicting activities, modification of activities, seasonal restrictions of activities, or avoiding the area.

• Provide habitat by managing as per Riparian Management Area (MA-F15) Prescriptions.

Redband and steelhead trout are present in the Bridge Creek Watershed. Redband trout are present in the Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed. Effects to MIS will be summarized here and further discussed in the Environmental Consequences section of this report.

Brook trout, historically stocked by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) on the Ochoco National Forest, are non-native to the Deschutes River and John Day River Basin. Brook trout are not currently stocked or managed for by ODFW, and are not part of ODFW’s overall native fish policy. One observation was made in 2003 from a Level II stream inventory report of a suspected brook trout in Upper Marks Creek but the identification was never confirmed. Brook trout are not present in any other project subwatersheds and will not be further discussed.

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) Species

The project Biological Evaluation (BE) documents possible effects of proposed activities on threatened and endangered species in the project area. There are no aquatic species listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) on the Ochoco National Forest or in the Lower John Day and Lower Crooked River subbasins. Threatened aquatic species that are known or suspected to occur on the Ochoco National Forest include bull trout and Middle Columbia River steelhead trout. Potential effects to these species were analyzed and the analysis is summarized in this Biological Evaluation. There would be no effect to bull trout, therefore consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is not required for the Bailey Butte Fire project. Designated critical habitat for steelhead is located near the project area. Formal consultation was initiated with National Marine Fisheries Service to determine the effects of the Bailey Butte Fire project on Middle Columbia River steelhead trout, but the request for formal consultation was withdrawn when the consultation lead to a determination of “No Effect” to Mid-Columbia steelhead trout and its critical habitat.

On December 19, 2011, an updated Region 6 Regional Forester Special Status Species list was released. Table 52 shows all of the species with documented or suspected occurrence on the Ochoco National Forest. There are other species categorized as “wildlife” and addressed in the wildlife report.

Bull trout and Critical Habitat

Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) are listed as threatened under the ESA. The closest population of bull trout relative to Marks Creek Subwatershed is known to occur in the lower Crooked River up to Opal Springs Dam where there is currently no upstream fish passage. Bull trout Critical Habitat, however, extends upstream of Opal Springs Dam about 11 miles where Highway 97 crosses the Crooked River. The closest population of bull trout and bull trout critical habitat relative to Bridge Creek Watershed are known to occur in the mainstem John Day River. Because the closest populations are over 50 miles from the confluence of the North Fork Crooked River and approximately 30 miles from the confluence of Bridge Creek, the project will have No Effect on bull trout or Critical Habitat and will not be further analyzed in this report. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is not required.

Steelhead and Critical Habitat

The Middle Columbia River steelhead distinct population segment (DPS) was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) on January 5, 2006 (71 FR 834). On September 2,

101


2005, NMFS published a final rule (70 FR 52630) to designate critical habitat for Mid-Columbia steelhead and 12 other ESUs/DPSs of salmon and steelhead. The final rule took effect on January 2, 2006. The John Day River is the longest free flowing river with wild steelhead in the Columbia River Basin. The John Day Basin has the distinction of being one of the few large basins in Oregon with no steelhead hatchery program. In the early 1960s, managers released approximately 500,000 hatchery winter steelhead fry and limited numbers of pre-smolts used for experimental purposes. Few likely survived due to the use of improper stocks and hauling mortality (90% of the fish were dead on arrival to the release site). No production releases of hatchery steelhead pre-smolts were ever made in the John Day Basin. Hatchery releases for any purpose ceased in 1966 in favor of wild stocks. There are five populations of John Day steelhead: Lower Main stem (below Picture Gorge), Upper Main stem (above Picture Gorge), North Fork, Middle Fork, and South Fork.

Middle-Columbia River Steelhead (steelhead) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) is listed under ESA as threatened and has been documented in Bridge Creek Watershed but has not been documented within the project area. However, Critical Habitat for steelhead is designated in West Branch Bridge Creek and Dodds Creek.

Redband trout

Redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp.) of the Malheur Lakes Species Management Unit (SMU) are listed as Sensitive in Oregon. This SMU is documented on the Ochoco National Forest in the Silver Creek and Silvies River drainages in the far southeast corner of the Forest. This SMU is not located in the project area. However, because little is known about the population of redband trout in the project area, we are still considering them as Sensitive. Within the project area, redband trout are present in Class I and II streams. Effects to redband trout will be analyzed in this report as a Sensitive species and as a MIS.

Westslope cutthroat trout

Westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) are listed as Sensitive in Oregon and are documented to occur on the Ochoco National Forest. All westslope cutthroat trout in Oregon exist only in the John Day River Basin. These populations are disjunct from the greater contiguous distribution in the Upper Missouri and Columbia basins of Montana and Idaho (ODFW 2005). Because they are not present in or near the project area, there will be No Impact to westslope cutthroat trout and will not be analyzed in this report.

Columbia spotted frog

There are currently four recognized Distinct Population Segments (DPS) of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris): Northern, Great Basin, Wasatch, and West Desert. Columbia spotted frogs within the Northern DPS are considered to be abundant; however, the other three DPS (Great Basin, Wasatch, and West Desert) are either declining or almost extirpated. Currently, only the Great Basin DPS that occurs in Oregon (Malheur, Lake, Harney and possibly Grant Counties) are considered a candidate species by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2009). The DPS found on the Ochoco National Forest are part of the Northern DPS and not listed as a candidate species under the ESA. They are, however, listed as Sensitive in Oregon. Effects to Columbia spotted frog will be analyzed in this report.

Crater Lake tightcoil

The Crate Lake tightcoil (Pristiloma arcticum crateris) is a small snail known to occur throughout the Oregon Cascades Range from Mt. Hood National Forest in the north to the Umpqua and Winema National Forests in the south (Gowan and Burke 1999). They are listed as Sensitive in Oregon. There are no data stating known or suspected locations of tightcoil on the Ochoco National Forest

102


(NatureServe Explorer). Because they are not present in or near the project area, there will be No Impact to Crater Lake tightcoil and will not be analyzed in this report.

Western ridged mussel

The western ridged mussel (Gonidea angulata) is not known to be located within the project area. Although they are suspected to be present on the Ochoco National Forest, there is no documented occurrence to date (Jepsen et al. 2009). In Oregon, Gonidea angulata is known from the Crooked River in Crook Co.; Rogue River in Curry Co.; Crooked and Deschutes Rivers in Deschutes Co.; Middle Fork and North Fork John Day Rivers in Grant Co.; Crooked Rivers in Jefferson Co.; John Day River in Wasco Co. (Xerces Freshwater Mussel database 2009). Though habitat may be present, because no documented occurrence exists within the Forest or project area, this species will not be considered further in this analysis.

Harney basin duskysnail

The Harney basin duskysnail (Colligyrus depressus), listed as Sensitive in Oregon, is only known to occur in the Silvies River drainage in Harney County, Oregon (NatureServe Explorer). Because they are not present in or near the project area, there will be No Impact to Harney basin duskysnail and will not be analyzed in this report.

Shortface lanx

The shortface lanx (Fisherola nuttalli) is a freshwater snail found in cold, unpolluted, well-oxygenated, permanent medium-sized streams to large rivers, at least 30 to 100 meters wide. They occur on diatom covered rocks in main channels or fast-flowing streams (Neitzel and Frest 1989). Because they are not present in or near the project area, there will be No Impact to shortface lanx and will not be analyzed in this report.

Indian Ford juga

The Indian ford juga (Juga hemphilli ssp. nov.), listed as Sensitive in Oregon, is a medium-sized snail found from a single site in Indian Ford Creek on the Deschutes National Forest (NatureServe Explorer). Because this is the only known site and is not near the project area, there will be No Impact to Indian Ford juga and will not be analyzed in this report.

Columbia clubtail

The Columbia clubtail (Gomphus lynnae) is a medium-sized dragonfly listed as Sensitive in Oregon. Only five populations are known, one on the Yakima River in Washington, one on the Owyhee River in Oregon, and three on the John Day River system in Oregon. This dragonfly can be found in a variety of river habitats, which can range from sandy or muddy to rocky, shallow rivers with occasional gravelly rapids, but water flow tends to be slow-moving (Paulson 1999). Although there is potential habitat for Columbia clubtail in the project area, the species has not been document in the area. Therefore, effects to Columbia clubtail will not be analyzed in this report.

A caddisfly

A caddisfly (Namamyia plutonis) has been documented in the Coastal and Cascade Ranges of Oregon and California on the Rogue River-Siskiyou, Siuslaw, and Willamette National Forests (Anderson 1976). Currently, fewer than 30 locations are known to contain this caddisfly, which occurs in low numbers. N. plutonis tend to be found associated with small streams in densely forested old growth or mature forest watersheds (Scheuering 2006). Because dense forested old growth or mature forest habitat does not exist in the project area, there will be No Impact to N. plutonis and the species will not be analyzed in this report.

103


Table 52. Aquatic species on the 2011 USFS Region 6 Regional Forester Special Status Species list that may occur on the Ochoco National Forest.

Species

Evolutionarily Significant Unit or Distinct Population

Segment

Listing Category

Type of Occurrence on Ochoco

NF

Potentially Present in

Project Area and Analyzed

in this Report

Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus)

All Federally Threatened Documented No

Steelhead (Oncorhynchus

mykiss)

Middle Columbia River

Sensitive in Oregon; Ochoco NF Management

Indicator Species Documented Yes

Redband trout (Oncorhynchus

mykiss ssp.) Malheur Lakes

Sensitive in Oregon; Ochoco NF Management

Indicator Species Documented Yes

Westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus

clarkii lewisi) All Sensitive in Oregon Documented No


(Rana luteiventris) Outside Great Basin Sensitive in Oregon Documented Yes

Crater Lake Tightcoil (Pristiloma arcticum

crateris) N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No


(Gonidea angulate) N/A Sensitive in Oregon and

Washington Suspected No

Harney basin duskysnail (Colligyrus depressus)

N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No

Shortface lanx (Fisherola nuttalli) N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No

Indian Ford juga (Juga hemphilli ssp.

nov.) N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No

Columbia clubtail (Gomphus lynnae) N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No

A caddisfly (Namamyia plutonis) N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No

Environmental Consequences – Watershed, Water Quality, and Aquatic Habitat

Effects Common to All Alternatives

Habitat Access

Physical Barriers

The Bailey Butte Fire project doesn’t propose activities that would change physical barriers in the project area, therefore there would be no direct or indirect effects to physical barriers in the Bridge

104


Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed. Conditions that are Not Properly Functioning would continue. Under currently impaired stream conditions, new headcuts could form that may create additional passage barriers to fish and other organisms. Because there would be no direct or indirect effects to physical barriers, it is expected that the Bailey Butte Fire project would not change the baseline conditions for steelhead.

Alternative A

Water Quality

Water Temperature

No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, no direct or indirect effects would result from Alternative A relative to stream temperatures in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed. Existing conditions contributing to impaired water temperatures would continue.

The trend of stream temperature increases should continue post fire until riparian vegetation recovers and begins to provide shade lost by high tree mortality along the stream banks. On small streams on the B&B Fire (Sisters Ranger District, Deschutes National Forest), water temperatures increased immediately after the fire by approximately 2oC but within five years began to trend to pre-fire summer temperatures (Pole Creek Report). Heflin Creek and Dodds Creek should respond in a similar pattern. In addition, streams in the wildfire area were in a cool temperature range pre-fire which will help buffer effects to fish in the short-term. Many streams in the project area are spring fed and were relatively unaffected by the Bailey Butte fire so would continue to contribute to cooler stream temperatures.

Shade

No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, no direct or indirect effects would result from Alternative A relative to stream shade in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed. Existing conditions contributing to impaired stream shade would continue.

Tributaries in the headwaters may have a more watershed scale effect to shade depending on the mileage affected by the Bailey Butte fire, such as Marks Creek Subwatershed. Due to the size of Marks Creek, these effects will be moderated. Similar to water temperature, the trend of loss of shade should continue until riparian vegetation recovers.

Fine Sediment

No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, no direct or indirect effects would result from Alternative A relative to fine sediment or turbidity in the streams in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed. Hillslope erosion may increase from a reduction in live canopy and consumption of organic material on the forest floor from the Bailey Butte Fire, especially in stands that burned at high intensity. Overall trends in sediment in fish spawning and rearing habitat will increase over the short-term. Once ground vegetation becomes reestablished, sediment supply will slowly decrease and the balance of fine sediment stored in channel and exported will begin to exceed that of inputs from road and hillslopes. Due to the frequent high flow events, the export of excess fine sediment should occur in a few years.

Habitat Elements

Bank Stability

No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, no direct or indirect effects would result from Alternative A relative to bank stability in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek

105


Subwatershed. Existing unstable banks, likely as a result of loss of riparian vegetation from Bailey Butte fire, would take decades to recover naturally through implementation of the no action alternative.


No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, no direct or indirect effect would result from Alternative A relative to large woody material. Bailey Butte fire will have increased the mortality of standing trees, especially in high to moderately intense burned areas. Down wood from falling dead trees would increase over the next 5-10 years and provide surface roughness to trap and store sediment. This will occur in riparian areas and hydrologically connected ephemeral draws in both no-action and action alternatives. Large wood recruitment will continue to contribute to pool formation and cover for fish habitat in Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed.


No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, there would be no direct or indirect effect to pool frequency and quality in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed. Rates of wood recruitment will increase as mentioned above in the Large Woody Material section. The scale of recruitment will be dependent on existing stands, topography, and fire intensity. As large woody material is accrued, pool frequency will increase.

Native Riparian Conditions

No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, there would be no direct or indirect effect to native riparian conditions in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed. Bailey Butte fire will have removed riparian vegetation, especially in areas which experienced high severity fire. As native riparian reestablishes over time, it is expected that riparian conditions will return to conditions pre-fire.

Width/Depth Ratios

No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, there would be no direct or indirect effect to width/depth ratios in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed. Width/depth ratios are an indicator for bank stability which is dependent on riparian vegetation. It is expected that the Bailey Butte fire removed some riparian vegetation; more severe in moderate to high burn severity areas. Until riparian vegetation becomes reestablished, bank stability and subsequently width-to-depth ratios will be compromised.

Watershed Condition


No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, no direct or indirect effects would result from Alternative A relative to road densities and road locations in the Bridge Creek Watershed and Marks Creek Subwatershed. Existing road densities and their current locations would continue. In the long-term with the implementation of Alternative A, the no action alternative, no temporary roads would be built and no existing roads would be decommissioned or reconstructed.

Equivalent Harvest Acres

No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, no direct or indirect effects would result from Alternative A relative to the EHA in the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds. Historic timber harvest and wildfire effects to water yield within the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds would continue to recover with time.

106


Effects to Baseline Conditions determined in the 2014 Programmatic Biological Assessment for steelhead for the John Day River Basin

No actions would take place as a result of Alternative A; therefore, no change would result in Alternative A relative to the baseline conditions for steelhead.

Effects Common to All Action Alternatives The action alternatives include riparian planting within six miles of RHCA and six miles of directional tree felling into streams to replace large woody material. These activities are proposed in the Heflin, Clover, O’Kelly and Camp Creek drainages where burn severity was high and fire effects to riparian areas, including consumption of large woody material and mortality of riparian vegetation, are likely to be severe. Adding large wood to the stream channel will improve instream aquatic habitat that was degraded following the fire, and help trap sediment in areas to help promote plant growth and stability. Planting riparian vegetation in the floodplain and terrace along streams in the fire area will help recover shade more quickly in the fire area, and will help stabilize banks. Improving bank stability will be important in the fire area because it is expected that flows will be elevated in these watersheds due to the loss of hillslope vegetation. Six miles of directional tree felling into streams to replace large woody material and planting of riparian hardwood species is proposed. Below are the streams and distances proposed for treatment:

• 2.5 miles of Heflin Creek, from the forest boundary to headwaters • 1.3 miles of tributary to Heflin Creek, from confluence of Heflin Creek to headwaters • miles of Clover Creek, from the forest boundary to headwaters • miles of O’Kelly Creek, from forest boundary to ¼ mile upstream of Road #2600-611 • 0.5 miles of tributary to Camp Creek, from forest boundary to Road #2210

Water Quality

As mentioned in the Analysis Design section, criteria for analyzing Water Quality include stream temperatures, stream shade, bank stability, and fine sediment. Fine sediment will be addressed separately in each action alternative section. Water quality within project areas that are not treated with either riparian planting or tree felling will have the same direct and indirect effects as described under Alternative A.

Stream temperature, shade and bank stability are functions of, but not completely dependent upon, riparian vegetation and LWM. The action alternatives propose six miles of riparian planting and six miles of directional tree felling, which may increase recovery of native riparian conditions and replace LWM faster than in areas where natural recovery occurs. Stream temperatures, shade and bank stability may improve faster from riparian planting treatments than areas where natural recovery from the Bailey Butte fire occurs, especially in areas that experienced moderate to high intensity fire. Only minimal felling of trees would occur within the RHCA resulting in negligible effect to the water quality indicators listed above, so harvest activities within the Bailey Butte Project will have no effect on these indicators. Limited harvest will occur outside the riparian zone, but within the RHCA along Nature Creek, upslope of the 2210 road along Camp Creek and within RHCAs around wetlands, but not within wetland perimeters. PDCs prevent activities within the wetland perimeter; however, treatments outside of the perimeter and within the wetland RHCA are not expected to have adverse water quality impacts. Therefore, the project would have a short-term and long-term beneficial effect on stream temperature, shade, and bank stability in the areas of purposed planting and tree felling. The action alternatives will have a beneficial effect on baseline indicators for steelhead, but will not change the indicator call for water quality parameters.

107


Habitat Elements

As mentioned in the Analysis Design section, criteria for analyzing Habitat Elements includes large woody material, pool frequency and quality, native riparian conditions, and width/depth ratios. Habitat elements within project areas which are not treated with either riparian planting or tree felling will have the same direct and indirect effects as described under Alternative A.

Riparian vegetation is typically resilient to fire and rapidly recovers following fire. However, in landscapes altered by decades of resource extraction and where natural processes and ecosystem structures have been degraded, recovery from the effects of fire may be slower, more sporadic, and potentially incomplete (Beschta et al. 2003). The action alternatives propose six miles of riparian planting in RHCAs. As a consequence, native riparian conditions will recover faster in the areas planted compared to areas where natural recovery occurs.

Similarly, the proposed six miles of directional tree felling will have an immediate benefit for LWM compared to areas where natural recruitment occurs. As nearby stands recover, LWM frequency will trend to pre-fire conditions. Pool frequency and quality is closely tied to LWM, therefore the effects of the project would be very similar. Pool frequency and quality will be improved faster than areas recovering naturally after the fire.

Width-to-Depth ratio is one of the most sensitive indicators to changes in channel stability as a result of disturbance to riparian vegetation, channels or watersheds. The six miles of proposed riparian planting and directional tree felling may recover bank stability faster compared to areas where natural recovery occurs. Therefore width/depth ratios may also recover faster than in areas recovering naturally after the fire. There would be no harvest of trees within the RHCA that would contribute to the habitat elements listed above (with the exception of Nature Creek, which is discussed below), so harvest activities within the Bailey Butte Project will have no effect on these elements. Therefore, the project would have a short-term and long-term beneficial effect on large woody material, pool frequency and quality, native riparian vegetation and width/depth ratios in the areas of proposed planting and tree felling. In addition, the action alternatives would not change the baseline conditions for steelhead in regards to the previously mentioned habitat elements.

Watershed Condition


No new specified roads are proposed for construction. Therefore, there would be no direct or indirect effects to road density/location in the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed, West Branch Bridge Subwatershed, and Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed. Because there would be no direct or indirect effects to road density/location in the Middle Bear and West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatersheds, the Bailey Butte Fire Project will not change the baseline conditions for steelhead.


Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, restoration of riparian special plant communities and prescribed fire all have some effect on the EHA. Activities proposed in Alternatives B and C that could affect EHA are limited to salvage harvest and felling and harvest of hazard trees; however, almost all of the harvest will be of dead or dying trees5, which is already accounted for in EHA from the wildfire itself. One indication of high levels of disturbance is when EHA estimates exceed a threshold of 25 percent (see Analysis Design). In addition, disturbance activities concentrated in unstable or sensitive areas can put a watershed at risk of impairment. Based on a combination of historic timber harvest, prescribed burning, and wildfire activities and activities proposed in

5 Removal of live trees will be limited to those that are likely or imminent danger trees or are needed to be removed for access, such as along skid trails or landings.

108


Alternatives B and C within the Ochoco National Forest Boundary portion of the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds, EHA were estimated and projected through the estimated time period of the Bailey Butte Fire project (Table 53). These estimates indicate EHA percentage increases from existing condition to be negligible and below the threshold, which is to be expected since this is a salvage sale and limited removal of live trees is planned as part of this project.

Disturbance history is also a factor of the amount of disturbance concentrated in potentially unstable areas and/or refugia and/or riparian areas. As indicated in the Geology section of this EA, prevalent dormant landslide terrain exists across the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds, as well as smaller active landslides in the Bridge Creek Watershed. The concentration of activities within RHCAs, particularly in the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed, and unstable terrain in both the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds, add a level of sensitivity to both watersheds intersecting the project area.

As a result of implementation of Alternatives B and C, Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds are expected to remain as Functioning at Risk relative to EHA. Since the magnitude of disturbance and removal of live trees from implementation of Alternatives B and C is minimal, as evidenced by the negligible change in EHA and relatively quick recovery, it is expected to have a negligible effect on the condition of the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds relative to EHA. Implementation of both alternatives would still meet the Forest Plan standards for EHA.

Because the effects of either action alternative are determined to have a negligible effect to EHA and EHA is being use as a surrogate for changes in peak/base flow, drainage network increase, disturbance history and regime, implementation of either action alternative would not change baseline conditions for steelhead. Table 53. Projection of EHA for Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds based on a combination of historic activities and Alternatives B and C.

Calendar Year

Bridge Creek Alternative B

EHA (%)

Bridge Creek Alternative C

EHA (%)

Upper Ochoco Cr. Alternative B

EHA (%)

Upper Ochoco Cr. Alternative C

EHA (%) 2015 22.1% 22.1% 12.5% 12.5% 2016 21.7% 21.6% 12.2% 12.2% 2017 21.2% 21.2% 11.9% 11.9% 2018 20.7% 20.7% 11.5% 11.5% 2019 20.1% 20.1% 11.2% 11.2% 2020 19.5% 19.5% 10.9% 10.9% 2021 18.5% 18.5% 10.7% 10.7% 2022 17.6% 17.6% 10.4% 10.4% 2023 16.8% 16.8% 10.1% 10.1% 2024 16.3% 16.3% 9.8% 9.8% 2025 15.5% 15.5% 9.6% 9.6%

Alternative B

RHCA Treatment in Nature Creek

The roadside salvage unit along Road #2600-452 is included in both Alternative B and C. Road #2600-452 parallels Nature Creek for approximately 0.4 miles before ending near theRNA boundary. Because of hazard trees between the stream and the road, there will be incidental removal of trees within the RHCA (RHCA width at this location is 300 feet). During a field visit the fisheries biologist, with direction from specialists in timber, identified hazard trees in the RHCA and the appropriate treatment. After walking the area, approximately five trees were identified that were within the RHCA. Four of the five trees were well outside of the influence of Nature Creek or its

109


riparian area, so it was determined that these trees would not contribute to large woody material to the stream channel or floodplain, and since the trees were dead, they will never contribute shade to the stream channel. One tree was identified that would contribute large wood to the stream channel. After careful investigation, it was determined that because the tree had such a significant lean towards the road, it would never contribute large wood to the floodplain or Nature Creek and that it would be unsafe to force it into Nature Creek. In addition, the tree is dead and no longer contributes shade to the stream. Therefore, based on field observations, there will be no effect from harvesting trees within the RHCA of Nature Creek along Road #2600-452. No equipment would be allowed within the RHCA, so trees would be felled towards the road and winched to a landing.

Water Quality

Fine Sediment Delivery

Disturbed WEPP was used to assess sediment delivery from skid trails routes in the Bailey Butte Project area (Table 54 and Table 55). Harvest units (both unit and roadside salvage) were broken up by soil type (clay loam, silt loam, sandy loam, or loam) and surface rock content. Pre-project vegetation cover was predicted using the Burned Area Reflectivity Classification (BARC) maps from the Bailey Butte fire. Generally, areas that burned at a low intensity were estimated to have 40% ground cover and areas that burned at a moderate and high intensity were estimated to have 10% ground cover. Slope gradient for harvest units and the lower sediment delivery zone, as well as horizontal hillslope length, were estimated using GIS. For harvest units, sediment production was estimated by changing the treatment/vegetation parameter to “Skid Trail,” and then multiplying sediment yield by 0.15, based on approximately 15% of the unit actually having skid trails within it.

Sediment delivery to streams in the project area from haul routes was estimated using the Road WEPP tool in TerrainWorks (Table 54). The model was run based on drainage improvements required by road maintenance as part of timber sales and based on a high traffic level. Results indicate an improvement in sediment delivery from roads in the West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed and the Upper Marks Creek Watershed and a slight increase in sediment delivery in the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed. Overall, sediment delivery to streams from haul routes will have a negligible effect resulting from Alternative B. Table 54. Modeled Sediment Delivery from Alternative B.

Subwatershed

Alternative B Sediment

Delivery from Roads

(tons/yr)


Delivery from Skid

Trails (tons/yr)


Delivery from

Temporary Roads (tons)


Condition* (tons)

Alternative B

Increase from

Existing Condition

Middle Bear Creek 1.4 4.1 0 143 4%

West Branch Bridge Creek -0.9 1.5 0 394 0%

Upper Marks Creek -1.8 2.0 0 175 0%

*Total sediment yield estimate is a total of natural background production (hillslope) and delivery from roads.

Alternative B proposes up to 300 acres of salvage logging using ground-based logging systems. Hazard trees along 19 miles of Forest Roads would be abated as well as tree removal of merchantable size if allowed. No new roads are proposed for construction; however, approximately 0.2 miles of new temporary roads and 0.5 miles of temporary roads on existing disturbance are proposed for use in

110


Alternative B. Based on Disturbed WEPP modeling, sediment delivery from Alternative B will be negligible in West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed and Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed. However, Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed will have an increased amount of sediment delivery; majority of which is contributed from skid trails in harvest units.

Sediment delivery from skid trails were modeled based on “worst case scenario” and without implementation of Project Design Criteria. PDCs were designed to reduce impacts of fine sediment delivery to stream channels within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. PDCs and BMPs that limit disturbances within RHCAs from harvest activities include avoiding new skid trails, landings, and temporary roads within RHCAs and ephemeral draws and limiting reuse of them within zones typical for sediment delivery to streams. Effectiveness of PDCs and BMPs for timber harvest and road-related activities relative to fine sediment and turbidity are discussed in more detail in references found in the Road Management Activities and Mechanical Vegetation Management Activities sections of the National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands (USDA 2012). Therefore, it is expected that fine sediment delivery to the project area streams will be less than what was modeled using Disturbed:WEPP. Based on this, the Bailey Butte Fire project is anticipated to have no effect to the baseline conditions for steelhead.

In addition to implementing PDCs and BMPs, the Ochoco National Forest Commercial Road Rules provide commercial users with uniform road requirements. Commercial users are considered to be anyone generating traffic from commercial uses on or across the National Forest from purposes such as, but not limited to, log haul, rock haul, and commercial firewood hauling. The Commercial Road Rules include general road rules as well as damage control guidelines. The damage control guidelines are used to determine when actions, such as suspension of use, are to be taken to avoid damage to adjacent resources or roads, and to provide for user safety. Some of the damage control guidelines which would be applicable to the proposed project and suspend road use are: drainage not working as designed, ruts interfering with drainage, muddy ditch water, mud on roads that is contributing to siltation outside the travel way; and ruts 1-2 inches deep, or any ruts interfering with proper drainage.

Alternative B would slightly reduce fine sediment contributions from streambank erosion as a result of the streambank stabilization activity in the six miles of proposed riparian planting. Riparian treatment in Alternative B also includes cutting and leaving trees, some of which may land in the stream channel. Fine sediment would also continue to be transported through high energy, incised stream reaches downstream to lower energy reaches resulting in higher concentrations of fine sediment deposition in the downstream direction similar to the no action alternative.

Effects to Aquatic Species

Because the activities proposed in Alternative B are scattered, small-scale, and of short duration and incorporate aquatic protection measures that are designed to protect listed steelhead and sensitive redband trout and Columbia spotted frog, Alternative B would result in a call of “No Effect” for Mid-Columbia River steelhead and “May Impact, but Not Likely to Result in a Trend Toward Federal Listing” for redband trout and Columbia Spotted Frog in the Middle Bear, West Branch Bridge Creek, and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds.

The “No Effect” determination for Mid-Columbia River steelhead is based on the following rationale:

• No critical habitat is within the project area (closest critical habitat is 0.3 miles from the project area).

• Modeled short-term sediment production for road use and skid trails is determined to be a small percentage of natural background in project subwatersheds (4% in Middle Bear Creek and 0% in West Branch Bridge Creek and Upper Marks Creek).

• Implementation of PDCs and BMPs would reduce sediment delivery to stream to less than

111


the modeled amounts and help protect hydrology and aquatic species. • Due to the need to quickly harvest fire-killed trees, the project is expected to be implemented

during the summer of 2015 and during the instream work window for Mid-Columbia River steelhead, which means the critical time for steelhead protection will occur outside of project implementation.

• The proposed action is small in scale compared to the entire project area (300 acres of postfire salvage harvest and hazard tree removal along 19 miles of road, compared to a project area of approximately 7800 acres).

• Long-term improvements to hydrology and aquatic species and their habitat in the form of 6 miles of large wood placement and riparian planting will help improve conditions for Mid-Columbia River steelhead.

• Streams in the project area have no documented occurrence of steelhead.

Given that sediment levels are expected to be elevated due to log haul and skid trails, a short-term negative effect to native redband trout and Columbia Spotted Frog is expected, since these species are present in streams in the project area. Short-term sediment inputs from increased road use and skid trails may have negative effects, including fish displacement and disruption of normal habits. However, these effects are limited in scale and duration, and thus will not be transferred downstream to steelhead critical habitat or habitats occupied by steelhead. Based on this information, redband trout and Columbia spotted frog would be unaffected long-term in the Middle Bear Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek, and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds under actions in Alternative B.

Alternative C

Water Quality

Fine Sediment

Alternative C proposes harvest of merchantable trees along 19 miles of roads where hazard mitigation has been identified, and does not include any general salvage in harvest units. Based on Disturbed WEPP modeling (Table 55), sediment delivery from Alternative C would be negligible in West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed and Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed. However, Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed would have an increased amount of sediment delivery; majority of which is contributed from skid trails in harvest units. Alternative C is expected to produce 2% less fine sediment delivery to streams than Alternative B.

Fine sediment contributed from skid trails was modeled using the same criteria as Alternative B which was modeled using “worst case scenario” and without the implementation of PDCs. The same project design criteria listed under Alternative B that protects streams relative to fine sediment and turbidity from proposed project activities will be implemented for Alternative C. As described under Alternative B, Ochoco Road Rules will still apply under Alternative C, which will help mitigate any adverse effects from log haul activities in the project area.

Implementation of Alternative C will have a slight adverse effect in Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed. The primary activity affecting fine sediment and turbidity in Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed in Alternative C is the use of skid trails. Based on the temporary nature of skid trails and estimated sediment delivery based on “worst case scenario,” a minor adverse effect is anticipated as a short-term effect. In the long-term, with the implementation of PDCs, effects to fine sediment would be negligible in Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed. Alternative C would result in negligible fine sediment effects to streams in West Branch Bridge Creek and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds in both the short-term and the long-term. Because the effects from Alternative C are determined to be negligible, implementation of Alternative C will have no effect to the baseline conditions for steelhead in regards to fine sediment.

112


Table 55. Modeled Sediment Delivery from Alternative C.

Subwatershed

Alternative C Sediment

Delivery from Roads

(tons/yr)


Delivery from Skid Trails

(tons/yr)


Delivery from Temporary

Roads


Conditions* (tons/yr)

Alternative C Increase from

Existing Conditions

Middle Bear Creek 1.3 1.6 0 143 2%

West Branch Bridge Creek -0.9 1.3 0 394 0%

Upper Marks Creek -1.8 1.7 0 175 0%

*Total sediment yield estimate is a total of natural background production (hillslope) and delivery from roads.

Effects to Aquatic Species

Because the activities proposed in Alternative C are scattered, small-scale, and of short duration and incorporated aquatic protection measures that are designed to protect listed steelhead and sensitive Redband trout and Columbia spotted frog, Alternative C would result in a call of “No Effect” for Mid-Columbia River steelhead and “May Impact, but Not Likely to Result in a Trend Toward Federal Listing” call for redband trout and Columbia Spotted Frog in the Middle Bear, West Branch Bridge Creek and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds. The “No Effect” determination for Mid-Columbia River steelhead is based on the following rationale:

• No critical habitat is within the project area (closest critical habitat is 0.3 miles from the project area).


• Implementation of PDCs and BMPs would reduce sediment delivery to stream to less than the modeled amounts and help protect hydrology and aquatic species.

• Due to the need to quickly harvest fire-killed trees, the project is expected to be implemented during the summer of 2015 and during the instream work window for Mid-Columbia River steelhead, which means the critical time for steelhead protection will occur outside of project implementation.

• The proposed action is small in scale compared to the entire project area (hazard tree removal along 19 miles of road, compared to a project area of approximately 7800 acres).


• Streams in the project area have no documented occurrence of steelhead.

Given that sediment levels are expected to be elevated due to log haul and skid trails, a short-term negative effect to native Redband trout and Columbia Spotted Frog is expected, since these species are present in streams in the project area. Short-term sediment inputs from increased road use and skid trails may have negative effects, including fish displacement and disruption of normal habits. However, these effects are limited in scale and duration, and thus will not be transferred downstream to steelhead critical habitat or habitats occupied by steelhead. Based on this information, Redband trout and Columbia spotted frog would be unaffected long-term in the Middle Bear Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek, and Upper Marks Creek Subwatersheds under actions in Alternative C.

113


Cumulative Effects Past Projects

The effects of past projects would not add incremental effects to the effects of the Bailey Butte Fire Project. These past projects include the following implemented projects: Beaver (1989), Halfway (2007), Harpo (1998), Nature (1984), Ochoco Divide Campground (2005), Ochoco Divide Snowpark (2013), Snowshoe (1990), Invasive Weed Treatments (2006-2014) and Underdog (1993). These projects are no longer having an effect to aquatic resources due to either their distance from streams and riparian areas, the length of time that has passed since they were implemented and implementation of PDCs and BMPs.

Any possible incremental effect from historic timber harvest activities and wildfires within the forest boundary were included in the EHA analysis for the existing condition, as well as the cumulative effects. EHA analysis results indicate that past harvest activities and wildfires, as well as project activities, will not exceed LRMP thresholds (see detailed cumulative analysis for Alternatives B and C).

Future and Ongoing Projects

Bailey Butte Wildfire (2014)

The Bailey Butte Fire started on July 14th, 2014 by lightning and was contained on July 27th, 2014, after burning just over 10,000 acres on both private (2,483 acres) and Forest Service (7,789) lands. The fire burned acres within the following subwatersheds: West Branch Bridge Creek, Middle Bear Creek, and Upper Marks Creek. Table 56 lists the amount of acres burned by burn severity by subwatersheds. Table 56. HUC 6 subwatersheds affected by the Bailey Butte Fire. Percent of watersheds burned are reported in parentheses.

Subwatersheds Total Acres

Unburned/Very Low Acres

Burn Severity

Low Acres Moderate Acres High Acres

Middle Bear Creek 21529 19125 (89%) 1564 (7%) 830 (4%) 9 (0.04%) Upper Marks Creek 20588 18079 (88%) 1899 (9%) 561 (3%) 49 (0.2%) West Branch Bridge Creek 25385 21243 (84%) 2645 (10%) 1442 (6%) 54 (0.2%) Totals 6108 2833 112

In terms of fire suppression, 16.3 miles of fireline (dozer and hand line) were constructed, as well as safety zones, staging areas and drop points. Rehabilitation efforts to these areas included water bar construction and seeding. These restoration efforts will minimize the effects to riparian areas but until vegetation is established there will be some continued erosion from these bared soils into riparian areas.

It is expected there will be increased hillslope erosion and subsequent instream sedimentation following the Bailey Butte Fire, and will continue until vegetation recovery has occurred on these burned areas (at least 5 years). Sediment production from hillslope erosion in the Bailey Butte fire area was estimated to be approximately 14 tons using Disturbed WEPP.

Trees that presented immediate hazards to firefighters were felled for safety reasons along roads used during the Bailey Butte Fire. Following the fire, it was determined that some of the felled hazard trees had commercial value, so they were offered for sale. The project hydrologist and fisheries biologist reviewed the location of the hazard trees. None of the trees cut were within the RHCA and

114


did not contribute to large wood in the floodplain. It was determined that there would be “no effect” to water and aquatic resources from commercial salvage of these hazard trees.

Bailey Butte Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (2014/2015)

Following the Bailey Butte Fire, a Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) team was identified to conduct further fire restoration efforts. The team’s task was to conduct an assessment to identify imminent post wildfire threats resulting from the Bailey Butte Fire that could impact (i) human life and safety (ii) property (iii) and critical natural and cultural resources. Majority of BAER treatments which were funded are centered around roads, which included 26 miles of road improvement (such as culvert cleaning, installation of waterbars, and reconditioning of catch basins), one culvert replacement, and removal of four undersized culverts (see Appendix C for more detailed information). Road work associated with BAER in will have beneficial effects on aquatic resources due to long-term reductions in fine sediment from roads. Based on WEPP:Road modeling for road maintenance completed under BAER in the West Branch Bridge and Middle Bear Creek subwatersheds, there will be a decrease in fine sediment delivered to streams from improved road drainage by 0.2 tons and 1.1 tons per year, respectively. Other work funded by BAER includes 0.9 miles of forest boundary fence reconstruction, 425 acres of invasive weed treatment, 25 acres of native seeding in highly sensitive areas, hazard tree abatement along Highway 26, three gate installations, and installation of hazards signs along Highway 26. Work has either been implemented or will be accomplished by summer of 2015.

Bailey Butte Post Fire Restoration (Future)

In addition to BAER work, the Ochoco National Forest identified additional items that were not funded through BAER and requested funding from the regional office to implement these activities. Activities proposed for additional funding through the regional office include the removal of a culvert on the 2630-250 that crosses Crystal Creek that is undersized and the replacement of the culvert on the 2600-450 that crosses Marks Creek that is undersized. Additional road improvements including drainage construction and fill slope armoring are also proposed on roads in the Marks Creek Watershed. Road work associated with post-fire restoration work in the Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed will have beneficial effects on aquatic resources due to long-term reductions in fine sediment from roads. If funding is secured, work could be accomplished as soon as 2015.

Spears Vegetation Management (2007)

The Spears Project Area is approximately 39,200 acres and falls within the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed. As described in the Record of Decision, 4,935 acres have been treated through commercial harvest, 10,935 acres have been treated through pre-commercial harvest, and 196 acres of hardwood treatments have been implemented. Fuel reduction activities include approximately 15,162 acres of prescribed fire, 2,490 acres of grapple piling, and 793 acres of hand piling. Road management estimates include approximately 4.4 miles of new road construction, 11 miles of road reconstruction, and 5.9 miles of road decommissioning.

Deschutes and Ochoco NF Travel Management Plan (2011)

The Record of Decision for the Travel Management Project was signed in September 2011 and the Travel Management Decision implementation started as of January 2012. The decision does the following: 1) limits motor vehicle use to designated roads, trails, and areas shown on the Motor Vehicle Use Maps; 2) designates some gravel pits open to motorized access; 3) creates new conditions for motor vehicle access off of designated roads for dispersed camping; 4) changes some system roads to highway legal vehicle use only. No existing open designated roads or motorized trails were closed as a result of the decision; however, changes to cross-country travel, motorized access for dispersed camping, and motorized mixed use (highway legal and non-highway legal vehicles) of some system roads were made. Cross-country travel is no longer allowed on the Ochoco National

115


Forest. Motorized access for dispersed camping is only allowed to existing sites within 300 feet of roads shown on the Motor Vehicle Use Map and motor vehicles cannot drive closer than 30 feet to any wetland, stream, or water body at dispersed campsites. The decision makes no changes to developed campgrounds and does not apply to over-snow motorized travel or permitted activities such as firewood cutting.

Marks Creek Allotment Management Plan (2011)

The Marks Creek Allotment Management Plan (AMP) reauthorizes grazing in the Marks Creek, Ortman, and Wildcat Allotments; authorizes a variety of rangeland improvements; and implements riparian restoration activities. Almost the entire Marks Creek AMP Project Area is encompassed within the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed; however, small portions of the project area also intersect the Bridge Creek and Lower Ochoco Creek Watersheds. Five subwatersheds are intersected by the project area: Lower Marks Creek, Upper Marks Creek, Duncan Creek-Ochoco Creek, Ochoco Reservoir-Ochoco Creek, and Middle Bear Creek. This project was resulted in a call of “May Impact, but Not Likely to Result in a Trend toward Federal Listing” call for redband trout and Columbia Spotted Frog.

Bear Creek Allotment Management Plan (Future)

The Lookout Mountain Ranger District of the Ochoco National Forest is proposing to reauthorize term grazing permits and modify grazing management in four allotments: Bear Creek, Elkhorn, Snowshoe, and Trout Creek. The Bailey Butte fire is entirely within the Bear Creek AMP project area and intersects all or portions of the Bear Creek, Elkhorn, and Snowshoe Allotments. The Bear Creek project area is located approximately 40 miles northeast of Prineville. It encompasses the Trout Creek, Bear Creek and Bridge Creek drainages, which provide habitat for threatened and sensitive fish species such as steelhead and redband trout. The proposed actions vary by allotment, and are specific to the resource situation within each allotment. The Proposed Action for all allotments includes reauthorizing grazing and reauthorizing existing rangeland improvements. Allotment-specific proposals include conifer reduction and protection around aspen stands, construction and reconstruction of water developments, riparian restoration activities including in-stream placement of wood and/or rock structures, filling and connecting floodplains, planting hardwoods, and creating physical barriers (such as wood, rock or fences) to protect hardwoods and improve bank stability, conifer thinning to improve RHCA (Riparian Habitat Conservation Area) stand conditions and utilization of thinning materials for in-stream placement and improved bank stability, corral and holding pen construction, construction of stock driveways, and conifer thinning. A Draft EIS is anticipated to be completed late in 2015.

Ochoco Summit Trail System Project(Future)

The purpose and need of the Ochoco Summit Trail System project is to create a trail network that would include approximately 124 miles of proposed OHV trail and 45 miles of open National Forest System (NFS) roads that connect trail segments or contribute to the network by providing alternate “get-back” routes or other recreational experiences. The trail system would include about 69 miles of trail for Class I vehicles, 48 miles for Class II vehicles, and 52 miles for Class III vehicles. Trail systems for each vehicle class would also include staging areas and trailheads. Staging areas would each have at least one vault toilet, a picnic table, and a kiosk or sign board to provide information and maps. Other amenities, including supervised youth riding areas, defined camp sites, and warm-up loops are proposed at some staging area locations. Picnic tables and/or benches and interpretive signing are proposed at points along some trails. The only subwatershed where the Ochoco Summit OHV Project and Bailey Butte Fire Project overlap is in the Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed. Depending on alternative, Ochoco Summit proposes to construct between 0.5-1.8 miles of new trail in the Upper Marks Subwatershed. A supplemental DEIS for the Ochoco Summit Project is expected to be released sometime during the spring of 2015.

116


Canyon Fuels and Vegetation Management (2010)

The Canyon Project Area is approximately 13,632 acres and falls within the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed. It does not fall within the three subwatersheds that intersect the Bailey Butte Fire Project area, therefore it will only be analyzed as part of the EHA cumulative effects analysis. As described in the Record of Decision, 4099 acres were planned to have been treated through commercial harvest, 5,862 acres were planned to have been treated through pre-commercial harvest, 1,395 acres were planned for juniper removal, and 236 acres of hardwood treatments were planned to be implemented. Underburning was planned for 2,038 acres outside of the harvest or PCT units. Road management estimates include approximately 0.6 miles of new road construction, two miles of new temporary roads, 4.4 miles of reuse of existing temporary roads, decommissioning 4.9 miles of road and 2.9 miles of road closures. Underburning activities and portions of the pre-commercial thinning and juniper removal have yet to be completed.

Cumulative Effects Common to All Alternatives

Physical Barriers

No cumulative effects would occur relative to physical barriers since no direct or indirect effects would occur. Because it is determined that no cumulative effects would occur, implementation for any alternative would not have an effect to baseline conditions for steelhead in regards to physical barriers.

Cumulative Effects Common to All Action Alternatives

Water Quality

Temperature, shade, and bank stability

The effect to stream temperature, stream shade and bank stability from the Bailey Butte Fire Timber Salvage is anticipated to have a beneficial effect in the short-term and long-term in areas proposed for riparian treatment. Cumulatively, this would result in a beneficial effect in the short and long-term. No cumulative effects would occur relative to stream temperature, stream shade and bank stability outside of treated areas since no direct or indirect effects would occur. Because the areas proposed for riparian treatment (approximately 5% of the project area), the effects of the action alternatives are expected to not change the baseline conditions for steelhead in regards to the water quality indicators mentioned previously.

Fine Sediment

Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed

Past, present or foreseeable actions that could affect fine sediment within the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed include Bailey Butte fire, Bailey Butte BAER, Bailey Butte post fire restoration, Travel Management Rule, Marks Creek AMP, and Bear Creek AMP. The effects of the Bailey Butte fire have been analyzed and discussed throughout this section. In terms of timing, magnitude and duration, the Bailey Butte Fire project is expected to be implemented in the summer/fall of 2015 during the dry season, which would reduce the impacts as compared to implementation when the ground is wet and sediment delivery to streams is more likely. From a magnitude standpoint, the Bailey Butte Fire project is spread across three subwatersheds and is limited to a small percentage of these subwatersheds. Finally, the duration of the project would be very short; it is anticipated that the project would be completed in one year, so short-term effects would only persist for one year. The cumulative effects for the fire and Bailey Butte Fire Project would be the same as discussed in the effects section.

117


Bailey Butte BAER and Bailey Butte post-fire restoration effects relative to fine sediment are determined to have short-term minimal adverse effects and long-term beneficial effects. Short-term effects from these treatments are caused from ground disturbance during implementation of culvert cleaning, culvert removal, installation of drain dips, clearing of vegetation near culverts, catch basin reconditioning, and excavation of waterbars. These BAER activities would have a short-term, less than a year, effect on sediment delivery to streams; however, in the long-term (more than a year in the future) drainage improvements would substantially reduce sediment delivery to less than post-fire sediment delivery amounts. Travel Management Rule restricts and reduces motor vehicle use within the Ochoco National Forest. Travel Management Rule would have, assuming there is no unauthorized OHV use, a beneficial effect in regards to fine sediment and turbidity. Marks Creek AMP involves a small section of Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed (less than 100 acres); therefore, there would be no measureable effect. Bear Creek AMP proposes reauthorization of grazing within four allotments. It has been shown that grazing has effects to aquatic resources. Bear Creek AMP would analyze these effects and would appropriately address effects to fine sediment by implementing riparian restoration activities and adjusting grazing management. Pastures that were burned in Bailey Butte wildfire would not be grazed in the 2015 grazing season. In addition, pastures with substantial fire activity would be rested until specific riparian criteria are met (see Appendix 2).

Overall, short-term increases in sediment delivery to streams would occur with the implementation of Bailey Butte BAER, Bailey Butte post fire restoration, Bailey Butte Fire Project, and potentially Bear AMP. As discussed above, the timing would occur during the dry months of summer/fall, the magnitude is small in relation to the entire subwatershed, and the duration of effects would only occur for one year which would lead to a negligible effect as determined in the environmental effects section above. Cumulatively, the other projects listed above (Bailey Butte BAER and post-fire restoration and Bear AMP) would also contribute short-term (one year) negative effects, but within similar timing, magnitude and duration as the Bailey Butte fire project. Cumulatively, this would still lead to a negligible effect to aquatic species and resources in the project area.

In the long-term, Bailey Butte BAER, Bailey Butte post fire restoration, Travel Management Project, and areas proposed for riparian treatment in the Bailey Butte Fire Project would cumulatively have a beneficial effect to fine sediment and turbidity. The beneficial effects from Bailey Butte BAER, Bailey Butt post fire restoration and Travel Management Rule, in the long-term, would outweigh the short-term effects from areas outside of riparian treatment in the Bailey Butte Fire Project; cumulatively resulting in a negligible effect. Because the effects of the action alternatives are determine to have a cumulative negligible effect, the action alternatives would not affect the baseline conditions for steelhead to fine sediment for the Middle Bear Creek Subwatershed.

West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed

Past, present or foreseeable actions that could affect fine sediment within the West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed include Bailey Butte fire, Bailey Butte BAER, Bailey Butte post fire restoration, and Travel Management Rule. The effects to fine sediment and turbidity from the Bailey Butte Fire Timber Salvage would not incrementally add to the cumulative effects because of the immeasurable effects predicted for sediment delivery (Table 54 and Table 55). In addition, the action alternatives would not affect the baseline conditions for steelhead in regards to fine sediment for the West Branch Bridge Creek Subwatershed.

Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed

Past, present or foreseeable actions that could affect fine sediment within the Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed include Bailey Butte fire, Bailey Butte BAER, Bailey Butte post fire restoration, Travel Management Rule, Spears Vegetation Management, Marks Creek AMP, and Ochoco Summit OHV. The effects to fine sediment and turbidity from the Bailey Butte Fire Timber Salvage would not

118


incrementally add to the cumulative effects because of the immeasurable effects predicted for sediment delivery (Table 54 and Table 55).

Habitat Elements

Large Woody Material, pool frequency and quality, native riparian condition, and Width/Depth ratio

The effect to large woody material, pool frequency and quality, native riparian condition, and width/ratio from the Bailey Butte Fire Timber Salvage is anticipated to have a beneficial effect in the short-term and long-term in areas proposed for riparian treatment. Cumulatively, this would result in a beneficial effect in the short and long-term. No cumulative effects would occur relative to LWM, pool frequency and quality, native riparian condition, and width/depth ratio outside of treated riparian areas since no direct or indirect effects would occur. The action alternatives will have no cumulative effects, therefore would not change the baseline conditions for steelhead.

Watershed Condition


No cumulative effects would occur relative to road density and location if any action alternative is implemented because no new specified roads are proposed for construction; therefore, no direct or indirect effects would occur. Similarly, road density and location baseline conditions for steelhead would not be cumulatively affected.


Two allotment management plans (Bear AMP and Marks Creek AMP) and two vegetation management plan projects are located within the Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds with activities remaining to be implemented have the potential to cumulatively increase EHA. All or portions of three allotments from the Bear Creek Allotment Management Plan project are located within the Bridge Creek Watershed, activities include thinning around aspen stands, riparian restoration and thinning, creation of stock driveways and thinning conifers encroaching into Indian Prairie. Projects located within the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed with activities that have the potential to affect EHA include the Marks Creek Allotment Management Plan, the Canyon Fuels and Vegetation Management Project and the Spears Vegetation Management Project. These projects include thinning around aspen stands, commercial thinning, pre-commercial thinning and prescribed fire.

Cumulative effects from the portions of these projects not yet implemented, as well as historic activities, wildfire and both alternatives are shown in Table 57. Only minimal increases, less than 1%, are expected to result in EHA from future planned project activities resulting in levels below the Forest Plan thresholds and maintaining a functioning at risk condition.

Because the cumulative effects of either action alternative are determined to have a less than 1% increase in EHA and EHA is being use as a surrogate for changes in peak/base flow, drainage network increase, disturbance history and regime, implementation of either action alternative would not change baseline conditions for steelhead. Table 57. Projection of Cumulative EHA for Bridge Creek and Upper Ochoco Creek Watersheds based on a combination of historic activities, alternatives and future project activities.

Calendar Year


EHA (%)


EHA (%)


EHA (%)


EHA (%) 2015 22.1% 22.1% 12.9% 12.9% 2016 21.6% 21.7% 12.8% 12.8% 2017 21.7% 21.7% 12.6% 12.6% 2018 21.2% 21.2% 12.2% 12.2%

119


Calendar Year


EHA (%)


EHA (%)


EHA (%)


EHA (%) 2019 20.6% 20.6% 11.9% 11.9% 2020 19.9% 19.9% 11.5% 11.5% 2021 18.9% 18.9% 11.2% 11.2% 2022 18.0% 18.0% 10.8% 10.9% 2023 17.1% 17.1% 10.5% 10.5% 2024 16.6% 16.5% 10.3% 10.3% 2025 15.8% 15.8% 10.0% 10.0%

Cumulative Effects to Aquatic Species

Past, present or foreseeable actions that could affect aquatic species include all of the projects listed above in the Future and Ongoing projects section. No cumulative effects are expected to detrimentally affect redband, Mid-Columbia River steelhead and its critical habitat, and Columbia spotted frog because the effects from fine sediment, the only indicator projected to slightly increase and have an effect to aquatic species, would be negligible. Cumulatively, the previously mentioned project and the action alternatives for the Bailey Butte Fire will result in a call of “No Effect” for Mid-Columbia River Steelhead, and “May Impact, but Not Likely to Result in a Trend Toward Federal Listing” call for redband trout and Columbia Spotted Frog. Implementation of the Bailey Butte Fire Project would not change the baseline conditions for steelhead in regards to subpopulation size and characteristics.

Aquatic Management Indicator Species (MIS) Viability Analysis Fish species identified as management indicator species are listed in the FEIS for the Forest Plan. These species are rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). In the past, these fish have been stocked by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. They are no longer stocked in the streams in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area but may naturally reproduce in many streams (Classes I and II). For purposes of this analysis, effects to redband trout will act as a surrogate for MIS fish species. No further evaluation for brook trout will be discussed in this section.

Riparian ecosystems occur at the margins of standing and flowing water, including intermittent stream channels, ephemeral ponds, and wetlands. The aquatic MIS were selected to indicate healthy stream and riparian ecosystems across the landscape. Attributes of a healthy aquatic ecosystem includes: cold and clean water; clean channel substrates; stable streambanks; healthy streamside vegetation; complex channel habitat created by large wood, cobbles, boulders, streamside vegetation, and undercut banks; deep pools; and waterways free of barriers. Healthy riparian areas maintain adequate temperature regulation, nutrient cycles, natural erosion rates, and provide for instream wood recruitment.

The existing condition of redband trout habitat and extent of redband trout populations in the project area is displayed in the section of this report titled “Watershed and Subwatershed Descriptions” and “Existing Condition.” Refer to this section of the report for more information on conditions for Redband trout in the project area.

Limiting factors and threats for redband trout are similar throughout their range on the Ochoco National Forest and Crooked River National Grassland. The predominant threats are increases in stream temperature due to channel degradation due to riparian area management issues and population fragmentation from upstream passage issues mostly related to culverts at stream crossings.

Causal factors include legacy effects from over grazing, logging and road building in the 20th century. In most cases channels are currently recovering from these effects, especially grazing and logging,

120


however, road building issues that constricted floodplains continue to cause effects to fish habitat. Road crossings on the Ochoco are being replaced on a yearly basis with over 60 culverts either removed or replaced in the last 16 years. This has increased the ability of redband trout to move freely within and between watersheds.

There are no models developed to determine viability of the redband trout based on habitat. However, based on the local science from Stuart et al. (2007) and the estimated habitats from the Inter Columbia Basin Management Plan there appears to be appropriate habitat that is well distributed and available for redband trout across the Ochoco National Forest. In conclusion, the viability assessment indicates that habitat of the redband trout is still available in adequate amounts, distribution, and quality to maintain redband trout viability on the Ochoco National Forest and Crooked River National Grassland.

Given the project design and mitigations and the small scale of change in site specific locations, from the existing condition (especially relative to the scale of the Forest or overall subwatersheds included in this project), the continued viability of redband trout is expected to occur on the Ochoco National Forest. The predominant threats to redband trout on the Ochoco National Forest are increases in stream temperature and fragmentation of habitats from road culverts. The Bailey Butte Fire project was determined to have a beneficial effect in areas where riparian treatment occurs and “no effect” in areas outside of treated areas, therefore the viability of redband trout will not be affected.

Wildlife The following is a summary of the Wildlife Specialist’s Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

• The proposed action will have No effect to the federally endangered gray wolf.

• The proposed action May impact the following Region 6 sensitive species but will not lead to a trend towards Federal listing: white-headed woodpecker and Lewis’s woodpecker.

• The proposed action will have No impact to the following Region 6 sensitive species or their habitats: North American wolverine, bald eagle, bufflehead, American peregrine falcon, greater sage-grouse, tricolored blackbird, upland sandpiper, pygmy rabbit, Townsend’s big-eared, Columbia spotted frog, silver-bordered fritillary and Johnson’s hairstreak.

• The proposed action May impact the following Management Indicator Species and their habitats but will not contribute to a negative trend in species’ viability at the Forest level: Primary Cavity Excavators (PCE), pileated woodpecker and northern flicker. The proposed action will have No impact to the following Management Indicator Species and their habitats: bald eagle, golden eagle and prairie falcon. The project will have a net beneficial impact on Rocky Mountain elk and mule deer. The proposed action is consistent with the standards and guidelines (S&Gs) for Management Indicator Species in the Ochoco National Forest 1989 Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended.

• The proposed action May impact focal landbird species but is consistent with the biological objectives outlined in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington with the exception of those objectives which do not meet the purpose and need of the project.

o For dry forests these include retaining all ponderosa pine trees and snags >20” (Strategy page 30); and retain all trees/snags >20” for Lewis’s woodpecker in post-fire old ponderosa pine forests (Strategy page 48). The objectives for salvaging <50% of standing and down dead, and for salvaging less than 50% of snags 12-20”

121


(Strategy page 48) is met with only 76 acres of salvage and 131 acres of roadside hazard removal in PPDF Habitat Type within 2,240 acres of PPDF available within the fire area on National Forest land (9% of the PPDF habitat type area).

o For Eastside mixed conifer forests these include retaining all trees and snags >20” (Strategy page 51 and 67). The objectives for salvaging <50% of standing and down dead, and for salvaging less than 40% of snags 12-20” (Strategy page 67) is met with only 207 acres of salvage and 349 acres of roadside hazard removal in EMC Habitat Type within 5,191 acres of EMC available within the fire area on National Forest land (11% of the EMC habitat type area).

o Because the project includes hazard tree removal along roads either open to and used by the public, or used for administrative purposes, some trees >20” may be removed and the percentage of trees 12-20 inches dbh to be retained will be dependent on the degree of hazard related to roads or work areas.

o Because the project includes salvage of economic value in identified units, fire killed trees >20 inches dbh and 12-20 inches dbh will be removed. The number of snags in each size class to be retained will be dictated by the snag retention guidelines and the economic value of the material present. No less than the numbers reflected in the retention standards will be retained in association with each salvage unit with the exception of Unit 6, which involves both a road and a fenceline that needs to be reconstructed. On that unit retention will be in accordance to the retention standard to the extent that is possible, but the abatement of hazard along both the road and the fenceline will take precedence on this unit.

• The proposed action May impact the Raptors (birds of prey) and their habitats by very small scope and scale of reduction in trees and snags or by temporary displacement of foraging activity, but this would occur at such a small magnitude that it would not alter suitability of habitat or use of the area by these species, or contribute to a negative trend in species’ viability at the Forest level.

Introduction This section considers effects to terrestrial wildlife species discussed in the Ochoco LRMP Management Indicator Species (MIS) and their habitats, as well as other LRMP species, and landbird species. The discussions below are grouped into major categories such as Management Indicator Species (MIS); Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species (TES); Other LRMP Species and Landbirds. Species among these groups that do not have habitat in the analysis area or that would not be affected by the activities proposed by this project will not be addressed in detail in this document. These include the MIS species Rocky Mountain elk and mule deer; golden eagle and prairie falcon and bald eagle; TES species bald eagle, upland sandpiper, bufflehead, American peregrine falcon, tricolored blackbird, greater sage-grouse, pygmy rabbit, silver bordered fritillary, Johnson’s hairstreak, and horned grebe; osprey; focal landbird species flammulated owl, chipping sparrow, Townsend’s warbler, varied thrush, MacGillivray’s warbler, red-eyed vireo, veery, willow flycatcher, hermit thrush, upland sandpiper, vesper sparrow and gray-crowned rosey finch. These species will not be addressed in detail, but may be represented in tables that display the species groups. This report includes the biological evaluation documenting potential effects of the proposed Bailey Butte project on TES species in order to meet the requirements of Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2630.3., FSM 2670-2671, FSM W.O. Amendments 2600-2005-1, the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), and the Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP, USDA Forest Service [FS] 1989) for the Ochoco National Forest, as amended. A journey-level wildlife biologist prepared the biological evaluation (BE) for effects to listed or proposed species under the ESA and effects to Region 6

122


sensitive species (USDA Forest Service 2015). It will be filed with the project files with the supporting NEPA documentation.

Analysis Methods The species analyzed in this section include those with known presence and/or potential habitat on the Forest. If no surveys have been conducted for the species or there are no detections or no known occurrences, occupancy in the project area is assumed if potential habitat exists. Because the project would occur during the reproductive period in spring and summer, direct effects/effects may include direct mortality of offspring (eggs or nestlings) in nests or roost sites of trees felled, adult abandonment of nests with eggs or young due to felling and other operational disturbance, and minor displacement during foraging due to felling and other operational disturbance. These effects are anticipated to be low due to the narrow linear treatment areas adjacent to roads and the relatively small size of salvage units. Cutting of actively occupied nest trees will be avoided by marking trees with visible nest structures or cavities for retention. Nonetheless some nests may be overlooked and therefore there is potential for effects to individuals; however this effect would be localized and minor in scale. An abundance of untreated area adjacent to the treatment units will provide opportunity for displaced individuals to find refuge and possibly to establish a replacement nest.

A determination of positive, negative, or neutral trend towards viability for Management Indicator Species is made at the population level based on forest-wide habitat assessments. Effects to snags and down wood associated species are based on use of the DecAID advisor (Mellen-McLean et al. 2009) and habitat modeling at the forest and watershed level using the Ochoco and Deschutes Viable Ecosystems Viable Ecosystem Model (Viable).

For Sensitive Species potentially impacted by the proposed treatments, a determination of whether a “May Impact” determination would result in a “trend towards federal listing” for each species is made at the population level based on forest-wide information for these species.

Management Indicator Species

Primary cavity excavators (PCE) These are species such as woodpeckers and nuthatches, which are forest dwelling birds that are specialized for foraging on and nesting in decaying wood. They require trees with rotted heartwood for excavating nest holes and dead or dying trees for a foraging substrate (Jackman, 1974). This foraging substrate consists of insects such as bark and wood boring beetles on the surface or in the wood of trees or logs. Primary cavity excavators on the Ochoco National Forest include the following: pileated woodpecker, black-backed woodpecker, northern flicker, downy woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, Williamson’s and red-naped sapsuckers, three-toed woodpecker, Lewis’ woodpecker, black-capped and mountain chickadees, red-breasted, white-breasted and pygmy nuthatches. Primary cavity excavators depend on snags and logs for nesting, roosting, and foraging. Black-backed and three-toed woodpeckers are associated with lodgepole pine, while Lewis’ woodpeckers prefer ponderosa pine associations. White-headed woodpeckers and pygmy nuthatches share similar habitat of large open ponderosa pine, low shrub levels and large snags. The white-headed woodpecker is a primary cavity excavator of softer snags, while the pygmy nuthatch is a secondary cavity nester and can take advantage of natural cavities as well as woodpecker created cavities. Pileated woodpeckers and Williamson’s sapsuckers prefer mature and late-successional habitats in mixed conifer plant associations while northern flickers and hairy woodpeckers are found in a mix of habitats, especially those associated with edges. Downy woodpeckers and red-naped sapsuckers are associated with riparian habitat, but can also be found in a mix of habitats. The primary cavity excavators (PCE) are analyzed as a group; however the pileated

123


woodpecker and northern flicker are also analyzed individually as named MIS species with viability determinations included in the text of this document.

The most significant role that primary excavators play in the forest community is the provision of nest holes for small mammals or for cavity nesting birds that do not excavate their own holes (Jackman, 1974). Approximately 31 percent of the total bird fauna use snags for nesting, foraging, roosting, communicating, and as hunting and resting perches (Raphael and White, 1984). Rose et al. (2001) identifies 96 wildlife species associated with snags and 86 species associated with down wood. Most snag-using wildlife species are associated with snags greater than 14.2 inches dbh with about a third of these using snags greater than 29.1 inches dbh.

Dead wood is also a fundamental feature of healthy forests. Logs contribute to the hydrology of a site and provide microhabitats that protect wood-dwelling organisms with moist, thermally stable, predator-protected niches in which to live (Torgersen and Bull, 1995). Logs can be considered places in which animals such as the American marten forage, or places that animals such as fawns or black bear use for hiding cover and protection. Logs are also used for lookouts, feeding and reproduction, sources and storage of food, and bedding (Franklin et al., 1981). The persistence of large logs has special importance in providing wildlife with habitat continuity over long periods and through major disturbances (Franklin et al., 1981) and they have more potential uses as wildlife habitat (Rose, 2001). In addition (Rose, 2001) states that large accumulations of decaying wood provide wildlife habitat and influence basic ecosystem processes such as soil development and productivity, nutrient immobilization and mineralization, and nitrogen fixing. On the other hand, Rose et al. (2001) also states that forests east of the Cascade Crest are also strongly influenced by accumulations of decaying wood that set the stage for ecosystem disturbances from fire, insects, and disease.

Analysis of Dead Wood Habitat for the Bailey Butte and Lava Fires

Post-fire habitats offer an opportunity to manage for areas of high snag density; such areas are generated by disturbance events like fire, insects or disease, but can be limited spatially and temporally at the landscape scale. Over time fire-killed trees fall and become down wood habitat. The abundance and distribution of snag and down wood habitat within fire affected areas can be modified by salvage or woodcutting, or by future fire events.

This analysis was originally completed to help determine if salvage activities would be recommended in the Bailey Butte and Lava Fire areas, both of which burned in 2014 on the Ochoco NF. The decision has since been made not to propose salvage in the Lava Fire area. However, the full analysis was included with this EA to provide comprehensive information on the availability of PCE habitat on the Ochoco NF.

Analysis Methods: Because LRMP standards and guidelines do not address species use of habitats at various snag densities, the effects analysis employed a landscape-level snag analysis using Gradient Nearest Neighbor (GNN, Ohmann and Gregory 2002) vegetation data, information from DecAID (Decayed Wood Advisor), as well as post-fire predictions using Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG). The pre-fire GNN snag densities were adjusted based on the RAVG data for tree mortality. This post-fire data set is the basis of the analysis for Wildlife Species Tolerance Levels. This analysis includes three levels of analysis described in DecAID at three scales: 1) a Qualitative Assessment at a 5-subwatershed landscape scale; 2) a Wildlife Tolerance Level Analysis for the area within the 5-subwatershed area with RAVG coverage; and 3) a Species Specific Wildlife Habitat Analysis for the proposed treatment units within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Refer to the website www.fsl.orst.edu/lemma for more information on the GNN data. DecAID is a culmination of the most recent science and data available. As stated by Rose et al. (2001), DecAID is based on a thorough review of the literature, available research and inventory data, and expert judgment. DecAID can help managers decide how much snag and down wood of different sizes

124

http://www.fsl.orst.edu/lemma


should be retained to meet wildlife management objectives for a particular project or area (Mellen et al., 2012). The information contained in DecAID is based on published scientific literature, research data, expert judgment, and professional experience. It is primarily a statistical summary of published research data for wildlife presence (mainly cavity-nesting birds) and inventoried forest conditions (Mellen et al., 2012). DecAID presents information on the range of “natural conditions” (as represented by unharvested plots within the plots sampled), “current conditions” (all plots sampled, including both unharvested and harvested plots), and wildlife use.

DecAID contains two major data sets, which are summarized by wildlife habitat types. The vegetative inventory data is composed of statistical summaries of forest inventory data on snags and down wood in unharvested forests and entire landscapes across Oregon and Washington. The wildlife data are derived from a thorough review of published literature and other available data on wildlife use of snags and down wood, primarily in Oregon and Washington. DecAID provides a statistical synthesis of data showing levels of use by individual wildlife species of snags and down wood. Wildlife use data are not available for all structural condition classes in all wildlife habitat types.

In order to compare the relative abundance of high density dead wood habitat with “natural” or “reference conditions” (predicted using the data in DecAID), an appropriately-sized analysis area was needed to incorporate a landscape large enough so that the amount of area exhibiting high snag densities (resulting from the 2014 fire season) would be representative of the relative abundance of such habitat within a reference landscape. Using guidance found in the DecAID Guide (DecAID Implementation: Post-Disturbance Salvage Sales – Determining size of analysis Area for Distribution Analysis of Current Conditions). The area must encompass enough acres within each DecAID habitat type present in the fire area or affected area, to accommodate the scale of disturbance being evaluated as a portion of the total habitat type acres commensurate with the reference condition. The DecAID Advisor, provides information on calculating the size of the analysis area http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid-guide/salvage-analysis-area.shtml. An analysis area was selected for conducting the Qualitative Assessment which includes 5 sub-watersheds that when combined capture the mortality data for the Bailey Butte and Lava Fire areas. The Qualitative Analysis area was clipped to include only USFS managed land (refer to Figure 8 and Figure 9). The post-fire snag densities were then predicted using RAVG imagery, and resulting snag density distributions were compared to the underlying data on species use of various snag densities provided in DecAID. Four categories of basal area loss based on reflectance (from satellite imagery) contained in the RAVG data for the Bailey Butte Fire are displayed in Figure 10. Refer to the RAVG program’s website: http://www.fs.fed.us/postfirevegcondition for detailed information on RAVG analysis. Refer to the DecAID website for detailed information about cumulative species curves and tolerance levels: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/run-decaid.shtml.

Several assumptions were made in this analysis:

1. Areas meeting or exceeding the 80% tolerance level for snag density represent snag pulses created by large events like wildfire or insects and disease events (Mellen-McLean et al 2012).

2. Unharvested inventory plot data (plots with and without measureable snags) from the DecAID data set represent a natural or reference condition that approximates historic distribution and density of snags for the analysis area, the Historic Range of Variability (HRV).

3. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from Mellen-McLean et al (2012) contained in the DecAID data set represent how species would use similar habitat within the analysis area.

4. By managing habitat within HRV it is assumed that adequate habitat will be provided because species survived with those levels of habitat in the past to be present today (Mellen-McClean et al. 2012)

125

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid-guide/salvage-analysis-area.shtml

http://www.fs.fed.us/postfirevegcondition

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/run-decaid.shtml


5. Data collected at inventory plots is representative of conditions across all acres that share the same reflectance properties (satellite imagery).

6. A minor amount of the moderate to high severity fire area was coded in the regional data set as Montane Mixed Conifer (MMC) Habitat Type (32 acres or less than 1/10 of one percent of the forested acres within the Qualitative Assessment analysis area). These 32 acres of MMC were combined into the EMC habitat type for this analysis as they occur in such a small amount that they likely provide the same habitat value as the surrounding acres of EMC and they would not be of sufficient quantity to change the outcome of the analysis. Throughout the following analysis the MMC acres were included into the analysis for and reported within the EMC habitat type.

A minor amount of the moderate to high severity fire area was coded in the regional data set as Montane Mixed Conifer (MMC) Habitat Type (32 acres or less than 1/10 of one percent of the forested acres within the Qualitative Assessment analysis area). These 32 acres of MMC were combined into the EMC habitat type for this analysis as they occur in such a small amount that they likely provide the same habitat value as the surrounding acres of EMC and they would not be of sufficient quantity to change the outcome of the analysis. Throughout the following analysis the MMC acres were included into the analysis for and reported within the EMC habitat type.

To determine if salvaging is feasible, an analysis was completed to determine levels of snags within the given habitat types on the landscape. The DecAID Implementation Guide gives direction for completing a qualitative assessment that displays the amount of area that is in the 80-100% tolerance levels for snag density (high density snag patches). Information within the DecAID Implementation Guide (2012) suggests that 20 % of a habitat type should provide a high snag pulse on the landscape (at the 80% tolerance level or greater). Table 58 displays the snag density meeting 80% tolerance level by habitat type for snags ≥10 inches dbh (weighted for all 3 structural condition classes) and the percentage of the landscape expected to be in that condition based on the DecAID recommended 20% criteria. Areas meeting or exceeding the 80% tolerance level represent snag pulses created by large events like wildfire or insects and disease events. The information provided in DecAID (See DecAID Implementation: Post-Disturbance Salvage Sales - Determining Size of Analysis Area for Distribution Analysis of Current Conditions) indicates that the analysis area for determining if the outcome of the disturbance results in excess acres of high snag densities at the landscape level, as compared to the inventory distribution data from unharvested plots in DecAID, would need to encompass at least 10,435 acres of the Eastside Mixed Conifer (EMC) habitat type and at least 3,200 acres of the Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir (PPDF) habitat type. These minimum thresholds for analysis area size are based on the amount of area in each habitat type that would be needed in order for the amount of high fire mortality within the analysis area and in each habitat type (resulting from the 2014 fires) to be representative of 20% being in high density snag patches. For further details, refer to the DecAID Implementation Guide. There are approximately 31,535 forested acres of EMC habitat and 9,146 forested acres of PPDF habitat in the 5-subwatershed analysis area making this area an appropriate size with sufficient composition of habitat types for the Qualitative Assessment. Table 58. Tolerance Levels (Snag Density) and Percent of Landscape Expected to Meet 80% Tolerance Levels for the ≥10 inch diameter group under the Reference Condition from DecAID.

Eastside Mixed Conifer Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Size Class (dbh) >10”dbh >10”dbh 80% Tolerance Levela 20.9 snags/acre 4.7 snags/acre % of Landscape >80% tolerance levelb

20%

20%

aData for Eastside Mixed Conifer and Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir acquired from DecAID Table inv-3b (≥10 inch dbh) and Table inv-4b (≥20 inch dbh). bData for Eastside Mixed Conifer acquired from DecAID Figures EMC_ECB_O.inv-14, EMC_ECB_S.inv-14, and ECM_ECB_L.inv-14. Data for Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir acquired from Figures PPDF_O.inv-14, PPDF_S.inv-14 and PPDF_L.inv-14.

126


The analysis area includes five 6th field sub-watersheds, encompassing approximately 51,735 acres. Minor amounts of lodgepole and montane mixed conifer were combined into the EMC to simplify the analysis. Within this analysis area 12,354 acres are coded as PPDF habitat type and 39,381 acres are coded as EMC habitat type (EMC=EMC_ECB+MMC). Of those 3,208 acres in PPDF and 7,846 acres in EMC are associated with meadow complexes, rock outcrops and other non-forested features where high density snag patches would not have been expected to occur under natural conditions. These areas show up in the GNN data set as having zero snags as displayed in Figure 8 and Figure 9. These non-forested areas are not considered in this analysis to represent areas that would naturally contribute to 80% TL snag densities, thus they are not included in the acres displayed in Table 59 for forested stands or beyond this point in this analysis. Table 59 displays the acres of forested habitat with snag densities in excess of the 80% Tolerance Level based on GNN data prior to the fire season of 2014. Of the forested area within the two primary habitat types within the 5-subwatershed analysis area displayed in Figure 8 and Figure 9, the amount of area needed to meet the estimated reference condition by habitat type for snags ≥10 inches dbh, based on regional-level DecAID predictions are shown in the right hand column of Table 59 and on the first row of Table 60. Table 59. Acres with snag densities in excess of the 80% tolerance level (snag density) needed to meet the reference condition.

Habitat Type Acres of Habitat Type in Forested Stands in

the Analysis Area

Percent of Landscape Above 80% TL to Meet Reference

Condition

Total Acres with Snag Densities Exceeding the

80% TL Needed/Expected

EMC 31,535 20% 6,307 PPDF 9,146 20% 1,829

The best available vegetation and dead wood data for the 5-subwatershed analysis area (GNN modeling completed in Summer 2014 using data and imagery collected in 2012) indicates that there were approximately 31,535 acres of Eastside Mixed Conifer Habitat Type (EMC=EMC_ECB+MMC) and 9,146 acres of the Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir (PPDF) Habitat Type within the analysis area not associated with meadow complexes, rock outcrops or the non-forested features. Of that, approximately 4,375 acres of EMC and 3,959 acres of PPDF that had snag densities in excess of the 80% Tolerance Level for these habitat types at the end of fire season 2012. These acres are displayed in the second row of Table 60.

Additional recruitment of high snag density pulses would be gained due to insect and disease activity as well as fire events that occurred after the imagery was collected in 2012. Within the 5-subwatershed analysis area, the largest recent pulses of high density snag recruitment after September of 2012 are associated with the Bailey Butte and Lava fires of 2014. High tree mortality that results in snag densities in excess of the 80% Tolerance Level (due to wildfire effects) contribute to the recent high snag density pulses. From these two fires approximately 1,846 acres in EMC and 572 acres in PPDF were impacted by moderate to high severity fire. Existing regeneration and shelterwood harvest units were checked to see if areas with snags absent or at low densities were impacted by this level of fire severity, and these were found to generally not be affected by moderate or high intensity fire. For this reason the majority of the moderate- to high-severity fire acres occurred in fully stocked stands and are assumed to have recruited snags at the 80% TL. These acres are displayed in the third row of Table 60. There are additional acres of snag densities in excess of the 80% Tolerance Level in the analysis area resulting from small patches of mortality within the areas mapped as low severity (soil impacts). It is estimated that 5% or more of the area within mapped low severity actually has patches of tree mortality to meet the criteria for 80% tolerance level (4.7 snags per acre at 10” dbh or greater in Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir Habitat Type, or 20.9 snags per acre at 10” dbh or greater in Eastside Mixed Conifer Habitat Type). These acres are displayed in the fourth row of Table 60. An assessment of current insect and disease mortality based on examination of the most recent insect and disease mapping for 2012 and 2013, indicated that there

127


would be few acres within the 5-subwatershed analysis area mapped, subsequently to the 2012 GNN data, that would count toward the 80% tolerance level in either habitat type (personal communication, Andy Eglitis, 2014). For this reason insect and disease pockets that have occurred since September of 2012 were not included in the post-fire initial analysis displayed in Table 60. The resultant amount of acreage contributing high enough snag densities to meet the overall 80% tolerance level is 6,462 acres in EMC (or 20.5% of EMC) and 4,599 acres in PPDF (or 50.3%) as displayed on the 5th and 6th rows of Table 60. Thus we are currently slightly above the acres in the EMC Habitat Type, and more than double the acres in the PPDF Habitat Type that would be expected to exceed the 80% Tolerance Level under natural or reference conditions in the analysis area for the ≥10 inch dbh group (20% of each habitat type) based data in on DecAID.

Continued future mortality due to fire-induced stress and increased insect activity within the fire area is expected, especially in the Eastside Mixed Conifer Habitat Type where fire intolerant grand fir commonly occurs in abundance in size classes in excess of 10” dbh. Thus, over a period of 2 to 10 years additional mortality within the fire perimeter is expected to occur in stands that were not subjected to immediate stand replacement mortality levels. The extent of this future mortality is will depend on factors such as drought, insect activity and other sources stress. This future snag recruitment will at least to some extent provide replacement for snag breakage and fall down that is expected to occur over time. However, there is likely to be a period of time in the future in which many of the snags created by the 2014 fires will have fallen and the future snags will still be developing as living trees. Thus there will likely be a gap in availability of high snag density patches and very large snags in the future, as a result of limitations of snag longevity (fall down rate) and rate of development and recruitment of future snags. This gap is likely to occur between approximately 20 and 50 years into the future, regardless of salvage or retention in the immediate future. Table 60. Acres with snag densities in excess of the 80% tolerance level (snag density).

Pre-fire abundance and activity or event modifying high snag density patch abundance/distribution

EMC (acres)

PPDF (acres)

Acres of the forested EMC and PPDF habitat types that would be expected to exceed the 80% Tolerance Level under historic conditions in the analysis area for the ≥10 inch dbh group (20% of each habitat type) based data in on DecAID

6,307

1,829

Pre-fire acreage with snag densities in excess of the 80% Tolerance Level 4,375 3,959

Acres of stand replacement fire in moderate and high severity (high mortality) resulting in snag densities in excess of the 80% Tolerance Level (Baily Butte and Lava Fires)

+1,846 +572

Acres of mortality patches in low-severity (mixed-mortality) fire areas providing snag densities in excess of the 80% Tolerance Level post-fire (estimated at 5% of 6,184 acres in Baily Butte and Lava Fires.

+241 +68

Current acreage with snag densities in excess of the 80% Tolerance Level 6,462 4,599

Percent of forested area exceeding 80% Tolerance Level 20.5% 50.3% * Imagery used for GNN snag modeling was collected at approximately September 1, 2012; all activities after this date would not be reflected in the pre-fire snag density data from GNN so they were added in Table 58. All additions are the result of activities occurring after the 2012 imagery was taken.

Table 60 indicates that there is currently an amount of high density snag habitat (densities that exceed the 80% Tolerance Level) across 6,462 acres in the EMC habitat type within the analysis area. That amount is slightly more than the predicted reference condition based on the data contained in DecAID. As the amount of this habitat type is approximately at the target level of 20%, large-scale salvage of high density snag patches created by Bailey Butte and Lava Fires within the EMC Habitat

128


type would generally not be supported based on abundance of high snag densities within this habitat type. However, there are approximately 155 acres above the predicted reference condition level, the landscape level is currently within the historic range, and there is likely to be continued recruitment of snag patches both as a direct result of fire impacts (cambium, bud or root damage) and as an indirect result of increased susceptibility and insect activity within the fire areas. Salvage of fire killed timber is proposed on 208 acres of this habitat type in the Bailey Butte project area, which amounts to less than 1% of the 31,535 acres of the EMC habitat type within the analysis area. It is also very likely that continued snag recruitment will be expressed in the mixed mortality areas of both of the fires. This continued mortality is expected to continue over the next 2 to 5 years in the EMC habitat type where grand fir is common. This is a species that is not fire tolerant and thus susceptible to fire mortality. The initial reduction of high snag density habitat within the proposed salvage units will be offset by this anticipated mortality in the first few years following the salvage operation. Nonetheless, the proposed salvage would reduce the abundance of high snag density within 208 acres of EMC habitat type, bringing the percent meeting the 80% Tolerance Level down to 19.8% for the short term (69 acres, or a fraction of a percent less than the predicted reference condition of 20%). This would result in a very small reduction of the abundance of post-fire high-snag density patches which are important to a number of wildlife species, primarily cavity excavating birds including the black-backed, three-toed, hairy, and Lewis’ woodpeckers. This level of impact is so minor at the scale of the analysis area, that it is not expected to substantially alter the use of the area by these species, other than through reduced habitat and activity within the salvage unit boundaries. See the discussion on individual species below.

Table 60 also indicates that there is currently a surplus in the PPDF habitat type of area with snag density that exceeds the 80% Tolerance Level. Salvage in this habitat type of larger patches of fire-killed trees would be supported by the DecAID analysis to the extent that it is surplus (30.3% of the forested area in this habitat type, or up to 2,771 acres). The amount of salvage proposed in this habitat type (76 acres) amounts to less than 1% of the 9,146 acres of this forested habitat type within the analysis area. This level of salvage would not remove the surplus in high snag density that is present in this habitat type and would not reduce habitat for species that select for high snag density to below the predicted reference condition. See the discussion on individual species below.

Wildlife Species Tolerance Level Analysis:

Primary cavity excavators (PCE) are grouped as Management Indicator Species (MIS) in the Ochoco NF LRMP. Although within the PCE group, the pileated woodpecker and northern flicker are also specifically listed as MIS in the Ochoco NF LRMP. Pileated woodpeckers do not utilize high morality areas, but northern flickers do. Lewis’ and white-headed woodpeckers are R6 sensitive species. Both both of these species utilize fire killed trees for foraging and nesting. In addition, fire killed trees also provide habitat for both black-backed woodpeckers and secondary cavity nesting birds. The focus of the snag density distribution analysis focuses on those species that are known to utilize post-fire habitats and that are listed as MIS or TES species for Ochoco National Forest. The pileated woodpecker is not included in this analysis as this species is not represented in post-fire habitat by the DecAID data. This species is not associated with burned over forests, and would not be affected directly by salvage of fire-killed trees. Retention guidelines listed below for the salvage units would meet or exceed the LRMP standards for pileated woopdpeckers (LRMP 4-251).

DecAID contains two major data sets which are summarized by wildlife habitat types. The inventory data is composed of statistical summaries of forest inventory data on snags and down wood in unharvested forests and entire landscapes across Oregon and Washington. The vegetation inventory data in DecAID from the unharvested portion of the landscape can be used as a reference condition or desired future condition.

129


DecAID contains wildlife data that is derived from a thorough review of published literature and other available data on wildlife use of snags and down wood, primarily in Oregon and Washington. DecAID provides a statistical synthesis of data showing levels of use by individual wildlife species of snags and down wood. Wildlife data located in DecAID can be utilized by habitat type and structural class. For the Bailey Butte and Lava Fires there are two primary DecAID habitat types: Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir and Eastside Mixed Conifer. Minor amounts of lodgepole and montane mixed conifer were combined into the EMC to simplify the analysis. Hairy woodpeckers and northern flickers are identified in DecAID as using eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas fir stand replacement areas (Mellen et al. 2006).

In order to assess the post-fire habitat availability within the area impacted by the Bailey Butte and Lava Fires and potential effects of proposed salvage, an analysis area was established that had RAVG data for Bailey Butte and Lava Fire (part of Fox Fire Complex RAVG coverage). Using the predicted mortality from RAVG the baseline GNN snag estimates were updated for fire impact, and then the resulting post-fire snag conditions were compared to the tolerance levels in DecAID for a selection of species. The species selected for this analysis are those that could be affected by removal of snags from high mortality areas, which are specifically listed as MIS species under the Ochoco National Forest LRMP, or listed as sensitive and suspected or documented to occur on Ochoco National Forest, or those most likely to be affected by removal of snags from high mortality areas. The species selected for this analysis include: northern flicker (MIS), white-headed and Lewis’s woodpeckers (TES) and black-backed woodpecker (strongly associated with stand replacement fire).

The northern flicker was chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) for old growth juniper (LRMP FEIS 3-21 and 4-96). Many researchers have reported on aspects of behavior and nest use by flickers as part of general studies of cavity nesting birds. Recently such interest has intensified as flickers have been recognized as “keystone” excavators which may influence the abundance of secondary cavity nesters in forest systems (Martin et al. 2004). Though the northern flicker is listed as an MIS for old-growth juniper in the LRMP, it is not confined to that vegetation type. This analysis is based on data in DecAID and addresses this species association with post-fire conditions within the EMC and PPDF Habitat Types where the salvage activity is proposed.

Though the pileated woodpecker is listed as an MIS in the LRMP, it is not associated with high mortality post-fire habitat where the salvage activity is proposed. Where suitable habitat for pileated woodpeckers remains within the fire perimeters, salvage is not being proposed. Therefore pileated woodpeckers are not expected to be impacted by the proposed salvage activity in high mortality areas which are no longer suitable habitat for pileated woodpeckers. However, pileated woodpeckers could be affected by the roadside hazard treatments through removal of future foraging substrate. This impact is expected to be negligible at both the local and the landscape scale due to narrow width of the treatment areas and the abundance of potential future foraging substrate that will remain adjacent to the treatment areas. Existing foraging substrate (dead wood occupied by carpenter ants) that was not consumed by the fire will not be removed as is outlined in the Implementation Guide. Ant infested trees that are deemed to be roadside hazard may be felled, but they would not be removed, therefore they would still be available as foraging substrate. The majority of the trees to be removed under roadside hazard reduction have low potential to serve as nesting sites for pileated woodpeckers due to proximity to open areas along road clearings, insufficient diameter, or lack of a hollow center.

The following tables display the snag size and density ranges identified in DecAID for each of the snag dependent primary cavity excavator species analyzed for this project. These queries for snag size and density categories are the basis of the data displayed in the tolerance level tables contained in the discussion for each species below. Snag dependent secondary cavity nesters are addressed below in the section on landbirds.

130

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/166a/articles/species/166a/biblio/bib113


Table 61. Queries for post fire area in PPDF Habitat Type. For Snags ≥ 25cm (10")

Species 0 0-30% tolerance interval 30-50% tolerance interval 50-80% tolerance interval 80%+

If unit of measure is snags/ac

BBWO =0 >0 and ≤37.4/ac >37.4 and ≤52.8/ac > 52.8and ≤76.5/ac >76.5/ac

LEWO =0 >0 and ≤24.7/ac >24.7and ≤42.7/ac > 42.7 and ≤70.6/ac >70.6/ac

NOFL =0 >0 and ≤25/ac >25 and ≤44.9/ac > 44.9 and ≤83.1/ac >83.1/ac

WHWO =0 >0 and ≤22.2/ac >22.2and ≤40.9/ac > 40.9and ≤68.3/ac >68.3/ac

Table 62. Queries for post fire area in EMC Habitat Types (EMC,MMC&LP).

For Snags ≥ 25cm (10")

Species 0 0-30% tolerance interval 30-50% tolerance interval 50-80% tolerance interval 80%+

If unit of measure is snags/ac

BBWO =0 >0 and ≤56.1/ac >56.1 and ≤81.1/ac > 81.1and ≤117.6/ac >117.6/ac

LEWO =0 >0 and ≤24.8/ac >24.8and ≤43/ac > 43 and ≤71/ac >71/ac

NOFL =0 >0 and ≤25/ac >25 and ≤48/ac > 48 and ≤83.1/ac >83.1/ac

WHWO =0 >0and ≤40/ac > 40 and ≤118.4/ac >118.4/ac

Table 63. Queries for post fire area in all Habitat Types.

For Snags ≥ 50cm (20")

Species 0 0-30%

tolerance interval

30-50% tolerance interval

50-80% tolerance interval 80%+

If unit of measure is snags/ac LEWO =0 >0and ≤6.2/ac > 6.2 and ≤16.1/ac >16.1/ac NOFL =0 >0 and ≤2.2/ac >2.2 and ≤17.4/ac > 17.4 and ≤39.6/ac >39.6/ac

*BBWO = black-backed woodpecker LEWO = Lewis’s woodpecker WHWO = White-headed woodpecker NOFL = Northern Flicker

PCE Species that Utilize Stand Replacement Fire Areas There are a number of PCE species identified in DecAID that utilize stand replacement fire areas. Species will be individually addressed if they are identified Management Indicator Species or Sensitive Species on Ochoco National Forest and data in DecAID indicates that they utilize post-fire conditions in EMC or PPDF Habitat Types.

Of the Ochoco NF MIS and TES species, northern flickers and Lewis’s woodpeckers are identified in the DecAID data as using eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas fir stand replacement areas (Mellen et al. 2006). These two species are discussed in this section because they are represented in the post-fire data in DecAID only in stand replacement fire areas. The black-backed

131


and white-headed woodpecker use stand replacement conditions, but they are discussed in a section below because they are also represented by DecAID data as utilizing mixed mortality conditions in post-fire environments.

Table 64, Table 65, Table 66 and Table 67 provide compilations of synthesized data found in DecAID for wildlife use of snags in post-fire conditions of stand replacement fire for MIS or TES species on the Ochoco National Forest. Table 64. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities for 10 inch dbh and greater snags in recent post-fire Eastside Mixed Conifer DecAID Wildlife Habitat Type.

Species

30% t.l. Snag Density (#/acre)



Black-backed Woodpecker

56.1 81.1 117.6

Lewis’ Woodpecker 24.8 43.0 71.0 Northern Flicker 25.0 48.0 83.1 White-headed Woodpecker 0.0 40.0 118.4

Data acquired from DecAID Tables EMC_PF.sp-22

Table 65. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities rom various studies for 20 inch dbh and greater snags in recent post-fire Eastside Mixed Conifer DecAID Wildlife Habitat Type.

Species




Lewis’ Woodpecker 0.0 6.2 16.1 Northern Flicker 2.2 17.4 39.6 Data acquired from DecAID Tables EMC_PF.sp-22

Table 66. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 10 inch dbh and greater snags in recent post-fire Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir DecAID Wildlife Habitat Type.

Species




Black-backed Woodpecker 37.4 52.8 76.5

Lewis’ Woodpecker 24.7 42.7 70.6 Northern Flicker 25.0 44.9 83.1 White-headed Woodpecker 22.2 40.9 68.3

Data acquired from DecAID Tables PPDF_PF.sp-22

Table 67. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 20 inch dbh and greater snags in recent post-fire Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir DecAID Wildlife Habitat Type.

Species




Lewis’ Woodpecker 0.0 6.2 16.1 Northern Flicker 2.2 17.4 39.6 Data acquired from DecAID Tables PPDF_PF.sp-22

Northern Flicker

The northern flicker is generally most abundant in open forests and forest edges adjacent to open areas (Marshall et al. 2003 p. 371). It feeds on seeds, ants, beetles and other insects on the ground. Nest-tree species are strikingly variable; flickers reported nesting in most tree species in the wide range of woodlands they inhabit. Open or savanna-like structure of the habitat which provides space for foraging is more important than species of tree (Conner et al. 1975). Saab and Dudley (1998)

132

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/166a/articles/species/166a/biblio/bib021


found northern flickers used nest sites with the highest densities of large trees and selected for larger snags for nesting (average 17.2”dbh). Haggard and Gaines (2001) found flickers nested most often in stands with medium snag densities. According to DecAID northern flickers tend to select areas of high densities of large snags. In a study in Idaho nest sites for northern flickers increased within the fire area for the first 12 years (Saab, Russell, and Dudley 2007).

Saab, Dudley, and Thompson (2004) found that approximately 70% of original nest cavities used by secondary cavity excavators were created by northern flickers and hairy woodpeckers.

The NatureServe status for the northern flicker is secure at the global level (G5), secure at the national level for both the breeding and non-breeding ranges (N5B and N5N), and secure at the state level (S5).

Existing Condition

Using wildlife data from DecAID and the GNN snag modeling, the quality of habitat for post-fire cavity nesting birds was rated. Eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat that experienced stand replacement fire was utilized by the northern flicker in the DecAID data, and this species is predicted to use post-fire habitat in Bailey Butte and Lava Fires in the same manner. Table 68 shows habitat quality for northern flicker in both habitat types within this project’s analysis area. Based on density of snags 10” or larger dbh, there are approximately 173 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 5,978 acres of habitat (92% of that available) considered high quality habitat in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type in the analysis area. Based on density of snags 10” or larger dbh, there are approximately 543 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 16,844 acres of habitat (94% of that available) considered high quality habitat in eastside mixed conifer habitat type in the analysis area. Based on density of snags 20” or larger dbh, for all habitat types there are approximately 392 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 23,584 acres of habitat (97% of that available) considered high quality habitat in the analysis area. Table 68. Northern flicker habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area.

Habitat Type

Poor Quality Habitat 0-29% tolerance level

(acres)

Low Quality Habitat 30-49% tolerance level

(acres)

Moderate Quality Habitat 50-79% tolerance level

(acres)

High Quality Habitat 80% + tolerance level

(acres) Ponderosa pine / Douglas-fir

160

173

173

5,978

Eastside Mixed Conifer

195

272

543

16,844

All habitat types, snags > 20”

45 317 392 23,584

6,484 acres in Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type and 17,854 acres in Eastside Mixed Conifer habitat type in analysis area query for snags > 10”. All habitat types combined (24,338 acres) counted for snags > 20”.

Through the Forest wide assessment completed for MIS (2011), northern flicker reproductive habitat was mapped across the Ochoco National Forest. Across the Ochoco National Forest, approximately 84,369 acres of northern flicker priority nesting habitat occurred prior to the 2014 fire season. Habitat assessed for the northern flicker is associated with stand replacement, mixed mortality, underburned or unburned stands where conditions are relatively open. Though all but 272 acres of the pre-fire northern flicker habitat was exposed to low, moderate or high severity fire in the Bailey Butte Fire

133


area, it is still considered to be potentially suitable for this species as this species is known to use stand replacement fire areas. Thus, though the acres of habitat remains the same the quality of that habitat has been altered on 975 acres of low severity, 491 acres of moderate severity and 15 acres of high severity fire within the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter (See Table 69). Table 69. Northern flicker reproductive habitat within the Bailey Butte Fire Area and across the Ochoco National Forest.

Acres of Habitat in the Bailey Butte Fire Area

Pre-fire Acres of Habitat Across the Ochoco National Forest

Post-fire Acres of Habitat Across the Ochoco National Forest

1,753 acres 84,369 acres 84,369 acres

Lewis’s Woodpecker

Lewis’ woodpeckers feed on flying insects and are not strong cavity excavators. As such, they require large snags in an advanced state of decay that are easy to excavate, or use old cavities created by other woodpeckers, primarily northern flickers and hairy woodpeckers (Wisdom et al. 2000, Marshall et al. 2003). Linder and Anderson (1998) estimate that optimal canopy closure for Lewis’ Woodpeckers is less than 30%. This species is identified as a focal species for ponderosa pine with patches of burned old forests for the Strategy for Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington (Altman 2000). Lewis’ woodpeckers utilize post fire habitats over the longest period of time for nesting habitat. They will use old fires and large snags for nesting, using post fire habitat 10 years and greater. Lewis’ woodpeckers also prefer open habitat where they select large snags for nesting that are in very open environments.

The Lewis’ woodpecker is abundant in recent (2-4 years) and older burns (10-30 years post-fire) (Saab and Dudley 1998, Saab et al. 2007). It is positively associated with large diameter and higher snag densities in ponderosa pine patches in more open or salvage logged areas (Saab et al. 2002, Saab et al. 2009). Most research shows the Lewis’ woodpecker is most abundant in stands with low snag abundance (0-30 snags/acre) and does not occur or nest in areas with high snag densities (91-198 snags/acre) (Haggard and Gaines 2001). Haggard and Gaines (2001) found that 80% and Hejl and McFadzen (2000) found that 75% of the snags used for nesting by Lewis’ woodpeckers had broken tops.

Habitat for the Lewis’ woodpecker occurs sparingly throughout the Ochoco National Forest in the in open stands of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and grand fir where average tree size is 15 inches dbh or greater. The Bailey Butte Fire created some additional habitat for this species.

Existing Condition

Using wildlife data from DecAID and the GNN snag modeling, the quality of habitat for post-fire cavity nesting birds was rated. Eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat that experienced mixed to high fire mortality was utilized by the Lewis’s woodpecker in the DecAID data, and is predicted to use post-fire habitat in Bailey Butte and Lava Fires in the same manner. Table 70 shows habitat quality for white-headed woodpecker in both habitat types. Based on density of snags 10” or larger dbh, there are approximately 217 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 5,978 acres of habitat (92% of that available) considered high quality habitat in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type in the analysis area. Based on density of snags 10” or larger dbh, there are approximately 564 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 16,916 acres of habitat (95% of that available) considered high quality habitat in the eastside mixed conifer habitat type in the analysis area. Based on density of snags 20” or larger dbh, for all habitat types there are approximately 205 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 23,993 acres of habitat (99% of that available) considered high quality habitat in the analysis area.

134


Table 70. Lewis’s woodpecker habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area.

Habitat Type


(acres)


(acres)


(acres)


(acres)

Ponderosa pine/D-fir, snags > 10”

160 129 217 5,978

Eastside Mixed Con snags > 10”

171 202 564 16,916

All habitat types, snags > 20”

6 134 205 23,993

6,484 acres in Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type and 17,854 acres in Eastside Mixed Conifer habitat type in analysis area count for snags > 10”. All habitat types combined (24,338 acres) counts for snags > 20”.

Species that Utilize Stand Replacment, Mixed Severity, Underburned, and Unburned Fire Areas There are a number of species identified in DecAID that utilize mixed severity, underburned, and unburned fire areas. Refer to Table 64 through Table 67 for stand replacement summary of species data, and Table 73 through Table 76 for mixed, underburned and unburned summary of species data. Species will be individually addressed if they are identified as an MIS species or TES species on Ochoco National Forest. Although salvage units are only associated with stand replacing fire in eastside mixed conifer habitat, danger tree removal along haul routes occur in mixed severity, and underburned fire areas.

Of the Ochoco NF MIS and TES species, white-headed and black-backed woodpeckers are identified in the DecAID data as using eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir in both mixed-mortality and stand replacement areas (Mellen et al. 2006). These two species are discussed in this section because they are represented in the post-fire data in DecAID in both stand replacement and mixed mortality fire areas. The black-backed and white-headed woodpecker are discussed in this section because they are represented by DecAID data as utilizing mixed mortality and stand replacement conditions in post-fire environments.

There are two species of woodpeckers with data in DecAID indicating that they utilize stand replacement, mixed severity, underburned, and unburned fire areas, white-headed and black-backed woodpeckers.

White-headed Woodpecker

Dixon (1995) found that white-headed woodpecker densities positively increased with large ponderosa pine in Central Oregon. However, in south-central Oregon, white-head woodpeckers were found using primarily managed ponderosa pine dominated mixed conifer stands where 85% of the stands were <50 or 50-75 year old trees (Lindstrand III and Humes 2009). Kozma (2011) found that white-headed woodpeckers in Washington nested in ponderosa pine stands with low densities of large diameter (>20 inches dbh) trees. The mean diameter of all ponderosa pine trees was 12.9 inches dbh while the mean snag diameter in nest stands was 10 inches dbh (Kozma 2011).

White-headed woodpeckers may require dynamic landscapes with both burned and unburned habitat for the long-term persistence of populations (Hollenbeck et al. 2010). Wightman et al. (2010) found

135


existing open-canopied ponderosa pine forests before a fire and a mosaic of burn severities within 0.6 miles of nests for nest sites on the Fremont-Winema National Forest. They found the presence of larger, more decayed snags and fewer live trees near a snag (within 2.5 acres) after fire were important factors for nest selection; however this did not influence nest survival. Open-canopied pine forests with mature, cone-producing trees within proximity of burns were also important as long as most of the landscape was not subjected to stand replacement burns (Wightman et al. 2010). This species is identified as a focal species for Dry Forest with a conservation focus of Large Patches of Old Forest in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington (Altman 2000). A mosaic of burn severities across the landscape may improve white-headed woodpecker habitat by opening forest canopies in higher severity burned areas while retaining decayed snags created before wildfire and live cone-producing trees in unburned or low severity burned areas (Wightman et al. 2010).

Snags created by fire have lower retention rates than trees killed more slowly by insects or disease and fire-killed snags may not reach levels of decay favored by white-head woodpeckers until 2-3 years post-fire (Wightman et al. 2010). Therefore, snags existing before fire, if retained, or those with more advanced decay seem to be critical components in post-fire landscapes, especially in the first few years after fire (Wightman et al. 2010). Post-fire areas provide high density snag patches and areas not salvaged provide temporal snag habitat especially when adjacent to green suitable habitat.

The golden-mantled ground squirrel and yellow pine chipmunk are known nest predators. Golden-mantled ground squirrels are positively associated with down wood volume and yellow pine chipmunks are positively associated with shrub cover (Wightman et al. 2010). Down wood and shrub cover are reduced in post-fire environments; thus nest placement in high severity burned areas may be a viable strategy to reduce nest predation as long as unburned or low severity burned areas are available within the landscape for foraging (Wightman et al. 2010). Nests in unburned forests may be more vulnerable than those in burned forests as these may also experience lower ambient temperatures which affect incubation behavior and reproductive effort (Hollenbeck et al. 2010).

Existing Condition

Using wildlife data from DecAID and the GNN snag modeling, the quality of habitat for post-fire cavity nesting birds was rated. Eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat that experienced mixed to high fire mortality was utilized by the white-headed woodpecker in the DecAID data, and this species is predicted to use post-fire habitat in Bailey Butte and Lava Fires in the same manner. Table 71 shows habitat quality for white-headed woodpecker in both habitat types. Based on density of snags 10” or larger dbh, there are approximately 217 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 5,978 acres of habitat (92% of that available) considered high quality habitat in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type in the analysis area. Based on density of snags 10” or larger dbh, there are approximately 1,814 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 15,748 acres of habitat (88% of that available) considered high quality habitat in the eastside mixed conifer habitat type in the analysis area.

136


Table 71. White-headed woodpecker habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area.

Habitat Type


(acres)


(acres)


(acres)


(acres)

Ponderosa pine / Douglas-fir

160 129 217 5,978

Eastside Mixed Conifer 4 287 1,814 15,748

6,484 acres in Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type and 17,854 acres in Eastside Mixed Conifer habitat type in analysis area query for snags > 10”.

Black-backed Woodpecker

The black-backed woodpecker is a unique species is a focal species for old-growth lodgepole pine (Altman, 2000). However, it is also highly associated with post-fire environments. Wisdom et al. (2000) describes source habitats for black-backed woodpeckers as a year round resident that occurs in various forest types. Across its range it is most abundant in recently burned forests, but in Oregon, bark-beetle killed forests are frequently occupied. Black-backed woodpeckers are highly associated with stand replacement fire. Saab, Dudley and Thompson (2004) found black-backed woodpeckers rapidly colonize stand replacement burns within 1-2 years post-fire but are rare within 5 years which may be due to a decrease in prey of larval bark and wood boring beetles. In a study in Idaho Saab, Russell, and Dudley (2007) found that black-backed woodpecker nest densities peaked at 5 years post-fire. Several studies found that black-backed are found primarily in unlogged sites or clumps of high density trees/snags for both nesting and foraging (Saab and Dudley 1998, Hejl and McFadzen 2000, Haggard and Gaines 2001, Saab et al. 2002, and Cahall 2007). These stands may provide greater foraging opportunities since this species feeds primarily on bark and wood boring beetles (Saab et al. 2002, and Saab, Dudley and Thompson 2004). In addition, black-backed woodpeckers select for small diameter snags (12.7” + 1.1”dbh) for nesting and nest in hard snags with little decay (Saab and Dudley 1998 and Saab et al. 2002). They also select nest sites with the highest densities of snags >9”dbh (Saab and Dudley 1998).

Wood boring insects that come in with fire differ from mountain bark-beetle outbreaks. Marshall et al. (2003) warns that burned forests and bark-beetle outbreaks should not be considered equivalent habitats. Wisdom contrasted nesting success for black-backed woodpeckers of 68.5 percent in bark beetle infested forests in Oregon with 100 percent success in burned forests of western Idaho and northwestern Wyoming. Squirrel predation accounted for nest losses in Oregon. In Idaho, post- fire recolonization of large burn areas by squirrels did not take place during the first 3 years after the fire. Black-backed population increases in fire areas lasts for 5 years (Saab and Dudley 1998). Small-scale infestations of mountain bark-beetles in lodgepole pine or mixed conifer forests occur on a never ending cycle. Snag densities in this habitat type vary widely.

The NatureServe status for the black-backed woodpecker is secure at the global level (G5), apparently secure at the national level (N4), and vulnerable at the state level (S3).

Existing Condition

Using wildlife data from DecAID and the GNN snag modeling, the quality of habitat for post-fire cavity nesting birds was rated. Eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat that experienced mixed to high fire mortality was utilized by the black-backed woodpecker in the DecAID data, and is predicted to use post-fire habitat in Bailey Butte and Lava Fires in the same manner.

137


Table 72 shows habitat quality for black-backed woodpecker in both habitat types. Based on density of snags 10” or larger dbh, there are approximately 173 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 5,978 acres of habitat (92% of that available) considered high quality habitat in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type in the analysis area. Based on density of snags 10” or larger dbh, there are approximately 1,728 acres of habitat considered moderate quality and approximately 15,748 acres of habitat (88% of that available) considered high quality habitat in the eastside mixed conifer habitat type in the analysis area. Table 72. Black-backed woodpecker habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area.

Habitat Type


(acres)


(acres)


(acres)


(acres) Ponderosa pine / Douglas-fir

289 44 173 5,978

Eastside Mixed Conifer

626 384 1,096 15,748

6,484 acres in Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type and 17,854 acres in Eastside Mixed Conifer habitat type in analysis area query for snags > 10”.

Species that Utilize Mixed Severity, Underburned, and Unburned Fire Areas There are a number of species identified in DecAID that utilize mixed severity, underburned, and unburned fire areas. Species will be individually addressed if they are identified as an MIS species or a TES species on Ochoco National Forest. Although salvage units are only associated with stand replacing fire in EMC and PP/DF habitat types, danger tree removal along haul routes occur in mixed severity, and underburned fire areas.

Of the Ochoco NF MIS and TES species, pileated woodpeckers are identified in the DecAID data as using eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas fir in mixed mortality, but not in stand replacement areas (Mellen et al. 2006). This species is discussed in this section because it is represented in the post-fire data in DecAID only in mixed-mortailty, underburned or unburned conditions in post-fire environments. The other woodpecker species identified in the following tables are discussed elsewhere in this wildlife section. Table 73,

Table 74, Table 75 and Table 76 provide compilations of synthesized data for wildlife use of snags found within DecAID. Table 73. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 10 inch and greater snags in Eastside Mixed Conifer Small and Medium Structure Classes.

Species 30% t.l. Snag Density (#/acre)




Pileated Woodpecker 14.9 30.1 49.3 White-headed Woodpecker 0.3 1.9 4.3

Data acquired from DecAID Table EMC_S/L.sp-22.

138


Table 74. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 20 inch and greater snags in Eastside Mixed Conifer Small and Medium Structure Classes.





Cavity Nesting Birds NA 2.4 NA Pileated Woodpecker 3.5 7.8 18.4 White-headed Woodpecker 0.0 1.5 3.8

Data acquired from DecAID Table EMC_S/L.sp-22.

Table 75. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 10 inch and greater snags in Ponderosa Pine/Douglas Fir Small and Medium Structure Classes.






Data acquired from DecAID Table PPDF S/L.sp-22.

Table 76. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies for 20 inch and greater snags in Ponderosa Pine/Douglas Fir Small and Medium Structure Classes.






Data acquired from DecAID Table PPDF S/L.sp-22.

Pileated Woodpecker The pileated woodpecker occurs primarily in dense mixed-conifer forest in late seral stages or in deciduous tree stands in valley bottoms. It is occasionally seen in younger stands lacking large-diameter trees, particularly in winter. The association with late seral stages stems from the need for large diameter snags or living trees with decay for nest and roost sites, large diameter trees and logs for foraging on ants and other arthropods, and a dense canopy to provide cover from predators (Marshall et al 2003). Bull and Holthausen (1993) found pileateds selected stands for nesting with old growth, grand fir, no logging, and >60% canopy closure. They are rarely found in pure ponderosa pine forests. The largest woodpecker in the U.S., it needs large snags for nesting, generally averaging 25-36 inches in diameter in green forests and slightly larger snags in open habitats (24-45”dbh) (Mellen et al. 2006). Snags, live trees, and down logs (at least 15”dbh) are needed for foraging (Bull and Holthausen 1993). A major food source for the pileated woodpecker includes carpenter ants found in decaying snags and logs (Bull et al. 1997). Pileated woodpeckers also utilize roosts, primarily at night. These tend to be cavities in dead or hollow trees with hollow trees used more often (Bull, Holthausen, and Henjum 1990).

The NatureServe status for the pileated woodpecker is secure at the global and national levels (G5 and N5) and apparently secure at the state level (S4).

139


Existing Condition Pileated woodpecker habitats are located in denser mixed conifer forests, rather than in open areas or open stands resulting from moderate to high fire intensity. Eastside mixed conifer and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat that have relatively dense canopy conditions within mixed severity fire, underburned or unburned stands are considered to remain potentially suitable as habitat for the pileated woodpecker. Stand replacement fire conditions and many high fire intensity patches within mixed- mortality areas do not contribute to habitat for this species. Roadside hazard trees potentially affected by this project have a minimal contribution to pileated woodpecker habitat quality at a landscape scale. For these reasons this project is not expected to result in changes to quality or quantity of habitat for pileated woodpeckers, so a table displaying relative habitat quality for this species is not included in this report.

Through the Forest wide assessment completed for MIS (2011), pileated woodpecker primary reproductive habitat was mapped across the Ochoco National Forest. Some of this habitat has been reduced by moderate to high fire severity during the Bailey Butte and Fox fire events. Within the Bailey Butte fire perimeter habitat assessed for the pileated woodpecker is associated with mixed mortality, underburned and unburned stands that experienced very low or low fire severity. Across the Ochoco National Forest, approximately 23,155 acres of pileated woodpecker priority habitat was mapped prior to the 2014 fire season. Of that pre-fire priority nesting habitat, approximately 141 acres were impacted with moderate to high fire severity in 2014 (predominantly in Bailey Butte Fire) and are considered to be no longer suitable as priority nesting habitat for pileated woodpeckers. (See Table 77). Table 77. Pileated woodpecker reproductive habitat within the Bailey Butte Fire Area and across the Ochoco National Forest.

Acres of Habitat in the Bailey Butte Fire Area

Pre-fire Acres of Habitat Across the Ochoco National Forest

Post-fire Acres of Habitat Across the Ochoco National Forest

294/155 acres 23,155 acres 23,014 acres

No known nest sites occur within the project area. Records of 11 general observations are mapped within the project area, six of these sightings are in close proximity to roadside hazard treatment areas. Based on the distribution of these records, they were likely associated with 3 separate pre-fire territories (Dodd’s Creek, Frier/Heflin and Wildwood. It is likely that Dodd’s Creek and Wildwood remain occupied due to large patches of very low to low severity fire in these areas. It is less likely that Frier/Heflin is still suitable due to the relatively large amounts of moderate severity fire surrounding the area and the scarcity of unburned to very low fire severity in the area associated with this center of pileated woodpecker activity.

Site Specific Snag Habitat Analysis

Forest structure and avian communities will change fairly rapidly after a fire depending on differences in prey availability, size, distribution and age of snag habitat. Kotliar et al. (2002) reports in a review of literature associated with effects of fire and post-fire salvage logging that black-backed and three-toed woodpeckers rapidly colonize stand replacement burns within 1-2 years and are rare within 5 years due to declines in bark and wood boring beetles. In contrast, Lewis’ woodpeckers have been found to be abundant in both recent (2-4 year) and older burns (10-25 years) which may be associated with arthropod prey availability and their preference for low density snag areas. Hairy woodpeckers and northern flickers have shown mixed responses but usually decline within the first 25 years post-fire while mountain and western bluebirds commonly nest in recently burned forests but decline in mid-successional stages.

High tree mortality in eastside mixed conifer currently provides a snag pulse, and there are opportunities to provide a variety of snag densities to avian species that utilize post fire habitats. Mixed and underburned fire intensity in ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir habitat types provide an

140


opportunities to provide habitat for a variety of species that prefer open stands with residual large live trees. Some species find preferred habitat in stand replacement burns, while others find preferred habitat in unburned stands.

The snag retention guidelines identified in Table 8 (in the section titled “Project Design Criteria” in this EA) were designed for the Bailey Butte and Lava Fire Salvage projects using DecAID. DecAID is an advisory tool developed to help managers evaluate the impacts of forest conditions (existing conditions or conditions that would result from proposed activities) on wildlife that use snags and down wood. It is a summary, synthesis, and integration of current scientific knowledge about the sizes and amounts of snags and down wood used by cavity nesting birds in specific vegetation types in the West. For the reader’s convenience, the snag retention guidelines are provided here in Table 78 (for ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitats) and Table 79 (for mixed conifer habitats).

Design criteria for snag retention (variable retention) for treated areas are based on the best available science with regard to wildlife habitat requirements in burned stands outside of the high snag density areas. The focus of snag retention recommendations within salvage units is based on species that utilize stand replacing fire. To be responsive to species such as the Lewis’ and hairy woodpecker which are closely associated with post-fire habitats, to create habitats that are similar to sites found in the Saab et al. studies from 1994 to 1998 (Saab et al. 2002) and to achieve Forest Plan standards and guidelines, the following snag retention guidelines are recommended. Table 78. Snag Retention Guidelines Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Habitat Type.

Size Snags Per Acre 0-10” dbh Not included in harvest. 10-21” dbh 2 * >21” dbh 2 ** Within harvest areas a minimum 4 snags per acre ( 2 over 20” dbh and 2 10”dbh or greater) would remain post treatment or the retention areas in harvest units will have a minimum of 20 snags per 5 acres in snag clumps. There may be some variation from unit to unit depending upon conditions resulting in some retention areas having more or less dispersed snag retention.

Table 79. Snag Retention Guidelines Eastside Mixed Conifer Habitat Type.

Size Snags Per Acre 0-10” dbh Not included in harvest. 10-21” dbh 3 * >21” dbh 3 ** *These three snags will be clumped within .1 acre of one of the > 21” retention snags. **These snags will be the largest ponderosa pine available on a per acre basis, favoring smaller pine over larger white-fir.

These guidelines provide habitat for species such as the Lewis’ woodpecker that prefer to nest in large snags associated with large opening, and have been shown to nest in logged areas more often than unlogged. In addition, these guidelines also provide habitat for species such as the hairy woodpecker that prefer high density snags and unlogged areas.

Environmental Consequences – Primary Cavity Excavators (PCE) including Northern Flicker and Pileated Woodpecker

Alternative A

Under Alternative A (No Action), current management plans would continue to guide management of the project area. No fire-killed trees would be harvested in order to meet project goals. No danger trees along 17.2 miles (588 acres) of public or administrative access routes would be felled and

141


removed in order to meet project goals. Danger trees may be felled and left on-site or moved as needed to reduce hazards along roads over a longer time period. Standing dead trees in the proposed harvest units would fall over time, leaving a combination of broken snags and down dead wood throughout the fire area. Within the fire area existing (pre-fire) down wood was largely consumed by the fire in stand replacement areas and partially consumed in the mixed mortality areas where moderate amounts of down wood are assumed to exist.

The fire caused a dramatic, short-term increase in snag numbers. Snag habitat occurring within the fire area particularly, is serving as intermittent habitat for most cavity excavators (Saab, Dudley and Thompson 2004). Snag numbers do not continually increase over time because the process of tree mortality and snag recruitment are balanced by the processes of snag decay and fall (Everett et al. 1999). Over time, snag habitat will decrease creating a gap in snag density during the time period in which most of the snags will have fallen and there are few green trees of sufficient size to provide recruitment. This is particularly true of stand replacement areas where little snag habitat will exist between the period of large scale snag fall and future tree mortality (snag recruitment). Dahms (1949) found 10 years post-fire, 50% of fire killed ponderosa pine snags remained standing but this declined to 22% standing after 22 years. It is estimated that about 75% of all snags may fall within 20 years (Keen 1929, Dahms 1949, Parks et al. 1999, and Everett et al. 1999). For Douglas-fir and grand fir the fall down rate is much faster. The effect of the fire is an immediate increase in snag habitat and woodpecker populations followed by a reduction in available habitat and a decrease in local populations as snags fall. Implementation of this alternative would not alter the process of continuing tree mortality and snag fall down, but it would result in slightly higher level and continuity of fuel loading on the landscape, compared to the action alternatives. This could contribute slightly to future fire intensity and spread.

No reforestation of desired tree species (ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur to accelerate the development of desired forest conditions that would be consistent with management plan objectives. Stands that underwent stand-replacement and mixed mortality fires would be dependent on nearby natural seeds for reforestation. Delayed reforestation would increase the likely longevity of shrub dominance or less desirable conifer species such as grand fir, lodgepole pine and juniper. Natural tree regeneration is expected to consist of a mix of grand fir, ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, western larch, lodgepole pine and juniper.

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned over areas in the Heflin, Clover, O-Kelly and Camp Creek drainages would be implemented. Forgoing these actions would increase the likelihood of post-fire surface erosion, sediment deliver to creeks, would delay establishment of riparian shrubs in riparian zones or facilitate invasion of less desirable species such as juniper, annual grasses and weeds.

Alternative B

Within the 208 acres of stand replacement identified for salvage there will be no impact to pileated woodpecker, as they are not known to utilize stand replacement areas. Under Alternative B, 3 snags per acre will be retained between 10 and 19 inches dbh, and 3 snags per acre will be retained >20 inches dbh in the EMC Habitat Type. Alternative B, will retain 2 snags per acre between 10 and 19 inches dbh and 2 snags per acre will be retained >20 inches dbh in the PPDF Habitat Type. These treatments are proposed for implementation over the 234 acres within salvage units. Habitat for species that prefer high snag densities in stand replacement fire areas (black-backed woodpeckers) will have habitat reduced within the harvest areas, while species that select more open areas (Lewis’ woodpecker and northern flicker) may respond favorably within the treated stands which will be more open following treatment. As can be seen in Table 68, Table 70, Table 71, Table 72 and Table 77, the percentage of acres of moderate to high quality habitat for a variety of PCE species is very high within the analysis area, and the 234 acres of salvage will have a very limited impact on the percent

142


of area providing such habitat. These impacts will be localized within relatively small harvest units, with an abundance of habitat surrounding or adjacent to each unit. In addition, snag retention guidelines, as displayed in Table 78 and Table 79 will provide habitat within the harvest units for species that use low to moderate snag densities within stand replacement fire areas. Removal of old growth juniper or other juniper trees with sufficient size and defect to serve as nest sites for northern flicker is not included in this proposal. Northern flickers do nest in a wide variety of forest types, and a variety of forest types will continue to exist in abundance and well distributed across the Forest and within this project area. The salvage units are in high tree mortality patches which are no longer suitable as habitat for pileated woodpecker. For these reasons salvage proposed in this alternative is likely to have a slight negative impact on some PCE species, but is not likely to alter the abundance or distribution of any of the stand replacement associated species across the analysis area. The proposed treatment is of such small scope and scale that it would not contribute to loss of viability to these species on Ochoco National Forest.

Approximately 19 miles of roads are proposed for danger tree abatement. There are approximately 573 acres along the routes where danger trees will likely be treated. This has the potential to remove large trees suitable for nesting and foraging within mixed severity, underburned, and unburned areas. This impact is expected to be minor as they are linear strips along roads. Only imminent danger trees will be removed, therefore treatment will occur on a site specific basis removing individual trees or small groups of trees, rather than across the entire 573 acres. The roadside hazard tree removal would result in very small scale and localized reduction in potential nesting or foraging substrate for PCE species. However, removal of individual or small groups of hazard trees is not expected to alter the extent of habitat suitability for these species compared to the existing post-fire conditions. There would be a very slight reduction in habitat quality for species that select for areas of high snag density in mixed severity, underburned or unburned stands. This reduction would be negligible as the 588 acres mapped for roadside treatment represent only 7.5% of the USFS managed land within the fire perimeter, and only a fraction of that would actually be treated within the mapped corridors. This treatment would result in no detectable change to moderate or high quality habitat for any of the species analyzed that use mixed mortality, underburned or unburned stands.

Artificial regeneration of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and larch will move the forest towards a mixed conifer forest. Reforestation on 886 acres will focus on providing a mix of Douglas-fir, western larch and ponderosa pine at densities that will ultimately provide large trees and large snags. Moving stands toward more historic conditions of open grown stands may result in large diameter trees at a faster rate than natural regeneration of species that may be more favorable as nest sites for pileated woodpeckers in the future. Because grand fir is expected to come in regardless of the planting of more favored tree species, it is unlikely that the future foraging substrate (often provided by dead and dying grand-fir) would be limited by the improvement in establishment of ponderosa pine, western larch and Douglas-fir.

Riparian planting on six miles along Heflin, Clover, O’Kelly and Camp Creek drainages could contribute foraging resources for those species that forage on a variety of plant and insect food resources. These species include the northern flicker and Lewis’ woodpecker and the suite of species they represent as MIS or focal species. Lewis’s woodpecker nest sites are often associated with streams, wet meadows or dense shrub cover where insects are abundant, and they are known to feed on elderberry, currant, cherry, service berry and other mast producing trees and shrubs (Marshall, et. al 2003). The other PCEs analyzed have specific foraging behaviors that would not likely be affected substantially by establishment of riparian vegetation.

Directional falling of trees into and across 6 miles of streams on Heflin, Clover, O’Kelly and Camp Creek to replace large woody material will have a similar effect within the treated area as described above for salvage, except that the material will be retained on-site. Therefore the felled trees/snags will no longer have potential as nesting substrate, but could continue to function as foraging substrate

143


for some of the PCE species. The Lewis’s woodpecker is listed as a Focal Species for Riparian Woodlands in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Washington and Oregon (Strategy). Though some points of the Strategy for this species stated in the Strategy would not be fully employed (Retain fire burned trees; Retain standing dead or diseased trees), the retention standards shown in Tables 23 and 24 would be applied within riparian restoration treatment units. These standards exceed the minimum snag retention stated in the Strategy’s Biological Objectives for this species and meet the intent of providing a sufficient number of snags of large enough diameter to provide opportunities for cavity nesting birds in riparian woodland habitats. Development of these retention guidelines also incorporated consideration for this species which prefers open habitat areas. For these reasons this treatment is not expected to reduce the potential for the treated areas to serve as nesting or foraging habitat for this species or the group of species it represents.

Alternative C

The effects of this alternative on PCE are the same as those describe under Alternative B, except that this alternative does not propose to salvage dead trees outside of the roadside hazard reduction areas. Therefore this alternative would retain high density snags in stand replacement fire areas across the USFS managed portion of Bailey Butte Fire area including within the 234 acres proposed for salvage in Alternative B. The remainder of the effects are as described above for roadside salvage, reforestation and riparian restoration.

Cumulative Effects In the past 60 years two large wildfires have occurred within the Marks Creek Watershed:

The Marks Creek Burn occurred in 1968 and was subsequently salvaged. As a result very few large snags remain within that fire area. As the new stand matures in the Marks Creek Burn area, some of the suppressed trees will become small snags as the more vigorous members of the cohort become dominant. The impact of this fire and subsequent salvage is reflected in the existing condition and reflected in the 2012 GNN data used for the Forest-wide analysis. In other words, the salvage of the 1960’s Marks Creek burn has effects on snag density that are still present at the Forest-wide landscape scale which are displayed in the data set used in the Forest-wide MIS Analysis (Appendix A). However, that fire area is outside the 5-watershed analysis area used for the Qualitative Assessment described above, as well as outside the Species Tolerance Level analysis area. Therefore effects from that fire does not overlap this project’s analysis area, and thus does not combine with effect of this project to cumulatively affect snag habitat in the area of influence for this project.

The Hash Rock Fire of 2000 started in the Mill Creek Watershed but spread into the Marks Creek Watershed where it burned at high intensity on 1,041 acres. This fire event created a pulse of high density snags within the watershed that are reflected in the GNN data used for this analysis. Unlike the Marks Creek Burn described above, this fire area does overlap this project’s snag analysis area in time and space. Some of the high snag density patches displayed in the pre-fire maps (Maps 1 and 2) with acres displayed in Table 5 resulted from the Hash Rock Fire. The Hash Rock Fire was not salvaged so the snag pulse that was created does contribute to the snag densities described in this analysis. Though it has been 15 years since the Hash Rock Fire event, there are still snags within that fire area that combine with the snag pulse created by the Bailey Butte Fire to augment the abundance of moderate to high snag density within the analysis area.

These fires along with insect outbreaks and salvage history (including the 595 tree Cougar Salvage) contribute to the existing condition and are incorporated into the snag density distribution data generated by satellite imagery and reported in the GNN data. The net effect of implementing this alternative is that retention of all snags in the Bailey Butte Fire off-sets snag habitat that was reduced in the salvage of Marks Creek Burn and Cougar Salvage, and contributes an additional high density

144


snag habitat pulse to a landscape that already had a recent high density snag pulse in both the EMC and PPDF Habitat Types (in the Hash Rock Fire perimeter). As described above in the Qualitative Assessment, the EMC Habitat Type currently has 20.5% in high snag density sufficient to meet the 80% tolerance level for snag density. In the analysis area contains 50.3% of the PPDF Habitat Type at a snag density sufficient to meet the 80% tolerance level for snag density. These levels are attained by the cumulative effect of the Hash Rock Fire, Bailey Butte Fire, other small fires and insect and disease mortality.

The net effect of implementing either action alternative is that removal of snags on up to 900 acres in the Bailey Butte Fire further reduces snag habitat in the Marks Creek Watershed where snag density was reduced in the salvage of Marks Creek Burn and Cougar Salvage. As described above in the Qualitative Assessment, the EMC Habitat Type currently has 20.5% in high snag density sufficient to meet the 80% tolerance level for snag density. In the analysis area contains 50.3% of the PPDF Habitat Type at a snag density sufficient to meet the 80% tolerance level for snag density. These levels are attained by the cumulative effect of the Hash Rock Fire, Bailey Butte Fire, other small fires and insect and disease mortality. Within the analysis area salvage of fire killed timber is proposed on 208 acres of this habitat type, which amounts to less than 1% of the 31,535 acres of the EMC habitat type within the analysis area. It is also very likely that continued snag recruitment will be expressed in the mixed mortality areas of both of the fires. This continued mortality is expected to continue over the next 2 to 5 years in the EMC habitat type where grand fir is common. This is a species that is not fire tolerant and thus susceptible to fire mortality. The initial reduction of high snag density habitat within the proposed salvage units will be offset by this anticipated mortality in the first few years following the salvage operation. Nonetheless, the cumulative effect of proposed salvage would reduce the abundance of high snag density within 208 acres of EMC habitat type bringing the percent meeting the 80% Tolerance Level down to 19.8% for the short term (69 acres, or a fraction of a percent less than the predicted reference condition of 20%). This level of impact is so minor at the scale of the analysis area, that it is not expected to alter the use of the area by these species. In addition, the Snag Retention Guidelines, provide potential cavity nesting habitat within proposed salvage unit boundaries.

There is currently a surplus in the PPDF habitat type of area with snag density that exceeds the 80% Tolerance Level. Salvage in this habitat type of larger patches of fire-killed trees would be supported by the DecAID analysis to the extent that it is surplus (30.3% of the forested area in this habitat type, or up to 2,771 acres). The amount of salvage proposed in this habitat type (76 acres) amounts to 1% of the 9,146 acres of this forested habitat type within the analysis area. This level of salvage would not remove the surplus in high snag density that is present in this habitat type and would not reduce habitat for species that select for high snag density to a level below the predicted reference condition. A surplus in high density snag habitat in the PPDF habitat type would continue to occur until the point in time when significant snag fall has occurred (about 20 years) or the area reburns.

The Bailey Butte Salvage project will remove snags that have potential to provide habitat for species that use mixed severity or underburned fire areas. This removal would occur on a site-specific basis, as scattered individual trees or in clumps of danger trees associated with approximately 19 miles of road. Total area of danger tree removal is approximately 573 acres. Hazard tree removal is focused on imminent and likely danger trees that occur in stand replacing, mixed mortality, and underburned areas. Under the proposed project roadside hazard removal would occur on approximately 429 acres in EMC habitat type and 159 acres in PPDF habitat type. The majority of the road miles to be treated are not in high mortality areas. However, there are areas with moderate fire severity (in the headwaters of Heflin Creek, the O’Kelly Creek drainage, and adjacent to the RNA, where treatment areas contribute to the acres meeting the 80% tolerance level for snag density. The individual and small group hazard removal typically associated with this prescription in combination with the narrow width of treatment units is not likely to render the treated areas as unsuitable for cavity nesting

145


species for which the site is currently suitable. However, these units could contribute as much as 2 miles (72 acres) of further reduction in high snag density in EMC and as much as 1 mile (36 acres) of further reduction in high snag density in PPDF. Because the danger trees will be removed from a fairly narrow strip of habitat along the roads, it is unlikely that many individuals would be nesting within this area; rather this habitat may comprise a small percentage of one or more territories. However, disturbance from the danger tree operations could result in some individuals losing nest trees to felling operations or adults abandoning nest construction or eggs during the reproductive season.

Existing habitat quality for these species will remain throughout the remainder of USFS managed land within the fire area at least for a period of time before the snags fall naturally due to wind or decomposition or they are removed by firewood cutters. Personal use firewood cutting is occurs across Ochoco National Forest. Though legal removal of standing trees for firewood is limited to juniper and dead lodgepole, illegal snag cutting does occur on the Forest. Individual dead trees are being removed by firewood cutters primarily within the road prism of open roads or within 600’ of open roads. Cutting is not wide spread and occurs on a site specific basis, where individual trees, down logs or small groups of dead trees are removed. Private lands are often not managed for woodpecker habitat. Therefore, it is assumed that any habitat provided by these parcels is incidental and may not be long term.

Cumulatively, with the ongoing forest management projects there will be less than a 1% reduction in overall snag habitat across Ochoco National Forest. This would result in a negligible reduction of the abundance of post-fire high-snag density patches which are important to a number of wildlife species, primarily cavity excavating birds including the black-backed, three-toed, hairy, and Lewis’ woodpeckers. Implementation of this project will not contribute to a change in viability to these species on the Ochoco National Forest.

146


Figure 8. Map of ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

147


Figure 9. Map of eastside mixed conifer habitat type within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

148


Figure 10. Four categories of basal area loss based on reflectance (from satellite imagery) contained in the RAVG data for the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

149


Rocky Mountain Elk and Mule Deer Elk inhabit semi-open forest, mountain meadows, foothills, plains, and valleys. They graze on grasses and forbs and browse woody shrubs and twigs. Mule deer forage on grasses and forbs and browse primarily in shrub habitats. Unlike elk, mule deer select the most nutritious vegetative parts of the plants that they eat, which means that they have more specific foraging needs and a higher-quality diet than elk (Hayden et al. 2008). Herbaceous- and shrub-dominated vegetation occurs mostly in early successional habitats, that is, habitats that were recently disturbed. Disturbance events in forested areas, including wildfire, prescribed fire, wind storms, insect infestation, tree disease, and timber harvest, are key elements in maintaining herbaceous and shrubby forage components. Inadequate foraging habitats in or adjacent to summer range can be a limiting factor for winter conditioning and survival. Mule deer are migratory and move from high-elevation summer ranges to low-elevation winter ranges where foraging is easier under reduced snow depths. Some elk use similar elevational movements while others migrate over larger distances between winter and summer range.

Existing Condition

Elk and Deer management objectives on the Ochoco National Forest were developed cooperatively with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). The Bailey Butte Fire area is predominantly within the Ochoco Wildlife Management Unit (WMU 37), but also falls partially within the Grizzly WMU. Most of the acreage in the Grizzly WMU occurs on Bureau of Land Management (BLM), State of Oregon, and private ownership, while approximately half of the Ochoco WMU is on Ochoco National Forest. Herd objectives for winter and summer populations are based on the entire WMU and all ownerships. Inadequate foraging habitats in or adjacent to summer range can be a limiting factor for winter conditioning and survival. Due to variations in weather and vegetative response, and agricultural practices on private land within the WMUs, use by individual elk varies from year to year across these various land ownerships.

The LRMP established management allocations for Winter Range and General Forest Winter Range at lower elevations on Ochoco National Forest. The Bailey Butte Fire area is entirely outside of winter range in the Mark’s Creek Watershed, but dips into General Forest Winter Range in the Bear Creek Watershed. There are four acres proposed for salvage harvest and eleven acres proposed for hazard tree reduction within General Forest winter range in the Dodd’s Creek drainage.

LRMP Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines for Fish and Wildlife (LRMP 4-246) provides for protecting the character of elk calving sites May 15 to June 30 and elk wallows during rutting season (September 1 to October 15).

LRMP also establishes recommended road densities based on management allocation. For the allocations within the Bailey Butte Fire area, LRMP Standard and Guidelines for open road densities are as follows: General Forest Winter Range (MA-F21) 3 miles per square mile May 2 to November 31, one mile per square mile December 1 to May 1; General Forest (MA-22) 3 miles per square mile. Road densities in the Marks Creek are currently above, while Bear Creek and Bridge Creek Watersheds are within the LRMP recommended threshold of 3 miles of road per square mile.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Alternative A

Hiding cover or screening cover does not occur within most of the areas that experienced stand-replacement or mixed mortality burns. Without planting of coniferous tree species in upland areas that were burned at moderate to high severity (stand replacement areas) regeneration would depend on natural seed fall, germination and seedling survival. Forested areas with full crown consumption during the fire would have limited seed supply and future stand establishment would depend on seeds being brought in by wind or animals. Thus, the recovery of hiding and thermal cover would develop

150


more slowly than expected if stands had been planted. Similarly, without planting of riparian vegetation along streamsides the establishment of preferred forage species and hiding cover in riparian areas may be slower than would be expected if riparian plant had been implemented.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Alternatives B and C

Hiding cover or screening cover does not occur within most of the areas that experienced stand-replacement or mixed mortality burns. Therefore, felling and removing danger trees in these areas will have no further effect to hiding or screening. Felling and removing danger trees in the low severity or underburned/unburned areas will consist primarily of removing smaller diameter burned trees that do not provide canopy cover or hiding cover. Some removal of larger diameter danger trees may occur which may create small openings but this is anticipated to be minor in scope. All of the hazard tree treatment and salvage project area occurs within summer range with the exception of approximately 15 acres along FS road 2630-550 which is in General Forest Winter Range. The proposed treatment would occur outside of the restriction period for winter range (December 1 to May 1).

This project is designed to minimize impacts on riparian areas which are the sites most likely to contribute to calving habitat for elk. Of the Riparian Habitat Conservation Area acres within the fire perimeter (1,253 acres) approximately 150 acres would be within the areas identified for hazard tree removal (12% of RHCA acres). The majority of this treatment is immediately adjacent to roads that are open to public or administrative use. Therefore, impacts to elk from this activity is not likely to impact elk calving habitat or alter the behavior of cow elk in selecting calving sites.

Deer in the project area could be temporarily displaced during project implementation due to the noise levels and associated activities but this is also anticipated to be minor in scope. Due to the abundance of similar quality habitat in the surrounding area, individuals would be able to alter their foraging and dispersal patterns to another area. There are no proposed actions that would affect road densities. Hiding and thermal cover for the watersheds would remain the same.

Cumulative Effects Thermal cover has been reduced in previous harvest projects which are displayed in Table 10. The Bailey Butte, Hash Rock and Bridge Creek Fires also impacted thermal cover. Most of the areas with regeneration harvest activities that were completed in the 1980s and 1990s (see Table 10) are currently providing hiding cover, as most of them were not exposed to moderate or high fire intensity in the Bailey Butte Fire. Thermal and hiding cover does not currently occur in the salvage project areas and they are in areas of high fire mortality. Thermal and hiding cover that is retained following the Bailey Butte Fire in the roadside hazard areas has inherently lower value than other available cover in the analysis area due to it being in immediate proximity to roads. Over time, hiding and thermal cover should increase in quantity and quality. Dead trees would still provide minimal amounts of thermal moderation and hiding cover until the majority of dead trees have fallen. Big game will utilize down logs as hiding cover, when they are accessible. Under conditions of extreme accumulations of down wood, animals may not use this cover where they cannot easily move through it. Regeneration of trees to provide thermal cover, which is defined as 40 feet tall providing at least 40% crown closure, is expected to take 40 years or more depending on site capability. Planting of seedlings should improve the rate of recovery compared to natural regeneration and would have a beneficial impact to recovery of hiding cover. Riparian planting and felling of trees along 6 miles of stream in the fire area would also improve hiding cover.

Summer forage values for deer are expected to increase both in the short and long term after the fire. Removal of forest canopies through wildfire or prescribed fire stimulates forest floor vegetation and provides nutrient rich forage to ungulates. Forage values are expected to remain until crowns of regenerating conifers start reaching 40% crown closure in 60 years.

151


The proposed action would not add to ongoing or reasonably foreseeable cumulative impacts to mule deer.

Conclusion

The proposed action is consistent with LRMP standards and guidelines. The proposed action may affect individuals due to minor disturbance and small areas of reduced future hiding cover, but would not contribute to a negative trend in viability for Rocky Mountain elk or mule deer on the Ochoco National Forest.

Golden Eagle The golden eagle was chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) for cliff, talus or cave habitat (LRMP 4-245). Golden eagles inhabit shrub-steppe, grassland, juniper, and open ponderosa pine, and mixed conifer/deciduous habitats. They forage in a variety of habitat types and successional stages, preferring areas with an open shrub component that provides food and cover for prey. Suitable nesting and foraging habitat can be found in mountains, canyons, and rolling hills. Of 506 occupied nests in Oregon in 1982, 35% were in mature trees and 65% on ledges along rims and cliffs (Isaacs and Opp 1991). Nest trees are typically large live ponderosa pine with sturdy open branching and a trunk dbh >30 in. Golden Eagles have large breeding territories ranging 10-40 sq.mi. Nest territories may contain several alternate nests. Forage on a variety of prey species including: jackrabbit, cottontail, California and Belding’s ground squirrels, marmots, woodrats, small mammals, fresh carrion, and a variety of birds species (Marshall 2003). This species has a holartic distribution. In the North America this species breeds from Alaska and Canada south to Central Mexico. In the U. S. it occurs primarily west of the east slope of the Rocky Mountains. In Oregon, golden eagles are common to uncommon year round residents in all counties east of the Cascade Range (Marshall, 2003).

The population trend in Oregon is unknown. In 2011 a state-wide effort was initiated to determine the status of historic nesting territories across the State of Oregon. Golden Eagles counted during the mid-winter Bald Eagle survey in Oregon for 1992-2001 have varied from 79 to 128 and averaged 97 (Isaacs 2001). The populations of resident golden eagles in the northern part of the Great Basin, particularly in Idaho and Northern Utah, have shown indications of a decline (Marshall, 2003).

Existing Condition

On the Ochoco National Forest, including Crooked River National Grassland, there are records for 147 historic nesting sites. The majority of the nests are associated with extensive rimrock habitat present in Jefferson County. Of 147 historic sites forest-wide, only 12 occur in Crook County and 6 in Wheeler County. There are no known nests within the Bailey Butte Fire area. The nearest known golden eagle nesting territory is 6.5 miles northeast of the project area. That territory is reported as a historical potential gold eagle breeding area that was not surveyed in 2011-2014 (Isaacs, 2015). The majority of the district records are from wintering birds (October through February). However a number of sightings on the Forest occurred between March and August and these may be associated with nesting territories that have not been discovered. There are no district records and there are no historic potential breeding areas identified in the state-wide data set for golden eagles within the project area

Of the occupied nests studied by Isaacs and Opp in 1982, 65% were on rock ledges. A forest-level analysis was conducted in 2011 using updated GIS data on rock features. The output from this analysis reflects the majority of rock features with potential nesting habitat. Rock features identified in the GIS data are those that are of sufficient size to be detected from aerial photographs. The rock categories included in estimating potential nesting habitat for this species included the following:

152


rimrock, rock, rock/limestone, rocky knob, talus, talus/rocky knob, talus/rimrock. The GIS data layer is estimated to be 80% accurate in detecting rock features with cliff faces that have any potential as nesting sites. Some small cliffs may have been overlooked in the aerial photo interpretation, and some rock features identified as potentially having cliff habitat, may not be suitable for nesting sites. However, this data is expected to be representative of the majority of suitable nesting substrate and of sufficient accuracy for a comparison of potential rock habitat within the project area and across the landscape at a forest-wide scale. From this analysis it was estimated that at the forest level there are approximately 18,838 acres of potential cliff nesting habitat (less than 5 acres within the project area). There are a total of 34 watersheds (5th field HUC) on Ochoco National Forest. Potential cliff nesting habitat is distributed within all 34 of these watersheds, though some watersheds (Crooked River Grassland, Headwaters Deschutes River, Lake Billy Chinook, Lower Metolius River and Willow Creek) have substantially more cliff habitat than other watersheds across the Forest.

Golden eagle nests that are not on cliffs are typically on large ponderosa pine trees or snags in open stands, or on scattered individual large pine trees in otherwise open habitat such as rocky canyons, shrub/steppe or grassland settings. These individual scattered pines may occur in a variety of plant associations including juniper woodland, juniper steppe or xeric ponderosa pine.


No alternative would modify potential cliff nesting habitat. This alternative would not remove any scattered large ponderosa pine trees that have likelihood of serving as nest sites for golden eagles. Hazard trees greater than 21” dbh (that could serve as future nest trees) or snags may be felled as part of routine hazard abatement, but the felled material would not be removed. This felled material is not likely to contribute substantially to preferred prey habitat for golden eagles such as jack rabbits and ground squirrels. Retained snags could serve as perch sites for foraging golden eagles, though the majority of the project area is generally not preferred habitat for this species.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternatives B and C

No alternative would modify potential cliff nesting habitat. No alternative would remove scattered large ponderosa pine trees that have likelihood of serving as nest sites for golden eagles. Removal trees greater than 21” dbh (that could serve as future nest trees) or snags is of limited scope and scale and the proposed treatment areas do not fall within high probability areas for occupancy by golden eagles. For these reasons the direct effects of the proposed actions are not expected to affect golden eagles.

Cumulative Effects The proposed action alternatives do have affects potential effects that are very limited in scope and scale and with limited potential to be relevant to this species for the reasons described above. None the less, there are areas of previous harvest activities within the analysis area that have removed mature trees and large snags in the past that could have otherwise served as potential nest, roost or perch sites. The reduction of large trees and large snag structure that is the result of this past timber harvest activity does overlap in time and space with the proposed actions. However, outside of the hazard reduction and salvage units there will continue to be an abundance of snags, and within the salvage units retention standards displayed in Table 8 will be met. For these reasons this project, along with the effects of past timber harvest activities, is not likely to impact golden eagles or the potential for the area to become occupied for nesting, or used as a foraging area by golden eagles.

Conclusion

This project is likely to have a relatively minor influence on potential nesting and foraging habitat for golden eagles due to a general lack of extensive low to mid elevation cliff features and limited habitat

153


for primary prey species within the project boundary. For these reasons implementation of any alternative proposed in this project will have no impact to the viability of this species at the forest-level.

Prairie Falcon The prairie falcon was chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) for cliff, talus or cave habitat (LRMP 4-245). This species breeds from c. British Columbia east to N. Dakota, south to Baja California and Texas. It winters over much of its breeding range south to Mexico (Marshall 2003). They breed throughout the open country east of the Cascades wherever cliffs and outcrops provide opportunities for nesting (Marshall 2003). Prairie Falcons are most common in rimrock country, where they nest, but may travel great distances in search of prey (Marshall 2003, Birds of Oregon). A combination of rimrock or other outcrops and adjacent open country provides ideal breeding habitat. Cliffs need not be large. Denton (1979) found 59% of nest on cliffs less than 100 ft, some as low as 15 ft. The principal requirement is that the nest site be sheltered from above (Bent 1938, Webster 1976). This appears to reflect a need for shade and possibly protection from predators (Marshall 2003). Grasslands are the preferred habitat although they also occur in less-productive areas dominated by sagebrush. The principal requirement for foraging appears to be low and sparse vegetation that accommodates their foraging style. Prey most often consists of small mammals, usually ground squirrels (Denton 1976, Haak 1982b).

This species occurs in low density and exhibits wide-ranging habits (Marshall, 2003).

Densities of 3.9-8.0 breeding pairs/100square miles were found in Wasco and Wheeler counties (Janes 1975). Lardy (1980) found higher average densities in Malheur Co. (9.8-14.0/100sq.mi.). Populations, including those in Oregon, appear to be stable (White 1994).

Existing Condition

Private forest and rangeland outside of the analysis area are likely to provide suitable habitat for prairie falcons, where cliff or rimrock faces provide nest sites situated within or near open shrub and grassland habitat. Multiple records for this species are associated with privately owned meadowlands within 1 mile of the Forest boundary. Prairie falcon nests have been confirmed at other locations on Ochoco National Forest at low elevation, near the Forest boundary and on Crooked River National Grassland.

A forest-level analysis was conducted in 2011 using updated GIS data on rock features. The output from this analysis reflects the majority of rock features with potential nesting habitat. Rock features identified in the GIS data are those that are of sufficient size to be detected from aerial photographs. The rock categories included in estimating potential nesting habitat for this species included the following: rimrock, rock, rock/limestone, rocky knob, talus, talus/rocky knob, talus/rimrock. The GIS data layer is estimated to be 80% accurate in detecting rock features with cliff faces that have any potential as nesting sites. Some small cliffs may have been overlooked in the aerial photo interpretation, and some rock features identified as potentially having cliff habitat, may not be suitable for nesting sites. However, this data is expected to be representative of the majority of suitable nesting substrate and of sufficient accuracy for a comparison of potential rock habitat within the project area and across the landscape at a forest-wide scale. From this analysis it was estimated that at the forest level there are approximately 18,838 acres of potential cliff nesting habitat (less 5 acres within the project area). There are a total of 34 watersheds (5th field HUC) on Ochoco National Forest. Potential cliff nesting habitat for is distributed within all 34 of these watersheds, though some watersheds (Crooked River Grassland, Headwaters Deschutes River, Lake Billy Chinook, Lower

154


Metolius River and Willow Creek) have substantially more cliff habitat than other watersheds across the Forest.


No alternative would modify potential cliff nesting habitat. This alternative would not modify any features that have any likelihood of serving as nest sites or foraging areas for prairie falcons. Hazard trees that may be felled as part of routine hazard abatement, and snags retained under this alternative would have little if any influence on preferred prey for this species such as ground squirrels and voles. The majority of the project area is generally not preferred habitat for this species.


No alternative would modify potential cliff nesting habitat. There is potential for effects from human disturbance if prairie falcons choose to forage in the fire area in proximity to salvage operations. There are abundant foraging opportunities throughout the fire area and outside of treatment areas as only 10.6 % of the USFS managed land inside the fire perimeter is within areas proposed for harvest.

Cumulative Effects The proposed action alternatives do not have effects to this species that overlap in time and space with the effects of past, present or reasonably foreseeable actions with potential impacts to prairie falcons. There are no cumulative effects to this species from the proposed actions.

Conclusion

This project area is likely to have a relatively minor influence on potential nesting and foraging habitat for prairie falcons due to a general lack of extensive low to mid elevations sheer cliff features within the project boundary. For these reasons implementation of any alternative proposed in this project will have no impact the viability of this species at the forest-level.

Other Species Analyzed

Migratory and Resident Cavity Nesting Landbirds Snags are an important structural component in forest communities. Studies have shown that snags are used by approximately 60 species in eastern Oregon, many of which are cavity nesters. Dead and down woody material is also an important habitat component because it serves as sites for feeding, reproducing, cover, and resting. Hollow trees and logs are important structural components across the landscape and should be retained wherever possible. This habitat component is used by many species for night roosts, denning, resting, nesting, cover, and foraging habitat.

Forest structure and avian communities will change fairly rapidly after a fire, depending on differences in prey availability, size, distribution and age of snag habitat (Kotliar et al. 2002) Mountain and western bluebirds commonly nest in recently burned forests but decline in mid-successional stages. Studies show that cavity-nesting birds require higher snag densities in post-fire conditions versus green stands for nesting and productivity. This is likely due to cavity nesting birds requiring more snags for foraging, cover, and protection from predators in post-fire environments. DecAID synthesized data from research studies to create cumulative species curves for cavity nesting birds use of snags by habitat type and structural condition. From these curves tolerance levels were determined. Table 80 and Table 81 display the compilation of synthesized data in DecAID for cavity nesting bird use of snag densities from various studies by habitat type and structural condition in post-fire environments.

155


Table 80. Synthesized data for wildlife use of snag densities from various studies in recent stand replacement fire areas in both Eastside Mixed Conifer and Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fire Habitat Types.




Cavity Nesting Birds NA 8.4 NA

Table 81. Synthesized data for use of snag densities by cavity nesting birds from various studies in fire areas with mixed mortality, underburned and unburned stands in Eastside Mixed Conifer and Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Habitat Types.




Cavity Nesting Birds NA 2.4 NA

Existing Condition

The available habitat for cavity nesting birds in the Bailey Butte Fire project area is summarized in Table 82. Table 82. Cavity Nesting Bird habitat within the Bailey Butte/Lava Fire Analysis Area.

Habitat Type Poor to Low Quality Habitat 0-

49% tolerance level (acres)

Moderate to High Quality Habitat 50+% tolerance level

(acres) All habitat types, snags > 20” 171 24,166

All habitat types combined (24,338 acres) counted for snags > 20”.


Current management plans would continue to guide management of the project area. No fire-killed trees would be harvested. No danger trees along public or administrative access routes would be felled and subsequently removed. Danger trees would be felled and left on-site or moved as needed to reduce hazards along roads over a longer time period. Standing dead trees would fall over time, leaving a combination of broken snags and down dead wood throughout the fire area.

The fire caused a dramatic, short-term increase in snag numbers. Snag habitat occurring within the fire area particularly, is serving as intermittent habitat for most cavity excavators (Saab, Dudley and Thompson 2004). Snag numbers do not continually increase over time because the process of tree mortality and snag recruitment are balanced by the processes of snag decay and fall (Everett et al. 1999). Over time, snag habitat will decrease creating a gap in snag density during the time period in which most of the snags will have fallen and there are few green trees of sufficient size to provide recruitment. This is particularly true of stand replacement areas where little snag habitat will exist between the period of large scale snag fall and future tree mortality (snag recruitment) as described in detail in the section on Primary Cavity Excavators above.

No reforestation of native tree species (ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur to accelerate the development of desired forest conditions and opportunities for future snag recruitment. Stands that underwent stand-replacement and mixed mortality fires would be dependent on nearby natural seeds for reforestation. Natural tree regeneration is expected to consist of a mix of grand fir, ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, western larch, lodgepole pine and juniper. Delayed reforestation could increase the longevity of shrub dominance which may provide foraging habitat for some cavity nesting species, while delaying development nesting habitat.

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned over areas in the Heflin, Clover, O’Kelly and Camp Creek drainages would be implemented. Forgoing these actions could delay establishment of

156


riparian shrubs in riparian zones or facilitate invasion of less desirable species, which could affect the foraging habitat for some cavity nesting birds.


Danger trees felled, and/or dead trees salvaged under the action alternatives in the stand-replacement, mixed-severity and underburned areas would reduce potential nesting and foraging trees for cavity nesting birds. As disclosed in Table 78 and Table 79, snag retention guidelines apply to all salvage harvest units, except Unit 6. Given the high percentage of the analysis area that currently provides moderate to high habitat quality for these species (based on snag density), removal of snags on up to 300 acres and hazard reduction on up to 600 acres would have a negligible impact on these species at the landscape scale. This is based on the small scale of this project, 3.4 % of the available habitat acres are in treatment units. Of those acres in mapped treatment units, only a fraction of that would actually have removal of trees and snags, due to the hazard tree treatment involving removal of individual and small groups of hazard trees and the salvage units having snag retention patches.

Cumulative Effects There are areas of previous harvest activities within the analysis area that have removed mature trees and large snags in the past that could have otherwise served and potential nest or roost sites for cavity nesting birds. The reduction of large trees and large snag structure that is the result of this past timber harvest activity does overlap in time and space with the proposed actions. However, outside of the hazard reduction and salvage units there will continue to be an abundance of snags, and within the salvage units retention standards displayed in Tables 23 and 24 will be met. For these reasons this project, along with the effects of past timber harvest activities, is not likely to impact the viability of cavity nesting birds within the analysis area.

Focal Landbird Species The Forest Service has prepared a Landbird Strategic Plan (January 2000) to maintain, restore, and protect habitats necessary to sustain healthy migratory and resident bird populations to achieve biological objectives. The primary purpose of the strategic plan is to provide guidance for the Landbird Conservation Program and to focus efforts in a common direction. On a more local level, individuals from multiple agencies and organizations with the Oregon-Washington Chapter of Partners in Flight participated in developing a publication for conserving landbirds in this region. A Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington was published in May 2000 (Altman 2000). This document outlines conservation measures, goals and objectives for specific habitat types found in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington, which includes the Blue Mountain Region (OR) and this project area. This document identifies the priority habitats and focal species associated with each habitat type as displayed in Table 83. Those species with habitat present in the Bailey Butte Salvage and Hazard Tree Removal project area at identified in Table 83. Of the species highlighted in Table 83 which are highlighted (habitat present): White-headed and Lewis’s woodpeckers are addressed in detail in the section on Management Indicator Species (MIS-PCE) and in the section below on Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species (TES). The woodpeckers, flammulated owls and Vaux’s swift are included in the cavity nesting birds discussed above. Refer to those sections of this report for further information on these species. Potential impacts to those species with habitat present that are not disclosed elsewhere in this document are discussed below. Species without habitat present will not be further discussed.

157


Table 83. Priority habitat features and associated focal species in the Landbird Conservation Strategy.

Habitat Habitat Feature Focal Species for Central Oregon

Habitat Present in Bailey Butte Project

Dry Forest (ponderosa pine and Pine/Douglas-fir/grand fir

Large patches of old forest White-headed woodpecker Yes Old forest with grassy openings and thicket patches Flammulated owl Yes

Open understory with regenerating pines Chipping sparrow Yes

Burned old forest Lewis’ woodpecker Yes Mesic Mixed Conifer (Late-Successional)

Large snags Vaux’s swift Yes Structurally diverse, multi-layered

Varied thrush No

Overstory canopy and foliage volume Townsend’s warbler No

Dense shrub layer in forest openings and understory MacGillivray’s warbler No

Edges and openings created by wildfire

Olive-sided flycatcher Yes

Riparian Woodland and Shrub

Large snags in riparian woodland Lewis’s woodpecker Yes

Riparian woodland canopy foliage Red-eyed vireo No

Riparian woodland understory Veery No Shrub density in riparian shrub Willow flycatcher

In addition to the priority habitats displayed in Table 83, the Strategy also identified priority habitat features within unique habitats. For the Blue Mountains Subprovince, these include: subalpine forest; montane meadows; steppe shrublands; aspen and alpine. Focal species for these unique habitat inclusions respectively are hermit thrush, upland sandpiper, vesper sparrow, red-naped sapsucker and gray-crowned rosy finch.

Flammulated owl: Flammulated owls are found in a mosaic of open forests containing mature and old growth ponderosa pine or mixed conifer plant associations; more specifically ponderosa pine dominated stands with interspersed dense thickets and grassy openings. They utilize cavities in live or dead trees created by pileated woodpeckers, hairy woodpeckers, and northern flickers (McCallum and Gehlbach 1988). McCallum and Gehlbach (1988) found that flammulated owls select nest cavities with more open vegetation in front of the cavity as this species dives steeply when leaving the cavity then levels off and flies 1 to 2 meters above ground. It forages primarily on arthropods and other insects (USDA 1994c).

This species selects from a variety of habitat types from low elevation woodlands to high elevation subalpine forests. The analysis area does contain a variety of habitat types capable of supporting a variety of owl species including the flammulated owl. Private forestlands in the analysis area are also likely to provide suitable habitat for flammulated owls where large hollow pine snags are retained in mixed severity fire areas.

Chipping sparrow: In central Oregon chipping sparrows can be found in open coniferous forests or stands of trees interspersed with grassy openings or low foliage and are found in good numbers in central Oregon in juniper, ponderosa pine, and lodgepole pine forests (Marshall et al. 2003). They are associated with higher elevations are summer residents preferring open habitats with a shrub or regenerating pine component. Chipping sparrows occupy successional habitats after logging or burning because of an affinity for open, older stands of western mixed conifer forest (DeGraaf and Rappole 1995).

158


The current NatureServe Conservation Status Rank for chipping sparrows in Oregon is a S4, ‘apparently secure,’ and National 5, ‘secure’ and Global 5 ‘secure (2009). Breeding bird surveys have shown that population declines of chipping sparrows have averaged 3.9 percent annually in Oregon due to a decrease in fire to maintained open woodlands but also due to cowbird brood parasitism and competition with house sparrows and house finches (Marshall et al. 2003). Chipping sparrows are known to occur on both Lookout Mountain and Paulina Ranger District, including locations within the analysis area for this project. Habitat for the chipping sparrow includes open canopied stands of lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir grand fir with tree diameters 10-15 inches or larger, especially where patches of regenerating pine seedlings and saplings are present.

Vaux’s swift: The Vaux’s swift is associated with large snags in mesic mixed conifer forests. The Vaux’s swift is associated with late-successional mesic mixed conifer forest, and dependent on very large, hollow snags for nests and roosts. The best variables to predict Vaux’s swift occurrence is the number of snags greater than 20 inches dbh and the number of trees with conks of Indian paint fungus (Bull and Beckwith, 1993). Conservation issues listed in the landbird plan include loss of large snags during intensive forest management and insufficient recruitment of large snags through harvest rotations. Habitat objectives include retention and development of snags greater than 27 inches dbh and 82 feet in height in different stages of decay, including hollow snags. Recommended conservation measures include retention of broken topped trees, especially those over 40 inches dbh, large snag retention and recruitment of replacement snags (large live trees with defect).

The current NatureServe Conservation Status Rank for Vaux’s swift is Global G5 ‘secure’, National N5B ‘secure, breeding’ and Oregon S5 ‘secure’ (2009). Breeding bird surveys have shown state-wide population increases for Vaux’s swift of 3.7 percent annually in Oregon (1966-1999), while Sharp (1992) estimated a 8.9% decrease on National Forests during the 1980’s. The decline was attributed to harvest of late seral coniferous forests and conversion of stands of late seral grand fir dominated stands to early seral stands dominated by ponderosa pine which do not develop hollow tree structure as readily as grand fir does (Marshall et al. 2003). Vaux’s swifts have been recorded on Paulina Ranger District, but not within the analysis area.

Olive-sided flycatcher: The Olive-sided flycatcher inhabits montane and northern coniferous forests up to 3,000 meters in elevation, especially in burned-over forest areas with tall standing dead trees (DeGraaf and Rappole 1995). In Oregon this flycatcher is a summer resident that breeds in low densities throughout coniferous forests. The olive-sided flycatcher is an aerial insectivore that prefers forest openings or edge habitats where forest meets meadows, timber harvest units, rivers, bogs or marshes (Marshall et al. 2003). The current NatureServe Conservation Status Rank for the olive-sided flycatcher in Oregon is a S3B, ‘breeding vulnerable’, National 4B, ‘breeding apparently secure’ and Global G4 ‘apparently secure’ (2009). NatureServe (2010) stated that fire suppression throughout the breeding range has limited the acreage of available habitat. It also reports that the species is “apparently secure” globally although at risk from deforestation on wintering grounds in Central and South America.

Species associated with priority habitat features within unique habitats: For the Blue Mountains (subalpine forest; montane meadows; steppe shrublands; aspen and alpine). Focal species for these unique habitat inclusions respectively are hermit thrush, upland sandpiper, vesper sparrow, red-naped sapsucker and gray-crowned rosy finch.

Existing Condition

The fire reduced potential habitat for flammulated owls in ponderosa pine stands that were exposed to stand replacement fire intensity within the Bailey Butte Fire. These areas are no longer considered habitat. However, pine dominated stands that experienced mixed severity, underburning, or did not burn could still provide habitat for flammulated owls.

159


Chipping sparrows are associated with open habitats with a shrub or regenerating pine component. They utilize stands of trees interspersed with grassy openings or low foliage and are known to occupy successional habitats after logging or burning because of their preference for open, older stands stand of ponderosa pine or mixed conifer forest. Because the Bailey Butte fire burned with a variety of intensities across the 7,789 acres on USFS managed lands, habitat for this species was improved for the fire in mixed severity and underburned areas, but was reduced at least in the short term in stand replacement areas. With less than 30% of the Bailey Butte Fire burning at moderate to high severity (stand replacing) and over 70% burning at very low to low intensity, the majority of the fire area is still capable of providing habitat for this species, at least where residual live trees are intermixed with gaps and openings created by the fire or natural openings.

When not roosting or nesting in a chimney in town, Vaux’s swift utilize hollow trees or snags in forested environments. Large diameter grand fir trees with extensive heart rot creating a hollow chamber is a key component to habitat for this species. These types of trees are most commonly associated with riparian areas and unmanaged old-growth forests and are not common along the road segments proposed for treatment. Within the stand replacement fire intensity, the hollow trees that were present prior to the fire often were prone to ignition, and many may have fallen as a result of burn-out at the base.

The olive-sided flycatcher is considered a contrast species using old forests for nesting and either openings or gaps in old forests for foraging. Large trees and snags are preferred habitat elements for the olive-sided flycatcher (Romain-Bondi 2009). They are positively associated with recent burns (Hejl 1994 cited by Wisdom et al. 2000). Because the Bailey Butte fire burned with a variety of intensities across the 7,789 acres on USFS managed lands, habitat for this species was improved for the fire in mixed severity and underburned areas, but was reduced at least in the short term in stand replacement areas. With less than 30% of the Bailey Butte Fire burning at moderate to high severity (stand replacing) and over 70% burning at very low to low intensity, the majority of the fire area is still capable of providing habitat for this species, at least where residual live trees are intermixed with gaps and openings created by the fire or natural openings.

The MacGillivray’s warbler, red-eyed vireo, veery and willow flycatcher are associated with riparian woodland and shrub plant communities. The red-naped sapsucker is a bird that uses aspen dominated vegetation and riparian woodlands almost similar to the MacGillivray’s warbler, vireo, veery and willow flycatcher. These habitats exist within the planning area, but are typically small in size and fragmented. In stand replacement fire area many of these habitats were burned through and the brush consumed. In some areas small patches were spared from incineration. In mixed mortality and underburned areas, the riparian shrub component was skipped over by the fire where fuel moisture was high enough and fire behavior favorable for retention. In other cases the aerial biomass was scorched or consumed even in low intensity fire areas.


Current management plans would continue to guide management of the project area. No fire-killed trees would be harvested. This would retain potential nesting or roosting habitat structure for focal species that utilize large snags or hollow trees (such as Vaux’s swift and Lewis’s woodpecker) at least in the short term. Standing dead trees would fall over time, leaving a combination of broken snags and down dead wood throughout the fire area. This would contribute to fuel loading and continuity which could affect future fire intensity and spread, and thus likely reduce longevity of developing habitat for focal species that prefer woodland or forested habitat (such as all of the species listed for Dry Forest or Mesic Mixed Conifer Forests in Table 28.

No reforestation of desired tree species (Ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur. Stands that underwent stand-replacement and mixed mortality fires would be dependent on nearby

160


natural seeds for reforestation. Natural tree regeneration is expected to consist of a mix of grand fir, ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, western larch, lodgepole pine and juniper. Delayed reforestation could increase the longevity of shrub dominance which may provide habitat for focal species that prefer open or brushy conditions (such as veery, red-eyed vireo and the flycatchers), while delaying habitat development for species that prefer forested areas (the rest of the species in Table 28).

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned over areas in the Heflin, Clover, O-Kelly and Camp Creek drainages would be implemented. Forgoing these actions could delay establishment of riparian shrubs in riparian zones or facilitate invasion of less desirable species, which could affect the foraging habitat for some focal species (MacGillivray’s warbler, veery, red-eyed vireo and the flycatchers in Table 83).


Danger trees felled, and/or dead trees salvaged under the action alternatives in the stand-replacement and mixed-severity burned areas would reduce potential nesting and foraging trees for the White-headed woodpecker, Lewis’s woodpecker as described in detail in the MIS section above.

Both the chipping sparrow and flammulated owl utilize live stands of pine or mixed coniferous stands with patchy open understory. They are not likely to utilize the stand replacement fire areas proposed for salvage, but they may utilize hazard tree removal areas where the treatment is in underburned areas with a residual live tree canopy. The types of trees are most commonly used by Vaux’s swifts are associated with riparian areas and unmanaged old-growth forests and are not common along the road segments proposed for treatment. The potential for impact of the proposed activities on hollow trees of suitable diameter to provide communal roost or nest sites for Vaux’s swift is very low. For these reasons the removal of burned trees and individual or small groups of green trees identified as hazards along roads in the low severity, underburned or unburned areas could impact potential nesting, roosting or foraging trees for the chipping sparrow and flammulated owl, but is not likely to impact nesting, roosting or foraging habitat for the Vaux’s swift.

For the olive-sided flycatcher, removal of danger trees in stands that experienced low severity burns, were underburned, or were not burned could reduce potential perch/singing trees and possibly nest sites in hazard trees that still have green needles and provide for nest concealment.

The MacGillivray’s warbler, red-eyed vireo, veery and willow flycatcher are associated with riparian woodland and shrub plant communities. None of the alternatives include reducing shrub or meadow habitat. The action alternatives do include riparian restoration activities that would improve recovery of shrubby riparian vegetation thereby improving future development of habitat for these species.

No salvage is proposed within riparian habitats, so the impact on red-naped sapsucker would be limited to the felling of hazard trees in riparian areas along road segments to be treated. Since hazard treatment within riparian habitat conservation areas (RHCA) is limited to approximately 150 acres, the potential impact of this dead and hazard tree removal on MacGillivray’s warbler, red-eyed vireo, veery, willow flycatcher and red-naped sapsucker is negligible at the landscape scale. The riparian restoration work included in the action alternatives is likely to have a beneficial impact on these species.

Cumulative Effects There are areas of previous harvest activities within the analysis area that have modified forest conditions in the past. An ongoing program of forage utilization by livestock and management for big game populations has altered the abundance and distribution of vegetation including riparian woodland and shrub habitat. The salvage of fire killed trees in the harvest units would have no effect on existing green forest conditions, but could affect the abundance of legacy structure in the future stand. However, due to the anticipated fall down rate, the majority of the existing snags will become

161


down wood by the time the new forest develops mature or old forest characteristics. The hazard reduction could impact the abundance of structural components in green stands but at a very limited scope and scale. Aside from the reduction in snag habitat initially after harvest, which is thoroughly described above for PCE, Cavity Nesting Birds and in this section under Direct and Indirect Effects, the potential for cumulative effects to the Focal Species listed in Table 83 is negligible. For these reasons this project, along with the effects of past timber harvest activities, is not likely to impact Focal Species and the suite of species they represent within the project area.

Birds of Conservation Concern In January 2001, President Clinton issued an executive order on migratory birds directing federal agencies to avoid or minimize the negative impact of their actions on migratory birds, and to take active steps to protect birds and their habitats. Federal agencies were required within two years to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conserve migratory birds including taking steps to restore and enhance planning processes whenever possible. To meet this goal in part the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service developed the Birds of Conservation Concern released in December 2002 and released the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (2004).

The Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) identifies species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory non-game birds that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (USDI U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2008). Bird species considered for inclusion on lists in this report include non-game birds, gamebirds without hunting seasons, subsistence-hunted non-game species in Alaska, and Endangered Species Act candidate, proposed endangered or threatened, and recently delisted species. The goal is to prevent or remove the need for additional ESA bird listings by implementing proactive management and conservations actions. The U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (USFWS 2004) revised the 2001 Plan with new information and developed a list of U.S. and Canadian shorebirds considered highly imperiled or of high conservation concern. The list was updated in 2008 and is the basis of this analysis.

Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) were developed based on similar geographic parameters. Two BCRs encompasses the Lookout Mountain Ranger District – BCR 9 Great Basin and BCR 10 Northern Rockies (U.S. Portion only). The Bailey Butte Fire is entirely within the Northern Rockies BCR, so the list of Birds of Conservation Concern for BCR 10 are displayed in Table 84 and are the basis of this analysis. There are seven species with potential habitat in the project area: bald eagle, flammulated owl, calliope hummingbird, Lewis’s woodpecker, Williamson’s sapsucker, white-headed woodpecker and olive-sided flycatcher. Those are identified with highlighting in Table 84. Lewis’s and white-headed woodpeckers were previously analyzed under the Management Indicator Species and the Focal Landbird Species sections of this document. Effects determinations for these two species are also provided in the Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species section below. The flammulated owl and olive-side flycatcher were previously analyzed under the Focal Landbird Species. The bald eagle is analyzed under Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species below. The Williamson’s sapsucker is a member of the PCE group addressed in the Management Indicator Species Section and a member of the cavity nesting birds discussed above in the first section under Landbirds. Species that have habitat within the Bailey Butte Fire and project area which are not specifically addressed in other sections of this document are discussed in below (Calliope hummingbird).

162


Table 84. BCR 10 (Northern Rockies) BCC 2008 list of species.

Bird Species Preferred Habitat Habitat within the Bailey Butte Fire Area

Bald eagle Large trees near large water bodies or other key feeding areas (wetland/field/meadow)

Yes

Swainson’s hawk Open grassland/prairie areas with very sparse trees No

Ferruginous hawk Sagebrush plains and bunchgrass prairies No

Peregrine falcon Prominent vertical cliffs with ledges or cave-like features No

Upland sandpiper Expansive wetlands and prairies No

Long-billed curlew Fields and prairies, meadows, wetlands and grasslands No

Yellow-billed cuckoo Cottonwood galleries, dense riparian hardwoods No

Flammulated owl Pine forests with grassy openings Yes

Black swift Waterfalls or cliffs with dripping water or damp caves No

Calliope hummingbird Meadows, canyons and streams in open montane forest Yes

Lewis’s Woodpecker Open pine forests or burned forests with large snags present Yes

Williamson’s Sapsucker Open conifer forests, aspen with soft decayed wood Yes

White-headed Woodpecker Mature ponderosa pine forests with open understory Yes

Olive-sided flycatcher Open conifer forests or edges with tall live trees, near water Yes

Willow flycatcher Shrubby thickets, riparian shrub and tall herbaceous/shrub mix No

Loggerhead shrike Open country, desert shrub with scattered trees or shrubs No

Sage Thrasher Sagebrush, arid shrubland No Brewer’s sparrow Sagebrush, arid shrubland No McCown’s Longspur Dry, sparse prairies No

Black Rosy-finch Barren rock, bare open ground and snowfields No

Calliope Hummingbird

The calliope hummingbird inhabits meadows, canyons and streams in open montane forest, mountain meadows, and willow and alder thickets and gardens (AOU 1983). It nests in trees (frequently conifer) at the edge of meadows or in canyons or thickets along a stream. Nests are usually low in the trees with branches or foliage above. The feed on a variety of nectar producing plants, and are often associated with understory or riparian shrubs. It is not known if they occur in the project area but they are considered to be a common summer resident in the Blue Mountains (Marshall 2003), but the BBS map clearly indicates more reliable breeding data in the Blue Mountains north and east of Ochoco National Forest. It is listed as rare in the fall, and uncommon spring and summer in Common Birds of the Ochoco Region (USFS, 2001).

163


Existing Condition

Potential habitat exists in the low severity, underburned, or unburned areas, with a higher likelihood of occurrence in the RHCAs and associated with meadows near Crystal Creek and Nature Creek than in any of the proposed treatment areas.


No reforestation of tree species would occur. Delayed reforestation could increase the longevity of shrub dominance, which may prolong development habitat for species like the calliope hummingbird that prefer open or brushy conditions.

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned over areas in the Heflin, Clover, O’Kelly and Camp Creek drainages would be implemented. Forgoing these actions could delay establishment of riparian shrubs in riparian zones or facilitate invasion of other species such as grand fir and juniper, which could affect the foraging habitat for the calliope hummingbird.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Action Alternatives

The proposed action may result in mortality of individual adults, young and/or eggs due to felling operations conducted during the nesting season, abandonment of eggs or young by adults due to noise and operations associated with the felling operations, loss of suitable nest and/or perch trees, and displacement from foraging areas. Because the hazard reduction project area is a narrow linear strip of habitat alongside of roads, the habitat quality is likely reduced compared with meadow complexes elsewhere in the analysis area; therefore, project impacts are anticipated to be minor in scope. Because the salvage units are in stand replacement tree mortality areas, the potential for these acres to be occupied is very low. For this reason the salvage activities are expected to have no impact on this species. Habitat outside of the project units in the fire area and beyond the fire perimeter across the Forest is sufficient to meet this species’ requirements for nesting and foraging on a population level. Impacts to this species would be negligible and would not lead to a trend toward federal listing. The riparian restoration activities proposed under this project would likely improve habitat for this species which has been found in montane riparian shrub communities including current, alder, willow, red-osier dogwood and other shrubs. The reforestation proposed by this project would also speed the recovery of habitat for this species which is known to also utilize dense coniferous forests, and alder and cottonwood interspersed with ponderosa pine.

Cumulative Effects

Breeding Bird Survey data indicate a statistically non-significant 0.3% per year decline rangewide from 1966-2001 but with notable declines in Montana and Oregon. Potential threats include habitat loss, increased use of pesticides, and replacement of native plants by invasive plants in its breeding range and a restricted wintering range. This project would result in an negligible reduction in potential nesting habitat, no reduction in foraging habitat.

Conclusion

The proposed action may affect individuals if they occur in the project area. Habitat outside of the treatment units in the project watersheds is sufficient to meet nesting and foraging requirements on a population level, and in the long term reforestation and riparian restoration activities would have a beneficial impact on this species.

Species that use dead and down wood Logs provide organic and inorganic nutrients in soil development, contribute to water economy, provide microhabitats for a variety of plants and animals and provide structure for riparian associated

164


species in streams and ponds. Size, distribution, and orientation many be more important than tonnage or volume. Small logs provide escape cover or shelter for small sized species. It is still unknown what levels of down woody material are needed to provide quality habitat for associated species. Too much may impede travel by big game and present a fire hazard. However, increased levels also provide cover for small invertebrates and may protect seedlings from browse and scorching. Logs that lie along a contour are used more than those lying across contours. Larger sized logs are also used more and by more species than smaller logs (Bull et al. 1997).

Refer the section on primary cavity excavators (PCE), to the landbird section (Vaux’s swift), and to wolverine in the TES section for discussion of how these species use of snags and other woody debris. Black bear are found in a variety of timber types and they utilize hollow trees and logs during hibernation and for den sites. A variety of small mammals, such a squirrels and rabbits, utilize woody debris for cover, food storage and reproduction. A variety of bats also use snags for roosting or nursery sites. Potential effects of proposed alternatives on dead and down logs are similar to those described in the section on PCE. Please refer to that section for a description of direct, indirect and cumulative effects of alternatives on dead wood, including both standing snags and down logs.

Federally Listed and Proposed Species The endangered gray wolf has potential habitat in the Bailey Butte project area (see Table 85). Wolves have been known to pass through Ochoco National Forest. There are no established packs on the Forest or near this project area. The nearest known packs are in the Northeastern Oregon and in the Rogue River area. The Bailey Butte Fire area is in a location that is not likely to become occupied by a reproductive population of wolves due to the lack of large remote areas with very high big game populations. Wolves may periodically travel through the area during dispersal or exploratory forays, but are not likely to occupy the area consistently. Table 85. Federally Listed and Proposed Species under the Endangered Species Act within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Species Status Habitat Habitat/ Presence in Project Area Determination

Gray wolf (Canis lupus)

Federal Endangered Any Forest PAG Existing habitat No Effect

Gray wolf The gray wolf usually occurs in forested habitats with some open areas such as river valleys and meadows for hunting prey including pronghorn, deer and elk, and smaller mammals. Wolf packs (usually 5-10 animals) can have very large territories up to 400 square miles or larger. Key wolf habitat components identified in the 1987 Wolf Recovery Plan (USDI U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1987) are: 1) a sufficient, year-round prey base of ungulates and alternative prey, 2) suitable and somewhat secluded denning and rendezvous sites, and 3) sufficient space with minimal exposure to humans. Den sites are excavated areas in the soil but hollow logs, beaver lodges, the base of hollow trees, pit excavations, and rock caves, usually near water, are also used. Rendezvous sites are the activity sites used after the denning period and prior to the nomadic hunting period of fall and winter. They are often in open grassy areas near water or at forest edges.

In Oregon, the gray wolf is listed as Federally Endangered in areas west of Highways 395, 78 and 95 which includes the Ochoco National Forest. In 2011, a single male gray wolf was documented dispersing through Central Oregon and subsequently traveled south into California. In 2012, it was been documented traveling back and forth across the California/Oregon southern border and in 2014 a pack was established in the Rogue River watershed. There is a low probability that a gray wolf could

165


use the Bailey Butte project area for dispersal and hunting. The project area does not contain habitat for denning or rendezvous sites.

Environmental Effects, including Cumulative Effects

Denning or rendezvous habitat would not be affected because it does not occur in the project area. Danger tree felling would result in negligible short-term displacement due to disturbance from equipment and personnel (i.e., noise and felling of trees) due to the very low likelihood of wolf occurrence in the area and the normally nocturnal movements of wolves. Equipment and staging areas would not deter wolf dispersal through the project area. No effects to wolves or wolf habitat were identified; therefore the Bailey Butte Fire project would not contribute effects to wolves or wolf habitat that would combine with the effects of other projects that overlap in space and time.

Conclusion

The Bailey Butte project would have No effect to gray wolf habitat because there are no known resident wolves or breeding packs on the Ochoco National Forest.

Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species Table 86 lists 13 Region 6 sensitive terrestrial wildlife species known or suspected on the Ochoco National Forest. Based on a review of records and habitat requirements, the following Sensitive Species have potential habitat in the project area and may be impacted by the proposed action: Lewis’s woodpecker and white-headed woodpecker. These two species are fully analyzed and impacts disclosed in the Management Indicators Species (MIS) Section of this report under Primary Cavity Excavators (PCE). Refer to that section of this document for further details on the analysis of potential impacts to those species. Species with habitat in this project area that may be impacted by the proposed activities are discussed below. Species that do not have habitat within the project area and that will not be impacted directly, indirectly or cumulatively by this project include American peregrine falcon, bald eagle, bufflehead, upland sandpiper, tri-colored blackbird, greater sage-grouse, pygmy rabbit, North American wolverine, Townsend’s big-eared bat, Johnson’s hairstreak and silver-bordered fritillary. These “no impact” species will not be further discussed in this document.

166


Table 86. Regional Forester Sensitive Species occurring or potentially occurring on the Ochoco National Forest.

Species Status Habitat Habitat/Presence

in the Project Area

Determination

American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum)

Sensitive, MIS Riparian, Cliffs No habitat No impact

Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)

Sensitive, MIS Lakes, snags No habitat No impact

Lewis woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis)

Sensitive, MIS

Open ponderosa pine snags, burned areas Existing habitat May impact

White-headed woodpecker (Picoides albolarvatus)

Sensitive, MIS

Large-diameter ponderosa pine snags Existing habitat May impact

Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola) Sensitive Lakes, snags No habitat No Impact

Upland Sandpiper Sensitive Expansive wet meadows No habitat No Impact

Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) Sensitive Lakeside, bulrush

(cattails) No habitat No Impact

Greater sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)

Federal Candidate, Sensitive

Sagebrush flats

No habitat No Impact

Pygmy rabbit Sensitive, MIS

Tall Sagebrush with deep friable soils No habitat No Impact

North American wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus)

Sensitive, MIS

Mixed forests, High Elevation Potential habitat No Impact

Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii)

Sensitive, MIS

caves, buildings, bridges, mines No habitat No Impact

Johnson’s hairstreak (Callophrys johnsoni) Sensitive Mixed forests with

dwarf mistletoe Potential habitat No impact

Silver-bordered fritillary (Boloria selene) Sensitive Bogs and wet meadows No habitat No impact

White-headed woodpecker and Lewis’s woodpecker White-headed woodpecker

Habitat for the white-headed woodpecker occurs in open stands with mature cone bearing ponderosa pine trees. Refer to the section on Management Indicator Species (PCE) for more detailed information on this species.

Prior to the Bailey Butte fire, approximately 8,255 acres of priority nesting habitat were modeled and mapped across the forest (2011). The majority of this mapped priority habitat is found within the Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Habitat Type. Most of these habitat acres burned at a very low to low severity. However there are pockets of this habitat that burned at moderate severity (such as in the Heflin Creek drainage) where pre-fire habitat has been reduced by the effects of high tree mortality which eliminates pine nut production and bark gleaning opportunities that are important to this

167


species. However where pine forests burned with mixed mortality or underburned, the fire may have improved habitat for this species that prefers open stands of mature ponderosa pine. The fire likely created additional habitat inside the fire perimeter in areas where the fire resulted in a low intensity underburn.

The Bailey Butte Fire burned through approximately 150 acres of priority nesting habitat for this species. Of these, most impact on white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat resulted from the stand-replacement fire (negative impact) and mixed severity or underburned area (positive impact).

Lewis’ woodpecker

Habitat for the Lewis’ woodpecker occurs in open stands with large snags in an advanced state of decay. Refer to the section on Management Indicator Species (PCE) for more detailed information on this species.

Prior to the Bailey Butte fire, approximately 4,503 acres of priority nesting habitat were modeled and mapped across the Forest (2011); of this, the Bailey Butte Fire burned approximately 75 acres. Most of these habitat acres burned at a low or underburn intensity. The fire created some additional habitat for this species inside the project boundary as this species is known to select for very open stands where large snags are present.


Current management plans would continue to guide management of the project area. No fire-killed trees would be harvested. No danger trees along public or administrative access routes would be felled and subsequently removed. Danger trees would be felled and left on-site or moved as needed to reduce hazards along roads over a longer time period. Snag numbers do not continually increase over time because the process of tree mortality and snag recruitment are balanced by the processes of snag decay and fall (Everett et al. 1999). Standing dead trees would fall over time, leaving a combination of broken snags and down dead wood throughout the fire area. Future snag habitat will decrease creating a gap in snag density during the time period in which most of the snags will have fallen and there are few green trees of sufficient size to provide recruitment. This is particularly true of stand replacement areas where little snag habitat will exist between the period of large scale snag fall and future tree mortality (snag recruitment).

No reforestation of native tree species (ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur to accelerate the development of desirable forest conditions which provide foraging habitat for white-headed and Lewis’s woodpeckers. Stands that underwent stand-replacement and mixed mortality fires would be dependent on nearby natural seeds for reforestation. Natural tree regeneration is expected to consist of a mix of grand fir, ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, western larch, lodgepole pine and juniper. Delayed reforestation could increase the longevity of shrub dominance which may provide foraging habitat for Lewis’s woodpeckers, but could reduce the suitability of nesting habitat for white-headed woodpeckers which are susceptible to predation by small mammals in brushy areas.

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned over areas in the Heflin, Clover, O-Kelly and Camp Creek drainages would be implemented. Forgoing these actions could delay establishment of riparian shrubs in riparian zones which could affect the foraging habitat for Lewis’s woodpeckers.


The proposed action may result in direct mortality of individual adults, young and/or eggs due to felling operations conducted during the nesting season, abandonment of eggs or young by adults due to noise and operations associated with the felling operations, loss of suitable nest and/or perch trees, and displacement from foraging areas. Because the treatment areas are narrow linear strips of habitat alongside roads, or in scattered small units the habitat quality is likely less than nearby larger blocks

168


of habitat; therefore, project impacts are anticipated to be minor in scope. Habitat outside of the project area in the watershed is sufficient to meet this species’ requirements for nesting and foraging on a population level as described in detail in the section of this report on Primary Cavity Excavators (MIS section).

Cumulative Effects

Refer to the cumulative effects discussion for this species in the MIS section of this document. Previous impacts to woodpecker habitat in this analysis area include loss of large-diameter ponderosa pine trees from timber harvest (refer to Table 10), overstocked stands due to fire suppression, and illegal woodcutting of large pine snags. Snags removed under this project would occur in stand-replacement burned areas which could reduce some potential nesting and foraging structure for both species. Retention standards include 3 snags >10 inches per acre and 3 snags >20 inches per acre in EMC habitat type and 2 snags >10 inches per acre and 2 snags >20 inches per acre in PPDF habitat type. The proposed danger tree project would remove a small number of potential nest trees and foraging habitat but would not add to ongoing and reasonably foreseeable effects to the Lewis’ or white-headed woodpecker.

Conclusion

The Bailey Butte Fire project May Impact the white-headed and Lewis’s woodpecker but will not lead to a trend towards Federal listing or contribute to a negative viability trend on the Ochoco National Forest.

Other Featured Species

Pronghorn antelope Antelope can be seen on the forest during early spring green up, and throughout the summer on the Forest. Kidding may occur in more open and dry habitat where predator detection is better. Removal of hazard trees along roads and salvage of fire-killed trees in harvest units proposed by this project will have no impact on pronghorn antelope.

Raptors This section discusses potential effects to birds of prey that were not previously discussed.

Please refer to “Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species” for further discussion on bald eagles, refer to “Management Indicator Species” for further discussion on golden eagle and prairie falcon.

This section addresses potential impacts to northern goshawk, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, red-tailed hawk and a variety of forest-dwelling owls.

Goshawk

The goshawk is a forest dwelling accipiter that uses a wide variety of forest ages, structural conditions, and successional stages for a range of life needs and during different seasons. Nest areas are typically on north or east facing aspects, in drainages, and are often near streams or springs. Nest areas contain one or more stands of large, old trees with a dense canopy cover. Goshawks normally have alternate nest sites within a dense stand or in multiple stands in proximity to each other. As a result multiple suitable nest areas may be included in a nesting territory. Nest cores and the surrounding area are important for fledglings as they provide cover and prey for the developing young. Up to 60% of the area should be retained in an LOS condition, and management should

169


enhance younger stands towards LOS condition where possible. Snags and downed logs are important for many goshawk prey species and should be abundant.

Existing Condition: The Regional Forester’s Forest Plan Amendment 2 provides interim management direction for the management of goshawk habitat. To maintain consistency with this guidance, the following recommendations were followed: 30 acres of the most suitable nesting habitat surrounding all known nest trees will be protected; a 400 acre Post Fledging Area (PFA) has been established around the 30 acre core of the active nesting territory for one pair of goshawks within the Bailey Butte Fire Area. This PFA was exposed to a range of fire severity from unburned to high severity. Approximately 50% of that PFA was exposed to stand replacing fire severity, but the historic nest core and surrounding area burned at very low to low severity. This territory is known to be occupied and will be managed as a PFA in the future though adjustments will need to be made to the PFA boundary in order to include the 400 acres around the nest core. Another pair of goshawks nested in the Heflin Creek drainage prior to the Bailey Butte Fire. The majority of that territory was impacted by moderate to high fire severity and extensive stand replacement fire mortality, including within and adjacent to the historic nest core. The Heflin Creek PFA has been rendered unsuitable for nesting by goshawks and will not be managed as habitat for this species until recovery occurs or an alternate nesting area is located outside of the high fire severity area.


No fire-killed trees would be harvested. No danger trees along public or administrative access routes would be felled and subsequently removed. Danger trees would be felled and left on-site or moved as needed to reduce hazards along roads over a longer time period. Standing dead trees would fall over time, leaving a combination of broken snags and down dead wood throughout the fire area. This alternative would retain the majority of the standing and down dead trees which could indirectly benefit goshawks that prey of bird species that may utilize snags and down wood.

No reforestation of desired tree species (Ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur to accelerate the development of desirable forest conditions which would contribute to forested conditions and structure that could support nesting habitat for goshawks. Delayed reforestation under this alternative could impact the rate of recovery habitat to support the life needs for goshawks which nest in dense forested areas and forage in open forested areas.

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned over areas in the Heflin, Clover, O-Kelly and Camp Creek drainages would be implemented. Forgoing these actions could delay establishment of riparian shrubs in riparian zones which could affect the forage base for goshawks which feed on a variety of smaller birds.


Removal of danger trees in the project area will involve individual and small groups of burned trees. Salvage of fire-killed trees in the harvest units have crowns with little or no canopy cover and which do not provide habitat for these species. Where low severity or underburning occurred, habitat may have been enhanced by opening up the understory and allowing for greater use of these stands. Some danger trees identified that are still green may provide potential as nest or perch trees and may be part of one or more territories. Removal of danger trees within these areas may reduce potential nest or perch sites; however, it is likely that this activity would be of such small scope and scale that the reduction in trees and snags would not alter suitability of habitat or use of the area by this species. The project area is limited in scope and most of the trees proposed for removal occur in areas that are unsuitable as nesting habitat. Temporary displacement from foraging may occur due to noise associated with felling and removal operations.

170


Cooper’s hawk

The Cooper’s hawk prefers coniferous, mixed and deciduous forests but will also use riparian, juniper, and oak woodlands. Vegetative profiles around nests are trees >9 inches dbh and 40-60% canopy closure. Cooper’s hawks commonly nest in deformed trees infected with mistletoe. Cooper’s hawk territories range from 200 to 1,700 acres.

Existing Condition

Cooper’s hawks are known to use habitat comparable to what was present in the project area prior to the Bailey Butte Fire. Areas exposed to moderate or high severity fire (stand replacement mortality) are no longer suitable as habitat for this species. Potential habitat exists in the unburned, very low and low severity areas of the Bailey Butte Fire area.

Direct and Indirect Impacts - Alternative A

No fire-killed trees would be harvested and no danger trees along roads would be felled and subsequently removed. Danger trees would be felled and left on-site or moved as needed to reduce hazards along roads over a longer time period. Standing dead trees would fall over time, leaving a combination of broken snags and down dead wood throughout the fire area. This alternative would retain the majority of the standing and down dead trees which could indirectly benefit Cooper’s hawks that prey of bird species that may utilize snags and down wood.

No reforestation of native tree species (ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur to accelerate the development of desirable forest conditions which would contribute to forested conditions and structure that could support nesting habitat for Cooper’s hawks. Delayed reforestation under this alternative could impact the rate of recovery habitat to support the life needs for accipiters, such as the Cooper’s hawk which nest in dense forested areas and forage in open forested areas.

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned over areas in the Heflin, Clover, O-Kelly and Camp Creek drainages would be implemented. Forgoing these actions could delay establishment of riparian shrubs in riparian zones which could affect the forage base for Cooper’s hawks which feed on a variety of smaller birds.



Sharp-shinned hawk

The sharp-shinned hawk breeds in a variety of forest types, though most are dominated by conifers in elevations ranging from 300 to 6,000 feet. Vegetative characteristics found at nest sites include high tree density and high canopy cover which produce cool, shady conditions. Nest stands preferred by sharp-shinned hawks are younger than those preferred by Cooper’s hawk and northern goshawks

171


(usually 25-50 years old) and occur in even-aged stands. In eastern Oregon, all nest sites were in even-aged stand of white fir, Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, or aspen, with ground vegetation limited to grasses and creeping barberry (Marshall et al. 2003).

Existing Condition

There are a number of clear-cut harvest units within the Bailey Butte Fire Perimeter that have coniferous trees that are approaching or entering potential habitat suitability for this species. The majority of these old harvest units burned at relative low severity and potential as nesting habitat for this species was not substantially altered by the fire. A few of these regenerating stands did burn at a higher intensity and are likely unsuitable or marginal as nesting habitat for this species, such as in the Camp Creek drainage. These areas may remain suitable as foraging areas for this species which is known to forage over open country.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternative A

No fire-killed trees would be harvested and no danger trees along roads would be felled and subsequently removed. Danger trees would be felled and left on-site or moved as needed to reduce hazards along roads over a longer time period. Standing dead trees would fall over time, leaving a combination of broken snags and down dead wood throughout the fire area. This alternative would retain the majority of the standing and down dead trees which could indirectly benefit sharp-shinned hawks that prey of bird species that may utilize snags and down wood.

No reforestation of native tree species (ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur to accelerate the development of desirable forest conditions which would contribute to forested conditions and structure that could support nesting habitat for sharp-shinned hawks. Delayed reforestation under this alternative could impact the rate of recovery habitat to support the life needs for accipiters, such as the Cooper’s hawk which nest in dense forested areas and forage in open forested areas.

No riparian restoration activities associated with burned over areas in the Heflin, Clover, O-Kelly and Camp Creek drainages would be implemented. Forgoing these actions could delay establishment of riparian shrubs in riparian zones which could affect the forage base for sharp-shinned hawks which feed on a variety of smaller birds.



Red-tailed hawk

The red-tailed hawk inhabits open to semi-open mixed conifer and ponderosa pine forests, grasslands, meadows, and agricultural lands. Territory sizes range widely from a few hundred to several thousand acres (Johnsgard 1990, La Sorte et al. 2004, NatureServe 2012). This species often nests in

172


a large live tree at the edge of an open area. They usually forage over open areas rather than in dense forest environments.

Existing Condition

There are a number of natural and created openings within the Bailey Butte Fire Perimeter that have large live trees that survived the fire and provide potential nesting habitat for this species. The open forest and stand replacement areas will provide foraging habitat for this species which is known to forage over open country. However, the stand replacement areas of the fire are not likely to be suitable as nesting habitat due to the lack of protective cover at the nest and for fledglings.

Direct and Indirect Impacts - Alternative A

No fire-killed trees would be harvested and no danger trees along roads would be felled and subsequently removed. Danger trees would be felled and left on-site or moved as needed to reduce hazards along roads over a longer time period. Standing dead trees would fall over time, leaving a combination of broken snags and down dead wood throughout the fire area. This could increase the abundance of prey for red-tailed hawks that use down wood (such as small mammals), but may also impede the ability of the hawks to access this prey due to excessive accumulations of down wood and slash which may interfere with the ability of these hawks effectively detect and to capture the prey. In the long-term some of this high fuel loading would likely re-burn which would open up the area to foraging by species such as the red-tail which hunts over open areas.

No reforestation of desired tree species (Ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch) would occur to accelerate the development of desirable forest conditions which would contribute to development of large trees suitable for supporting a moderately large nest structure. This species prefers to nest in large trees on the end of more open areas. Delayed reforestation under this alternative could impact the rate of recovery suitable nesting habitat.



Other Raptors

Hawks, osprey, owls and falcons use a wide variety of forest ages, structural conditions, and successional stages. A variety of habitat conditions should be present across the landscape, so that features are present that would support populations of raptors at the landscape scale. Snags and downed logs, upland shrubs, meadows, hardwood patches and riparian zones are important for many prey species and should be abundant and in stable or improving condition.

173


Existing Condition

Much of the Bailey Butte Fire burned in a mosaic fashion resulting in a variety of forest conditions. The open forest and stand replacement areas will provide foraging habitat for those species which are known to forage over open country. Potential habitat exists in the unburned, very low and low severity areas of the Bailey Butte Fire area for species that prefer semi-open to more dense forest canopy conditions for foraging or nesting. However, the stand replacement areas of the fire are not likely to be suitable as nesting habitat for any of these species due to the lack of protective cover at the nest and for fledglings.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternative A

Hawks, osprey, owls and falcons use a wide variety of forest ages, structural conditions, and successional stages. A variety of habitat conditions would continue to occur across the landscape at least in the short term, so that features that are currently present that would support populations of raptors at the landscape scale would be provided at the level that they currently exist, and would be recruited at the rate that they are currently developing. Thus attainment of conifer trees in stands that don’t currently have them would be dependent on natural regeneration which would happen at a slower rate and would include a lower proportion of the desirable tree species (ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and western larch). Snags and downed logs would be retained and recruited at their current level and trend. Upland shrubs, meadows, hardwood patches and riparian zones which are important for many prey species would not be stabilized or improved through proactive treatment.


Removal of danger trees in the project area will involve individual and small groups of burned trees. Salvage of fire-killed trees in the harvest units have crowns with little or no canopy cover and which do not provide habitat for these species. Where low severity or underburning occurred, habitat may have been enhanced by opening up the understory and allowing for greater use of these stands. Some danger trees identified that are still green may provide potential as nest or perch trees and may be part of one or more territories. Removal of danger trees within these areas may reduce potential nest or perch sites; however, it is likely that this activity would be of such small scope and scale that the reduction in trees and snags would not alter suitability of habitat or use of the area by these species. The project area is limited in scope and most of the trees proposed for removal occur in areas that are unsuitable as nesting habitat. Temporary displacement from foraging may occur due to noise associated with felling and removal operations.

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative Effects in the analysis area include loss of suitable nest trees from vegetation management projects (SeeTable 10), woodcutting, fire and recreational disturbance. The Bailey Butte Fire resulted in a reduction of suitable nesting habitat, which includes components like canopy cover, large snags, and down woody material. The fire has led to less available suitable habitat. Other effects resulting from the wildfire include the loss of dense canopy in mixed severity burns and loss of canopy in the moderate to high severity burned areas. This results in a decrease in available suitable nesting and foraging habitat and a reduction in the number of occupied territories. The proposed hazard reduction would result in a very small reduction in potential nest and perch sites in suitable habitat for these species. The salvage of fire-killed trees in unsuitable nesting habitat would not add to past, ongoing or reasonably foreseeable effects to potential nesting habitat for raptor species. The salvage of fire-killed trees from 10.5% of the area within the Bailey Butte Fire area would not result in negligible effects to habitat for prey species for raptors that may occur across the analysis area.

174


Conclusion

The proposed action may impact individuals but would not contribute to a negative trend in viability of raptor species on Ochoco National Forest.

Botany The following is a summary of the Botany Specialist’s Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

Analysis Methods Sensitive Plant Species. Each area to be affected by management actions is investigated for sensitive plant habitat in a pre-field review. The NRIS TES database GIS layer and Ranger District Maps were assessed for known sites of Sensitive plant species. Additional analysis of aerial photos and GeoSpatial Imagery (1-m scale) determined high probability habitat. Botanical surveys were conducted in high probability habitat within the Bailey Butte fire project area before the wildfire of 2014, as well as post-fire in the summer of 2014, including portions of Camp Creek, Nature Creek, Crystal Creek, O’Kelly Creek, and Elkhorn. Species fact sheets provided by the Interagency Special Status Sensitive Species Program website were consulted for habitat descriptions for each Sensitive species. Additional surveys for suitable Sensitive plant habitat were conducted during the Burned Area Emergency Rehab reconnaissance. The results of these and previous botanical surveys in the project area form the basis for analyzing the effects of the proposed activities on Sensitive plants and their habitat.

There are 38 plant species on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List that are known or suspected to occur on the Ochoco National Forest. Each of these species was ranked with a probability of occurrence in the project area as High, Moderate, Low, or None.

Species were ranked with a high probability of occurrence if there is a documented population within the project area or if there is high quality habitat present and the species is known to occur within a few miles of the analysis area. Species determined to have a moderate probability of occurrence are those for which habitat is present and the species does or may occur on the Ochoco National Forest, but there are no documented occurrences in the analysis area. Species determined to have a low probability are those for which habitat is marginal or minimal in the project area. Species determined to have no probability of occurrence are for those not expected to occur because the project is outside of the potential distribution and geographic range of the species, and/or there is no suitable habitat within the project area. Of the 38 species, 17 occur or have suitable habitat within the project area (they are bolded in the table). The other 22 species have low or no probability of occurrence in the project area. These species would not be affected by the proposed project and will not be discussed further in the analysis.

Invasive Plant Species (Risk Assessment). Surveys for invasive species were conducted in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area in the summer and fall of 2014 as well as in previous years. Previously known sites in addition to newly discovered infestations have been inventoried in the NRIS database for invasives and mapped in GIS. The risk assessment below illustrates the factors used to determine the level of risk based on potential source of vectors, type of ground disturbing activity, and the proximity to existing Invasive plant infestations to the proposed units. Because timber harvest is proposed in areas that suffered moderate to high severity burns, there is already a large extend of bare ground exposed as a result of vegetation consumption by fire in these units. Factors including the species of Invasive plant, size of infestation, life history characteristics, as well as the dispersal mechanism are also incorporated into the risk rating in tables five and six. The results

175


from current and previous surveys, and the factors mentioned above form the rationale for analyzing direct, indirect and cumulative effects.

Affected Environment

Plant Communities in the Bailey Butte Fire Project Area Plant communities affected by wildfire and suppression activities on the Ochoco National Forest include plant association groups dominated by grand fir (Abies grandis) communities (3,000 acres), Douglas fir (Psuedotsuga menziesii) communities (1,200 acres), and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) communities (300 acres). Juniper woodland (Juniperus occidentalis) communities occupied 50 acres within the fire perimeter. Mixed conifer stands are interspersed with wet to mesic meadow communities (2,100 acres) dominated by grasses, sedges and forbs. Riparian vegetation dominated by alder (Alnus incana), willows (Salix sp.), aspen (Populus tremuloides), and cottonwoods (Populus trichocarpa) along streams and springs are scattered within the burn area. Dominant riparian shrub species include common snowberry (Symphoricarpus albus), wax currant (Ribes cereum), serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), and numerous sedges, rushes and forbs. Non-forest plant communities make up the remaining 350 acres within the fire perimeter and are composed of sagebrush (Artemesia tridentata), bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), mountain mahagony (Cercocarpus ledifolius) and a diversity of grasses. Common grass species include blue wild rye (Elymus glaucus), squirrel tail (Elymus elymoides), bluebunch wheatgrass (Psuedoroegneria spicata), Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), and pine grass (Calamagrostis rubescens) and tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa). There are also several non-native cultivar grass species in the burned area including smooth brome (Bromus inermis), tall oatgrass (Arrhenatherum elatius), and orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata).

These plant communities affected by the Bailey Butte Fire include habitat for plant species on the R6 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species Plant List (USDA 2011), and provide important habitat and ecological values for wildlife and human uses. Most of the native vegetation in the area is adapted to historical levels of wildfire, so there are no expected long-term negative effects on these native plant communities and their associated sensitive plant populations. The primary threat to the four existing sensitive plant populations and other suitable sensitive plant habitat is the invasion of non-native plant species including state listed Invasive plants that could displace sensitive plant populations. The risk of invasion of non-native and Invasive plants has increased due to suppression activity and wildfire (Asher et al. 2001). Other threats include the dispersal of invasive plants by vehicles, off-road vehicles, and livestock grazing. Livestock grazing can limit the recovery of desirable vegetation and spread Invasive plants into sensitive plant habitats (Goodwin et al. 2002).

Other Desirable Vegetation The 1,923-acre Ochoco Divide Research Natural Area (RNA) lies almost entirely within the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter; the RNA comprises 880 of ponderosa pine , 880 acres of mixed conifer, 190 acres of meadows and grasslands, and 85 acres of juniper/mountain mahogany, and is managed as a special designation to provide opportunities for research, education, and ecological benchmarks in naturally occurring ecosystems where natural processes are maintained. Approximately 885 acres burned with a High or Moderate severity within the RNA.

Other desirable plant communities include both native and introduced plant species that provide food or habitat for a variety of wildlife species and livestock. The primary threat to these communities is the invasion by non-native invasive plants that readily colonize burned areas. Non-native invasive plants reduce diversity and abundance of native plant species with a corresponding decrease in diversity and quality of wildlife habitat. Rapid colonization and expansion of non-native invasive weeds also increases erosion, decreases water quality, forage, and with some invasive species

176


particularly medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) ventenata (Ventenata dubia), and cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) can increase fire frequency and severity (Olson 1999). Livestock grazing before vegetation has recovered or re-established in heavily burned areas can limit the recovery of desirable vegetation, as well as introduce and spread non-native invasive plant.

Sensitive Plant species This section was prepared in compliance with the Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2672.4 and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (USDA 1989). Effects of the proposed activities are evaluated for those TES plant species on the current Regional Forester’s List (Appendix A: USDA Forest Service 2011). The intent of these requirements is to ensure that management activities will not jeopardize the continued existence of Proposed, Endangered, Threatened or Sensitive species, adversely modify critical habitat, and determine if the alternatives would result in a trend toward Federal listing. There are no Threatened or Endangered plant species on The Ochoco National Forest so there would be no impacts to Threatened or Endangered plant species.

Existing Condition The project was designed to avoid high probability habitats for sensitive plant species. There is one known sensitive plant, Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii, Peck’s mariposa lily, consisting of 4 populations within the Bailey Butte Fire project area (see Table 87). There are no proposed activities within these documented populations.

The 17 species of sensitive plants that were documented or have potential habitat in the project area were grouped by habitat type for analysis. Habitat groups include riparian and scabland. Other species with distinct habitat types have low or no probability of occurring within the fire project area and will not be discussed further. Table 87. R6 listed sensitive plant species documented within the Bailey Butte fire perimeter.

Species NRIS ID Acres Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii 6070100033 2.1 Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii 6070100037 2.1 Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii 6070100011 0.6 Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii 6070100036 0.4

Total 4 sites 5.2

Riparian Habitat

Riparian habitat in the Bailey Butte Fire analysis area is characterized by hardwood stream vegetation composed primarily of mountain alder (Alnus incana) with remnant patches of black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), and willow species (Salix spp.) with sedges (Carex spp), rushes (Juncus spp), and grass communities forming riparian meadows ranging from mesic to wet, scattered across the project area. Deciduous riparian habitats provide important ecological functions on the landscape. Riparian communities made up of these species are extremely diverse in plant and wildlife. Hydrologically, these deciduous plant communities provide excellent stability to stream banks and soil surfaces. Their deep spreading root systems can resist flooding and slow water velocity, and shade stream channels keeping temperatures low.

Riparian habitat (associated sensitive plant species)

Botrychium ascendens Botrychium crenulatum

177


Botrychium minganense Botrychium montanum Botrychium paradoxum Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii Carex lasiocarpa var. Americana Carex retrorsa Eleocharis bolanderi Muhlenbergia minutissima Potamogeton diversifolius Salix wolfii Utricularia minor Schistidium cinclidodonteum Tortula mucronifolia

Moonworts (Botrychium spp.)

There are five species of Botrychium, also known as moonworts or grapeferns, on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List. All of them have potential habitat in Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Moonworts are found in a variety of habitats in Oregon, from old growth Western red cedar forests to xeric open meadows, seeps, and springs. On the Ochoco National Forest moonwort species occupy primarily moist meadow sedge/forb communities associated with seeps, drainages, and the edges of wet meadows, to lightly shaded forested riparian areas. The habitat requirements of moonwort species on the Ochoco National Forest are similar, with several species often growing together; therefore, they will be considered as one group for this analysis.

The Bailey Butte Fire Area contains no known populations of Botrychium species. However, these plants are small in stature, may be dormant underground for several years, and therefore are easily overlooked. While populations are difficult to locate, their habitat is readily identifiable and their presence will be assumed in high probability habitat.

Peck’s Mariposa Lily (Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii)

Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii, Peck’s mariposa lily, is endemic to Central Oregon occurring mostly on the Ochoco National Forest (2,965 acres), with a few populations on the Malheur National Forest (290 acres) and the Prinville District of the Bureau of Land Management (150 acres). Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii is found in habitats ranging from riparian strips along seasonal streams and meadows within open ponderosa and lodgepole pine forests to open meadows, but is restricted to seasonally moist areas with patches of open, exposed, moderately deep to shallow soil. Very wet meadows and wetter portions of meadows tend not to support Peck’s mariposa lily; however the drier margins of these meadows and meadows that are seasonally dry or moist overall tend to support the largest populations of the lily.

The Conservation Strategy for Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii (Dewey 2011) suggests that this species may benefit from changes to riparian areas that result in increased amounts of transitional habitat. It also suggests that in some areas of the Ochoco National Forest, habitat for this species has been eliminated due to human influences. Road construction, grazing, timber harvest and other management activities have resulted in hydrological changes, especially stream down cutting, which has lowered water tables and in some locations has resulted in loss of riparian habitat for Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii (USDA 2004b).

Calachortus longebarbatus var. peckii is documented with four populations within the project area totaling 5.2 acres (see Table 87). All known populations are well outside any proposed Bailey Butte Fire project activity units and therefore, viability of the species would not be compromised by this project.

178


Sensitive Sedge Species (Carex spp.)

There are three sedge species listed as sensitive on the Regional Forester’s list that are suspected of occurring on the Ochoco National Forest. Lesser-panicled sedge (C. diandra), slender sedge (C. lasiocarpa var. americana )and retrorse sedge (C. retrorsa) are on the ORNHIC (2007) List 2. These listed sedge species occupy moist to very wet habitats and are found over a wide geographic range in Oregon and across North America.

Other Riparian Species

Eleocharis bolanderi, or Bolander’s spikerush, is a densely tufted, grass-like perennial that grows in seasonally moist meadows and channel edges in grass steppe-scablands, from foothills to moderate elevations in the mountains. Eleocharis bolanderi was known in Oregon only from historical records (1940’s) until it was located in Lake and Wallowa counties in 2002-2004. It also occurs in other eastern Oregon counties as well as other western states.

Muhlenbergia minutissima, or annual dropseed, is an annual grass is associated with sandy gravelly drainages, rocky slopes, flats, road cuts and open sites at moderate to high elevations. In Oregon, it has been documented at only one site in Malheur County. It has also been documented in other western states.

Potamogeton diversifoliius, or Rafinesque’s pondweed, is an aquatic perennial forb is found in shallow ponds, marshes, and reservoirs in sage grassland or pine woodlands. It is found in most states.

Salix wolfii, or Wolf’s willow, is primarily a high elevation species associated with sites that collect cold air (Brunsfeld and Johnson 1985). In Oregon, it has been documented in Wallowa and Harney Counties. It has been documented in Idaho, Nevada, and the Rocky Mountain States.

Utricularia minor, or lesser bladderwort, grows in low nutrient lakes and peatbog pools in lowlands and montane zones up to 4,000 feet. In Oregon, it has been documented in several counties on both sides of the Cascades. It also occurs in most western states and across the northern half of the US to the east coast.

Riparian Bryophytes

Schistidium cinclidodonteum occurs in large loose mats on wet or dry rocks or on soil in rock crevices along intermittent streams. It is suspected on the Ochoco National Forest but has not yet been documented.

Tortula mucronifolia, or mucronleaf torula moss has been documented in Southwest Oregon and in two sites in eastern Oregon. It distributed widely across North America and also in New Zealand. No management guide exists yet, but the ISSSSP species fact sheet suggests managing known sites and surveying for more sites until more is known about this species.

Scabland Habitat

Scablands are characterized by rocky clay soils that are very dry, shallow, gravelly lithosols with cryptogenic soils, characterized by frost heaves in the winter. There is a general lack of vegetation with much of the gravelly soils being bare. Plants that do colonize these scablands include Artemesia rigida, Poa sandbergii and Danthonia unispicata. There is approximately 5.8 acres of mapped scabland habitat in the Bailey Butte Fire project area but the habitat is marginal.

Scabland habitat (associated sensitive plant species)

Achnatherum hendorsonii Achnatherum wallowaensis

179


Eriogonum cusickii

Achnatherum hendersonii and Achnatherum wallowensis are regional endemic species that occur sporadically in central and northeastern Oregon. They are found exclusively on scablands in Central and North Central Oregon.

There are forty-seven Achnatherum hendersonii sites and nine Achnatherum wallowensis sites documented on the Ochoco National Forest in the NRIS-TES database. None of these sites occur within the Bailey Butte Fire analysis area,

Eriogonum cusickii, or Cusicks’s buckwheat grown on sage scablands (lithosol soils), sandy volcanic flats, and mixed grasslands. In Oregon, it has been documented in Harney and Lake Counties. It has also been documented in Crook and Deschutes counties, but these occurrences may have been misidentified, no new occurrences have been found.

There are no proposed activities in scabland habitats within or adjacent to the project area; therefore no effects to sensitive plants associated with scablands are expected.

Other habitat-Basalt cliffs

Cheilanthes feei, (Fee’s lip fern)

Fee’s lip fern is found on calcareous cliffs and ledges, especially on limestone from 300-12,500 feet in elevation. In Oregon, it has been documented in Wallowa County. It is suspected on the Ochoco National Forest, but no populations have been found. There are no proposed activities within or adjacent to this habitat therefore no effects to Fee’s lip fern are expected.

Environmental Effects This section of the report describes the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the treatments proposed for each alternative, separate by rare plant species habitat. The proposed activities and affected associated rare plant habitat are organized by alternative in Table 88. Table 88. Summary of proposed activities by action alternative and affected rare plant habitat.

Alt. B Alt. B Alt. C Alt. C

Activity Treatment TES habitat (acres)

Treatment (acres)

TES habitat (acres)

Salvage Harvest Units 234 acres .61 0 0 Roadside Salvage 588 acres 10.7 588 10.7 Felling in RHCA 81.4 acres 81.4 77.7 77.7 Reforestation Conifer planting 886 acres 9 886 9 Stream restoration Directional felling 6 miles 161 161 161 Riparian planting 6 miles 161 161 161 Transportation System

Miles of road TES Habitat (acres) Miles of road

TES habitat (acres)

New temporary roads 0.16 0 0 0

Riparian Habitats

While effects such as damage by falling trees, logging equipment, and road construction can directly impact sensitive plants and their habitats, one particular indirect effect is the lowering of the water

180


table in riparian zones, and associated sensitive plant habitat, due to stream down cutting. This can be caused by road construction, logging, wildfire, and livestock grazing that removes vegetation and exposes stream banks, increasing runoff effects and the potential for channel erosion (USDA 2004b). Therefore, analysis of effects to rare plant populations in riparian habitats is intricately tied to hydrological changes in their habitat (Seymour 2009).

Alternative A

This alternative would have no disturbance through hazard tree removal, commercial salvage, road construction or other activities proposed in the action alternatives that could directly or indirectly affect viability of sensitive plant species. Natural wildfires prevent these early successional TES species from being outcompeted by other plant species, including encroaching conifers. However, the potential for introduction and spread of non-native invasive weeds into sensitive plant habitat is very high and will likely occur even under the no action alternative. Sensitive riparian habitats including seeps, springs and creeks occur within the fire perimeter and have burned areas that are now susceptible to invasion by non-native invasive plants. Exclosure fences protecting these areas from livestock have burned in the Bailey Butte fire and are no longer protecting these sensitive plant habitats. Detecting and treating invasive plants in these sensitive riparian habitats will be important for the recovery of the native riparian plant community, and maintaining suitable sensitive plant habitat and the wildlife that depends on them. Non-native invasive weeds are abundant in the fire area and spread by wildlife, vehicular traffic, recreational activities, and by natural processes such as wind, surface water flow and livestock grazing. Grazing will be discussed further in the cumulative effects section.

Alternative B

There are no proposed activities within known sensitive riparian plant populations; therefore no direct effects are expected. For sensitive plant populations that are new or may have been overlooked, their presence will be assumed in high probability suitable habitat. Soil compaction or erosion caused by logging activities and road construction can impact future recruitment by changing hydrological patterns in riparian habitat. Heavy slash resulting from both hazard tree felling and removal can bury plants. There will be no proposed commercial harvest of fire-killed trees within Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) which has potential habitat for sensitive plant species. Fire killed trees in these RHCAs would be felled only in roadside units if they pose a safety hazard but left on site to add large down wood to the system. Fire killed trees in proposed harvest units that occur in RHCAs will be left as reserve trees and therefore would not affect sensitive riparian plant habitat.

Riparian planting and reforestation activities will occur in high severity burned areas, none of which have known sensitive plant populations, therefore there are no direct effects expected. Heavy slash resulting from directional felling for stream restoration can land on or bury sensitive plants, however these areas are high severity bare areas that are unlikely to have suitable habitat for years to come. There is likely to be positive effects to sensitive riparian plant species habitat from proposed stream restoration activities in severely burned riparian areas as these activities will stabilize stream banks, reduce erosion, trap sediment, and raise the water table which will improve sensitive riparian plant habitat. Conifer planting could also have a positive effect on rare plant habitat by stabilizing soil on slopes and improving infiltration rates in the uplands which can raise water tables in the lowland riparian areas. There is no proposed temporary road construction or reconstruction in sensitive plant habitat within the Bailey Butte Fire Project area; therefore no direct effects to sensitive plants are expected.

The project design criteria include no harvest buffers in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs). Hazard trees in roadside units within these designated areas will be felled for public safety but no further ground disturbance will occur. Burned trees in proposed harvest units that occur within RHCAs will be left standing so as not create ground disturbance in sensitive plant habitat.

181


There are no proposed activities within scabland habitats therefore no direct or indirect effects are expected for this alternative for sensitive plant species associated with scabland habitat.

Short-term indirect effects are possible as a result of the proposed activities introducing and spreading weeds into sensitive plant habitat. Logging equipment, and administrative vehicular and foot traffic required to implement the proposed activities will likely increase the risk of introducing and spreading existing weed seeds into burned areas with or adjacent to sensitive plant habitat where proposed activities would occur. Surveys and treatment of non-native invasive plants are part of the preventative measures of this project as well as the other prevention measures stated in the Project Design Criteria will greatly reduce the indirect effects of invasion by non-native invasive species.

Alternative C

Alternative three differs from the proposed action in that there would be no tree removal outside the roadside units. There would be 234 fewer acres of salvage timber harvest, and no temporary road construction to access those acres. Associated actions including directional felling, riparian planting and reforest activities will be the same as Alternative B. There are no additional proposed activities in Alternative Three within known sensitive plant populations; and the direct effects are expected to be the same as for Alternative B. For sensitive plant populations that are new or may have been overlooked, their presence will be assumed in high probability suitable habitat, and project design criteria will ensure the protection of any potential sensitive plant habitat.

Short-term indirect effects are the same as discussed for roadside units in Alternative B, and there would be no indirect effect of introducing and spreading weeds into sensitive plant habitat within the harvest units outside the road prism. Logging equipment, and administrative vehicular and foot traffic required to implement the proposed activities would not take place for these 234 acres and therefore this alternative would have a lower risk of introducing and spreading existing weed seeds into burned areas with or adjacent to sensitive plant habitat where proposed activities would occur. Weed prevention measures would be followed and would reduce the risk of introducing and spreading weeds into sensitive plant habitat as a result of roadside salvage activities.

Cumulative Effects for All Alternatives

Cumulative effects are those that are expected from the impact of the no-action, and action alternatives, when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. Cumulative effects are based on the project area and the adjacent private land.

Past management in the cumulative effects analysis area, including timber harvest and associated activities such as road construction, activity fuels treatment, pre-commercial thinning (PCT) , prescribed burns, and reforestation, as well as a century of historic livestock use, stream channeling, seeding with non-native cultivar grasses, fire suppression, and wildfire have resulted in areas of degraded riparian conditions. Many stream channels have widened and incised, thus losing floodplain area and the associated vegetation that depends on wet conditions. Past activities that have created bare ground have also created establishment sites for non-native invasive plants that have since readily colonized a large portion of the project area including sensitive plant habitat. The activity table below (Table 3) includes most but not all of the past activities on FS lands associated with the Bailey Butte Fire Project area.

Continuing influences, such as grazing and roads, contribute to negative effects on sensitive plants and their habitat. Repeated and lengthy grazing by livestock in riparian areas can dramatically alter the plant community, compact the soil, change soil surface hydrology, microclimate, create down cutting of streams by removing vegetation that would otherwise stabilize stream banks and function to trap and deposit sediment creating wet meadows and floodplains (Elmore 1992). Grazing also causes trampling of actual Peck’s mariposa lilies and consumption of their basal leaves reduces

182


photosynthate available for bulb renewal (Fiedler 1987). Heavy grazing in riparian areas has and continues to have negative effects on sensitive plants and habitat in the Bailey Butte fire analysis area. Livestock grazing on the forest serve as vectors for spreading and introducing Invasive plants into Sensetive plant habitat. Although some of the sensitive plant habitat is protected from the effects of livestock grazing by exclosures, several exclosure fences burned in the Bailey Butte Fire. Nature Creek, Sheep Smother, and several other exclosures protecting springs and seeps were damaged by the fire and are no longer keeping livestock out of thee sensitive plant habitats, therefore the risk of introducing non-native invasive plants from surrounding infesations into these sensitive habitats is highly likely, unless livestock grazing is postponed until exclosure fences are repaired.

Calochortus longebartus var. peckii requires particular edaphic conditions for its recruitment and survival. It tends to occupy sites whose soil moisture levels are transitional between wet meadow and near-stream plant communities, and distinctly drier upland plant communities, it is reasonable to expect that the taxon would be very sensitive to minor, but persistent changes in local hydrology (Dewey 2011). Altering the hydrology of stream channels is one of the largest threats to Peck’s mariposa lily (Fredricks 1989). Over time, many activities in the Bailey Butte project area have detrimentally affected stream channels. Down cutting, caused by cattle grazing, timber harvest, road construction, and inadequate sized culverts, has lowered the water table resulting in a loss of riparian habitat. This in turn has fragmented the Calochortus populations within the watershed and the affected rare calcareous habitats where Botrychium species occur.

Road building, even temporary roads, alter stream drainage patterns. It is speculated that Peck’s mariposa lily is spread by bulblets moving downstream during high water flow. Roads that cross drainages can affect bulblet dispersal. Road building on scabs and other sensitive ecosystems can permanently alter or remove habitat for sensitive species.

Large infestations of invasive plants within the fire perimeter occur along roads, meadows and plantations where fire fighting vehicles, heavy equipment, hoses, and foot traffic undoubtedly picked up seeds and spread them to new areas. New infestations are highly likely and may not be detected until spring or summer of 2015. The majority of the existing weed sites are located along Nature Creek, Camp Creek, O’Kelly Creek, as well as the Wildwood campground and snowshoe point area. There are major roads along these riparian areas, including HWY 26, and Forest Service roads 27, 2630, 2210 and many spur roads that parallel or cross sensitive plant habitat with most weeds occurring along the road shoulders, although some are beginning to invade the surrounding native habitat. Non-native invasive weeds in sensitive plant habitat have a negative impact on rare plant populations. Non-native invasive weeds can outcompete sensitive plants by growing faster, larger and taking up limited resources, particularly nitrogen and water, more efficiently than rare native species. Invasive plants particularly spotted knapweed can chemically inhibit the germination of rare plants and can invade disturbed sites as well as relatively undisturbed perennial plant communities (DiTomaso 2000).

When native vegetation is overgrazed and trampled, bareground is exposed, the competing native vegetation is removed, and livestock can introduce invasive plant seeds stuck on their fur, particularly the Velcro-like seeds of houndstongue and long awned seeds like medusahead, into these disturbed areas, thus greatly increasing the probability of these sites becoming colonized by non-native invasive species, which is evident in the Bailey Butte Project area. Non-native invasive species further degrades sensitive plant habitat, and outcompetes sensitive plant species such as small statured botrychiums.

Invasive Plant Species An invasive plant is defined as “a non-native plant whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health” (Executive Order 13122). Invasive plants

183


are a threat to native plant communities, biological diversity, and proper ecosystem functioning on National Forest Land as well as other land ownerships. Invasive plants lead to many negative environmental effects including: displacement of native plants; reduction in habitat and forage for wildlife and livestock; loss of threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; increased soil erosion and reduced soil productivity; and changes in the intensity and frequency of fires (Sheley and Larson 1994, Scott and Pratini 1995, Sheley et al. 1997, Di Tomaso 2000, USDA 2005). These invasive plant species thrive in a new environment because they arrive without the complement of predators, disease, and other natural control agents found in their native region of the world. Most of these species take advantage of disturbances such as wildfires, logged units and associated skid trails and landings, roads, rock quarries, prescribed burned areas, and heavily impacted areas caused by overgrazing, off-road vehicles and trails. Weed seeds and other propagules can be introduced by vehicles, wind, water, animals, humans and hay brought in for livestock. Once established, weed populations serve as a seed source for further dispersal, generally along roads and trail corridors.

Forest Service Manual (FSM) direction requires that Invasive plant Risk Assessments be prepared for all projects involving ground-disturbing activities. For projects that have a moderate to high risk of introducing or spreading Invasive plants, Forest Service policy requires that decision documents must identify Invasive plant control measures that will be undertaken during project implementation (FSM 2081.03, 29 November 1995). Invasive plants are identified from the Ochoco National Forest Invasive Plant List.

In 2006, the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forest developed Invasive Plant Prevention Practices using the Guide to Invasive plant Prevention Practices (July 12, 2001). These practices were preceded by Forest Plan direction that was established with the Pacific Northwest Region Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Record of Decision (October 2005). When the R-6 Invasive Plant Species FEIS ROD came out in October 2005, it amended R-6 Forest Plans and contained 23 Standards related to prevention and treatment of invasive plants. Additional direction for the management of invasive plants is contained in Forest Service Manual, Section 2080. Prevention practices were also included in the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forest and Crooked River National Grassland Invasive Plant Treatments Environmental Impact Statement (USFS 2011).

The invasive plant prevention practices are provided for use on the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests and Crooked River National Grassland to minimize the introduction of invasive plants; minimize conditions that favor the establishment or spread of invasive plants; and to facilitate the integration of invasive plant management practices into resource programs.

Effects of the activities of the project on the introduction, spread and enhancement of invasive plant populations and required mitigation measures are addressed in this document.

Existing Condition There are several species from the Ochoco National Forest Invasive Plant List (Appendix D) within the Bailey Butte Salvage Project (See Table 89). The risk of introducing weeds into the Bailey Butte fire project area, or spreading infestations already established in the fire project area depends on the amount of bare ground created by the wildfire, the amount of disturbed ground created by the proposed activities, proximity to existing infestations and the dispersal mechanism for each invasive species spreading seed. Large infestations of invasive plants within the fire perimeter occur along roads, meadows, plantations, and previously logged units.

The Bailey Butte Fire has increased vulnerability of the landscape to invasive plants because of: 1) increased availability of light and nutrients in the burned areas, 2) reduction in competition from native plants for subsurface resources such as nutrients and water, and 3) increased opportunity for introduction and spread where fire fighting vehicles, heavy equipment, hoses, and foot traffic

184


undoubtedly picked up seeds and spread them to new areas. New infestations are highly likely and may not be detected until spring or summer of 2015.

The suppression effort created approximately 15 miles of dozer line and hand line within the fire perimeter. In addition, numerous staging areas and safety zones were created. Although a weed washing station was set up, much of the firefighting equipment came onto the forest from outside the area without being washed, so new weed species could have been introduced. Assessing the establishment and treating new weed infestations on roads and dozer lines in 2015, along with major road corridors used for fire suppression access, as part of early detection and rapid response program will be critical to the recovery of native plants within the burned area. Table 89 lists the Oregon State Invasive plants present within the Bailey Butte fire perimeter by soil burn severity. Table 89. Invasive plant sites on the Ochoco National Forest within the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter associated with Soil Burn Severity Class.

Bailey Butte Fire on NF lands Acres with Soil Burn Severity Class Acres Species Common Name Sites High Moderate Low Unburned Total

Centaurea diffusa Diffuse knapweed 3 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3

Centaurea biebersteinii spotted knapweed 36 0 1.4 25 0.5 26.9

Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed 1 0 0 0.1 0 0.1

Cynoglossum officinale Houndstongue 61 11 236 565 149 961

Onopordum acanthium Scotch thistle 3 0 0.16 0.01 0.13 0.3

Salvia aethiopis Mediterranean sage 2 0 0 0.08 0.04 0.1

Taeniatherum caput-medusae medusahead 27 0 67.7 130 17.6 215.3

Total 113 11 305 720 167.4 1204

Environmental Effects Alternative A

Fire alone often promotes invasions of non-native and/or invasive plants. Burning removes existing vegetation, exposes mineral soil, redistributes soil nitrogen, and post fire environments are drier and have more light, all conditions which can promote non-native plants, including invasive plants like cheat grass, medusahead, knapweed, scotch thistle and non-native rhizomatous cultivars such as smooth brome and tall oatgrass. In a review of 35 studies D’Antonio (2000) found that only 20% of time did fire reduce or eliminate invading species but often post-fire changes altered the competitive relationships between native and non-native species. Freeman, et.al (2007) looked at data collected from 7 wildfire sites in coniferous forests and found that wildfire was responsible for increases in nonnative species richness and cover. Non-native rhizomatous grass species were seeded across the Ochoco National Forest for forage, and erosion control. It is apparent within the mixed severity burn areas in the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter these non-native seeded grasses have resprouted from rhizomes and are quickly colonizing burned areas within the project area. Medusahead is a rapid colonizer of burned areas when a seed source is present and it is highly likely that it will spread rapidly into the moderate to high severity burned areas even if none of the proposed activities take place.

The effect being considered is the intensity and scope of disturbance and the increased risk of invasive plant introduction and spread from known populations. There is a heavy infestation of

185


medusa head on private land bordering forest service land. Three miles of the Forest Service boundary fence was burned in the fire and livestock now have access to FS land. Invasive plant surveys and treatment along the Forest Service Boundary will be necessary to prevent dispersal of non-native invasive plants coming onto Forest Lands from private lands. The no action alternative would pose the least risk to invasive plant spread and introduction relative to the action alternatives because little to no additional ground disturbance since fire would occur and fewer vectors could introduce seed. However, non-native invasive species are likely to increase across the proposed units even without disturbance.

Direct and Indirect Effects––Alternatives B and C

The effects of salvage logging on understory vegetation may be site-specific. Review of the literature shows some conflicting results on the effect of salvage logging on understory vegetation recovery and increases in non-native plants. Beschta, et al. (2004) noted that post-fire salvage logging can adversely affect soil integrity and persistence of native plant species and impede ecological recovery after a fire through changes to microclimate and mechanical damage to regenerating plants and soils. Purdon et al. (2004) found reduced abundance of understory vegetation following salvage logging in forest stands that had experienced high-severity fire in the boreal forests of southern Québec.

However, Keyser et al. (2009) found no discernible effect of salvage logging on understory development 5 years after fire and neither a reduction in total plant cover nor an increase in the abundance of exotic species in ponderosa pine forests in the Black Hills. No differences in cover among forbs, grasses, and shrubs were observed by Lopez Ortiz (2007) between salvaged and unsalvaged stands in Douglas-fir forests in the Klamath Region of Oregon. She found the abundance of key species changed as a result of salvage logging with stimulation of nitrogen fixing shrubs and ponderosa pine related to aspects and warmth of the sites. Acton (2003) saw increases in exotic species cover, but not species richness after salvage logging and concluded that the measurement scale may be an important consideration in experiment design.

Monitoring of wildfire effects across Central Oregon over the past decade has shown that areas where invasive plant infestations existed before the fire broke are at the highest risk of invasive plant expansion (Pajutee 2013). Expansion of houndstongue and medusahead occurred in the Maxwell Fire on the Ochoco National Forest with the biggest post fire infestations occurring along roads that were salvage logged (personal observation), but expansion and introduction also occurred within the fire area in designated wilderness that were not salvaged, but were grazed 3 years post fire. Expansions of diffuse knapweed and St John’s wort were seen after the 2003 B&B Fire in Sisters in both salvaged and unsalvaged areas.

There are approximately 65 acres of mapped and inventoried invasive plants in the proposed harvest units and a hand felling no commercial harvest unit (Unit 7) in Alternative B (Tables 90 and 91) and an additional 297 acres of mapped and inventoried invasive plants in the proposed roadside unit (Table 91) which are the same acres for alternative B and alternative C. The Baily Butte Fire Salvage project poses a HIGH risk of the introduction and spread of invasive plants overall because the proposed activities are expected to disturb soil, impact some native species which are recovering, and introduce vectors for invasive seed spread with equipment and vehicles. Actions to reduce, but not eliminate invasive plant risk are included in the Project Design Criteria. All known infestations within proposed units, both harvest units and roadside units as well as haul routes, would be treated with appropriate herbicide in accordance with the Invasive Plant Treatment EIS (2011) before ground disturbing activities occur, as authorized during the BAER process. Risk of introduction and spread of Invasive plants can be reduced further by requiring clean equipment and vehicles and minimizing ground disturbance and traffic around existing infestations.

There are 3 small segments of proposed temporary road construction (totaling 0.16 miles) to access harvest units: 11 and 8 for Alternative B. There are no known invasive plant species within unit 8, but

186


there are 1.7 acres of high priority invasive plant species within unit 11. The risk associated with creating temporary roads in unit 11 is HIGH. The risk for unit 8 is Moderate as there is no known existing weed infestation but there is diffuse knapweed immediately adjacent to the proposed temp road. Creating new temporary roads opens already burned ground to mineral soil. Medusahead and houndstongue that occurs within the unit will likely colonize this newly created road surface as their seed readily attaches to wildlife such as deer and elk which often use these roads for travel.

Alternative C poses slightly less of a risk of invasive plant introduction or spread as a result of ground disturbing activities because of the 65 acres of known invasive plant populations which would not be included in Alternative C, and because Alternative C does not include temporary road construction. Table 90. Invasive plant sites in proposed harvest units.

Unit number Species Infestation ID

Acres in unit Risk factor

1 Spotted

knapweed 607011022 0.25 3-High

1 Field bindweed 607010145 0.05 2-Moderate 1 Houndstongue 607011123 1.5 3-High 1 Medusahead 607010149 0.02 3-High 3 Houndstongue 607010121 0.03 2-Moderate 3 Medusahead 607011092 7.5 3-High 6 Houndstongue 06070131-133 8.5 3-High 6 Medusahead 607011093 27.2 3-High

7 Diffuse knapweed 607010147 0.04 2-Moderate, hand felling

7 Houndstongue 607011107 0.25 3-High, hand felling 10 Houndstongue 607010780 7.9 3-High 10 Medusahead 607010873 9.53 3-High 11 Houndstongue 0607010914-15 1.2 3-High 11 Medusahead 607011122 0.5 3-High

Total 64.7 3-High

Table 91. Invasive plant sites in proposed roadside harvest units.

Species Road number Acres in road units Risk Factor Diffuse knapweed

607, 700 .10 2-Mod

Spotted knapweed

600 1.0 3-High

Field bindweed 607 .10 2-Mod Houndstongue 452, 600, 607, 608, 610, 623, 630, 700, 2210 203 3-High Medusahead 600, 607, 608, 610, 700 92.8 3-High Total 297 3-HIGH

187


Risk Assessment- Factors considered in determining the level of risk for the introduction or spread of invasive plants are:

_X X_ HIGH

Has to be a combination of the following three factors:

1. Known weeds in/adjacent to project area. YES,

2. Any of vectors #1-8 (descriptions follow) in project area. YES

3. Project operation in/adjacent to weed population. YES

4. Seeds readily dispersed by natural agents YES

_ __ MODERATE

1. Any of vectors #1-5 present in project area. YES

___ LOW

1. Any of vectors #6-8 present in project area. YES

OR

2. Known weeds in/adjacent to project area without vector presence. YES

Vectors (if contained in project proposal) ranked in order of weed introduction risk:

1. Heavy equipment (implied ground disturbance) YES

2. Importing soil/gravel YES

3. OHVs YES

4. 4. Grazing (long-term disturbance) YES

5. 5. Tree felling, riparian planting YES

6. 6. Plant restoration (tree planting) YES

7. 7. Recreationists (hikers, mountain bikers, horses) YES

8. 8. Forest Service project vehicles/foot traffic YES

Cumulative Effects This analysis also considers the cumulative effects of invasive species risk within the Bailey Butte Fire Project area, FS roads and subwatersheds; Upper Marks Creek, West Branch Bridge Creek, and Upper Bear Creek and adjacent private land over the past 100 years to 10 years into the future. This analysis area was chosen because invasive species disperse by a number of agents but the most relevant project related cumulative effects for invasive species expansion and its effects on sensitive plants and their habitats is concentrated in these subwatersheds.

Past management which has affected invasive species risk in the cumulative effects analysis area over the past 100 years includes: timber harvest, livestock use, fire suppression, wildfires, recreation, utility line installations, construction on private lands, road use, and road construction. There are approximately 3,000 acres of land with invasive species in the cumulative effects analysis area. Densities vary and populations are widely scattered with some areas of higher concentrations particularly medusahead on private lands. Many of the known invasive plant infestations have been treated manually for years prior to the Invasive Plant Treatment EIS, which gave us legal jurisdiction to use herbicides. Since 2011, we began treating priority infestations with herbicide. This has helped

188


reduce some populations and limit the spread of others; however there are still large source populations of Invasive plant species in the cumulative effects area.

The heaviest concentrations of invasive plant populations on FS lands are associated with areas of past timber harvest from the Beaver and Snowshoe area Timber sales (Activities Table 3). These infestations continue to persist and are providing a seed source for dispersal throughout the area. Within the West Branch Bridge sub watershed there are large open areas that endured heavy grazing both on public and private land, with large infestations of medusahead on private land bordering forest service land. Many of these infestations were bulldozed for a fire breaks during the suppression activities in the summer of 2014 and are expected to be corridors for dispersal from private to FS lands. Resting the burned area from livestock grazing will be critical to reducing the spread from this area, however three miles of the Forest Service boundary fence was burned in the fire and livestock now have access to FS land. Invasive plant surveys and treatment along the Forest Service Boundary will be necessary to prevent dispersal of non-native invasive plants coming onto Forest Lands from private lands.

Wildfires such as Bailey Butte and Hash Rock have created large areas of early seral habitats vulnerable to invasive plants. Monitoring of other wildfires in the area in the past decade has shown that areas where invasive plants exist are at the highest risk of invasive plant expansion.

Continuation of the Bailey Butte Roadside Hazard Tree salvage will continue to create conditions favorable for invasive plant spread. The Travel Management Plan will reduce vehicle access and reduce risk of invasive plant spread. Invasive plant control on public lands through the Deschutes/Ochoco Invasive Plant program will reduce invasive plant species abundance and the risk of spread.

Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (BAER) activities are currently and will continue to be implemented in the cumulative effects area. Culvert reconditioning, culvert removal, installation of drain dips, reconditioning catch basins, as well as water bar construction all have the potential to introduce and spread invasive plants within the cumulative effects area depending on the degree of ground disturbance these activities create. Invasive plant treatments that were funded through BAER will focus on new infestations that come up in the burned areas of Bailey Butte fire perimeter focusing around sensitive plant habitat and the Research Natural Area. These activities will reduce the introduction and spread of invasive plants in the cumulative effects area but will only be effective for one year. After 2015, other funds must be used for invasive plant treatment in the cumulative effects area.

Activities associate with this project include proposed stream restoration activities Heflin, Clover, Camp, and O’Kelly Creek within the cumulative effects analysis area will most likely improve riparian and forest conditions vulnerable to invasive plant invasion by trapping sediment, improving riparian floodplain conditions and increasing resiliency of riparian vegetation. Increased invasive plant treatments in riparian areas and along roads and trails, along with re-vegetation of unneeded roads with native plants, combined with other efforts of streamside and forest restoration in the watershed to cumulatively improve vegetative conditions and native plant habitat quality by restoring habitat and reducing effects from unmanaged recreation.

The Ochoco Summit Trail System project is also currently in the planning stages and will ultimately reduce the amount of unmanaged use and focus use on designated roads and trails within the cumulative effects area. This project is expected to increase OHV use in the cumulative effects area but would reduce invasive plant risk by removing vectors for spread outside designated roads and trails and restoring de-vegetated areas. However, numerous invasive plant sites occur along roadsides in the private interface and within areas experiencing moderate to heavy recreational use by vehicles and equestrians.

189


Climate change is expected to affect invasive species in the future. A recent review (Vose, et.al 2012) concluded that invasive species will likely become more widespread, especially in areas of disturbance and in dry forest ecosystems. He notes that plant invasions can be influenced by warmer temperatures, earlier springs and earlier snowmelt, reduced snowpack, changes in fire regimes, elevated nitrogen deposition, and elevated carbon dioxide concentrations. Invasive species common to the Ochoco National Forest, such as spotted and diffuse knapweeds (Centurea spp.), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), and cheat grass (Bromus tectorum) showed increased productivity in response to elevated carbon dioxide under controlled conditions. Risk of exotic invasive plants entering forests is likely highest in mountainous ecosystems, such as the cumulative effects analysis area, where historically cooler temperatures and closed-canopy forests may have limited invasive plants.

To summarize, the factors which most influence invasive plant spread in the analysis area are vectors that spread invasive plants, and the amount of disturbed ground. This project, in conjunction with other projects in the watershed, will cause a cumulative increase in the risk of invasive plant populations expanding in the subwatersheds as equipment and project vehicles enter.

Fuels and Air Quality The following is a summary of the Fuels and Air Quality Specialist’s Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

Fuels

Affected Environment

The Bailey Butte fire burned with a range of severities within the 7,789 acres of the fire on Forest System land. In moderate and high severity portions of the fire (6,775 acres, 87%) there are no surface fuels remaining other than sparse patches of shrubs, duff and litter. Most of the trees are scorched, and on many, all that remains are the boles and large limbs.


Alternative A

Based on an estimated pre-fire basal area of 175 (Rawlings 2015), without logging, by 2034 the average fuel load from falling fire-killed trees across the harvested areas is estimated to peak at 51.4 tons per acre of woody debris (Peterson 2010). Coupled with a brush understory which commonly follows high-severity fire, the potential for another high-severity fire in the next 15-40 years is high; this would set back forest regeneration and cause severe damage to soils. This type of event has occurred on the Ochoco. In the fall of 2013 two fires burned in the 13-year old Hash Rock fire scar in the Mill Creek Wilderness; the Whiskey Springs fire grew to 86 acres, and the Twin Pillars fire grew to 144 acres. Suppression action was not taken on these fires due to the risk to firefighter safety caused by the heavy density of old fire-killed trees (snags) from the previous fire.


The desired residue profile most closely resembling the recently burned current condition in the project area (GTR 52, pg 44) has 18 tons per acre of downed woody material, but 12.6 tons of that material is greater than 9 inches in diameter.

Based on an estimated post-salvage basal area of 40, the average fuel load immediately after salvage across the harvested areas is estimated to be 2.7 tons per acre of downed woody debris. Most of this would be small diameter debris, under six inches diameter.

190


By 2034 the average fuel load across the harvested areas is estimated to be 5.4 tons per acre of downed woody debris. Most of this debris would be from trees under 11” dbh that were not harvested due to the inability to salvage them before they rotted.

The effect of this woody material on fire risk (the chance of undesirable fire effects) is low. In a study of 68 stand-replacing wildfires that burned between 1970 and 2007 in dry coniferous forests of Eastern Washington and Oregon, “Post-fire logging initially increased average surface fuel loads relative to unlogged areas by accelerating surface deposition of branches and tops from fire-killed trees. However, fuel loads on unlogged sites surpassed fuel loads on logged sites within 5-10 years after wildfire and remained higher until at least 35 years following wildfire, as fuel deposition from broken and fallen snags exceeded that from logging residue” (Peterson, et al 2014).

According to Brown, et al 2003, in the next ten years, “High severity fire is unlikely because duff and downed woody fuels that support prolonged burning would be absent. Large woody fuels would still be accumulating through falldown, and they would not have decayed enough to support smoldering combustion, which can extend the period of downward heating. If salvage operations leave concentrations of small woody fuels, high severity burning could occur where the fuels are concentrated.” Should fire occur and forest managers decide to suppress it, areas of of roadside salvage are easily accessible by fire suppression forces, and the risk to firefighter safety from snags would be lower in harvested areas.

Cumulative Effects

There is a Research Natural Area in the middle of the Bailey Butte fire area. Under most conditions, a fire start in the RNA would not be suppressed, in order to let natural processes occur and because of the high risk to firefighter safety from steep topography and heavy fuels, especially snags. A wildfire moving from the RNA into general forest would be easier to suppress if it moved into areas where salvage logging occurred.

Livestock grazing in the project area could resume within a few years, which could reduce fire spread in open stands with light fuels by reducing grass, which helps carry fire through a stand. The amount of reduction would depend on how intensely an area is grazed, how productive the grass is in any given year, and how extreme fire conditions are on any given day. The effects of grazing would be limited in stands dominated by brush.

Air Quality

Effects of the Action Alternatives

In Alternative B, branches and tops (slash) from harvested trees would be cut and piled at a landing, with one landing per ten acres of harvest, and one slash pile per landing. This project would generate approximately 24 slash piles. The slash piles would be burned the first or second winter after harvest.

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for assuring compliance with the Clean Air Act. The DEQ monitors the emissions from prescribed fire through the Oregon State Department of Forestry smoke management program. (State of Oregon, 2005) Site specific fuels data is entered into a state database along with observations of environmental conditions taken while burning. This data is used to determine the amount of emissions produced statewide by prescribed fire, and maintain compliance with the Clean Air Act.

The data in Table 92 are calculated smoke emissions from an individual pile. These are the data that would be transmitted to the Department of Forestry for smoke management.

191


Table 92. Calculated smoke emissions from a burned slash pile.

Volume (cubic ft)

Pile Biomass (tons)

Consumed Fuel (tons)

Emissions by pollutant (tons)

PM PM10 PM2.5 CO CO2 CH4 NMHC

1,472.62 20.2559 19.2431 0.2107 0.1491 0.1299 0.7310 32.0149 0.0539 0.0435

Calculations from the Piled Fuels Biomass and Emissions Calculator, Fire and Environmental Research Applications Team, Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station

The Oregon Administrative Rules regarding smoke management encourages using wood or other biomass for making products or for energy production in order to reduce emissions from prescribed fire (OAR 629-048-0200(1)). Slash piles would be available for market. Should the market for biomass increase, more piles would be removed from the forest, reducing the smoke from pile burning.

The OARs define Smoke Sensitive Receptor Areas as areas that are provided the highest level of protection under the smoke management plan because of their history of smoke incidents, density of population or other special legal status related to visibility. (OAR 629-048-0005(26)) The nearest SSRAs to the project area are Redmond, 40 miles to the southwest, and John Day, 70 miles to the east. The OARs define Class I Areas as wilderness areas designated by Congress that are subject to visibility protection under the Environmental Protection Agency’s Regional Haze Rule and the federal Clean Air Act. (OAR 629-048-0005(5)) The nearest Class I wilderness to the Bailey project is the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness, 70 miles to the east. Due to distance, prevailing winds out of the west, and the short duration and relatively low volume of smoke, the smoke from burning piles would not likely effect Class I wilderness areas or Smoke Sensitive Receptor Areas. There is no history of smoke from burning on the Ochoco effecting Class I wilderness areas or Smoke Sensitive Receptor Areas.

Smoke could cause a short duration impact to forest roads, including the Highway 26 corridor, and hunter camps, especially at night. Smoke pooling often occurs in the late evening/early morning hours as cold stable air settles into valley floors. This is called an “inversion.” Inversions generally lift by mid-day as valley floors heat up. Prescribed burning is avoided during persistent inversions to avoid having smoke pool without conditions conducive to lifting.

No smoke would be generated in Alternative C because there would be no slash piles, and therefore no burning of slash piles.

Cumulative Effects t

Smoke from prescribed fires would continue in other watersheds. Smoke from prescribed fires on nearby private and State owned land, which is regulated by Oregon Department of Forestry Smoke Management Division, could occur. Even with regulation, prescribed fire smoke could create short-term effects. These usually last only a few hours as the approval to burn from ODF Smoke Management comes at times of favorable atmospheric conditions. ODF approves the amount of prescribed burning based on expected smoke dispersal. Prescribed burning in this geographical area has not resulted in a violation of air quality standards, although nuisance smoke occasionally occurs.

Range Resources The following is a summary of the Range Specialist’s Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

192


Introduction The project area is within portions of six allotments: Bear Creek cattle allotment, Crystal Springs cattle allotment, Elkhorn cattle allotment, Marks Creek cattle allotment, Snowshoe cattle allotment and Wildcat cattle allotment. The project area also includes the Ochoco Divide Research Natural Area which is not grazed.

Livestock grazing is permitted throughout the project area by domestic cattle which primarily utilize herbaceous vegetation. To facilitate the management of these allotments, water developments and fences have been constructed over the years. A majority of the water developments are associated with spring sources or stock ponds. Approximately 25 miles of fence lines and 10 water developments fall within the Bailey Butte Fire parameter.

For the purpose of discussing livestock grazing, only the area located within the allotments will be included in the discussion.

History of Grazing on Allotments The project area has been grazed since the late 1800s by sheep and cattle with the main objective of providing forage for livestock. By the 1980s grazing was meeting more objectives than just forage production. Grazing was used to remove herbaceous vegetation from tree plantations, utilization of introduced grass species and reduce fine fuels for fire consumption.

In all allotments, stocking rates have reduced significantly from the late 1800s. Specific history of the six grazing allotments in the project area is as follows:

• In the Bear Creek allotment, the majority of grazing has occurred by cattle at various stocking rates. The allotment was not completely fenced until 1970. Prior to, unauthorized grazing occurred continuously in the allotment and rotational grazing was limited.

• In the Crystal Springs allotment, sheep grazing was a continuous use since before the turn of the century until 1973. An analysis was done by the Forest Service in 1978 to change the class and stocking rate to cattle.

• In the Elkhorn allotment little information is available but records discuss the use of sheep grazing before turning it into a cattle allotment.

• In the Marks Creek allotment, sheep were grazed on the allotment until 1965 when the permit was converted to cattle and stocking rates adjusted.

• In the Snowshoe allotment, sheep were grazed until 1962 when fences were constructed to converted the area into cattle grazing.

• In the Wildcat allotment, sheep grazing happened until the 1920s; this allotment was also part of 2 other neighboring allotments until 1973. In all allotments, stocking rates have reduced significantly from the late 1800s.

Current Management The project area is made up of six allotments: Bear Creek allotment, Crystal Springs allotment, Elkhorn allotment, Marks Creek allotment, Snowshoe allotment and Wildcat allotment. A partial deferred rotation grazing system has been used on Bear Creek and Elkhorn allotments. A deferred rotation grazing system means to allow for a deferment for each pasture on a rotating basis (Holechek et al. 2001). In both of these allotments, one pasture is limited to turning on after July 15th to protect steelhead habitat. The Crystal Springs, Marks Creek and Snowshoe allotments are managed based on

193


topography utilization the higher elevation pastures last. See Table 93 for general allotment information pertaining to the project area. Table 93. General allotment information.

Allotment Total Acres

Acres In Project Area

Kind/Class Permitted Number

Season of Use AUMs

Bear Creek 17,423 1,244 (7%) Cattle-cow/calf 132 06/05-09/30 685 Crystal Springs 7,183 512 (7%) Cattle-cow/calf 185 05/17-08/31 871

Elkhorn 14,913 116 (1%) Cattle-cow/calf 290 06/15-09/30 1,378 Marks Creek 10,546 375 (4%) Cattle-cow/calf 294 07/01-09/30 1,190

Snowshoe 2,711 2,711 (100%) Cattle-cow/calf 156 08/12-09/30 343

Wildcat 18,902 169 (1%) Cattle-cow/calf 150 06/01-09/30 805

Bear Creek Allotment The Bear Creek allotment has three pastures: Dodd’s, North Bear and South Bear. The permit authorizes 132 cow/calf pairs from June 5th through September 30th, for a total of 685 AUMs (Animal Unit Months). The Bear Creek allotment has a total of 17,423 acres, 1,244 acres falls in the project area which is seven percent of the allotment, all in the Dodd’s pasture. Deferred rotation occurs between two of the three pastures with the other pasture, Dodd’s, being managed for late season use because of critical habitat for steelhead timing restrictions; livestock are not allowed in the watershed prior to July 15th.

Crystal Springs Allotment The Crystal Springs allotment has a total of three pastures: Coyle Creek, Crystal Springs and Middle. The permit authorizes a total of 185 cow/calf pairs from May 17th through August 31st, equaling 871 AUMs. The Crystal Springs allotment has a total of 7,183 acres, 512 acres fall within the project area which is seven percent of the allotment, all in the Crystal Springs pasture. This allotment is grazed following topography starting in the lower elevation pasture, Coyle Creek, as soon as range readiness criteria is met and moving up the grade ending in Crystal Springs pasture in August.

Elkhorn Allotment The Elkhorn allotment has a total of four pastures: Bridge Creek, Elkhorn, Indian Prairie and Val Trail. The permit authorizes a total of 290 cow/calf pairs from June 15th through September 30th, for a total of 1,378 AUMs. The Elkhorn allotment has a total of 14,913 acres, 116 acres fall within the project area which is one percent of the allotment, all in the Elkhorn pasture. Deferred rotation occurs between two of the four pastures, Elkhorn and Val Trail. The Indian Prairie pasture is used to gather when needed and the Bridge Creek pasture is always used last because of critical habitat for steelhead timing restrictions of July 15th.

Marks Creek Allotment The Marks Creek allotment has a total of six pastures: Garden Springs, Grant Meadow, Little Hay Creek, Nature, Pothole and Spears Meadow. The permit authorizes a total of 294 cow/calf pairs from July 1st through September 30th, for a total of 1,190 AUMs. The Marks Creek allotment has a total of 10,546 acres, 375 acres fall within the project area which is four percent of the allotment, the entire Nature pasture. Because of the location of the coral and topography, this allotment is grazed the same every year moving up the grade with the season.

194


Snowshoe Allotment The Snowshoe allotment has a total of two pastures: Nature Creek and Snowshoe. The permit authorizes a total of 156 cow/calf pairs from August 12th through September 30th, for a total of 343 AUMs. The Snowshoe allotment has a total of 2,711 acres all of which fall in the project area. The Snowshoe pasture is considered critical habitat for steelhead and is therefore always used later in the season, Nature Creek is used earlier in the season.

Wildcat Allotment The Wildcat allotment has a total of three pastures: Salmon, Viewpoint and Wildcat. The permit authorizes a total of 150 cow/calf pairs from June 1st through September 30th, for a total of 805 AUMs. The Wildcat allotment has a total of 18,902 acres, 169 acres fall within the project area which is one percent of the allotment, all in the Viewpoint pasture. Because of the location of the coral and topography, this allotment is grazed the same every year moving up the grade with the season.

Range Improvements Throughout the project area there are several range improvements including fences, water developments and exclosures. All range improvements help in keeping livestock distributed throughout the allotment. Permittees are responsible for pasture fence line, allotment boundary fence line and water developments. Permittees maintain fences prior to turn-out every year. Most exclosure maintenance belongs to the Forest Service. Several water developments have been recorded as needing maintained or placed in a different location for resource concern. See Table 94 for range improvement details that are located in the project area. Table 94. Range improvements in the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Fence Miles Water Developments 25 miles 10

Existing Condition

Upland Range The vast majority of the acres burned in the allotments was considered “capable” range which means range capable of producing forage and being accessed by livestock. Also, the majority of the acres burned in the allotments is transitory range which is defined as land that is suitable for grazing use of a nonenduring or temporary nature over a period of time. For example, on particular disturbed lands, grass may remain in the area for a period of time before being replaced by trees or shrubs not suitable for forage (Forest Service, 1989). Table 95 displays the total acres at different burn severities by allotment.

195


Table 95. Acres of fire severity by allotment.

Allotment Severity Acres

BEAR CREEK

High 2 Moderate 319

Low 718 Unchanged/Very Low 205 BEAR CREEK Total 1,244

CRYSTAL SPRINGS

High 0 Moderate 51

Low 384 Unchanged/Very Low 77

CRYSTAL SPRINGS Total 512

ELKHORN

High 0 Moderate 19


ELKHORN Total 116

MARKS CREEK

High 1 Moderate 19


MARKS CREEK Total 375

SNOWSHOE

High 31 Moderate 910

Low 1,378 Unchanged/Very Low 390 SNOWSHOE Total 2,710

WILDCAT

High 0 Moderate 10


WILDCAT Total 169

Because of the various levels of severity, transitory range will recover different in each severity. Different grass species recover from fire different as well (Brown and Smith, 2000). For example, certain species like fescue or needle-and-thread recover in two to three years while bluebunch wheatgrass and Sandberg bluegrass recover quickly after fire (Brown and Smith, 2000). After a light burn by wildfire, plant recovery is usually rapid with ground cover returning to pre-burn status in one or two growing seasons (Johnson 1998). The expected recovery for transitory range by severity level is as follows:

• For the High severity level, recovery is expected to happen in 3-5 years. • For Moderate severity level, recovery is expected to happen in 2-3 years. • For Low and Unchanged/Very Low severity levels, recovery is expected to happen in 1-2

years.

Riparian Range Riparian condition on some of the allotments was monitored prior to or after the Bailey Butte wildfire by using a Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) assessment and Multiple Indicator Monitoring (MIM). The PFC assessment determined the physical functioning state while the MIM data looks at multiple factors that determine trends, including current grazing management. See Table 96 and Table 97 for summary information for both plots.

196


Table 96. PFC results for streams within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Allotment Pasture Stream PFC Reach Determination Trend Read

Elkhorn Elkhorn Camp Creek 1 PFC NA 2014 Snowshoe Nature

Creek Nature Creek 1 FAR Upward 2014

2 FAR Not Apparent 2014 *PFC=Proper Functioning Condition; FAR=Functional at Risk

The PFC study on Camp Creek was established on July 11, right before the Bailey Butte fire, by an interdisciplinary team. One reach was assessed on Camp Creek determined to be in Properly Functioning Condition (PFC). PFC implies that it is in a state of resiliency that will allow a riparian-wetland area to hold together during high-flow events with a high degree of reliability.

The PFC study on Nature Creek was established on August 27, after the Bailey Butte fire by an interdisciplinary team. Both reaches were determined to be Functional at Risk (FAR), reach one was in an upward trend and reach two the trend was not apparent. Signs of erosion post fire was witnessed and noted during the field assessment as well as an increased risk of invasive species. Table 97. MIM results within the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

The MIM study in the Elkhorn pasture was located on Camp Creek. Species composition in 2014 was dominated by mesic gramminoid species at 42% greenline composition, mesic forb species at 27% greenline composition and clover (Trifolium longipes) at 17% greenline composition. Woody species was a minor component throughout the transect with 92% of the woody species in the young age class. Given the results of species composition and cover composition the site rated Early Greenline Ecological status which means the site is dominanted by early seral species and needs more stabilizing species for proper functioning. However, the wetland rating has improved from fair in 2011 to good in 2014 so this area is in an upward trend. Stubble height and woody browse all met Forest Plan Standards (Forest Service, 1989).

The MIM study in the Nature Creek pasture was located on Nature Creek. Species composition in 2014 was dominated by mesic gramminoid species at 75% and mesic forb species at 24%. There was very little woody species in the transcent, in fact one mature species was identified. Given the results of species composition and cover composition the site rated Early Greenline Ecological status which means the site is dominanted by early seral species and needs more stabilizing species for proper functioning. However, the wetland rating has improved from fair in 2011 to good in 2014 so this area in improving. Stubble height and woody browse all met Forest Plan Standards (Forest Service, 1989).

Allotment Pasture Year Results

Elkhorn Elkhorn 2011 Greenline Ecology Status-Early

Wetland Rating-Fair Greenline Stability-Low

2014 Greenline Ecology Status-Early

Wetland Rating-Good Greenline Stability-Low

Snowshoe Nature Creek 2011 Greenline Ecology Status-Early

Wetland Rating-Fair Greenline Stability-Low

2014 Greenline Ecology Status-Early

Wetland Rating-Good Greenline Stability-Low

197


Grazing management in the analysis area includes several practices that help livestock distribution and improve riparian habitat. Practices include: active management and riding, trailing and herding, stock driveways, water improvements, rotational grazing strategies and division pasture fences.

Enviromental Effects (Alternatives B and C) The proposed action includes salvage logging on up to 900 acres, reforestation on about 886 acres and six miles of replacement of large woody material and riparian vegetation planting in Heflin, Clover, O’Kelly and Camp Creek drainages. All of these effects would improve range and riparian conditions.

There are no proposed activities in the Crystal Springs, Elkhorn or Wildcat allotments so there are no effects to this project in these allotments.

The Bear Creek, Marks Creek and Snowshoe allotments will include removal of fire killed trees, which will open the area up in these treated acres and improve transitory range conditions by allowing sunlight and other resources to be captured in the understory better. The improved transitory range will improve range conditions in the affected allotments. The reforestation activities will improve range conditions on the 886 acres by stabilizing the site and the riparian vegetation planting and large woody placement will improve the riparian conditions on six miles by stabilizing the creek and riparian areas. All activities in this project will improve range and riparian conditions.

Cumulative Effects Because of the scope, scale and location of project activities, it is not expected that they would contribute incremental effects that would combine with the effects of past and foreseeable projects, including range management. Due to the resting schedule in the severely burned pastures, it’s expected that this project would be completed before grazing is resumed on those pastures.

Recreation and Scenic Values The following is a summary of the Recreation and Scenic Values Specialist’s Report. The entire report is incorporated by reference and can be found in the project file, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Prineville, Oregon.

Recreation

Existing Condition The recreation facilities and public use areas involved with the Bailey Butte Fire are generally limited to the Ochoco Divide Highway 26 corridor and FS Road 2210. The vision of Ochoco National Forest is to promote healthy watersheds, healthy communities, and sustainable ecosystems while providing abundant recreational opportunities.

Recreation use in the project area includes wildlife viewing, hunting, sightseeing, camping, horseback riding, snowmobiling, and off-highway vehicle (OHV) use. There is one recreation event, Bandit Springs Horse Endurance ride that has a very marginal use of a small corner of the low severity burned area. There are however a variety of developed recreation sites and opportunities along the Highway 26 corridor that were either directly involved with fire or located on the fringes of the perimeter. These facilities are:

Cougar East Trial Head: Located on the North side of the Ochoco divide crest, up slope of Heflin creek adjacent along the Highway. This small trail head serves non-motorized trail enthusiast such as Mt. Bikers, hikers and horse riders. The fire burned moderate to severe intensity for approximately 1 ½ miles of trail and encompassed the trail head parking area. High mortality and snags resulted from

198


the fire. Salvage Unit #2 borders this trail for approximately ½ mile as the trail skirts its NW side of the unit. The unit is uphill of the trail. Visitors tend to look N and NW away from the unit to broader expanse views of the John Day watersheds. Harvesting burnt trees and snags will reduce falling logs that present a hazard to public safety and reduce future trail obstacles that would otherwise diminish the recreation experience, access and contribute to user created trail reroute damage and its effects.

Ochoco Divide Campground: This fee campground contains 25 campsites and is open from May through mid-October. Though no significant structures were lost, the entire facility was subjected to the fire environment of mid to low severity. Some large and mid-size burned trees were immediately mitigated for fire fighter and public safety. Since initial fire suppression, using the Scotts guide assessment parameters, more trees maybe deemed a potential hazard from the imminent effects of the fire severity.

Ochoco Divide Snow Park: Accessed from Highway 26, this snow park is open from November to March. It is primarily used by snowmobiles accessing trail #1 that links to Walton Snow Park farther to the southwest. The immediate surrounding forest is a mix of aspen, ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and dense second story grand fir. Over the years, the grand fir has shown higher mortality of its mature trees than other species which have been mitigated over time for public safety. Grand fir is also more sensitive to extreme heat resulting in their survivability and structural integrity becoming compromised over time.

Marks Creek Sledding Hill: This sled hill has basic amenities, but is not highly developed. The fire burned at low intensity on the north and east flanks. The stand is predominantly ponderosa pine with some larch, but the fire’s effects resulted in very few snags that are within the area used for sledding.

Wildwood Campground: This campground is rustic with low development features. It contains six campsites that receive low use throughout the summer form March to November with most use occurring during fall hunting season. The facility received forest health thinning treatments to reduce mistletoe infestations in 2012. This treatment contributed positively to fire control efforts. Fire intensity immediately surrounding the campground was low to none. Stands left untreated along the FS Rd 2210 experienced various fire intensities leaving much higher mortality. No Danger tree mitigations are expected within the campground itself. However, there exist many fire prone danger trees exposing risk to accessing the campground from both the north and south along FS Rd 2210.


Alternative A

The recreational access and use to some facilities would be affected, both short and long term (1-10 years), due to higher risks associated with danger trees. As fire damaged mortality increases over time, so too would public risk exposure to these trees increase. Cougar Trail Head and Ochoco Divide Snow park are most at risk immediately within and adjacent to their facilities. Wildwood Campground is secondarily at risk due to high roadside mortality in accessing to the campground. Concern for public safety may conclude closure of roads or access to any of these facilities, greatly affecting the recreational opportunities they provide. Some displacement of recreational use, primarily from Wildwood Campground, would be expected if road closures are enacted in lieu of danger tree risk.


Recreation use across the Forest typically involves using travel routes while exploring more than one location. Therefore, it is expected that the typical visitor may be exposed to some degree of harvest and treatment activity such as short term hauling traffic, traffic flaggers and delays, noise from equipment, and smoke from burning when units are actively being treated. In periods following

199


treated units, the visitor may experience presence of slash piles until removed, and stumps. Visual signs of burned vegetation either broadcast or the remnant footprints of slash piles will mostly go unnoticed within the backdrop of a fire burned landscape from the Bailey Fire incident. Winter harvest activities could limit snowmobile access at Ochoco Divide Snow Park, but could largely accommodate most public recreational demand if harvest activity was limited from Monday through Thursdays when sufficient snow for snowmobiling exists.

There often is increased dispersed visitor use in burned areas for harvesting mushrooms for both personal and commercial use. If yields are noticeably productive, increased dispersed and developed recreation use may experience higher than normal occupancies. Facilities such as Cougar Trail Head and Wildwood would be particularly accommodating for parking and access to desirable mushroom harvests. Maintaining open public access to these facilities would potentially benefit more visitors.

Table 98 lists recreation facilities in the project area and adjacent proposed activities. Table 98. Developed recreation facilities in the Bailey Butte Fire project area.

Recreation Facility Unit #s Road Side Salvage Road No.

Cougar Trail Head #2 26-650 Marks Creek Sled Hill 2630 Wildwood Campground 2210 Ochoco Divide Snow Park

#9

Treatment would improve public safety by reducing danger trees both by road side salvage and treating units adjacent to high density use associated with developed recreation facilities. Some dispersed site users may be temporarily displaced due to loss of access during harvest and danger tree removal activities. This could increase camping use at other dispersed sites. Using developed campgrounds and heavily used dispersed sites for industrial camps would not be allowed. Visual evidence of treatment activities may be apparent to the casual forest visitor at or near some of these camping areas.

Recreational trail users would likely experience activities from unit #2 when being treated. Users could encounter noise, dust, smoke, and logging-related traffic, when these activities occur. Scenic quality would be enhanced as ponderosa pines develop longer term while opening views in the short term. Design elements have been incorporated in the project design to reduce effects to recreational users.

Cumulative Effects

Ochoco Summit Trail System EIS: The preferred alternative is for the Ochoco Summit Trail System EIS proposes limited OHV trails within the Bailey Butte Fire perimeter. Should OHV trails be constructed, it is unknown if or how much additional total use would result. There exists the possibility of increased OHV use in the vicinity of the development of these trails. Existing trail systems in Central Oregon has experienced increased use over time and have become a popular destination for local and out of area recreationists. It is likely that cumulative effects of thinning and burning would create a more open stand. This coupled with varied, but low gradient terrain will afford more accessible acres to OHV use.

Special Use Permits: There currently is one special use permit issued within the project area, Bandit Springs Horse Endurance Ride. The effects of the endurance ride are not expected to overlap with the effects of this project in space and time.

Cumulative effects of the proposed actions, when combined with other actions whose effects overlap with the effects of this project in space and time, are not likely to have adverse effects to the

200


recreation experience or opportunity. Displacement of recreational activity during project implementation would be short term and minimal and wouldn’t contribute effects to other locations.

Scenic Values

Introduction The Forest Plan allocated some areas to visual management, including corridors for retention (Highway 26 MA-F25), and Historic Summit Trail (MA-F7). These provide an abundance of opportunities for scenic vistas, wildlife viewing, access to dispersed and developed camping. Maintaining a natural appearance and protection of natural resources along these roads accommodate visitors seeking of natural scenery and to provide a high quality recreational experience. The general emphasis in these areas is to maintain the natural-appearing character of the forest.

Alternative A

The following excerpt was taken from Spears EIS Ochoco National Forest and is relevant today in understanding past conditions leading to the Bailey Butte Fire which now contains areas of high mortality and loss of vegetation due to fire’s effects.

The existing scenery has a variety of disturbed and undisturbed areas. Human-caused activities have altered the natural-appearing landscape. Diverse vegetation stands and species (with various age, size classes, and health conditions) can be found throughout the project area. These vegetation stands include: ponderosa pine, lodge pole pine, western larch, Douglas-fir, white fir, and riparian species.

Although the existing forest conditions may appear natural to a casual visitor, the forest conditions are not natural. Older trees are being suppressed by the densely stocked understory in many units due to the change in fire regime caused by fire suppression. Densely stocked forest and canopy closure, due to the lack of low intensity fire regime, has led to the loss of the open, park-like ponderosa pine stands historically found within the area. Overstocked and dense stands in parts of the project area have led to serious fire risk. The natural processes can no longer function as they did historically because of these dense stand conditions.

The competition for available space, nutrients, and the encroachment from shade-tolerant under stories is prevalent, especially along the travel and scenic corridors (within 0.25 miles). The depth-of-field view deep into the forest is restricted in locations to mostly the immediate foreground area of the landscape due to the high level of vegetation density.

The pre-fire dense mosaic has resulted in high tree mortality that has now resulted in danger trees. Not mitigating these stands with the No Action Alternative will have no immediate change to the landscape or foreground retention. However it is foreseeable that short and longer term changes would contribute to increased public danger which could limit public access. There also would not be any reforestation of desired tree species that could have benefited both the human and natural environment particularly where higher fire intensities resulted in loss of seed banks to provide a speedier vegetative recovery. As dead and dying trees fall they will be removed by public fire wood cutters that can travel anywhere within 600 feet off of a road with their vehicles and trailers any time of year their permits allow. This activity will be ongoing for years and will include all days of the week and season regardless of any other planned activities both human and natural. Commercial harvest would have been very short term and have had mitigations to protect resources and be limited to reduce conflict during weekends, holidays, events, nesting activity and other considerations.

201



The Forest visitor can expect to see stumpage, hand piles, and blackened woody debris from slash pile and harvest activity. With fewer standing snags and dying trees, field of view could be somewhat enhanced, allowing more topographic features to be observed. Dispersed Camp sites would see no change in the immediate use of the sites, but foreground and visual to roads may be more exposed.

Management activities would occur within the Scenic Corridors, within Retention and Partial Retention visual management allocations. The long term (5 years and longer) scenic quality within the treatment areas may improve slightly or would remain the same as the existing condition.

Casual observers may view cut stumps and slash piles within 600 feet of roadways. Short term effects of dust, noise, smoke and increased traffic are expected when these units are being treated. Visual, scenic and forest health objectives are expected to be longer term effects and enhance the natural setting. Travel access within the corridors will be available, but visitors may encounter log hauling traffic. Noise and activity of equipment is more limited and confined to the active unit at time of treatment.

Highway 26 Visual Corridor MA-F25 This visual corridor includes foreground viewing areas classified as retention. The emphasis is to maintain and enhance the scenery for travelers along US Highway 26 and to maintain the “big tree appearance.” Slash from fuel or vegetation treatment activity should be completed with project and not visible for more than one season. Silviculture objectives include managing mixed conifer with emphasis for maintaining western larch and provide views of distant landscapes, aspen stands, and rock outcrops.

Salvage Unit #2 borders Highway 26 for approximately two tenths (.2) of a mile just south of the Cougar Trail Head. This small segment to the highway corridor will only have a brief and limited exposure to the viewer. The unit experienced high mortality from greater fire intensities. Salvage removal is expected for mid to larger diameters within the unit, but smaller diameter trees will remain. Planting desirable species is expected within this unit which will expedite signs of forested recovery.

Historic Summit Trail MA-F7 A portion of the Historic Summit Trail resides in the current location of road 2630 within the Bailey Butte Fire project area. Ochoco National Forest land management plan designated this historic trail as “partial retention” emphasizing to protect the integrity of the Summit Trail. The visual management boundary will not exceed 600 feet either side of road. As stated in the Ochoco LRMP Desired Condition: “The Summit Trail will be a place where Forest visitors can enjoy the cultural and recreational resources offered in a visually pleasing environment. Vegetation may appear manipulated in widely dispersed areas in order to enhance the cultural and recreational resources, but will generally not dominate the landscape.”

Conclusion: Harvest units near scenic corridors are sparse and will not be visually dominant to the surrounding landscape view sheds. Danger tree salvage will be limited to the foreground view while retaining limited snags for wildlife. Improving public safety and access to the forest and recreation facilities will be enhanced both short and long term. Though harvest and salvage activities will be noticeable to those present during treatments, the activity will be relatively of short duration with after effects of stumps and slash piles slightly longer 1-5 years as forbs, brush and understory become established. Planting of desirable species in treated units will establish historical range of variability faster while providing aesthetic and environmental advantages over non treatment.

202


Evaluation of Wilderness Characteristics There is no stand-alone report for this section; this section was written directly to the EA.

The 7,789-acre Bailey Butte Fire project area comprises a variety of land allocations and land uses, including a Research Natural Area (RNA), an Old Growth Area within the RNA, developed recreation sites, and General Forest, in which a primary Forest Plan objective is programmed timber harvest. A well-used, paved highway (US Highway 26) crosses the project area, and the area contains Forest roads that are maintained for public access, as well as roads that are administratively closed but maintained in a condition suitable for use by Forest staff, range permittees, and others who require access to work areas.

There is no designated Wilderness or Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) within the project area. The closest Wilderness, Mill Creek, is about 1 mile from the project boundary at its nearest point. The closest IRA is located at Lookout Mountain and is about 3.5 miles from the project area.

Wilderness characteristics within the Bailey Butte Fire project area were evaluated based upon criteria in the Wilderness Act of 1964. Lightning-caused wildfire is a natural event and the presence of burned trees should affect neither the underlying naturalness of an area nor the availability of opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation; therefore, the evaluation of existing condition will focus on the landscape conditions that were present in the project area prior to the Bailey Butte fire as well as changes in the landscape that occurred during fire suppression activities.

Apparent naturalness of the project area; degree to which the area generally appears to be affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprints of man’s work substantially unnoticeable.

Generally, man’s work is substantially noticeable within the project area in the following instances:

• The Cumulative Effects section in this EA identified a variety of vegetation management project that have taken place within the project area in the last 30 years (see Table 10). Activities ranged from shelterwood cutting and understory thinning to reforestation to fuels reduction treatments and prescribed burning. Typically, vegetation management (especially timber harvest) requires a network of forest roads, skid trails and landings; many of these remain apparent on the landscape where management activities have taken place within the project area.

• Developed recreation opportunities in the project area are described in the “Recreation” section in Chapter 3 of this document. Ochoco Divide Campground and Ochoco Divide Snow Park are areas with substantial man-made alterations that are noticeable on the landscape; they do not appear natural. Cougar East Trailhead, Marks Creek Sledding Hill and Wildwood Campground are developed facilities, but are not highly developed; still, each involves some degree of amenities that reduce the apparent naturalness of the site.

• Fire suppression activities included creation of about 15 miles of dozer line and hand line, as well as felling of imminent hazards to protect the safety of firefighters. Postfire rehabilitation of firelines should reduce the appearance of man’s activities but is not likely to eliminate it in all cases. Generally hazard trees were felled along roads and near trailheads or other established staging areas where evidence of man’s work was already apparent.

Generally, man’s work is substantially unnoticeable in the project area in the following instances:

• The Ochoco Divide RNA, which encompasses about 1,900 acres within the project area, is an area within which natural process are allowed to occur (LRMP page 4-56). Human-caused changes to the ecosystem are not expected to be evident (LRMP page 4-57). Prior to the Bailey Butte fire, the RNA was fenced to exclude cattle, so that the effects of livestock grazing would not be evident.

203


• Areas of steep terrain within the project area generally have been excluded from vegetation management and are therefore areas where the imprints of man’s work are not noticeable.

According to the “Range” section in Chapter 3 of this document, the project area is within portions of six grazing allotments: Bear Creek cattle allotment, Crystal Springs cattle allotment, Elkhorn cattle allotment, Marks Creek cattle allotment, Snowshoe cattle allotment and Wildcat cattle allotment. Livestock grazing is permitted throughout the project area by domestic cattle which primarily utilize herbaceous vegetation. To facilitate the management of these allotments, water developments and fences have been constructed over the years. A majority of the water developments are associated with spring sources or stock ponds. Approximately 25 miles of fence lines and 10 water developments fall within the Bailey Butte Fire parameter. Generally range improvements are considered not to be substantially noticeable on the landscape (see FSH 1909.12, Ch. 71.22b).

Specialist reports for wildlife, plants, aquatics, and silviculture were completed for the Bailey Butte Fire project EA. Generally these indicate that the composition of plant and animal communities within the project area is consistent with what is described in the Forest Plan and what is natural for the area, based on plant associations identified described by Johnson and Clausnitzer (1992). Prior to the Bailey Butte fire, natural fuel loads and density of forest stands may have been higher than what would occur naturally, in the absence of human management. The project area included identified populations of invasive non-native plant species. These departures were not sufficient to be described as “substantially unnatural,” and the project area appears to reflect ecological conditions that would normally be associated with the area without human intervention.

The degree to which the project area has outstanding opportunities for solitude.

According to the “Transportation” section in this EA, there are approximately 65 miles of roads under Forest Service jurisdiction within the project area; the project area is also transected by US Highway 26. While not all roads in the project area are open for public use, most roads do see at least a moderate amount of public and/or administrative use annually. Use generally begins in spring and increases moderately through the summer, with peak use occurring in the late summer and fall, with deer and elk hunting seasons. Developed recreation sites, as described above, exist in the project area but represent a minor component of the total area. The “Recreation” section in this EA indicates that about 80% of all recreational use on the Ochoco National Forest is dispersed, and it is expected that recreational use within the project area is consistent with that estimate.

Beyond the road system and developed recreation sites, and possibly including those areas at some times, the project area provides a great deal of opportunity for solitude, particularly for forest visitors who are willing to venture beyond roads and developed areas. In particular, the Ochoco Divide RNA provides great opportunity for solitude as it has no roads or developed trails within its boundary (a nonmaintained historical trail does pass through the RNA).

The degree to which the project area has opportunities for a primitive and unconfined type of recreation.

While overnight camping and pack and saddle use are discouraged within the RNA (LRMP 4-182), the RNA does represent an area where primitive and unconfined day-use recreation is available. The RNA and the Old Growth Area within it are both within the “Semiprimitive Nonmotorized” Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS); while the remainder of the project area is within the “Roaded Natural” and “Roaded Modified or Rural” ROS, and are less likely to provide opportunities for primitive recreation. However, as previously indicated, some areas within the project area are largely unmodified by human activity due to topography and may provide opportunity for primitive recreation experience.

204


Effects to Wilderness Characteristics (all alternatives) Activities proposed in the Bailey Butte Fire project are limited in scope and scale and focused specifically on mitigating roadside hazards created by fire-killed trees and recovery of economic value from fire-killed trees in areas that are accessible by the existing road system. Therefore the project does not propose to modify areas of the landscape that previously did not show noticeable evidence of man’s work. Because the project would not construct roads or create access to areas that are currently not accessible by road, project activities would not affect opportunities for solitude or primitive recreation. Implementation of the project would create a short-term increase in traffic volume, human presence and noise while roadside hazards are being felled, general salvage units are being harvested, and logs are being hauled from the project area; this disturbance is expected to be limited to the late summer and early fall of 2015. Reforestation and riparian restoration activities would be expected to take place within five years of project implementation, and would be limited to specific areas that could easily be avoided by forest visitors; these activities would involve a short-term increase in forest workers and noise that would be limited to the immediate project areas.

Cumulative Effects Past projects whose affects overlap with the effects of this project in space and time have been addressed in the discussion of existing condition. The foreseeable federal action, implementation of the Ochoco Summit Trail System project (currently in the planning phase), would overlap a portion of the Bailey Butte Fire project area. Because the proposed motorized trail system would primarily utilize existing mixed-use roads and closed/decommissioned roads that are still evident on the landscape, it is unlikely to affect wilderness characteristics that are present within the project area. No cumulative effects are anticipated.

Climate Change There is no stand-alone report for this section; this section was written directly to the EA.

Introduction Climate change projections for the Pacific Northwest (PNW) include year-round warming temperatures, increased winter precipitation, and drier summers. In the next century, average annual temperature is expected to increase from between 3.3 to 9.7 degrees Fahrenheit, depending on global emissions scenarios, and is expected to increase the most during summer months (Mote et al. 2013). There is considerable disagreement across various climate models on the magnitude and direction of changes in precipitation regionally, but mean precipitation in the PNW is generally projected to increase in the winter, spring, and fall, while summer precipitation is projected to decrease (Karl et al. 2009). Due to increased temperatures and seasonal changes in precipitation, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2007) projects that worldwide, more areas will be affected by drought and precipitation will increasingly fall in the form of heavy rainfall events.

In the PNW, snowpack is projected to decrease in extent and duration, particularly at lower elevations (OCCRI 2010). Hydrologic response to climate change in watersheds with significant snowpack may be the most drastic; as warming would increase winter flows and advance the timing of spring snowmelt. By 2050, snowmelt is projected to shift 3 to 4 weeks earlier than the 20th century average (Barnett et al. 2005), and summer flows will be lower (Mote et al. 2013).

With earlier onset of summer conditions (due to warming temperatures, earlier snowmelt, and decreased summer precipitation), increased occurrence and severity of drought and fires, as well as greater vulnerability to insects and diseases can be expected (Mote et al. 2003). Warming is expected

205


to encourage northward expansion of southern insects and longer growing seasons would allow more insect generations per season.

The Forest Service does not have a national policy or guidance for managing carbon, and the tools for estimating carbon cycling and sequestration are not fully developed. Current direction for addressing climate change issues in project planning and the NEPA process is provided in the document Climate Change Considerations in Project Level NEPA Analysis (USFS 2009). This document outlines the basic considerations for assessing climate change in relation to project-level planning. Two types of climate change effects will be considered for this analysis:

• Effect of the proposed project on climate change, specifically effects to greenhouse gas emissions and carbon cycling. Examples include: pyrogenic emissions caused by prescribed burning, changes in biogenic emissions through thinning and forest management, avoidance of large pyrogenic emissions associated with wildfire through forest management, and carbon cycle alterations through reforestation and forest management.

• Effect of climate change on the proposed project. Examples include: effects of climate change on the seed stock selection for reforestation, potential changes in natural forest regeneration, and effects of decreased snow fall on recreation or stream flows.

The Forest Service mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the National forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations. The agency has developed the Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change (USFS 2008) because climate change threatens our ability to fulfill that mission. The framework, outlined in Table 99, describes several inter-related programs of the agency to help forests, grasslands, and humans mitigate and adapt to global climate change. Table 99. Seven goals to address climate change taken from the Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change (USFS 2008).

Foundational

Science - Advance our understanding of the environmental, economic, and social implications of climate change and related adaptation and mitigation activities on forests and grasslands. Education - Advance awareness and understanding regarding principles and methods for sustaining forests and grasslands, and sustainable resource consumption, in a changing climate.

Structural

Alliances - Establish, enhance, and retain strong alliances and partnerships with federal agencies, State and local governments, Tribes, private landowners, non-governmental organizations, and international partners to provide sustainable forests and grasslands for present and future generations. Policy - Integrate climate change, as appropriate, into Forest Service policies, program guidance, and communications and put in place effective mechanisms to coordinate across and within Deputy Areas.

Action

Sustainable Operations - Reduce the environmental footprint of Forest Service operations and be a leading example of a green organization. Adaptation - Enhance the capacity of forests and grasslands to adapt to the environmental stresses of climate change and maintain ecosystem services. Mitigation - Promote the management of forests and grasslands to reduce the buildup of greenhouse gases, while sustaining the multiple benefits and services of these ecosystems.

206


Existing Condition There is uncertainty about how the climate will change within the project area in the future. This portion of central Oregon has gone through at least five distinct periods of warming climate over the past 110 years (NASA 2013). This region has had an increase in mean annual temperature around 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit between 1920 and 2003 (OCAR 2010), only a small fraction of which can be attributed to natural (Pacific Decadal Oscillation and El Nino/Southern Oscillation) variability.

Lengthening of the fire season due to early snow melt and warmer summers appears to be causing a trend of larger and more frequent fires in the western US (Westerling et al. 2006). Throughout the next century, an increase in fire activity is expected in all major forest types in Oregon. Depending on the emissions scenario, forest area burned could increase by 180% to 300% by the end of the century (OCAR 2010). Over the past decade, Oregon’s forest area affected by mountain pine beetle has increased (ibid.). Warmer winters increases the survival of bark beetle, while also increasing the susceptibility of host trees as a result of increased drought stress.

There is an increasing focus on understanding the carbon cycle in forests as mitigation of anthropogenic emissions becomes increasingly important. Carbon stored in coniferous forests makes up more than one third of all terrestrial carbon (Kashian et al. 2006). Large forest disturbances, such as fire, and the recovery from disturbances are important to regional carbon cycling and may contribute significantly to changes in the carbon budget. Large wildfires cause a pulse of carbon emissions from combustion. Following fire, the net ecosystem productivity (NEP), or net carbon, is controlled primarily by heterotrophic respiration and net primary productivity (NPP), or net plant growth (Irvine et al. 2007). Eventually the carbon balance should reach zero as the forest is regenerated and carbon is sequestered. However, carbon imbalance can persist for over a century depending on the rate of forest regeneration and the amount of woody biomass left to decompose (Kashian et al. 2006).

Research on post-fire carbon pools in the Central Oregon shows that fire severity affects carbon fluxes in both ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests. Meigs and others (2009) found that although stand replacing fire caused more than 90% reduction in aboveground live carbon, NPP was only 40% lower in high severity stands versus low severity stands. This suggests a strong compensatory effect of non-tree vegetation often associated with stand replacing fire. However, if tree regeneration is reduced due to competition with shrubs and forbs, long-term carbon storage may be reduced during the fire cycle (Kashian et al. 2006). While post-disturbance NEP in some forest ecosystems (those not moisture or temperature limited, such as tropical systems) is dominated by respiration from composition of woody debris, dry forests have relatively slow rates of decay. Consequently, in Central Oregon, changes in NPP are more important in determining NEP (Irvine et al. 2007). Thus decreases in NPP associated with stand replacing fire may have regional carbon pool effects as fire is projected to increase in size and intensity.


Alternative A Effect of the proposed project on climate change

Under the no action alternative, all aboveground dead coarse woody debris, or necromass, would remain on site. While the majority of trees in the project area are already dead, a large portion of carbon is still stored in their intact boles. Over time, the carbon would slowly be released to the atmosphere as dead trees begin to decay and decompose.

Brush response cannot be precisely predicted, but from experience with other fires in Central Oregon and literature suggesting a positive correlation between fire severity and non-tree vegetation (Meigs et

207


al. 2009) it is likely that brush establishment will be high. Brush competition with tree seedlings may slow forest regeneration, and may cause the project area to act as a carbon source for several decades before carbon sequestration from tree growth exceeds carbon emissions from decomposition.

Effect of climate change on the proposed project

The effect of climate change on the project area is uncertain and depends on future emission scenarios. Predicted changes of warmer and drier summers may affect forest regeneration by causing drought stress on seedlings and saplings (Hanson et al. 2000). Under this alternative, planting may not occur as quickly as desirable and natural regeneration may incur more natural mortality due to changing climate. Lack of regeneration (artificial or natural) may cause prolonged periods of a brush-dominated successional stage.

Alternatives B and C Effect of the proposed project on climate change

The scope and degree of change from this action alternative is minor. The total area proposed for salvage (up to 900 acres) is a fraction of the forestland in the project area and on the Ochoco National Forest as a whole. A project of this magnitude would contribute minimally to regional greenhouse gases. Furthermore, at the global scale, the proposed action’s direct and indirect contribution to climate change would be negligible, and therefore the project’s cumulative effects on greenhouse gasses and climate change would also be negligible.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has summarized the contributions to climate change of global human activity sectors in its Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC 2007). From 1970 to 2004, the top three anthropogenic contributors to greenhouse gas emissions globally were fossil fuel combustion (56.6%), deforestation (17.3%), and agriculture/waste/energy (14.3%). The deforestation category is split into land use conversions and large scale deforestation. Deforestation is defined as removal of all live trees, most notably the conversion of forest into agricultural land or developed landscapes (IPCC 2000).

This project does not fall within any of these main contributors of greenhouse gas emissions. Forestland will not be converted to alternative land uses, but instead will be replanted to encourage and hasten successful regeneration of forest. The utilization of timber for lumber and other durable wood products should also be accounted for in the carbon budget. Life cycle analyses of wood, from forest to final product, show that carbon can be stored in wood products for hundreds of years (Hennigar et al. 2010). Additionally, the use of wood products for construction rather than fossil fuel intensive concrete and steel has positive carbon implications (Perez-Garcia et al. 2005). This alternative aims to positively affect regional carbon pools by sequestering carbon in the form of new forests (reforestation) and the utilization of dead timber for wood products. Some fossil fuel emissions associated with heavy equipment and vehicles would occur, but not to the extent and degree that would contribute to global carbon pools.

Effect of climate change on the proposed project

Though the effects of climate change to this project are difficult to predict, general trends and predictions show warmer, drier summers and increasing occurrence and severity of wildfires. This alternative may have short term effects on fuel quantity and arrangement. Salvage logging has been shown to immediately increase fine woody debris above the level of debris in unsalvaged stands, due to logging activity and slash (Donato et al. 2006, Monstano et al. 2007). Most scientific literature related to salvage logging studies short-term effects, including most literature on re-burn potential in fire-salvaged stands. Monsanto and Agee (2007) used a chronosequence of fire in eastern Washington to demonstrate the longer term effects of salvage logging on fuels. After about 10 years, the level of coarse woody debris in unsalvaged stands exceeded that of debris in salvaged stands (ibid). While the

208


initial increase in fine fuels after salvage may seem risky, perhaps the more important determinant of re-burn potential is the dense early successional vegetation (young trees and dense shrubs) that will dominate the project area for several decades. Reforestation after salvage may increase the ability of a forested stand to establish more quickly.

Other Disclosures Civil Rights and Environmental Justice There have been no issues or concerns raised regarding the interests of Native American Tribes.

There are no known direct, indirect or cumulative effects to Native Americans, minority groups, women, or civil rights beyond effects disclosed in the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.

Executive Order 12898 on environmental justice requires federal agencies to identify and address any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low income populations. The action alternatives would have no disproportionately high or adverse effects to minority or disadvantaged groups qualifying under the environmental justice order. Scoping raised no issues or concerns related to the principles of environmental justice. Implementation of either action alternative would not cause disproportionately high and adverse human health effects, high or adverse environmental effects, substantial environmental hazard or effects to differential patterns of consumption of natural resources. All interested parties will continue to be involved with commenting on the project and the decision making process.

Congressionally Designated Areas No congressionally designated areas such as Wilderness or Wild and Scenic Rivers would be affected by the proposed activities, as there are none in the project area.

Prime Farm and Forest Lands and Wetlands The Secretary of Agriculture issued Memorandum 1827, which is intended to protect prime farmlands and rangelands. The project area does not contain any prime farmlands or rangelands. Prime forestland is not applicable to lands within the National Forest System. National Forest System lands would be managed with consideration of the impacts on adjacent private lands; if prime forestlands exist on adjacent private land, they are unlikely to be affected by the proposed activities due to the limited scope and scale. There would be no direct, indirect or cumulative adverse effects to these resources; thus, the project complies with the Farmland Protection Act and Departmental Regulation 9500-3, “Land Use Policy.”

Compliance with Forest Plan Direction The alternatives are consistent with the goals, objectives and direction contained in the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, and its accompanying Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision, as amended.

PACFISH and INFISH All action alternatives would be consistent with the Ochoco National Forest Plan. The application of all BMPs to mitigate sediment effects would be required under all action alternatives. The Project

209


Design Criteria designed for this project will also ensure that harmful effects to water quality and fisheries resources will be properly and rapidly addressed.

A review of the standards and guidelines provided in INFISH and PACFISH found that activities in the Bailey Butte Fire Timber Salvage are within INFISH and PACFISH requirements and direction. Following are INFISH/PACFISH standards and guidelines appropriate to this project and a brief description of how these standards and guidelines will be met.

Timber Management

TM-1 (a-c): Where catastrophic events such as fire, flooding, volcanic, wind, or insect damage result in degraded riparian conditions, allow salvage and fuelwood cutting in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas only where present and future woody debris needs are met, where cutting would not retard or prevent attainment of other Riparian Management Objectives, and where adverse effects can be avoided to inland and anadromous native fish. For priority watersheds, complete watershed analysis prior to salvage cutting in RHCAs.

Bailey Butte Fire project does not propose harvest in the RHCAs with the exception of the two areas in Nature Creek and Camp Creek (see “Hydrology and Aquatic Species” section in this EA). The project fisheries biologist determined that the treatment of these two areas would not retard or prevent attainment of RMOs in these areas.

Roads Management

RF-2 (a-f): For each existing or planned road, meet the RMOs and avoid adverse effect to inland and anadromous native fish.

No new roads are proposed for the project. All action alternatives will not retard or prevent attainment of the Riparian Management Objectives as long as the appropriate Project Design Criteria and BMPs are implemented for existing roads.

RF-3 (a-c): Determine the influence of each road on the Riparian Management Objectives.

No roads are proposed for closure. All action alternatives will not retard or prevent attainment of the Riparian Management Objectives as long as the appropriate Project Design Criteria and BMPs are implemented for roads.

RF-5: Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish-bearing streams.

No new road crossings are proposed for the project.

General Riparian Area Management

RA-2: Trees may be felled in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on site when needed to meet woody debris objectives.

No timber harvest is proposed in the RHCA with the exception of the two areas in Nature and Camp Creek (see “Hydrology and Aquatic Species” section in this EA). Any trees posing a safety risk in the RHCA will be felled and left on site. In addition, six miles of directional tree felling is proposed to enhance LWM

Watershed and Habitat Restoration

WR-1: Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the long-term ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserve the genetic integrity of native species, and contributes to attainment of the Riparian Management Objectives.

Six miles of riparian planting and six miles of directional tree felling are proposed in the action alternatives. As discussed in the Effects section, both treatments are anticipated to

210


provide faster recovery in areas which experienced high severity burn from the Bailey Butte fire. These treatments would contribute to the attainment of the RMOs.

Fish and Wildlife Restoration

FW-1: Design and implement fish and wildlife habitat restoration and enhancement actions in a manner that contributes to attainment of the RMOs.

The action alternatives propose six miles riparian planting and six miles of direction tree fell to replace LWM. As discussed in the Effects section, both treatments are anticipated to provide a beneficial effect which would contribute to attainment of the RMOs.

Consistency with Wildlife Standards and Guidelines Cavity Nesters

Wildlife standards and guidelines for cavity nester habitat are on pages 4-243 to 4-245 and on 4-261 to 4-263 of the LRMP. These standards and guidelines were developed at a time when the Ochoco National Forest was still practicing regeneration harvest methods in order to provide a minimum level of existing and future snag habitat in association with harvest units that would otherwise have very limited potential to provide snag habitat due to harvest intensity. The LRMP prescribes various levels by management area (LRMP Table 4-39) in order to meet a forest-wide objective of 47%. The management area standards displayed on 4-39 of the LRMP prescribe snag levels between 40% (General Forest) and 100% (Research Natural Areas) for this project area. The levels in the LRMP are based on the presumption that viable populations would be supported with 20% of maximum population potential, but that effective populations would be achieved with snag levels at or above 40% of maximum population potential (Thomas, 1979). Table 18 in Thomas, 1979, indicates that 40% is equivalent to 5 snags/100 acres > 20” plus 55 snags/100 acres 12 to 20” plus 30 snags/100 acres 10 to 12” for a total of 90 snags/100 acres (or 0.9 total snags/acre). The snag numbers for 100% of maximum potential population are distributed across the same size classes and add up to 225 snags/100 acres (or 2.25 total snags/acre). The LRMP was amended with Regional Office approval of the Ochoco Viable Ecosystems Management Guide (VEMG) in 1994. In that document snag prescriptions are stratified to better fit site potential and the historic range of variability (HRV). Stand level guidelines are provided for each Plant Association Group (PAG) and each seral stage within each PAG. Generally stand replacement areas (such as in the proposed harvest units) are considered to be early seral. The VEMG recommendations for early seral conditions are as follows: moist grand fir and dry grand fir PAGs: 2 to 6 snags <20” and 0.2 to 2 snags >20” per acre; Douglas-fir PAG: 2 to 6 snags <20” and 0.2 to 2 snags >20” per acre; low site (dry) ponderosa pine PAG: 0.1 to 1 snag >20” where available; western juniper PAG: 0.1 to 1 snag >12” where available. In 1995 the Regional Forester amended Forest Plans east of the spotted owl range. This Regional Forester’s Plan Amendment #2 is known as Eastside Screens. Though the Bailey Butte Project occurs within area for which this amendment applies, this interim guidance is for management of timber sales in late and old structure (LOS) forests. The Decision Notice for the Eastside Screens state that the interim direction does not apply to post-fire salvage with incidental green volume outside of currently mapped old growth, or to sales to protect health and safety (USFS 1995). All harvest activities proposed in Alternatives A and B are exempted from the Eastside Screens.

The snag retention guidelines displayed in Table 8 meet or exceed the snag retention recommendations in VEMG and the LRMP. The project is consistent with the Ochoco LRMP, as amended.

Species Associated with Dead and Down Logs

Wildlife standards and guidelines for species associated with dead and down logs are on page 4-249. The LRMP prescribes two uncharred logs per acre at least 20’ in length and at least 12 inches in

211


diameter. The LRMP was amended with Regional Office approval of the Ochoco Viable Ecosystems Management Guide (VEMG) in 1994. In that document large woody debris prescriptions are stratified to better fit site potential and the historic range of variability (HRV). Stand level guidelines are provided for each Plant Association Group (PAG) and each seral stage within each PAG. Generally stand replacement areas (such as in the proposed harvest units) are considered to be early seral. The VEMG guide states that down wood recruitment will come from residual large sized trees and future inputs from competition and subsequent mortality of the new dominant canopy layer (all PAGs). The VEMG recommendations for early seral conditions for stands with small, medium and large live tree sizes are: moist grand fir PAG: 2 to 8 down trees per acre of size representative of the dominant canopy layer; dry grand fir and Douglas-fir PAGs: 1 to 5 down trees per acre of size representative of the dominant canopy layer. For ponderosa pine PAGs pines trees are late seral and the VEMG recommendation is 0 to 1 down log per acre. In the western juniper PAG VEMG recommendations are 0 to 1 down log per acre.

In 1995 the Regional Forester amended Forest Plans east of the spotted owl range. This Regional Forester’s Plan Amendment #2 is known as Eastside Screens. Though the Bailey Butte Project occurs within area for which this amendment applies, this interim guidance is for management of timber sales in late and old structure (LOS) forests. The Decision Notice for the Eastside Screens state that the interim direction does not apply to post-fire salvage with incidental green volume outside of currently mapped old growth, or to sales to protect health and safety (USFS 1995). All harvest activities proposed in Alternatives A and B are exempted from the Eastside Screens. The existing down wood retention guidelines combined with the anticipated snag fall over the 6,967 acres within the Bailey Butte fire perimeter that will not have harvest or hazard reduction, will result in down wood levels that will far exceed the snag retention levels described in VEMG and the LRMP. It is expected that where down wood levels have not already been met within treatment units, they will be within the first decade. The project is consistent with the Ochoco LRMP, as amended.

Management Indicator Species Effects to management indicator species identified in the Ochoco Forest Plan were analyzed (see “Hydrology and Aquatic Species” and “Wildlife” sections of this EA, as well as the specialists’ reports associated with those sections; specialists’ reports are located in the project file at the Ochoco National Forest, Prineville, Oregon). The proposed action would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Ochoco National Forest for any Management Indicator Species. With the Project Design Criteria and snag retention guidelines, the proposed action is consistent with the Forest Plan, as amended.

Compliance with Other Policies, Plans and Jurisdictions NEPA at 40 CFR 1502.25(a) directs “to the fullest extent possible, agencies shall prepare draft environmental impact statements concurrently with and integrated with …other environmental review laws and executive orders.”

National Forest Management Act To ensure consistency with the National Forest Management Act, the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended, was consulted. The Forest Plan contains several standards and guidelines that apply forest-wide or to specific management areas. Both forest-wide and management area specific standards and guidelines were reviewed. All alternatives were designed to be consistent with the Ochoco Forest Plan, as amended.

212


National Environmental Policy Act NEPA establishes the format and content requirements of environmental analysis and documentation. The entire process of preparing the environmental assessment was undertaken to comply with NEPA.

National Historic Preservation Act A cultural resource inventory has been completed for the project area. The activities in the preferred alternative have been designed to have no effect on historic properties through both protection and avoidance measures. The project review for cultural resources under the terms of the 2004 Programmatic Agreement between the Region 6 Forest Service, Oregon State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council for Historic Properties was signed on November 19, 2014. Under the terms of that agreement, the Bailey Butte Fire Project (aka “Bailey Butte Timber Salvage and Hazard Tree EA) meets criteria for a Historic Properties Avoided determination. Based on these findings, the project complies with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

Endangered Species Act Biological Evaluations have been prepared to document possible effects of proposed activities on threatened and endangered species in the Bailey Butte Fire project area. No endangered species are known to occur on the Ochoco National Forest.

The endangered gray wolf has potential habitat in the Bailey Butte project area. Wolves have been known to pass through Ochoco National Forest. There are no established packs on the Forest or near this project area. See discussion in the “Wildlife” section of this EA for more information.

Threatened aquatic species that are known or suspected to occur on the Ochoco National Forest include bull trout and Middle Columbia River steelhead trout. There would be no effect to bull trout or bull trout critical habitat; there would also be no effect to Middle Columbia River steelhead trout or their critical habitat.

Due to the proximity of Middle Columbia River steelhead trout critical habitat to the Bailey Butte Fire Project area, the Biological Evaluation for aquatic species initially suggested that the action alternatives “May Affect but are not likely to Adversely Affect” Middle Columbia River steelhead trout. Stacey Forson, Supervisor of the Ochoco National Forest (ONF), initiated formal consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) and submitted a biological assessment (BA) for review on April 9, 2015. Since then there have been numerous phone conversations (04/16/15, 04/24/15 and 05/07/15) between NOAA Senior Fisheries Biologist Randy Tweten and ONF fisheries biologist Jennifer Mickelson regarding the effects of the project on Mid-Columbia River steelhead and its critical habitat. Based on these discussions and in agreement with NOAA Fisheries, the ONF changed the effects call from “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” to “No Effect.” This decision was based on the following rationale:

• No critical habitat is within the project area (the closest critical habitat is 0.3 miles from the project area).


• Implementation of PDCs and BMPs would reduce sediment delivery to stream to less than the modeled amounts and help protect hydrology and aquatic species.

• Due to the need to quickly harvest fire-killed trees, the project is expected to be implemented during the summer of 2015 and during the instream work window for Mid-

213


Columbia River steelhead, which means the critical time for steelhead protection will occur outside of project implementation.

• The proposed action is small in scale compared to the entire project area (300 acres of postfire salvage harvest and hazard tree removal along 19 miles of road, compared to a project area of approximately 7800 acres).


• Streams in the project area have no documented occurrence of steelhead. The sizes of the streams in the Bailey Butte Fire project area are small and not suitable habitat for steelhead trout.

Forest Supervisor Forson withdrew the BA and request for formal consultation via written communication on May 12, 2015; on May 13, 2015 the ONF received an email from Randy Tweten of NOAA Fisheries; Mr. Tweten indicated that the ONF’s decision to change the effects call was appropriate based on the rationale described above.

See discussion in the “Hydrology and Aquatic Species” section of this EA for more information regarding the analysis of effects to aquatic species.

The Clean Water Act The objective of the Clean Water Act (CWA) is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of all waters to protect the Beneficial Uses as documented according to criteria by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ 2010). A beneficial use is a resource or activity that would be directly affected by a change in water quality or quantity.

To help implement the objectives of the Clean Water Act, Oregon has developed and adopted water quality standards. Water quality standards include beneficial uses, narrative and numeric criteria, and antidegradation policies. Standards are designed to protect the most sensitive beneficial use within a water body. A determination that water quality is impaired can be based on: evidence of a numeric criterion exceedance; evidence of a narrative criterion exceedance; evidence of a beneficial use impairment; or evidence of a declining trend in water quality such that it would exceed a standard prior to the next listing period (ODEQ 2010).

The analysis disclosed in the “Hydrology and Aquatic Species” section of this EA (starting on page 72) indicates that the project is in compliance with the Clean Water Act.

The Clean Air Act Both proposed action alternatives are designed to be consistent with the Clean Air Act. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is responsible for assuring compliance with the Clean Air Act. In 1994, the Forest Service, in cooperation with DEQ, the Oregon Department of Forestry, and the BLM signed a Memorandum of Understanding to establish a framework for implementing an air quality program in Northeast Oregon. The Memorandum of Understanding includes a prescribed fire emission limit of 15,000 tons of PM-10 per year for the Malheur, Ochoco, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman national forests. All prescribed burning on these forests is coordinated with DEQ through the State of Oregon smoke management program. Only Alternative B includes pile burning; if implemented this alternative would be conducted in compliance with the State of Oregon Smoke Management System and would meet smoke management objectives for total emissions. See the Fuels discussion in this EA (page 191).

214


The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 The purpose of this Act is to establish an international framework for the protection and conservation of migratory birds. The Act makes it illegal, unless permitted by regulations, to “pursue, hunt, take, capture, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, including in this Convention…for the protection of migratory birds…or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird” (16 USC 703). The original 1918 statute implemented the 1916 Convention between the United States and Great Britain (for Canada). Later amendments implemented treaties between the Unites States and Mexico, Japan, and the Soviet Union (now Russia).

Effects to bird species listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act are described in the “Wildlife” section of the Bailey Butte Fire Project. The project is in compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Short-term uses of the human environment and the maintenance of long-term productivity NEPA requires consideration of “the relationship between short-term uses of man’s environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity” (40 CFR 1502.16). As declared by the Congress, this includes using all practicable means and measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans (NEPA Section 101).

The stability of the toe slopes of the dormant landslide terrain along the creeks will be protected and maintained through the use of riparian buffers. Reducing slope erosion, due to mass wasting, will serve to maintain long-term productivity of the land.

Unavoidable Adverse Effects All of the alternatives considered result in some adverse effects. Many of these adverse effects would be minimized through implementation of design criteria and resource protection measures identified in this EA or through mitigation measures. Even with implementing these measures, there would still be adverse effects that cannot be avoided.

Soils Additional detrimental soil conditions are expected as a result of implementing any of the action alternatives. The use of ground-based tractor logging would result in additional compaction and displacement. The design criteria described in this EA provide resource protection measures to minimize these unavoidable adverse effects. The alternatives were designed to limit the amount of detrimental soil conditions consistent with R6 Supplement 2500-98-1 (Regional Guidelines), effective August 24, 1998.

On temporary roads, the road surface can be revegetated, but soil productivity is reduced because of compaction. These adverse effects to soils cannot be avoided.

Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds) The potential for introduction and spread of noxious weeds exists under every alternative considered, including no action. A noxious weed risk assessment concluded that the potential for introducing and spreading noxious weeds cannot be completely avoided. Both action alternatives create conditions

215


that are conducive to the introduction and spread of noxious weeds. Implementation of design criteria and resource protection measures would minimize these adverse effects. However, proposed activities would result in conditions conducive to the introduction and spread of noxious weeds.

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources Irreversible commitments of resources are those that cannot be regained, such as the extinction of a species or the removal of mined ore. Irretrievable commitments are those that are lost for a period of time such as the temporary loss of timber productivity in forested areas that are kept clear for use as a power line rights-of-way or road.

Irreversible commitments are decisions affecting nonrenewable resources such as soils, wetlands, roadless areas, and cultural resources. Such commitments are considered irreversible because the resource has deteriorated to the point that renewal can occur only over a long period of time or at great expense or because the resource has been destroyed or removed.

Removing aggregate (gravel) from mineral material sources would result in an irreversible commitment of resources. Once aggregate is removed from material source sites and placed on roads, it cannot be renewed except over long periods of time.

Irretrievable commitments of natural resources involve the loss of production or use of resources. This represents opportunities foregone for the period of time that the resource cannot be used.

Fire-killed timber that is not proposed for salvage at this time presents an irretrievable loss of potential economic recovery.

216


List of Preparers Ramon Alonso, Transportation Planner

Marcy Anderson, Team Leader, Environmental Coordinator

Christian Benedict, Forester

Dino Borghi, Geographic Information System Specialist (GIS)

Jim David, Soils Scientist

Vickie Dunaway, Timber Appraiser

Krista Farris, Botanist

Jeff Finley, Forester

Carrie Gordon, Geologist

Ron Gregory, Archaeologist

Diane Hopster, Hydrologist

Becky Kreachbaum, Silviculturist

Kent Koeller, Recreation Planner

Jennifer Mickelson, Fisheries Biologist

Christine Pyle, Fisheries Biologist

Dede Steele, Wildlife Biologist

Bryan Scholz, Fuels Planner

217


References Acton, S. 2003. Fire Severity and Salvage Logging Effects on Exotics in Ponderosa Pine dominated

forests. Poster session. Payette National Forest, New Meadows, Idaho and Forest Sciences Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_p029/rmrs_p029_443_475.pdf

Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire Ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Island Press. Washington, DC. Pages 53-74, 113-186, 320-408.

Altman, B. 2000. Conservation Strategy For Landbirds in the Northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington. Oregon-Washington Partners In Flight.

AOU (American Ornithologists’ Union). 1983. Checklist of North American Birds. 6th Edition.

Am. Ornithology Union. Washington DC.Asher, J.E., Dewey, S., Johnson, C., Olivarez, J. 2001. Reducing the spread of invasive exotic plants following fire in western forests, deserts, and grasslands. In: Galley, Krista. E. M.; Wilson, Tyrone P., eds. Proceedings of the invasive species workshop: The role of fire in the control and spread of invasive species; Fire conference 2000: the first national congress on fire ecology, prevention, and management; 2000 November 27 - December 1; San Diego, CA. Misc. Publ. No. 11. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 102-103. Abstract. (40681)

Belt, G.H., J. O’Laughlin, and T. Merrill. June 1992. Design of Forest Riparian Buffer Strips for the Protection of Water Quality: Analysis of Scientific Literature. University of Idaho. Idaho Forest, Wildlife and Range Policy Analysis Group. Report No. 8.

Bent, A.C. 1938. Life histories of North American birds of prey. Part 2. US National Museum. Bulletin 170. Reprinted by Dover Publications, New York.

Beschta, R.L., et. al. 2004. Postfire Management on Forested Public Lands of the Western United States. Conservation Biology 18: 957-967.

Bjornn, T.C., and D.W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. In Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats. Edited by William R. Meehan. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19:83-138.

Brown, E.R. 1985. Management of wildlife and fish habitats in forests of western Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, Oregon.

Brown, J.K., E.D. Reinhardt, and K.A. Kramer. 2003. Coarse Woody Debris: Managing Benefits and Fire Hazard in the Recovering Forest. (U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, UT), RMRS-GTR-105.

Brown, J.K. and J.K. Smith, Eds. 2000. Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on flora. Gen Tech Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol.2. Ogden, UT: S.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. P. 28, 151-152.

Brunsfeld, S. and Johnson, D. 1985. Field Guide to the Willows of East-Central Idaho. Forest, Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station. University of Idaho. Moscow, ID.

Bull, E.L. and R.C. Beckwith. 1993. Diet and foraging behavior of Vaux’s swifts in northeastern Oregon. Condor 95:1016-1023.Beschta RL, Bilby RE, Brown GW, Holtby LB, Hofstra TD. 1987. Stream temperature and aquatic habitat: fisheries and forestry interactions. In Streamside Management: Forestry and Fishery Interactions, Salo EO, Cundy TW (eds). Institute of Forest Resources, University of Washington: Seattle, WA; 191–232.

218

http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_p029/rmrs_p029_443_475.pdf


Bull, E.L. and R.S. Holthausen. 1993. Habitat use and management of pileated woodpeckers in northeastern Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 57(2):335-345.

Bull, E.L., G. Parks, and T.R. Torgersen. 1997. Trees and logs important to wildlife in the Interior Columbia River basin. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-391. Portland, OR: Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; 55 p.

Cahall, R.E. and J.P. Hayes. 2009. Influences of postfire salvage logging on forest birds in the Eastern Cascades, Oregon, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 257: 1119-1128.

Collins, B.M., G.Roller, and S.L. Stephens. 2011. Fire and fuels at the landscape level. Plumas Lassen Study: 2010 Annual Report. U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Davis, CA. (Module of the 2010 report).

Cordova, J.J. 1995. Streamside forest, channel constraint, large woody debris characteristics, and pool morphology in low order streams, Blue Mountains, Oregon. M.S. thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 143 p.

Croke, J.C. and P.B. Hairsine. 2006. Sediment delivery in managed forests: a review. Environmental Review. 14: 59-87.

Cushman, K. and R. Huff. 2007. Conservation Assessment for Fungi included in the Forest Service Regions 5 and 6 Sensitive and BLM California, Oregon and Washington Special Status Species Program. Portland, Oregon. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/species-index/flora-fungi.shtml.Conner, R.N., et. al. 1975. Woodpecker Nesting Habitat in Cut and Uncut Woodlands in Virginia. The Journal of Wildlife Management Vol. 39, No. 1 (Jan., 1975), pp. 144-150D’Antonio, C. M. 2000. Fire, plant invasions, and global changes. Pages 65–93 in H. A. Mooney and R. J. Hobbs,editors. Invasive species in a changing world. Island Press, Covelo, California, USA.

Dahms, W.G. 1949. How long do ponderosa pine snags stand? Research Notes, No. 57. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Deschutes Branch.

DeGraaf, Richard M. and John H. Rappole. 1995. Neotropical Migratory Birds: Natural History, Distribution, and Population Change. Cornell Univ. Press. 676 pp.

Denton, S. J. 1976. Status of prairie falcons breeding in Oregon. M. S. Thesis. Oregon State University. Corvallis, Oregon.

Dewey, R. 2011. Conservation Strategy for Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii. Ochoco National Forest. Prineville, OR.

Dewey, R, 2012. Mycorrhizal fungi: Biological/ecological information and effects of selected types of forest management actions. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/planning-tools/#fungi

Dixon, R.D. 1995. Ecology of white-headed woodpeckers in the central Oregon Cascades. Masters Thesis. Univ. Idaho. 148 pp.DiTomaso, J.M. 1997. Risk analysis of various weed control methods. Proc., California Exotic Pest Plant Council Symposium 3:34-39.

DiTomaso J.M. 2000. Invasive Weeds in Rangelands. Weed Science 48:255-265.

Donato, D.C, J. B. Fontaine, J.L. Campbell, W.D. Robinson, J.B. Kauffman, and B.E. Law. 2009. Conifer Regeneration in stand-replacement portions of a large mixed-severity wildfire in the Klamath-Siskiyou Mountains. Can. J. Forest Resources 39(4).

Duff, Donald A. 1979. Riparian habitat recovery on Big Creek, Rich County, Utah. In: Proc., Forum-Grazing and Riparian/Stream Ecosystems. Trout Unlimited Inc.

219

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/species-index/flora-fungi.shtml

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/species-index/flora-fungi.shtml

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/planning-tools/%23fungi


Elliot, W.J. 2000. Impact of roads and other corridors. Chapter 9 in: G. Dissmeyer (ed.). Drinking Water from Forests and Grasslands - A Synthesis of the Scientific Literature. USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station General Technical Report SRS-39: 85-100.

Elliot, W. J. and D. E. Hall. 2010. Disturbed WEPP Model 2.0. Ver. 2011.11.22. Moscow, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Online at <http://forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu/fswepp>.

Elmore, W. 1992. Riparian Responses to Grazing Practices in: Naiman,. Robert J., ed. Watershed management. New York, NY: Springer Verlag: 442-. 457.

Everett, R., J. Lehmkuhl, R. Schellhaas, P. Ohlson, D. Keenum, H. Riesterer, and D. Spurbeck. 1999. Snag dynamics in a chronosequence of 26 wildfires on the east slope of the Cascade Range in Washington state, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire 9(4): 223-234.

Fiedler, P.L. 1987. Life History and Population Dynamics of Rare and Common Mariposa Lilies (Calochortus Pursh: Lilliaceae). Journal of Ecology 75: 977-995.

Fowler, J.F. and C.H. Sieg. 2004. Post fire mortality of ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir: a review of methods to predict tree death. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-132. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 25 p.

Franklin, J.F. et. al. 1981. Ecological characteristics of old-growth Douglas-fir forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-118. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, Oregon. Fiedler, P.L. 1986. Concepts of Rarity in Vascular Plant Species, with Special Reverence to the Genus Calochortus Pursh (Lilliaceae). Taxon. 35 (3): p. 511.

Franklin, J.F. and J.K. Agee. 2003. Forging a Science-Based National Forest Fire Policy. Issues in Science and Technology Online. Fall 2003.

Freeman, J.P., T.J. Stohlgren, M.E. Hunter, P.N. Omi, E.J. Martinson, G.W. Chong, and C.S. Brown. 2007. Rapid assessment of postfire plant invasions in coniferous forests of the western United States. Ecological Applications 17(6): 1656-1665.

Gamperl, A.K., Rodnick, K.J., Faust, H.A., Venn, E.C., Bennett, M.T., Crawshaw, L.I., Keeley, E.R., Powell, M.S., and Li, H.W. 2002. Metabolism, swimming performance, and tissue biochemistry of high desert redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp.): evidence for phenotypic differences in physiological function. Physiol Biochem Zool 75(5): 413-431.

Gomi, T., R. D. Moore, et al. (2005). "Suspended sediment dynamics in small forest streams of the Pacific Northwest." Journal of the American Water Resources Association 41(4): 877-898.

Goode, J.R., Luce, C.H., Buffington, J.M., 2012. Enhanced sediment delivery in a changing climate in semi-arid mountain basins: implications for water resource management and aquatic habitat in the northern Rocky Mountains. Geomorphology 139–140, 1–15.

Grace, J. M. III Ph.D. 2003. "Minimizing the impacts of the forest road system." In: Proceedings of the conference 34 international erosion control association; ISSN 1092-2806. [Place of publication unknown]: International Erosion Control Association: 301-310.http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/ja/ja_grace011.pdf

Gregory, S.V., F.J. Swanson, W.A. McKee, and K.W. Cummins. 1991. An ecosystem perspective of riparian zones. Bioscience 41:540-551.

Gresswell, R.E. 1999. Fire and Aquatic Ecosystems in Forest Biomes of North America. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. Volume 128, Number 2. 193-221.

Haak, B. A. (1982). Foraging ecology of Prairie Falcons in northern California.

220

http://forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu/cgi-bin/engr/library/searchpub.pl?pub=2000v


Haggard, M. and W.L. Gaines. 2001. Effects of stand-replacement fire and salvage logging on a cavity-nesting bird community in eastern Cascades, Washington. Northwest Science 57(4):387-396.

Hayden, J., G. Ardt, M. Fleming, T.W. Keegan, J. Peek, T.O. Smith, and A. Wood. 2008. Habitat Guidelines for Mule Deer: Northern Forest Ecoregion. Mule Deer Working Group, Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. USA.

Hejl, S.J. 1994. Human-induced changes in bird populations in coniferous forests in western North America during the past 100 year. In Studies in Avian Biology. Cooper Ornithological Society; 15:232-246 In: Wisdom, Michael J.;Richard S.; Wales, Barbara C.; Hargis, Christina D.; Saab, Victoria.; Lee, Danny C.; Hann, Wendel J.; Rich, Terrell D.; Rowland, Mary M.; Murphy, Wally J.; Eames, Michele R. 2000. Source Habitats for Terrestrial Vertebrates of Focus in the Interior Columbia Basin: Broad-Scale Trends and Management Implications. Volume 2-Group level results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-485. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 3 vol. (Quigley, Thomas M., tech. ed.; Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: scientific assessment).

Hejl, S. and M. McFadzen. 2000. Maintaining fire-associated bird species across forest landscapes in the northern Rockies. Summary Report. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 14p.

Holechek, Jerry L., Rex D. Pieper, Carlton H. Herbel. 2001. Range Management Principles and Practices, 4th edition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey. P. 254.

Hollenbeck, J.P., V.A. Saab, and R.W. Frenzel. 2010. Habitat suitability and nest survival of white-headed woodpeckers in unburned forests in Oregon. J. Wildl. Manage 75(5):1061-1071.Harvey, A. 1991. Organic Matter Function in the Western Montane Forest Soil System, Deborah Page-Dumroese, Al Harvey, Martin Jurgensen and Russell Graham; In the proceedings of The Management and Production of Western Montane Forest Soils, Boise, Idaho; USDA-Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, General Technical Report INT-280.

Ice, G.G. 2001. How direct solar radiation and shade influences temperature in forest streams and relaxation of changes in stream temperature. Cooperative Monitoring Evaluation Research (CMER) workshop. Heat transfer processes in forested 162 watersheds and their effects on surface water temperature. Lacy, Washington.

Isaacs, F. B., and R. R. Opp. Distribution and productivity of golden eagles in Oregon, 1965-1982. Oregon Birds 17.2 (1991): 40.

Isaacs, F. B. 2001. Midwinter Bald Eagle Survey for Oregon from 1988-2001. Oregon Eagle Foundation.

Jackman, S.M. 1974. Woodpeckers of the Pacific Northwest: their characteristics and their role in the forests. M.S. thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

Janes, Stewart W. 1975. Raptor Breeding Ecology of the Clarno Basin and Anteope Valley, Oregon.

Johnsgard, Paul A. 1990. Hawks, Eagles and Falcons of North America. Washington D.C. Smithsonian Institute Press.Jepsen, S., S.F. Jordan and R. Huff. 2009. Species Fact Sheet for Western Ridged Mussle (Gonidea angulata ). Prepared for the Xerces Society of Invertebrate Conservation.

221


Johnson, Jr., C.G. and R.R. Clausnitzer. 1992. Plant Associations of the Blue and Ochoco Mountains. R6-ERW-TP-036-92. Pacific Northwest Region: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. PP. 107-110.

Johnson, Jr., C.G. 1998. Vegetation response after wildfires in national forests of Northeastern Oregon. R6-NR-ECOL-TP-06-98. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region.

Jones JA, Swanson FJ, Wemple DC, Synder KU. 2000. Road effects on hydrology, geomorphology, and disturbance patches in stream networks. Conservation Biology 14: 76-85.

Keen, F.P. 1929. How soon do yellow pine snags fall? Journal of Forestry 27:735-737.

Keyser TL, Smith FW, Shepperd WD (2009) Short-term impact of post-fire salvage logging on regeneration, hazardous fuel accumulation, and understorey development in ponderosa pine forests of the Black Hills, SD, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire 18, 451–458.

Kotliar, N.B., S.J. Hejl, R.L. Hutto, V.A. Saab, C.P. Melcher, and M.E. McFadzen. 2002. Effects of fire and post-fire salvage logging on avian communities in conifer-dominated forests of the western United States. Studies in Avian Biology 25:49-64.

Kozma, J.M. 2011. Composition of forest stands used by white-headed woodpeckers for nesting in Washington. Western North American Naturalist 71(1):1-9.La March, J.L. and D.P. Lettenmaier. 2001. Effects of forest roads on flood flows in Deschutes River, Washington. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 26: 115-34.

Lardy, M. E. 1980. Raptor inventory and ferruginous hawk breeding biology in southeastern Oregon (Doctoral dissertation, University of Idaho).

La Sorte, F.A., R.W. Mannan, R.T. Reynolds, and T.G. Grubb. 2004. Habitat associations of sympatric red-tailed hawks and northern goshawks on the Kaibab Plateau. Journal of Wildlife Management 68: 307–317.

Lewis, S.L. 1969. Physical factors influencing fish populations in pools of a trout stream. Transactions of American Fisheries Society 98(1): 14-19.

Linder, K.A. and S.H. Anderson. 1998. Nesting habitat of Lewis’ woodpeckers in southeastern Wyoming. J. Field Ornithol. 69(1):109-116.

Lindstrand III, L. and M. Humes. 2009. White-headed woodpecker occurrences in Sun Pass State Forest, south-central Oregon. Northwestern Naturalist 90:212-216.

Liquori, M., and C. R. Jackson. 2001. Channel response from shrub-dominated riparian communities and associated effects on salmonid habitat. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37:1639-1651.

Lisle, T.E. 2002. How much dead wood in channels is enough? In: WF Laudenslayer Jr, PJ Shea, BE Valentive, CP Weatherspoon,TE Lisle (eds.) Proceedings of the symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western forests, Gen.Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-181. Albany, CA: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station: 58-93.

Lopez Ortiz, 2007. Plant community recovery after High Severity Wildfire and Post-fire management in the Klamath Region. MS Thesis. Oregon State University. http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/handle/1957/7285

Luce and Black 1999. Sediment Production from Forest Roads in Western Oregon. Water Resources Research 35(8):2561-2570.

222

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/handle/1957/7285


Marcuson, P. E. 1977. The effect of cattle grazing on brown trout in Rock Creek, Montana. Montana Dep. Fish and Game Fed. Aid Prog. F-20-R-21-lla.

Marshall, D.B., M.G. Hunter, and A.L. Contreras, Eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Martin, Kathy, Kathryn EH Aitken, and Karen L. Wiebe. 2004. "Nest sites and nest webs for cavity-nesting communities in interior British Columbia, Canada: nest characteristics and niche partitioning." The Condor 106.1 (2004): 5-19.

McCallum, D.A. and F.R. Gehlbach. 1988. Nest-site preferences of flammulated owls in western New Mexico. Condor 90:653-661.

Mellen-McLean, K. 2012. DecAID Advisor: the decayed wood advisor for managing snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in forests of Washington and Oregon. Version 2.20. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region and Pacific Northwest Research Station; USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon State Office; Portland, Oregon. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/index.shtml

Mellen-McLean, Kim, Bruce G. Marcot, Janet L. Ohmann, Karen Waddell, Susan A. Livingston, Elizabeth A. Willhite, Bruce B. Hostetler, Catherine Ogden, and Tina Dreisbach. 2009. DecAID, the decayed wood advisor for managing snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in forests of Washington and Oregon. Version 2.1. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region and Pacific Northwest Research Station; USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon State Office; Portland, Oregon. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/index.shtml

Mellen-McLean, K. et. al. 2006. DecAID, the decayed wood advisor for managing snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in forests of Washington and Oregon. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region and Pacific Northwest Research Station; USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon State Office; Portland, Oregon.

McDade, M.H., F.J. Swanson, W.A. McKee, J.F. Franklin, and J. Van Sickle. 1990. Source distances for coarse woody debris entering small streams in western Oregon and Washington. Can. J. For. Res. 20:326–330.

Megahan, W. F. and J. G. King. 2004. Erosion, sedimentation and cumulative effects in the Northern Rocky Mountains. In A Century of Forest and Wildland Watershed Lessons, G. G. Ice and J. D. Stednick, eds. Washington, DC: Soc. of Am. Foresters. pp. 201-222.

Meleason, M.A., Gregory, S.V., and Bolte, J.P. 2003. Implications of riparian management strategies on wood in streams of the Pacific Northwest. Ecological Applications 13: 1212-1221

Meyer, K. A., J. A. Lamansky, Jr., and D. J. Schill. 2010. Biotic and abiotic factors related to redband trout occurrence and abundance in desert and montane streams. Western North American Naturalist 70(1): 77-91.

Mikulovsky, S. and Juan De la Fuente, 2012, USFS, Fall AGU Poster “ Reactivation of Deep-Seated Landslides in Northwestern California after Wildfires in 2006 and 2008”.

Minshall, G. W., and J. T. Brock. 1991. Anticipated effects of forest fire on Yellowstone stream ecosystems. In: Keiter, R. B., and M.S. Boyce (eds.). Greater Yellowstone's future: man and nature in conflict? Yale University Press.

Montgomery DR, Buffington JM, Smith RD, Schmidt KM, Pess G. 1995. Pool spacing in forest channels. Water Resources Research 31: 1097–1105.

223

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/index.shtml

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/index.shtml


Montgomery, D.R. and J.M. Buffington. 1997. Channel reach morphology in mountain drainage basins. Geological Society of America Bulletin 109: 596-611.

NatureServe. 2009-2012. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1 NatureServe, Arlington, VA. Available at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer

NatureServe. 2015. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Feb. 2009. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available at: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ (Accessed 13 February 2015).

Neitzel, D. A. and T. J. Frest. 1989. Survey of Columbia River Basin streams for giant Columbia River spire snail Flumincola columbiana and Great Columbia River limpet Fisherola nuttalli. Tech. Rep. #PNL7103, Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs. 59 pp.

Noss, R.F., J.F.Franklin, W. Baker, T.Schoennagel, and P.B.Moyle. 2006. Ecology and Management of Fire-prone Forests of the Western United States. Society for Conservation Biology Scientific Panel on Fire in Western US Forests, Washington, D.C.

Noss, R.F., J.F.Franklin, W.L. Baker, T.Schoennagel, and P.B.Moyle. 2006. Managing Fire-prone forests in the western United States. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 4(9): 481-487

OAR 340 200. Oregon Administrative Rules, Department of Environmental Quality, Division 200. General Air Pollution Procedures and Definitions

OAR 340 200-0040. Oregon Administrative Rules. Visibility Protection Plan for Class 1 Areas.

OAR 629 048. Oregon Administrative Rules. Department of Forestry, Division 48. Smoke Management

Ohmann, J.L. and M.J. Gregory. 2002. Predictive mapping of forest composition and structure with direct gradient analysis and nearest- neighbor imputation in coastal Oregon, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2002, 32(4): 725-741.

Olson, B.E. 1999. Impacts of Noxious Weeds on Ecologic and Economic Systems, p. 4-15, and Grazing and weeds. p. 85-96. In: Sheley, R. L. and Petroff, J. K., eds. Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon St. Univ. Press, Corvallis.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2010. Oregon’s 2010 Integrated Report, Water Quality Assessment. Portland, Oregon.

Parks, C.G., D.A. Conklin, L. Bednar, H. Maffei. 1999. Woodpecker use and fall rates of snags created by killing ponderosa pine infected with dwarf mistletoe. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-515. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 11pp.

Parsons, A., P.R. Robichaud, S.A. Lewis, C. Napper, and J.T. Clark. 2010. Field guide for mapping post-fire soil burn severity. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-243. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 49 pp.

Paulson, D.J., 1977. Ochoco National Forest Soil Resource Inventory, Pacific Northwest Region, U. S. Forest Service, Ochoco National Forest. Owen, W. 2003. The Effects of Fire on Rare Plants. Unpublished report distributed by the USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC.

Paulson, D. 1999. Dragonflies of Washington. Seattle Audobon Society, Seattle, Washington. 31 pp.

Peterson, D.W., E.K. Dodson and R.J. Harrod. 2014. Post-fire logging reduces surface woody fuels up to four decades following wildfire. Forest Ecology and Management 338 (2015) 84-91

224

http://www.natureserve.org/explorer

http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/


Potyondy, John, and Theodore W. Geier. 2011. Watershed Condition Classification Technical Guide. Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service. http://www.fs.fed.us/publications/watershed/watershed_classification_guide.pdf.

Purdon, M., S. Brais, and Y. Bergeron. 2004. Initial response of understory vegetation to fire severity and salvage-logging in the southern boreal forest of Quebec. Applied Vegetation Science 7:49-60.

Raleigh, R.F., T. Hickman, R.C. Soloman, and P.C. Nelson. 1984. Habitat suitability information: Rainbow trout. U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.60. 64pp.

Raphael, M.G. and M. White. 1984. Use of Snags by Cavity Nesting Birds in the Sierra Nevada. Wildlife Monographs 86:1-66.

Rodnick, K.J., Gamperl, A.K., Lizars, K.R., Bennett, M.T., Rausch, R.N., and Keeley, E.R. 2004. Thermal tolerance and metabolic physiology among redband trout populations in south-eastern Oregon. Journal of Fish Biology 64(2): 310-335.

Romain-Bondi, K.A. 2009. Wildlife Species and Habitat Assessment of Proposed Trails in Mount Spokane State Park. Pacific Biodiversity Institute, Winthrop, Washington. 64 p.

Rose, C. L., B. G. Marcot, T. K. Mellen, J. L. Ohmann, K. L. Waddell, D. L. Lindley, and B. Schreiber. 2001. Decaying wood in Pacific Northwest forests: concepts and tools for habitat management. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, 580-623.

Rosgen, D. L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, Colorado.

Ryan, K.C. and E.D Reinhardt. 1988. Predicting post fire mortality of seven western conifers. Canadian Journal of Forest Restoration 18: 1291-1297

Saab, V.A. and J.G. Dudley. 1998. Responses of cavity-nesting birds to stand-replacement fire and salvage logging in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests of southwestern Idaho. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-11. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 17 p.

Saab, V.A., R. Brannon, J. Dudley, L. Donohoo, D. Vanderzanden, V. Johnson, and H. Lachowski. 2002. Selection of fire-created snags at two spatial scales by cavity-nesting birds. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-181. Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service. 14 pp.

Saab, V.A., J. Dudley, and W.L. Thompson. 2004. Factors influencing occupancy of nest cavities in recently burned forests. Condor 106:20-36.

Saab, V.A., R.E. Russell, and J.G. Dudley. 2007. Nest densities of cavity-nesting birds in relation to postfire salvage logging and time since wildfire. The Condor 109:97-108.

Saab, V.A., R.E. Russell, and J.G. Dudley. 2009. Nest-site selection by cavity-nesting birds in relation to postfire salvage logging. Forest Ecology and Management 257:151–159.

Scott, D.W., C.L. Schmitt, and L.H. Spiegel. 2002. Factors affecting survival of fire injured trees: A rating system for determining relative probability of conifers in the Blue and Wallowa Mountains. BMPMSC-03-01. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, Blue Mountains Pest Management Service Center, November 25, 2002.

Schulz, W.H., J.A. Coe, W.L. Ellis and J.D. Kibler. 2006. Preliminary assessment of the landslides along the Florida River downstream from Lemon Reservoir, La Plata County, CO. USGS OF Report 2006-1343, 29 pg.

225

http://www.fs.fed.us/publications/watershed/watershed_classification_guide.pdf


Sessions, J., P. Bettinger, R.Buckman, M.Newton, and J.Hamann. 2004. Hastening the return of complex forests following fire: the consequences of delay. Journal of Forestry 102(3): 38-45.

Seymour, J. 2009. Draft Hydrology Report for the Canyon Vegetation Management Environmental Impact Statement. Lookout Mt. Ranger District, Ochoco NF, Prineville, OR.

Shank, D. 2004. Fire Related Soil Impacts: Monitoring of the Eyerley, B & B, Booth West, Cabot Creek and Brush Creek Reburns; Deschutes National Forest.

Sharp, B.E. 1992. Neotropical Migrants on National Forests in the Pacific Northwest. Unpublished. USFS Portland, Oregon.

Shatford, J.P.A., D.E . Hibbs and K.J. Puettmann. 2007. Conifer regeneration after forest fire in the Klamath-Siskiyou’s: how much, how soon? Journal of Forestry April/May 2007, pp. 139-146.

Sheley, R.L. and Larson, L.L. 1994. Observation: Comparative life-history of cheatgrass and yellow starthistle. Journal of Range Management 47:450-456.

Sheley, R.L, Olson, B.E., Larson, L.L. 1997. Effect of weed seed rate and grass defoliation level on diffuse knapweed. Journal of Range Management. 50:39-43.

Storck PA, Bowling L, Wetherbee P, Lettenmaier DP. 1998. Application of a GIS based distributed hydrologic model for the prediction of forest harvest effects of peak flow in the Pacific Northwest. Hydrological Processes 12: 889–904.

Stuart AM, Grover D, Nelson TK, and SL. Theisfeld. 2007. Redband trout: resilience and challenge in a changing landscape. American Fisheries Society, Oregon Chapter.

Surfleet, C.G., Skaugset, A.E., and Meadows M.W. 2011. Road runoff and sediment sampling for determining road sediment yield at the watershed scale. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, Vol. 41, No. 10, pp. 1970-1980.

Swanson, D. A., 1969, "Reconnaissance Geologic Map of the East Half of the Bend Quadrangle, Crook, Wheeler, Jefferson, Wasco and Deschutes Counties, Oregon", USGS, Misc. Geologic Investigations Map I-568.

Swanson, M.E., J.F. Franklin, R.L. Beschta, C.M. Crisafulli, D.A. DellaSala, R.L. Hutto, D.B. Lindenmayer, and F.J. Swanson. 2011. The forgotten stage of forest succession: early-successional ecosystems on forest sites. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment doi: 10.1890/090157.

Takken, I., Croke, J. & Mockler, S. (2006), A practical method for the management of road runoff. Sediment Dynamics and the Hydromorphology of fluvial systems (Proceedings of a symposium held in Dundee, UK, July 2006). IAHS Publ. 306, 249–256.

Thomas, J.W. et. al. 1979. Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests: the Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service Agriculture Handbook No.553.

Torgersen, T.R. and E.L. Bull. 1995. Down logs as habitat for forest-dwelling ants- the primary prey of pileated woodpeckers in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science. 69:294-303.

Toupin, R. and M. Barger. 2005. Field Guide for Danger Tree Identification and Response. Forest Health Protection, Pacific Northwest Region, USDA Forest Service. Portland, OR. 56 pp.

Xerces Freshwater Mussel Database. 2009. http://www.xerces.org/mollusks/

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado, 119 pp.

226


USDA Forest Service. 1988. General Water Quality Best Management Practices. Pacific Northwest Region. November, 1988.

USDA Forest Service. 1989. Land and Resource Management Plan, Ochoco National Forest and Crooked River National Grassland. U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region (August 1989).

USDA Forest Service. 1994. Viable Ecosystems Management Guide: Ochoco National Forest. Prineville, Oregon.

USDA. 1994. Flammulated, Boreal, and Great Gray Owls in the United States: A Technical Conservation Assessment. General Technical Report RM-253. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

USDA Forest Service. 1995. Pacific Northwest Region. Regional Forester Plan Amendment #2: Decision Notice for the Revised Continuation of Interim Management Direction Establishing Riparian, Ecosystem and Wildlife Standards for Timber Sales; June, 1995. Portland, OR.

USDA Forest Service. 1995. Implementation of the Inland Native Fish Strategy letter. Northern Region, Intermountain Region and Pacific Northwest Region.

USDA Forest Service. 1995. Inland Native Fish Strategy Environmental Assessment, Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact, Intermountain, Northern and Pacific Northwest Regions.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1995. Decision notice/decision record, FONSI, environmental assessment and appendices for the implementation of interim strategies for managing anadromous fish-producing watersheds in eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and portions of California (PACFISH).

USDA Forest Service. 2001. Common Birds of the Ochoco Region. Pacific Northwest Region, Ochoco National Forest. Prineville, Oregon.

USDA Forest Service. 2011. Update of the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species Lists and Transmittal of Strategic Species List. December 1, 2011. Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, OR.

USDA Forest Service. 2011. Ochoco National Forest Management Indicator Species Viability Assessment. Prineville, Oregon.

USDA Forest Service. 2012. National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands. FS-990a.

USDA Forest Service. 2014. Rapid Assement of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG). Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, OR.

USDA Forest Service. 2014. John Day River Basin Water Quality Restoration Plan (North Fork John Day, Middle Fork John Day, Upper John Day and Lower John Day Sub-Basins). Umatilla, Wallowa-Whitman, Malheur and Ochoco National Forests.

USDA Forest Service. 2014. Joint Aquatic and Terrestrial Programmatic Biological Assessment for Federal Lands within the Deschutes and John Day River Basin’s Administered by the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forest. April 2014.

USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report PSW-109, pp. 75–78. (Berkeley, CA)

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Birds of conservation concern. Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

227


USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan. Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.USDA Forest Service. 2012. Deschutes/Ochoco National Forests Invasive Plant Treatments Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Bend, Oregon.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of conservation concern. Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

United States Government. (1988). Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended through the 100th Congress. U.S. Department of the Interior.

USDA Forest Service GTR-PNW-52. 1976. Photo Series for Quantifying Forest Residues, pg 44.

USDA, Forest Service, August 2014; Ochoco National Forest; Baer Soil Resource Specialist Report; Bailey Butte Fire (Waterman, Complex), prepared by Jim David (Soil Scientist, Ochoco National Forest and Sarah Jane Hash (Soil Scientist, Deschutes National Forest).

USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station; March 2007; Volcanic-Ash-Derived Forest Soils of the Inland Northwest: Properties and Implications for Management and Restoration; Proceedings RMRS-P-44 on 9-10 Nov 2005, Cour d’Alene, ID conference

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Species Assessment and Listing Priority Form for the Columbia spotted frog (Great Basin DPS). http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/candforms_pdf/r8/D027_V01.pdf

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service species assessment and listing priority assignment form for the Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Region 1, Lacey, Washington. 60 pp.

Vose, James M.; Peterson, David L.; Patel-Weynand, Toral, eds. 2012. Effects of climatic variability and change on forest ecosystems: a comprehensive science synthesis for the U.S. forest sector. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-870. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 265 p.

Walker, G. W. and Norman S. MacLeod, 1991 "Geologic Map of Oregon", Department of Oregon Geology and Minerals Industry, 1:500,000.

Walker, G. W., Norman V. Peterson and Robert C. Greene, 1967, “Reconnaissance Geologic Map of the East Half of the Crescent Quadrangle, Lake, Deschutes and Crook Counties, Oregon”, USGS, Misc. Geologic Investigations Map I-493.

Walling, D. E. & Webb, B. W. (1988) The reliability of rating curve estimates of suspended sediment yield: some further comments. In: Sediment Budgets (ed. by M. P. Bordas & D. E. Walling) (Proc. Porto Alegre Symp., December 1988), 337-350. IAHS Publ. no. 174.

Water Resources, Appendix V, Columbia-North Pacific Region Comprehensive Framework Study, Volume 2 (Subregions 7-12), April 1970, prepared by Columbia-North Pacific Technical Staff, Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission, Vancouver, Washington.

Webster, H. 1976. The prairie falcon: trapping the wild birds. North American falconry and hunting hawks. North American Falconry and Hunting Hawks, Denver, CO USA, 153-167.

Wemple DC, Jones JA. Grant GR. 1996. Channel network extension by logging roads in two basins, western Cascades, Oregon. Water Resources Bulletin 32: 1195-1207.

White, C. M. 1994. Population trends and current status of selected western raptors. Studies in Avian Biology, 15, 161-172.

Wightman, C.S., V.A. Saab, C. Foristal, K. Mellen-McLean, and A. Markus. 2010. White-headed woodpecker nesting ecology after wildfire. J. Wildl. Manage. 74(5): 1098-1106.

228

http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/candforms_pdf/r8/D027_V01.pdf


Wisdom, M.J., R.S. Holthausen, B.C. Wales, C.D. Hargis, V.A. Saab, D.C. Lee, W.J. Hann, T.D. Rich, M.M. Rowland, W.J. Murphy, M.R. Eames. 2000. Source habitats for terrestrial vertebrates of focus in the interior Columbia basin: broad-scale trends and management implications. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-485. Portland, OR. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 3 Vol.

Woldie, D.W., R.C. Sidle, and T. Gomi. 2009. Impact of road-generated storm runoff on a small catchment response. Hydrological Processes, Volume 23, p. 3631-3638.

Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press, WA.

Yount, J.D., and G.J. Niemi. 1990. Recovery of the lotic communities and ecosystems from disturbance-a narrative review of case studies. Environmental Management 14:547-569.

Zwieniecki, M. and M. Newton. 1999. Influence of streamside cover and stream features on temperature trends in forested streams of western Oregon. West.J. Appl. For. 14(2):106 –113.

229


Appendix 1: Biological Evaluations The following summary tables summarize the biological evaluations for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive species (TES) on the Ochoco National Forest relative to effects of the Bailey Butte Fire project. The “Wildlife” and “Hydrology and Aquatic Species” sections of this EA, as well as the specialist reports associated with those sections (located in the project file, Ochoco National Forest, Prineville, Oregon) contain discussion and analysis supporting these tables. Table 100. Summary of biological evaluation for terrestrial wildlife and insects.

Species Status Habitat Habitat/ Presence in Project Area

Determination (both action alternatives)

Gray wolf (Canis lupus)

Federal Endangered Any Forest PAG Existing habitat No Effect

American peregrine falcon (Falco

peregrinus anatum) Sensitive Riparian, Cliffs No habitat No impact

Bald eagle (Haliaeetus

leucocephalus) Sensitive Lakes, snags No habitat No impact

Lewis woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis) Sensitive Open ponderosa pine

snags, burned areas Existing habitat

May Impact, but Not Likely to

Result in a Trend Toward Federal

Listing White-headed woodpecker

(Picoides albolarvatus)

Sensitive Large-diameter ponderosa pine snags Existing habitat


Result in a Trend Toward Federal

Listing Bufflehead

(Bucephala albeola) Sensitive Lakes, snags No habitat No Impact

Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda)

Sensitive Expansive wet meadows No habitat No Impact

Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) Sensitive Lakeside, bulrush

(cattails) No habitat No Impact

Greater sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)

Federal Candidate, Sensitive

Sagebrush flats

No habitat No Impact

Pygmy rabbit (Brachylagus idahoensis)

Sensitive, MIS Tall Sagebrush with deep friable soils No habitat No Impact

North American wolverine

(Gulo gulo luscus) Sensitive, MIS Mixed forests, High

Elevation Potential habitat No Impact

Townsend’s big-eared bat

(Corynorhinus townsendii)

Sensitive, MIS caves, buildings, bridges, mines No habitat No Impact

Johnson’s hairstreak (Callophrys johnsoni)

Sensitive Mixed forests with dwarf mistletoe Potential habitat No impact

Silver-bordered fritillary (Boloria

selene) Sensitive Bogs and wet

meadows No habitat No impact

230


Table 101. Summary of biological evaluation for aquatic species.

Species

Evolutionarily Significant

Unit or Distinct

Population Segment

Listing Category

Type of Occurrence on

Ochoco NF

Potentially Present in

Project Area

Determination (both action alternatives

Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus)

All Federally Threatened Documented No No Effect

Steelhead (Oncorhynchus

mykiss)

Middle Columbia River

Federally Threatened Documented Yes No Effect

Redband trout (Oncorhynchus

mykiss ssp.) Malheur Lakes Sensitive in

Oregon Documented Yes


Result in a Trend Toward Federal Listing

Westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus

clarkii lewisi) All Sensitive in

Oregon Documented No No Impact


(Rana luteiventris)

Outside Great Basin

Sensitive in Oregon Documented Yes


Result in a Trend toward

Federal Listing Crater Lake Tightcoil (Pristiloma arcticum

crateris) N/A Sensitive in

Oregon Suspected No No Impact


(Gonidea angulate) N/A

Sensitive in Oregon and Washington

Suspected No No Impact

Harney basin duskysnail (Colligyrus depressus)

N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No No Impact

Shortface lanx (Fisherola nuttalli) N/A Sensitive in

Oregon Suspected No No Impact Indian Ford juga

(Juga hemphilli ssp. nov.)

N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No No Impact

Columbia clubtail (Gomphus lynnae) N/A Sensitive in

Oregon Suspected No No Impact A caddisfly

(Namamyia plutonis) N/A Sensitive in Oregon Suspected No No Impact

231


Appendix 2: Recommendations for Grazing in Allotoments Affected by the Bailey Butte Fire Purpose: Document grazing recommendations for the range allotments involved in the Bailey Butte fire.

On July 14, 2014, a lightning strike hit the top of Bailey Butte. Over the next several days, the fire grew to a total of about 10,272 acres with approximately 7,789 acres on the Ochoco National Forest. The fire burned all or portions of six allotments: Bear Creek, Crystal Springs, Elkhorn, Marks Creek, Snowshoe and Wildcat. These allotments all have term grazing permits associated with them.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that all areas burned by the Bailey Butte wildfire will not be grazed in the 2015 grazing season. Two pastures, Elkhorn and Viewpoint, have a very small portion of the area burned, therefore it is recommended that these pastures be used in 2015 but the burned areas not grazed. Because of the majority of the pastures being burned the following pastures will be rested:

Allotment Pasture Percent of Pasture Burned

Bear Creek Dodd’s 16% Crystal Springs Crystal Springs 25% Marks Creek Nature 100% Snowshoe Nature Creek 100% Snowshoe Snowshoe 100%

The Dodd’s pasture in the Bear Creek allotment was burned 1,244 acres of the 7,647 acres total, which is 16% of the pasture. The severity of the fire in this pasture is displayed in the table below. This pasture contains designated critical habitat for steelhead, a federal endangered species. Because of the higher percentage of the pasture burned and higher percent of moderate severity, it is recommended that this entire pasture be rested during the 2015 grazing season. An evaluation prior to the 2016 grazing season will determined if criteria has been met to allow cattle back on in 2016. The Dodd’s pasture provides 256 AUMs of the total 685 AUMs (37%) or about 1½ months of the four month permit. During the 2015 grazing season, the other two pastures will be allowed to be grazed until standards are met.

Dodd’s Pasture Burn Severity Severity Acres High 2.44 (0%) Moderate 318.95 (26%) Low 717.96 (58%) Very Low/Unchanged 205.10 (16%)

The Crystal Springs pasture in the Crystal Springs allotment was burned 512 acres of the 2,038 acres total, which is 25% of the pasture. The severity of the fire in this pasture is displayed in the table below. The area encompassing the burn has a lot of open meadows so cattle tend to concentrate in the area, both of the Designated Monitoring Areas (DMAs) for the pasture are located in the burn perimeter indicated an area of high concentration for cattle use. The Crystal Springs pasture provides 317 AUMs of the 871 AUMs total (36%). During the 2015 grazing season we will provide an extra pasture with the Forest Service horse administration pasture and allow the permittee to grazing in the pastures until standards are met to try to reduce the loss of AUMs as much as possible. It is recommended that the Crystal Springs pasture be rested for the 2015 grazing season and evaluated prior to grazing in 2016 to determine if the criteria established under the criteria section has been met.

232


Crystal Springs Pasture Burn Severity Severity Acres High 0.22 (0%) Moderate 51.31 (10%) Low 383.69 (75%) Very Low/Unchanged 76.74 (15%)

The Nature pasture in the Marks Creek allotment was burned 376 acres of the 376 acres total or 100% of the pasture. The severity of the fire in the pasture is displayed in the table below. Because the entire pasture was burned, it is recommended that the pasture be rested for the 2015 grazing season and evaluated for the set criteria prior to grazing in 2016. The Nature pasture provides 40 AUMs of the 1,190 AUMs total, which is 3%. The 40 AUMs should be able to be spread out among the remaining pastures and not have a loss to the permittee while still meeting standards.

Nature Pasture Burn Severity Severity Acres High 0.66 (0%) Moderate 18.50 (5%) Low 285.32 (76%) Very Low/Unchanged 70.91 (19%)

Both of the Nature Creek and Snowshoe pastures make –up the Snowshoe allotment entirely. These pastures were burned 2,711 acres or 100% total of the allotment. The severity of the fire in the pasture is displayed in the table below. Because the entire allotment was burned, it is recommended that the allotment be rested for the 2015 grazing season. The Snowshoe allotment provides 343 AUMs. Prior to the 2016 grazing season the allotment will be evaluated to see if it has met the criteria.

Nature Creek and Snowshoe Pastures Burn Severity Severity Acres Nature Creek High 13.18 (3%) Moderate 81.30 (16%) Low 274.67 (55%) Very Low/Unchanged 131.89 (26%) Snowshoe High 18.21 (1%) Moderate 828.47 (37%) Low 1,103.72 (50%) Very Low/Unchanged 258.28 (12%)

The Elkhorn pasture in the Elkhorn allotment was burned 116 acres of the 2,971 acres total, which is 4% of the pasture. The area is in the northwest corner of the pasture with mixed severity as displayed in the table below. It is recommended that the Elkhorn pasture be grazed because of the high percent of Low severity fire, the small percent of the pasture and the ability for the permittee to keep livestock out of this area. The Elkhorn pasture provides 396 AUMs of the 1,378 total (29%) or forage for about one month of the 3 ½ month permit.

Elkhorn Pasture Burn Severity Severity Acres High 0.24 (0%) Moderate 18.41 (16%) Low 87.78 (76%) Very Low/Unchanged 9.42 (8%)

233


The Viewpoint pasture in the Wildcat allotment was burned 169 acres of the 8,461 acres, which is 2%. The burned area is in the northern corner of the pasture with mixed severity as displayed in the table below. It is recommended that the Viewpoint pasture be grazed because of the high percent of Low severity fire, the small percent of the pasture located in the far upper corner. The Low severity fire acres are expected to recover by the end of the season and this pasture is used last in the grazing. The Viewpoint pasture provides 409 AUMs of the 805 total (51%) of forage for about two months of the four month permit.

Viewpoint Pasture Burn Severity Severity Acres High 0.0 (0%) Moderate 9.58 (6%) Low 146.42 (87%) Very Low/Unchanged 12.71 (8%)

Criteria:

• Resources of concern associated to grazing in the Bailey Butte fire area are riparian areas because of the tendency for high concentration of cattle and invasive species because of the high population of houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale) in the area. Before grazing resumes in pastures rested during the 2015 grazing season, certain criteria should be analyzed:

• For the Snowshoe allotment, MIMs will be re-read on Nature creek with a recovery of at least the baseline data collected in 2011. Baseline data for 2011 was an early serial community so it is expected that within 2-3 years that area should have recovered to this state. If the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) determines grazing can occur prior to recovery baseline data, that is possible.

• The Winward Riparian study #CS-CS-W01 will be re-read with a recovery of at least the baseline data collected in 2005 for Crystal Springs pasture. If the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) determines grazing can occur prior to recovery baseline data, that is possible.

• BLS data will be collected on Heflin creek to determine conditions and an IDT will determine when grazing can occur in the Dodd’s pasture.

• Key areas in higher production upland soils where known houndstongue populations exist should achieve an estimated 80% potential foliar cover to reduce vulnerability to invasives or if an IDT determines grazing can occur prior to.

• Insure at least a 6” (Sedges) or 4” (Grasses) residual herbaceous vegetation on key riparian stabilizing species at the end of the growing season. This will help maintain bank cover to protect banks and provide ground cover to prevent invasive species spread.

234


Appendix 3: Burn Severity vs. Vegetation Mortality in the Bailey Butte Fire of 2014; Photos

The following maps illustrate the difference between burn severity and vegetation mortality within the Bailey Butte fire of 2014. Briefly, “burn severity” refers to the condition of the soil following the wildfire; soils were affected in a mosaic of low, moderate and high severity, as described here:

Soil Burn Severity Severity Indicators

Low Surface organics still recognizable; structural aggregate stability unchanged; roots unchanged; exposed soil appears brown or black; vegetation likely still green.

Moderate

Up to 80% of surface organics may be consumed; soil structure generally unchanged; fine roots may be scorched but not completely consumed; ash on surface is generally blackened with possible gray patches; potential recruitment of effective ground cover from scorched needles falling to ground.

High

All or nearly all of the pre-fire ground cover and surface organic matter (litter, duff and fine roots) is generally consumed, charring may be visible on larger roots; prevailing color is site is often black due to extensive charring; bare soil or ash is exposed and susceptible to erosion and aggregate structure may be destabilized; soil is often gray, orange or reddish where large fuels were concentrated and consumed.

“Vegetation mortality” refers to the condition of the vegetation, including forested stands, following the wildfire. Vegetated areas within the fire perimeter experienced a combination of low (less than 25%) mortality, mixed (25-75%) mortality, and stand replacement (75% mortality or more).

While areas with high burn severity also frequently experience stand replacement, stand replacement fire does not always correlate with high burn severity. A crown fire may move through a stand of trees and cause over 75% mortality, but have very little effect on the soil because the ground doesn’t experience extreme heat. Well over half of the fire area experienced low or very low burn severity, but almost 30% of the burned area experienced stand-replacing mortality.

235


Soil Burn Severity Map (Bailey Butte Fire area)

236


Map of Vegetation Mortality (Bailey Butte Fire area)

237


The following pictures from Heflin Creek illustrate the types of areas where riparian restoration was proposed in the Bailey Butte Fire project. Generally, these areas experienced high burn severity and high vegetation mortality.

238


239


240


Appendix 4. Project maps Map 1: Project location.

Map 2: Ochoco National Forest Plan Management Areas.

Map 3: Alternative B, the Proposed Action.

Map 4: Alternative C

Map 5: Reforestation and Riparian Restoration Activities Common to Alternatives B and C

241

Documents

United States Department of Agriculture Bailey Butte Fire Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · 2017-09-19 · United States Department of Agriculture . Forest