United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest 

Service 

July 2007 

Record of Decision 

and 

Final Environmental Impact 

Statement 

Spears Vegetation 

Management Project 

Lookout Mountain Ranger District 

Ochoco National Forest 

Crook and Wheeler Counties, Oregon 
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its 

programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, 

age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all 

prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, 

audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice 

and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil 

Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, 

Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an 

equal opportunity provider and employer. 
Spears Vegetation Management Project 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service 

Responsible Official: Jeff Walter, Forest Supervisor, Ochoco National Forest 

For Information Contact: Katherine Farrell, Team Leader 

Ochoco National Forest 

3160 NE Third Street 

Prineville, OR 97754 

(541) 416-6500 

Abstract: This Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) describes the effects of 

implementing five alternatives to manage fuels and vegetation in the Spears Project Area. The 

project area is located about 20 miles northeast of Prineville, Oregon within the Marks Creek 

Watershed and Veazie Creek Subwatershed. The project area encompasses nearly 39,200 acres. 

Alternative 4 is the preferred alternative and would treat fuels and vegetation on approximately 

16,740 acres, including 4,935 acres of commercial harvest. An estimated 12.3 million board feet 

(MMBF) would be harvested. Alternative 1 is the no action alternative and does not treat any 

acres. Implementation of any action alternative would necessitate amending the Forest Plan. 

Alternative 2 is the proposed action and would treat approximately 17,000 acres and harvest 

approximately 15.4 MMBF. Alternative 3 does not include any commercial timber harvest and 

would treat approximately 15,500 acres. Alternative 4 was developed in response to concerns 

related to road construction. Alternative 5 was developed in response to concerns related to 

wildlife habitats. Alternative 5 would treat approximately 15,850 acres and harvest 

approximately 8.9 MMBF. 

Table of Contents 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page i 

Table of Contents 

Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... i 

Changes Between Draft and Final EIS ..............................................................................................vii 

Chapter 1.................................................................................................................................... vii 

Chapter 2.................................................................................................................................... vii 

Chapter 3.................................................................................................................................... vii 

Appendices ................................................................................................................................ vii 

Chapter 1. Purpose of and Need for Action........................................................................................1 

Document Structure..................................................................................................................... 1 

Purpose and Need for Action....................................................................................................... 1 

Late and Old Structure (LOS), Early-seral Species Composition, and Infestations by Insects 

and Disease............................................................................................................................... 2 

Fuels ......................................................................................................................................... 4 

Hardwood Plant Communities ................................................................................................. 5 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) ...................................................................... 6 

Proposed Action .......................................................................................................................... 7 

Project Area ................................................................................................................................. 7 

Forest Plan Direction................................................................................................................... 8 

Decision Framework.................................................................................................................... 9 

Public Involvement.................................................................................................................... 10 

Issues ......................................................................................................................................... 11 

Significant Issues.................................................................................................................... 11 

Other Issues............................................................................................................................ 13 

Non-significant Issues............................................................................................................ 16 

Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action ..................................................................17 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 17 

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study .................................................. 17 

Alternatives Considered in Detail.............................................................................................. 17 

Alternative 1 (No Action) ...................................................................................................... 17 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) ............................................................................................ 18 

Alternative 3........................................................................................................................... 21 

Alternative 4........................................................................................................................... 21 

Alternative 5........................................................................................................................... 23 

Design Elements Common to All Alternatives...................................................................... 25 

Monitoring.............................................................................................................................. 38 

Comparison of Alternatives....................................................................................................... 39 

Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences..............................................45 

Late and Old Structure (LOS) ................................................................................................... 45 

Affected Environment............................................................................................................ 45 

Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................ 50 

Early-seral Species Composition............................................................................................... 58 

Affected Environment............................................................................................................ 58 

Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................ 59 

Infestations by Insects and Disease ........................................................................................... 62 

Affected Environment............................................................................................................ 62 
Table of Contents 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page ii 

Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................ 64 

Fuels........................................................................................................................................... 66 

Affected Environment............................................................................................................ 66 

Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................ 68 

Potential Fire Behavior and Probability .................................................................................... 73 

Affected Environment............................................................................................................ 73 

Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................ 74 

Hardwood Plant Communities................................................................................................... 75 

Affected Environment............................................................................................................ 75 

Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................ 76 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas ........................................................................................ 78 

Affected Environment............................................................................................................ 78 

Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................ 81 

Aquatic Species ......................................................................................................................... 90 

Essential Fish Habitat............................................................................................................. 90 

Management Indicator Species .............................................................................................. 90 

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species .................................................................... 91 

Air Quality............................................................................................................................... 102 

Affected Environment.......................................................................................................... 102 

Environmental Consequences .............................................................................................. 103 

Botanical Species..................................................................................................................... 105 

Affected Environment.......................................................................................................... 105 

Environmental Consequences .............................................................................................. 110 

Forest Wood Products and Jobs............................................................................................... 117 

Affected Environment.......................................................................................................... 117 

Environmental Consequences .............................................................................................. 119 

Heritage Resources and Plants of Cultural Value ................................................................... 122 

Affected Environment.......................................................................................................... 122 

Environmental Consequences .............................................................................................. 123 

Cumulative Effects............................................................................................................... 127 

Non-native Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds)......................................................................... 128 

Affected Environment.......................................................................................................... 128 

Environmental Consequences .............................................................................................. 130 

Recreation................................................................................................................................ 132 

Bandit Springs Recreation Area........................................................................................... 133 

Developed and Dispersed Camping Areas........................................................................... 139 

Snow Parks........................................................................................................................... 143 

Trails..................................................................................................................................... 145 

Wilderness............................................................................................................................ 147 

Soils ......................................................................................................................................... 150 

Compaction and Displacement............................................................................................. 150 

Mass Wasting ....................................................................................................................... 155 

Visual Quality.......................................................................................................................... 158 

Affected Environment.......................................................................................................... 158 

Environmental Consequences .............................................................................................. 159 

Water Quality .......................................................................................................................... 163 
Table of Contents 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page iii 

Temperature and 303(d) list ................................................................................................. 163 

Sediment and Turbidity........................................................................................................ 170 

Equivalent Harvest Area (EHA) .......................................................................................... 180 

Wildlife.................................................................................................................................... 186 

Goshawk............................................................................................................................... 186 

Other Raptors ....................................................................................................................... 192 

Management Indicator Species ............................................................................................ 194 

Snags and Down Wood........................................................................................................ 211 

Connective Corridors ........................................................................................................... 220 

Neotropical Birds ................................................................................................................. 222 

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species .................................................................. 230 

Elk ........................................................................................................................................ 240 

Short-term Uses and Long-term Productivity ......................................................................... 247 

Unavoidable Adverse Effects .................................................................................................. 248 

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources...................................................... 248 

Cumulative Effects .................................................................................................................. 249 

Other Required Disclosures..................................................................................................... 249 

Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination......................................................................................268 

Preparers and Contributors ...................................................................................................... 268 

Distribution of the Environmental Impact Statement.............................................................. 270 

Federal, State, and Local Agencies ...................................................................................... 271 

Tribes.................................................................................................................................... 272 

References........................................................................................................................................273 

Index ................................................................................................................................................285 

Appendix A......................................................................................................................................286 

Description of Proposed Treatments ....................................................................................... 286 

Alternative Specific Activities by Unit ................................................................................... 289 

Appendix B ......................................................................................................................................322 

Unit-by-Unit Soils Analysis .................................................................................................... 322 

Appendix C ......................................................................................................................................334 

Response to Comments ........................................................................................................... 334 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 334 

Chapter 1. Purpose of and Need for Action............................................................................ 334 

Purpose and Need for Action ............................................................................................... 334 

Decision Framework ............................................................................................................ 336 

Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action........................................................ 338 

Alternatives Considered in Detail ........................................................................................ 338 

Monitoring............................................................................................................................ 339 

Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ................................... 340 

Late and Old Structure (LOS) .............................................................................................. 340 

Early-seral Species Composition ......................................................................................... 346 

Infestations by Insects and Disease...................................................................................... 348 

Fuels ..................................................................................................................................... 352 

Hardwood Plant Communities ............................................................................................. 360 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas................................................................................... 361 

Aquatic Species.................................................................................................................... 362 
Table of Contents 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page iv 

Air Quality............................................................................................................................ 367 

Forest Wood Products and Jobs ........................................................................................... 368 

Non-native Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds) ..................................................................... 369 

Soils...................................................................................................................................... 369 

Water Quality ....................................................................................................................... 372 

Wildlife................................................................................................................................. 373 

Cumulative Effects............................................................................................................... 381 

Other Required Disclosures ................................................................................................. 382 

Miscellaneous....................................................................................................................... 385 

Appendix D......................................................................................................................................397 

Letters from Governmental Agencies...................................................................................... 397 

Appendix E ......................................................................................................................................406 

Maps ........................................................................................................................................ 406 

Map 1 Vicinity Map 

Map 2 Management Areas 

Map 3 Fish Distribution 

Map 4 Alternative 2 Commercial Harvest 

Map 5 Alternative 2 Precommercial Thinning and Hardwood Treatments 

Map 6 Alternative 2 Fuels Treatments 

Map 7 Alternative 3 Precommercial Thinning and Hardwood Treatments 

Map 8 Alternative 3 Fuels Treatments 

Map 9 Alternative 4 Commercial Harvest 

Map 10 Alternative 4 Precommercial Thinning and Hardwood Treatments 

Map 11 Alternative 4 Fuels Treatments 

Map 12 Alternative 5 Commercial Harvest 

Map 13 Alternative 5 Precommercial Thinning and Hardwood Treatments 

Map 14 Alternative 5 Fuels Treatments 

Map 15 Priority Fuels Treatment Areas and Wildland Urban Interface 

Map 16 Recreation 

Map 17 Key Wildlife Areas 

List of Tables and Figures 

Table 1. Summary of activities included in Alternative 2. .....................................................20 

Table 2. Summary of activities included in Alternative 3. .....................................................21 

Table 3. Summary of activities included in Alternative 4. .....................................................23 

Table 4. Summary of activities included in Alternative 5. .....................................................25 

Table 5. Comparison of the effects of implementing each alternative. ..................................40 

Table 6. Acres by Plant Association Group (PAG). ...............................................................45 

Table 7. Viable Ecosystem seral/structural matrix. ................................................................46 

Table 8. Moist grand fir PAG. ................................................................................................47 

Table 9. Dry grand fir PAG. ...................................................................................................47 

Table 10. Douglas-fir PAG.....................................................................................................48 
Table of Contents 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page v 

Table 11. Mesic ponderosa pine PAG. ...................................................................................48 

Table 12. Xeric ponderosa pine PAG. ....................................................................................49 

Table 13. Western juniper PAG..............................................................................................49 

Table 14. Existing LOS and historic ranges by PAG. ............................................................50 

Table 15. Existing and post-treatment LOS by PAG (acres)..................................................55 

Table 16. Projected acres of LOS by PAG (Year 20).............................................................55 

Table 17. Projected acres of LOS by PAG (Year 30).............................................................56 

Table 18. Projected acres of LOS by PAG (Year 50).............................................................56 

Table 19. Acres dominated by grand and Douglas-fir............................................................59 

Table 20. Acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch..........................................59 

Table 21. High risk stages by PAG.........................................................................................64 

Table 22. Acres in a condition of high risk to insects and disease. ........................................65 

Table 23. Fire regime and condition class . ............................................................................67 

Table 24. Acres of fuel reduction activities............................................................................69 

Table 25. Acres of fuel reduction treatments in Alternative 3................................................71 

Table 26. Percent potential flame length (feet) by alternative................................................73 

Table 27. Rate of spread by alternative. .................................................................................73 

Table 28. Crown fire activity (percent of project area) by alternative....................................74 

Table 29. Burn probabilities (percent of project area) by alternative. ....................................74 

Table 30. Interim objectives for pool frequency in INFISH...................................................79 

Table 31. Existing amount of large woody debris compared to objective..............................80

Table 32. Comparison of activities within RHCAs by alternative. ........................................81 

Table 33. Acres of commercial harvest within RHCAs by alternative and stream class. ......82 

Table 34. Acres of hardwood thinning within RHCAs by stream class. ................................83 

Table 35. Acres of precommercial thinning within RHCAs by alternative and stream class.84 

Table 36. Acres of prescribed burning within RHCAs by stream class. ................................85

Table 37. Road construction (miles) by alternative................................................................88 

Table 38. Road closure, decommission, and reconstruction (miles) by alternative. ..............88 

Table 39. Road work (miles) within Class I and II RHCAs by alternative. ...........................99 

Table 40. Emissions from prescribed fire (tons)...................................................................104 

Table 41. Central Oregon population growth. ......................................................................117 

Table 42. Annual employments and income maintained or created.....................................120

Table 43. Acres of activities within the Bandit Springs Recreation Area. ...........................138 

Table 44. Miles of trail in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area ...........................................139 

Table 45. Acres of activities within 0.25 mile of developed campgrounds..........................143 

Table 46. Number of Forest Plan dispersed sites within units..............................................143 

Table 47. Acres of activities within 0.25 mile of snow parks...............................................144 

Table 48. Miles of Walton Lake cross-country ski trails within or adjacent to units...........147 

Table 49. Miles of snowmobile trails within or adjacent to units.........................................147 

Table 50. Miles of the Wildcat Trail within or adjacent to units..........................................149 

Table 51. Acres of activities by alternative. .........................................................................152 

Table 52. Acres of activities within the visual corridors. .....................................................162 

Table 53. Marks Creek 7-day average maximum water temperatures for 1997-2006. ........164 

Table 54. Tractor harvest unit areas of concern within 200 feet of streams.........................173 

Table 55. Tractor harvest unit areas of concern within 200 feet of streams.........................176 

Table 56. Tractor harvest unit areas of concern within 200 feet of streams.........................178 
Table of Contents 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page vi 

Table 57. Open road densities within 400 feet of streams....................................................180 

Table 58. EHA on National Forest System lands. ................................................................183 

Table 59. Primary reproductive habitat for goshawks post-treatment and after 50 years. ...187 

Table 60. Alternative 2 acres of activities within PFAs. ......................................................188 

Table 61. Alternative 3 acres of activities within PFAs. ......................................................189 

Table 62. Alternative 4 acres of activities within PFAs. ......................................................190 

Table 63. Alternative 5 acres of activities within PFAs. ......................................................191 

Table 64. Acres of treatment in pileated woodpecker feeding habitat. ................................201 

Table 65. Amount of pileated woodpecker habitat over time compared to HRV. ...............201 

Table 66. Amount of white-headed woodpecker habitat over time compared to HRV. ......204 

Table 67. Surveys and retention levels for snags less than 20 inches dbh............................214 

Table 68. Surveys and retention levels for snags greater than 20 inches dbh. ...................214 

Table 69. Distribution data for unharvested plots in DecAID 

for ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat types.............................................................215 

Table 70. Tolerance levels in ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir large tree (>10”snags)........215 

Table 71. Tolerance levels in ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir large tree (>20”snags)........216 

Table 72. Log levels prescribed in the Eastside Screens. .....................................................218 

Table 73. Cougar Salvage prescription for snags by PAG. ..................................................220 

Table 74. Blue Mountains Subprovince priority habitats and focal species.........................223 

Table 75. Comparison of existing habitat to HRV. ..............................................................224 

Table 76. Habitat acres for Alternative 2..............................................................................226 

Table 77. Habitat acres for Alternative 3..............................................................................227 

Table 78. Habitat acres for Alternative 4..............................................................................228 

Table 79. Habitat acres for Alternative 5..............................................................................229 

Table 80. Existing percent cover, road density, HEI, and Forest Plan goal. ........................245

Table 81. HEI General Forest (Summer Range). ................................................................245 

Table 82. HEI General Forest Winter Range........................................................................245 

Table 83. HEI Winter Range. ...............................................................................................246 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction..........................................................................254 

Figure 1. Projected acres of multi-strata LOS by alternative. ................................................57 

Figure 2. Projected acres of single-strata LOS by alternative. ..............................................57 

Figure 3. Projected total acres of LOS by alternative. ...........................................................57 

Figure 4. Grand and Douglas-fir dominated stages. ...............................................................60 

Figure 5. Ponderosa pine and western larch dominated stages...............................................60 

Figure 6. Acres in high risk stages susceptible to insects and disease and the 

historic range of high risk stages. ................................................................................66 
Changes between Draft and Final EIS 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page vii 

CHANGES BETWEEN DRAFT AND FINAL EIS 

Chapter 1 

Additional references to scientific literature have been included. 

The public involvement section has been updated to reflect the 45-day comment period. 

Chapter 2 

Design elements have been updated to reflect additional field work. 

Chapter 3 

Added definitions to the Fuels section to clarify fire regimes. 

Added to the descriptions of RHCAs to indicate that Class IV RHCAs are 100 feet including 

both sides of the stream channel. 

Added clarifying information on redband trout and effects from sediment delivery. 

Added information on the cumulative effects of livestock to the Soils section. 

Added information on raptors other than goshawk, bald eagle, and peregrine falcon. 

Included additional references to scientific literature and results of local monitoring. 

Appendices 

Updated Appendix A to include descriptions of road work. 

Added a new Appendix C that contains the responses to comments received as a result of the 45-

day comment period. 

Added a new Appendix D that contains letters from governmental agencies. 

Renumbered the map appendix and changed it to Appendix E. 
Changes between Draft and Final EIS 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page viii 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 1 

CHAPTER 1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR 

ACTION 

Document Structure 

The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in compliance with 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and 

regulations. This EIS discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that 

would result from the proposed action and alternatives. The document is organized into four 

chapters: 

Chapter 1. Purpose and Need for Action: The chapter includes information on the history of the 

project proposal, the purpose of and need for the project, and the agency’s proposal for achieving 

that purpose and need. This section also details how the Forest Service informed the public of 

the proposal and how the public responded. 

Chapter 2. Alternatives, including the Proposed Action: This chapter provides a more detailed 

description of the agency’s proposed action as well as alternative methods for achieving the 

stated purpose. These alternatives were developed based on significant issues raised by the 

public and other agencies. This discussion also includes mitigation measures. Finally, this 

section provides a summary table of the environmental consequences associated with each 

alternative. 

Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences: This chapter describes the 

environmental effects of implementing the proposed action and other alternatives. This analysis 

is organized by resource. 

Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination: This chapter provides a list of preparers and 

agencies consulted during the development of the EIS. 

Index: The index provides page numbers by document topic. 

Appendices: The appendices provide more detailed information to support the analyses 

presented in the environmental impact statement. 

Additional documentation, including more detailed analyses of project area resources, may be 

found in the project record located at the Lookout Mountain Ranger District office in Prineville, 

Oregon. 

Purpose and Need for Action 

The purpose and need for this proposal was derived from evaluating current planning direction 

identified in the Forest Plan, identifying desired future conditions, and comparing them to the 

existing conditions in the project area. The 1998 Marks Creek Watershed Analysis, the May 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 2 

2002 Addendum to the Marks Creek Watershed Analysis, and the December 2002 Bandit II 

Environmental Assessment were used as a basis for the existing condition. The purposes of this 

proposal are to: 

 1. Maintain and increase the abundance of late and old structure (LOS). 

 2. Reduce fuels and the potential for high-intensity wildfires. 

 3. Maintain conditions that would currently support low-intensity fires. 

 4. Reduce the susceptibility of the landscape to large-scale infestation by insects and 

disease. 

 5. Enhance hardwood communities, such as aspen and cottonwood. 

 6. Increase riparian vegetation and large tree structure in RHCAs. 

 7. Increase early-seral species composition. 

This action responds to the goals and objectives outlined in the Ochoco National Forest Land and 

Resource Management Plan as amended (Forest Plan), and helps move the project area towards 

desired conditions described in that plan. 

Late and Old Structure (LOS), Early-seral Species Composition, and 

Infestations by Insects and Disease 

The Forest Plan (p. 4-12) identifies a goal of maintaining forest health for present and future 

uses. The Forest Plan (p. 4-3) also has a goal to “maintain or enhance ecosystem functions to 

provide long-term productivity of forest resources and biological communities.” The objective 

associated with this goal is to provide for all seral stages of plant associations, with a distribution 

that is ecologically sound. The Interim Ecosystem Standard in the Eastside Screens (Appendix 

B, p. 4) states “characterize ... [the] watershed for patterns of stand structure ... and compare to 

the historic range of variability.” The Ochoco National Forest Viable Ecosystems Management 

Guide (Simpson et al. 1994) is a tool for analyzing each seral/structural stage for the plant 

associations found on the Ochoco National Forest. Managing an ecosystem within its range of 

natural (or historic) variability is a scientifically defensible way to maintain diverse, resilient, 

productive, and healthy systems (Swanson et al. 1994). 

The vegetative conditions in the Spears project area were characterized with the Viable 

Ecosystems Model (Simpson et al. 1994). This model was used to compare existing seral 

structural conditions to the historic range of variability (HRV). The model focuses on 

relationships between combinations of vegetation structure and species composition. Based on 

the comparison of seral structural conditions, there are too many areas dominated by trees from 5 

to 20.9 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) and not enough areas dominated by large trees 

(greater than 21 inches dbh). Many areas have dense tree stocking in the understory and the 

abundance of species such as Douglas-fir and grand fir (late-seral species) has increased. 

Late and old structure (LOS) is the vegetative stage in which large trees are common. Large 

trees are 21 inches dbh or larger. Historically, the amount of LOS within the project area would 

have ranged from approximately 10,600 to 20,200 acres. Today, the amount of area classified as 

LOS is approximately 5,650 acres, which is well below the HRV. 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 3 

LOS is classified into two types, multi or single strata. Multi-strata LOS has several strata of 

trees present. Single-strata LOS is more open and has a single stratum of large trees and young 

trees are absent or only a few exist in the understory. Historically, the single strata condition was

the most common type of LOS in the project area, ranging from approximately 8,000 to 15,000 

acres in abundance. Approximately 1,900 acres of single-strata LOS exists within the project 

area. Historically, multi-strata LOS ranged from 2,600 to 5,300 acres in the project area. 

Currently, there are approximately 3,700 acres classified as multi-strata LOS in the project area. 

Today, about 65 percent of the existing LOS is multi-strata compared to about 25 percent 

historically. 

The current departure from historic LOS conditions is primarily a result of past timber harvest 

(which removed large trees from the landscape), the Hash Rock Fire of 2000 (in which an 

estimated 940 acres of LOS were lost), and fire exclusion. Fire exclusion over the past 90 years 

has encouraged the establishment and development of late-seral, shade-tolerant understory trees 

such as grand fir within what were once open stands of primarily early-seral large trees. 

Historically, stands were less dense, contained a higher percentage of fire-tolerant species such 

as ponderosa pine and western larch, and had more open understory conditions. When stands 

become denser, additional competitive stress is placed on the remaining large trees. Trees under 

competitive stress are less vigorous, grow slower, and are more prone to being killed by insects 

and disease. Dense multi-strata stands are also more prone to stand replacement wildfire due to 

the presence of ladder fuels and increased canopy density. 

Given the relatively low amount of large trees and the time and growth needed to develop large 

trees, it is important to take action now to increase the resiliency of large trees and increase 

growth rates in smaller trees by reducing competition. Competition from intermediate and 

suppressed trees in ponderosa pine stands reduces growth of the large dominant and codominant 

trees (Cochran 1993). Removing small and medium sized trees (trees less than 21 inches dbh) 

will reduce competitive stress and reduce the amount of area with overstocked stands. 

Overstocked stands are slow growing because of competition and are less resistant to insects and 

disease. Removing trees less than 21 inches dbh would reduce stand density and move multicanopied (multi-strata) stands towards single canopied (single-strata) stands. This would 

maintain these stands longer into the future. Based on the low levels of LOS in the project area, 

there is a need for (1) increasing the abundance of LOS within the Spears Project Area, 

especially single-strata LOS; (2) maintaining the existing amount of LOS; (3) maintaining 

existing large trees and encouraging the development of additional large trees; and (4) reducing 

competition among trees and reducing susceptibility to infestations by insects and disease. 

Removing smaller, understory trees would: 

 1. Maintain and increase the future abundance of LOS by reducing competition. 

Precommercial and commercial thinning would reduce stand densities to recommended stocking 

levels. This would encourage increased growth rates on the remaining trees allowing them to 

become large trees more rapidly. Precommercial and commercial thinning would also remove 

trees with damage or disease and those weakest trees unlikely to ever become large trees. 

Reducing stand densities, removing ladder fuels, and reducing fuel loadings would also improve 

the likelihood of younger/smaller trees reaching large tree size without being killed in a wildfire. 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 4 

Precommercial and commercial thinning would remove understories which have developed in 

the absence of frequent, low-intensity wildfire, moving stands from multi towards single strata. 

Precommercial thinning and underburning will maintain stands which are currently single strata 

by removing small trees before they develop into a full canopy stratum. 

 2. Maintain LOS by reducing the likelihood of a stand replacement wildfire. Removing 

ladder fuels and reducing crown densities through precommercial and commercial thinning 

would raise canopy base height, reduce canopy bulk density, and reduce the potential for a highintensity wildfire. Treatment of activity-generated and natural fuels would reduce surface fire 

intensity, lower flame heights, and reduce the potential for large trees to be killed. 

 3. Improve stand health by increasing vigor and reducing susceptibility to insect and 

disease related mortality. Reducing competition would allow the large trees to maintain or 

increase vigor, thus reducing their susceptibility to being killed by insects and disease. 

Precommercial and commercial thinning would reduce the number of smaller trees, thus 

increasing the growing space available for the remaining large trees. Underburning would also 

reduce the number of small trees, although it is mostly effective on only the smallest trees or fireintolerant species, such as grand fir. 

 (4) Increase early-seral species composition. Precommercial and commercial thinning, as 

well as underburning, will favor the retention of species which were more abundant historically. 

Fire-tolerant, early-seral species such as ponderosa pine and western larch would be favored for 

retention while fire-intolerant species such as grand fir would be targeted for removal. Stands of 

predominately fire-tolerant species would be more likely to survive a future wildfire. 

Fuels 

The Forest Plan (p. 4-9) identifies a goal to “Provide for the ecologically sound use of prescribed 

fire as a cost-effective management tool for achieving resource management objectives.” The 

Forest Plan (p. 4-10) also identifies objectives related to prescribed burning. These objectives 

relate to reducing wildfire intensities to support a cost-efficient fire protection organization, and 

emulating the natural role of fire in maintaining environmental diversity and site productivity. 

Since the Forest Plan was developed, there have been several efforts that stress the importance of 

reducing hazardous fuels and restoring healthy ecosystems. In April 1999, the General 

Accounting Office (GAO) in a report to Congress concluded that “the most extensive and serious 

problem related to the health of national forests in the interior West is the over-accumulation of 

vegetation.” The GAO report criticized the Forest Service for not having “clear goals, 

objectives, direction, and budgets that adequately address ecosystem restoration and maintenance 

needs.” 

In April 2000, the Forest Service responded with “A Cohesive Strategy for Protecting People and 

Sustaining Resources in Fire-Adapted Ecosystems” (Cohesive Strategy). This strategy addresses 

the hazards and risks from unnatural over-accumulations of fuels in high-frequency, lowintensity fire regimes, and the wildfires in these regimes which burn at high levels of severity. 

The purpose of the Cohesive Strategy (p. 10) is to restore and maintain health in fire-adapted 

ecosystems across the interior West. The Cohesive Strategy outlines prescribed fire and 

mechanical fuels treatments to reduce the hazards and risks. 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 5 

Later that same year, the National Fire Plan was developed with the intent of actively responding 

to severe wildland fires and their impacts to communities. The National Fire Plan recognizes 

that wildland fires play an integral role in many forest and rangeland ecosystems; however, 

decades of fire exclusion efforts have disrupted the natural fire regimes. 

In August 2001, a 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy for reducing wildland fire risks was issued. 

The Comprehensive Strategy outlines an approach to “reduce the risks of wildfire to 

communities and the environment.” 

In August 2002, the President announced the Healthy Forests Initiative (HFI). The HFI 

recognized that “forest and rangelands of the West have become unnaturally dense, and 

ecosystem health has suffered” and that “these unhealthy forests, overloaded with fuels, are 

vulnerable to unnaturally severe wildfires.” Congress responded in part to the HFI by passing 

the Healthy Forest Restoration Act to help reduce hazardous fuels and restore healthy forest and 

rangeland conditions. 

In July 2005, the Crook County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) was approved. 

This plan designated a large portion (more than half) of the Spears project area as Wildland 

Urban Interface (WUI). In the Crook County CWPP, this area was identified as an area to 

expedite WUI hazardous fuels treatments. This WUI area includes all land in the project area 

southeast of U.S. Highway 26, all private property, and lands northwest of U.S. Highway 26 for 

its entire length. U.S. Highway 26 is a major egress and ingress route for the Marks Creek 

watershed. Unplanned ignitions have the potential to affect private property, recreation users, 

and the electronic equipment at Viewpoint communication site. In November 2006, the Wheeler 

County CWPP was approved. The Wheeler County CWPP also identified WUI in the northeast 

portion of the Spears project area. 

Historically, the dominant disturbance factor in the project area was frequent, low-intensity fire 

that eliminated the majority of seedlings and saplings. Most of the Spears project area had a 

short fire return interval, typically returning every 5 to 25 years. Frequent, low-intensity fires 

helped to maintain open stands of large trees, dominated by ponderosa pine. These frequent fires 

resulted in low levels of surface fuels. In the absence of frequent, low-intensity fires, forest 

stands in the project area have developed multi-canopy conditions, stocking levels have 

increased, ladder fuels have increased, surface fuels have increased, and the abundance of lateseral, fire-intolerant species (such as grand fir) has increased. These changes from historic 

conditions have left forested stands susceptible to high-intensity wildfire, with an increased 

potential for the unwanted loss of trees, water quality, soil productivity, wildlife habitat, and 

other forest resources. High-intensity wildfires caused by these conditions also limit the 

suppression options available to firefighters, decreasing the safety, efficiency, and economy of 

fire suppression. 

Hardwood Plant Communities 

The Forest Plan (p. 4-3) identifies a goal of maintaining “native, historic, and desirable introduced 

plant and animal species and communities.” The Forest Plan (p. 4-32) identifies a desired future 

condition where hardwoods such as cottonwood, aspen, alder, and willow will be more common 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 6 

along streams, meadows, and wet areas. In other words, the desired future conditions is to have 

well distributed and vigorous hardwood communities across the project area. The Forest Plan 

standards and guidelines (p. 4-121) state “manage aspen stands to produce a vigorous population, 

forest-wide.” The 1998 Marks Creek Watershed Analysis (p. 114) recommends that aspen and 

cottonwood stands be re-invigorated by thinning conifers within and adjacent to clones. 

Both cottonwood and aspen grow in self-perpetuating clones in areas of locally high moisture such 

as meadows, seeps, and adjacent to streams. Conifer trees are encroaching into aspen and 

cottonwood stands in the project area. Mueggler (1989) states that aspen is a relatively shortlived, shade-intolerant species, that rapidly declines in abundance as conifers gain dominance in 

the overstory. In the project area, conifers are competing with the hardwood trees for light, 

moisture, and growing space. Since the hardwood trees are not shade tolerant, they can be 

shaded out by the encroaching conifers, which results in loss of vigor for the hardwoods in the 

short term, and can lead to loss of the clone(s) in the long term. There is a need for more 

vigorous aspen and cottonwood stands. 

Removing conifer trees within and adjacent to aspen and cottonwood stands would reduce 

competition for light, moisture, and growing space. Reducing competition would also improve 

the vigor of hardwood stands and prevent a decline in the abundance, distribution, and extent of 

hardwood communities within the project area. 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) 

In 1995, the Decision Notice for the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH) was signed and 

amended the Ochoco Forest Plan. The INFISH established Interim Riparian Management 

Objectives (RMOs) for several fish habitat features. 

The Forest Plan emphasis for riparian areas is to manage streamside vegetation and habitat to 

maintain or improve water quality. Forest Plan goals for riparian vegetation includes providing 

“an amount and distribution of large woody debris characteristic of natural aquatic and riparian 

ecosystems; and habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native 

plant, vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the viability of ripariandependent communities” (INFISH, pp. A-1 to 2). 

The amount and type of vegetation in riparian areas plays an important role in the maintaining 

and improving both water quality and fish habitat. The increasing amount of conifers in RHCAs 

prevents woody vegetation such as alder, willow, aspen, and shrubs from expanding. Conifers 

within RHCAs compete with these species for nutrients. Many of these broadleaf species are 

shade-intolerant; throughout the project area conifers are shading these brushy, shrubby species, 

and they are losing vigor. The roots of woody vegetation helps to stabilize streambanks and the 

stems act as a roughness element that reduces the velocity and erosive energy of over bank flow 

during high water events. Conifers do not provide the same bank stabilizing function as these 

brushy, shrubby species. 

Based on stream surveys, the project area is deficient in the amount of large woody material in 

streams. Large woody material provides aquatic habitats and shade for streams. Redband trout, 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 7 

like many other salmonids, have evolved in stream systems in which large woody material helps 

retain organic and inorganic particulate matter that is important for channel stability, biological 

diversity, and productivity (Nakamura and Swanson 1993). Large wood influences habitat for 

fish and other aquatic organisms by serving as energy dissipaters, flow deflectors, and dams. 

Large woody material in streams and the adjacent flood plain provides streambank stability, 

decreases flow velocities, increases storage time (decreases downstream flood risk), and stores 

sediment. Large trees are needed in RHCAs because they become large woody material when 

they fall. 

There is a need for fewer conifers within RHCAs. Reducing the amount of conifers within 

RHCAs would (1) encourage alder, willow, aspen, and other broadleaf species to expand, and (2) 

increase the growth rates of remaining conifers in RHCAs so they grow larger and can 

eventually provide future large wood to streams. 

Proposed Action 

The Lookout Mountain Ranger District is proposing to manage vegetation through commercial 

timber harvest, precommercial thinning, and fuel reduction activities to meet the purpose and 

need. The proposed action includes approximately 6,172 acres of commercial harvest, 11,160 

acres of precommercial thinning, and 196 acres of thinning in hardwood stands. Fuel reduction 

activities include approximately 15,464 acres of prescribed fire, and 3,015 acres of grapple and 

718 acres of hand piling. Commercial harvest includes tractor, skyline, and helicopter logging 

systems. Areas identified as tractor logging are areas where heavy equipment, such as logging 

tractors/skidders, will be used to remove a commercial product. Road construction activities 

include 18.0 miles of new road construction, and 12.0 miles of reconstructing roads on an 

existing road bed. Newly constructed roads and roads that are reopened would be closed after 

harvest activities are complete. A complete description of the proposed action (Alternative 2) is 

contained in Chapter 2. 

Project Area 

The project area is located about 20 miles northeast of Prineville, Oregon. U.S. Highway 26 

bisects the project area. The project area lies within portions of T. 12 S., R. 19 E.; T. 12 S., R. 20 

E.; T. 13 S., R. 18 E.; T. 13 S., R. 19 E.; T. 13 S., R. 20 E.; T. 14 S., R. 18 E.; T. 14 S., R. 19 E.; 

Willamette Meridian. Map 1 (vicinity map) displays the project area. 

The project area is comprised of approximately 39,200 acres primarily within the Marks Creek 

watershed. Marks Creek flows into Ochoco Creek, approximately 6 miles above Ochoco 

Reservoir, and is a part of the Deschutes/Crooked River Basin. Elevations range from 5,985 feet 

above sea level on Wildcat Mountain on the western edge of project area to 3,360 feet where 

Marks Creek joins Ochoco Creek. 

There are several tracts of private land (2,325 acres) within the project area boundary. 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 8 

Forest Plan Direction 

This project is tiered to the 1989 Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Ochoco 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), as amended by the 1995 

Revised Continuation of Interim Management Direction Establishing Riparian, Ecosystem, and 

Wildlife Standards for Timber Sales (Eastside Screens), the 1995 Inland Native Fish Strategy 

(INFISH), and the 2006 Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program EIS. The Forest Plan 

direction, including standards and guidelines, are based on these documents and were used in 

developing the proposed activities. 

There are 13 Forest Plan management areas in the project area. A management area is 

“composed of lands with similar capabilities or characteristics” (Forest Plan, p. 4-45). Each 

management area has specific goals, desired future conditions, and standards and guidelines. 

The location of these management areas is depicted on Map 2. The emphasis for each of the 

management areas is briefly described below. 

MA-F3 Mill Creek Wilderness - Protect the Wilderness ecosystem. Manage use to maintain a 

natural setting and preserve solitude (Forest Plan, p. 4-52). The project area includes 

approximately 3,650 acres of the Mill Creek Wilderness. No activities are proposed within this 

management area. 

MA-F5 Research Natural Area - Allow natural processes to occur for research purposes 

(Forest Plan, p. 4-56). The project area includes approximately 1,000 acres of the Ochoco 

Divide RNA. No activities are proposed within this management area. 

MA-F6 Old Growth - Habitat will be provided for wildlife species dependent upon old-growth 

stands (Forest Plan, p. 4-58). The project area contains an estimated 821 acres of allocated old 

growth. 

MA-F7 Summit Historic Trail - Protect the existing integrity of the Summit Trail. Enhance 

and interpret significant segments for public enjoyment and education. Pristine segments will be 

managed to protect, interpret, and preserve their historic qualities (Forest Plan p. 4-60). The 

project area includes an estimated 972 acres of the Summit Historic Trail management area. 

MA-F13 Developed Recreation - 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). The project area includes 69 acres within the developed 

recreation management area. 

MA-F14 Dispersed Recreation - Provide and maintain a near-natural setting for people to 

utilize while pursuing outdoor recreation experiences (Forest Plan, p. 4-72). The project area 

includes 52 sites that were identified in the Forest Plan as dispersed recreation sites. 

MA-F15 Riparian and RHCA - Manage streamside vegetation and habitat to maintain or 

improve water quality. The INFISH delineated Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 9 

where riparian-dependent resources receive primary emphasis. These RHCAs include traditional 

riparian corridors, wetlands, intermittent streams, and other areas that help maintain the integrity 

of aquatic ecosystems. RHCAs encompass the MA-F15 management area and are overlaid on 

other management areas. RHCAs are shown on the Fish Distribution Map (Map 3 located at the 

end of this EIS). There are an estimated 4,546 acres within RHCAs. 

MA-F16 Bandit Springs Recreational Area - Provide dispersed, nonmotorized recreational 

opportunities within a setting where most management activities are generally not evident to the 

casual observer. Periodic manipulation of vegetation to meet recreation and visual objectives for 

the area will be apparent to the user. Timber stands will be managed to develop and maintain 

resistance to catastrophic events that would detract from the recreational experience (Forest Plan, 

pp. 4-76 and 4-77). The Bandit Springs Recreation Area is 1,580 acres. 

MA-F20 Winter Range - Manage for big game winter range habitat (Forest Plan, p. 4-82). The 

project area includes an estimated 3,824 acres of winter range. 

MA-F21 General Forest Winter Range - Manage for timber production with management 

activities designed and implemented to recognize big game habitat needs (Forest Plan, p. 4-84). 

The project area includes an estimated 2,428 acres within this management area. 

MA-F22 General Forest - 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). There are an estimated 16,792 

acres of general forest within the project area. 

MA-F25 U.S. Highway 26 Visual Corridor - Maintain and enhance the scenery for travelers 

along U.S. Highway 26 (Forest Plan, p. 4-93). The project area includes 5,586 acres within the 

U.S. Highway 26 Visual Corridor. 

MA-F26 Visual Management Corridors - Maintain the natural-appearing character of the 

Forest along major travel routes, where management activities are usually not evident or are 

visually subordinate to the surrounding landscape (Forest Plan, p. 4-95). The project area 

includes approximately 400 acres in visual management corridors outside the U.S. Highway 26 

corridor. 

Decision Framework 

The responsible official for this proposal is the Forest Supervisor of the Ochoco National Forest. 

The responsible official will decide whether to: 

 1. Select the proposed action, or 

 2. Select an action alternative that has been considered in detail, or 

 3. Modify an action alternative, or 

 4. Select the no-action alternative, and 

 5. Identify what mitigation measures and monitoring will apply. 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 10 

The responsible official will decide whether to conduct commercial timber harvest, 

precommercial thinning, hardwood thinning, and fuels reduction activities in the Spears project 

area. The decision will be determined by how well each alternative provides the best mix of 

prospective results in regard to the purpose and need, the issues, types and levels of effects, and 

public comments. The responsible official will consider: 

 1. Would LOS be maintained and increased? Would the amount of single-strata LOS be 

increased? Would stand density be reduced to remove competitive stress on large trees? Would 

the management activities result in more large trees being maintained over time, as well as 

encourage the development of additional large trees? 

 2. Would the density and species composition of forested stands be modified towards a 

balance of seral/structural stages as described by the historic range of variability? Would the 

susceptibility of the landscape to large-scale infestation by insects and disease be reduced? 

Would forested stands shift toward dominance by early-seral, fire-tolerant species such as 

ponderosa pine and western larch? 

 3. Would surface fuels, ladder fuels, and stand density be reduced to decrease the 

susceptibility to high-intensity wildfire? Would the abundance of late-seral, fire-intolerant 

species (such as grand fir) be reduced? Would fire regimes move toward those that occurred 

historically? 

 4. Would maintenance underburning occur to maintain conditions that currently support 

low-intensity fires? 

 5. Would the vigor of hardwood stands be improved? Would the competition with 

conifers be reduced? Would the abundance, distribution, and extent of hardwood communities 

within the project area be maintained or increased? 

 6. Would the proposed activities contribute toward meeting the interim Riparian 

Management Objectives contained in INFISH? Would the proposed activities in RHCAs 

encourage alder, willow, aspen, and other broadleaf species to expand? Would the proposed 

activities accelerate the development of large trees so they provide future large wood to streams? 

Public Involvement 

The Notice of Intent (NOI) was published in the Federal Register on June 2, 2006. The NOI 

requested public comment on the proposal by June 26, 2006. On May 23, 2006, as part of the 

public involvement process, the agency mailed letters to 63 individuals, organizations, adjacent 

landowners, and other potentially interested organizations, including tribal agencies. 

Forest Service staff also met with members of the Crook County Natural Resources Planning 

Committee to discuss the Spears Project on three occasions (March 27, 2006, June 6, 2006, and 

January 4, 2007). Two field trips to the project area were held. The first field trip was on June 

6, 2006, and the second was on August 30, 2006. 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 11 

The Spears Project has also been listed in the Ochoco National Forest Schedule of Proposed 

Actions since the Spring 2006 edition. 

In response to the initial public involvement efforts, the Forest Service received comments from 

nine individuals, organizations, groups, and tribes. Using these comments from the public, the 

interdisciplinary team developed a list of issues to address. 

In May 2007, the Draft EIS was made available for public comment. The Notice of Availability 

for the Draft EIS for the Spears Vegetation Management Project was published in the Federal 

Register on May 11, 2007 (Vol. 72, No. 91). Seven comment letters were received during the 

comment period, including one letter from a governmental agency. These comments were 

considered and responses to all substantive comments can be found in Appendix C. 

Issues 

The Forest Service separated the issues into three groups: significant, other, and non-significant 

issues. Significant issues were defined as points of discussion, debate, or dispute about 

environmental effects that may occur as a result of the proposed action. Significant issues were 

used to develop alternatives and design elements or resource protection measures. Other issues 

were defined as concerns related to the proposed action. Non-significant issues were identified 

as those: (1) outside the scope of the proposed action; (2) already decided by law, regulation, 

Forest Plan, or other higher level decision; (3) irrelevant to the decision to be made; or (4) 

conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence. The Council on Environmental 

Quality regulations explain this delineation in Sec. 1501.7, “...identify and eliminate from 

detailed study the issues which are not significant or which have been covered by prior 

environmental review (Sec. 1506.3).” 

Significant Issues 

The Forest Service identified two issues from the scoping comments that led to alternative 

development. The first issue related to road construction. Comments suggested that the 

proposed action included too much road construction. Other comments suggested that the road 

density in the project area was too high and should be reduced. Some comments indicated that 

roads cause fragmentation and affect water quality. Alternative 4 was developed with an 

emphasis on using existing roads and minimizing new road construction. Alternative 4 does 

include some new road construction; new road segments are generally less than 0.25 miles. 

Other comments related to roads suggested that additional roads should be closed. All of the 

newly constructed roads in Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 will be closed after use. In addition, some 

currently open roads will be closed and other roads will be decommissioned. The amount of 

road construction, reconstruction, closure, and decommissioning varies by alternative. The 

alternative descriptions in Chapter 2 provide information on road work included in each 

alternative. The differences between alternatives are measured by the amount of road 

construction, reconstruction, and decommissioning. 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 12 

The second issue that led to developing an alternative was related to wildlife. Comments related 

to wildlife included concerns about habitat for goshawks, pileated woodpeckers, elk, cavitynesting birds, and neotropical migratory birds. Alternative 5 was developed by comparing the 

proposed action to a variety of wildlife habitats such as pileated woodpecker feeding habitat 

(pfh), goshawk post-fledging areas (PFA), elk satisfactory cover (70% canopy closure) in winter 

range, connective corridors (Eastside Screens), and special habitats such as aspen and 

cottonwood stands. Alternative 5 was developed to include a greater emphasis on variable 

density thinning and retention of dense patches of vegetation within these wildlife habitats. The 

differences between alternatives are measured by the activities within and changes to goshawk 

and pileated woodpecker habitat. For elk, the differences between alternatives are measured by 

the change in the Habitat Effectiveness Index (HEI). 

One commenter suggested that the project should establish conditions for effective winter range 

use by deer and elk. All of the alternatives were designed to meet Forest Plan standards for 

winter range. Alternative 5 was developed with an added emphasis on wildlife habitat including 

habitat in winter range. The effects of each of the alternatives on winter range are disclosed in 

Chapter 3 under the elk section. 

One commenter stated that they supported variable density thinning that allows young forests to 

develop into more complex and resilient forests. All of the action alternatives include variable 

density thinning. Alternative 5 was developed with an emphasis on wildlife habitat and includes 

a greater emphasis on variable density thinning and retention of dense patches of vegetation in 

certain wildlife habitats. 

In the scoping letter and the Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS, the Forest Service indicated that 

it was considering an alternative that included only precommercial thinning and prescribed fire 

activities. Several comments suggested that an alternative should be considered that did not 

include commercial harvest or road construction. Other comments suggested that an alternative 

should be considered that included a diameter limit of 10 or 14 inches dbh. Alternative 3 does 

not include any commercial harvest, road construction, and limits thinning to trees less than 12 

inches dbh. 

Some commenters suggested that snags should be harvested, while others suggested that snags 

should be retained and additional snags should be created. The level of snags across the project 

area varies. In the Hash Rock Fire area, there are many snags. Over the last 30-35 years, about 

7,500 acres have been harvested. These areas are deficient in snags. Across the project area, the 

number of snags is estimated to average about 65 percent of the maximum potential population. 

The Eastside Screens indicates that snags should be maintained at 100 percent of potential 

population levels. Because the amount of snags is less than 100 percent of potential population 

levels, none of the alternatives include harvesting snags with the exception of snags that pose a 

safety hazard. 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 13 

Other Issues 

Some comments indicated that commercial harvest and precommercial thinning should only be 

allowed in RHCAs where these actions would benefit riparian management objectives. Part of 

the Purpose and Need for this project is to encourage vegetative diversity in RHCAs and increase 

the future availability of large wood. All of the activities in RHCAs in the action alternatives 

have been proposed to promote attainment of riparian management objectives. 

One commenter stated that the proposed action should not create or leave excessive levels of 

untreated slash. All of the action alternatives include activity-fuels treatments, such as 

underburning, grapple piling, and hand piling. In addition, where precommercial thinning is 

proposed in some plantations, slash will be lopped. 

A few comments expressed concerns related to effects on soils. Chapter 3 includes a discussion 

of the expected effects on soils. Appendix B includes a unit-by-unit analysis of soil conditions. 

Two commenters suggested that the effects of OHV use needed to be considered and that 

targeted mitigation to reduce OHV use needed to be included in the EIS. Where appropriate, the 

effects of OHV use are discussed under the cumulative effects sections in Chapter 3. Targeted 

mitigation to reduce OHV use was not considered in detail in this EIS because it is outside the 

scope of this project. However, the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests are beginning a 

Travel Management project that will result in identifying roads, trails, and areas where motorized 

use, including OHVs, will be allowed. 

One commenter suggested that the primary cause of decline in hardwood communities is 

excessive livestock grazing. There are several causes for hardwood decline including 

competition with conifers, stream down cutting, excessive vegetation upslope of hardwoods, 

road diversions, and browse by both livestock and wildlife. All action alternatives include 

reducing conifer competition in several aspen and cottonwood stands. In conjunction with 

thinning conifers, fencing would be constructed around many of these stands to reduce browse 

pressure. 

One commenter suggested that the hydrologic impacts of roads should be analyzed. The Water 

Quality discussion in Chapter 3 includes a discussion of the hydrologic impacts of roads. 

One commenter stated that the project area contained unroaded areas adjacent to the Mill Creek 

Wilderness and the Ochoco Divide Research Natural Area (RNA) and that the EIS should fully 

analyze any effects to roadless areas and values. The Final EIS does not analyze effects to 

roadless areas and values because there are no inventoried roadless areas within the project area. 

The areas identified as “unroaded” by the commenter are generally small. Several of these small 

areas are in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area, which is adjacent to the Mill Creek Wilderness. 

As mentioned previously, the emphasis in this area is to provide dispersed, nonmotorized 

recreational opportunities within a setting where most management activities are generally not 

evident to the casual observer. None of the alternatives include any road construction in the 

small areas within the Bandit Springs Recreation Area that the commenter identified as 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 14 

unroaded. The Bandit Springs Recreation Area would continue to be managed for nonmotorized recreation. Southwest of the Bandit Springs Recreation Area, the commenter 

identified an area primarily in Sections 18 and 19, between the Mill Creek Wilderness and U.S. 

Highway 26. This area has already been developed and includes several roads and evidence of 

past logging activities. Roads in this area include U.S. Highway 26, 3350, 3350-100, 3350-102, 

3350-103, 3350-209, and unclassified roads that are not numbered. Another area the commenter 

identified as unroaded encompasses the Ochoco Divide RNA and straddles the watershed 

boundary. This area is only partially within the project area. None of the alternatives proposed 

any road construction in this area, with the exception of a short spur road to access Unit 887 in 

Alternative 2. This short spur road would come off the 2630-013 in Section 36. This area has 

already been developed and contains several roads including the 2630-015, 2630-016, the 450 

and 452 roads, and an “unclassified” road between the 2630-013 road and the 452 road. None of 

the areas identified by the commenter, with the possible exception of the area around the Ochoco 

Divide RNA, are undeveloped. Management emphasis within the Ochoco Divide RNA is to 

allow natural processes to occur for research purposes and education. None of the alternatives 

would alter the character of the Ochoco Divide RNA. 

Several commenters stated that the Agency must prioritize fuel treatment in areas that protect 

homes and communities. During the development of the proposed action, the interdisciplinary 

team identified several fuel treatment emphasis areas, including areas within the WUI. Fuel 

reduction activities were proposed in these areas to tie into treatment areas from past activities. 

These areas were labeled as fuel compartments and are displayed on Map 15 along with the 

Crook County identified WUI. Lands identified by Wheeler County have not yet been included 

in the Ochoco GIS system and are not displayed on Map 15. The following paragraphs describe 

the fuel compartments with an explanation of the areas to protect, past activities, and units 

identified in the Spears proposal that would reduce fire hazard. 

Fuel Compartment A: This emphasis area runs along Road 27, U.S. Highway 26, and access to 

private property. Within this area, maintenance burning and thinning along Highway 26 would 

occur. Within plantations slash would be lopped. Spears units (718, 719, 722, 723, 727, 729, 

and 401) have been interlinked with previously treated areas such as those from the McGinnis 

and Harpo timber sales and the Cougar underburn project. Spears units, combined with the Hash 

Rock fire and previous activities are designed to provide a buffer to the private property in this 

fuel compartment. 

Fuel Compartment B: This emphasis area partially surrounds the Ochoco Divide RNA, and runs 

along U.S. Highway 26 and Roads 2630 and 2210. These roads have been identified as 

ingress/egress routes. Within this area, maintenance burning and thinning along Highway 26 

would occur. Within plantations slash would be hand piled or lopped. The combination of 

treatments in this area is to increase the probability of a successful suppression action should an 

unplanned ignition occur in or near the RNA. 

Fuel Compartment C: This emphasis area includes NFS lands adjacent to private property and 

U.S. Highway 26. Within this area, maintenance burning and thinning along U.S. Highway 26 

would occur. This area includes Hamilton Butte. Underburning on and near Hamilton Butte 

occurred in the 1980s, 1990s, and in 2004. Activities in this area would tie the proposed Spears 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 15 

units with previous underburning and with thinning that occurred under the Harpo Timber Sale. 

Spears units in this area include 559, 560, 562, 876, 878, and 925. Spears units, combined with 

the previous activities, are designed to provide a buffer to the private property in this fuel 

compartment and increase the probability of successful suppression should an unplanned ignition 

occur. 

Fuel Compartment D: This emphasis area includes NFS lands adjacent to private property and 

U.S. Highway 26. Within this area, maintenance burning and thinning in previously treated units 

along U.S. Highway 26 would occur. Units will be grapple piled and/or underburned. There has 

been little management activity in the areas bordering private property to the south and west 

during the past 20 years. A high percentage of the area along private property contains 

hazardous conditions. Activities in this area are designed to reduce surface and ladder fuels and 

reduce the hazardous conditions. Fuel reduction in this area would reduce the likelihood that an 

unplanned ignition will spread from NFS lands to private lands or vice versa. At this time, the 

private property adjacent to the National Forest is largely undeveloped and is used for livestock 

grazing and some timber production. 

Fuel Compartment E: This emphasis area includes areas along Road 3350 and U.S. Highway 26. 

These roads have been identified as ingress/egress routes. Within this area, maintenance burning 

and thinning of previously treated areas would occur. Thinning units will be grapple piled and/or 

underburned. This area also includes the Jim Elliott Old Growth Management Area (OGMA). 

Previous treatments along the west and southwest side of the OGMA occurred as part of the 

Thunder Project (timber sale and underburning). The east-northeast side of the OGMA has had 

little activity in the past 20 years. It is possible that an unplanned ignition on the east-northeast

side could enter the OGMA and render it unsuitable for pileated woodpeckers. If an unplanned 

ignition were to occur on a 97th percentile day, most of the OGMA would be expected to burn at 

high intensity because of the existing fuel loading and vegetation in the OGMA block. Spears 

units 109, 110, 163, 171, 174, 212, 814, 816, 818, 828, 832, 833, 935, 940, and 941 would 

reduce fuels near the OGMA and reduce the likelihood of an unplanned ignition spreading into 

the OGMA. 

Fuel Compartment F: This emphasis area includes areas along Road 3350 and the Mill Creek 

Wilderness. Within this area, maintenance burning and thinning of regeneration in previously 

treated units would occur. Regeneration units will be grapple piled and/or underburned. Spears 

units within this area are interlocked with previous treatments of the Felix and Harpo Timber 

Sales and Felix and Jackson Creek underburn projects. 

Fuel Compartment G: This emphasis area includes areas along the Mill Creek Wilderness 

boundary. Within this area, maintenance burning and thinning of previously treated areas would 

occur. Thinning units will be grapple piled and/or underburned. The Spears units would provide 

protection from unplanned ignitions entering the Mill Creek Wilderness and the Highway 26 

corridor from unplanned ignitions in adjacent forested areas. 

Fuel Compartment H: This emphasis area includes areas along Roads 2620, 2610, and 2610-

150. These roads have been identified as ingress/egress routes. Within this area, maintenance 

burning and thinning of previously treated areas would occur. Thinning units will be grapple 
Chapter 1 - Purpose of and Need for Action 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 16 

piled and/or underburned. This area includes a goshawk nest site and post-fledging area. During 

the past 20 years, several underburning and timber harvest activities have occurred. Spears units 

306, 858, 860, 862, 863, and 946 would link with previously treated areas and provide a measure 

of protection to the ingress/egress routes and the goshawk nesting area. 

Non-significant Issues 

Comments that were determined to be non-significant included statements such as reduce or 

remove livestock grazing or develop a long-term management strategy for the entire Lookout 

Mountain Ranger District. Other comments suggested that the purpose and need for action 

should be redefined to include restoration and wildlife were also determined to be nonsignificant. 

Some commenters suggested that trees greater than 21 inches dbh should be harvested to allow 

younger stands room to grow. This comment was not considered in detail because the amount of 

LOS across the landscape is deficient (see the Purpose and Need for Action). In addition, the 

Eastside Screens (part of the Forest Plan) already decided that all live trees greater than or equal 

to 21 inches dbh be maintained, unless the amount of LOS is above the HRV. 

One commenter stated that the project area contains many openings from past activities that have 

not successfully regenerated. The commenter suggested that the alternatives include 

reforestation activities in these areas. The available data for the project area indicates that in the 

last 3 decades there have been 112 units which were harvested with a regeneration prescription. 

With a regeneration prescription, reforestation is usually needed to restock the area following 

harvest. The Forest Plan (p. 4-205) indicates that stocking standards require a minimum of 50 

trees at least 4-1/2 feet tall be present before a stand can be certified as stocked. Out of 112 

units, there are 10 units which have not been certified as stocked. Of those, five units (totaling 

38 acres) were not planted because they were specifically harvested to provide telemark ski 

opportunities in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area; there are no plans to stock these five units. 

In the other five units, planting occurred in 2003. The number of trees per acre in these units 

range between 258 and 285 trees per acre; however, the trees are not yet taller than 4-1/2 feet. 

(The April 6, 2007, Silvicultural Input for this project includes additional information.) 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 17 

CHAPTER 2. ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE 

PROPOSED ACTION 

Introduction 

This chapter describes and compares the alternatives considered for the Spears Vegetation 

Management Project. It includes a description of each alternative considered. Maps of each 

alternative are located in Appendix E. This section also presents the alternatives in comparative 

form, sharply defining the differences between each alternative and providing a clear basis for 

choice among options by the decision maker and the public. 

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study 

Federal agencies are required by NEPA to rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all 

reasonable alternatives and to briefly discuss the reasons for eliminating any alternatives that 

were not developed in detail (40 CFR 1502.14). Public comments received in response to the 

proposed action provided suggestions for alternative methods for achieving the purpose and 

need. Some of these alternatives may have been already decided by other decisions, duplicative 

of the alternatives considered in detail, or determined to be components that would cause 

unnecessary environmental harm. One alternative was briefly considered, but dismissed from 

detailed consideration. An alternative that would include harvesting trees greater than 21 inches 

dbh was eliminated from detailed study because it was inconsistent with the purpose and need. 

Alternatives Considered in Detail 

The Forest Service developed five alternatives in detail, including the no action and proposed 

action alternatives. Alternatives 4 and 5 were developed directly in response to issues raised by 

the public. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Alternative 1 is the no action alternative. This alternative serves as a baseline for comparison of 

the effects of all of the alternatives. Under the no action alternative, no activities would be 

implemented to accomplish the stated purpose and need for the Spears Vegetation Management 

Project. 

Routine activities such as road maintenance and suppression of unplanned fires would continue. 

Activities authorized under separate decisions would also continue. These activities include 

livestock grazing and noxious weed treatments. Recreational use of the area, including camping, 

hunting, and motorized and non-motorized uses, would also continue. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 18 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

Alternative 2 is the proposed action. This alternative was developed to respond to the purpose 

and need. The proposed action includes approximately 6,172 acres of commercial harvest, 

11,160 acres of precommercial thinning, and 196 acres of thinning in hardwood stands. Fuel 

reduction activities include approximately 15,464 acres of prescribed fire, and 3,015 acres of 

grapple piling, and 718 acres of hand piling. Commercial harvest includes tractor, skyline, and 

helicopter logging systems. Areas identified as tractor logging are areas where heavy equipment, 

such as logging tractors/skidders, will be used to remove a commercial product. 

No trees greater than 21 inches dbh, live or dead, would be cut except those necessary to be 

removed for safety reasons or road construction. 

Stands selected for commercial and precommercial thinning have a large component of pole and 

small sized (less than 21 inches dbh) trees with dense stocking conditions. The objective of 

these treatments is to move stands towards late and old structural stage conditions in a more 

rapid timeframe than would occur with no treatment. Maps 4, 5, and 6 display the commercial 

harvest and road work, precommercial thinning and hardwood treatments, and fuels treatments 

for Alternative 2. 

Commercial harvest on slopes less than 35 percent would be implemented with ground-based 

harvest systems and the activity fuels will either be treated with prescribed fire, grapple piling, or

hand piling. Where there are short, steep pitches in tractor logging units, these areas may be 

harvested by methods such as pulling cable. On steeper slopes, such as those over 35 percent, a 

skyline or helicopter harvest system would be employed for soil protection. Helicopter harvest 

systems are also designated for areas with concerns about using ground-based systems. Map 4 

displays the logging systems associated with commercial harvest. 

Stands selected for fuels reduction activities are (1) stands with either commercial timber harvest 

or precommercial thinning where fuels are present as a result (activity fuels), (2) stands that 

exhibit a high level of fuels resulting from the natural accumulations of material, or (3) stands 

that currently exhibit low-intensity fire conditions and require periodic treatment to maintain that 

condition. The objective of these fuel reduction activities are to move stands towards or 

maintain conditions with lower fuel loadings to approximate conditions when fire occurred at 

lower intensities and higher frequencies. 

Stands selected for hardwood thinning contain aspen or cottonwood clones where conifers are 

encroaching and competing with the hardwoods. After thinning is complete in these stands, 

slash will be treated with a combination of methods including lop and scatter, arranging slash to 

protect sprouts, and/or hand piling. Temporary exclosures will be constructed to protect sprouts 

in fourteen hardwood stands. Caging of individual sprouts will occur in five hardwood stands. 

Appendix A includes a description of the proposed treatments and a table showing the 

prescriptions for each unit included in Alternative 2. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 19 

Road construction activities include 18.0 miles of new road construction, and 12.0 miles of 

reconstructing roads on an existing road bed. Newly constructed roads and roads that are 

reopened would be closed after harvest activities are complete. 

The Roads Analysis Report for the Bandit II Project Area was updated for the Spears project and 

is contained in the project record. The following is a list of roads that will be constructed; these 

roads will be closed after harvest activities are complete. 

2210101-542 2620000-878 3300500-127b 3300529-125 3350000-212 

2600100-847 2620014-517 3300502-126 3300529-806 3350011-210 

2600350-738 2620031-559 3300504-112 3300550-105 3350102-185 

2610026-851 2630013-887 3300504-118 3300550-202 3350102-189 

2610050-825 2630020-524 3300516-138 3300550-207 3350102-845 

2610300-535 2700000-748 3300529-115 3300550-809 3350200-191 

2620000-304 3300500-108 3300529-120 3350000-160 

The following is a list of roads that will be constructed; these roads will be decommissioned after 

harvest activities are complete. 

2600014-815 2610021-891 2610155-565a 2700555-752b 

2600209-707 2610100-863 2610155-565b 3350000-821 

2610000-865 2610150-303 2700555-752 3350102-705 

The following is a list of roads that will be reconstructed for use during harvest activities. 

2600013 2610153 2620035 3300503 3350018 

2610024 2610159 2630013 3300504 3350102 

2610056 2620011 2630020 3300529 3350200 

2610058 2620013 3300504-139 3300550 3350209 

The following is a list of roads that will be closed after harvest activities are complete. 

2600012 2600350 2610024 2610159 3300550 

2600013 2600400 2610025 2700655 3350214 

2600017 2610013 2610153 3300516 

2600310 2610022 2610155 3300527 

The following is a list of roads that will be decommissioned after harvest activities are complete. 

2600014 2610025 2630021 3300517 3350024 

2600254 2620030 2700554 3300550 3350100 

2610012 2620032 2700559 3300551 3350214 

2610013 2620039 3300504 3350023 3350308 

Three Forest Plan amendments are needed to implement this alternative. The first amendment 

would allow timber harvest activities in multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir Plant Association 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 20 

Group (PAG). The Douglas-fir PAG is currently within the Historic Range of Variability (HRV) 

for multi-strata LOS and below the HRV for single-strata LOS. Timber harvest would occur in 

multi-strata LOS within the Douglas-fir PAG to reduce competition and maintain large trees in 

this area; these stands would be converted to single-strata LOS. Following treatment, multistrata LOS would be below HRV. The second amendment would allow commercial timber 

harvest within connective corridors. This activity is designed to maintain existing large trees and 

promote development of additional large trees within corridors; however, commercial harvest 

would reduce the canopy closure to less than two-thirds of site potential. The third amendment 

would allow precommercial thinning, hand piling, and underburning in the Stewart Springs Old 

Growth Management Area (OGMA). These activities are proposed to improve the longevity of 

large ponderosa pine on south and west facing slopes. The activities are consistent with the 

objectives for OGMAs, but are not consistent with the standard and guideline that indicates 

vegetative management is not allowed. 

Table 1. Summary of activities included in Alternative 2. 

Fuel Reduction Activities (acres) 

Underburn Activity Fuels 

Underburn Natural Fuels 

Grapple Pile 

Hand Pile 

Total

9,953 

5,511 

3,015 

 718

19,197 

Commercial Harvest (acres) 6,172 

Logging Systems (acres) 

Tractor 

Skyline 

Helicopter 

Total

 

5,366 

82 

 724

6,172

Noncommercial Activities (acres) 

Precommercial thinning 

Hardwood thinning 

Total

11,160 

 196

11,356 

Total Activity Acres 

(Many activities overlap the same acres, e.g. activity fuel 

treatments overlap with commercial harvest and 

precommercial thinning activities.) 

16,942 

Total Project Area Acres 39,200 

Road Management (miles) 

Construction 

Reconstruction 

Decommissioning 

 

18.0 

12.0 

6.5 

Estimated Volume from Commercial Harvest 

(million board feet) 15.4
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 21 

Alternative 3 

This alternative was developed to address the purpose and need without the use of commercial 

timber harvest. This alternative focuses on activities that reduce hazardous fuels and the risk of 

stand loss due to high fuel loadings, maintain existing desired fuel levels, increase forested 

stands’ resiliency to insects and disease, and increase growth rates in smaller diameter stands. 

Generally, trees greater than 9 inches dbh would not be cut, except juniper. In isolated cases of 

damaged or diseased trees, trees up to 12 inches dbh would be cut. Maps 7 and 8 display the 

activities proposed in this alternative. 

Appendix A includes a description of the proposed treatments and a table showing the 

prescriptions for each unit included in Alternative 3. 

One Forest Plan amendment is needed to implement this alternative. The plan amendment 

would allow precommercial thinning, hand piling, and underburning in the Stewart Springs 

OGMA. These activities are proposed to improve the longevity of large ponderosa pine on south 

and west facing slopes. The activities are consistent with the objectives for OGMAs, but are not 

consistent with the standard and guideline that indicates vegetative management is not allowed. 

Table 2. Summary of activities included in Alternative 3. 

Fuel Reduction Activities (acres) 

Underburn Activity Fuels 

Underburn Natural Fuels 

Hand Pile 

Total

8,323 

5,603 

 856

14,782 

Noncommercial Vegetative Activities (acres) 

Precommercial thinning 

Hardwood thinning 

Total

9,703 

 196

9,899 

Total Activity Acres 

(Many activities overlap the same acres, e.g. activity fuel 

treatments overlap with precommercial thinning 

activities.) 

15,501 

Total Project Area Acres 39,200 

Road Management (miles) 0 

Alternative 4 

Alternative 4 was developed based on the road issue discussed in Chapter 1. Alternative 4 

included the objective of minimizing the amount of new road construction. This alternative 

focuses on using existing roads whether open or closed and includes reconstruction. Even 

though this alternative emphasizes use of existing roads, it does include some new road 

construction. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 22 

Maps 9, 10, and 11 display the commercial harvest and road work, precommercial thinning and 

hardwood treatments, and fuels treatments for Alternative 2. 

Appendix A includes a description of the proposed treatments and a table showing the 

prescriptions for each unit included in Alternative 4. 

The Roads Analysis Report for the Bandit II Project Area was updated for the Spears project and 

is contained in the project record. The following is a list of roads that will be constructed; these 

roads will be closed after harvest activities are complete. 

2600350-738 2620014-517 3300502-126 3300529-120 3350102-189 

2610026-851 2630013-887 3300504-112 3300529-125 3350102-845 

2610300-535 2700000-748 3300504-118 3300529-806 3350200-191 

2620000-878 3300500-127b 3300516-138 3350000-160 

The following is a list of roads that will be constructed; these roads will be decommissioned after 

harvest activities are complete. 

2610120-863a 2610155-565 2700555-752b 

2610120-863b 2700555-752 

The following is a list of roads that will be reconstructed for use during harvest activities. 

2600013 2610153 2620035 3300504 3350102 

2610024 2610159 2630013 3300529 3350200 

2610056 2620011 3300550-108b 3300550 3350209 

2610058 2620013 3300503 3350018 

The following is a list of roads that will be closed after harvest activities are complete. 

2600012 2600350 2610024 2610159 3300550 

2600013 2600400 2610025 2700655 3350214 

2600017 2610013 2610153 3300516 

2600310 2610022 2610155 3300527 

The following is a list of roads that will be decommissioned after harvest activities are complete. 

2600254 2620030 2700559 3300551 3350308 

2610012 2620032 3300504 3350023 

2610013 2620039 3300517 3350100 

2610025 2700554 3300550 3350214 

Three Forest Plan amendments are needed to implement this alternative. The first amendment 

would allow timber harvest activities in multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG. Timber 

harvest would occur in multi-strata LOS within the Douglas-fir PAG to reduce competition and 

maintain large trees in this area; these stands would be converted to single-strata LOS. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 23 

Following treatment, multi-strata LOS would be below HRV. The second amendment would 

allow commercial timber harvest within connective corridors. This activity is designed to 

maintain existing large trees and promote development of additional large trees within corridors; 

however, commercial harvest would reduce the canopy closure to less than two-thirds of site 

potential. The third amendment would allow precommercial thinning, hand piling, and 

underburning in the Stewart Springs OGMA. These activities are proposed to improve the 

longevity of large ponderosa pine on south and west facing slopes. The activities are consistent 

with the objectives for OGMAs, but are not consistent with the standard and guideline that 

indicates vegetative management is not allowed. 

Table 3. Summary of activities included in Alternative 4. 

Fuel Reduction Activities (acres) 

Underburn Activity Fuels 

Underburn Natural Fuels 

Grapple Pile 

Hand Pile 

Total

9,824 

5,338 

2,490 

 793

18,445 

Commercial Harvest (acres) 4,935 

Logging Systems (acres) 

Tractor 

Helicopter 

Total

4,177 

 758

4,935 

Noncommercial Vegetative Activities (acres) 

Precommercial thinning 

Hardwood thinning 

Total

10,935 

 196

11,131 

Total Treatment Acres 

(Many activities overlap the same acres, e.g. activity fuel 

treatments overlap with commercial harvest and 

precommercial thinning activities.) 

16,740 

Total Project Area Acres 39,200 

Road Management (miles) 

Construction 

Reconstruction 

Decommissioning 

 

4.4 

11.0 

5.9 

Estimated Volume from Commercial Harvest 

(million board feet) 12.3 

Alternative 5 

Alternative 5 was developed based on the wildlife issue discussed in Chapter 1. This alternative 

includes variable density thinning within some wildlife habitats, and leaving higher densities in 

moister areas such as draw bottoms and RHCAs. Timber harvest and precommercial thinning is 

designed to maintain clumpiness and old tree cohorts within some wildlife habitats. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 24 

This alternative focused on habitats for pileated woodpecker, goshawk, white-headed 

woodpecker, and elk. To address wildlife issues, prescriptions were adjusted to retain habitat 

features for the identified species. Examples of adjusting prescriptions include things such as 

retaining some clumps and defective trees. 

Appendix A includes a description of the proposed treatments and a table showing the 

prescriptions for each unit included in Alternative 5. 

The Roads Analysis Report for the Bandit II Project Area was updated for the Spears project and 

is contained in the project record. The following is a list of roads that will be constructed; these 

roads will be closed after harvest activities are complete. 

2600350-738 3300500-108 3300516-138 3350102-189 

2610026-851 3300500-127b 3300529-120 3350102-845 

2620014-517 3300504-112 3300529-125 3350200-191 

2700000-748 3300504-118 3350102-185 

The following is a list of roads that will be constructed; these roads will be decommissioned after 

harvest activities are complete. 

2610155-565 2700555-752a 2700555-752b 

The following is a list of roads that will be reconstructed for use during harvest activities. 

2600013 2610153 2620013 3300503 3350018 

2610056 2610159 2630013 3300504 3350102 

2610058 2620011 2630020 3300529 3350200 

The following is a list of roads that will be closed after harvest activities are complete. 

2600013 2600400 2610153 2610159 3300516 

2600350 2610013 2610155 2700655 3350214 

The following is a list of roads that will be decommissioned after harvest activities are complete. 

2610012 2620039 2700559 3300550 3350214 

2610013 2630021 3300504 3300551 3350308 

2620032 2700554 3300517 3350100 

Maps 12, 13, and 14 display the commercial harvest and road work, precommercial thinning and 

hardwood treatments, and fuels treatments for Alternative 5. 

Two Forest Plan amendments are needed to implement this alternative. The first amendment 

would allow timber harvest activities in multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG. Timber 

harvest would occur in multi-strata LOS within the Douglas-fir PAG to reduce competition and 

maintain large trees in this area; these stands would be converted to single-strata LOS. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 25 

Following treatment, multi-strata LOS would be below HRV. The second amendment would 

allow precommercial thinning, hand piling, and underburning in the Stewart Springs OGMA. 

These activities are proposed to improve the longevity of large ponderosa pine on south and west 

facing slopes. The activities are consistent with the objectives for OGMAs, but are not 

consistent with the standard and guideline that indicates vegetative management is not allowed. 

Table 4. Summary of activities included in Alternative 5. 

Fuel Reduction Activities (acres) 

Underburn Activity Fuels 

Underburn Natural Fuels 

Grapple Pile 

Hand Pile 

Total

9,503 

4,702 

2,150 

 881

17,236 

Commercial Harvest (acres) 3,942 

Logging Systems (acres) 

Tractor 

Helicopter 

Total

3,325 

 617

3,942 

Noncommercial Vegetative Activities (acres) 

Precommercial thinning 

Hardwood thinning 

Total

10,952 

 196

11,148 

Total Treatment Acres 

(many activities overlap the same acres, e.g. activity fuel 

treatments overlap with commercial harvest and 

precommercial thinning activities.) 

15,850 

Total Acres in the Project Area 39,200 

Road Management (miles) 

Construction 

Reconstruction 

Decommissioning 

 

3.2 

10.1 

4.9 

Estimated Volume from Commercial Harvest 

(million board feet) 8.9

Design Elements Common to All Alternatives 

The Forest Service developed the following design elements to be used as part of all of the action 

alternatives. These design elements were developed to reduce the environmental effects of the 

proposed activities or to comply with standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan. Many of the 

design elements for RHCAs and Water Quality/Fisheries are intended to meet the requirements 

for protection of water quality in the State of Oregon through planning, application, and 

monitoring of Best Management Practices (BMPs). 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 26 

Air Quality/Private Land Interface 

 Use signing and public notice when burning during hunting season or other times when 

public use of the area is high. To help ensure public safety during burning operations, signs or 

other traffic control measures would be used in accordance with Oregon Department of 

Transportation permit requirements. 

 All prescribed burning operations would be coordinated with the Oregon State 

Department of Environmental Quality and the Oregon State Department of Forestry through 

FASTRACS, the State of Oregon smoke management program. Anticipated weather conditions 

would be favorable for smoke dispersion. 

 Burn areas adjacent to private land will be patrolled before leaving the site following 

ignition and daily thereafter until the unit fire management officer determines there is no further 

threat to private land. 

 Hazard trees along private land boundaries, created by underburning activities, will be 

felled and left on site. 

 Private landowners within the project area will be notified approximately 14 days in 

advance of any burning activities adjacent to their lands. 

Cultural Resources 

 If a cultural/heritage resource site were discovered or disturbed during implementation, 

efforts would be made to avoid any further disturbance. Site-specific mitigation would be 

determined if sites may not be avoided, and consultation with the Oregon State Historic 

Preservation Office (SHPO) would occur prior to resuming activities. 

Summit Historic Trail 

 Protect the existing historic qualities and features, such as blazed trees, along the Summit 

Historic Trail and Road 27. These areas will be managed within a general border of 600 feet 

either side of the edge of the road or trail and provide a natural setting within the foreground 

area. Unit 751 is within Summit Trail visual partial retention and visual retention designation. 

Unit 752 is within visual retention designation. Units 748 and 742 are adjacent to the Summit 

Trail visual retention corridor boundary. The District Archaeologist will assist with layout of 

Units 738, 740, 751, 752, and 776. 

 Do not post boundary tags on Road 27 and Road 2630 within the Summit Historic Trail 

Management Area. This includes boundary tags for commercial harvest and precommercial 

thinning units. Within retention and partial retention areas (600 feet either side of the Roads 27 

and 2630) in Units 502, 508, 510, 514, 544, 552, 745, 751, 752, 893, 904, and 905 remove 

boundary tags when the contract is completed. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 27 

 In Units 751 and 752, consider yarding tops attached to landings outside visual corridor 

and foreground area to reduce fuel loadings. Use slash to cover/disguise stumps within 75 feet 

of Road 27. 

 Paint trees for removal in Units 742, 748, 751, and 752. If trees are not harvested, repaint trees so blue marking paint is not visible. 

 Do not use or construct landings within 600 feet either side of Road 27 and Road 2630 

within the Summit Historic Trail Management Area. Exceptions can be made on a case-by-case 

basis, if landings would not be visible in the foreground area because of natural topographic 

features. This applies to Units 742, 748, 751, and 752. 

 Hand pile slash in foreground retention areas along Road 27. This applies to Units 742, 

748, 751, and 752. 

 Do not skid or land along trail route in Units 751 and 752. 

 Minimize new road construction off Road 27. Any newly constructed roads would be 

closed after use. Road closure activities would include activities to conceal locations such as 

covering with vegetation or woody debris. This applies to Units 742, 748, 751, and 752. 

 During precommercial thinning activities in Units 751 and 752, transition thinning to 

blend with adjacent stand conditions. Leave clumps of small trees. 

 For precommercial thinning activities, stumps would not exceed 8 inches in height. Slash 

may be lopped and scattered or piled. Where slash is piled, piles would be small (2-3 feet tall by 

4-feet wide). Burn slash or piles within 1 year if possible. This applies to precommercial thin 

Units 508, 510, 514, 544, and 893 and aspen Units 502, 552, and 745. Retain clumps in 

foreground areas to reduce visual impacts and blend treatments with adjacent areas. 

 Hazard trees will be felled along Road 27. If hazard trees contain blazes, the tree would 

be cut above the blaze. This applies to Unit 751 and 752. 

 Protect historic qualities in and adjacent to Units 738, 740, and 776 which are along the 

stock driveway segment (alternate route for Summit Trail). Minimize the number of skid trails 

that cross the stock driveway segment to no more than three per mile. Do not use or create 

landings within 150 feet of stock driveway segment. Do not post boundary within 25 feet of 

stock driveway segment. 

 Retain carved aspen and protect log troughs. Carved aspen is known to occur Units 104, 

402, 403, 407, 409, 502, 533, 745, 905, and 908. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 28 

Noxious Weeds 

 Conduct a weed identification workshop for Forest Service personnel who would be 

preparing, implementing, and/or administering the proposed activities. 

 Re-use of landings infested with noxious weeds would not occur, shade would be 

retained, and burning would be avoided within 100 feet of the infestation. Avoid these areas for 

camps, staging, and parking areas. Units associated with infestations include 110, 306, 317, 542, 

544, 559, 707, 803, 819, 841, 844, 859, 894, 895, 896, 897, 899, 941, 945, and 961. Exceptions 

may be made through coordination with the district weed coordinator. 

 Avoid or minimize disturbance within or adjacent to existing noxious weed infestations 

or develop a control plan to prevent their expansion. For example, avoid using weed-infested 

areas for camps, staging areas, landings, or parking areas. Exceptions may be made through 

coordination with the district weed coordinator. 

 Avoid grapple or hand piling of slash within 200 feet of U.S. Highway 26 and the first 

1/4-mile from the junction of roads connected to U.S. Highway 26. Along Forest Road 2610 this 

criteria extends for the first 1/2-mile. This applies to Units 107, 108, 110, 211, 306, 502, 520, 

567, 568, 700, 707, 708, 722, 734, 740, 741, 814, 815, 818, 819, 828, 832, 833, 838, 840, 841, 

842, 844, 850, 874, 886, 900, 921, 922, and 967. This does not apply to the thinning of conifers 

in Unit 507, an aspen treatment unit. Exceptions proposed to address risk adjacent to private 

land will be coordinated through the District Botanist. 

 Water for prescribed fire control, watering roads, or other activities would be obtained 

from weed-free sites. 

 To reduce the potential for weed spread through mineral material (i.e. gravel and rock) 

used on roads and landings, Ochoco NF material sources will be inspected to ensure materials 

are weed free. Additionally, the sale contract would include provisions requiring any material 

from other sources is weed free. 

 To reduce the potential for transport or spread of noxious weeds by road construction or 

logging equipment, the timber sale contract would require: (1) certification that equipment be 

clean of all plant or soil material that may result in the establishment or spread of noxious weeds; 

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. 

 Revegetate roads that will be closed or decommissioned, primary skid trails, and log 

landing areas as part of the final sale contract work. Seeds that are used to revegetate areas 

would be certified as “All States Noxious Weed Free” by an approved testing laboratory, such as 

the Oregon State University Seed Lab. If available, use source-identified, locally-collected 

native grass species including pinegrass (Calamagrostis rubescens), squirreltail (Elymus 

elymoides), Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda), basin wildrye (Leymus cinereus), blue wildrye 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 29 

(Elymus glaucus), or native cultivars such as red fescue (Festuca rubra) and big bluegrass (Poa 

ampla). Seed mixture would be applied at approximately 10 lbs/acre. 

 Document all noxious weed infestations identified during implementation by notifying 

the district noxious weed coordinator. 

 Include a noxious weed locator map in the project file to assist in avoidance and 

monitoring. 

 Conduct pre-project surveys to document existing infestations of noxious weeds. 

 Road closures would be coordinated with the district noxious weed coordinator to ensure 

that noxious weed sites are inventoried. 

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

drainages. 

 Straw materials that are used in sediment traps will be certified weed-free or be acquired 

from certified fields that produce weed-free seed for the grain or grass seed industry. 

Range/Minerals 

 Livestock fences, cattle guards, and other structural range improvements would be 

protected and/or returned to their pre-activity condition if damaged during thinning or burning 

operations. 

 Logging, burning, and road closure activities would be coordinated with 

permittees/mining claimants as needed. Efforts will be made to minimize conflicts between 

livestock use/mining activities and logging, thinning, and burning activities. Mining claims 

occur in or near Units 160 and 210. 

Recreation 

 Restrict commercial timber haul on holiday weekends (i.e., Memorial Day, 4th of July, 

Labor Day) and during the weekends of deer rifle hunting season. Restrict use from Thursday 

noon through Monday noon. Also restrict commercial timber haul on the day before opening of 

deer rifle season. 

 Activities adjacent to management allocated dispersed recreation sites will be designed to 

retain visual screening. Also activity-generated slash within 25 feet of dispersed sites that is 

useable as firewood will be stacked. This applies to Units 137, 184, 210, 306, 401, 512, 707, 

718, 719, 723, 737, 751, 752, 812, 821, 850, 851, 863, 867, 873, 901, 922, 947, 949, and 972. 

 Avoid utilizing management allocated dispersed recreation sites for log decks, piling 

slash, storing road rock, or dumping borrow material. This applies to Units 179, 184, 210, 306, 

524, 707, 718, 751, 752, 821, 851, and 863. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 30 

 Avoid allowing industrial (contractor) camps at management allocated dispersed 

campsites. This applies to Units 137, 179, 184, 210, 306, 307, 501, 512, 538, 550, 552, 700, 707, 

718, 719, 723, 812, 821, 851, 860, 862, 863, 867, 873, 876, 893, 901, 922, 947, and 949. 

 After timber harvest activities are complete, disturbed sections of system trails would be 

reconstructed to the existing (pre-harvest) condition within 2 months of activity or funds would 

be collected for reconstruction. This includes replacing any trail markers that are removed as a 

result of timber harvest activities and roads that are reopened. 

 Commercial harvest, thinning, and burning activities would be coordinated with special 

use permit holders or their representatives, as needed. Efforts would be made to minimize 

conflicts between recreation permittees and commercial harvest, thinning, and burning activities. 

 Along trails, where the trail is the boundary, avoid “straight line” burning by using 

methods such as discontinuous ignition. The objective is to have mosaic burns with low scorch 

height on trees. This restriction applies to Units 172, 199, 200, 201, 214, 738, 739, 740, 741, 

743, 744, 772, and 776. 

Bandit Springs Nordic Trail System

 Commercial timber harvest activities would be restricted between December 1 and March 

30. Activity-generated slash would be cleared prior to the ski season for a minimum of 10 feet 

on each side of trails (for a minimum width of 20 feet). This restriction applies to Units 738, 

740, 742, 748, 751, 752, and 776. 

 Noncommercial activities adjacent to trails would be restricted and trails cleared of 

activity-generated slash between December 1 and March 30. Slash would be cleared prior to the 

ski season for a minimum of 10 feet on each side of trails (for a minimum width of 20 feet). 

Clear slash as soon as activity is finished or at least prior to the ski season. This restriction 

applies to Units 739, 743, 744, 747, 772, and 885. 

 Landings would not be located on system trails in Units 740, 742, 751, and 752. 

 Avoid locating grapple piles within 100 feet of system trails. This applies to Units 738, 

740, 742, 748, 751, 752, and 776. 

 To reduce the time that management activities in Unit 740 are apparent, grapple piles will 

be removed or burned by December 1 of the year following the piling activity. 

 To minimize the intensity of underburning, perform a spring burn on Unit 741. 

 Prescribed fire would not be ignited within 50 feet of each side of system trails when the 

trail is inside a burn unit. This applies to Units 738, 739, 740, 741, 742, 747, 751, 752, and 900. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 31 

 Along system trails, if trees containing blue or orange diamond or other trail markers are 

marked to be cut, the trail markers would be moved to a nearby tree at the time the tree is marked 

for removal. System trails occur in Units 736, 739, 740, 742, 743, 751, 752, 772, and 776. 

 Boundary tags, markers, and flagging would be removed after completion of post-sale 

activities along all system trails. 

 Feather edges around ski trails and trail corridors. Avoid geometric shapes and lines not 

in character with the existing landscape. Activities are designed to appear as a natural 

occurrence when viewed in the Foreground. This applies to Units 738, 739, 740, 742, 743, 751, 

752, 772, and 776. 

 Informative signs will be posted at Bandit Springs Rest Area, trailheads, and access 

points prior to activities occurring in this area. 

Ochoco Divide Sno-Park, Road 27, and Road 2630 snowmobile routes 

 Commercial timber harvest activities would be restricted on weekends (Friday noon to 

Monday noon) between December 1 and March 30. The sale administrator may waive this 

seasonal restriction only when there is no snow. 

 Restrict commercial timber haul on the Snow Park Tie Trail and the Marks CreekIndependence Mine Snowmobile Trails (Roads 2630 and 2630-013) on weekends (Friday noon 

to Monday noon) between December 1 and March 30. The sale administrator may waive this 

seasonal restriction only when there is no snow. 

 Informative signs will be posted at Ochoco Divide Campground, Ochoco Sno-Park, 

Marks Creek Sno-Park, and Walton Lake Sno-Park prior to activity. 

Corral Flat Dispersed Camping Area 

 All slash would be removed from the permitted horse trails 2 weeks prior to the annual 

endurance ride. The annual endurance ride usually occurs during the third weekend in July. 

This activity applies to Units 303, 304, 514, 524, 530, 531, 532, 550, 560, and 893. 

 Commercial harvest operations would be restricted for 3 weeks (end of June-July) each 

year during the annual endurance ride. There would be a commercial harvest restriction within 

1/4-mile of the endurance ride trail that begins the Wednesday before each endurance ride and 

continues until the Tuesday following the event. This seasonal restriction applies to Units 303, 

304, 524, 530, 531, 532, 550, and 560. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 32 

Walton Lake Nordic Ski Trail System 

 Activities adjacent to trails would be restricted between December 1 and March 30. 

Slash would be cleared prior to the ski season for a minimum of 10 feet on each side of trails (for 

a minimum of 20 feet). Clear slash as soon as activity is finished or at least prior to the ski 

season. This restriction applies to Units 544 and 546. 

Wildcat Trail # 833 

 After timber harvest activities are complete, disturbed sections of system trails would be 

reconstructed to the existing (pre-harvest) condition within 2 months of activity or funds would 

be collected for reconstruction. This includes replacing any trail markers that are removed as a 

result of management activities. Slash would be cleared from the trail for a minimum of 10 feet 

on each side. Prohibit grapple piling within 100 feet of trails. This applies to Units 172, 199, 

200, 201, and 214. 

 Landings would not be located on system trails. This applies to Units 166, 172, 199, 200, 

and 201. 

RHCAs 

 No machine (i.e. bulldozer) fire lines would be constructed within RHCAs. 

 Hand fire lines would not be constructed within 10 feet of a Class IV stream or within 20 

feet of Class I, II, or III streams. Hand fire line would not be constructed through seeps, bogs, 

springs, meadows, and any other wet area. 

 Fire prescriptions for RHCAs would provide for a mosaic of burned and unburned 

material to retain vegetation for infiltration. 

 To meet mosaic and intensity objectives, fire may be purposely ignited within RHCAs. 

Prescribed fires would not be ignited within 50 feet of a stream. 

 Avoid locating industrial camps in RHCAs. 

 Precommercial thinning would not cause a reduction in shade on perennial streams (Class 

I, II, and III) with the exception of thinning to promote deciduous trees and shrubs. The Lookout 

Mountain Ranger District, using a solar pathfinder, developed thinning protocols based on the 

height of trees at various slopes and distances. Trees that provide shade would not be cut. 

Thinning around hardwoods would be coordinated with the fisheries biologist or hydrologist. 

 Thinning and burning activities would not remove vegetation that is contributing to bank 

stability, especially in those areas adjacent to dormant or active landslide terrain. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 33 

 Within RHCAs, effective ground cover would be established on landings and skid trails 

used for logging operations and on decommissioned and temporary roads. When consistent with 

other management actions, slash would be used on skid trails, temporary roads, and roads 

proposed to be closed. This would be done in conjunction with post-haul treatments when 

timber harvest is completed. 

 Hazard trees within RHCAs, which are required to be felled, would be left on site or 

managed for the attainment of RMOs for in-stream large wood recruitment. 

 Where precommercial thinning occurs in RHCAs that are below the RMO for the small 

size class of large woody debris (see Table 31), trees between 6 and 9 inches dbh would be 

managed for the attainment of RMOs for large wood. 

 There will be no new landings within RHCAs and ephemeral draws. Existing landings 

may be reused. Reuse of existing landings within RHCAs will be coordinated with the fisheries 

biologist or hydrologist. 

 To reduce ground-disturbance within RHCAs, ground-based machinery for logging or 

slash piling operations would not be used within RHCAs, including areas around springs, except 

on existing roads. Other exceptions would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis with the 

hydrologist or fisheries biologist. Exceptions include: 

 1. Pulling cable (winch lining) from an existing road in an RHCA.

 2. Using existing roads as landings in RHCAs, such as in Units 104, 117, 306, 532, 559, 

564, and 707. 

 3. Constructing spur roads to access landings within units, such as Units 112 and 118. 

Landings will be located outside RHCA. 

 Within Class IV RHCAs, no commercial harvest would occur within 25 feet of the 

stream bank to reduce potential sediment delivery 

 To maintain shade and stream bank stability, commercial harvest within Class I, II, and 

III RHCAs would only occur in the outer 100 feet of the RHCAs. 

 To reduce ground-disturbance within RHCAs during precommercial thinning and 

burning operations, off-highway or all-terrain vehicles would not be operated within RHCAs or 

on closed roads within RHCAs. 

Sensitive Plants 

 Areas would be designated to protect habitat for yellow lady’s slipper orchid 

(Cypripedium parviflorum). Slash piling and underburning would be avoided in these areas. 

Units that contain potential yellow lady’s slipper (moist grand fir) habitat would be reviewed 

prior to implementation. Potential yellow lady’s slipper habitat occurs in Units 163, 199, 515, 

526, 542, 546, 707, 738, 748, 751, 823, 824, 845, 846, 869, 870, 872, 889, 932, 942, 959, and 

982. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 34 

 To protect sensitive species associated with riparian areas, no ground-based equipment, 

including grapple pilers, would be used within 100 feet of areas identified as containing Peck’s 

lily (Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii) populations or habitat. Exceptions can occur on 

existing roads and crossings, or other areas that have been reviewed by the botanist. Potential 

habitat for Peck’s lily occurs in or near Units 120, 148, 302, 303, 407, 408, 409, 501, 502, 503, 

512, 513, 514, 521, 524, 532, 538, 552, 560, 562, 565, 567, 568, 569, 704, 741, 744, 734, 742, 

747, 748, 867, 888, 907, 913, 914, 921, 922, 923, 925, 980, and 981. 

 Vehicles, including off-highway or all-terrain vehicles, will not be operated within areas 

identified as Peck’s lily habitat, except on existing roads. 

 To reduce impacts to scabland habitat (lithosol soils), and associated sensitive ricegrass 

(Achnatherum hendersonii and A. wallowaensis) habitat, construction of temporary roads or 

landings on scabland habitats would not occur. Scabland habitats occur within Units 111, 112, 

117, and 806. 

 Avoid ground-disturbing activities, including piling of slash, on scablands. Vehicles, 

including off-highway or all-terrain vehicles, will not be operated on scablands. Exceptions can 

occur on existing roads, or other areas that have been reviewed by the botanist. 

Soils 

 For tractor logging units, the leading end of logs would be suspended where practical 

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. 

 Skid trails would be designated and approved prior to logging and would be located on 

already disturbed areas where possible. Where practical, skid trails would avoid ephemeral 

draws and scablands. Where not practical, skidding would be perpendicular to ephemeral draws. 

Skid trails, landings, and roads would be designed to limit the cumulative extent of activities. 

 After harvest and grapple piling activities are completed, soil monitoring will evaluate 

the need for soil rehabilitation, such as tilling. Soil rehabilitation is expected to occur in Units 

107, 111, 114, 120, 125, 127, 139, 143, 160, 162, 163, 166, 173, 176, 181, 198, 300, 301, 302, 

310, 311, 317, 509, 515, 524, 531, 532, 550, 559, 560, 563, 565, 569, 570, 572, 700, 705, 707, 

711, 718, 729, 734, 738, 740, 742, 751, 752, 811, 815, 821, 824, 825, 831, 836, 846, 848, 858, 

859, 863, 865, 869, 878, 888, 891, 986, and 988. 

 Grapple pilers would be limited to operating on existing compacted/displaced areas to 

limit the amount of detrimental soil conditions. In undisturbed areas, grapple pile equipment 

would be allowed to make 1-2 passes to move between skid trails and other detrimentally 

disturbed areas. Grapple pilers would be limited to slopes less than 35 percent. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 35 

 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. 

 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. 

Visual/Scenic Resources 

 Boundary tags, flagging, and markers would be removed from harvest units in foreground 

retention areas after completion of activities to minimize visibility. Foreground retention areas 

include the U.S. Highway 26 corridor, corridors along Roads 27 and 2630, and portions of Road 

2210, and the Bandit Springs Recreation Area. This applies to Units 108, 110, 148, 509, 542, 

550, 559, 564, 700, 707, 734, 740, 742, 748, 751, 752, 814, 815, 817, 841, 851, 887, and 888. 

 In Foreground retention areas, trees within 75 feet of the primary travel corridor would be 

cut to minimize stump heights. For commercial timber harvest, stumps would not exceed 6 

inches in height. For precommercial thinning activities, stumps would not exceed 8 inches in 

height. Primary travel corridors include U.S. Highway 26, Road 27, Road 2630, and portions of 

Road 2210, and designated trails (including trails in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area). This 

applies to Units 108, 110, 148, 211, 509, 510, 514, 542, 550, 555, 559, 564, 567, 568, 700, 707, 

708, 722, 734, 740, 742, 748, 751, 752, 814, 815, 817, 818, 819, 828, 840, 841, 844, 851, 874, 

887, 888, 893, 896, and 981. Along Road 27 which is the Summit Historic Trail, minimize 

stump heights within 300 feet of road; this applies to Units 751 and 752. 

 In Foreground retention areas, where practical, design and locate new skid trails and 

landings at least 300 feet from primary travel corridors. Landings would be revegetated within 1 

year of use. Primary travel corridors include U.S. Highway 26, Roads 27 and 2630, and portions 

of Road 2210. This applies to Units 108, 110, 148, 509, 542, 550, 559, 564, 700, 707, 734, 740, 

742, 748, 751, 752, 814, 815, 817, 841, 851, 887, and 888. 

 To reduce long-term visual effects in Visual Corridors, tree marking paint would be used 

to designate trees to be harvested, rather than trees to be retained. This applies to Units 108, 110,

148, 509, 542, 550, 559, 564, 700, 707, 734, 740, 742, 748, 751, 752, 814, 815, 817, 841, 851, 

887, and 888. 

 Underburning activities in the Foreground retention areas would be designed to avoid 

scorching more than 1/3 of the live crown of dominant and codominant trees. Activities such as 

pruning of lower branches may be used to guard against high crown fire if necessary. 

Foreground retention areas include primary travel corridors along U.S. Highway 26, Roads 27 

and 2630, and portions of Road 2210. This applies to Units 501, 512, 520, 538, 741, 747, 833, 

838, 842, 886, 900, 901, 921, 922, and 923. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 36 

Water Quality/Fisheries 

 New roads will be closed or decommissioned in accordance with District written 

guidelines for “Road Closure and Decommissioning” when harvest operations are completed, 

except when otherwise designated. The purpose of closing and/or decommissioning roads is to 

eliminate motorized travel, provide long-term drainage, and reduce erosion potential to speed 

recovery. 

 Newly constructed roads within RHCAs would not parallel streams. 

 Seeps, springs, and landslide areas would be managed using Class III and IV RHCAs as 

specified in INFISH. 

 Skid trails and temporary roads within 50 feet of the scab-conifer interface, that are used 

during harvest operations, would be designed to reduce the concentration of flows and to 

encourage the flow of water off of them. This applies to Unit 111.

 Streams requiring classification or reclassification would be coordinated through the 

hydrologist or fisheries biologist prior to marking. 

 To maintain ground cover and reduce potential sediment delivery, natural fuels 

(underburning) activities in the Wildcat and Salmon Creek subdrainages would occur at least 1 

year before or 3 years after commercial timber harvest. This applies to Units 137, 804, 805, 823, 

928, and 961. 

 Landings used in harvest operations 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. 

 Dust abatement on haul roads would occur to reduce sediment (i.e. dust) entering 

streams. Generally, this means haul roads within RHCAs. Water used for dust abatement would 

be obtained from sources identified in the May 1996 Ochoco National Forest Water 

Conservation Plan. 

 Newly constructed and reconstructed roads with stream crossings would have adequate 

relief drainage installed prior to runoff reaching the stream channel. Filter strips below drainage 

structures would be of sufficient size to catch sediment before runoff enters streams. If adequate 

filter strips are not available, slash, straw material, rock aprons, or other filtering structures 

would be installed. Stream crossings structures (culverts and fords) on Class IV streams would 

be installed when the channel is dry. 

 In channel work on Class I-III streams would be accomplished in accordance with 

“Oregon Guidelines for Timing of in-Water Work to protect Fish and Wildlife Resources, June 

2000.” For the Spears project area, the timing for in-water work is July 1 to October 31. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 37 

 Relief drainage/erosion control devices, such as straw material or sediment traps, would 

be placed at designated road/stream crossings to reduce sediment delivery to streams. The 

fisheries biologist or hydrologist will coordinate specifications and locations. 

 During wet periods, commercial road use will not contribute to siltation outside the 

roadway. For example, suspension of use may occur when road use is contributing to sediment 

detachment and transport, i.e. rutting 1 - 2 inches deep, muddy ditch water. 

Wildlife 

Goshawk 

 A 400-acre post fledging area (PFA) has been established around each known nest site. 

Commercial harvest operations, precommercial thinning, and underburning within PFAs would 

occur during the period September 1 through February 28. No management activities, including 

underburning activities, would occur inside the 30-acre nest stand. 

 There would be a seasonal restriction (March 1 to August 31) on commercial harvest, 

precommercial thinning, and underburning within approximately 1/2-mile of an active nest. This 

may also be applied to hauling operations if nests are within the immediate proximity of the haul 

route. This seasonal restriction may be waived on an annual basis if a nest inventory determines 

that breeding is not active. This restriction applies to Units 302, 303, 401, 722, 723, 727, 729, 

734, 815, 816, 818, 819, 858, 860, 861, 867, 903, 919, 934, 949, and 984. 

Other Raptors 

 Nest Sites - For the primary zone within 330 feet of nest site, maintain existing habitat 

characteristics. For the secondary zone (between 330 and 660 feet) around a nest site, modified 

treatments are permitted. Modified treatments are intermediate treatments between that required 

in the primary zone and that normally prescribed outside the whole protection zone. Operations 

would be restricted for both primary and secondary zones between March 1 and August 1. 

Underburning would not be allowed within 330 feet of the nest site. This seasonal restriction 

may be waived on an annual basis if a nest inventory determines that breeding is not active. This 

seasonal restriction applies to Units 148, 177, 211, 212, 302, 303, 304, 401, 402, 559, 560, 719, 

722, 723, 729, 874, 875, 934, 952, 955, and 962. 

Osprey: There would be a seasonal restriction (March 1 to August 1) on commercial 

harvest, precommercial thinning, and underburning within 1/4-mile of osprey nests. This 

seasonal restriction may be waived on an annual basis if a nest inventory determines that 

breeding is not active. This restriction applies to Units 401, 559, 719, 722, 723, 729, 874, 875, 

and 955. 

Deer and Elk 

 Activities involving heavy/power equipment would not be allowed within big game 

winter range areas from December 1 through May 1, unless coordinated through the wildlife 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 38 

biologist. This seasonal restriction applies to Units 100, 101, 104, 105, 106, 111, 112, 115, 117, 

139, 142, 143, 148, 155, 202, 207, 212, 311, 315, 806, 809, 814, 820, 825, 826, 831, 834, 836, 

and 839. 

 Activities within elk calving areas will be seasonally restricted from May 15 to June 30. 

This seasonal restriction applies to Units 101, 104, 105, 112, 115, 117, 118, 119, 120, 124, 125, 

126, 137, 138, 139, 151, 155, 163, 171, 172, 173, 174, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 196, 198, 199, 

200, 201, 202, 203, 206, 207, 212, 214, 400, 404, 405, 521, 522, 524, 530, 531, 532, 534, 535, 

801, 804, 805, 806, 815, 816, 817, 818, 819, 823, 910, 915, 920, 926, 928, 930, 935, 940, 941, 

943, 957, 958, 959, 961, 964, and 968. 

Snags/Down Logs 

 Snags that pose a safety hazard would be felled. Within RHCAs, they would be left on 

site or managed for in-stream large wood. 

 Harvest activities would not remove existing down logs. Fuel reduction activities would 

be designed to minimize loss of large down wood. This includes no direct ignition of large down 

wood, briefing of burn crews to emphasize burn objectives, and burning under conditions which 

make large fuels unavailable for consumption. Down logs are defined as logs that are 12 inches 

or greater at the small end and greater than 6 feet in length. 

 Burning within goshawk post-fledging areas, pileated feeding habitat, and connective 

corridors would be coordinated with the wildlife biologist. 

Monitoring 

Conduct post-project surveys and monitoring of noxious weed infestations, including mineral 

material sources, to evaluate the effects of the project on noxious weeds. Post-project surveys 

would identify new noxious weed infestations while they are small. 

Temperature monitoring will continue on selected stream reaches such as Marks, Peterson, and 

Little Hay Creeks. 

Pre and post-activity temperature and shade monitoring will be accomplished on at least one 

aspen stand where thinning is scheduled. 

Three water quality monitoring stations have been established in the Marks Creek Watershed: 

Marks Creek above Little Hay Creek, Peterson Creek at the lower 500 road crossing, and 

Wildcat Creek above U.S. Highway 26. Discharge, TSS (total suspended solids), and turbidity 

will be measured. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 39 

Comparison of Alternatives 

This section provides a summary of the effects of implementing each alternative. Information in 

Table 5 is focused on the purpose and need and significant issues where different levels of 

effects or outputs can be distinguished quantitatively or qualitatively among alternatives. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 40 

Table 5. Comparison of the effects of implementing each alternative.

 Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Late and Old Structure (LOS) 

projections at Year 0, 

20, and 50 

There are 5,575 acres of LOS in the project area. After 20 and 50 years, the amount is expected to increase to 8,283 and 11,368 acres. 

At Year 0, there is 5,575 acres of LOS. After 20 and 50 years, the amount is expected to increase to 8,626 and 12,065 acres. 

At Year 0, there is 5,575 acres of LOS. After 20 and 50 years, the amount is expected to increase to 8,416 and 11,644 acres. 

At Year 0, there is 5,575 acres of LOS. After 20 and 50 years, the amount is expected to increase to 8,600 and 12,011 acres. 

Early-seral Species Composition 

There are 22,794 acres dominated 

by early-seral 

species. After 20 and 50 years, the amount of the area dominated 

by early-seral 

species would be 21,581 and 20,465, respectively. 

After treatments, there would be 23,433 acres dominated by early-seral species. After 20 and 50 years, the amount would be 24,136 and 23,098, respectively. 

After treatments, there would be 21,929 acres dominated by early-seral species. After 20 and 50 years, the amount would be 22,542 and 21,436, respectively. 

After treatments, there would be 23,197 acres dominated by early-seral species. After 20 and 50 years, the amount would be 23,889 and 22,843, respectively. 

High Risk to Insects and Disease 

There are 11,865 acres at high risk to insects and disease. By year 50, there would 

be 21,551 acres at 

high risk. 

After treatments, there would be 8,800 acres at high risk to insects and disease. By year 50, there would 

be 19,425 acres at 

high risk. 

After treatments, there would be 11,095 acres at high risk to insects and disease. By year 50, there would 

be 20,921 acres at 

high risk. 

After treatments, there would be 9,191 acres at high risk to insects and disease. By year 50, there would 

be 19,653 acres at 

high risk. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 41 

Table 5. Comparison of the effects of implementing each alternative.

 Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Fuels Treatments No activities 

would occur and existing hazard levels would not 

be reduced. The 

amount of departure from reference conditions would not be reduced and would increase over time. Within Fire Regimes (FR) I and II, there is a moderate departure, 43 and 57% respectively. Within FR III, the 

percent departure 

is low at 16%. 

Fuel reduction activities would occur and would reduce the departure from reference conditions in FRs I and III. The 

percent departure 

in FR 1 would be low at 29%. The 

percent departure 

in FR III would 

be low at 13%. 

The percent departure in FR II would remain moderate at 58%. 

Fuel reduction activities would occur and would reduce the departure from reference conditions in FRs I and III. The 

percent departure 

in FR 1 would be moderate at 37%. The percent departure in FR III would be low at 15%. The 

percent departure 

in FR II would be moderate at 58%. 

Fuel reduction activities would occur and would reduce the departure from reference conditions in FRs I and III. The 

percent departure 

in FR 1 would be low at 31%. The 

percent departure 

in FR III would 

be low at 14%. 

The percent departure in FR II would remain moderate at 58%. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 42 

Table 5. Comparison of the effects of implementing each alternative.

 Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Hardwood Thinning Cottonwood and 

aspen would continue to lose vigor because of competition with conifers and in the long term, clones may shrink or die out. 

Cottonwood and aspen would 

become more 

vigorous, increasing sprouting and the longevity of mature trees. Cottonwood and aspen would be maintained and may increase in extent and vigor. 

Same as Alternative 2. 

Same as Alternative 2 

RHCAs The existing 

amounts of 

broadleaf species 

would continue to compete with conifers and may decrease in number and extent. 

Activities on 1,853 acres would reduce conifers and competition. Alder, willow, aspen, and other 

broadleaf species 

would become more vigorous and may expand. The growth of residual conifers would increase and would 

become a source 

for future large wood to streams. 

Activities on 1,726 acres would reduce conifers and competition. Alder, willow, aspen, and other 

broadleaf species 

would become more vigorous and may expand. The growth of residual conifers would increase and would 

become a source 

for future large wood to streams. 

Activities on 1,834 acres would reduce conifers and competition. Alder, willow, aspen, and other 

broadleaf species 

would become more vigorous and may expand. The growth of residual conifers would increase and would 

become a source 

for future large wood to streams. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 43 

Table 5. Comparison of the effects of implementing each alternative.

 Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Goshawk Postfledging areas No activities within PFAs. 

Retain habitat suitability in the short term. 

Activities on 678 acres within 6 PFAs. Alters habitat suitability; all PFAs would remain suitable for occupancy. 

Activities on 499 acres within 6 PFAs. Alters habitat suitability; all PFAs would remain suitable for occupancy. 

Activities on 607 acres within 6 PFAs. Alters habitat suitability; all PFAs would remain suitable for occupancy. 

Goshawk Habitat Retains existing 

amount (22,896 acres) of primary nesting habitat. The amount of 

primary nesting 

habitat is within the HRV. 

Results in 23,272 acres of primary nesting habitat across the project area. The amount of primary nesting habitat is within the HRV. 

Results in 23,243 acres of primary nesting habitat across the project area. The amount of primary nesting habitat is within the HRV. 

Results in 23,243 acres of primary nesting habitat across the project area. The amount of primary nesting habitat is within the HRV. 

Pileated Woodpecker Habitat 

The existing amount of habitat would be maintained and would increase in the short term. Overtime, high stand densities may lead to mortality which would reduce the amount of suitable nesting habitat. 

This alternative reduces habitat quality on 414 acres of feeding habitat and would reduce the amount of 

primary nesting 

habitat by 1,182 acres in the short term. Primary nesting habitat would be within HRV. 

This alternative maintains habitat quality on 250 acres of feeding habitat and would reduce the amount of 

primary nesting 

habitat by 190 acres in the short term. Primary nesting habitat would be within HRV. 

This alternative reduces habitat quality on 360 acres of feeding habitat and would reduce the amount of 

primary nesting 

habitat by 996 acres in the short term. Primary nesting habitat would be within HRV. 
Chapter 2 - Alternatives 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 44 

Table 5. Comparison of the effects of implementing each alternative.

 Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Elk No satisfactory or 

marginal cover would be treated. The HEI for winter range would be 53.8. The HEI for general forest winter range would be 45.1. 

Satisfactory cover would be reduced 

by 895 acres. 

The HEI for winter range would be 10.2. The HEI for general forest winter range would be 15.0. The HEI is within standards. 

Satisfactory cover would be reduced 

by 801 acres. 

The HEI for winter range would be 14. The HEI for general forest winter range would be 37.6. The HEI is within standards. 

Satisfactory cover would be reduced 

by 870 acres. The 

HEI for winter range would be 13.8. The HEI for general forest winter range would be 37.6. The HEI is within standards. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 45 

CHAPTER 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

This chapter summarizes the physical, biological, social, and economic environments of the 

project area and the effects of implementing each alternative on that environment. It also 

presents the scientific and analytical basis for the comparison of alternatives presented in the 

alternatives chapter. 

The information in this chapter summarizes the affected environment, direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects of the alternatives along with conclusions and supporting rationale. Further 

information on the specifics of the affected resources such as historical conditions, assumptions, 

methodologies, analyses, specific localized information, references, and technical documentation 

can be found in the individual specialists’ reports in the project record. 

Late and Old Structure (LOS) 

Affected Environment 

The upland forest areas within the Spears project area have been characterized using the plant 

association concept. Plant associations are a method of land classification which is based on the 

probable, or projected, plant community which will occupy a site given enough time and an 

absence of disturbance influences. The 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 Clausnitzer 1992). The mapping was based on 1:12000 aerial 

photography and intensive fieldwork. In 1998, the adjacent private lands within the Marks Creek 

watershed were mapped using 1:16000 aerial photos. 

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. Six PAGs occur within the Spears project 

area. There are approximately 4,600 acres of nonforest area within the project area. 

Table 6. Acres by Plant Association Group (PAG). 

Plant Association Group Total Acres 

Moist Grand fir 1,300 

Dry Grand fir 19,844 

Douglas-fir 8,047 

Mesic Ponderosa Pine 2,659 

Xeric Ponderosa Pine 1,318 

Western Juniper Woodland 1,431 

 34,599 

*PAG acres have been updated and vary from those listed in the Watershed Analysis. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 46 

The Ochoco National Forest’s Viable Ecosystem Management Guide (Simpson et al. 1994) 

describes a seral/structural matrix for characterizing forest vegetation within each of the PAGs. 

The Ochoco NF matrix has three seral stages based on species composition (early, mid, late), and 

each of these is subdivided into five size/structural conditions (grass/forb/shrub, seedling/sapling, 

pole, small trees, large trees). Thus, the matrix can accommodate up to fifteen cells. The 

grass/forb/shrub condition is only reflected in the early seral condition. Matrix cells are further 

subdivided to reflect relative differences in tree density, subscripts “a” and “b” are used to denote 

high and low density, respectively. For example, L4a describes a late-seral species composition, 

small-sized trees, at a high-density level. An example matrix is shown below: 

Table 7. Viable Ecosystem seral/structural matrix.

Structure Class Species Composition 

Early Mid Late 

Grass, forb, shrub (trees may be present but not dominant) E1 -- -- 

Seedling, sapling (less than 4.9 inches dbh) E2 M2 L2 

Pole (between 5 and 8.9 inches dbh), high density E3a M3a L3a 

Pole, low density E3b M3b L3b 

Small (between 9 and 20.9 inches dbh), high density E4a M4a L4a 

Small, low density E4b M4b L4b 

Medium/large (21 inches dbh and larger), high density E5a M5a L5a 

Medium/large, low density E5b M5b L5b 

Satellite imagery from 1999, updated to 2004 through change detection analysis, has been used 

to determine the current distribution of seral structural stages. The resolution of the satellite 

imagery is approximately 1/6th of an acre. Each 1/6 acre is assigned to one of the VEMG matrix 

classifications depending upon species composition, structure, and density. Stand growth and 

disturbance since 2004 that changed vegetative stages has not been included. These changes 

would include slightly increased canopy closure due to ingrowth and expanded conifer 

dominance on sites identified as grass, shrub, and forb (E1). They would also include mortality 

due to insects and disease, resulting in an increase in the E1 condition. The amount of change 

since 2004 is so small that it would not meaningfully alter the analysis. The effects of past 

harvest, fire, and mortality were incorporated into the 2004 satellite analysis. 

The characterization of the existing landscape took into account past activities within the project 

area. Numerous timber sales have occurred within the project area under a variety of harvest 

prescriptions. Past harvest activity includes 3,357 acres of clearcut or shelterwood harvesting, 

3,860 acres of overstory removal, and 341 acres of partial removal cutting. Past timber sales in 

the project area include Ace, Butterfield, Claypool, Coyle Salvage, Cougar Salvage, Felix, H&G, 

Harpo, Koch, Marks, Marks Creek, McGinnis, Metal Creek, Nature, President’s, Quarter, 

Salmon, Shamrock, Snowshoe, Thunder, Top Cat, and Underdog. Based on a cursory visual 

inspection, selective harvest has also occurred on the majority of private lands in the project area. 

The Hash Rock Fire burned an estimated 4,594 acres within the project area. The majority of the 

area burned at low intensity. From 2003 to 2005 increased tree mortality from bark beetles also 

affected vegetative conditions. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 47 

The Viable Ecosystem model has been used to characterize the existing landscape and to provide 

a means of comparison to historical conditions. Five of the six PAGs have been fully analyzed 

for the project area. A range of acres for each stage is given to compare the current conditions to 

conditions found in the area historically. The existing condition of the western juniper PAG is 

displayed but effects on the alternatives on this PAG were not analyzed because the number of 

acres treated is small, and mostly consists of underburning which would have little if any effect 

on the vegetative stages. Tables 8 through 13 display the existing condition and the historic 

range of variability (HRV) for all six PAGs in the project area. 

LOS is an important vegetative condition specifically identified in the Regional Forester’s Forest 

Plan Amendment No. 2 (June 1995). This Forest Plan amendment is commonly referred to as 

the Eastside Screens. The Eastside Screens define LOS as vegetative structures in which large 

trees are a common feature. It goes on to identify two different structural conditions, multi and 

single strata. 

Satellite imagery is used as the landscape analysis tool to estimate the existing amount of LOS. 

The Viable Ecosystem size/structure class 5 (21 inch or greater dbh) is used to identify existing 

LOS. Differentiation between multi- and single-strata LOS is based on the “a” and “b” density 

classifications. The amount of each LOS type by PAG was compared to its corresponding HRV. 

Table 8. Moist grand fir PAG. Table 9. Dry grand fir PAG. 

S/S 

Stage 

Existing 

(acres) 

Low 

(acres) 

High 

(acres) 

 S/S 

Stage 

Existing 

(acres) 

Low 

(acres) 

High 

(acres) 

E1 128 65 156 E1 1793 397 1389

E2 51 65 156 E2 917 595 1588

E3a 18 13 39 E3a 127 198 595

E3b 10 52 156 E3b 336 794 2381

E4a 173 5 26 E4a 2664 476 794

E4b 205 21 104 E4b 6372 1905 3175

E5a 149 5 13 E5a 1000 476 794

E5b 71 21 52 E5b 696 1905 3175

M2 49 39 130 M2 815 595 1786

M3 35 65 210 M3 500 595 1986

M4a 62 156 416 M4a 352 595 1111

M4b 61 39 104 M4b 1661 2381 4445

M5a 179 104 208 M5a 1026 397 992

M5b 21 26 52 M5b 489 1588 3969

L2 0 0 26 L2 5 0 397

L3 3 13 65 L3 18 0 397

L4a 26 52 104 L4a 297 318 794

L4b 13 0 0 L4b 353 79 198

L5a 43 52 104 L5a 397 635 1270

L5b 3 0 0 L5b 26 159 318
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 48 

Table 10. Douglas-fir PAG. Table 11. Mesic ponderosa pine PAG. 

S/S 

Stage 

Existing 

(acres) 

Low 

(acres) 

High 

(acres) 

 S/S 

Stage 

Existing 

(acres) 

Low 

(acres) 

High 

(acres) 

E1 160 402 1609 E1 109 133 665

E2 684 0 805 E2 17 0 133

E3a 119 0 161 E3a 0 0 27

E3b 106 0 644 E3b 0 0 106

E4a 1587 322 644 E4a 2 0 53

E4b 1797 1288 2575 E4b 17 0 213

E5a 343 563 805 E5a 0 0 53

E5b 184 2253 3219 E5b 0 0 213

M2 47 0 805 M2 14 0 133

M3 89 0 402 M3 16 0 133

M4a 140 80 322 M4a 65 0 53

M4b 139 322 1288 M4b 54 0 213

M5a 95 80 241 M5a 18 0 80

M5b 1 322 966 M5b 0 0 319

L2 229 0 402 L2 485 0 266

L3 140 0 402 L3 93 133 319

L4a 968 258 515 L4a 553 0 106

L4b 638 64 129 L4b 1025 532 957

L5a 550 258 515 L5a 97 0 106

L5b 31 64 129 L5b 94 1330 1755
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 49 

Table 12. Xeric ponderosa pine PAG. Table 13. Western juniper PAG. 

S/S 

Stage 

Existing 

(acres) 

Low 

(acres) 

High 

(acres) 

 S/S 

Stage 

Existing 

(acres) 

Low 

(acres) 

High 

(acres) 

E1 43 66 330 E1 123 716 1002 

E2 19 0 66 M2 92 72 143 

E3a 0 0 7 M3 70 72 143 

E3b 0 0 59 L4a 596 0 0 

E4a 9 0 13 L4b 525 215 429 

E4b 49 66 119 L5 25 72 172 

E5a 0 0 13

E5b 0 66 119

M2 4 0 66

M3 4 0 66

M4a 72 0 26

M4b 71 66 237

M5a 2 0 20

M5b 0 66 178

L2 58 66 132

L3 44 66 263

L4a 779 0 46

L4b 104 198 428

L5a 58 0 53

L5b 2 198 474

Currently, the project area contains an estimated 5,575 acres of LOS. Most of the LOS, about 

3,960 acres, is in a multi-strata condition. Historically, the overall amount of LOS would have 

ranged between 10,569 and 20,205 acres. Historically, most of the LOS would have been single 

strata due to the frequent low-intensity fires which were the dominate disturbance regime in the 

area. Examination of each PAG reveals that all PAGs are within or above the historic range for 

the multi-strata condition. All PAGs except moist grand fir are below the historic range for the 

single-strata condition. The moist grand fir PAG is within the range for the single-strata 

condition. The moist grand fir PAG was historically influenced by more infrequent, higherseverity fires which are reflected in the historic ranges. Across all PAGs, the total amount of 

multi-strata LOS is within the combined historic ranges, while single-strata LOS is below. 

The information displayed in Table 14 includes all LOS stages within the project area, regardless 

of patch size. The Ochoco NF has identified a minimum patch size of 5 acres that must be met 

in order to qualify as an LOS “stand” as described in the Eastside Screens. (The April 6, 2007, 

Silvicultural Input for this project includes additional information.) 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 50 

Table 14. Existing LOS and historic ranges by PAG.

Plant Association 

Group 

LOS 

Type 

Existing

(acres) 

Historic Low 

(acres) 

Historic High 

(acres) 

Status 

multi 371 161 325 above range

Moist grand fir single 95 47 104 within range

Total 466 208 429

multi 2,423 1,508 3,056 within range

Dry grand fir single 1,211 3,652 7,462 below range

Total 3,634 5,160 10,518

multi 988 901 1,561 within range

Douglas-fir single 216 2,639 4,314 below range

Total 1,204 3,540 5,875

multi 115 0 239 within range

Mesic ponderosa pine single 94 1,330 2,287 below range

Total 209 1,330 2,526

multi 60 0 86 within range

Xeric ponderosa pine single 2 330 771 below range

Total 62 330 857

 

multi 3,957 2,570 5,267 within range

Total (all PAGs) single 1,618 7,998 14,938 below range

Total 5,575 10,568 20,205

Environmental Consequences 

Successional and structural changes as a result of the alternatives and projections through time 

were estimated using the Viable Ecosystem model. This model accounts for multi-directional 

change (multiple pathway succession) through time, but does not include future disturbances. 

The model does include density-dependent growth effects. The fuels reduction activities have 

not been incorporated into the projections because the effects of these activities are not 

anticipated to create changes in species composition, structure, or density of a magnitude large 

enough to be measured. 

There are two primary processes that affect the movement of one seral structural stage to 

another. Species composition changes due to succession tend to favor shade-tolerant species and 

move stages from early seral to late seral. Growth moves stages from smaller to larger structural 

stages. Although some insects and disease disturbances are species specific and can move early 

seral to mid or late seral, natural disturbance processes (including fire, insects and diseases, and 

flooding) tend to move stages backward from mid or late seral to early seral. The magnitude of 

movement depends on the intensity of the disturbance. Some disturbances, such as low-intensity 

fire, may not affect the dominant stand character, but serve to maintain the existing stage. 

Differing growth rates were applied to the two density categories (“a” and “b”) within the grand 

fir, Douglas-fir, and ponderosa pine PAGs. These growth rates directly correspond to rates of 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 51 

change in structure in the Viable Ecosystem seral/structural stages. Less dense “b” stages 

received an average 20 percent growth rate increase over stands which have high “a” densities. 

This estimate corresponds with density and spacing studies (Oliver 1979, Barrett 1982, Cochran 

and Barrett 1993, and Cochran and Barrett 1999b) where growth rate increases from thinning 

varied between 15-25 percent depending on stand density and little gains were realized when 

canopy closure was not reduced below 50-60 percent.

The projected future abundance of each stage is based on stand development assumptions for the 

various seral structural stages. The 20, 30, and 50-year time intervals were chosen to 

demonstrate development over time. These projections indicate that all action alternatives move 

toward the HRV for the first 20 years. Between 20 and 50 years, the results indicate the action 

alternatives move closer to the HRV than the no action alternative. These projections include 

changes from natural growth and succession, as well as endemic levels of disturbance (insects 

and disease). The projections do not include future disturbance events such as widespread insect 

and disease occurrences, fire, or management activities other than continued fire suppression. 

The action alternatives are designed to reduce tree density and improve growth and vigor of the 

residual trees and reduce susceptibility to insects and disease. Thinning will more quickly 

restore historic seral/structural stage conditions and improve growing conditions for larger trees 

than either no action or prescribed fire alone. Thinning also decreases the probability of crown 

fires, reducing the potential area burned by unwanted fires, and decreases potential fire severity 

(Peterson et al. 2005). 

Live trees 21 inches dbh or larger would not be cut in any prescription except when necessary to 

provide safe working conditions. Hazardous trees that are cut down in Riparian Habitat 

Conservation Areas would be left on site. 

Numerous studies have shown increased growth and vigor of remaining trees following thinning 

(Oliver 1979, Barrett 1981, Barrett 1982, Barrett 1989, Larson et al. 1983, Cochran and Barrett 

1999a, and Cochran and Barrett 1999b). Growth response to thinning has been shown to occur 

in all size classes of trees, including large old ponderosa pine (McDowell et al. 2003). Other 

studies have shown reduced susceptibility to many insect and diseases that are density related 

(Roth and Barrett 1985 and Filip and Schmidt 1990). Further studies show moderated fire 

hazard and lower crown fire potential as a result of thinning and fuel reduction activities (Omi 

and Martinson 2002 and Pollet and Omi 2002). 

Alternative 1 

LOS development within the project area would be determined by existing stocking and species 

composition. Much of the future LOS that develops through natural growth and succession 

would tend towards mid or late-seral species composition and multi-strata characteristics. These 

conditions are already within or above the historic range for all PAGs. Within 20 years, the total 

amount of multi-strata LOS is projected to exceed the overall historic range for the project area. 

The rate at which stands would develop large tree character would be hampered by over stocked 

conditions. On drier sites, such as the ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir PAGs, stand stagnation 

may preclude the attainment of additional large trees. Existing LOS (i.e. large trees) would 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 52 

continue to be susceptible to mortality from competition with understory trees and the 

accompanying increase in risk to loss due to insects, disease, and wildfire. 

Tables 15 through 18 and Figures 1, 2, and 3 below display the predicted amounts of LOS that 

would occur under each alternative. 

Alternative 2 

Activities would generally move stands in a multi-strata condition to or towards a single-strata 

condition. Many stands would continue to be in an uneven-aged condition. Reducing stand 

density would reduce competitive stress on the remaining trees (Powell 1999). This would result 

in more large trees being maintained over time, as well as to encourage the development of 

additional large trees (Cochran et al. 1994). The abundance of early-seral species would be 

maintained and enhanced in the long-term; however, late-seral species would continue to be 

present in stands where they exist prior to treatment. Grand fir and Douglas-fir would be 

retained both in the overstory (all trees >21” dbh) as well as in the understory but in lesser 

amounts. 

Activities are also proposed in single-strata conditions but where stocking density is currently 

considered to be too high. Thinning activities would target the smaller diameter and less 

vigorous trees for removal, while maintaining the generally single-strata characteristics. This 

would encourage the development of large structure at an accelerated rate. In addition, reducing 

stocking density would increase tree vigor and reduce insect and disease hazard. 

Activities would remove understory trees to reduce stand density, to maintain existing large 

trees, and to enhance the development of additional large trees. No live trees 21 inches dbh or 

larger, except those trees considered hazardous to the logging/hauling operation, would be cut. 

Primarily fire-intolerant, late-seral species would be targeted for removal although these species 

would not be eliminated. 

Reducing stand densities would reduce competitive stress. This would result in more large trees 

being maintained over time, as well as encourage the development of additional large trees. 

Activities would also reduce the risk of large tree mortality due to disturbance agents. Singlestrata conditions are more likely to be sustained over time than multi-strata conditions since the 

trees are more vigorous and less susceptible to insects, disease, and wildfire. The abundance of 

early-seral species would be maintained and enhanced in the long term. 

The overall amount of LOS would not change immediately due to treatment, although 929 acres 

of multi-strata LOS would be converted to single-strata LOS. The overall amount of multi-strata 

LOS would not be reduced below historic levels; however, the amount of multi-strata LOS 

within the Douglas-fir PAG would drop below the historic range by 222 acres. By year 20, the 

amount of multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG would increase to be within the historic 

range. After year 20, the amount of multi-strata LOS remains within or above the historic range 

for all PAGs. This alternative results in the greatest amount of single-strata LOS in both the long 

and short term, although the overall amount of single strata does not reach the historic range 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 53 

within the 50-year projection period. Tables 15 through 18 and Figures 1, 2, and 3 below display 

the predicted amounts of LOS that would occur under each alternative. 

Alternative 3 

Precommercial thinning in this alternative would remove smaller diameter trees and reduce some 

competitive stress on the remaining trees. Early-seral species or disease-resistant trees would be 

selected for retention where possible. Because only small trees would be removed, the amount 

of competition among the remaining trees would vary depending on the existing stand density 

and number of trees greater than 9 inches dbh. In some units, it may not be possible to reach 

recommended stocking levels. Disease in trees larger than 12 inches dbh, such as dwarf 

mistletoe, would not be reduced. The ability to change species dominance from late seral to 

early seral would be limited where there is an abundance of late-seral trees 9 inches dbh and 

larger. In addition, the ability to move from multi-strata conditions to single-strata conditions 

would be reduced where trees in the 9 to 20 inch dbh range make up a separate canopy strata. 

Reducing stand densities would reduce competitive stress although not to the extent possible 

with commercial harvest. Density reduction would result in more large trees being maintained 

over time, as well as encourage the development of additional large trees. Activities would also 

reduce the risk of large tree mortality due to disturbance agents. Single-strata conditions are 

more likely to be sustained over time than multi-strata conditions since the trees are more 

vigorous and less susceptible to wildfire. The abundance of early-seral species would be 

maintained and enhanced in the long term. This alternative would not directly move any acres of 

multi-strata LOS to single-strata LOS. 

The overall amount or distribution of LOS would not change immediately due to thinning. 

Precommercial thinning would tend to maintain LOS in its current condition for a longer period 

of time when compared to Alternative 1. In stands that are currently not LOS, thinning trees less 

than 9 inches dbh would accelerate their growth and allow the development of large trees at a 

faster rate than if they were left unthinned. By year 20, there would be an increase in the amount 

of LOS, but the increase is the least of all the action alternatives. This trend continues through 

the 50-year projection period. Tables 15 through 18 and Figures 1, 2, and 3 below display the 

predicted amounts of LOS that would occur under each alternative. 

Alternative 4 

Activities would generally move stands in a multi-strata condition to or towards a single-strata 

condition similar to Alternative 2; however, fewer acres would be treated. Many stands would 

continue to be in an uneven-aged condition. Reducing stand density would reduce competitive 

stress on the remaining trees (Powell 1999). This would result in more large trees being 

maintained over time, as well as to encourage the development of additional large trees (Cochran 

et al. 1994). The abundance of early-seral species would be maintained and enhanced in the 

long-term; however, late-seral species would continue to be present in stands where they exist 

prior to treatment. Grand fir and Douglas-fir would be retained both in the overstory (all trees 

>21” dbh) as well as in the understory but at lesser amounts. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 54 

Activities are also proposed in single-strata conditions but where stocking density is currently 

considered to be too high. Thinning activities would target the smaller diameter and less 

vigorous trees for removal, while maintaining the generally single-strata characteristics. This 

would encourage the development of large structure at an accelerated rate. In addition, reducing 

stocking density would increase tree vigor and reduce insect and disease hazard. 

The overall amount of LOS would not change immediately due to treatment, although 763 acres 

of multi-strata LOS would be converted to single-strata LOS. The overall amount of multi-strata 

LOS would not be reduced below historic levels; however, the amount of multi-strata LOS 

within the Douglas-fir PAG would drop below the historic range by 129 acres. By year 20, the 

amount of multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG would increase to be within the historic 

range. After year 20, the amount of multi-strata LOS remains within or above the historic range 

for all PAGs. This alternative results in more single-strata LOS than Alternative 3, but less than 

Alternative 2. Tables 15 through 18 and Figures 1, 2, and 3 below display the predicted amounts 

of LOS that would occur under each alternative. 

Alternative 5 

Activities would generally move stands in a multi-strata condition to or towards a single-strata 

condition similar to Alternative 2; however, fewer acres would be treated and in several stands 

higher-density levels would be retained. Activities would generally move stands in a multi-strata 

condition to or towards a single-strata condition. Many stands would continue to be in an 

uneven-aged condition. Reducing stand density would reduce competitive stress on the 

remaining trees (Powell 1999). This would result in more large trees being maintained over 

time, as well as to encourage the development of additional large trees (Cochran et al. 1994). 

The abundance of early-seral species would be maintained and enhanced in the long-term; 

however, late-seral species would continue to be present in stands where they exist prior to 

treatment. Grand fir and Douglas-fir would be retained both in the overstory (all trees >21” dbh) 

as well as in the understory but at lesser amounts.

Activities are also proposed in single-strata conditions but where stocking density is currently 

considered to be too high. Thinning activities would target the smaller diameter and less 

vigorous trees for removal, while maintaining the generally single-strata characteristics. This 

would encourage the development of large structure at an accelerated rate. In addition, reducing 

stocking density would increase tree vigor and reduce insect and disease hazard. 

The overall amount of LOS would not change immediately due to the proposed activities. The 

overall amount of multi-strata LOS would not be reduced below historic levels; however, the 

amount of multi-strata LOS within the Douglas-fir PAG would drop below the historic range by 

108 acres. By year 20, the amount of multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG would increase to 

be within the historic range. After year 20, the amount of multi-strata LOS remains within or 

above the historic range for all PAGs. This alternative results in more single-strata LOS than 

Alternative 3, but less than Alternatives 2 and 4. Treatments in this alternative are similar to 

those in Alternatives 2 and 4, except for the modified prescriptions proposed for certain units 

with wildlife habitat emphasis. Those modifications include leaving portions of units untreated 

and/or retaining higher residual densities than Alternative 2 or 4. Modeling these modifications 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 55 

is outside the capabilities of the Viable Ecosystem model. Given the nature of these 

modifications, and the acres involved, it is reasonable to predict that the output of the model will 

overstate changes in vegetative stages by approximately 15 percent. Given that caveat, this 

alternative would move an estimated 685 acres of multi-strata LOS to single-strata LOS. Tables 

15 through 18 and Figures 1, 2, and 3 below display the predicted amounts of LOS that would 

occur under each alternative. 

Table 15. Existing and post-treatment LOS by PAG (acres). 

PAG 

LOS 

Type 

Alternative 

1 (existing) 

Alternative 

2 

Alternative 

3 

Alternative 

4 

Alternative 

5 

multi 371 305 371 320 330 Moist grand fir single 95 151 95 138 136

multi 2,423 1,886 2,423 1,942 1,992 Dry grand fir single 1,211 1,742 1,211 1,688 1,642

multi 988 679 988 772 793 Douglas-fir single 216 523 216 431 411

Mesic ponderosa multi 115 98 115 100 101

pine single 94 112 94 109 108

Xeric ponderosa multi 60 60 60 60 60

pine single 2 2 2 2 2

multi 3,957 3,028 3,957 3,194 3,276

Total (all PAGs) single 1,618 2,547 1,618 2,381 2,229

Total (both multi and single) 5,575 5,575 5,575 5,575 5,575

Table 16. Projected acres of LOS by PAG (Year 20).

PAG 

LOS 

Type 

Alternative 

1 

Alternative 

2 

Alternative 

3 

Alternative 

4 

Alternative 

5 

multi 462 409 464 422 423

Moist grand fir single 101 150 102 139 138

multi 3,500 3,047 3,509 3,098 3,140

Dry grand fir single 1,803 2,441 1,865 2,387 2,324

multi 1,352 1,124 1,345 1,189 1,208

Douglas-fir single 382 758 436 667 634

Mesic ponderosa multi 346 332 347 334 335

pine single 115 139 121 136 135

Xeric ponderosa multi 211 215 216 217 215

pine single 12 12 12 12 12

multi 5,870 5,126 5,881 5,259 5,322 Total (all PAGs) single 2,413 3,499 2,535 3,341 3,243

Total (both multi and 

single) 8,283 8,626 8,416 8,600 8,565
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 56 

Table 17. Projected acres of LOS by PAG (Year 30).

PAG 

LOS 

Type 

Alternative 

1 

Alternative 

2 

Alternative 

3 

Alternative 

4 

Alternative 

5 

multi 502 456 506 468 469 Moist grand fir single 103 149 105 139 139

multi 4,016 3,607 4,030 3,655 3,693 Dry grand fir single 1,988 2,656 2,073 2,604 2,537

multi 1,525 1,335 1,519 1,389 1,405 Douglas-fir single 435 831 509 742 705

Mesic ponderosa multi 445 433 448 435 436

pine single 121 146 129 143 142

multi 270 275 276 277 276 X Pine single 15 15 15 15 15

multi 6,759 6,106 6,779 6,224 6,279 Total (all PAGs) single 2,662 3,798 2,831 3,643 3,538

Total (both multi and 

single) 9,420 9,904 9,610 9,867 9,817

Table 18. Projected acres of LOS by PAG (Year 50).

PAG 

LOS 

Type 

Alternative 

1 

Alternative 

2 

Alternative 

3 

Alternative 

4 

Alternative 

5 

multi 576 541 582 551 552 Moist grand fir single 106 147 109 138 137

multi 5,007 4,685 5,033 4,727 4,757 Dry grand fir single 2,194 2,890 2,314 2,840 2,769

multi 1,861 1,741 1,861 1,777 1,787 Douglas-fir single 497 913 599 829 789

Mesic ponderosa multi 618 607 620 609 609

pine single 126 153 137 150 149

Xeric ponderosa multi 364 369 370 371 370

pine single 18 19 19 19 19

multi 8,426 7,944 8,466 8,035 8,075 Total (all PAGs) single 2,942 4,122 3,178 3,976 3,863

Total (both multi and 

single) 11,368 12,065 11,644 12,011 11,938
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 57 

Figure 1. Projected acres of multi-strata LOS by alternative. 

Multistrata LOS

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Alt1 Alt2 Alt3 Alt4 Alt5

Acres

0 years

20 years

30 years

50 years

Low Acres

High Acres

Figure 2. Projected acres of single-strata LOS by alternative. 

Single Strata LOS

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

Alt1 Alt2 Alt3 Alt4 Alt5

Acres

0 years

20 years

30 years

50 years

Low Acres

High Acres

Figure 3. Projected total acres of LOS by alternative. 

Total LOS

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

Alt1 Alt2 Alt3 Alt4 Alt5

Acres

0 years

20 years

30 years

50 years

Low Acres

High Acres
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 58 

The projections for Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 include only the proposed activities associated 

with each alternative. They do not include any future management such as continued 

underburning, thinning, or other stand-tending activities that may occur in the future. Thus, the 

predicted amounts of multi-strata LOS tend to increase with time as succession and stand growth 

continue without further management activities other than continued fire suppression. 

Cumulative Effects 

There are no active or planned timber sales within the Spears project area that would alter the 

amount of LOS or change species composition. The effects of past harvest and other activities 

have been included in the description of the existing condition. There are no other vegetation 

projects (i.e. precommercial thinning or fuels reduction activities) currently ongoing or planned 

within the area. Approximately 1,500 acres of precommercial thinning from the 2002 Bandit II 

project have been completed within the area. This work was done in 2003 and 2004; fuels 

reduction in these units (underburning and pile burning) has not been completed and is included 

in the action alternatives. 

Increased mortality from bark beetles was occurring in the project area following the Hash Rock 

Fire of 2000. It appears that the amount of mortality has decreased to endemic levels in the past 

2 years. No further increase in insect mortality is anticipated related to the Hash Rock Fire. 

Most of the private ownership within the project area is xeric ponderosa pine or juniper. Some 

nonforest land is also associated with homes and meadows. The privately owned forestland 

contains little, if any, LOS. It is foreseeable that land management practices on these lands 

would neither favor the development of additional LOS nor remove existing LOS. 

Early-seral Species Composition 

Affected Environment 

There are two primary processes that affect the movement of one seral structural stage to 

another. Species composition changes due to succession tend to favor shade-tolerant species and 

move stages from early seral to late seral. Growth moves stages from smaller structure to larger 

structural stages. Although some insects and disease disturbances are species specific and can 

move early seral to mid or late seral, natural disturbance processes (including fire, insects and 

diseases, and flooding) tend to move stages backward from mid or late seral to early seral. The 

magnitude of movement depends on the intensity of the disturbance. Some disturbances, such as 

low-intensity fire, may not affect the dominant stand character, but serve to maintain the existing 

stage. 

The projected future abundance of each stage is based on stand development assumptions for the 

various seral structural stages. The 20, 30, and 50-year time intervals were chosen to 

demonstrate development over time. These projections indicate that all alternatives move toward 

the HRV for the first 20 years. Between 20 and 50 years, the treatments proposed in the action 

alternatives provide a landscape which is closer to the HRV than the no action alternative. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 59 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

Vegetation would continue to develop within the project area in a manner determined by existing 

stocking and species composition. Many of the future stages, which develop through natural 

growth and succession, would tend towards mid or late-seral species composition and multistrata characteristics. Many of these conditions are already within or above HRV. The rate at 

which many stands develop large tree character would be hampered by overstocked conditions. 

On drier sites, such as ponderosa pine PAGs, stand stagnation would become more common. 

Existing trees would continue to be weakened by competition in overly dense stands. 

Dense structural stages, already above the historic abundance, would continue to increase, 

reaching the highest levels of all alternatives. Acres dominated by grand and Douglas-fir (lateseral species) would steadily increase, while acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western 

larch (early-seral species) would steadily decrease. Tables 19 and 20 and Figures 4 and 5 display 

the effects of the five alternatives on species composition and dense conditions. 

Table 19. Acres dominated by grand and Douglas-fir. 

 0 years 20 years 30 years 50 years 

Alternative 1 3,711 4,266 4,472 4,947 

Alternative 2 2,719 3,208 3,370 3,748 

Alternative 3 3,412 3,954 4,149 4,595 

Alternative 4 2,878 3,191 3,543 3,932 

Alternative 5 2,974 3,477 3,649 4,048 

Table 20. Acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch. 

 0 years 20 years 30 years 50 years 

Alternative 1 22,794 21,581 21,283 20,465 

Alternative 2 23,433 24,136 23,103 23,098 

Alternative 3 21,929 22,542 19,546 21,436 

Alternative 4 23,197 23,889 23,626 22,843 

Alternative 5 23,220 23,630 23,363 22,576 

Effects Common to all Action Alternatives 

Proposed treatments (commercial harvest and precommercial thinning) are designed to reduce 

tree density and improve growth and vigor of the residual trees and reduce susceptibility to 

insects and disease. These treatments would more quickly restore historic seral/structural stage 

conditions and improve growing conditions for larger trees than either no action or prescribed 

fire alone. Commercial harvest and precommercial thinning would decrease the probability of 

crown fires, reducing the potential area burned by unwanted fires, and would decrease potential 

fire severity (Peterson et al. 2005). 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 60 

Figure 4. Grand and Douglas-fir dominated stages. 

Acres Dominated by GF/DF

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5

Acres

0 years

20 years

30 years

50 years

Low Acres

High Acres

Figure 5. Ponderosa pine and western larch dominated stages. 

Acres Dominated by PP/WL

13,000

15,000

17,000

19,000

21,000

23,000

25,000

27,000

29,000

Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5

Acres

0 years

20 years

30 years

50 years

Low Acres

High Acres

Alternative 2 

The abundance of early-seral species would be maintained and enhanced in the long-term; 

however, late-seral species would continue to be present in stands where they exist prior to 

treatment. Grand fir and Douglas-fir would be retained both in the overstory (all trees >21” dbh) 

as well as in the understory but at lesser amounts.

Acres dominated by grand and Douglas-fir would be reduced the most of any alternative, yet 

remain with the historic range. Acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch would be 

increased by about 650 acres due to treatment, and increase by an additional 700 acres over the 

next 20 years. 

Alternative 3 

Early-seral or disease-resistant species would be selected for retention where possible. Because 

only small trees would be removed, the amount of competition among the remaining trees would 

vary depending on the larger density and it may not be possible to reach recommended stocking 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 61 

levels in some units. The ability to change species dominance from late seral to early seral will 

be limited in stands where there is an abundance of late-seral trees 9 inches dbh and larger. 

Acres dominated by grand and Douglas-fir would be reduced by about 300 acres, the least of any 

action alternative. Acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch would be increased by 

about 865 acres due to treatment, then increase by 600 acres over the next 20 years, surpassing 

the amount in Alternative 1 at that time. 

Alternative 4 

The abundance of early-seral species would be maintained and enhanced in the long-term; 

however, late-seral species would continue to be present in stands where they exist prior to 

treatment. Grand fir and Douglas-fir would be retained both in the overstory (all trees >21” dbh) 

as well as in the understory but at lesser amounts.

Acres dominated by grand and Douglas-fir would be reduced by more than 800 acres, but stay 

within the historic range. Acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch would be 

increased by about 400 acres due to treatment, and increase by an additional 700 acres over the 

next 20 years. 

Alternative 5 

The abundance of early-seral species would be maintained and enhanced in the long-term; 

however, late-seral species would continue to be present in stands where they exist prior to 

treatment. Grand fir and Douglas-fir would be retained both in the overstory (all trees >21” dbh) 

as well as in the understory but at lesser amounts.

Acres dominated by grand and Douglas-fir would be reduced by about 250 acres, but stay within 

the historic range. Acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch would be increased by 

about 425 acres due to treatment, and increase by about 400 additional acres over the next 20 

years. 

Cumulative Effects 

There are no active or planned timber sales within the Spears project area that would alter the 

amount of area dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch. The effects of past harvest and 

other activities have been included in the description of the existing condition as described 

previously. There are no other vegetation projects currently ongoing or planned that would alter 

the amount of area dominated by early-seral species. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 62 

Infestations by Insects and Disease 

Affected Environment 

Past management practices, including fire exclusion and selection harvest, have favored the 

development of stands, which are now considered to be out of balance when compared to their 

historic conditions. Historically (100+ years ago) stands in the project area would have 

commonly had more ponderosa pine and western larch and less grand fir and Douglas-fir. They 

would have been more open and single storied rather than the multi-storied stands of today. 

These stand conditions were maintained by frequent, low-intensity fires, which prevented them 

from becoming overcrowded. The natural disturbance agents found in the project area, have 

always been present; however, the degree to which they now affect the area can be considered to 

be a reflection of the ecosystem’s health and resiliency. 

Bark Beetles: Aerial insect and disease surveys for years 1996 through 2006 show numerous 

active mortality centers due to bark beetle feeding. Stand exams and field reconnaissance also 

identified bark beetle activity and susceptible stand conditions. Elevated levels of western pine 

beetle occurred in the area following the Hash Rock Fire. Patches of beetle mortality outside of 

the burn area were first detected in the late winter of 2004 and by late summer 2004 were highly 

visible from Highway 26. Mortality patches ranged in size from small groups of 2-4 trees, up to 

4-5 acres. Primarily large diameter ponderosa pines were attacked, although smaller pines 

within a patch of large pines were also killed. Spread of the beetle was enhanced due to the dry 

summers of 2001, 2002, and 2003 as well as overstocked conditions in many of the stands. 

Beetle populations peaked in 2004 and the Regional Aerial Detection Surveys for that fall 

mapped over 3,800 acres of scattered mortality within the watershed. Beetle populations 

declined in 2005 and again in 2006. At this time, it appears that elevated mortality from this 

bark beetle event has declined. 

Mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) and western pine beetle (Dendroctonus 

brevicomis) occur in the project area. Ponderosa pine is a susceptible host in overstocked stands. 

Bark beetle mortality is symptomatic of over-stocked stand conditions that create competition 

stress and reduce tree vigor (Schmid et al.1994 and Graham and Knight 1965). Thinning 

(density reduction) has been shown to be effective in reducing bark beetle susceptibility in stands 

(Fettig et al. 2007). 

Douglas-fir beetle (Dentroctonus pseudotsugae) and the fir engraver (Scolytus ventralis) also 

occur in the project area. Both of these insects are regarded as secondary pests because they 

attack trees that are weakened and stressed. Factors such as drought, defoliation, overstocking, 

and disease can result in outbreaks of these insects that can cause increased mortality within a 

stand. 

Defoliating Insects: From approximately 1987 to 1992, this project area, along with the rest of 

the Ochoco Mountains, experienced an outbreak of western spruce budworm which caused large 

amounts of trees damage and/or mortality in nearly all stands in which grand fir and Douglas-fir 

are major components. Beginning in 1992, the Marks and Harpo timber sales included harvest in 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 63 

stands with high levels of mortality and damage from the western spruce budworm. Attributes, 

which contribute to high susceptibility to defoliating insects, are: (1) increased amount of later 

seral host species, (2) increased stand densities, and (3) the development of multi-storied stand 

structures (Carlson and Wulf 1989). The trend without vegetative treatments would be for these 

characteristics to increase until insect population dynamics and climatic conditions combine to 

generate another outbreak of epidemic proportions. 

Dwarf mistletoe: Dwarf mistletoes are present in the project area. Ponderosa pine dwarf 

mistletoe (Arceuthobium campylopodum) decreases tree vigor, reduces growth, and increases 

susceptibility to other pathogens (Hawksworth and Shaw 1987). Infections in trees of the upper 

canopies spread readily to trees in the lower canopies. Douglas-fir dwarf mistletoe 

(Arceuthobium douglasii) causes growth loss, reduced wood quality, topkill, and mortality. 

Dwarf mistletoes are largely specific to one or two host tree species. In other words, Douglas-fir 

dwarf mistletoe would not be expected to infect ponderosa pine (Knutson and Tinnin 1980). 

Dwarf mistletoes accelerate the movement to mid and late-seral species compositions by 

reducing the vigor of infected early-seral species and increasing the competitive edge of laterseral species. Dwarf mistletoes cause branch structure to broom creating nest and hiding sites for 

many animals. Some animals forage on dwarf mistletoe plants. 

Dwarf mistletoes are probably more common at present than historically due to the reduction of 

normal fire events. Dwarf mistletoe spreads from infected trees to adjacent trees that are close 

enough to catch mistletoe seeds as they are released from the plant. Historically more stands in 

the project area were open with fewer understory trees. Frequent, low-intensity fire would have 

scorched lower branches and killed infected branches which would have reduced or prevented 

the spread of mistletoe. As stands have become more dense and multi-strata, dwarf mistletoes 

have been able to spread faster. As height growth slows due to infected branches, dwarf 

mistletoe moves more quickly into the higher tree crown. Brooming branches contribute to 

ladder fuels that allow wildfires to reach tree crowns increasing the risk of crown fire initiation. 

Dwarf mistletoe management can be directed at either prevention or reduction. The most 

effective treatment for dwarf mistletoe control is to remove infected overstory trees; this project 

does not include the removal of large trees over 21 inches dbh. Harvest or precommercial 

thinning in the lower canopies can and does reduce stocking and can effectively reduce some 

growth loss, improve vigor, and reduce re-infection (Roth and Barrett 1985). Favoring an 

immune tree species when performing thinning is also an effective method of dwarf mistletoe 

management (Knutson and Tinnin 1980). 

Root disease: Armillaria root disease and laminated root rot are present in the project area. 

They are most evident within stands of high density and those with a major component of laterseral species. Vigorously growing trees can be infected but can often confine the fungi and limit 

the extent of the infection (Hadfield et al. 1986). Most of the root disease activity in the project 

area can be found in the grand fir PAG, especially in areas where stand conditions combine to 

reduce stand vigor. These diseases can kill trees directly, and often work in conjunction with 

insects and disease to create pockets or patches of mortality (Hagle and Shaw 1991). 

Historically, these disease centers were usually small and contributed to stand diversity. With 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 64 

the changes over time in species composition, the incidence of and susceptibility to root disease 

infection is increasing. The tendency, without disturbance, is for infection centers to be 

repopulated with host tree species and for infections to perpetuate and intensify. 

Table 21 displays the seral/structural stages by PAG that are considered to be at high risk of 

damage by insects and diseases. 

Table 21. High risk stages by PAG. 

PAG High Risk Stages 

Moist GF E4a, E5a, M5a, L3, L4a, L5a 

Dry GF E3a, E4a, E5a, M4a, M5a, L3, L4, L5 

Doug-fir E3a, E4a, E5a, M4a, M5a, L3, L4a, L5a 

Mesic PP M4a, M5a, L4a, L5a 

Xeric PP M3, M4a, M5a, L4a, L5a 

Currently, there are about 11,900 acres within the project area that are in stages rated as high 

risk. This exceeds the historic range of high risk stages by about 600 acres. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

No actions would be taken to reduce susceptibility to insects and diseases. Vegetative 

development would continue dependent on the conditions and successional trends which 

currently exist. More of the project area would develop conditions such as high density and an 

abundance of later-seral species. High risk stages would become more abundant in the future. In 

20 years the amount of high risk area is projected to increase by an additional 4,600 acres. 

Table 22 and Figure 6 below display the amount of high risk area associated with each 

alternative. 

Effects Common to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

The proposed activities would reduce susceptibility to insects and disease by decreasing tree 

density, favoring early-seral species, and moving towards single-strata conditions which were 

more abundant historically. Decreasing tree density would result in increased growing space and 

less competition for the remaining trees. This would increase their vigor and lessen the risk of 

tree mortality caused by bark beetles and root diseases. The susceptibility to western spruce 

budworm would be reduced by (1) favoring early-seral species (ponderosa pine and western 

larch) which are not preferred primary hosts, (2) reducing multilayered canopy conditions which 

support larval survival during dispersal, and (3) improving tree vigor and the ability to withstand 

attack. Susceptibility to dwarf mistletoe would be reduced by (1) favoring non-host tree species, 

(2) reducing dense multilayered canopy conditions favorable to seed dispersal, and (3) improving 

tree vigor which would allow for increased tree height growth. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 65 

Alternative 2 

This alternative reduces the high-risk stages by more than 3,000 acres. This alternative brings 

the amount of area into the range at which it historically occurred. The proposed activities 

would reduce stand densities, increase the relative abundance of early-seral species, and increase 

resistance to disturbance agents. This alternative reduces the acres of high risk condition the 

most of all alternatives. This trend continues through the 50-year projection period. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative reduces the high-risk stages by almost 800 acres, and brings the amount of area 

just into the range at which it historically occurred. This alternative is predicted to have the least 

amount of risk reduction of all the action alternatives. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative reduces the high-risk stages by almost 2,700 acres, and brings the amount of area 

into the range at which it historically occurred. The proposed activities would reduce stand 

densities, increase the relative abundance of early-seral species, and increase resistance to 

disturbance agents. 

Alternative 5 

As discussed previously, the predictions made by the Viable Ecosystem model are not able to 

fully account for the modified prescriptions incorporated into this alternative. It can be 

anticipated that the untreated patches within units, and the areas retaining more than the 

recommended stocking level would continue to be in a high risk stage. The model prediction of 

amount of high risk area reduced is potentially overstated by about 15 percent. The actions 

proposed in this alternative, however, are estimated to reduce the high-risk stages by almost 

2,400 acres, and bring the amount of area into the range at which it historically occurred. 

Table 22. Acres in a condition of high risk to insects and disease. 

 0 years 20 years 30 years 50 years 

Alternative 1 11,865 16,491 18,439 21,551 

Alternative 2 8,800 13,877 16,004 19,425 

Alternative 3 11,095 15,802 17,770 20,921 

Alternative 4 9,191 14,188 16,283 19,653 

Alternative 5 9,486 14,440 16,518 19,859 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 66 

Figure 6. Acres in high risk stages susceptible to insects and disease 

and the historic range of high risk stages. 

High Insect/Disease Hazard

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5

Acres

0 years

20 years

30 years

50 years

Low Acres

High Acres

The 20, 30, and 50-year projections include only the actions associated with each alternative. 

They do not include any future management such as continued underburning, thinning, or other 

stand-tending activities, which may occur. Thus, the acres of high risk increase with time as 

succession and stand growth continue uninterrupted.

Cumulative Effects 

There are no ongoing or planned activities, other than those described in the action alternatives, 

that would reduce the amount of area in the high risk stages. Therefore, there are no cumulative 

effects that relate to insect and disease susceptibility. 

Fuels 

Affected Environment 

The most common natural disturbance that has had an effect on vegetation in the project area is 

lightning-caused fire. Fire exclusion over the last 90-100 years has reduced the acres burned 

from naturally occurring, low-intensity fires. Frequent, low-intensity fires removed both surface 

and ladder fuels resulting in more open forest stands than what occur today. When fire is kept 

out of forest stands, both surface and ladder fuels increase and stands become denser, which 

increases the likelihood of high-intensity wildfire. As a result of fire exclusion, the amount of 

fuel loadings and the density of forest stands have increased. 

Fire regimes describe the role of fire as a disturbance process for a given landscape. A fire 

regime is defined as the fire frequency or interval as “the average number of years between fires” 

and severity as the “effect of the fire on the dominant over story vegetation” (Hardy et al. 2001 

and Schmidt et al. 2002). The majority of the Spears project area is classified as Fire Regimes I 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 67 

and III which correlates with the ponderosa pine PAG at the lower elevations and mixed conifer 

at upper elevations. 

Fire regimes are divided into five levels of historical natural fire occurrences; only three of the 

five regimes occur within the Spears project area. Fire regime is a reflection of the biophysical 

environment that occurs across a landscape, hence none of the alternatives would have any effect 

on fire regime. 

Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) is used to describe general landscape fire regime and 

vegetation/fuel characteristics. Estimates of these characteristics are calculated for comparison 

with estimates of natural fire regime reference values and reference condition vegetation/fuel 

characteristics to index FRCC (a classification of the amount current conditions have departed 

from those of historical reference conditions). 

Condition classes are generally equivalent to low, moderate, and high departure from the natural 

or historical range of variability (HRV). 

Table 23 displays the effects of the alternatives on condition class within each fire regime for the 

Spears project area. 

Table 23. Fire regime and condition class (percent departure from reference conditions). 

Fire Regime Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5

I 2 

(43) 

1 

(29) 

2 

(37) 

1 

(31) 

1 

(31) 

II 2 

(57) 

2 

(58) 

2 

(58) 

2 

(58) 

2 

(58) 

III 1 

(16) 

1 

(13) 

1 

(15) 

1 

(14) 

1 

(14) 

Fire Regime I includes the ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir PAGs. Fire Regime I comprises 

about 35 percent of the project area. Currently, areas within this fire regime exhibit a moderate 

amount of departure (43%) from reference conditions, primarily a deficiency of late-seral, open 

vegetation/fuels conditions. Alternatives 2 through 5 reduce the amount of departure. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 move this fire regime into condition class 1. Fire Regime I has a fire 

frequency of 0-35 years and low (surface fires most common) to mixed severity (less than 75% 

of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced) (www.frcc.org). 

Fire Regime II is a minor component in the project area. The juniper woodland PAG is Fire 

Regime II. Within Fire Regime II, there is a lack of open, early-seral condition compared to 

reference conditions. This results in a moderate amount of departure and is classified as 

condition class 2. There is little if any treatment proposed for Fire Regime II under any of the 

alternatives and the condition class remains the same for all alternatives. Fire Regime II has a 

fire frequency of 0-35 years and high (stand replacement) severity (greater than 75% of the 

dominant overstory vegetation replaced) (www.frcc.org). 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 68 

Fire Regime III comprises 61 percent of the project area. Current vegetation and fuels conditions 

are similar to reference conditions, with departure at 16 percent and in condition class 1. 

Alternatives 2 through 5 reduce the amount of departure as shown in the table above. This 

occurs primarily by increasing the amount of late-seral, open vegetation/fuels conditions. Fire 

Regime III has a fire frequency of 35-100+ years and mixed severity (less than 75% of the 

dominant overstory vegetation replaced) (www.frcc.org). 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

This is the no action alternative and no fuel reduction activities, including prescribed fire, would 

occur. No fuel reduction activities would occur within the WUI. In the absence of frequent, 

low-intensity fires, forest stands in the project area have developed multi-canopy conditions, 

stocking levels have increased, ladder fuels have increased, surface fuels have increased, and the 

abundance of late-seral, fire-intolerant species (such as grand fir) has increased. These changes 

from historic conditions have left forested stands susceptible to high-intensity wildfire, with an 

increased potential for the unwanted loss of trees, water quality, soil productivity, wildlife 

habitat, and other forest resources. These trends would continue. The amount of the project area 

that is in condition class 1 would decrease over time as both surface and ladder fuels increase. 

The amount of the project area in condition classes 2 and 3 would increase as fuels accumulate 

and departures from reference conditions increase. Over time, the amount of area with the 

potential for high-intensity wildfire would increase while the amount of area that would support 

low-intensity fire would decrease. 

There are no ongoing or reasonably foreseeable activities in the project area that would reduce 

the amount of fuel accumulations and reduce the potential for high-intensity wildfire. 

Alternative 2, 4, and 5 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

These alternatives include several types of fuel reduction activities including activity-fuels 

underburning, natural fuels underburning, piling, and jackpot burning. Precommercial thinning 

and commercial timber harvest are also considered because they would reduce ladder fuels. The 

amount of each fuel reduction activity varies by alternative as displayed in Table 24. Fuel 

reduction activities would occur both within and outside the WUI. In Alternative 2, an estimated 

8,493 acres would be treated in the WUI. In Alternative 4, the amount of treatment in the WUI 

is an estimated 8,474 acres. In Alternative 5, an estimated 8,112 acres would be treated within 

the WUI. 

Fuel reduction activities may be used alone or in combination. For example, most areas where 

precommercial thinning is prescribed also include activity-fuels underburning to reduce the 

amount of surface fuel created by the thinning activity. In all areas where commercial harvest is 

prescribed, there would be a follow-up activity such as grapple piling, hand piling, and/or 

underburning to reduce the activity fuels. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 69 

Table 24. Acres of fuel reduction activities. 

 Alternative 2 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Commercial harvest 6,172 4,935 3,942 

Precommercial and hardwood thinning 11,356 11,131 11,148 

Underburning 15,464 15,162 14,205 

Hand piling 718 793 952 

Grapple piling 3,015 2490 2150 

Jackpot burning 219 265 910 

Prescribed fire operations that are conducted after harvest and thinning operations would reduce 

activity fuels (i.e. slash). These fuels are surface fuels and consist of limbs, branches, tree tops,

and small trees. Based on prescribed fires in the Trout, Mill, Yobear, and Sheep Rock areas, 40 

to 70 percent of the surface area of prescribed fire units is burned, thereby removing surface 

fuels. These fire operations would reduce the density of seedlings and saplings (generally less 

than 3 inches dbh) in these stands and may result in small changes in species composition. 

Because ponderosa pine and western larch are fire-tolerant species, small trees of these species 

are more likely to survive while fire would kill many of the small fir trees. In addition to 

removing activity fuels, prescribed fire operations would also reduce some of the natural fuel 

accumulations. Prescribed fire in these stands would also prune the lower branches of larger 

trees, increasing the distance from the forest floor to the crowns of those trees, making them less 

susceptible to high-intensity wildfire. 

Activity fuels created by commercial harvest and precommercial thinning cause a short-term 

increase (up to 6 years) in the potential for high-intensity wildfire because they increase the 

amount of surface fuels. For the first year after thinning, the fuel moisture in green slash makes 

it unavailable to burn, unless a wildfire occurs under extreme conditions (Rothermel et al. 1986). 

After approximately 1 year, the slash has dried out, needles have turned red, and slash is 

available to burn. Should a wildfire occur during this time, the additional heat generated by the 

increased fuel load has the potential to cause undesired effects to the surrounding stand, soils, 

and other resources. This hazard is mitigated by either lopping (cutting) the slash to reduce the 

height of the fuel bed so that it is under 12 inches, or by piling the slash. Lopping and piling 

both reduce fire intensity by rearranging fuels. In units that have been lopped, after 2 or 3 years 

the slash gets further compacted by winter snows and can be burned with a low-intensity 

underburn. This delay also allows for the redistribution of nutrients from the slash back into the 

soil (Graham et al. 1999). 

In three units (110, 210, and 810), underburning would occur prior to commercial harvest and 

precommercial thinning to reduce the existing amount of fuels in these stands. These prescribed 

fire operations would kill many small trees (generally less than 3 inches dbh). Some medium 

and large trees may also be killed by fire; the trees most likely to be killed by fire operations are 

fire-intolerant species such as fir. Based on past experience, between 1 and 10 percent of the 

medium and large trees may be killed. Fire operations in these three stands would reduce the 

density of the stand by removing trees and would change the species composition by removing 

fire-intolerant trees. However, in these three units underburning alone would not remove enough 

trees. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 70 

Maintenance or natural fuels underburning would occur in many stands. Maintenance 

underburning would remove mostly surface fuels. Some small trees less than 3 inches dbh 

would be killed, but these activities are not expected to change the density of the forested stand 

or the species composition because these stands tend to be more open with relatively low fuel 

levels. Prescribed fire in these stands would also remove some ladder fuels by pruning the lower 

branches of larger trees, increasing the distance from the forest floor to the crowns of those trees, 

making them less susceptible to high-intensity wildfire. 

The number of units that would include jackpot burning varies by alternative. Jackpot burning 

would be completed after commercial harvest and/or precommercial thinning operations to 

remove concentrations of activity fuels prior to underburning. In combination, the prescribed 

fire operations would reduce both surface and ladder fuels. 

In some areas, activity fuels would be piled, either by hand or grapple machines. Where fuels 

are piled, an estimated 60-70 percent of the surface fuels would be piled and burned. Where 

piles are located, there would be small amounts of soil scorching. Hand piles tend to be small (5-

6 feet high by 3-4 feet wide) and burning these piles would not alter the species composition or 

density of surrounding stands. Grapple piles are generally 5-10 feet high and 10-15 feet wide. 

Radiant heat from grapple piles may occasionally kill nearby trees, but not enough to measurably 

change species composition or stand density. Piling allows the fuels to be treated sooner, 

generally within 1-2 years. 

All of the activities described above that reduce ladder and surface fuels also reduce the potential 

for crown fire, crown scorch (which kills trees by scorching their needles with convective heat), 

radiant heat damage to cambium (the inner bark of trees, where diameter growth occurs), and 

radiant heat damage to soils and tree roots (Saveland and Nuenschwander 1989). 

Linking Spears units with previous activity areas would increase the likelihood that suppression 

actions would be successful if an unplanned ignition does occur. Activities along ingress/egress 

routes such as U.S. Highway 26 and Roads 27, 2630, 2620, 2610, 2610-150, and 3350 would 

reduce fuels within these road corridors and contribute to safe evacuation routes for both 

homeowners and visitors in the project area. Reducing fuels would increase the likelihood that 

wildfires would be suppressed while they are small and would reduce the risk of wildfires 

spreading between NFS lands and private lands. Finally, unplanned ignitions in or near OGMA, 

the Mill Creek Wilderness, and the Ochoco Divide RNA may be more successfully suppressed. 

All of these fuel reduction activities would reduce the amount of departure from reference 

conditions and would move fire regime I into condition class 1. Table 23 displays the changes in 

percent departure from reference conditions. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 71 

Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

This alternative includes activity fuels underburning, natural fuels underburning, hand piling, and 

jackpot burning. Precommercial thinning is considered a fuel reduction activity because it 

reduces ladder fuels. The amount of each fuel reduction activity is displayed in Table 25. Fuel 

reduction activities would occur both within and outside the WUI. This alternative includes an 

estimated 7,722 acres of fuel reduction activities within the WUI. These activities may be used 

alone or in combination. For example, most areas where precommercial thinning is prescribed 

also include activity-fuels underburning to reduce the amount of surface fuel created by the 

thinning activity. 

Prescribed fire operations would be conducted after thinning operations to reduce activity fuels. 

These fuels are surface fuels and consist of limbs, branches, tree tops, and small trees. Based on 

prescribed fires in the Trout, Mill, Yobear, and Sheep Rock areas, 40 to 70 percent of the surface 

area of prescribed fire units is burned, thereby removing surface fuels. These fire operations 

would reduce the density of seedlings and saplings (generally less than 3 inches dbh) in these 

stands and may result in small changes in species composition. Because ponderosa pine and 

western larch are fire-tolerant species, small trees of these species are more likely to survive 

while fire would kill most of the small fir trees. In addition to removing activity fuels, 

prescribed fire operations would also reduce some of the natural fuel accumulations. Prescribed 

fire in these stands would also prune the lower branches of larger trees, increasing the distance 

from the forest floor to the crowns of those trees, making them less susceptible to high-intensity 

wildfire. 

Table 25. Acres of fuel reduction treatments in Alternative 3. 

 Alternative 3 

Precommercial and hardwood thinning 9,899

Underburning 13,926

Hand piling 856

Jackpot Burning 1,716

Precommercial thinning would cause a short-term increase (up to 5 years) in the potential for 

high-intensity fire because they increase the amount of surface fuels. For the first year after 

thinning, the fuel moisture in green slash makes it unavailable to burn, unless a wildfire occurs 

under extreme conditions (Rothermel et al. 1986). After approximately 1 year, the slash has 

dried out, needles have turned red, and the slash is available to burn. Should a wildfire occur 

during this time, the additional heat generated by the increased fuel load has the potential to 

cause undesired effects to the surrounding stand, soils, and other resources. This hazard is 

mitigated by either lopping (cutting) the slash to reduce the height of the fuel bed so that it is 

under 12 inches, or by piling the slash. Lopping and piling both reduce fire intensity by 

rearranging fuels. In units that have been lopped, after 2 or 3 years the slash gets further 

compacted by winter snows and can be burned with a low-intensity underburn. This delay also 

allows for the redistribution of nutrients from the slash back into the soil (Graham et al. 1999). 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 72 

Maintenance or natural fuels underburning would occur in many stands. Maintenance 

underburning would remove mostly surface fuels. Some small trees would be killed, but these 

activities are not expect to change the density of the forested stand or the species composition 

because these stands tend to be more open with relatively low fuel levels. Prescribed fire in 

these stands would also remove some ladder fuels by pruning the lower branches of larger trees, 

increasing the distance from the forest floor to the crowns of those trees, making them less 

susceptible to high-intensity wildfire. 

In some areas, activity fuels would be hand piled. Where fuels are piled, an estimated 60-70 

percent of the surface fuels would be piled and burned. Where piles are located, there would be 

a small amount of soil scorching. Hand piles tend to be small (5-6 feet high by 3-4 feet wide) 

and burning these piles would not alter the species composition or density of surrounding stands. 

Piling allows the fuels to be treated sooner, generally within 1-2 years. 

Linking Spears units with previous activity areas would increase the likelihood that suppression 

actions would be successful if an unplanned ignition does occur. Activities along ingress/egress 

routes such as U.S. Highway 26 and Roads 27, 2630, 2620, 2610, 2610-150, and 3350 would 

reduce fuels within these road corridors and contribute to safe evacuation routes for both 

homeowners and visitors in the project area. Reducing fuels would also increase the likelihood 

that wildfires would be suppressed while they are small and would reduce the risk of wildfires 

transitioning between NFS lands and private lands. Finally, unplanned ignitions in or near 

OGMA, the Mill Creek Wilderness, and the Ochoco Divide RNA boundaries may be more 

successfully suppressed. 

All of the activities described above that reduce ladder and surface fuels also reduce the potential 

for crown fire, crown scorch, radiant heat damage to cambium, and radiant heat damage to soils 

and tree roots (Saveland and Nuenschwander 1989). Even though these activities would reduce 

the amount of departure from references conditions, they do not change condition class. Table 

23 displays the changes in percent departure from reference conditions. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past activities such as the Hash Rock Fire and the Marks Creek Burn reduced fuel loading in the 

project area. Prescribed fire activities that were completed before the Bandit II decision was 

withdrawn reduced the fuel loading on 1,726 acres. In some areas, the amount of surface fuels 

increased as a result of precommercial thinning activities authorized under the Bandit II decision. 

In many cases, such as in Unit 535, no activity fuel treatment was completed because the 

decision was withdrawn. The action alternatives in the Spears project include follow-up fuels 

treatments in these areas. The effects of these and other past activities such as timber harvest 

were taken into account when describing the affected environment and the number of acres in 

each condition class. 

There are no other activities in the project area that would reduce fuels and result in changes in 

condition class. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 73 

Potential Fire Behavior and Probability 

Affected Environment 

Potential fire behavior and probability for the Spears project area was analyzed utilizing 

FlamMap, Version 3 (Finney et al. n.d.) and ArcFuels (Ager 2005). Modeling was used to 

predict various fire behavior characteristics and probabilities of occurrence for Alternative 1 (no 

action) to assess the affected environment as well as the four action alternatives to assess 

changes as a result of proposed treatments. All assessments used the same weather and fuel 

condition scenario so that the effects of different alternatives could be consistently compared. 

Scenarios were modeled under hot dry conditions with a 10 mile per hour northwesterly wind 

across the project area. Fire behavior attributes assessed include flame length, rate of spread, and 

potential crown fire activity. 

Flame length is the distance between the flame tip and the midpoint of the flame depth at the 

base of the flame (generally the ground surface); flame length is an indicator of fire intensity. 

Flame lengths less than 4 feet are generally of low enough intensity that suppression crews can 

directly attack the fire, while flame lengths more than 4 feet require that control lines be built 

using heavy equipment. Flame lengths more than 8 feet generally require indirect suppression 

tactics and in many cases indicate intensities high enough to result in stand replacement events. 

Table 26. Percent potential flame length (feet) by alternative. 

Alternative 0-4 4-8 8-11 > 11 

1 26% 21% 17% 36% 

2 57% 13% 8% 21% 

3 55% 13% 9% 23% 

4 57% 13% 8% 22% 

5 55% 13% 9% 22% 

Rate of spread is measured in chains (66 feet) per hour and is used to determine the type and 

number of resources that would be needed to suppress a fire. Faster rates of spread generally 

result in larger fires which are more difficult to control. 

Table 27. Rate of spread by alternative. 

Alternative 0-10 ch/hr 10-40 ch/hr 40-80 ch/hr > 80 ch/hr 

1 10% 30% 28% 32% 

2 49% 15% 15% 21% 

3 46% 16% 16% 22% 

4 49% 15% 15% 21% 

5 47% 16% 16% 22% 

Crown Fire Activity - Two types of potential fires were predicted; surface fire (no crown fire) 

and crown fire (both passive and active). Crown fire activity can be used as an indicator of 

potential stand effects with surface fire generally having the least effect on stand structure, 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 74 

density, and composition while crown fire generally indicates a fire behavior resulting in at least 

partial stand replacement. 

Table 28. Crown fire activity (percent of project area) by alternative. 

Alternative Surface fire Crown Fire 

1 20% 80% 

2 53% 47% 

3 49% 51% 

4 53% 47% 

5 51% 49% 

Burn Probability - To asses the overall susceptibility of the landscape to burning, 1,000 random 

ignitions were used to assess changes for each alternative. High burn probabilities are directly 

correlated to fire sizes that occur on a landscape under similar conditions. Large fires produce 

higher probabilities than small fires since each fire burns a larger fraction of the landscape. 

Since fire size is a function of the gross spread rate and duration of the fire, activities or 

conditions that reduce the spread rate also lower burn probabilities. 

Table 29. Burn probabilities (percent of project area) by alternative. 

Alternative Low Moderate High) 

1 41% 45% 14% 

2 90% 10% 0% 

3 90% 10% 0% 

4 93% 7% 0% 

5 93% 7% 0% 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

There would be no activities that would result in modifying fire behavior or burn probabilities 

across the project area other than continued fire suppression efforts for unplanned wildfires. 

Fuel conditions within the area currently support potentially high fire intensities, high rates of 

spread, and a large amount of potential crown fire behavior (80%). See Tables 26 to 29. Fortyone percent of the project area has a low-burn probability, while 59 percent has a moderate or 

high probability. Continued stand growth, successional changes, and continued fire exclusion 

would result in these indicators increasing over time. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

All action alternatives include activities that would modify fire behavior by reducing ground 

fuels, reducing ladder fuels (small understory trees), and removing activity-generated fuels 

following commercial harvest and precommercial thinning. All action alternatives would result 

in reducing areas that support higher flame lengths and faster rates of spread. All action 

alternatives reduce the amount of area which could potentially support crown fire by 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 75 

approximately 30 percent. Under all action alternatives, there is approximately a 50 percent 

increase in the amount of low-burn probability over that predicted for Alternative 1. 

Although the FlamMap predictions for fire behavior and burn probability show slight differences 

between Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5, these differences are not meaningful because they fall within 

the uncertainty and randomness associated with the model. All action alternatives produce 

essentially the same result because there are only small differences between the total amount of 

treatment and the arrangement of treatments within the project area. All activities in all action 

alternatives are designed to reduce surface and ladder fuels, which are the primary factors 

associated with fire behavior. 

Cumulative Effects 

There are no other actions proposed on NFS lands within the project area which would modify 

potential fire behavior. It is foreseeable that activities on private lands would be undertaken to 

reduce potential fire behavior and fire effects. Oregon Department of Forestry has recently 

acquired a grant from the National Fire Plan to perform fuel reduction activities adjacent to 

private homes inside the Spears project area. These activities would lessen potential fire effects 

on private lands and would probably be geared towards providing defensible space around 

structures. There are approximately 2,300 acres of private land within the area. It is unknown 

how much of this area might be treated to lessen potential fire behavior but given that the total 

amount of private land is a relatively small amount of the project area (less than 6%), it is 

unlikely that these activities would have a measurable effect on the potential fire behavior and 

probability across the landscape. 

Hardwood Plant Communities 

Affected Environment 

Quaking aspen and cottonwood provide unique and special habitats. The project area contains 

numerous small aspen stands usually associated with riparian areas. Aspen develop as clones 

where individual trees are short-lived and are replaced by sprouts from the root system. Aspen is 

sensitive to conifer encroachment and accompanying shading, browsing by livestock and big 

game, and reduced water tables. 

Both cottonwood and aspen grow in self-perpetuating clones in areas of locally high moisture such 

as meadows, seeps, and adjacent to streams. Conifer trees are encroaching into aspen and 

cottonwood stands in the project area. These conifers compete with the hardwood trees for light, 

moisture, and growing space. Since the hardwood trees are not shade tolerant, they can be 

shaded out by the encroaching conifers, which results in loss of vigor for the hardwoods in the 

short term, and can lead to loss of the clone(s) in the long term. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 76 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

No thinning activities would occur. Conifer trees would continue to encroach into aspen and 

cottonwood stands in the project area. These conifers compete with the hardwood trees for light, 

moisture, and growing space. Since the hardwood trees are not shade tolerant, they would 

continue to be shaded out by the encroaching conifers. Aspen and cottonwood trees would 

continue to lose vigor and, in the long-term, clones may shrink or die out. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Thinning would occur in 196 acres of hardwood stands. These thinning activities would result in 

cutting or girdling conifer trees. Removing conifer trees within and adjacent to aspen and 

cottonwood stands would reduce competition for light, moisture, and other nutrients and 

maintain hardwood plant communities. Aspen are known to decline as conifers gain dominance 

in the overstory (Mueggler 1989) and removing conifers is expected to reverse this decline. 

Cottonwood and aspen would become more vigorous, increasing sprouting and the longevity of 

mature trees. 

Thinning would occur in 196 acres of hardwood stands under each of the action alternatives. 

These thinning activities would involve cutting or girdling conifer trees up to 15 inches dbh. 

Removing conifer trees within and adjacent to aspen and cottonwood stands would reduce 

competition for light, moisture, and other nutrients. Slash arrangement, individual cages, and 

fencing would protect developing sprouts from being browsed. Brown (1995) indicates that 

fencing or other obstructions alone does not cause aspen to regenerate because of shading. 

Hardwoods are expected to increase because the proposed thinning activities would reduce 

shading and slash arrangement and fencing would reduce browsing pressure. 

An exclosure fence is proposed to be constructed within one of the two cottonwood stands on 

Peterson Creek, unit 145. In unit 145 half of the stand would be fenced with a big game 

exclosure, while the other half would have a livestock exclosure with individual cages within it. 

Slash would be lopped and scattered. In the other cottonwood stand on Peterson Creek, unit 916, 

no fence would be constructed. Most slash would be lopped and scattered; however, some 

individual trees would be felled to provide protection to streambanks and to protect individual 

sprouts. In aspen stands, most slash would be lopped and scattered while some individual trees 

would be arranged to provide protection to sprouts. Aspen exclosure fences would be 

constructed, as follows: Sears Creek unit 915, two big game exclosures; Marks Creek units 507 

and 908, two big game exclosures; Coyle Butte units 525 and 910, two big game exclosures; 

Rush Creek unit 533, one livestock exclosure with individual cages; Crystal Creek units 407, 

408, 552, 577 and 909, three big game exclosures and two livestock exclosures with individual 

cages within them; McGinnis Creek unit 737, one big game exclosure. Small cages would be 

constructed to protect aspen sprouts in other stands, as follows: Crystal Creek units 409, 410, 

and 411; Coyle Butte units 403, 404, and 405; Cornez Creek unit 401; Deadman Creek unit 914; 

Little Hay Creek unit 402; Grant Meadows units 406, 911, 912, and 913. This would allow 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 77 

small sprouts to develop into sapling and pole sized stems, that would provide future 

replacements for larger overstory trees. Sprout protection would be limited to strategic 

arrangement of slash in units 502, 745, 904, and 905 in order to meet visual objectives at the snopark and along Road 27. Cottonwood and aspen would become more vigorous, increasing 

sprouting and the longevity of mature trees. Aspen and cottonwood clones would be expected to 

be maintained or increased in extent and vigor as a result. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions with effects that could combine with effects of 

the proposed action, and which would result in effects to hardwood communities include riparian 

planting, construction of exclosure fences and individual cages, the repair of headcuts, road 

construction, ongoing road maintenance, and livestock grazing. 

In the last several years, riparian planting has occurred along Marks, Reilly, McGinnis, Rush, 

Deadman, Little Hay, E. Fork Hamilton, and W. Fork Hamilton Creeks. Riparian planting and 

the protection of riparian vegetation with exclosures and cages have contributed to increased 

extent and development of riparian hardwood habitat. Livestock grazing in riparian areas 

generally has reduced the stature and abundance of hardwood sprouts because livestock consume 

leaves and small branches and trample sprouts. However, the development of upland watering 

sites and salt stations, and the use of riders associated with livestock management would have 

helped distribute cattle out of the riparian areas, thus partially compensating for past browsing 

and trampling damage. Livestock are expected to continue grazing in the four allotments that 

overlap the project area. Livestock browsing and trampling are expected to continue; however, 

constructing big game and livestock exclosures and individual cages around sprouts would 

reduce the amount of damage to hardwoods. 

Repair of headcuts with step-pool structures improved channel stability and maintained water 

tables above the structures which maintains potential to support riparian vegetation. In 2002 and 

2003, headcuts were repaired on Little Hay and McGinnis Creek. Though road construction has 

in some areas intercepted natural drainage and concentrated flow along ditches, road 

maintenance would generally promote cross draining of water to ensure continued down slope 

hydrology which is vital to maintenance of riparian vegetation. Since 2000, nine culverts have 

been replaced, one culvert was removed, and road decommissioning occurred on Roads 2600-

021, 2600-022, 2600-253, 2600-301, 2610-012, and 3300-550. These activities have all 

increased stream drainage to ensure continued down slope hydrology. 

The effects of restorative activities (planting, protection, headcut repair, road work, off-site 

salt/water) when combined with the effects of this project on hardwood stands complement each 

other in promoting riparian hardwood habitat. The effects of browsing, trampling, and 

hydrologic interception are at least partially compensated for by the beneficial effects of the 

proposed activities on riparian hardwoods. Considering past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

activities, aspen and cottonwood clones would be expected to be maintained or increased in 

extent and vigor. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 78 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas 

Affected Environment 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) are portions of watersheds where riparian 

dependent resources receive primary emphasis, and management activities are subject to specific 

standards and guidelines contained in INFISH. 

For streams, the width of RHCAs are determined by whether it is fish-bearing and whether it is 

perennial or intermittent. There are an estimated 4,546 acres of RHCAs in the project area. In 

addition to streams, RHCAs also occur around ponds, lakes, reservoirs, wetlands, landslides, and 

landslide-prone areas. RHCAs for these areas have not been mapped and are not included in the 

estimated acres of RHCAs within the project area. As noted in the design criteria in Chapter 2, 

seeps, springs, and landslides would have RHCAs around them. There are no ponds, lakes, 

reservoirs, or wetlands greater than 1 acre in size on NFS lands within the project area. 

Class I and II streams are fish-bearing and RHCAs extend 300 feet slope distance from the 

stream channel. Class I and II RHCAs are 600 feet wide, including both sides of the stream 

channel. There are approximately 45 miles of Class I and II streams in the Spears project area. 

The RHCAs for these streams encompass 3,273 acres. 

Class III streams are perennial, non-fish-bearing streams and RHCAs extend 150 feet slope 

distance from the stream channel. Class III RHCAs are 300 feet wide including both sides of the 

stream channel. There are approximately 14 miles of Class III streams in the Spears project area. 

The RHCAs for these streams encompass 509 acres. 

Class IV streams are seasonally flowing, or intermittent and RHCAs extend 50 feet slope 

distance. Class IV RHCAs are 100 feet wide including both sides of the stream channel. There 

are approximately 63 miles of Class IV streams and Class IV RHCAs encompass approximately 

764 acres in the project area. 

The amount and type of vegetation in riparian areas plays an important role in the maintaining 

and improving both water quality and fish habitat. The increasing amount of conifers in RHCAs 

prevents woody vegetation such as alder, willow, aspen, and shrubs from expanding. Conifers 

within RHCAs compete with these species for nutrients. Many of these broadleaf species are 

shade-intolerant; throughout the project area conifers are competing with and shading these 

brushy, shrubby species, and they are losing vigor. The roots of woody vegetation help to 

stabilize streambanks and the stems act as a roughness element that reduces the velocity and 

erosive energy of over bank flow during high water events. Conifers do not provide the same 

bank stabilizing function as these brushy, shrubby species. 

INFISH established landscape-scale interim Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs) that 

would be applied to watersheds with inland native fish. INFISH states that the interim RMOs 

would not be met instantaneously, but would be achieved over time. INFISH also recognized 

that all RMOs may not occur on a specific segment of stream within a watershed, but all should 

generally occur at the watershed scale for stream systems of moderate to large size (3rd to 6th 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 79 

order streams). There are no RMOs that specifically address riparian vegetation; however, 

riparian vegetation does affect pool frequency, water temperature, large woody debris, width-todepth ratios, and bank stability. All of the habitat features described in the interim RMOs are 

inter-related. 

The interim RMOs that apply to the Spears project area include pool frequency, water 

temperature, large woody debris, and width-to-depth ratios. The interim RMOs for bank stability 

and lower bank angle only apply to non-forested systems; the Spears project area is a forested 

system and these RMOs do not apply. Additional discussion is contained in the January 2007 

Spears Resource Report and Biological Evaluation for Aquatic Species. 

Pool Frequency 

The frequency and area of pools is dependent on stream gradient and drainage area, generally as 

stream size (order) increases, pools become larger but more infrequent. In smaller order 

channels, large wood in the stream channel increases pool frequency (Montgomery and 

Buffington 1993). Pool depth and complexity is also a function of the abundance of woody 

debris and sediment routing. Large pulses of sediment moving through a stream system can 

restrict pool depth and ultimately limit habitat capability. The bankfull width-to-depth ratio, a 

primary indicator of channel dimension, is also directly related to both pool quantity and quality. 

An inverse relationship between stream width and pool spacing has been well documented by 

Rosgen (1996). The number of pools per mile increases as the stream channel narrows as shown 

in Table 30. 

Table 30. Interim objectives for pool frequency in INFISH. 

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

Pools per mile 96 56 47 26 23 18 14 12 9 

Marks Creek is lacking pool structure. Level II steam surveys completed in 1999 in Marks 

Creek indicated that pools averaged 20.01 per mile. Average number of pools for 25 feet wetted 

width from INFISH is 47 pools per mile. On Nature Creek, there were 42.24 pools per mile. 

Nature Creek is moving towards meeting the objective of 47 as described in INFISH. Because 

similar conditions have been observed on other streams within the project area, the findings from 

these stream surveys are assumed to apply throughout the project area. Therefore, the streams in 

the project area are assumed to have fewer pools than indicated by the INFISH interim RMOs. 

Water Temperature 

The interim objective for water temperature is to not increase the maximum water temperature 

based on a 7-day average and to have maximum water temperatures below 59 degrees Fahrenheit 

in adult holding habitat and 48 degrees Fahrenheit within spawning and rearing habitats. 

Currently, water temperature monitoring in the project area indicates that the 7-day average 

temperatures exceeds the RMO for water temperature. Water temperatures are discussed later in 

this chapter in the section on water quality. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 80 

Large Woody Debris 

Large woody material in streams and the adjacent flood plain provides streambank stability, 

decreases flow velocities, increases storage time (decreases downstream flood risk), cools water 

temperature, and stores sediment. Large woody debris (i.e. down trees) also appears to reduce 

grazing and browsing impacts on bank stability by reducing accessibility to the riparian 

vegetation. Large wood helps to form pools in the stream channel. 

Based on stream surveys, the project area is deficient in the amount of large woody material in 

streams. Large woody material provides aquatic habitats and shade for streams. Redband trout, 

like many other salmonids, have evolved in stream systems in which large woody material helps 

retain organic and inorganic particulate matter that is important for channel stability, biological 

diversity, and productivity (Nakamura and Swanson 1993). Large wood influences habitat for 

fish and other aquatic organisms by serving as energy dissipaters, flow deflectors, and dams. 

Large trees are needed in RHCAs because they become large woody material when they fall. In 

the Spears project area, there is less large woody debris than the amount indicated by the RMO. 

Table 31 displays the desired amounts of large woody debris, by size, and the existing amounts 

based on the 1997 Level II stream survey. Desired amounts were determined from INFISH and 

a study of unmanaged, mixed conifer, Blue Mountain streams (Cordova 1995). 

Table 31. Existing amount of large woody debris compared to objective. 

Large Woody Debris Size Objective 

(# of pieces per 100 feet)

Existing Amount 

(# of pieces per 100 feet) 

>21 inches dbh, >35 feet long 0.4 - 0.8 0.33 

>12 inches dbh, >35 feet long 1.3 - 1.7 1.49 

>6 inches dbh, >35 feet long 3.4 - 4.5 2.32 

Width-to-depth Ratio 

The width-to-depth ratio is often used as an index of cross-sectional shape, where both width and 

depth are usually measured at the bankfull level. Both depth and width can respond rapidly to 

changes in sediment load and/or discharge. Whether a stream erodes downward or outward is 

influenced by both local shear stresses and whether the bed or banks are the most easily eroded. 

Bank vegetation increases the resistance to erosion through its binding effects on banks, with 

erosion decreasing as the percentage of roots in the soil increases, and this leads to narrower 

channels than would otherwise be expected. The effect of vegetation on channel shape is more 

pronounced in smaller streams (Gordon et al. 1992).

Changes in width-to-depth ratios are a result of wood recruitment within RHCAs, sediment 

delivery, and bank stability. Wood embedded in the stream channel and streambanks narrows 

the channel, slows velocity, catches sediment, and creates pools. Showing an improvement in 

large wood recruitment will result in improvement in width-to-depth ratios. Narrower deeper 

stream channels result in cooler water temperatures improving habitat for fish. 

The interim RMOs for width-to-depth ratios are less than 10. Bottom Line Stream surveys 

indicate that the width-to-depth ratio for Marks Creek is 13.63. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 81 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

No activities would occur in RHCAs. In many places, high densities of conifers within the 

RHCAs would continue to inhibit the growth of deciduous, broadleaf species such as alder, 

willow, aspen, and cottonwood. The existing conifers in RHCAs would continue to compete for 

nutrients with broadleaf species and other conifers. Because of competition, conifers would 

grow at slower rates and trees (future large woody debris) would be smaller in diameter than 

would be expected in less dense stands. 

Since the Forest Plan was signed in 1989 and again when INFISH was signed in 1995, the 

Ochoco National Forest has been managing riparian areas to maintain or improve riparian 

conditions. Because of protection of streams, meadows, seeps, springs, and riparian areas over 

the last 15+ years, pools have been improving. Large woody material increased as a result of 

budworm mortality in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. Wood recruitment inside the Hash Rock 

Fire (2000) perimeter will improve the pool structure as some of the dead trees fall into the 

creeks from weather events such as wind. Recruitment of large wood outside the fire area as a 

result of beetle-killed trees is also expected to improve pool numbers when dead trees inside 

RHCAs begin to fall in the next 5 to 10 years. Over time, pool numbers are expected to increase 

and width-to-depth ratios are expected to decrease, providing cooler water and cover. Large 

wood from logs would also catch sediment. Riparian vegetation that has been planted along 

streams in the fire perimeter would help stabilize pools, increase cover, decrease width-to-depth 

ratios, and reduce water temperatures. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Several activities have been proposed within RHCAs to increase the vigor of riparian vegetation 

and contribute to recruitment of future large woody material. Table 32 summarizes the proposed 

activities within RHCAs. Tables 33 through 38 provide a breakdown of activities within RHCAs 

by stream, stream class, and alternative. Streams identified as “trib” are unnamed tributaries to 

the named stream. 

Table 32. Comparison of activities within RHCAs by alternative. 

 Commercial 

Harvest 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

Hardwood 

Thinning 

Prescribed 

Fire 

Hand 

Piling 

Total* 

Alt. 1 0 0 0 0 0

Alt. 2 226.31 891.40 123.80 1,636.52 104.39 1,853.17

Alt. 3 0 835.99 123.80 1,506.77 103.02 1,725.86

Alt. 4 192.62 884.21 123.80 1,617.54 108.36 1,834.19

Alt. 5 140.15 899.13 123.80 1,492.82 108.36 1,691.51

*Totals do not add because more than one activity would occur on the same acre. For example, 

commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and hand piling may all occur on a single acre. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 82 

Table 33. Acres of commercial harvest within RHCAs by alternative and stream class. 

Alternative 2 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Class Class Class 

Stream Name I II III IV I II III IV I II III IV 

Buck 2.96 1.48 1.48 

Buck trib 1.27 

Cornez trib 0.16 0.16 

Crystal trib 1.42 0.38 0.38 1.42 

Deadman 12.51 12.51 12.51 

Deadman trib 3.36 3.36 0.53 

Jim Elliott 0.48 0.12 0.12 

Jim Elliott trib 2.84 2.84 0.15 

Little Hay 2.86 1.60 2.86 

Little Hay trib 1.33 1.33 1.33 

Long Hollow 3.82 3.82 3.82 

Marks 30.92 27.18 24.37 

Marks trib 3.07 4.33 26.25 3.07 4.33 25.08 3.07 3.85 22.90 

McGinnis trib 4.17 4.17 4.17 

Peterson 18.74 0.13 1.09 12.77 0.51 0.13 1.09 

Peterson trib 10.26 10.24 8.07 10.24 3.0 

Rush trib 5.18 5.18 

Salmon 18.86 18.86 13.87 

Salmon trib 18.04 17.85 16.97 6.79 16.97 4.07

Sears 2.55 1.60 0.92 

Sears trib 0.76 0.33 0.76 0.33 

Wildcat 3.66 1.29 3.66 1.29 2.96 1.29 

Wildcat trib 0.30 14.75 0.30 14.69 0.30 12.23

Total 30.92 69.82 46.36 79.20 27.18 59.67 40.66 65.10 24.37 42.30 27.24 46.23 

Alternative 3 is not displayed in Table 33 because no commercial harvest would occur in that 

alternative. The amount of hardwood thinning activities is the same in all four action 

alternatives. Under all four action alternatives, hardwood thinning activities would occur on 

123.8 acres within RHCAs. 

Commercial harvest is proposed in the outer portions of RHCAs in Alternatives 2, 4, and 5. 

Activities in RHCAs are not prohibited (INFISH 1995). Avoidance of all short-term effects 

should not be allowed to preclude management changes or restoration actions (9/22/1995 letter 

re: implementation of INFISH). Sediment is not likely to enter streams during commercial 

harvest because of filtering vegetation. Should any sediment enter the streams from commercial 

harvest, it would only be small amounts and would be indistinguishable from background levels 

because of the no-harvest buffer and restrictions on ground-based equipment. The short-term 

effects would not be great enough to jeopardize attainment of the RMOs. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 83 

Table 34. Acres of hardwood thinning within RHCAs by stream class. 

Stream Class 

Stream Name I II III IV Total 

Cornez 3.25 3.25

Crystal 14.51 14.51

Crystal Trib 29.94 9.69 3.18 42.81

Deadman 7.81 7.81

Deadman trib 0.34 0.34

Little Hay 5.11 5.11

Marks 4.54 3.55 2.40 10.49

Marks Trib 17.16 17.16

McGinnis 10.98 10.98

Peterson 2.94 2.94

Rush 3.70 3.70

Sears 4.70 4.70

Total 4.54 94.84 17.54 6.88 123.80

In Class I and II RHCAs, no harvest would occur within 200 feet of the stream channel. In Class 

III RHCAs, no harvest would occur within 50 feet of the stream channel. In Class IV RHCAs, 

no harvest would occur within 25 feet of the stream channel. Because of the distance to the 

stream, commercial harvest by itself in Class I and II RHCAs would have negligible effects to 

the RMOs. However, commercial harvest is combined with precommercial thinning and 

underburning to promote attainment of RMOs for pool frequency, water temperature, large 

woody debris, and width-to-depth ratios. Commercial harvest in the outer portions of the 

RHCAs would reduce tree densities and increase the growth of the residual trees. When 

combined with precommercial thinning, increased tree growth is also expected in the inner 

portion of the Class I and II RHCAs. Larger trees that become large wood in the outer portions 

of Class I and II RHCAs are unlikely to reach the stream channel, but large trees within the inner 

portions of these RHCAs would increase future recruitment of large woody material. In Class III 

and IV RHCAs, larger trees in the outer portion of the RHCAs are more likely to reach stream 

channels because larger trees may be as tall as 100 feet and could fall directly into the stream 

channel. Within RHCAs, commercial harvest would promote the development of larger trees 

and future large wood recruitment. 

Commercial harvest in Class III and IV RHCAs would benefit riparian-associated trees and 

shrubs such as cottonwood, aspen, alder, and willow by reducing competition for nutrients and 

growing space. These treatments would contribute to future large woody debris recruitment, 

pools, decreased width-to-depth ratios, and reduced water temperature. In the future, when large 

trees fall into streams they would improve pool numbers which would reduce stream 

temperatures. Increases in riparian vegetation would contribute to bank stability and capture 

sediments, contributing to narrower streams and decreased width-to-depth ratios. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 84 

Table 35. Acres of precommercial thinning within RHCAs by alternative and stream class. 

Alternative 2 Alternative3 Alternative 4 

Class Class Class 

Stream Name I II III IV I II III IV I II III IV 

Buck 22.53 3.13 22.53 Buck trib 1.27 1.27 Cornez 21.42 21.42 21.42 Cornez Trib 1.38 1.22 1.38 Crystal 42.20 1.48 42.20 1.48 42.20 1.48 Crystal trib 7.07 3.17 5.65 3.17 5.65 3.17 Deadman 17.16 17.16 17.16 Deadman trib 5.09 1.98 2.26 1.98 5.09 1.98 Jim Elliot 4.90 0.12 4.90 4.90 0.12 Jim Elliot trib 5.52 2.68 5.52 Little Hay 4.64 3.04 3.38 Little Hay trib 1.33 0.37 1.33 0.37 1.33 0.37 Long Hollow 12.44 12.44 12.44 Marks 111.12 103.59 112.9 12Marks trib 124.16 59.56 78.51 124.18 56.18 78.83 124.16 59.56 78.16 McGinnis trib 8.50 4.62 8.50 4.62 8.50 4.62 

Nature 0.29 

Peterson 60.89 2.0 1.93 60.89 1.87 0.84 54.92 1.87 0.84 Peterson Trib 14.53 13.98 12.34 13.98 12.34 13.98 Polly 0.27 0.27 0.27 Polly Trib 6.99 6.99 7.03 Reilly 34.47 34.47 34.47 Rush trib 5.18 5.18 Salmon 38.92 38.92 38.92 Salmon trib 27.81 24.39 27.81 24.39 27.71 24.40 Sears 11.95 11.95 11.97 Sears trib 0.76 1.73 1.39 0.76 1.39 Wildcat 28.66 6.47 1.29 26.50 6.47 0.38 28.66 6.47 1.29 Wildcat trib 28.46 16.67 23.47 28.46 16.67 16.13 28.46 16.67 23.41 Total 111.12 452.81 159.24 168.24 103.59 429.94 141.79 156.04 112.9 445.59 155.39 166.46 12
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 85 

Table 36. Acres of prescribed burning within RHCAs by alternative and stream class. 

Alternative 2 Alternative3 Alternative 4 

Class Class Class 

Stream Name I II III IV I II III IV I II III IV 

Buck 22.53 3.13 22.53 Buck trib 1.27 1.27 Cornez 21.42 21.42 21.42 Cornez Trib 1.38 1.22 1.38 Crystal 96.46 4.70 96.52 4.70 96.46 4.70 Crystal trib 31.09 8.81 29.73 8.50 29.66 8.81 Deadman 40.09 34.36 40.09 Deadman trib 3.36 0.53 3.36 0.18 Jim Elliot 4.90 23.44 3.47 4.90 4.90 0.12 Jim Elliot trib 2.84 2.84 Little Hay 67.36 0.80 67.39 0.88 66.10 0.80 Little Hay trib 5.87 13.40 5.87 13.40 5.87 13.40 Long Hollow 3.82 3.82 3.82 Marks 200.63 11.85 0.24 197.28 11.85 0.24 200.71 11.85 0.24 20Marks trib 173.43 68.71 85.43 173.51 65.33 86.18 173.43 68.71 85.08 McGinnis 10.14 10.14 18.60 McGinnis trib 8.50 4.62 8.50 4.62 16.58 4.62 

Nature 13.27 13.27 13.27 

Peterson 74.36 39.80 1.48 74.41 39.80 1.48 68.39 39.67 0.39 Peterson Trib 78.08 57.34 78.08 57.34 75.89 57.34 Polly 0.27 0.27 0.27 Polly Trib 6.99 7.03 7.03 Reilly 36.49 36.49 36.49 Rush 40.11 40.11 Rush trib 11.78 2.31 1.76 11.78 2.31 Salmon 87.06 87.23 87.06 Salmon trib 30.25 34.70 30.25 34.70 30.14 34.71 Sears 35.77 35.77 35.78 Sears trib 2.37 0.50 0.17 2.37 0.17 Wildcat 53.99 1.29 51.85 0.38 53.99 1.29 Wildcat trib 44.39 25.36 38.0 44.9 25.44 28.72 44.39 25.36 37.94 Total 200.63 837.43 336.99 261.46 197.28 770.44 290.55 244.55 200.71 838.68 317.89 256.39 20
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 86 

No heavy machinery or off road vehicles would be used in the RHCAs for commercial harvest, 

except to reuse existing roads and existing landings. Ground-based equipment would be used in 

RHCAs in portions of Units 104, 117, 306, 532, 559, 564, and 707. No new landings would be 

constructed within RHCAs. To reduce ground disturbance within RHCAs and potential 

sediment delivery, new landings would be located outside RHCAs and winch lining would be 

used to remove trees. Residual slash and the unharvested areas are expected to filter sediment 

before it reaches the streams. Reshin and others (2006) found that a 10-meter setback of felling 

and yarding activities prevented most sediment delivery to streams. In Class I and II RHCAs the 

setback of felling and yarding activities is 200 feet and any sediment from harvest activities 

would be small and is not expected to adversely affect redband trout. In Class III RHCAs, the 

setback is at least 50 feet. Alternative 3 would have no effect from commercial harvest 

activities. 

Precommercial thinning is proposed in RHCAs in all action alternatives. Precommercial 

thinning would occur to within 5 feet of stream channels. No heavy machinery or off road 

vehicles would be used in the RHCAs to implement this activity. Understory conifer trees 

(typically less than 9 inches dbh) would be thinned to approximately 16 to 18 foot spacing. The 

heights of trees at various slopes and distances that provide shade during the period when peak 

temperatures occur were calculated. Based on these calculations, only trees that do not provide 

shade would be removed so that the existing amount of stream shade is maintained. Removing 

these conifers would result in more sunlight to deciduous vegetation which, in turn, would result 

in more vigorous deciduous vegetation. This activity would have similar effects as commercial 

harvest by reducing understory tree density and reducing competition. The growth rate of 

residual trees would increase, promoting future large woody debris. Thinning would reduce the 

competition between riparian-associated species and conifers resulting in more woody, shrubby 

species. Precommercial thinning would result in increased growth rates for both conifers and 

riparian vegetation. Precommercial thinning would promote attainment of RMOs in RHCAs 

(Class I-IV). In the future, when large trees fall into streams they would increase pool numbers 

and help reduce stream temperatures. Increases in riparian vegetation would contribute to bank 

stability and capture sediments, contributing to narrower streams and decreased width-to-depth 

ratios. Precommercial thining activities are not expected to result in sediment delivery to 

streams because this activity would not remove ground vegetation that filters sediment. 

Prescribed underburning is proposed within RHCAs in all action alternatives. Ignition would not 

occur within 50 feet of the streams; however, fire would be allowed to burn within 50 feet of the 

stream. Prescribed fires are expected to burn in a mosaic pattern in the RHCAs with an objective 

of burning up to 20 percent of the area at a low-intensity level. Project design criteria have been 

established to retain large woody debris and for the construction of firelines in RHCAs. Burning 

within the RHCAs would reduce stand density and remove ladder fuels by killing small seedling 

and sapling sized trees. Burning is also expected to consume surface fuels such as leaves, 

needles, limbs, and branches that have fallen. Like the other activities, the reduced competition 

is expected to rejuvenate riparian-associated species, increasing riparian species composition and 

abundance. Increased riparian species would improve bank stability and shade which would 

promote attainment of RMOs in the future, particularly the RMOs for width-to-depth ratio and 

stream temperature. Some large woody debris is expected to be consumed during burning 

activities; however, burning activities would be designed to minimize consumption of large 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 87 

down wood. While some large wood may be consumed, fire is expected to kill some standing 

trees that over time would fall and become large woody debris. Reducing competition promotes 

the growth of residual trees that will be future large woody debris. 

Hardwood thinning activities are proposed within RHCAs in all action alternatives. Conifers 

would be cut and left on the ground or lopped and scattered. These thinning activities would 

occur in aspen and cottonwood stands and reduce the amount of conifers that are competing with 

these hardwood species. As a result, aspen and cottonwood clones would be expected to be 

maintained or increased in extent and vigor. Shade is expected to increase in these stands as the 

hardwood species increase in size as a result of reduced competition. Increased levels of shade 

would contribute to lower stream temperatures. 

Hand piling of thinning slash within RHCAs is planned in all action alternatives. This treatment 

would have no effects on RMOs for pool frequency, water temperature, large woody debris, or 

width-to-depth ratio. The hand piled material is small diameter slash that would not provide 

large woody debris to the stream and therefore would have no effect on pool formation and 

reduced water temperatures resulting from pools. 

Road work is proposed in RHCAs in Alternatives 2, 4, and 5. Table 37 displays the amount of 

road construction by alternative. Table 38 displays the amount of road reconstruction, closures, 

and decommissioning. Alternative 3 does not propose any road work and is not included in 

Tables 37 and 38. Under Alternative 3, roads within RHCAs are expected to continue to 

transport sediment to streams, particularly to Crystal, Marks, Peterson, Rush, Salmon, and 

Wildcat Creeks. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 include reconstruction activities to improve drainage 

and reduce sediment to these streams. 

Road work, including constructing, reconstructing, closing, and decommissioning, affects 

sediment delivery to streams. The construction of new road within RHCAs would increase the 

potential for sediment delivery to streams. New roads would provide additional soil disturbance 

and potential for sediment transport. The primary sediment delivery sites will be at road/stream 

crossings. Based on monitoring of sediment delivery during a culvert installation project on 

Badger Creek, a Class II stream, only small amounts of sediment are expected and sediment is 

expected to settle out within 200 feet of the area of disturbance. This monitoring indicated that 

sediment levels returned to background levels in less than 24 hours. Monitoring of stream 

structure work on McKay Creek also resulted in increased sediment within 200 feet of the area of 

disturbance; sediment also settled out or was dispersed within a few hours of the activity. 

Construction of roads in the Salmon Creek RHCA would not increase sediment delivery because 

the new construction would be above an existing road that effectively blocks sediment from 

entering Salmon Creek. 

Closing and decommissioning roads within RHCAs would reduce compaction, increase 

infiltration, and improve road drainage which would reduce concentrated flows and sediment 

transport. Reconstruction of roads within RHCAs would improve drainage and reduce 

sedimentation from the existing condition. Existing roads within RHCAs known to be chronic 

sources of sediment include road 3300-504 along Salmon Creek and road 2630-013 near Crystal 

Creek. Both of these roads would be reconstructed which would reduce the amount of sediment 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 88 

entering these streams. Additionally, two culverts would be removed on Rush Creek and 

portions of Road 2620-030 would be decommissioned. These actions would result in small 

amounts of sediment during the work activity and would eliminate the chronic sediment 

production from the two undersized culverts. 

Table 37. Road construction (miles) by alternative. 

Stream Name Alternative 2 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Deadman 0.05 0.02 0.02

Marks trib 0.07 0 0.03

Salmon 0.06 0.06 0.06

Salmon trib 0.08 0.03 0.03

Total 0.26 0.11 0.14

The net result is that Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would result in a reduction of open roads in RHCAs 

and an improvement over current conditions by reducing compaction, improving road drainage, 

and reducing the amount of sediment produced by roads. During the short term, prior to 

vegetation becoming established on scarified road surfaces, there may be an increase in sediment 

production from road closure, decommission, and reconstruction activities. However, with 

drainage and outsloping, sediment reaching the streams is expected to be minimal. Work would 

normally occur during the summer months when stream flows are low. However, small pulses 

of sediment may occur if a rain event immediately followed road work. The rain event would 

increase flow in the stream and sediment would be dispersed throughout the system. 

Table 38. Road closure, decommission, and reconstruction (miles) by alternative. 

Stream Name Alternative 2 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Crystal 0.5 .05 0.5

Crystal trib 0.2 0 0.2

Deadman 0.7 0.9 0.9

Deadman trib 0.1 0.1 1

Jim Elliott .05 0 0

Little Hay trib 0.2 0.2 0.2

Marks 1 1 0.6

Marks trib 0.8 0.8 0.7

McGinnis trib 0.5 0.5 0.4

Peterson 0.4 0.4 0.4

Peterson trib 0.1 0.3 0.3

Reilly 0.2 0.2 0

Rush 0.5 0.5 .05

Rush trib 0 0.1 0

Salmon 2.5 2.4 2.4

Salmon trib 0.1 0.3 0.3

Wildcat 0.3 0.3 0.1

Wildcat trib 0.2 0.2 0.1

Total 8.4 8.2 8.2
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 89 

The proposed activities would not retard attainment of RMOs. None of the proposed activities 

would immediately result in meeting RMOs for pool frequency, water temperature, large woody 

debris, or width-to-depth ratio. However, these activities would promote attainment of RMOs in 

the future. 

Cumulative Effects 

The cumulative effect of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions is expected to be 

improved RHCA function and condition. RHCAs in which the proposed activities overlap with 

past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions include Cornez, Jim Elliott, Little Hay, Marks, 

McGinnis, Reilly, and Rush Creeks. 

The Hash Rock Fire burned the upper reaches of Cornez, Hamilton, McGinnis, and Reilly 

Creeks in the summer of 2000. The fire removed ground cover, riparian vegetation, and large 

woody debris. Immediately after the fire, there was a high risk of bank erosion and channel 

widening. Since that time, vegetation has reestablished. Large wood recruitment is now 

occurring as fire-killed trees fall into streams. Precommercial thinning and prescribed burning 

activities within the RHCAs of these streams by the action alternatives would contribute towards 

the development of future large woody debris by increasing the growth rates of residual trees. 

As a result, these activities promote future recruitment of large woody debris. Hardwood 

thinning in the RHCAs of Cornez and McGinnis Creeks would promote increased riparian 

vegetation and increased shade. Post-fire work in these areas to stabilize stream systems 

included both riparian planting and replacing undersized culverts on McGinnis Creek, Reilly 

Creek, and the east and west forks of Hamilton Creek; replacing two undersized culverts on 

Cornez Creek, and decommissioning approximately 0.4 miles of road on McGinnis Creek. 

Precommercial thinning and prescribed burning along these streams would complement riparian 

planting that has already occurred, contributing to increased hardwood species composition and 

abundance. Road closure and decommission on Cornez Creek, Reilly Creek, and tributaries to 

McGinnis Creek would complement previous road decommission and culvert replacements 

along these streams. Sediment production from roads and culverts is expected to decrease along 

these streams. The cumulative effect of these treatments is to promote attainment of RMOs for 

pool frequency, water temperature, large woody debris, and width-to-depth ratios. 

Activities that have occurred in the RHCAs of Jim Elliott, Little Hay, Marks, and Rush Creeks 

include road decommissioning along Jim Elliott Creek; headcut stabilization, riparian planting, 

and fencing on Little Hay Creek; riparian planting, stream channel restoration, and road 

decommissioning along Marks Creek; and riparian planting along Rush Creek. Commercial 

harvest, precommercial thinning, prescribed burning, hardwood thinning, and road work along 

these streams would also contribute toward the attainment of RMOs for pool frequency, water 

temperature, large woody debris, and width-to-depth ratios. 

Livestock grazing would continue. The Marks Creek, Wildcat, Burn, and Crystal Springs 

allotments overlap the Spears project area. Historic grazing contributed to the removal of 

deciduous woody vegetation and compaction of alluvial terraces. Livestock grazing levels have 

been reduced from historic and riparian vegetation has since improved. Activities within 

RHCAs would likely attract livestock because removing small trees and surface and ladder fuels 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 90 

would remove barriers to livestock movement. Increasing sunlight to the ground by removing 

conifers would also increase growth of grasses and shrubs. This would increase the amount of 

forage available which would also attract livestock. Livestock are expected to continue to use 

riparian areas and are expected to consume some of the increased forage. Livestock use of 

riparian areas is not expected to increase because activities in the uplands are expected to 

increase forage and remove barriers to livestock movement similar to the activities in the 

RHCAs. Also, livestock grazing permits include provisions for distributing livestock or moving 

livestock from pastures when certain triggers are reached. Triggers include bank trampling and a 

switch to preference for woody species. Livestock are expected to be moved when triggers are 

reached. Where hardwood thinning activities occur in RHCAs, livestock are not expected to 

utilize these areas because some fences and cages would be constructed and slash would be 

arranged to discourage livestock use. 

Aquatic Species 

Essential Fish Habitat 

The Pacific Fishery Management Council designated Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for Chinook 

salmon on September 27, 2000. This designation included current and some historic habitat in 

the Deschutes Basin. Historical habitat above Pelton Round Butte Dam was included. Historical 

habitat located above Ochoco Reservoir Dam was not included because the dam does not allow 

fish passage. The Spears project area is upstream from Ochoco Reservoir Dam and is not 

considered EFH. Therefore, this project would have no effect on EFH. 

Management Indicator Species 

The Forest Plan identified Management Indicator Species (MIS) to determine the effects of 

management activities on fish and wildlife habitat. Management indicator species are species 

whose presence in a certain location or situation at a given population level indicates a particular 

environmental condition. Population changes are believed to indicate effects of management 

activities on a number of other species. 

Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) were picked as 

indicators of riparian and aquatic habitat. In the past, these fish were stocked by the Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. They are no longer stocked in the streams in the project area, 

but naturally reproduce in many streams. These trout species can be found in the same streams 

where redband trout are found. Effects to brook and rainbow trout habitat would be the same as 

the effects described for redband trout habitat in the section on threatened, endangered, and 

sensitive species. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 91 

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species 

Affected Environment 

Two aquatic species federally listed as threatened are known to occur on the Ochoco National 

Forest. These species are: bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) and Mid-Columbia River steelhead 

trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp.). There are no endangered aquatic species on the Ochoco 

National Forest. Several species from the R-6 Regional Forester’s sensitive species list are 

known to occur on the Ochoco National Forest and include: redband trout (Oncorhynchus 

mykiss ssp.), Malheur mottled sculpin (Cottus bairdi), west slope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus 

clarki lewisi), Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris), and Mid-Columbia River spring 

Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). 

This project would have no effect to the Mid-Columbia River steelhead trout or Mid-Columbia 

spring chinook salmon because dams constructed downstream of the project area on the Crooked 

and Deschutes Rivers, and Ochoco Dam on Ochoco Creek prevent anadromous fish from 

accessing streams in the project area. There would be no effect to the bull trout, Malheur 

mottled sculpin, or west slope cutthroat trout because they are not known to exist in the project 

area or there is no habitat for the species in the project area. The January 2007 Resource Report 

and Biological Evaluation for Aquatic Species contains additional information on threatened, 

endangered, and sensitive aquatic species. 

Redband Trout 

The redband trout is known to occur throughout the project area. There are 45 miles of fishbearing streams (Class I or II) in the project area: 36 miles are on National Forest System lands 

and 9 miles are on private lands. Recent fish distribution surveys conducted by ODFW in 2004 

demonstrate that habitat and distribution of fish has expanded since 1991. Map 3 displays the 

streams that are occupied by redband trout. This map was developed using ODFW fish survey 

data and Ochoco National Forest stream survey data. 

The redband trout is a stream spawner, normally spawning in the spring (March through June). 

The eggs usually hatch in 4-7 weeks and alevins (pre-emerging fish) take an additional 3-7 days 

to absorb the yolk before becoming free-swimming. The average age at first spawning is 2-3 

years, but some wild populations do not spawn until they are age 5. Gravel embeddedness of 

less than 20 percent is essential to maintain healthy salmonid population, especially in those 

areas identified as potential or existing spawning areas (Bjorn and Reiser 1991). Fine sediments 

degrade spawning gravels and spawning success by filling the spaces between rocks, reducing 

the oxygenation and survival of eggs. 

Redband trout populations are currently depressed. However, existing populations are generally 

in fair condition, based on age distribution and condition factor (ODFW 1991). Recent fish 

distribution surveys conducted by ODFW in 2004 demonstrate that habitat and distribution of 

fish have expanded since 1991. The combination of habitat modification, low summer flows, 

high summer stream temperatures, lack of suitable riparian vegetation (due to roads in RHCAs, 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 92 

stream down cutting, conifers shading hardwood species, and livestock browse), and increase in 

sediment (due to roads built within RHCAs) has affected redband trout populations in the project 

area. Sediment has been found to fill spawning gravels resulting in lower numbers of fry 

emergence, lower oxygen levels, and change in food sources and habitat features. 

Redband trout have evolved in stream systems in which large woody debris helps retain organic 

and inorganic particulate matter that is important for channel stability, biological diversity, and 

productivity (Nakamura and Swanson 1993). Large woody debris influences habitat for fish and 

other aquatic organisms by serving as energy dissipaters, flow deflectors, and dams. As large 

wood accumulates it forms pools in the stream channel. The deep water of the pools lowers 

water temperature. Fish use pools for hiding cover, to seek refuge in cooler water during the 

summer months, and as resting areas while feeding. 

Temperatures of 60 degrees F are considered ideal for rapid growth of rainbow trout (Leitritz and 

Lewis 1980). In the Spears project area, temperatures are likely below 56 degrees F for the 

months of October to March prior to spawning. Females are most productive when they are in 

water where temperatures do not exceed 56 degrees F for 6 months before spawning (Leitritz and 

Lewis 1980). Water temperatures in the high 70’s, except under otherwise ideal conditions, may 

cause stress, which predisposes disease or in some cases, death for all age classes. Water 

temperatures in the high 70’s have not been recorded in the project area in the last 10 years. 

Redband trout are most successful in habitats with temperatures of 70 degrees or slightly lower, 

but can survive if there is cooler, well-oxygenated water into which they can retreat as the 

surface waters warm over 70 degrees F. The warmest 7-day maximum average temperature 

recorded in Marks Creek was 75.6 degrees F. In some tributaries, the naturally occurring 

temperatures also exceeded State standards. In the summer, temperatures in some stream 

reaches exceed 70 degrees F and retard the growth of and stress redband trout. However, 

temperature monitoring in the project area indicates that many of the streams have temperatures 

below 70 degrees F and provide areas where redband trout can move into. Streamside vegetation 

such as willow, alder, and aspen is important for providing shade in the summer and insulation in 

the winter. 

Streams in the project area have a low number of pools. In a channel with a low number of 

pools, the ratio of surface area to volume of water is high, and water in the channel tends to heat 

and cool rapidly. This causes variations in daily temperatures as much as 15 to 20 degrees F. 

Large pulses of sediment moving through a stream system can restrict pool depth and ultimately 

limit habitat capability; the proposed activities are not expected to cause large pulses of sediment 

to move through the system. 

Erosion from previous activities in the project area such as timber harvest, road construction, and 

grazing have caused sediment input into streams. Erosion has also reduced the reproductive 

success of redband populations. The Hash Rock Fire in 2000 removed ground cover and riparian 

vegetation in the upper reaches of Hamilton, Cornez, Reilly, and McGinnis Creeks. Since then, 

vegetation has been reestablished in the fire area as a result of sprouting and planting. Increases 

in vegetation help stabilize streambanks, filter sediment, reduce water temperature, provide 

hiding cover, and improve width-to-depth ratio. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 93 

Habitat features of the redband trout that may be directly affected by the proposed activities 

include large woody debris (LWD), stream shade, and sediment delivery to streams. Effects to 

these features, in turn, affect pool frequency and depth, water temperature, and width-to-depth 

ratios. 

Columbia Spotted Frog 

Columbia spotted frogs inhabit a variety of vegetation communities, including coniferous or 

mixed forests, grasslands, and riparian areas of sage-juniper brush lands. Historically, Columbia 

spotted frogs were found at elevations ranging from near sea level to 7,370 feet. Although no 

formal surveys have been conducted, Columbia spotted frogs are known to occur in the project 

area. 

Dumas (1966) reported that relative humidity of less than 65 percent is lethal to adult spotted 

frogs in approximately 2 hours, a factor which would restrict spotted frogs to higher elevations or 

moist riparian zones in arid western landscapes. Because both breeding and over-wintering 

occur at aquatic sites, populations are located in the general vicinity of ponds, lakes, springs, 

and/or streams. A study in arid southwestern Idaho (Munger et al. 1998) found adult spotted 

frogs were associated with palustrine, shrub-scrub, intermittent riverine, streambed, or seasonally 

flooded sites. Frogs were also associated with vegetation indicating permanent water sources 

(i.e., willows and submerged aquatic plants rather than with emergent vegetation such as sedges) 

and vegetation providing hiding and thermal cover (e.g., willows). Spotted frogs are located in 

similar habitats in the project area. 

Summer foraging may occur at the same water body used for breeding and over wintering, but in 

many cases frogs move to other areas. Spotted frogs move to other sites in summer for a variety 

of reasons including predator avoidance and the attractions of more abundant food and less 

competition (Bull and Hayes 2001). Foraging sites include ephemeral pools in forests and 

meadows, streams (permanent and intermittent), river edges, riparian zones, temporary and 

permanent ponds, lake margins, and marshes. Sites used for summer foraging only in the Idaho 

mountains included all types of wetland habitats and were on average smaller and shallower than 

wetlands used for breeding and wintering, with less forest or shrub cover along shorelines 

(Pilliod et al. 2002). Patla (1997) found that “spotted frogs demonstrate considerable plasticity 

in summer foraging habitat, making use of small wet or damp areas in forest and meadows, 

including water-filled tire tracks, stream edges, and marshes.” 

Wintering habitat includes ponds, streams, under stream banks, springs, beaver dams, and 

underground areas (associated with water bodies), but all such sites must have above freezing 

temperatures, be moist or wet, and be well oxygenated. Columbia spotted frogs winter in or 

immediately adjacent to aquatic sites, where they can avoid the threat of freezing or oxygen 

depletion (Bull and Hayes 2002). 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 94 

Environmental Consequences 

Redband Trout 

The definition for adverse effects in INFISH (1995) was utilized in the fisheries analysis. This 

definition states “adverse effects include short- or long-term, direct or indirect management 

related impacts of an individual or cumulative nature, such as mortality, reduced growth, or other 

adverse physiological changes; harassment of fish; physical disturbance of redds; reduced 

reproductive success; delayed or premature migration; or other adverse behavioral changes.” 

Management related impacts to large woody debris, stream shade provided by vegetation, and 

sediment delivery resulting from the proposed activities were evaluated to determine the degree 

of effects to redband trout. Evaluation of these variables indicates the effects to the RMOs 

describing good fish habitat, including pool frequency, large woody debris, and width-to-depth 

ratios. Bank stability and lower bank angle are not further discussed because these RMOs apply 

to non-forest systems. The Spears project area is a forested system. 

Alternative 1 

There are no activities proposed in Alternative 1 that would directly alter redband trout habitat. 

In many places, high densities of conifers within the RHCAs would continue to inhibit the 

growth of deciduous, broadleaf species such as alder, willow, aspen, and cottonwood. Conifers 

in RHCAs would continue to compete for nutrients with broadleaf species, as well as other 

conifers. Because of competition, conifers would grow at slower rates and trees (future large 

woody debris) would be smaller diameter than less dense stands. In open canopy areas where 

woody vegetation is present along streambanks, shade would increase. Increasing shade over 

streams contributes to reducing water temperature and acts as hiding cover for redband trout. 

Large woody material has been increasing as a result of budworm mortality in the late 1980’s 

and early 1990’s. Wood recruitment inside the Hash Rock Fire (2000) perimeter will improve 

the pool structure as some of the dead trees fall into the creeks from weather events such as 

wind. Recruitment of large wood outside the fire area as a result of beetle-killed trees is also 

expected to improve pool numbers when dead trees inside RHCAs begin to fall in the next 5 to 

10 years. Over time, pool numbers are expected to increase and width-to-depth ratios are 

expected to decrease, providing cooler water and cover. Large wood is also expected to catch 

sediment. Riparian vegetation that has been planted along streams in the fire perimeter will help 

stabilize pools, increase cover, decrease width-to-depth ratios, and reduce water temperatures. 

Road 3300-504 along Salmon Creek would continue to be a chronic sediment source. Two 

culverts on Rush Creek would also continue to be a chronic sediment source. Gravel 

embeddedness of less than 20 percent is essential to maintain healthy salmonid population, 

especially in those areas identified as potential or existing spawning areas (Bjorn and Reiser 

1991). If sediment exceeds 20 percent, the spaces 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. Salmon Creek along Forest Road 3300-504 and the undersized culverts on 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 95 

Rush Creek would continue to contribute sediment into Salmon Creek and Rush Creek, which 

would reduce the suitability of spawning habitat in these areas. 

This alternative would have no impact on redband trout or its habitat. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

The analysis for redband trout focused on activities within Class I and II RHCAs because 

redband trout are found within Class I and II streams. Activities proposed in the action 

alternatives that occur outside of RHCAs would have negligible effects to the redband trout. The 

RHCA buffers would protect streams from sediment inputs and provide for other riparian 

functions including the delivery of organic matter and woody debris, stream shading, and bank 

stability (INFISH pp. A-4). Sedimentation that may result from activities in the uplands, such as 

timber harvest, precommercial thinning, fuels treatments, and road work would be filtered by 

ground vegetation and slash in both the treated areas and RHCA. Activities occurring within the 

RHCAs of Class III and IV streams would also have negligible effects to the redband trout, 

because these streams are non-fish bearing or intermittent. While Class III and IV streams 

provide water to fish-bearing streams and could transport sediment downstream, the no harvest 

areas within RHCAs would minimize sediment delivery to streams. Precommercial thinning and 

underburning activities are not expected to result in more than background levels of sediment 

because slash and ground vegetation would help filter sediment and underburning activities 

would occur during spring and fall when vegetation is more moist and less likely to burn. 

Commercial harvest would occur in the outer 100 feet of Class I and II RHCAs in Alternatives 2, 

4, and 5. The amount of commercial harvest ranges from a high of 101 acres in Alternative 2, to 

87 acres in Alternative 4, and a low of 67 acres in Alternative 5. Table 33 displays the amount of 

commercial harvest by stream name and stream class. With a few exceptions, ground-based 

machinery for harvest would not occur in RHCAs. No grapple piling would occur in RHCAs. 

Units 104 (Salmon), 306 (Little Hay), 532 (Long Hollow), 559 (Marks), 564 (Marks) and 707 

(Marks) have existing roads within the RHCAs that would be reused during harvest operations. 

These roads effectively block sediment from the harvest activity from entering Salmon, Little 

Hay, Long Hollow, or Marks Creek. Unit 117 (Salmon Creek) would be harvested using a 

helicopter logging system where little ground disturbance would occur. There would be 

negligible effects to the redband trout from commercial harvest in the outer 100 feet of Class I 

and II RHCAs, because harvest would not occur within 200 feet of the stream channels. Stream 

shade and water temperature would be unaffected by commercial harvest because none of the 

trees removed from the outer portion of the RHCAs provide shade. Sediment from commercial 

harvest would be filtered by existing ground vegetation in the 200-foot non-treated area. Reshin 

and others (2006) found that a 32.8-foot (10 meter) setback of felling and yarding activities 

prevented sediment delivery to streams from about 95 percent of harvest-related erosion. Large 

wood from the outer portions of these RHCAs would not be expected to reach the stream 

channel. Pool frequency would be unaffected. 

Precommercial thinning would occur within 5 feet of the stream channel in Class I and II 

RHCAs. The amount of precommercial thinning in Class I and II RHCAs ranges between 534 

and 582 acres in the action alternatives. Table 35 identifies the amount of precommercial 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 96 

thinning by alternative and by stream class. Understory trees (typically less than 9 inches dbh) 

would be thinned to approximately 16 to 18-foot spacing which would promote growth of the 

remaining trees; increasing the diameter and number of trees that may reach sizes for future large 

wood (>21 inches dbh). Future large wood recruitment would improve fish habitat by creating 

pools and hiding cover. Where precommercial thinning occurs in RHCAs that are below the 

RMO for the small size class of large woody debris (see Table 31), some cut trees between 6 and 

9 inches dbh would be left on site. Water temperatures would decrease from increased numbers 

of pools. Competition between conifers and riparian-associated species would be decreased, 

increasing hardwood and broadleaf species composition and abundance. Increased abundance of 

riparian species would increase bank stability and reduce erosion because of the deeper root 

systems of these species. They would also provide increased stream shade. Thinning trees 

within RHCAs would contribute to improved redband trout habitat in the future by increasing 

riparian shrubs which provide cover, bank stability, and stream shade. No heavy equipment or 

OHVs would be used during precommercial thinning activities so there would be minimal 

ground disturbance from this activity. Ground vegetation, as well as the slash resulting from 

precommercial thinning would filter any sediment from the thinning activity. There would be 

little or no disturbance to fish or fish habitat during implementation of this activity. Fish would 

move to another part of the stream and/or seek hiding cover if some activity in the RCHA was a 

minor disturbance just as they would when deer cross the stream or feeds in the RHCA. 

Prescribed underburning would occur within RHCAs. Within Class I and II RHCAs, the amount 

of burning by alternative varies between 950 and 1,040 acres. Table 36 displays the amount of 

burning by stream, stream class, and alternative. Burning within the RHCAs would reduce 

ladder fuels by killing small seedling and sapling sized trees. Like the other activities, the 

reduced competition is expected to increase growth of residual trees and rejuvenate riparianassociated species, increasing riparian species composition and abundance. Large woody debris 

may be consumed during burning; however, design criteria have been developed to minimize 

consumption of large down wood. While some large wood is expected to be consumed, fire is 

also expected to kill some standing trees that over time would fall and become large woody 

debris. Reducing competition also promotes the growth of residual trees that will be future large 

woody debris. Prescribed burning activities are expected to result in minimal amounts of 

sediment because (1) burning would occur during spring and fall when conditions are moist and 

burn intensity would be light, (2) consumption of live vegetation and large diameter wood would 

be minimal, (3) not all units in a single drainage would be burned in the same year, and (4) 

burning activities would occur over a 10-year period. 

Hand piling of some thinning slash would occur within RHCAs. Piling would occur after 

thinning, usually before the fuels dry out. The piles would be burned in the late fall or early 

winter usually within 2 to 4 years. This sequence of activities retains ground cover to filter 

sediment. Slash piles can act as filters for sediment into streams immediately after treatment. 

Large woody debris would be unaffected by this activity. The material that is piled is small 

diameter slash. Pool frequency and formation would be unaffected since large woody debris 

would not be affected. Water temperature would also be unaffected. 

Approximately 100 acres of hardwood thinning would occur within Class I and II RHCAs. In 

areas where hardwood thinning would occur, conifers are competing with aspen and cottonwood 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 97 

for nutrients, light, and growing space. Thinning conifers in these areas would improve the vigor 

of aspen and cottonwood. These species are expected to be maintained and increase in extent. 

Shade would increase with expansion of stream side hardwoods. Increased shade contributes to 

lower temperatures in streams. The felled conifers would be left for downed wood or would be 

lopped and scattered leaving slash on the ground. Some slash would be manipulated to protect 

seedlings from grazing and trampling. There would be no underburning in these areas. Some of 

the larger conifers up to 15 inches dbh would be girdled and would be retained as snags. This 

activity is expected to result in increasing numbers of aspen and cottonwood trees, which would 

increase shade within the RHCAs. Retaining slash would add filtering vegetation from upland 

sediment during rain events. 

Road work, including closing, decommissioning, reconstructing, and constructing, affect 

sediment delivery to streams. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would each construct approximately 300 

feet (0.06 miles) of new road in the RHCA of Salmon Creek. This is the only new road 

construction in Class I or II RHCAs. Construction of this road would provide additional soil 

disturbance and potential for sediment transport; however, the new construction would be above 

an existing road that effectively blocks sediment from entering Salmon Creek. Construction of 

this road would not affect habitat and spawning success of the redband trout. Alternative 2 

would result in 10 new road/stream crossings. One of these crossings would be on Salmon 

Creek, a Class II stream; the other nine new road/stream crossings would be on Class IV streams. 

At this crossing, a temporary culvert would be installed. A pvc pipe or plastic lined ditch would 

be used to divert the water around the installation site from upstream to downstream. The water 

would be diverted around the area of disturbance during culvert installation to reduce sediment 

input into the stream during excavation. After installation, the diversion is removed and the 

water is put into the culvert. The same process would be followed to remove the culvert. 

Installing and removing a culvert on Salmon Creek is not expected to adversely affect redband 

trout. Installing a culvert has similar effects to installing stream structures. During installation

of stream structures on McKay Creek, cloudy water was observed while the equipment was 

working in the stream. Fish were observed in the area of disturbance just before work began. 

The fish immediately moved away from the area of disturbance. Fish returned to the area of 

disturbance and were using the new structures within an hour of the installation (personal 

observation of the District Fishery Biologist). Alternatives 4 and 5 result in 5 and 6 new stream 

crossings, respectively. All of these new crossings would be on Class IV streams. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 propose to close, decommission, and reconstruct roads within Class I and 

II RHCAs. Table 39 displays the amount of road work within Class I and II RHCAs by 

alternative. Closing and decommissioning roads would reduce compaction and improve road 

drainage, reducing concentrated flows and sediment transport. Reconstruction of roads would 

improve road drainage and reduce sedimentation from the existing condition. Existing roads 

within Class I and II RHCAs known to be chronic sources of sediment include road 3300-504 

along Salmon Creek and road 2630-013 near Crystal Creek. During reconstruction activities, 

small amounts of sediment would be delivered directly to these streams. Based on monitoring of 

sediment delivery during a culvert installation project on Badger Creek, a Class II stream, only 

small amounts of sediment are expected and sediment is expected to settle out within 200 feet of 

the area of disturbance. This monitoring indicated that sediment levels returned to background 

levels in a few hours. During the time of disturbance, fish will temporarily move to other parts 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 98 

of the stream during the short duration (less than 1 day) that sediment delivery is expected. This 

road work will not cause an adverse effect to redband trout because it is common behavior for 

fish to migrate throughout streams in the project area. After reconstruction is complete, the 

amount of sediment entering the streams would be reduced from the existing level. 

Two culverts would be removed on Rush Creek and portions of Road 2620-030 would be 

decommissioned. Again, short-term sediment delivery is expected; however, fish can easily 

migrate up or down stream and avoid the area of disturbance. These actions would eliminate the 

chronic sediment production from the two undersized culverts. 

Reducing chronic sediment sources along Salmon, Rush, and Crystal Creeks would reduce 

sediment in these areas and improve spawning habitats for the redband trout. Road work would 

not cause an adverse effect to redband trout because (1) fish naturally move up or downstream 

when there is any disturbance such as from big game, vehicles, or people, (2) the duration of 

disturbance at each location is expected to last for less than 24 hours, and (3) the extent of the 

disturbance at each specific road/stream crossing where work occurs is expected to about 200 

linear feet of stream. Even if all road work occurred on the same day, redband trout would not 

be adversely affected because the total area of effect would be less than 1/2 mile out of 45 miles 

of Class I and II streams in the project area. 

Prior to vegetation becoming established on scarified road surfaces, there may be an increase in 

sediment production from road closure and decommissioning activities. However, with proper 

drainage and outsloping, sediment reaching the streams is expected to be minimal. Work would 

generally occur during the summer months when stream flows are low and eggs produced during 

spawning (ranging from May to June) have hatched. During road work, fish can move to other 

parts of the stream and avoid any sediment. Small pulses of sediment may occur if a rain event 

immediately followed road work. The rain event would increase flow in the stream and sediment 

would be dispersed throughout the system and is not expected to adversely affect redband trout. 

Alternative 3 does not include any road work and would maintain the current conditions. Under 

Alternative 3, roads within the RHCAs of Class I and II streams are expected to continue to 

transport sediment to streams, particularly to Crystal, Marks, Peterson, Rush, Salmon, and 

Wildcat Creeks. Spawning habitat would continue to be degraded by sediment delivery from 

roads. 

Recent fish distribution surveys conducted by ODFW in 2004 demonstrate that habitat and 

distribution of fish has expanded since 1991. The activities proposed in all four action 

alternatives are not expected to reverse this trend. 

The determination for redband trout for Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 is may impact individuals or 

habitat but would not cause a trend toward federal listing. The proposed activities would result 

in small amounts of sediment delivery to streams. However, fish would move out of the area of 

disturbance. Over time, sediment would be reduced as a result of increases in riparian vegetation 

from thinning and underburning in RHCAs. Fish habitat would be improved and fish 

populations would increase in the long term as a result of pool formation from large wood 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 99 

recruitment. The proposed activities would not retard attainment of RMOs and would not cause 

adverse effects on redband trout. 

Table 39. Road work (miles) within Class I and II RHCAs by alternative. 

Stream Alternative 2 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Name Reconstruction, 

decommission, 

and close 

Construction Reconstruction,

decommission, 

and close 

Construction Reconstruction, 

decommission, 

and close 

Construction 

Crystal .53 .03 .53 

Jim Elliott .03 

Marks 1.05 1.05 .6 

Peterson .35 .36 .36 

Reilly .18 .18 

Rush .47 .48 .03 

Salmon 2.47 .06 2.38 .06 2.38 .06 

Wildcat .27 .28 .1 

Total 5.3 .06 4.76 .06 4 .06 

Cumulative Effects 

Class I and II streams in which the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions 

overlap in time and space include Cornez, Jim Elliott, Little Hay, Marks, McGinnis, Reilly, and 

Rush Creeks. Past actions including riparian planting, headcut stabilization, stream restoration, 

road closure and decommission, and culvert replacements have all contributed to improved 

riparian function and condition, including improvements in stream shade and sediment reduction. 

The difference in cumulative effects between the action alternatives is negligible. The 

cumulative effects of Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 are the same for Jim Elliott, McGinnis, and 

Reilly Creeks. Cumulative effects are very near the same on Cornez, Little Hay, and Marks 

Creek (+/- 15 acres between alternatives). In all cases, the cumulative effects are expected to be 

beneficial to the redband trout. Closing, decommissioning, and reconstructing roads in the 

RHCAs of Jim Elliott, Marks, Reilly, and Rush Creeks is expected to reduce sediment transport 

to these streams. Hardwood thinning, precommercial thinning, and prescribed burning within 

the RHCAs of Marks, McGinnis, Reilly, and Rush Creeks would complement riparian planting 

that previously occurred along these streams, contributing to increased stream shade. These 

activities would also promote the growth of residual trees which would be a source of future 

large wood recruitment that would contribute to the development of pools, further adding to 

reduced water temperatures and sediment reduction. 

The livestock grazing within Class I and II RHCAs is expected to continue at the current levels. 

Precommercial thinning and underburning activities would remove barriers to livestock 

movement and are likely to increase forage as a result of increased sunlight and nutrients. 

Livestock use of riparian areas is not expected to increase because activities in the uplands are 

expected to increase forage and remove barriers to livestock movement similar to the activities in 

the RHCAs. Also, livestock grazing permits include provisions for distributing livestock or 

moving livestock from pastures when certain triggers are reached. Triggers include bank 

trampling and a switch to preference for woody species. Livestock are expected to be moved 

when triggers are reached. Where hardwood thinning activities occur in RHCAs, livestock use 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 100 

in these areas would be small because some fences would be constructed and slash would be 

arranged to discourage livestock use. 

Columbia Spotted Frog 

Alternative 1 

There are no activities proposed in Alternative 1 that would directly alter spotted frog habitat. 

In open canopy areas where woody vegetation is present along streambanks, shade would 

increase. Increasing shade over streams contributes to reducing water temperature and acts as 

hiding cover for Columbia spotted frogs. 

This alternative would have no impact on Columbia spotted frog or its habitat. 

Alternative 2, 4, and 5 

Harvesting trees would not contribute to changes in frog habitat. Ponds, seeps, and wet areas 

that may be used by frogs are included within RHCAs (INFISH 1995) and harvest would not 

occur within 25 feet. 

Precommercial thinning would occur on up to 900 acres within RHCAs. The amount varies by 

alternative and is displayed in Table 32. No heavy equipment or OHVs would be used in 

RHCAs for implementing this activity. There would be little disturbance to spotted frogs during 

implementation of this activity. Since workers would be walking through the area and using 

chainsaws to cut trees generally less than 9 inches dbh, frogs could move to other areas during 

this activity. 

Reconstructing roads within RHCAs (up to 3.5 miles) on Salmon, Crystal, and Rush Creeks, 

reduces sedimentation from the existing condition by improving road surfaces and drainage. 

Activities would occur when the flows of streams are low and frog eggs have hatched. 

Precipitation is low during the summer months in the project area. Frogs make use of summer 

foraging in small wet or damp areas in forest and meadows, including water-filled tracks, stream 

edges, and marshes. Frogs that use water-filled tracks from vehicles may be affected by 

reconstruction of existing roads in RHCAs. Current visitor traffic that disturbs frogs using 

water-filled tracks would no longer affect these frog sites because these sites would be destroyed. 

Road work would occur after eggs have hatched. 

Road closure work includes adding drainage structures. Long term the closed roads would have 

fewer puddles that would be used by frogs which may affect foraging frog numbers. Using small 

spur roads within RHCAs prevents building new parallel roads or opening longer segments of 

roads that would increase sedimentation to the stream and reducing vegetation. Keeping existing 

vegetation by reusing roads can be used by frogs for cover and foraging instead of building new 

parallel roads to existing roads in RHCAs. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 101 

An estimated 124 acres of hardwood thinning would occur in RHCAs. Vegetation for summer 

and winter habitat would be improved by implementing hardwood thinning activities. Increased 

riparian vegetation would increase cover and close areas for increased humidity needed by frogs. 

Fuels treatments would occur in the spring and fall. Hand piles would be burned later in the year 

after the first snow. Egg deposition occurs for frogs soon after snowmelt. Eggs are normally 

deposited in water at temperatures of approximately 57.2 degrees F. Fire generally does not 

creep through seeps, bogs, springs, meadows, or other wet areas. Fire line would not be 

constructed in these areas. Foraging that takes place in the summer would not be affected by 

fuels treatments that take place in the spring and fall. Therefore, it is unlikely that fuel 

treatments would affect frogs or their habitat. 

These alternatives would result in a may impact individuals or habitat determination for 

Columbia spotted frog because road work within RHCAs may occur while frogs are present. 

Frogs would be expected to move to other areas. Road reconstruction would reduce the amount 

of water-filled tracks that might be used by frogs and other road work and could affect individual 

frogs. During precommercial and hardwood thinning activities, individual frogs could be 

disturbed by workers in RHCAs; frogs would be expected to move to other areas during these 

activities. 

Alternative 3 

Precommercial thinning would occur on approximately 835 acres within RHCAs. No heavy 

equipment or OHVs would be used in RHCAs for implementing this activity. There would be 

little disturbance to spotted frogs during implementation of this activity. Since workers would be 

walking through the area and using chainsaws to cut trees generally less than 9 inches dbh, frogs 

could move to other areas during this activity. 

An estimated 124 acres of hardwood thinning would occur in RHCAs. Vegetation for summer 

and winter habitat would be improved by implementing hardwood thinning activities. Increased 

riparian vegetation would increase cover and close areas for increased humidity needed by frogs. 

Fuels treatments would occur in the spring and fall. Hand piles would be burned later in the year 

after the first snow. Egg deposition occurs for frogs soon after snowmelt. Eggs are normally 

deposited in water at temperatures of approximately 57.2 degrees F. Fire generally does not 

creep through seeps, bogs, springs, meadows, or other wet areas. Fire line would not be 

constructed in these areas. Foraging that takes place in the summer would not be affected by 

fuels treatments that take place in the spring and fall. Therefore, it is unlikely that fuel 

treatments would affect frogs or their habitat. 

This alternative would result in a may impact individuals or habitat determination for Columbia 

spotted frog because workers could disturb individual frogs during precommercial and hardwood 

thinning activities. Frogs are expected to move away from these areas while thinning activities 

are occurring. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 102 

Cumulative Effects 

The cumulative effects for spotted frogs are similar to those described for RHCAs. Where the 

Hash Rock Fire burned the upper reaches of Cornez, Hamilton, McGinnis, and Reilly Creeks in 

the summer of 2000 it reduced spotted frog habitat by removing vegetation. Planting in these 

areas and natural regrowth of vegetation has increased spotted frog habitat since the Hash Rock 

fire. Large wood recruitment is now occurring as fire-killed trees fall into and near streams. 

This large wood helps to provide hiding cover for frogs. Post-fire work in the fire area has 

increased streambank stability as a result of both riparian planting and replacing undersized 

culverts on McGinnis Creek, Reilly Creek, and the east and west forks of Hamilton Creek; 

replacing two undersized culverts on Cornez Creek, and decommissioning approximately 0.4 

miles of road on McGinnis Creek. Precommercial thinning and prescribed burning along these 

streams would complement riparian planting that has already occurred, contributing to increased 

hardwood species composition and abundance. Road closure and decommission on Cornez 

Creek, Reilly Creek, and tributaries to McGinnis Creek would complement previous road 

decommission and culvert replacements along these streams. 

Activities that have occurred in the RHCAs of Jim Elliott, Little Hay, Marks, and Rush Creeks 

include road decommissioning along Jim Elliott Creek; headcut stabilization, riparian planting, 

and fencing on Little Hay Creek; riparian planting, stream channel restoration, and road 

decommissioning along Marks Creek; and riparian planting along Rush Creek. Commercial 

harvest, precommercial thinning, prescribed burning, hardwood thinning, and road work along 

these streams would also contribute toward the attainment of RMOs for pool frequency, water 

temperature, large woody debris, and width-to-depth ratios. 

Air Quality 

Affected Environment 

Air quality can be affected by both wildfire and activity fuels burning. National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards have been developed and include standards for total suspended particulates 

(solid material contained in smoke). 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 the Oregon DEQ, the Oregon Department of Forestry, and the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM), signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to establish a framework 

for implementing an air quality program in northeast Oregon. The MOU includes a prescribed 

fire emission limit of 15,000 tons of PM 10 per year for the national forests of the Blue 

Mountains (Malheur, Ochoco, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman). PM 10 are particulate matter 

that measure 10 microns in diameter or less, and are small enough to enter the human respiratory 

system. All prescribed burning on these forests is coordinated with the Oregon DEQ and 

Department of Forestry through the State of Oregon smoke management program. 

Winds in the Spears project area are typically from the southwest-to-northwest during the spring 

and fall prescribed fire seasons. Inversions are common at night in the fall in the Marks Creek 

valley, but tend to dissipate by mid-morning. Populated areas that may be affected by smoke 

from underburning are primarily the private lands along Marks Creek. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 103 

The nearest Class I airshed is the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness, 75 miles to the east. The 

nearest special protection sone is Bend, 50 miles to the west, into the prevailing winds. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

Activity fuels and natural fuels underburning activities would not occur. There would be no 

emissions produced as a result of implementing this alternative. Because Alternative 1 would 

not result in any emissions, there are no cumulative effects associated with this alternative. 

However, because the amount of fuels in the project area would not be reduced and fuels would 

continue to accumulate, the intensity of any wildfire within the project area and the amount of 

emissions it would produce would be higher than if fuels were reduced. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Due to the location of the project area and local weather patterns, smoke from prescribed fire 

would not affect Class I airsheds or urban special protection zones. 

Burning activities would be conducted under the State of Oregon Smoke Management System to 

track smoke produced and would be coordinated with adjacent National Forests to meet smoke 

management objectives for total emissions. 

Prescribed fire operations would be conducted under favorable smoke dispersal conditions and 

would be suspended during persistent inversion conditions. Burning during inversion conditions 

increases the potential for smoke pooling in the Marks Creek valley. Residents and visitors to 

the area would encounter smoke as long as the inversion conditions persist, which can be 

anywhere from a few days to a few weeks. Residents in the area are also likely to encounter 

dust, noise, and increased traffic from prescribed burning operations. 

Underburning activities would be implemented over a period of about 10 years. The amount of 

natural fuels and activity fuels underburning would vary by alternative and the amount of 

emissions produced would vary by alternative. Table 40 displays the estimated total annual 

emissions over the 10-year implementation period for underburning activities included in each of 

the alternatives. 

Alternative 2 includes the highest level of prescribed fire operations and would produce the most 

emissions. Alternative 2 would produce an estimated 2,440 tons of PM 10 particulates over the 

10-year implementation period. Alternative 4 would produce the second highest level of 

emissions and would produce an estimated 2,342 tons of PM 10 particulates. Alternatives 5 and 

3 would produce 2,240 and 1,950 tons, respectively. The highest estimated annual emission of 

PM 10 is 366 tons, which is less than 3 percent of the annual emission limit for the Blue 

Mountains. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 104 

Table 40. Emissions from prescribed fire (tons).

Project Year Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7 Yr 8 Yr 9 Yr 10 

% of Project 10% 10% 10% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10% 5% 5% 

Alternative 2 

Underburn 173 173 173 260 260 173 173 173 87 87 

Pile Burn 70 70 70 106 106 70 70 70 35 35 

Total PM10 244 244 244 366 366 244 244 244 122 122 

Alternative 3 

Underburn 179 179 179 268 268 179 179 179 89 89 

Pile Burn 16 16 16 24 24 16 16 16 8 8 

Total PM10 195 195 195 292 292 195 195 195 97 97 

Alternative 4 

Underburn 173 173 173 259 259 173 173 173 86 86 

Pile Burn 62 62 62 93 93 62 62 62 31 31 

Total PM10 234 234 234 352 352 234 234 234 117 117 

Alternative 5 

Underburn 165 165 165 248 248 165 165 165 83 83 

Pile Burn 59 59 59 88 88 59 59 59 29 29 

Total PM10 224 224 224 336 336 224 224 224 112 112 

Prescribed fire operations would reduce the amount of fuel in the project area. With a reduction 

in fuel levels, the intensity of wildfires and the amount of emissions they produce would be 

reduced. 

Cumulative Effects 

During the summer months, there are occasional smoke intrusions into the Prineville area from 

agricultural burning in Crook and Jefferson Counties. Prescribed burning in the Spears project 

area would occur during the spring and fall, and would not coincide with those intrusions. 

In June 2006, the Ochoco Valley Fuels Reduction project was authorized. This project includes 

the use of prescribed fire on approximately 2,700 acres in the Upper Ochoco Creek Watershed 

which lies due east of the project area. This project is expected to be implemented over 2-3 

years beginning in 2007. This project is expected to produce a total of 293 tons of PM 10 

emissions over the 2-3 year implementation period. 

The Lookout Mountain Ranger District is in the process of developing the Snowshoe Fuels 

Reduction project. The purpose of the Snowshoe project is to develop a fuel break along U.S. 

Highway 26. This project is in the Bridge Creek Watershed which is adjacent to the project area 

on the north. This project is expected to include up to 200 acres of prescribed fire. The earliest 

implementation of this project would begin is fall 2007. This project is expected to produce a 

total of 22 tons of PM 10. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 105 

Both of these fuel reduction projects will result in some smoke emissions that may overlap with 

emissions from the Spears Project. The amount of emissions from these two fuel reduction 

project would be small (less than 2% of the annual emission limit) and combined with the 

emissions from the Spears project would be less than 5% of the annual emission limit. All of 

these projects will be coordinated with the Oregon DEQ and the other National Forests in the 

Blue Mountains to ensure that the annual emission limit is not exceeded. 

Botanical Species 

Affected Environment 

There are no known proposed, endangered, or threatened plant species known or expected to 

occur on the Ochoco National Forest. Therefore, there would be no effect to threatened or 

endangered botanical species as a result of any of the alternatives. 

There are 28 plant species on the 2004 Regional Forester's Sensitive Species List documented or 

suspected to occur on the Ochoco National Forest; 13 of these species do not have potential 

habitat within the Spears project area. These species are: Estes wormwood, South Fork John 

Day milkvetch, Peck’s milkvetch, Deschutes milkvetch, long-bearded mariposa lily, dwarf 

suncup, narrow-leaved sedge, Ochoco lomatium, disappearing monkeyflower, Peck’s 

penstemon, Columbia cress, arrow-leaf thelypody, and Howell’s thelypody. There would be no 

impact to any of these species from any of the alternatives. (More information is contained in 

the January 12, 2007, botany report.) 

The 15 sensitive species that have potential habitat, or are known to occur in the project area, 

have been grouped where they occupy similar habitats, and anticipated effects of the alternatives 

are similar. The habitat groups are riparian, moist forest, and non-forest scabland. The 

following species are those that have either been documented in or near the project area, or have 

a higher potential for occurrence in the area. The groupings are as follows: 

 1. riparian species: ascending moonwort, crenulate moonwort, Mingan’s moonwort, 

mountain moonwort, twin-spike moonwort, pinnate moonwort, Peck’s mariposa lily, porcupine 

sedge, interior sedge, silverskin lichen, and margined streamside moss. 

 2. moist forest species: yellow-lady’s slipper orchid and Back’s sedge. 

 3. scabland species: Henderson’s needlegrass and Wallowa needlegrass. 

Surveys were conducted for sensitive plants in the project area in 1990-1993, 2000, 2001, and 

2006. Records of these surveys can be found in the Lookout Mountain Ranger District office. 

Most of these surveys were completed as intuitive control and in areas with the highest potential 

for Peck’s lily and needlegrass species. Peck’s mariposa lily and interior sedge have been 

documented to occur in the project area. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 106 

Riparian Species 

Moonworts (Botrychium spp.) 

The six species of sensitive moonworts known to occur on the Ochoco NF occupy similar 

riparian habitats and are discussed here as one group. This group includes ascending moonwort 

(Botrychium ascendens), crenulate moonwort (B. crenulatum), Mingan’s moonwort (B. 

minganense), mountain moonwort (B. montanum), twin-spike moonwort (B. paradoxum), and 

pinnate moonwort (B. pinnatum). Because Mingan’s moonwort has been determined to be more 

common than originally believed, it may be removed from the Regional Forester’s sensitive 

species list. The six moonwort species are considered rare and local species, meaning there are 

only a few known populations and the populations are usually small. 

These are small, primitive plants closely related to ferns. They reproduce by spores, and are 

associated with mycorrhizal fungi. Habitat for the six moonwort species is primarily moist 

ground sedge/forb communities associated with seeps, drainages, and the edges of wet meadows 

at relatively high elevations, generally over 5,000 feet. Moonwort sites are found within or 

adjacent to coniferous forest, especially grand fir (Abies grandis) communities. Though several 

surveys have been completed, none of these species have been documented in the Spears project 

area. Where these species have been found on other portions of the Ochoco National Forest, 

they occupy sites that are partially shaded to fully open at the edges of clearcuts. When found, 

more individual plants have been located at intact sites versus altered sites. At least one 

population is in a natural wet meadow. Habitat and populations appear to be stable (Ianni et al. 

1996, pers. comm. and Lesko, personal observation). Moonworts may be dependent on some 

level of natural disturbance, such as flooding or other natural processes that occasionally create 

small openings for spores to become established. 

Peck’s Mariposa Lily (Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii) 

Peck’s mariposa lily is a local endemic, known only from the Ochoco Mountains of eastern and 

central Oregon. Most populations occur along drainages associated with Big Summit Prairie and 

Little Summit Prairie. Other populations have been recorded on McKay Creek, Marks Creek, in 

the Maury Mountains, and on the former Snow Mountain Ranger District. 

Peck’s mariposa lily occurs in vernally moist areas, along intermittent drainages and meadow 

margins. This species is a sterile triploid, reproducing asexually through the production of 

bulblets in the axil of its single leaf or flower bracts (Kagan 1996). With no genetic transfer and 

limited ability to expand into suitable habitat, maintaining existing populations is essential for 

continued species viability. 

In the Spears project area, populations are primarily along meadows and low-gradient drainages 

in the lower elevations. Compared with other portions of the Ochoco National Forest, the Spears 

project area contains a moderate amount of potential habitat. The majority of plants are in the 

Grant Meadows area. Monitoring indicates populations of this species are stable (Halvorson 

2000 and 2003, pers. comm.). Proposed units with potential to affect habitat include 120, 148, 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 107 

302, 303, 407, 408, 409, 501, 502, 503, 512, 513, 514, 521, 524, 532, 538, 552, 560, 565, 734, 

742, 747, 748, 867, 888, 896, and 980. 

Non-native plants have likely contributed to a decline in Peck’s mariposa lily. Sensitive plant 

site records indicate non-native grasses such as timothy and Kentucky bluegrass are ubiquitous 

in Peck’s mariposa lily sites. These non-native grasses have been present for several decades, 

and do not appear to threaten the viability of Peck’s mariposa lily. Teasel and Canada thistle 

have begun to dominate some areas of suitable habitat for this sensitive species. Within the 

project area, it appears teasel invasion into Peck’s mariposa lily habitat has resulted in 

extirpation of one sub-population. 

Past management activities are also likely to have contributed to a decline in Peck’s mariposa 

lily. Road construction and timber harvest with heavy machinery resulted in soil disturbance that 

impacted individual plants because of their shallow root system. Soil compaction and erosion 

changed hydrological patterns and reduced potential future recruitment in some areas. Other 

activities, such as slash piling and burning, resulted in scorched soils which damaged plants and 

their habitat. Piling and burning activities also increased the risk for introduction and spread of 

non-native invasive plants that may displace Peck’s mariposa lily. 

Earlier interpretations of survey data suggest that occurrences of this species are so small in 

number, with the exception of Grant Meadows, that this species may be at risk of extirpation 

from the majority of the Marks Creek watershed. However, this species is often inconsistent in 

its flowering patterns. This can affect survey data interpretations. The 1990-1992 surveys may 

have been completed during years of relatively low flowering. Informal monitoring and field 

review since these surveys indicate populations are larger and more widespread within the 

project area (Lesko, personal observation). 

Porcupine Sedge (Carex hystericina) and Interior Sedge (Carex interior) 

These species are associated with very wet riparian habitats, usually in association with perennial 

water. On the Ochoco National Forest, porcupine sedge has been found along Black Canyon 

Creek and other creeks on the Paulina Ranger District. It also occurs in the Bridge Creek 

watershed on public lands administered by the BLM. Though surveys of potential habitat have 

been completed, this species has not been documented in the project area. It appears to be more 

often associated with non-forested lower elevations, and may not occur in the Spears project 

area. Interior sedge has been documented within the Spears project area, and in other places on 

the Ochoco National Forest. Because interior sedge is more common than had been earlier 

believed, it may be removed from the Regional Forester’s sensitive species list. Both species 

appear to be tolerant of moderate grazing disturbance (Lesko, personal observation). In Oregon, 

habitat for these species appears stable (Halvorson 2001, pers. comm., Helliwell 2001, and Yates 

2001, pers. comm.). Few areas of potential habitat in the project area presently appear to be 

threatened by non-native invasive plants. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 108 

Silverskin Lichen (Dermatocarpon luridum) and Margined Streamside Moss (Scouleria 

marginata ) 

Silverskin lichen has been documented in a variety of aquatic habitats in Washington, Oregon, 

and California. It has been found on rocks or bedrock in streams, rivers, or seeps that are usually 

submerged or inundated for most of the year. Surveys have occurred on other portions of the 

Ochoco National Forest, and this species was documented. Because perennial streams occur in 

the project areas, habitat is assumed to be present. Habitat does not appear to be threatened by 

invasive species. Livestock use that results in physical damage by hooves may impact this 

species, but maintaining habitat for this species appears to be more related to maintaining water 

quality. 

Margined streamside moss species is endemic to the Pacific Northwest, found in southern British 

Columbia, Washington, Idaho, western Oregon, and northern California. It often forms dark 

mats on exposed to shaded rocks in streams; seasonally submerged or emergent. Surveys have 

occurred on portions of the Ochoco National Forest and this species was not found. However, 

because perennial streams occur in the project area, habitat is assumed to be present. Habitat 

does not appear to be threatened by invasive species. Livestock use may result in physical 

damage to plants by hooves. However, closely-related species appear to occupy rocky, steep 

stream habitats that are not usually associated with high livestock use. Maintaining habitat for 

this species appears to be more related to maintaining water quality. 

Moist Forest Species 

Yellow Lady's-Slipper Orchid (Cypripedium parviflorum) 

This species typically occupies very moist upland sites and riparian zones. This habitat is moist 

grand fir (Abies grandis)/twinflower (Linnaea borealis) and grand fir/beadlily (Clintonia 

uniflora) plant associations. This orchid is also known as Cypripedium calceolus var. 

parviflorum. A population of Cypripedium orchids with yellow flowers, tentatively identified as 

Cypripedium parviflorum, occurs in an old harvest unit in the Trout Creek watershed in the 

western portion of the Ochoco National Forest. This site was partially cut in the early to mid 

1970’s using an overstory removal prescription. The unit did not have any slash disposal 

following the 1970’s harvest. The population appears to be stable. It appears to be associated 

with the decomposing large woody debris left on site after the harvest and areas with partial 

shade. 

In the Spears project area, the highest-probability habitat for this species would occur on 

northerly aspects in higher-elevation western and northern portions of the area. Proposed units 

with potential to affect habitat include 163, 199, 515, 526, 542, 546, 707, 738, 748, 751, 823, 

824, 845, 846, 869, 870, 872, 889, 932, 942, 959, and 982. No populations or plants of yellow 

lady’s-slipper orchid have been documented in the project area, despite surveys for this and other 

projects, including limited-focus surveys for this species in 2000 and 2001. Other surveys in and 

near the Spears project area have documented a similar species, mountain lady’s-slipper orchid 

(Cypripedium montanum). 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 109 

While this species appears to be somewhat tolerant of moderate disturbance, heavy ground 

disturbance such as road construction or log skidding may destroy plants or habitat. Burning 

may remove large woody debris on which this species may depend. Design elements have been 

incorporated into all the action alternatives to maintain habitat for yellow lady’s-slipper orchid. 

These elements include maintaining partial shade and no slash piling or underburning on areas 

identified as yellow lady’s-slipper orchid habitat, unless reviewed by the district botanist. 

Back’s Sedge (Carex backii) 

Back’s sedge occurs across much of the western United States and Canada, though it is less 

common in the Pacific Northwest (Wood 2002). Recent information suggests occurrences of this 

species in Oregon have been misidentified, and are actually Carex cordillerana, a “new” species 

yet to be described (formally published). In central Oregon, this species was last documented in 

1916 on private land along Ochoco Creek at Cabin Station Pasture which is adjacent to the 

Ochoco National Forest. 

Back’s sedge occupies riparian areas and moist meadows, but also has been documented in moist 

woods and thickets in eastern Oregon (Wood 2003, pers. comm.). This species also occurs in 

rocky, often steep areas. These sites are less susceptible to livestock grazing, indicating this 

species may be more likely to occur in areas with little or no grazing (Lytjen 2003, pers. comm.). 

Back’s sedge is not rhizomatous and reproduces only by seed. It is not considered a fire-adapted 

species, but because it is most often found on moist sites, only high-intensity wildfire is likely to 

affect it (Wood 2002). 

Though surveys have been completed on a variety of sites throughout the Ochoco National 

Forest, including within the Spears project area, this species has not been documented on the 

Ochoco National Forest or in central Oregon. These and earlier surveys indicate this species is 

likely not present in the Spears project area. It appears likely that this species has been 

extirpated from central Oregon. The closest known populations are approximately 100 miles 

east of the project area. Populations of this species on the Umatilla, Malheur, and WallowaWhitman National Forests appear to be stable (Wood 2003, pers. comm.). It is also known to 

occur on lands managed by the Burns District of the BLM (Lytjen 2003, pers. comm.). 

Scabland Species 

Needlegrass Species (Achnatherum hendersonii and A. wallowaensis) 

These perennial grasses are regional endemic species. They are associated with residual, clay 

soils known as lithosols. This habitat is commonly referred to as non-forest balds or scablands. 

These species are uncommon but widely scattered on the Ochoco National Forest. These species 

occur sporadically in central and northeastern Oregon on rocky, scabland ridges, often in 

association with rigid sagebrush, Sandberg bluegrass, onespike oatgrass, and buckwheat species. 

Dry, heavy clay to gravelly, droughty, shallow soil is common, with aspect mostly south to 

southwest, with gentle to moderate slopes. Stone circles, stripes, and nets are common signs of 

frost heaving in these sites (Virlakas 1990 and Maze and Robson 1996). Known sites are at 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 110 

elevations of 3,400 to 5,400 feet. The closest documented populations are on land managed by 

the BLM within the North Fork Crooked River watershed. No populations of these species have 

been documented within the project area, though few areas of suitable habitat have been 

surveyed. There are two units (704 and 806) with potential to affect habitat; this includes the 

roads used to access these units. 

Studies indicate that where scabland soils occur on slopes exceeding 15 percent, measurable 

erosion has occurred over the last 100 years. As a result of these changes, productivity and plant 

community composition has also likely changed due to the loss of surface soil, grazing, and 

invasion by exotic species. Monitoring indicates the majority of this change occurred several 

decades ago. Though this species occurs on these altered sites, it is difficult to estimate effects 

of these changes on sensitive needlegrass populations. Where scablands occur on flatter slopes, 

less erosion has occurred, indicating little change in productivity and plant communities (David 

2001, pers. comm.). On the Ochoco National Forest, the majority of this habitat appears to be 

stable and is expected to remain suitable for these species. 

Monitoring of this species has not been extensive. However, scabland habitat associated with 

this species presently appears to be stable, and, except for road construction and some damage by 

OHV traffic, has changed little over the last few decades. Because scabland habitat does not 

recover from disturbance, protection is emphasized under the Ochoco National Forest Plan. 

Environmental Consequences 

Riparian Species 

Alternative 1 

This alternative includes no disturbance, such as road construction, timber harvest, burning or 

other activities that may affect viability of these species. Habitat would be maintained. 

Therefore, there would be no impact to Peck’s mariposa lily, the six moonworts, porcupine 

sedge, interior sedge, silverskin lichen, or margined streamside moss. Monitoring indicates 

populations or habitats for these species are currently stable; therefore short-term (less than 10 

years) effects are unlikely. Because Peck’s mariposa lily appears to decline if competition is not 

set back due to fire or other disturbance, the continued policy of wildfire suppression and lack of 

management practices, such as tree thinning and prescribed burning, may lead to a long-term 

decline of Peck’s mariposa lily (Kagan 1996 and Halvorson 2003, pers. comm.). 

Alternative 3 

This alternative includes no disturbance from road construction, timber harvest, or grapple 

piling. However, other activities, including thinning and hand piling and burning of slash, may 

potentially affect these species. Heavy thinning slash and piling can bury plants, and burning 

these higher fuel loads can scorch soils, damaging plants and their habitat, and increasing risk for 

introduction and spread of non-native invasive plants that may displace sensitive plants. 

However, the majority of habitat would be maintained. Therefore, anticipated short-term effects 

would be that some individuals or habitat may be affected, but would not be likely to contribute 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 111 

to a trend towards federal listing or a loss of viability Peck’s mariposa lily, the six moonworts, 

porcupine sedge, interior sedge, silverskin lichen, or margined streamside moss. 

Where precommercial thinning and prescribed burning would occur along forest/meadow 

interface that contains habitat for Peck’s mariposa lily, the expected long-term effects (>10 

years) would be enhanced habitat resulting from the reduction of shade and the expansion of 

meadow habitat. This may result in expansion of populations. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

Soil disturbance from heavy machinery can directly impact individual plants. Soil compaction or 

erosion can impact future recruitment by changing hydrological patterns in riparian habitat. 

Heavy thinning slash and piling can bury plants, and burning these higher fuel loads can scorch 

soils, damaging plants and their habitat, and increasing risk for introduction and spread of nonnative invasive plants that may displace sensitive plants. 

In the long term (more than 10 years), management activities such as thinning and burning may 

improve habitat for Peck’s mariposa lily by reducing competition from conifers and other 

competing vegetation (Ianni et al. 1996, pers. comm.). 

All of the action alternatives avoid mechanical disturbance of known populations and high 

probability habitat for Peck’s mariposa lily, the six moonworts, porcupine sedge, interior sedge, 

silverskin lichen, or margined streamside moss. Ground-based equipment would be restricted in 

most Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) and in areas identified as habitat for these 

species. 

Seeding of native or native cultivar grasses and forbs would take place during rehabilitation of 

log landings and portions of closed and decommissioned roads, including those in riparian areas, 

to reduce potential for erosion and introduction and spread of noxious weeds. Additional seeded 

grasses and forbs may move into Peck’s mariposa lily habitat. Observations indicate Peck’s 

mariposa lily populations and habitat are stable. Populations of native and non-native grasses 

and non-noxious forbs appear to have shared habitat with Peck’s mariposa lily for decades. 

Therefore, seeding is not expected to increase the risk to Peck’s mariposa lily. On highly 

disturbed sites such as roads, seeded grass and forbs can colonize these sites and reduce risk of 

some noxious weeds, such as teasel, which appears to be a greater threat to Peck’s mariposa lily. 

Habitat for the six moonworts, porcupine sedge, and interior sedge is very moist. Seeding 

upland grasses and forbs of the species proposed is not likely to expand into this habitat and 

affect these species. Though some localized impacts due to non-native invasive plants, such as 

teasel, are apparent in Peck’s mariposa lily habitat, they presently do not appear to threaten the 

viability of this or other sensitive species on the Ochoco National Forest. 

The riparian habitat for these species is typically excluded from timber harvest. Moist habitat is 

unlikely to burn during prescribed burning. However, other actions including road maintenance, 

reconstruction, and decommissioning, precommercial thinning, and fuels treatments that would 

occur within the RHCAs may damage some individual Peck’s mariposa lily, moonworts, 

porcupine sedge, interior sedge, silverskin lichen, and margined streamside moss plants or their 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 112 

habitats. However, these activities: (1) are expected to only affect the periphery of such habitat 

(e.g. thinning along a meadow edge); (2) are not expected to burn with high intensity; (3) would 

affect areas already heavily disturbed (e.g. road decommissioning); or (4) would occur primarily 

in marginal habitat or other areas unlikely to affect viability of populations. Therefore, 

anticipated short-term effects (less than 10 years) would be that some individuals or habitat may 

be affected, but would not be likely to contribute to a trend towards federal listing or a loss of 

viability to sensitive plant species associated with riparian areas, wet meadows, or seeps and 

springs. 

Where precommercial thinning and prescribed burning would occur along forest/meadow 

interface that contains habitat for Peck’s mariposa lily, the expected long-term effects (more than 

10 years) would be enhanced habitat resulting from the reduction of shade and the expansion of 

meadow habitat. This may result in expansion of populations. Road decommissioning may 

result in less vehicle use in riparian areas, which may also further protect, and may enhance 

habitat. 

Cumulative Effects 

Habitat quality for the majority of sensitive plant species has likely declined since historic 

conditions. Road construction, livestock grazing, fire exclusion, logging, vehicle use, stream 

channelization, introduction and spread of non-native invasive plants (noxious weeds), and other 

factors have resulted in changes to meadow and riparian habitat. 

Observations and monitoring over the last decade indicate habitats for these sensitive species are 

generally stable, despite continuing influences from livestock, noxious weeds, and recreation use 

(Lesko, pers. observation, and Halvorson 2003, pers. comm). In some areas, riparian 

improvement projects, such as planting, and headcut (stream channel) repair appear to have 

enhanced or expanded habitat for sensitive species associated with riparian areas. Where conifer 

thinning (and follow-up burning) has occurred, forest stands have moved towards conditions 

more closely approximating historic conditions. This is expected to benefit sensitive plant 

species that favor open conditions. An example is where thinning and prescribed burning 

occurred along a forest/meadow interface where fire exclusion has resulted in conifer expansion 

into meadow habitat (Arno 2000). Meadow habitat associated with Peck’s mariposa lily has 

increased, reversing the trend of shrinking meadows. 

Noxious weeds are expected to continue to be introduced by vehicles and livestock, but control

measures are occurring under the 1998 Integrated Weed Management Plan, and are expected to 

continue. The Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests are currently completing an EIS for sitespecific management of noxious weed infestations. This is expected to result in additional 

treatment areas on the Ochoco National Forest and in the Spears project area. Implementation of 

additional weed management is expected to have little short-term effect on sensitive plant 

species, and may have long-term beneficial effects. 

Existing untreated infestations of non-native invasive plants are expected to spread, and threaten 

plant communities by directly displacing native vegetation, including sensitive plant species. 

Though teasel appears to have impacted at least one sensitive plant subpopulation, and Canada 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 113 

thistle also occurs in sensitive plant habitats, they currently do not appear to have a measurable 

effect on the overall viability of sensitive plant populations. Though Canada thistle is expected 

to expand, impacts to viability of sensitive plants are presently not foreseen. Spread of 

biological control agents on the Ochoco National Forest may ultimately result in a decline of 

Canada thistle. 

Assuming noxious weed control continues, weeds are less likely to affect sensitive plant habitats. 

Therefore, no cumulative effects are expected on sensitive plant species that would add to the 

direct and indirect effects described in the previous section. Noxious weeds may pose a longterm threat (>10 years), but due to variables that are hard to predict, long-term assessment of 

weed effects on sensitive plants would be speculative. 

The sensitive plant species associated with riparian areas are not expected to be affected by 

wildfire. These species occur in areas that are generally moist year-round, or in the case of 

Peck’s mariposa lily, are dormant during wildfire season. 

Monitoring indicates where livestock have been fenced out of Peck’s mariposa lily habitat, 

densities of this species appear to be decreasing, possibly due to increased competition from 

grasses (Halvorson 2003, pers. comm.). Where thinning and burning activities improve forage 

production and palatability, there may be some increased use by livestock. This improved forage 

may help to distribute livestock and its impacts over a larger area. This is not expected to result 

in cumulative effects to sensitive plant populations. 

Moist Forest Species 

Alternative 1 

This alternative does not include road construction, road decommissioning, timber harvest, 

hardwood thinning, seeding, burning, or other activities that may affect viability of these species. 

Habitat would be maintained. Therefore, no impact is expected that would likely contribute to a 

trend towards federal listing or a loss of viability to populations of yellow lady’s-slipper orchid 

or Back’s sedge. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative includes no disturbance from road construction, timber harvest, or grapple 

piling. However, other activities, including thinning and hand piling and burning of slash, may 

potentially affect these species. Heavy thinning slash can bury plants, and burning these higher 

fuel loads can scorch soils, damaging plants and their habitat, and increasing risk for introduction 

and spread of non-native invasive plants that may displace sensitive plants. However, the 

majority of habitat would be maintained. Therefore, anticipated short-term effects (less than 10 

years) would be that some individuals or habitat may be affected, but would not be likely to 

contribute to a trend towards federal listing or a loss of viability of yellow lady’s-slipper orchid 

or Back’s sedge. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 114 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

Most of the suitable habitat for these species is associated with moist grand fir habitat and upland 

portions within RHCAs. Specific measures to protect habitat were incorporated into each of 

these alternatives. 

While yellow lady’s-slipper orchid appears to be somewhat tolerant of moderate disturbance, 

heavy ground disturbance such as road construction or log skidding may destroy plants or 

habitat. Burning may remove large woody debris on which this species may depend. In yellow 

lady’s-slipper orchid these alternatives would maintain partial shade and would not pile slash or 

burn areas identified as yellow lady’s-slipper orchid habitat, unless reviewed by the district 

botanist. Additionally, harvest unit layout, activity fuels burning, and post-sale tilling in these 

areas would be reviewed by the district botanist to avoid loss of suitable habitat. 

Though surveys indicate Back’s sedge is not likely to occur in the project area, and may no 

longer occur in central Oregon, potential habitat does exist in the project area. The moist sites 

associated with this species are primarily in RHCAs. With a few exceptions, timber harvest 

within RHCAs would be completed without the use of ground-based machinery. In addition, 

large wood would be maintained in moist grand fir habitats. Weather and fuels moisture 

conditions associated with natural fuels underburning generally result in little to no fuels 

consumption in the moist forest habitats associated with these species. Therefore, this activity is 

not expected to affect viability of these species. 

Seeding of upland grasses and forbs would occur on portions of decommissioned or closed 

roads, log landings, and skid trails, including those in habitats associated with yellow lady’sslipper orchid and Back’s sedge, to stabilize soils and reduce potential for noxious weed 

introduction or spread. If available, native seed produced from local collections of pinegrass, 

blue wildrye, and bottlebrush squirreltail would be used. Otherwise, native cultivars would be 

used. They include red fescue and big bluegrass. These grasses are already present in many 

areas of the Ochoco National Forest, and primarily occur on heavily disturbed areas such as road 

shoulders and log landings. In general, they do not appear to be aggressive in displacing existing 

native vegetation (Lesko, pers. observation). Seeding these cultivars is not expected to colonize 

undisturbed areas and affect the viability of yellow lady’s-slipper orchid or Back’s sedge. Even 

less risk would be expected with the seeding of locally collected native grasses and forbs. 

Activities such as road maintenance and road decommissioning may in the short-term affect 

some habitat, but are expected to result in long-term enhancement of associated habitat by 

reducing impacts from vehicles. Aspen thinning would include removing conifers and piling 

slash that may impact habitat, but this activity is limited to less than 200 acres. Therefore, some 

individuals or habitat may be impacted by implementation of these alternatives, but is not 

expected to lead to a trend towards federal listing or affect viability of yellow lady’s-slipper 

orchid or Back’s sedge. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 115 

Cumulative Effects 

Habitat quality for the majority of sensitive plant species has likely declined since historic 

conditions. Road construction, livestock grazing, fire exclusion, logging, vehicle use, stream 

channelization, introduction and spread of non-native invasive plants (noxious weeds), and other 

factors have resulted in changes to forest habitat.

Observations and monitoring over the last decade indicate habitats for Ochoco National Forest 

sensitive species are generally stable, despite continuing influences from livestock, noxious 

weeds, and recreation use. (Lesko, pers. observation, and Halvorson 2003, pers. comm). On 

upland forest sites, prescribed burning has resulted in increased exposed soils, which have 

increased susceptibility to noxious weed introduction and spread. This risk increases when 

prescribed fire exceeds normal intensities, such as occurs during unanticipated weather changes 

during burning activity. Burning has improved forage production and palatability, and in some 

areas resulted in increased livestock use. Where areas burn too hot or where livestock grazing 

occurred before sufficient recovery of vegetation and the soil organic layer, grazing has affected 

these areas by compacting and displacing soil. This increases the risk of erosion, riparian 

degradation, and serves as vectors for introduction and spread of noxious weeds (DeClerk 1997, 

DiTomaso 1997, Arno 2000, Asher et al. 2001, and Zimmerman et al. 2002). This may affect 

long-term (>10 years) viability of sensitive plants and habitat. However, large-scale burning can 

also help distribute livestock, and its impacts, over a wider area. Grazing has occurred on what 

is now the Ochoco National Forest for a century, and a 20-year history of prescribed burning and 

successive livestock use. Sensitive plant populations presently appear stable following these 

activities (Lesko, pers. observation). 

Noxious weeds are expected to continue to be introduced by vehicles and livestock, but control 

measures are occurring under the 1998 Integrated Weed Management Plan, and are expected to 

continue. The Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests are currently completing an EIS for sitespecific management of noxious weed infestations. This is expected to result in additional 

treatment areas on the Ochoco National Forest for integrated noxious weed management. 

Implementation of additional weed management is expected to have little short-term effect on 

sensitive plant species, and may have long-term beneficial effects. 

Existing untreated infestations of non-native invasive plants are expected to spread, and threaten 

plant communities by directly displacing native vegetation, including sensitive plant species. 

Teasel and Canada thistle currently do not appear to have a measurable effect on the overall 

viability of sensitive plant populations. Though Canada thistle is expected to expand, impacts to 

viability of sensitive plants are presently not foreseen. Spread of biological control agents on the 

Ochoco National Forest may ultimately result in a decline of Canada thistle. 

Assuming noxious weed control continues, weeds are less likely to affect sensitive plant habitats. 

Therefore, no cumulative effects are expected on sensitive plant species that would add to the 

direct and indirect effects described in the previous section. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 116 

Scabland Species 

Alternative 1 

Alternative 1 avoids ground-disturbing activities on scablands that provide the primary habitat 

for both of the sensitive needlegrass species. Therefore, this alternative is expected to result in 

no impact to these species. 

Alternative 3 

Alternative 3 avoids ground-disturbing activities on scablands that provide the primary habitat 

for Henderson’s and Wallowa needlegrass. Observations indicate that scabland habitats are 

affected little, if at all, by prescribed burning activities, because these areas have very low fuel 

levels. Therefore, this alternative is expected to result in no impact to these species. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

Project design includes measures to avoid disturbance of primary habitats for sensitive plant 

species. Other actions including road maintenance, reconstruction and decommission, 

precommercial thinning, and fuels reduction activities may damage some individual Henderson’s 

and Wallowa needlegrass plants or their habitats. These activities are expected to only affect the 

periphery of such habitat (e.g. thinning along a scabland edge) or would affect areas already 

heavily disturbed (e.g. road decommissioning). Therefore, the anticipated effects would be that 

some individuals or habitat may be affected, but would not be likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing or a loss of viability to sensitive plant species associated with scabland 

habitats. 

Cumulative Effects 

Habitat quality for the majority of sensitive plant species, including those mentioned above, has 

likely declined since historic conditions. Road construction, livestock grazing, fire exclusion, 

logging, vehicle use, introduction and spread of non-native invasive plants (noxious weeds), and 

other factors have resulted in changes to scabland habitat. 

Observations and monitoring over the last decade indicate habitats for Ochoco National Forest 

sensitive species are generally stable, despite continuing influences from livestock, noxious 

weeds, and recreation use (Lesko, pers. observation, and Halvorson 2003, pers. comm). 

Sensitive species associated with scablands, or non-forest balds, have changed little in the last 

few decades, and are expected to remain in their current condition. 

Species associated with scabland occur on areas with relatively low fuel levels. Because of low 

fuel levels on scablands, these sites only burn during extreme conditions, such as during high 

winds on hot summer days. This is the time when associated species are dormant, and less 

susceptible to damage by fire. These species are likely to be adapted to, and remain viable with 

periodic wildfire. Observations indicate these sites are also generally less susceptible to noxious 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 117 

weeds. Therefore, sensitive species associated with scablands are expected to be unaffected by 

wildfire or noxious weeds. 

Forest Wood Products and Jobs 

Affected Environment 

For the purposes of describing socio-economics effects on the economy, the economy was 

considered central and southeastern Oregon. The effects to the local economies are based on the 

estimated number of jobs created. 

The bulk of the area and communities potentially influenced by actions on the Ochoco National 

Forest lie within Deschutes, Crook, and Jefferson, the southern most part of Wheeler, eastern 

most part of Grant, and the northern most sections of Harney and Lake Counties (zone of 

influence or zone). The major population centers within the zone and their population figures 

based on the 2000 census are: Prineville (7,356), Bend (52,029), Redmond (13,481), Madras 

(5,078), John Day (1,821) Prairie City (1,080) and Burns/Hines (3,490) (U.S Department of 

Commerce 2001a). Populations and change for the region and by each individual county are 

displayed in Table 41.

Table 41. Central Oregon population growth. 

Population County 1990 Census Data 2000 Census Data Change Percent 

Crook 14,111 19,182 5,071 35.9%

Deschutes 74,958 115,367 40,409 53.9%

Grant 7,855 7,950 95 1.2%

Harney 7,060 7,609 549 7.8%

Jefferson 13,676 19,009 5,333 39%

Lake 7,176 7,422 245 3.3%

Wheeler 1,380 1,550 170 11%

Totals 126,216 178,089 51,873 40%

Sources: US Bureau of the Census, Vital Records, Oregon Health Division. 

Future population projections mimic that of the past decade. Deschutes, Crook, and Jefferson 

Counties are expected to continue with aggressive growth, whereas the more rural counties, 

Wheeler, Grant, Harney, and Lake are projected to grow slowly, if at all. 

According to the 2000 Census, estimated civilian labor force was: Crook, 7,525, up 12 percent 

since the 1990 census; Deschutes, 57,614, up 40 percent since the 1990 census; Jefferson, 8,570, 

up 31 percent since the 1990 census; Wheeler, 598, up 14 percent since the 1990 census; Harney, 

3,110, up 16 percent since the 1990 census; Grant, 4,051, down 4 percent since the 1990 census; 

and Lake, 3,371, down 9 percent since the 1990 census. The labor force in Oregon as a whole 

increased 18 percent. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 118 

In Crook County, the three largest sectors were trade (1,640), lumber and wood products (1,510), 

and government (1,180). Since 2000, with the closure of the remaining sawmills, employment in 

the lumber and wood products has decreased. In August 2006 there were 1,110 people employed 

in this sector. In Deschutes County the three largest sectors were Finance/Insurance/Real-estate 

(14,170), trade (13,080), and government (6,900). In Jefferson County the three largest sectors 

were government (2,460), trade (1250), and lumber and wood products (1,150). In Wheeler 

County the three largest sectors were government (200), trade (50), and finance/insurance/realestate (20). In Harney County, the three largest sectors were manufacturing (590), trade (600), 

and government (1,060). In Grant County the three largest sectors were government (1,101), 

trade (500), and finance/insurance/real-estate (430). In Lake County the three largest sectors 

were government (940), trade (500), and lumber and wood products (290) (U.S Department of 

Commerce 2001c, and Labor Trends 2006). 

Unemployment rates in the individual counties were: Crook, 9.1 percent; Deschutes, 6.4 

percent; Jefferson, 6.5 percent; Wheeler, 10 percent; Harney, 8.8 percent; Grant, 12.1 percent; 

and Lake, 10.1 percent. The unemployment rate in Oregon as a whole was 5.7 percent (U.S 

Department of Commerce 2001a). 

Since then the economies have had both better and worse years. However, in Grant, Harney, and 

Lake Counties the unemployment rate has not dipped below the 2000 unemployment rate. As of 

February 2006 unemployment rates in the individual counties were: Crook, 7.7 percent; 

Deschutes, 6.1 percent; Jefferson, 8.5 percent; Wheeler, 8.3 percent; Harney, 12.3 percent; 

Grant, 12.7 percent; and Lake, 10.7 percent. The unemployment rate in Oregon as a whole was 

6.5 percent (Labor Trends 2006) 

The economies of Deschutes and Jefferson Counties, followed by Crook, are the most robust in 

the zone. In Deschutes County, although there has been an increase in the number of jobs 

created, the huge increase in the labor force (up 40%) has negated much of this success, at least 

in terms of the unemployment rate. Crook County’s overall economic diversity which is 

dominated by one manufacturing sector industry (lumber and wood products) and one wholesale 

trade sector company (Les Schwab) is lower than the other two. However, because of the 

diversity of all three, their economies are expected to remain strong. Future projections call for 

continued growth and diversification of these economies. Even in Crook County, with the 

announcement by Les Schwab that they are going to move their corporate headquarters to Bend, 

economic expansion is expected to out pace the impact of this move. Wheeler (small agricultural 

based economy), Grant (heavy reliance on lumber and wood products and government), Harney 

(government and agriculture), and Lake (heavy reliance on lumber and wood products, 

government, and agriculture) Counties’ economies, due to their small size and lack of diversity, 

have had their economies lag substantially behind Crook, Deschutes, and Jefferson and Oregon 

as a whole. Future projections also call for continued slow growth in these three economies (U.S 

Department of Commerce 2001b, Oregon Employment Department 1992, and Yohannan 2006, 

pers. comm.). In fact Grant and Harney Counties had the highest and second highest 

unemployment rates in the state in 2005. 

Although the past decade (1990-2000) has seen a significant reduction in employment within the 

lumber and wood products industry, the lumber and wood products industry is still an important 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 119 

contributor to the local economies. In Crook County (2000), 1,510 people were employed in the 

lumber and wood products industry. This accounted for 25 percent of all wage and salary 

employment in the county, and represented the third highest paying job in the county. Since 

then, with the closure of additional sawmills, employment in the lumber and wood products has 

decreased. In August 2006 there were 1,110 people employed in this sector. Most of these jobs 

are located in the logging and secondary wood products sectors. In Deschutes County, 4,770 

people were employed in the lumber and wood products industry. This accounted for 10 percent 

of all wage and salary employment, and represented the seventh highest paying job in the county. 

In Jefferson County, 1,150 people were employed in the lumber and wood products industry. 

This accounted for 19 percent of all wage and salary employment, and represented the third 

highest paying job in the county. As of February 2006, 1,080 individuals were employed in this 

sector. In Harney County, 204 people were employed in the lumber and wood products industry. 

This accounted for 11 percent of all wage and salary employment, and represented the highest 

paying job in the county. Today, only a handful of people still work in this sector. In Grant 

County, 370 people were employed in the manufacturing sector. This accounted for 14 percent 

of all wage and salary employment (the State does not separate out the lumber and wood 

products from the other manufacturing employment), and represented the third highest paying 

job in the county. As of February 2006, 250 individuals were still employed. Of all the counties 

in the zone, Grant is the only local economy remaining with a significant dependency on logging 

and primary manufacturing (sawmills). In Lake County, 290 people were employed in the 

lumber and wood products industry, and other manufacturing. This accounted for 13 percent of 

all wage and salary employment, and represented the third highest paying job in the county. 

Today, 260 people are employed in this sector. Wheeler County has no manufacturing sector 

industries (U.S Department of Commerce 2001c and Labor Trends 2006). 

Environmental Consequences 

Timber harvest (lumber and wood products) and road work (road construction, reconstruction, 

and decommissioning) 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. Employment and personal income impacts were made from 

estimates derived from Gebert and others (2002) and Phillips (2004 pers. comm.). The jobs 

associated with prescribed fire and precommercial thinning are based on local observations and 

do not include indirect and induced jobs. 

Table 42 shows the annual estimated job and income impacts by alternative. These estimates are 

for commercial forest products, precommercial thinning, piling of small woody debris (slash), 

road construction, road reconstruction, road decommissioning, and prescribed fire. No attempt 

has been made to value what has been termed ecosystem service values. This type of analysis, if 

done at all, is more appropriate at the Forest Plan level, not at the project level (Bartuska 2000).

Timber harvest jobs and income shown in Table 42 are based on State-wide relationships and are 

not necessarily the expected impact in any one county. Because of this, the estimated jobs and 

income figures in Table 42 are likely to be higher than what one would expect in a less 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 120 

developed rural economy. For example, the indirect and induced jobs described above would be 

less in a rural economy such as Crook’s as money “leaks” out of the local economy to Redmond, 

Bend, and the Willamette Valley. The jobs and income associated with the road work are 

directly tied to Crook County’s economy (Phillips 2005). However, they are based on all road 

work within the County. Because the road work on the Ochoco National Forest is generally less 

intensive, the number of jobs portrayed in Table 42 is likely overstated. 

Over half of the timber jobs displayed in Table 42 are associated with primary manufacturing 

(sawmills), and since there is no certainty on where this manufacturing would occur (may not be 

processed even within the zone); it is not possible to predict where many of these jobs would 

exist. 

Table 42. Annual employments and income maintained or created. 

 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4 Alt. 5 

Estimated Timber Volume to be 

Harvested (MMBF) 

0 15.4 0 12.3 8.9

Jobs, timber harvest 0 245 196 141.5

Income, timber harvest ($1000) 0 8,384 6,696 4,845

Jobs, road work 0 9.1 0 5.3 4.6

Income, road work ($1000) 0 0.29 0.17 0.15

Jobs, precommercial thinning 

/slash piling 

0 17.1 14.9 16.7 16.2

Jobs, prescribed fire 0 10.7 8.3 10.3 9.6

Alternative 1 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

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, regional, or State economies. This alternative 

would not contribute to maintaining forest product jobs. The ability to substitute this material 

from another source is questionable given the current availability of timber, especially from 

Federal lands. As noted in the affected environment section, Crook County no longer has any 

primary manufacturing capacity and more than half of the direct jobs supported by the 

harvesting, transporting, and processing of timber are associated with primary manufacturing. It 

is unlikely that many of these local logging jobs would be supported by another harvest activity 

on the Ochoco National Forest or within the zone. This would result in some downward 

pressures on all facets of Crook County’s economy. 

The economic activity associated with road work, and vegetation and fuel treatments would not 

occur under this alternative. Except for the prescribed fire treatments (these are usually 

accomplished with local Forest resources), many of the jobs associated with these activities, 

especially the precommercial thinning and slash piling, are accomplished through the use of 

contracting and many of the resources needed, including workers, are from outside the zone. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 121 

Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Alternative 3 is similar to Alternative 1 because it does not include any commercial harvest 

activities. Since most of the economic activity associated with the action alternatives is tied 

directly to commercial harvest activities, the economic effects would be similar to the No Action 

Alternative. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 propose commercial harvest activities and would contribute to the local, 

regional, and State economies. Table 42 displays the expected level of harvest in million board 

feet and the number of timber and related jobs that would be created or maintained by each 

alternative. The estimated jobs would occur over several (3-7) years as timber is harvested and 

processed. 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 in the affected environment section, 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 southern Deschutes County. 

In addition to the employment and income figures from harvesting and manufacturing of wood 

products, the vegetation, fuel treatments, and road work, would also generate jobs and income 

over the next 3 to 10 years. 

It is reasonable to expect a good proportion of the precommercial thinning work would go to 

minority-based small businesses, as they have in the past. The vast majority of these businesses 

and their employees are based along the I-5 corridor, so most of the disposable income from 

these activities would not flow into local communities. There would be some local economic 

activity generated from these activities but it may be outside the area. The primary services 

needed by the workers would be food and shelter. Local businesses that can supply food 

(grocery stores and restaurants) and other services would capture most of the money being spent 

by the workers in the area. Some businesses may increase their employment, either by 

temporarily adding employees, or giving present employees more hours. This would likely 

result in increased local household incomes during implementation of project activities. Since 

these businesses have supported similar workforces in the past, capitol expansion would 

probably not be required. 

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 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 122 

effectively with and supported anticipated fluctuations in the workforce expected with the 

implementation of an action-based alternative. 

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 impacts under Alternatives 1 and 3. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

which provide commercial wood products in addition to economic activities associated with the 

other management activities, along with these same overall economic trends, will help strengthen 

local, particularly Crook’s, and regional economies. In the context of larger economies, regional 

or State-wide scales, the amount lost under Alternatives 1 and 3, or the amount provided in 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would not be measurable. 

Heritage Resources and Plants of Cultural Value 

Affected Environment 

Central Oregon and the Ochoco Mountains are within the ancestral domain of several tribes 

including The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, The Burns Paiute, The 

Klamath Tribes, and The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. The Ochoco 

National Forest is within lands ceded to the government through the 1855 Treaty with the Tribes 

of Middle Oregon, or The Confederated Tribes of The Warm Springs Reservation. 

All tribes took advantage of root crops, fruits, berries, and a variety of plant life. Although the 

availability of resources fluctuated over the millennia, the archaeological record suggests the 

native inhabitants followed life ways similar to those documented through ethnographic studies 

during the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. The Northern Paiute, Wasco, Walla Walla (later called 

Warm Springs), Cayuse, Umatilla, Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin were present when Lewis 

and Clark arrived and each tribe has its own unique history and heritage. Archaeological sites 

today are recognized through the remaining stone tools and features. Site patterns in the Ochoco 

Mountains show a broad distribution of upland use with preferences for south facing slopes, 

major drainages, and high elevation spring sites. The environment, available resources, travel 

routes and corridors, and traditional use areas also contributed to site location preferences. 

Prior to European contact, expected site types would include lithic scatters, plant processing 

sites, habitation or residential sites, resource procurement, or quarry sites. The most common 

site type in this early time period are lithic scatter sites which include flaked stone debitage and 

flaked stone tools. 

Historic sites represent several themes including exploration, settlement, mining, trapping, 

transportation routes, livestock grazing, and ranching. Historic sites often involve wooden 

structures or cabins, carved trees, blazed trees, fence lines, trails, roads, and log watering troughs

which may be adversely affected by fire, heavy equipment, and tree falling. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 123 

Hanging black moss (Bryoria fremotii) is the most abundant culturally significant plant in the 

Spears project area. It primarily grows on the lower branches of conifers. Decades of fire 

exclusion has likely resulted in an increase of this plant. Bitterroot (Lewisia rediviva) and 

several Lomatium species occupy non-forested habitats often called scabland. Soils associated 

with scabland or lithosols are shallow with high clay content. There are small amounts of these 

roots in the Spears project area. Gathering areas are more common in the North Fork of the 

Crooked River drainage to the east of the project area. Camas (Camassia quamash), generally 

found in moist meadows, is not abundant in the Spears project area. Yampa (Perideridia 

gairdneri) generally found in forested areas is not abundant in the Spears project area. 

The project area has a variety of archaeological and historic period sites. Known sites would be 

managed to protect and retain features that make these sites eligible to the National Register of 

Historic Places (NRHP). In general, the project area is viewed as a moderate use area for early 

inhabitants. Archaeological sites tend to concentrate along the main stem of Marks Creek. 

Historic period sites are most representative of the livestock grazing theme. The historic Summit 

Trail corridor represents a travel corridor for moving livestock and a transportation route along 

the high elevation summit of the Ochoco Mountains. The route has been determined eligible to 

the NRHP and is managed to retain physical features and the natural setting along the route. 

Segments are rated by their integrity and the setting is managed through preservation, retention, 

or partial retention objectives. The corridor corresponds to existing travel routes known as Road 

27 and Road 2630. 

Environmental Consequences 

The effects analysis is based on the potential for damage to artifacts, features, environmental 

settings, and alteration of the surface and subsurface arrangement by machinery, fuel loadings, 

potential fire temperatures, and duration of fire activities. Portions of the Spears Project Area 

was surveyed during planning efforts for several small projects; then, in 1993 the entire Marks 

Creek watershed was surveyed as a whole (Maercklein 1993). During planning efforts for the 

Bandit II project, additional surveys and consultation with the Oregon State Historic Preservation 

Office was completed. During the past 10 years, no new sites have been identified. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Alternative 1 

Levels of natural fuels would continue to accumulate. Densely stocked understory trees would 

not be treated and thinning of larger trees would not occur. Untreated fuels under this alternative 

would increase the potential for high-intensity wildland fire. Catastrophic stand replacement fire 

may have a negative affect on physical materials, historic features, and natural setting. 

There would be no change to the natural setting along Road 27. Fuel loadings along the Summit 

Trail corridor (Road 27 and Road 2630) would continue to increase. No new roads would be 

constructed and closed roads would not be opened for use. High fuel loadings would increase 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 124 

the risk for wildfire and the subsequent fire suppression activities. Uncontrolled fire and fire 

suppression activities may lead to damage of historic features and loss of natural setting. 

The no action alternative would not modify the availability of plants of cultural value in the 

project area. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

These three action alternatives include commercial harvest activities, thinning of small trees (less 

than 9 inches dbh), and treatment of slash through piling and burning. Implementation would 

likely occur within a 10-year period. The area has been surveyed for heritage resources and 

known sites sensitive to disturbance would be avoided or qualities which make them eligible to 

the NRHP would be protected. 

Design elements were created specifically for the action alternatives in the Spears project area to 

manage cultural resources, protect heritage values, and avoid ground-disturbing activities on 

sensitive sites (see the design elements for heritage resources in Chapter 2). These design 

elements would be applied to all the action alternatives. 

Layout and marking of several units would be coordinated with the archaeologist to ensure 

cultural objectives are met. In some units, heritage sites would be avoided during unit layout and 

design. In other units, features like trails, blazes, or signs on mature trees would be retained 

within the proposed treatment unit. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 propose a sequence of activities including commercial harvest, followed 

by precommercial thinning of small trees, hand or grapple piling of slash, jackpot burning, and 

underburning based on stand need. The sequence of activities are displayed by alternative and 

by unit in Appendix A. These activities often include multiple contracts, such as one for the 

commercial harvest, one for thinning, and one for grapple piling. There is a greater risk for 

damage to heritage sites when multiple activities are identified under separate contracts, handled 

by a variety of specialists, and implemented over an estimated 10-year period. 

Commercial harvest and precommercial thinning both increase the amount of surface fuels. 

Heritage sites that are sensitive to underburning and heat from burning are at risk of damage 

from the fuel reduction activities. Design elements would be applied to 20 units to reduce the 

risk of damage. Reducing stand density and removing ladder fuels through these thinning 

activities has a long-term benefit of reducing the potential for high-intensity wildfires. Grapple 

piling is also included in some units to reduce the risk by rearranging surface fuels and 

increasing the window when burning can occur. 

Grapple piling is proposed on an estimated 3,000 acres followed by pile burning. Grapple piling 

on 10 units overlaps with heritage sites where design elements would be applied to protect 

heritage values and features. Grapple piling has the potential to damage sites on the surface and 

subsurface. The grapple piles are likely to burn hotter than if the fuels were not piled, which has 

the potential to scorch the soil and alter lithic artifacts. Grapple piles along the Summit Trail 

corridor would alter the natural setting for 2-3 years until the piles are burned. Grapple piles 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 125 

would not be placed in the foreground area so that a more natural setting adjacent to Road 27 is 

retained. 

The historic Summit Trail corridor (MA-F7) is managed to retain the natural setting as well as 

physical features. This early transportation corridor includes Road 27, Road 2630, and segments 

of trails or stock driveways designated in the early 1900’s to move livestock across the forest. 

Design elements were developed with emphasis on the natural setting and foreground area 

(varies from 100 to 300 feet depending on terrain). Harvest in the foreground area would be 

minimized and low stump heights required. Skid trails, log decks, and landings would be 

restricted from the foreground area. Hand piles would be allowed and grapple piling would be 

restricted. The project identified the need for fuels reduction along Road 27 to provide for 

vehicle safety. These design elements help to ensure that the natural setting is retained along the 

Summit Trail corridor. 

Proposed treatments would reduce fuels and stand density along 1.5 miles of Road 27 Summit 

Trail corridor using a variety of methods. The activity units along the Summit Trail corridor 

include hardwood thinning (units 502, 745, 904, and 905 ); underburning (units 741, 747, and 

900); a combination of tractor harvest, precommercial thin, grapple pile, and underburn (units 

742, 748, 751, and 752); and a combination of precommercial thin, hand pile, and underburn in 

unit 743. The natural setting would be altered with the construction of one new road to access 

unit 748 (road 2700-748) and re-use of several roads (2700-655, 2700-554, and 2700-402). 

These roads would be closed when project activities have been completed. Tractor harvest 

activities would primarily treat areas adjacent to the foreground to reduce stand density and in 

some cases remove trees within the foreground area. Log decks and landings would be restricted 

from the foreground areas to retain more natural conditions adjacent to Road 27. 

Thinning of young trees and underburning would be used to reduce ladder fuels and slash in the 

foreground areas adjacent to Road 27. Stand density would be reduced and clumps of young 

trees would be left to retain a more natural setting. Thinning slash in the foreground areas would 

be lopped or hand piled. Thinning of small trees in several aspen stands (units 502, 745, 904, 

905) would emphasize aspen trees and slash would be lopped or hand piled to protect young 

aspen. 

Approximately 3 miles along Road 2630 Summit Trail corridor would be treated using 

underburning (508, 510, 514, and 555), precommercial thinning (520 and 893), and thinning in 

aspen stands (552, 909, and 407). Thinning slash would be lopped or hand piled and burned 

within 1-2 years. These activities would retain the natural setting while reducing the risk for 

wildland fire. 

The features, integrity, and natural setting of the historic Summit Trail would benefit from these 

activities in the long term (more than 10 years). Fuels would be reduced and the potential for 

high-intensity wildfires would decrease. There would be short-term (up to 10 years) effect to the 

natural setting with the increase and use of spur roads. The natural setting would be affected in 

the short-term because management activities would be visible. The casual forest visitor may 

see the removal of young trees, hand piles, scorched bark, and black or yellow needles from 

underburning in the short-term (1 to 3 years) but would not see evidence of logging or ground-
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 126 

based equipment. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would result in reducing fuels and stand density and 

maintaining the natural setting and features of the historic Summit Trail. 

The dominant culturally significant plant in the project area is hanging black moss. Proposed 

activities may reduce the density of trees that provide habitat for the hanging black moss and 

current levels would be maintained on untreated acres. Habitat and populations of the hanging 

black moss would continue to exist throughout the project area. Less than 1 percent of scabland 

habitat would be disturbed by proposed activities in the action alternatives. Populations and the 

abundance of culturally significant root crops would be expected to remain the same although 

individual plants may be affected. These species occur in open rocky areas with shallow soils. 

Such areas are sparse in the Spears project area but have been identified in rocky areas along 

Marks Creek near the Oregon Department of Transportation rock pit. 

Alternative 3 

Alternative 3 proposes prescribed fire and thinning of young trees using chainsaws. Design 

elements would be applied to protect and retain features sensitive to fire and to retain the natural 

setting along Road 27 (6 thinning units) and stock driveway segments of the historic Summit 

Trail (4 thinning units). Alternative 3 may take an estimated 10 years to complete. Heritage 

sites overlap with 26 precommercial thinning units, 14 underburn units, and 9 hardwood thinning 

units. Design elements would be applied to manage and protect the qualities which make these 

sites eligible to the NRHP. 

Alternative 3 would reduce the risk of potential stand replacement fire through understory 

thinning and underburning on 1.5 miles along Road 27 and 3 miles along Road 2630. Fuel 

loadings and stand density would be reduced. The natural setting along Road 27 would be 

retained while reducing young trees using precommercial thinning methods, lopping or hand 

piling slash, and subsequent burning of slash. There would be no new road construction or 

reconstruction on closed road systems and no use of ground based equipment. Activities along 

the Historic Summit Trail on Road 2630 would retain the natural setting, although some 

evidence of thinning and underburning activities would be evident. Alternative 3 would result in 

reducing fuels and stand density and maintaining the natural setting and features of the historic 

Summit Trail. 

Proposed activities may reduce the density of trees that provide habitat for the hanging black 

moss and current levels would be maintained on untreated acres. Habitat and populations of the 

hanging black moss would continue to exist throughout the project area. Less than 1 percent of 

scabland habitat would be disturbed by proposed activities. Populations and the abundance of 

culturally significant root crops would be expected to remain the same although individual plants 

may be affected. These species occur in open rocky areas with shallow soils. Such areas are 

sparse in the Spears project area but have been identified in rocky areas along Marks Creek near 

the Oregon Department of Transportation rock pit. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 127 

Cumulative Effects 

Ongoing activities include livestock grazing, recreation events, wildfire suppression, firewood 

cutting, mining (agate and thunder egg claims), and road maintenance. Livestock grazing in the 

Marks Creek, Wildcat, Burn, and Crystal Springs Allotments would continue. Cattle tend to 

graze and damage artifacts near water sources, spring developments, salting grounds, and along 

fences. Artifact breakage and surface disturbance is most likely to occur where cattle trail or 

concentrate. Recreation activities like camping, off road vehicle use, and unauthorized artifact 

collecting are most damaging to heritage sites. Disturbance to sites results from human use, 

vehicle use, fire rings, temporary outhouses, and vandalism. In general increased recreation use 

correlates to increased vandalism and damage to heritage sites through removal of artifacts or 

disturbance to features. Recreation use is expected to continue at the current rate and disturbance 

to sites would also continue. 

Tribal access, gathering, and collection activities would continue. 

Past projects in the vicinity of the Spears project include the Hash Rock Fire and restoration 

activities. These projects have been completed and heritage issues were addressed under a caseby-case review with the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office. There was a loss of integrity 

on a portion of the Summit Trail (Road 27) from the Hash Rock Fire and suppression activities. 

The Crystal Springs Organizational Camp permit has expired and there are no plans to renew the 

special use permit. At this time, it is likely that the structures will be removed. Any effort to 

remove these structures would be coordinated with the Oregon SHPO on a separate case-by-case 

review. 

At this time, the Forest Service is developing a proposal to modify grazing in the Burn and 

Crystal Springs Allotments. The proposal for the Burn Allotment is to change to an earlier 

grazing season. The proposal for the Crystal Springs Allotment is to change to an earlier grazing 

season with a slight reduction in AUMs (animal unit months). Proposed activities may include 

fence construction or water developments. These projects would address effects to heritage 

resources under a separate case-by-case review with the Oregon SHPO. 

The Forest Service is also developing the Snowshoe Fuels Reduction Project adjacent to the 

north boundary of the Spears project. The Snowshoe proposal is to reduce fuels by underburning 

and precommercial thinning young trees. As part of the planning efforts for the Snowshoe 

proposal, effects to heritage resource would be addressed under a separate case-by-case review 

with the Oregon SHPO. 

The Oregon Department of Transportation will continue their efforts to replace bridges on 

Highway 26 and expand the Sears Rock Pit. Both of these projects have addressed heritage 

resources under a separate case-by-case review with the Oregon SHPO. 

Relative to heritage resources and plants of cultural value, the effects of these projects and the 

Spears project area do not overlap spatially with the exception of livestock grazing. The action 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 128 

alternatives would result in more open stands and more grass and forb species which would 

increase forage availability for livestock. Livestock may use these areas, but concentrated 

livestock use in these areas is not expected. If undiscovered heritage sites exist in these areas, 

livestock use may result in some artifact breakage.

Non-native Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds) 

Affected Environment 

Non-native invasive plants are aggressive plants capable of degrading environmental quality or 

causing economic harm. Noxious weeds are a subset of these plants and are designated 

“noxious” by the Secretary of Agriculture or state agencies. Because some non-native species 

that are known to be aggressive have not been officially designated as “noxious,” the term “nonnative invasive plants” is becoming more common. Many use the term “noxious weeds” for all 

non-native invasive plants (Sheley et al. 1999c). Both terms are used interchangeably in this 

EIS. 

Noxious weeds have many characteristics, such as rapid growth rates, high seed production, and 

extended growing periods that give them advantages over native plants (Sheley and Larson 

1994a, DeClerck 1997, Sheley et al. 1999b, and Roche and Roche 1998). 

In 2000-2003, pre-project noxious weed surveys were completed along both open and closed 

roads within the project area. The surveys focused on roads because that is where noxious weeds 

are most commonly found. Additional weed surveys occurred in 2006. Common weed species, 

such as teasel and Canada thistle, have not been completely documented, especially where 

scattered individual plants occur along road shoulders. However, along the road system, at least 

95 percent of infestations of these common weed species have been documented. 

At least 60 noxious weed infestations have been documented within the Spears project area. 

Most weeds have been present in the area for at least a decade. Noxious weed inventories 

indicate most infestations begin on disturbed areas, such as road shoulders, old log landings, and 

recreation sites. With most infestations along roads, primary introduction of noxious weeds 

appears to be through vehicles. Other vectors include water (e.g. streams), wind, livestock, 

wildlife, and mineral material and heavy equipment used for road maintenance and construction 

projects. 

Noxious weeds that are known to occur in the project area include: 

bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare) Russian knapweed (Centaurea repens) 

Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium) 

Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) 

diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) St. John’s wort (Hypericum perforatum) 

hound’s-tongue (Cynoglossum officinale) sulfur cinquefoil (Potentilla recta) 

leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) teasel (Dipsacus sylvestris) 

Mediterranean sage (Salvia aethiopis) whitetop (Cardaria draba) 

medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) 

morning glory (Convolvulus arvensis) 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 129 

Teasel is not listed as noxious by the State of Oregon, but is considered a non-native invasive 

plant on the Ochoco National Forest because of its potential for displacing native vegetation. 

The Ochoco National Forest is currently managing noxious weeds under the 1998 Integrated 

Weed Management Plan Decision Notice. Weed management includes a variety of strategies, 

depending on the species, size of infestation, and location. Included are chemical, cultural, 

mechanical, and biological controls. The aggressiveness of the treatment strategy varies by weed 

species. For the more aggressive species such as spotted knapweed and medusahead, the 

threshold for control is one plant. Monitoring of treated infestations has shown that weed control 

has been effective, and herbicide use has declined where treatment has occurred. However, 

noxious weeds are continuing to spread and new infestations are being discovered. The 

continued spread of noxious weeds is likely. 

For species such as knapweed, controls are being implemented, and density of weeds is 

decreasing, though on the majority of sites, some seed production still occurs from plants that 

germinate after treatment, re-sprout after incomplete pulling, or otherwise escape the control. As 

long as seed production continues, eradication is difficult. This situation is complicated by the 

persistence of viable seed in the soil for many years (Eddleman 1996, pers. comm.). 

Canada thistle may be the most common noxious weed on the Ochoco National Forest. It can be 

found on a variety of sites, including rock pits, roadsides, dispersed camping areas, meadows, 

and old harvest units. In susceptible areas, numerous, small infestations of this plant are often 

followed by rapid expansion (Sheley 2004). This perennial plant has a deep root system which 

makes hand pulling infeasible. Because Canada thistle is so common, management has focused 

on biological controls; some biological controls have become established in some areas of the 

Ochoco National Forest. Ongoing research and monitoring has shown some success in reducing 

weed densities in central Oregon. Within the Spears project area, the effectiveness of biological 

controls has been limited and Canada thistle infestations continue to expand. 

Common, widespread species, such as bull thistle, Canada thistle, and teasel have not all been 

documented, and are not receiving herbicide or mechanical treatments. Though bull thistle 

quickly establishes the first few years following burning or timber harvest, its density decreases 

over time as other vegetation becomes re-established. Teasel is common, especially in riparian 

areas along U.S. Highway 26. 

New infestations of a variety of species have been documented within the project area over the 

last several years. These new infestations were not included in the 1998 integrated weed 

management decision. Currently, treatment of these infestations is limited to hand pulling. 

Individual noxious weed plants are occasionally found by field-going personnel; many of these 

weeds are hand pulled and removed when encountered.

The Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests are in the process of completing an EIS that 

analyzes a proposal for site-specific treatment of specific noxious weed infestations. This 

planning effort will expand noxious weed treatments. The EIS includes a proposal to use new 

herbicides and methods. Noxious weed management on the Ochoco National Forest will be 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 130 

modified and will depend on the upcoming decision that results from the Deschutes and Ochoco 

National Forest Invasive Plant Treatment EIS. The upcoming decision is expected to increase 

weed treatments in the Spears project area. 

The degree of environmental impact due to noxious weeds is relative to weed density. Although 

more than 60 infestations occur within the project area, infestations are generally limited to road 

corridors. Due to ongoing weed management, these infestations are typically small, less than 

1/10 acre, and collectively they occupy less than 1 percent of the project area. At this time, 

environmental effects related to noxious weeds is low. With current control measures, weed 

densities are not expected to increase substantially in the next 10 years. 

Environmental Consequences 

The Forest Service is required to determine factors that would increase the risk for introduction 

and spread of noxious weeds, and design projects to reduce these risks, especially for ground 

disturbing and site altering activities (FSM 2081). Proposed commercial harvest activities would 

remove vegetation and disturb the soil organic layer, increasing potential for introduction and 

spread of noxious weeds. Though prescribed burning is normally low intensity, burning slash 

piles or intense burning that results in scorched soils can increase risk by increasing the time 

needed for vegetation to re-establish. Chapter 2 includes design elements that are incorporated 

into all the action alternatives to reduce the risk of introducing and spreading noxious weeds. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Alternative 1 

Alternative 1 does not create any additional ground disturbance. Alternative 1 does not include 

any road construction, timber harvest, slash piling, or burning that would result in exposed soils. 

This alternative would have no potential for increasing the risk for introduction and spread of 

noxious weeds. The present level of risk would continue from existing infestations. New weed 

infestations are likely to become established within the project area as a result of ongoing 

activities, such as vehicle use by the public and livestock grazing. Compared with the other 

alternatives, Alternative 1 offers the lowest risk for introduction and spread of noxious weeds. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would create additional ground disturbance and exposed soils from road 

construction, timber harvest, grapple and hand piling of slash, and underburning. Alternative 2 

would create an estimated 4,994 acres of ground disturbance, the highest amount among the 

action alternatives. Alternative 4 would create 4,577 acres, and Alternative 5 would result in an 

estimated 4,157 acres of new ground disturbance. 

Though risk would increase due to additional ground disturbance, these alternatives also include 

prevention measures, such as minimizing exposed soils and requiring “certified clean” 

equipment. Measures to reduce these risks have been incorporated in all action alternatives, 

either as project design elements, such as requiring clean equipment, or site-specific, such as the 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 131 

omission of commercial harvest from Units 501 and 503. Following project activities, road 

closures and seeding would reduce risk of weed introduction and spread. Increased risk from 

ground disturbance would be partially offset by reduced vehicle use. Post-project weed 

monitoring would occur and is expected to detect infestations while they are relatively small. 

Alternatives 5, and then 4 have progressively higher risk, with Alternative 2 creating the most 

exposed soils and having the highest risk of introducing and spreading noxious weeds. 

Alternatives 3 

Alternative 3 does not include any ground disturbance resulting from road construction or timber 

harvest. However, hand piling of slash and underburning would result in exposed soils and 

increase the risk for introduction and spread of noxious weeds. Hand piling and burning of slash 

would create an estimated 2,956 acres of exposed soils. Alternative 3 has the least amount of 

increased risk when compared to the other action alternatives. 

Cumulative Effects 

The exact source of non-native invasive plant infestations is unknown, but they are expected to 

have originated from several areas. The location pattern shows concentrated sites along roads. 

Other infestations are associated with recreation sites and mineral material sites, indicating the 

primary vector for noxious weeds appears to be vehicles. Vehicle use and other activities will 

continue in the Spears project area, regardless of the alternative chosen, including no action. 

Additional introduction and spread of noxious weeds, especially hound’s-tongue, appears to be 

through livestock and wildlife (Lesko, pers. observation, and DeClerck 1997). Some infestation 

in the project area have been documented on sites that have had relatively little disturbance. 

There is an inherent risk of new infestations (such as from windblown seed) in all alternatives, 

regardless of other activities. 

The cumulative effects of present and reasonably foreseeable activities indicate a high risk for 

introduction and spread of noxious weeds. Weeds will continue to be introduced and spread by 

vehicles, livestock, fence maintenance, the recreating public (horseback riders, hikers, and 

campers), water, windborne seed, wildlife, and other sources. 

Prevention techniques for weed risk associated with reasonably foreseeable activities, such as 

requiring clean equipment for road maintenance are expected to be effective in reducing weed 

risk. The majority of other activities, including legal recreational driving and illegal off-road 

vehicle use, are more difficult to control. Wet season illegal off-road use and legal road use can 

be conducive to weed spread because mud can contain weed seeds and can cling to tires. The 

current weed treatment activities are reducing the cumulative effects related to weed risk. 

Wildfire and fire suppression can result in introduction or spread of weeds by equipment brought 

in from different areas that may contain weed seed or plant parts. Because of the emergency 

nature of wildfire, prevention measures including equipment cleaning are not always 

implemented or feasible. Dozer lines, hand lines, drop points, safety zones, and staging areas, all 

result in exposed soils which increase the risk of spread of noxious weeds. These sites are all 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 132 

heavily traveled which again increases the risk of introducing and spreading noxious weeds. 

Vehicle traffic during and after suppression activities can introduce weeds to highly susceptible 

soils. Therefore, introduction and spread from wildfire suppression activities is possible. Use of 

natural fire control lines, such as rocky ridges and existing roads, can reduce the risk of weed 

spread. Fire rehabilitation efforts are normally implemented that can mitigate many of the 

effects of the suppression activities. 

Human use of the National Forest is increasing and is expected to continue to increase in the 

future as populations in nearby towns continue to grow. Increased human use and expanding 

non-native noxious weed infestations outside the Spears project area will likely increase the 

potential for new noxious plant infestations. 

Where controls have been implemented, weed infestations have generally decreased. 

Management of weed infestations included in the 1998 Integrated Weed Management Plan is 

expected to continue until a new management plan is adopted. The remaining untreated 

infestations would continue to spread, displacing native and desirable non-native vegetation and 

reducing biodiversity. 

The Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests are currently completing an EIS for integrated 

noxious weed management. Integrated weed management on the Ochoco National Forest will be 

modified based on upcoming decisions resulting from this EIS process. A decision on this EIS is 

expected to occur in 2007. 

The degree of environmental impact due to noxious weeds is relative to the acres infested. 

Collectively, noxious weeds occupy less than 1 percent of the project area. Therefore, at present, 

environmental effects due to noxious weeds is considered low. Assuming noxious weed control 

continues, anticipated effects resulting from introduction and spread of noxious weeds is 

expected to remain relatively low. 

Recreation 

Recreation use in the project area includes wildlife viewing, hunting, fishing, driving for 

pleasure, camping, hiking, mountain biking, rock hounding, geo-caching, off-highway vehicle 

driving, horseback riding, cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, sledding, dog sledding, and 

snowmobiling. The project area includes a small portion of the Mill Creek Wilderness. 

There are several developed recreation sites within the project area: Ochoco Divide 

Campground, White Rock Campground, White Fir Springs, Bandit Springs Recreation Area, 

Ochoco Divide Snow Park, and Marks Creek Snow Park. There are also numerous dispersed 

campsites, such as the Corral Flat area. 

This section has been divided into five topics including Bandit Springs Recreation Area, 

Developed and Dispersed Camping Areas, Snow Parks, Trails, and Wilderness. Changes to the 

visual character of the scenery are described in the Visual Quality section later in this chapter. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 133 

Bandit Springs Recreation Area 

Affected Environment 

The Bandit Springs Recreation Area consists of 1,580 acres and is located near Ochoco Divide 

between the Mill Creek Wilderness and U.S. Highway 26. The area is a popular cross-country 

ski area and contains approximately 14 miles of designated ski trails. The Forest Plan emphasis 

for the area is to provide a variety of dispersed, non-motorized recreational opportunities within 

a setting where most management activities are generally not evident to the casual observer. 

Forest Plan direction specifies that periodic manipulation of the vegetation, including timber 

harvest, will occur to develop and maintain resistance to catastrophic events which would detract 

from the recreational experience. Management activities would be apparent in the area. 

Many of the forest stands in the area feature large diameter ponderosa pine with developing 

understories of fir, pine, and larch. The Forest Plan notes that ponderosa pine areas should be 

managed for a combination of multi-storied stands and open, park-like stands. Mixed conifer 

areas should be managed to maintain a mix of species with an emphasis on maintaining western 

larch. 

Approximately 975 acres of the Bandit Springs Recreation Area and 6.2 miles of trail in the 

recreation area were burned in the Hash Rock Fire. Intensities varied from high-intensity stand 

replacement fire to low-intensity underburning. Most of the high-intensity fire occurred adjacent 

to and south of McGinnis Creek. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

This alternative does not include any vegetative treatments. The recreational experience would 

not be directly affected by harvest or non-harvest activities. Understories would continue to 

develop and increase the amount of multi-storied conditions. The amount of open, park-like 

stands of ponderosa pine would continue to decrease. Stand densities would continue to increase 

placing additional stress on older overstory trees. Shade-tolerant grand fir would continue to 

become more abundant, while ponderosa pine and larch dominance would decrease. Fuel 

loadings, including small understory trees, would continue to increase. Susceptibility to wildfire 

and/or insects and disease would continue increasing over time. Dense, multi-storied stands are 

susceptible to disturbance and, as these conditions increase over time, additional high-intensity 

wildfires would be expected to occur. In the long term, scenic quality would be degraded as 

open stands of large diameter ponderosa pine become less abundant. Riparian and upland 

vegetation along McGinnis Creek would recover from the Hash Rock Fire. Riparian vegetation 

would recover unaided by aspen improvement projects. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 134 

Alternative 2 

Within the Bandit Springs Recreation Area, this alternative includes 327 acres of commercial 

harvest and 278 acres of precommercial thinning designed to develop or maintain resilience to 

natural disturbance events. (The prescriptions for commercial activities also include 

precommercial thinning and activity fuels underburning; the prescriptions for precommercial 

thinning also include activity fuels underburning). Forest stands would move toward conditions 

that are more sustainable and resistant to high-intensity wildfire or large-scale insect and disease 

outbreaks. Commercial harvest and precommercial thinning activities would focus on removing 

small tress from the understory. Large trees would be retained. Stand densities would be 

decreased, single-storied open conditions would become more abundant, and fire-tolerant 

ponderosa pine and larch would be maintained. Competitive stress within stands would be 

reduced which would increase growth rates and encourage the development of more large trees 

over time. More of the older, larger diameter trees would be maintained over time. Stand 

resiliency would be increased and the likelihood of disturbances, like the Hash Rock Fire, would 

be reduced. A variety of stand conditions, including both ponderosa pine and mixed conifer, 

would be retained in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area. 

Natural fuels underburning (39 acres) would be used to maintain or reduce fuel loadings and 

reduce the abundance of small understory trees. Reducing or maintaining low fuel loadings 

would increase the resistance to catastrophic wildfire events. This was demonstrated during the 

Hash Rock Fire when the fire essentially stopped at the boundary of the 1995 Mill Creek 

Prescribed Natural Fire (PNF). The Mill Creek PNF effectively reduced the intensity and rate of 

spread of the Hash Rock Fire (Owens 2001). Table 43 displays the acres of activities within the 

Bandit Springs Recreation Area for all alternatives. 

Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and underburning activities would create short 

term (3-5 years) and long term (10-15 years) effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. 

Such effects include impacts to visual quality, recreational experiences, and trails. In the short 

term (up to 10 years), the visual quality may be affected as visitors would see stumps, slash piles 

(grapple and hand piles), bare soil, skid trails, smoke, and boundary tags. There would be 

decreased stand densities and fewer small trees which would open up the views of surrounding 

areas and natural features. In the long term (more than 10 years), the visual quality would be 

enhanced as more large ponderosa pines develop and views of open, park-like stands become 

more frequent. 

Summer users may encounter noise, dust, smoke and logging-related traffic if they are present 

when these activities occur. As a result, the natural recreation experience may be altered due to 

short term disturbance of solitude and primitiveness. Precommercial thinning would leave small 

diameter trees on the ground after they have been cut. Thus, traveling off of trails and roads 

would be more difficult for 3-8 years until slash from logging and precommercial thinning is 

burned. Mountain bikers would have a difficult time if riding off trails and roads, but hikers and 

horseback riders would still be able to step over the small trees. Users may be temporarily 

displaced during harvest activity due to area closures for safety reasons. Cross-country skiers 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 135 

and other winter users would not be displaced or disturbed because commercial timber harvest 

activities would be restricted between Thanksgiving and March 30. 

Some of the cross-country ski trails are on existing roads which would be reopened during 

harvest activities. The trails may appear wider because they would be cleared and used for 

logging traffic. There would be approximately 2.4 miles of road work within the Bandit Springs 

Recreation Area. This includes approximately 0.3 mile of new road construction and closing the 

roads after timber hauling and 0.2 mile of new road construction and decommissioning the roads 

after timber hauling. 0.2 mile of existing roads would be decommissioned and 1 mile of existing 

roads would be closed following timber haul. Visuals may be affected as road beds would be 

evident in the long run but would eventually become overgrown with vegetation. 

Decommissioned roads would be torn up, seeded, and water barred after use. These roadbeds 

may provide cross-country skiers more trail opportunities. 

Out of the 14 miles of designated ski trails within Bandit Springs Recreation Area, 7.1 miles are 

either within or adjacent to units. Bike Tie Trail is not in any units. 0.7 miles of Easy Trail, 0.4

miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, and 0.2 miles of Woodpecker Trail are in or adjacent to 

precommercial units. 0.1 miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, 1.4 miles of Ponderosa Loop Trail, and 

0.4 miles of Ochoco Way Trail are in or adjacent to underburn units. 1.9 miles of McGinnis 

Creek Trail, 0.1 miles of Ponderosa Loop Trail, 0.2 miles of Ridge Climb Trail, 0.7 miles of 

Woodpecker Trail, and 0.7 miles of Ochoco Way Trail are in or adjacent to commercial harvest 

units. Table 44 displays a summary of miles of trail within units for all alternatives. 

Design elements (see Chapter 2) have been incorporated to reduce impacts to recreational users. 

These include timing of activities to avoid the high-use winter season, minimizing stump heights 

so stumps are less visible, placing boundary tags and marking paint on the back side of trees or 

removing them after treatment to reduce the visibility, and clearing ski trails of slash prior to the 

winter season. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative includes 536 acres of precommercial thinning and activity fuels underburning 

designed with similar objectives as described for Alternative 2. Activities would focus in stands 

which have abundant numbers of trees less than 9 inches dbh. Small tree densities would be 

decreased, single-storied open conditions would become more abundant, and fire-tolerant 

ponderosa pine and larch would be maintained. Stand resiliency would be increased where 

treatment occurs and the likelihood of disturbances like the Hash Rock Fire would be reduced, 

although not to the same extent as Alternatives 2, 4, and 5. Precommercial thinning alone would 

not remove enough competitive stress to achieve objectives for increasing the amount of late and 

old structure. 

Natural fuels underburning (39 acres) would occur as discussed in Alternative 2 to maintain or 

reduce fuel loadings and reduce the abundance of small understory trees. Reducing or 

maintaining low fuel loadings would increase the resistance to catastrophic wildfire events. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 136 

Precommercial thinning and fuels activities would create short term (3-5 years) and long term 

(10-15 years) effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. Such effects include impacts to 

visual quality, recreational experiences, and trails. In the short term, the visual quality may be 

affected as visitors would see stumps, hand piles, bare soil, smoke, and boundary tags. The 

exposed stumps would be smaller and, therefore, would deteriorate faster. There would be 

decreased stand densities and fewer small trees which would open up the views of surrounding 

areas and natural features. There would be reduced screening along the trails due to the decrease 

in small diameter trees. In the long term, the visual quality would be enhanced as more large 

ponderosa pines develop and views of open, park-like stands become more frequent. 

This alternative includes using existing roads and no new roads would be constructed. As a 

result, the natural recreation experience may be better retained than Alternatives 2, 4, and 5. The 

scatter/lop fuel treatment would leave more small trees scattered on the ground. Traveling off of 

trails and roads would be more difficult for 3-8 years until slash from precommercial thinning is 

burned. Thus, mountain bikers would have a difficult time if riding off trails and roads, but 

hikers and horseback riders would still be able to step over the small trees. The activity area 

would not be closed and summer users would not be temporarily displaced. There would be no 

conflicts between recreation users and logging traffic. 

Out of the 14 miles of designated ski trails within Bandit Springs Recreation Area, 7.1 miles are 

either within or adjacent to units. Bike Tie Trail is not in any units. 0.7 miles of Easy Trail, 2.3

miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, 0.1 miles of Ponderosa Loop Trail, 0.2 miles of Ridge Climb 

Trail, 0.7 miles of Woodpecker Trail, and 0.7 miles of Ochoco Way Trail are in or adjacent to 

precommercial units. 0.1 miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, 1.4 miles of Ponderosa Loop Trail, 0.2 

miles of Woodpecker Trail, and 0.4 miles of Ochoco Way Trail are in or adjacent to underburn 

units. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative includes 327 acres of commercial harvest and 278 acres of precommercial 

thinning. Precommercial thinning would focus on stands which have abundant numbers of trees 

less than 9 inch dbh. Small tree densities would be decreased, single-storied open conditions 

would become more abundant, and fire-tolerant ponderosa pine and larch would be maintained. 

Stand resiliency would be increased where treatment occurs and the likelihood of disturbances 

like the Hash Rock Fire would be reduced. 

Natural fuels underburning (113 acres) would occur as discussed in Alternative 2 to maintain or 

reduce fuel loadings and reduce the abundance of small understory trees. Reducing or 

maintaining low fuel loadings would increase the resistance to catastrophic wildfire events. 

Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and underburning activities would create short 

term (3-5 years) and long term (10-15 years) effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. 

Such effects include impacts to visual quality, recreational experiences, and trails. In the short 

term, the visual quality may be affected as visitors would see exposed stumps, slash piles 

(grapple and hand piles), bare soil, skid trails, smoke, and boundary tags. There would be 

decreased stand densities and fewer small trees which would open up the views of surrounding 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 137 

areas and natural features. In the long term, the visual quality would be enhanced as more large 

ponderosa pines develop and views of open, park-like stands become more frequent. 

This alternative focused on using existing roads. There would be approximately 2.1 miles of 

road work within the Bandit Springs Recreation Area. This includes approximately 0.2 mile of 

new road construction and decommissioning the road after timber hauling. 0.2 mile of existing 

road would be decommissioned and 1 mile of existing road would be closed following timber 

haul. Visuals may be affected as road beds would be evident in the long run but would 

eventually become overgrown with vegetation. Decommissioned roads may be torn up and 

water barred after use. The roads may provide cross-country skiers more trail opportunities. 

Summer users may encounter noise, dust, smoke and logging-related traffic if they are present 

during these activities. The natural recreation experience may be altered due to short term 

disturbance of solitude and primitiveness. Precommercial thinning would leave small diameter 

(9 inches dbh) trees on the ground after they have been cut. Thus, mountain bikers would have a 

difficult time if riding cross-country. Hikers and horseback riders would be able to step over the 

small trees. Summer users may be temporarily displaced during harvest activity due to area 

closures for safety reasons. Cross-country skiers and other winter users would not be displaced 

or disturbed because commercial timber harvest activities would be restricted between 

Thanksgiving and March 30. 

Out of the 14 miles of designated ski trails within Bandit Springs Recreation Area, 8.2 miles are 

either within or adjacent to units. 0.7 miles of Easy Trail, 0.4 miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, 

and 0.2 miles of Woodpecker Trail are in or adjacent to precommercial units. 0.5 miles of Bike 

Tie Trail, 0.2 miles of Easy Trail, 0.2 miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, 1.4 miles of Ponderosa 

Loop Trail, 0.3 miles of Woodpecker Trail, and 0.4 miles of Ochoco Way Trail are in or adjacent 

to underburn units. 1.9 miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, 0.1 miles of Ponderosa Loop Trail, 0.7 

miles of Woodpecker Trail, 0.7 miles of Ochoco Way Trail, and 0.2 miles of Ridge Climb Trail 

are in or adjacent to commercial harvest units. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative includes 197 acres of commercial harvest and 315 acres of precommercial 

thinning. Precommercial thinning would focus on stands which have abundant numbers of trees 

less than 9 inch dbh. Small tree densities would be decreased, single-storied open conditions 

would become more abundant, and fire-tolerant ponderosa pine and larch would be maintained. 

Stand resiliency would be increased where treatment occurs and the likelihood of disturbances 

like the Hash Rock Fire would be reduced, although not to the same extent as Alternative 2. 

Natural fuels underburning (115 acres) would occur as discussed in Alternative 2 to maintain or 

reduce fuel loadings and reduce the abundance of small understory trees. Reducing or 

maintaining low fuel loadings would increase the resistance to catastrophic wildfire events. 

Commercial harvest, precommercial, and fuels activities would create short term (3-5 years) and 

long term (10-15 years) effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. Such effects include 

impacts to visual quality, recreational experiences, and trails. In the short term, the visual quality 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 138 

may be affected as visitors would see exposed stumps, slash piles, bare soil, skid trails, smoke, 

and boundary tags. There would be decreased stand densities and fewer small trees which would 

open up the views of surrounding areas and natural features. The prescriptions in this alternative 

include variable density thinning, leaving clumpier stand structures, and leaving higher densities 

in moist areas. In the long term, the visual quality would be enhanced as more large ponderosa 

pines develop and views of open, park-like stands become more frequent. 

Summer users may encounter noise, dust, smoke and logging-related traffic if they are present 

when these activities occur. As a result, the natural recreation experience may be altered due to 

short term disturbance of solitude and primitiveness. Precommercial thinning would leave small 

trees less than 9 inches dbh on the ground after they have been cut. Thus, mountain bikers would 

have a difficult time if riding cross-country. Hikers and horseback riders would be able to easily 

step over the small trees. Summer users may be temporarily displaced during harvest activities 

due to area closures for safety reasons. Cross-country skiers and other winter users would not be 

displaced or disturbed because commercial timber harvest activities would be restricted between 

Thanksgiving and March 30. 

Some of the trails are on existing roads which would be reopened during harvest activities. The 

trails may appear wider due to clearing and use during harvest activities. There would be 

approximately 1.7 miles of road work within the Bandit Springs Recreation Area. This includes 

approximately 0.3 mile of new road construction and closing the road after timber hauling and 

0.2 mile of new road construction and decommissioning the road after timber hauling. 0.1 mile 

of existing road would be decommissioned and 0.4 mile of existing road would be closed 

following timber haul. Visuals may be affected as road beds would be evident in the long run 

but would eventually become overgrown with vegetation. Decommissioned roads would be torn 

up and water barred after use. The roads may provide cross-country skiers more trail 

opportunities. 

Out of the 14 miles of designated ski trails within Bandit Springs Recreation Area, 5.6 miles are 

either within or adjacent to units. 0.7 miles of Easy Trail, 0.4 miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, 

and 0.2 miles of Woodpecker Trail are in or adjacent to precommercial units. 0.1 miles of 

McGinnis Creek Trail and 0.4 miles of Ochoco Way Trail are in or adjacent to underburn units. 

1.9 miles of McGinnis Creek Trail, 0.7 miles of Woodpecker Trail, 0.7 miles of Ochoco Way 

Trail, and 0.2 miles of Ridge Climb Trail are in or adjacent to commercial harvest units. 

Table 43. Acres of activities within the Bandit Springs Recreation Area. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5

Commercial 0 327 0 327 197 

Precommercial

Thinning 

0 278 513 278 315 

Hardwood 0 23 23 23 23 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 39 39 113 115 

Total 0 644 575 741 649 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 139 

Table 44. Miles of trail in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area within or adjacent to units. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5

Commercial 0 3.6 0 3.6 3.5 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

0 1.3 4.7 1.3 1.3 

Hardwood 0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 1.9 2.1 1.9 0.5 

Total 0 7.1 7.1 7.1 5.6 

Cumulative Effects 

In 2005, the Forest Service published a new rule for providing motor vehicle access to the 

national forests and grasslands. When implemented, the rule prohibits use of motor vehicles 

outside or off designated roads, trails, and areas. Some trails, roads, and areas will be closed in 

the future and others will be designated for motorized travel. The implementation date is 

expected to be in 2009. The Ochoco National Forest is in the preliminary process of developing 

a proposed action. This effort is not expected to alter recreational use in the Bandit Springs 

Recreation Area because the emphasis for this area is non-motorized recreational opportunities. 

There are no other planned or reasonable foreseeable activities that are expected to alter 

recreational use in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area. 

Developed and Dispersed Camping Areas 

Affected Environment 

Developed recreation areas include sites that are currently developed for camping, trailhead 

parking, and other recreational activities. The campgrounds within the project area include 

Ochoco Divide and White Rock Campgrounds. Dispersed recreation areas include user-created 

sites generally along roads and riparian areas, such as White Fir Springs and Corral Flat. Within 

the project area boundary, there are approximately 52 Forest Plan identified dispersed sites. 

Ochoco Divide Campground is a popular, heavily used site within a mature stand of 

predominantly ponderosa pine just off U.S. Highway 26. It is located 30 miles northeast of 

Prineville at the summit of Ochoco Pass. This concessionaire-operated campground provides 28 

campsites with potable water and garbage service. The primary use season is May 1 through 

September 15. Most visitors arrive late in the evening and continue on their trip in the morning, 

so the area is generally quiet and vacant during the day. 

White Rock Campground is a primitive camp within a stand of mostly grand fir. It is located at 

the eastern boundary of Mill Creek Wilderness, approximately 31 miles east of Prineville at the 

end of Forest Road 3350-300. There are two campsites with tables, fire rings, and a toilet. This 

campground also serves as the trailhead for the Wildcat Trail. Most use at this site is by people 

accessing the Wildcat Trail. The primary season of use is from late May through early 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 140 

November. Hunters usually occupy this area during the latter months of the use season. There is 

also a popular rockhounding area near this campground. Fire line construction during the Hash 

Rock Fire increased potential rockhounding activities in the area. Ground-disturbing activities 

generally bring thundereggs and agates closer to the surface. 

White Fir Springs is a primitive site used primarily by rockhounders during early spring and 

summer and by hunters during late fall. This site is located off Forest Road 3350. There are two 

popular rockhounding sites near this camp. 

Corral Flat is a dispersed camping site that is primarily used by equestrian enthusiasts. Annual 

Special Use Permit (SUP) events, such as Endurance Rides, are staged at this area. The 

Prineville Ridge Riders have a 5-year endurance ride SUP that authorizes use of non-system 

trails that connect to the camping area. The trails consist of a 12, 20, and 30-mile loop. On 

average, 90 riders participate in this ride. This dispersed site is located approximately 27 miles 

east of Prineville off Forest Road 2630. The open meadows and large ponderosa pine stands 

draw visitors to the area. There are no units near or adjacent to the Corral Flat dispersed camp 

site. Campers at this area would not be affected. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

There would be no direct effect on camping sites within the project area. Use of these sites is not 

expected to change. Over time, the visual character of the areas would change as understory 

trees grow and stands become denser. Large diameter ponderosa pine trees would become less 

common. 

Alternative 2 

Treatments would improve the long-term health of timber stands adjacent to the above camping 

areas (developed and dispersed sites), thus creating a more appealing natural setting. Visitors 

would be able to see the ‘before and after’ effects of vegetation treatments if they visit the sites 

frequently. Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and fuels activities would create short 

term (3-5 years) and long term (10-15 years) effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. 

Short-term impacts would be evident near some of the camping areas. Effects from commercial 

harvest activities would include increased noise and dust from logging operations, increased 

traffic from timber hauling, reduced visual quality due to logging slash, stumps, exposed dirt, 

smoke, and blackened ground and vegetation from underburning activities. In the long term, the 

visual quality would be enhanced as more large ponderosa pines develop and views of open, 

park-like stands become more frequent. 

There are no units adjacent to Ochoco Divide Campground, but underburning (approximately 88 

acres total) within one-quarter of a mile of the campground would occur. Smoke would be 

present during burning. Visitors would not be displaced, but may encounter smoke. There are 

no units adjacent to White Rock Campground, but within one-quarter of a mile, units 

(approximately 36 acres total) would be commercially harvested and impacts from logging 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 141 

activities would be apparent to visitors. Table 45 displays the acres of treatment within 0.25 

miles of campgrounds for all alternatives. 

Ground disturbance associated with tractor logging systems and road construction activities may 

increase the potential for rockhounding because agates and thundereggs would be more exposed. 

The amount of rockhounding activities near White Rock Campground and White Fir Springs 

may increase. 

Vegetation treatments would be evident in and around dispersed campsites. Some users may be 

temporarily displaced due to loss of access during harvest activities. This may increase camping 

at other dispersed sites. See Table 46 for number of dispersed sites within treatment units for all 

alternatives. 

Alternative 3 

Precommercial thinning and underburning activities would have short-term impacts on users, 

such as noise from thinning activities and smoke during underburning. Blackened ground and 

vegetation, and slash and small stumps would be visible. Visual evidence of activities may be 

apparent to the casual forest visitor at or near some camping areas. Over time, large ponderosa 

pine trees would be more apparent. This alternative has no commercial harvest or road building. 

There are no units directly adjacent to Ochoco Divide Campground, but within one-quarter of a 

mile, units (approximately 24 acres total) would be precommercial thinned, and approximately 

40 acres would be underburned. Smoke would be present during burning. Visitors would not be 

displaced. There are no units directly adjacent to White Rock Campground, but within onequarter of a mile, units (approximately 21 acres total) would be precommercial thinned. 

Vegetation treatments would be evident in and around dispersed campsites. Some users may be 

temporarily displaced while thinning activities occurred. This may increase camping at other 

dispersed sites. 

Alternative 4 

Treatments would improve the long-term health of timber stands adjacent to the above camping 

areas (developed and dispersed sites), thus creating a more appealing natural setting. Visitors 

would be able to see the ‘before and after’ effects of vegetation treatments if they visit the sites 

frequently. Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and fuels activities would create short 

term (3-5 years) and long term (10-15 years) effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. 

Short-term impacts to the camping areas would be evident near some of the areas. Effects from 

commercial harvest activities would include increased noise and dust from logging operations, 

increased traffic from timber hauling, reduced visual quality due to logging slash, stumps, 

exposed dirt, smoke, and blackened ground and vegetation from underburning activities. In the 

long term, the visual quality would be enhanced as more large ponderosa pines develop and 

views of open, park-like stands become more frequent. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 142 

There are no units adjacent to Ochoco Divide Campground, but within one-quarter mile, units 

(approximately 88 acres total) would be underburned. Smoke would be present during burning. 

Visitors would not be displaced, but may encounter smoke. There are no units adjacent to White 

Rock Campground, but within one-quarter mile, units (approximately 29 acres total) would be 

commercially harvested and impacts from logging activities would be apparent to visitors. 

Ground disturbance associated with tractor logging systems and road construction activities may 

increase the potential for rockhounding because agates and thundereggs would be more exposed. 

The amount of rockhounding activities near White Rock Campground and White Fir Springs 

may increase. 

Vegetation treatments would be evident in and around dispersed campsites. Some users may be 

temporarily displaced due to loss of access during harvest activities. This may increase camping 

at other dispersed sites. 

Alternative 5 

Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and fuels activities would create short term (3-5 

years) and long term (10-15 years) effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. In the 

short term, there would be effects to visual quality, recreational experiences, and trails. The 

visual quality may be affected as visitors would see stumps, slash piles, bare soil, skid trails, 

smoke, and boundary tags. There would be decreased stand densities and fewer small trees 

which would open up the views of surrounding areas and natural features. In the long term, the 

visual quality would be enhanced as more large ponderosa pines develop and views of open, 

park-like stands become more frequent. 

The prescriptions in this alternative include leaving clumpier stand structures and leaving higher 

densities in moist areas. Treatments would improve the long-term health of timber stands 

adjacent to camping areas (developed and dispersed sites), thus creating a more appealing natural 

setting. 

There are no units adjacent to Ochoco Divide Campground, but within one-quarter of a mile, 

units (approximately 88 acres total) would be underburned. Smoke would be present during 

burning. Visitors would not be displaced. There are no units adjacent to White Rock 

Campground, but within one-quarter of a mile, units (approximately 36 acres total) would be 

commercially harvested and impacts from logging activities would be apparent to visitors. 

Ground disturbance associated with tractor logging systems and road construction activities may 

increase the potential for rockhounding because agates and thundereggs would be more exposed. 

The amount of rockhounding activities near White Rock Campground and White Fir Springs 

may increase. 

Vegetation treatments would be evident in and around dispersed campsites. Some users may be 

temporarily displaced due to loss of access during harvest activities. This may increase camping 

at other dispersed sites. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 143 

Table 45. Acres of activities within 0.25 mile of developed campgrounds. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Commercial 0 37.8 0 30.1 37.9 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

0 0 45 0 0 

Hardwood 0 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.9 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 88.2 39.9 88.2 88.1 

Total 0 133.9 92.8 126.2 133.9 

Table 46. Number of Forest Plan dispersed sites within units. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Commercial 0 9 0 9 7 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

0 3 7 3 4 

Hardwood 0 5 5 5 5 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 8 10 8 7 

Total 0 25 22 25 23 

Cumulative Effects 

In 2005, the Forest Service published a new rule for providing motor vehicle access to the 

national forests and grasslands. When implemented, the rule prohibits use of motor vehicles 

outside or off designated roads, trails, and areas. Some trails, roads, and areas will be closed in 

the future and others will be designated for motorized travel. The implementation date is 

expected to be in 2009. The Ochoco National Forest is in the preliminary process of developing 

a proposed action. This effort may alter recreational use at developed and dispersed camping 

sites because motorized vehicle use would be restricted to designated roads, trails, and areas. 

However, until a proposed action is developed it is not possible to disclose the expected effects 

because the roads, trails, and areas that will be designated for motorized use is uncertain. 

There are no other planned or reasonable foreseeable activities that are expected to alter 

recreational use in dispersed and developed camping areas. 

Snow Parks 

Affected Environment 

Ochoco Divide, Bandit Springs, and Marks Creek Snow Parks are within the project area and are 

near or adjacent to Bandit Springs Recreation Area. The snow parks are located off of U.S. 

Highway 26, 25-30 miles northeast of Prineville. These parks require Sno-Park permits 

(between November 15 and April 30), are paved, and have toilets. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 144 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

There would be no direct or indirect effects to the snow parks. Use at these sites is expected to 

continue. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

Ochoco Divide Snow Park is closed in the off-season; therefore, there would be no direct effect 

to visitors. The primary use period is from December 1 to March 15. Management activities 

would be conducted outside of the primary use season. Unit 502 (hardwood thinning in an aspen 

stand) is adjacent to the snow park. Within 0.25 miles of Ochoco Divide Snow Park, about 95 

acres would be underburned. Activities would be visible, such as scorched trees, smoke, slash 

piles, and stumps. Visual evidence of activities may be apparent to the casual forest visitor at or 

near these areas. Over time, large ponderosa pine trees would be more apparent. 

Bandit Springs and Marks Creek Snow Parks are accessible year round. Within 0.25 miles of 

Bandit Springs Snow Park, approximately 40 acres would be commercially harvested, 16 acres 

would be precommercial thinned, and 20 acres would be underburned. Within 0.25 miles of 

Marks Creek Snow Park, approximately 40 acres would be commercially harvested, 20 would be 

precommercial thinned, and 38 would be underburned. Activities would be visible, such as 

scorched trees, stumps, slash piles, and exposed dirt. There would be log haul traffic on Roads 

2630 and 2630-113; however, haul would be restricted on weekends. See Table 47 for the 

amounts of activities by alternative within 0.25 mile of these snow parks. 

Table 47. Acres of activities within 0.25 mile of snow parks. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Commercial 0 82.7 0 79.9 79.9 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

0 41.2 181.7 44 44 

Hardwood 0 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.6 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 154.1 96.3 155.3 153.9 

Total 0 299.6 299.6 300.8 299.4 

Alternative 3 

Precommercial thinning and underburning activities would have short-term impacts on users, 

such as noise from thinning activities and smoke during underburning. Blackened ground and 

vegetation, and slash and small stumps would be visible. Visual evidence of activities may be 

apparent to the casual forest visitor at or near these snow parks. Over time, large ponderosa pine 

trees would be more apparent. 

Within 0.25 miles of Ochoco Divide Snow Park, approximately 60 acres would be 

precommercial thinned and 41 would be underburned. Within 0.25 miles of Bandit Springs 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 145 

Snow Park, approximately 58 acres would be precommercial thinned and 17 acres would be 

underburned. Within 0.25 miles of Marks Creek Snow Park, approximately 34 acres would be 

precommercial thinned and 38 acres would be underburned. Activities would be visible, such as 

scorched trees, exposed stumps, slash piles, and exposed dirt. 

Cumulative Effects 

In 2005, the Forest Service published a rule (36 CFR 212) for providing motor vehicle access to 

the national forests and grasslands. When implemented, the rule prohibits use of motor vehicles 

outside or off designated roads, trails, and areas. Some trails, roads, and areas will be closed in 

the future and others will be designated for motorized travel. The implementation date is 

expected to be in 2009. The Ochoco National Forest is in the preliminary process of developing 

a proposed action. This effort is not expected to alter recreational use of these snow parks 

because the use of over-snow vehicles is exempted from the requirement to designate roads, 

trails, and areas for motor vehicle use. 

There are no other planned or reasonable foreseeable activities that are expected to alter use of 

these snow parks. 

Trails 

Affected Environment 

There are approximately 24.5 miles of designated trails within the project area. This includes the 

14 miles of cross-country ski trails in Bandit Springs Recreation Area (already discussed in the 

above section), 2.5 miles of cross-country ski trails from the Walton Lake area (Butterfield, 

Corral Loop, and Drop-Off Trails), 6 miles of the Wildcat Trail in Mill Creek Wilderness, and 

4.5 miles of designated snowmobile trails. The Snow Park Tie Trail is a 2.5-mile long 

snowmobile trail that connects Ochoco Divide Snow Park with the Marks Creek-Independent 

Trail. Two miles of the Marks Creek-Independent Mine snowmobile trail is within the project 

area boundary. 

User-created trails exist in and around the project area. The endurance ride trail includes three 

loop trails that go in and out of treatment units. The Mustang Loop is approximately 20 miles, 

the High Loop is 30 miles, and the Pony Loop is 12 miles. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

There would be no effects to the trails or trail use in the project area. Trail maintenance 

activities would continue. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 146 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

All of the action alternatives include activities near or adjacent to trails. Commercial harvest, 

precommercial thinning, and fuels activities would create short term (3-5 years) and long term 

(10-15 years) effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. Visitors would see stumps, 

piles, bare soil, smoke, and boundary tags. Trails that lie within or adjacent to commercial 

harvest units would be impacted directly from logging operations and post-harvest activities 

including noise, dust, logging traffic, altered scenery from slash or thinning, timber falling, and 

skid trails. As a result, the natural recreation experience may be altered due to short term 

disturbance of solitude and primitiveness. In the long term, the visual quality would be enhanced 

as more large ponderosa pines develop and views of open, park-like stands become more 

frequent. 

Precommercial thinning activities would leave small trees less than 9 inches dbh on the ground 

after they have been cut. Thus, traveling off of trails and roads would be more difficult for 3-8 

years until slash from logging and precommercial thinning is burned. Mountain bikers would 

have a difficult time if riding off trails and roads, but hikers and horseback riders would still be 

able to step over the small trees. To lessen the impacts to designated cross-country ski trails, 

there would be limited times to conduct logging operations. Prior to the use season, any logging 

slash on designated trails would be removed. Landings would not be located on designated 

trails. To lessen the impacts on the endurance ride held the third weekend in July, the portions of 

the permitted trail that are within the project area would have all slash pulled back from the trail 

2 weeks prior to the event. See Tables 48 and 49 for the amount of trails and snowmobile trails 

within/adjacent to units by alternative. 

Alternative 3 

Activities would focus in stands which have abundant numbers of small (less than 9 inches dbh) 

trees. Small tree densities would be decreased, single-storied open conditions would become 

more abundant, and fire-tolerant ponderosa pine and larch would be maintained. Precommercial 

thinning and fuels activities would create short term (3-5 years) and long term (10-15 years) 

effects that would be evident to the casual visitor. In the short term, the visual quality may be 

affected as visitors would see exposed stumps, piles, bare soil, smoke, and boundary tags. The 

visible stumps would be smaller and, therefore, would deteriorate faster. There would be 

decreased stand densities and fewer small trees which would open up the views of surrounding 

areas and natural features. There would be reduced screening along the trails due to the decrease 

in small diameter trees. In the long term, the visual quality would be enhanced as more large 

ponderosa pines develop and views of open, park-like stands become more frequent. 

The scatter/lop fuel treatment would leave more small trees scattered on the ground. Traveling 

off of trails and roads would be more difficult for 3-8 years until slash from precommercial 

thinning is burned. Thus, mountain bikers would have a difficult time if riding off trails and 

roads, but hikers and horseback riders would still be able to step over the small trees. The 

activity area would not be closed and summer users would not be temporarily displaced. There 

would be no conflicts between recreation users and logging traffic. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 147 

Table 48. Miles of Walton Lake cross-country ski trails within or adjacent to units. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Commercial 0 0.3 0 0.3 0 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

0 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.5 

Hardwood 0 0 0 0 0 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 

Total 0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.1 

Table 49. Miles of snowmobile trails within or adjacent to units. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Commercial 0 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

0 0.6 1.5 1.5 0.6 

Hardwood 0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 

Total 0 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 

Cumulative Effects 

In 2005, the Forest Service published a rule for providing motor vehicle access to the national 

forests and grasslands. When implemented, the rule prohibits use of motor vehicles outside or 

off designated roads, trails, and areas. Some trails, roads, and areas will be closed in the future 

and others will be designated for motorized travel. The implementation date is expected to be in 

2009. The Ochoco National Forest is in the preliminary process of developing a proposed 

action. This effort is expected to alter trail use. However, until a proposed action is developed it

is not possible to describe the expected effects because the roads, trails, and areas that will be 

designated for motorized use is uncertain. 

There are no other planned or reasonable foreseeable activities that are expected to alter trail use 

in the project area. 

Wilderness 

Affected Environment 

The Mill Creek Wilderness encompasses 17,400 acres; 3,668 acres are within the project area. 

The Mill Creek Wilderness is the largest wilderness on the Ochoco National Forest and is the 

most heavily used. Use is primarily due to easy access and proximity to the city of Prineville. 

Elevations range from 3,725 to 6,640 feet above sea level. The terrain varies from the rugged, 

rocky cliffs of Desolation Canyon to the flat meadows of Bingham Prairie. Spectacular rock 

outcrops are present at Twin Pillars and Whistler Point. Many users accessing the eastern third 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 148 

of the wilderness camp or park at White Rock Campground and hike or ride horseback on the 

Wildcat Trail. There are also several dispersed campsites along the eastern boundary that 

receive heavy use during the fall hunting months. Other dispersed campsites exist within the 

wilderness area and are primarily located at springs, along streams, adjacent to meadows, or 

other attractive and accessible features. Management emphasis for this area is to protect the 

wilderness ecosystem and to maintain a natural setting and preserve solitude. 

In August and September 2000, the Hash Rock Fire burned 14,236 acres of the Mill Creek 

Wilderness, including 2,846 acres within the Marks Creek Watershed. The Hash Rock Fire 

damaged approximately 15.5 miles of trail in the Mill Creek Wilderness. These trails have been 

repaired. These trails are scheduled to be maintained annually. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

There would be no direct or indirect effects to the wilderness area. Recreation users would 

continue to access and enjoy the wilderness. 

Alternative 2 

There would be no direct effects to the Mill Creek Wilderness. Where commercial harvest units 

border the wilderness, users may encounter evidence of logging operations and post-logging 

treatments such as noise, stumps, slash piles, smoke, and blackened vegetation. Similar evidence 

of thinning and underburning activities would also be apparent. Over time, the health of 

remaining trees would be improved, which in turn, would improve scenic quality. 

Roads that are reconstructed within 0.25 miles of the wilderness boundary would be closed to 

minimize illegal motorized access in the wilderness. Within 0.25 miles of the wilderness 

boundary, there would be approximately 0.2 miles of new road construction and 0.4 miles of 

road reconstruction. After commercial harvest activities, the new road would be 

decommissioned. Decommissioned roads would be scarified, seeded, and water barred after use. 

The reconstructed road would be closed when done using it. Visuals may be affected as road 

beds would be evident in the long run but would eventually become overgrown with vegetation. 

Recreation users would continue to access the wilderness. Approximately 1.3 miles of the 

Wildcat Trail are within or adjacent to units. Users may encounter noise, dust, and smoke if they 

are present when these activities occur. As a result, the natural recreation experience may be 

altered due to short term disturbance of solitude and primitiveness. See Table 50 for number of 

miles of the Wildcat Trail within/adjacent to units for all alternatives. 

Alternative 3 

There would be no direct effects to the wilderness area. Where precommercial thinning units 

border the wilderness, indirect effects include noise and visual evidence from thinning and 

underburning activities such as chainsaw noise, smoke, and blackened vegetation. Over time, 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 149 

the health of remaining trees would be improved, which in turn, would improve the scenic 

quality. No road construction or commercial harvest would occur. Recreation users would 

continue to access the wilderness. Approximately 0.8 miles of the Wildcat Trail are within or 

adjacent to units. Users may encounter noise, dust, and smoke if they are present when these 

activities occur. As a result, the natural recreation experience may be altered due to short term 

disturbance of solitude and primitiveness. 

Alternative 4 

There would be no direct effects to the Mill Creek Wilderness. Where commercial harvest units 

border the wilderness, users may encounter evidence of logging operations and post-logging 

treatments such as noise, stumps, slash piles, smoke, and blackened vegetation. Similar evidence 

of thinning and underburning activities would also be apparent. Over time, the health of 

remaining trees would be improved, which in turn, would improve scenic quality. There would 

be no road construction or reconstruction within 0.25 miles of the wilderness boundary. 

Recreation users would continue to access the wilderness. Approximately 1.1 miles of the 

Wildcat Trail are within or adjacent to units. Users may encounter noise, dust, and smoke if they 

are present when these activities occur. As a result, the natural recreation experience may be 

altered due to short term disturbance of solitude and primitiveness. 

Alternative 5 

There would be no direct effects to the Mill Creek Wilderness. Where commercial harvest units 

border the wilderness, users may encounter evidence of logging operations and post-logging 

activities such as noise, stumps, slash piles, smoke, and blackened vegetation. The prescriptions 

in this alternative include leaving clumpier stand structures and leaving higher densities in moist 

areas. In the long term, the visual quality would be enhanced as more large ponderosa pines 

develop and views of open, park-like stands become more frequent. Treatments would improve 

the long-term health of timber stands, thus creating a more appealing natural setting. There 

would be no road construction or reconstruction within 0.25 miles of the wilderness boundary. 

Recreation users would continue to access the wilderness. Approximately 1.3 miles of the 

Wildcat Trail are within or adjacent to units. Users may encounter noise, dust, and smoke if they 

are present when these activities occur. As a result, the natural recreation experience may be 

altered due to short term disturbance of solitude and primitiveness 

Table 50. Miles of the Wildcat Trail within or adjacent to units. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Commercial 0 0.7 0 0.5 0.7 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

0 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.6 

Hardwood 0 0 0 0 0 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 0 0 0 0 

Total 0 1.3 0.8 1.1 1.3 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 150 

Cumulative Effects 

There are no other ongoing, planned, or reasonable foreseeable activities that are expected to 

affect the Mill Creek Wilderness. Recreation users are expected to continue to access and enjoy 

the wilderness. 

Soils 

Compaction and Displacement 

Affected Environment 

The project area contains a wide variety of soils. Soils in the project area may be affected by 

erosion, compaction, and/or displacement. The potential for effects to soils is directly related to 

the number of acres of each activity proposed. 

To maintain site productivity, the Forest Plan includes a standard for soil compaction and 

displacement. At a minimum, at least 80 percent of the activity area should be in a noncompacted/non-displaced condition within 1 year of any management activity. The standard is 

applied at an individual scale such as a unit of a timber sale. The January 10, 2007, Soils Report 

for this project more fully describes the soil standard and can be found in the project record. 

Detrimental soil conditions result from compaction, displacement, and charring. Compaction is 

the packing together of soil particles by exerting force at the soil surface and a resulting increase 

in soil density. Roads, log landings, and skid trails are typically areas that are detrimentally 

compacted during commercial timber harvest activities. Displacement is the movement or 

rearrangement of the soil so that normal processes are affected. Displaced soils are often 

loosened and are more susceptible to erosion. Soil charring can occur when concentrations of 

fuels are burned and the soil becomes superheated. This causes loss of organic matter and 

hydrophobic soil conditions can result from the cooked waxes and resins in the surface ash layer. 

Typically, charring occurs on landings where large piles (concentrations) of slash are burned. 

Burning of hand and grapple piles does not typically result in detrimental charring because of the 

small pile size. 

The existing condition of the soils resource was determined by the Forest soil scientist and other 

members of the interdisciplinary team. A combination of local knowledge, walk-through 

transecting, and aerial photo interpretation was used to determine existing soil disturbance for 

each unit. This unit-by-unit evaluation of existing soils condition was completed and is 

contained in Appendix B to this EIS. This unit-by-unit evaluation includes an assessment of 

harvest units and grapple piling units. Other non-harvest activities were not included because 

they are not expected to cause detrimental soil disturbance. Existing disturbance was quantified 

to the nearest ten percent bracket (0-10, 10-20, etc.), estimates were made as to tilling potential 

based on soil type and slope, and unit-specific mitigations identified where needed to ensure 

compliance with the soil standard. The evaluation of existing conditions reveals that more than 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 151 

half of the acres included in commercial harvest units currently exceed 20 percent detrimental 

soil conditions. 

Environmental Consequences 

Tractor (ground-based) logging systems can cause the highest amount of soil impacts and can 

result in exceeding the soil standard if not carefully designed and actively monitored. Classic, 

rubber-tired skidders and skidding crawler-type tractors are used on an average 100-foot skid 

trail spacing to skid logs to the landings which are accessed by roads. The main skid trails 

comprise the majority of the detrimental disturbance, which is largely compaction and 

displacement. Skid trails on an average of 100-foot spacing contribute roughly 10-15 percent 

detrimental disturbance in an average unit with landings and roads making up an additional 5 and 

2 percent, respectively. Overall, potential for detrimental soil conditions is 17-22 percent per 

entry; this does not include any mitigation or other measures to reduce potential impacts, nor 

does it include existing levels of detrimental disturbance. Past harvest practices have often led to 

unacceptable amounts of detrimental soil conditions. Current practices confine disturbance 

largely to existing skid trails and landings from prior entries. 

Helicopter logging systems are used on steeper slopes, in areas where road building is difficult or 

expensive, and/or in areas where tractor logging would cause unacceptable resource effects. The 

economic costs are higher for this type of logging and the impact to the soil resource are lower. 

Detrimental disturbance averages 2 to 5 percent per entry, primarily on roads and landings. 

Skyline logging systems are used largely on steeper slopes where there is sufficient deflection for 

the use of cable operations. They usually have an access road at the top of the unit or drainage 

with landings along the roads. Detrimental disturbance averages 6 to 12 percent per entry, 

primarily on roads, skyline corridors, and landings. 

Grapple piling of slash is used to reduce fuel loadings in harvest units. The objective is to lessen 

fuel loading and break up fuel continuity, not remove all fuel from a site. Grapple piling is 

achieved using boomed equipment that is required to stay on previously disturbed areas. Fuels 

objectives can be achieved with little or no additional soil impacts. 

Yarding with tops attached (YTA) is another treatment to reduce fuel loadings in harvest units. 

This treatment results in lower fuel amounts inside the harvest unit by concentrating slash at the 

log landings. This requires larger landings and more intense heat results when the landing piles 

are burned, producing more charred soil. Since the landings are situated most often on top of old 

landings and disturbed areas from prior activities, this usually does not result in a net increase in 

detrimental soil conditions. For tractor harvest units, YTA skid trails are somewhat wider due to 

the sweeping action of the limbs. 

Recent monitoring results on the Ochoco National Forest (Blackbear Timber Sale) show that 

detrimental soil conditions can be kept within acceptable levels using tractor logging systems. 

This requires that design elements be followed and that the need for tilling be evaluated after 

harvest activities. Reuse of existing detrimentally disturbed areas can result in little or no 

additional impacts to soils. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 152 

Several other types of treatments are also proposed which generally do not result in detrimental 

soil impacts. These treatments include: precommercial and hardwood thinning, underburning, 

and activity-fuels hand piling and burning. Soil disturbance that may result from these activities 

is limited in scale, and of such a light intensity, that no detrimental compaction, displacement, or 

charring is expected. These activities do not involve the use of heavy equipment such as 

bulldozers. No measurable detrimental effects to the soil resource are expected from these 

activities under any alternative. 

Soil tilling is proposed to alleviate detrimental compaction. It is feasible in deeper ash soils on 

slopes of 30 percent or less. Heavy equipment is used and tilling would be focused on skid trails 

and landings which are excess to current and future management needs. 

Table 51. Acres of activities by alternative. 

 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Tractor Harvest 5,366 0 4,177 3,325

Helicopter Harvest 724 0 758 617

Skyline Harvest 82 0 0 0

Precommercial and 

Hardwood Thinning 

11,356 9,899 11,131 11,148

Grapple Piling 3,015 0 2,490 2,150

Hand Piling 718 856 793 881

Yard Tops Attached 333 0 439 400

Activity Fuels Underburning 9,953 8,323 9,824 9,503

Natural Fuels Underburning 5,511 5,603 5,338 4,702

Road Impacts 30 0 8 6

Soil Tilling* 120 0 95 88

*The actual amount of tilling would be based on post-harvest monitoring. These acres are the minimum acres that 

are estimated to be required to meet the soil standards on a unit-by-unit basis (see Appendix B). 

Alternative 1 

This alternative is the no action alternative and would not affect soils. Existing natural processes 

would continue. No soil tilling 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 worms). This natural process can take hundreds of years to fully restore 

damaged soils. Fire intensities would potentially be more severe resulting in more detrimental 

charring and hydrophobic soil conditions. 

Fuels reductions would not occur thereby increasing the risk of increased oxidation and 

mineralization of nutrients such as nitrogen and potassium. This may result in increased fire 

severity which can reduce site productivity (Harvey et al. 1991). 

This alternative would comply with the regional and Forest Plan soil standards. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 153 

Alternative 2 

This alternative includes the most timber harvest, as well as the most ground-based harvest. This 

alternative has the greatest potential to increase the amount of detrimental soil compaction, 

displacement, and charring. This alternative has unit specific mitigations and practices identified 

which would ensure that activity units meet the soil standards (see unit-by-unit soils analysis in 

Appendix B and Chapter 2, design elements). These include design of logging systems, 

avoidance of specific areas, and soil tilling. This alternative creates approximately 30 acres of 

detrimental soil compaction and displacement due to construction of new roads. This alternative 

would result in approximately 120 acres of tilling to alleviate detrimental soil compaction. 

Some detrimental soil charring is expected to occur under the grapple piles and at landings where 

YTA occurs. This detrimental charring would be of a low percentage (estimated to be 5 to 6 

piles per acre at 100 square feet/pile which yields 1.1 to 1.3 percent impacts which are mostly on 

existing trails and landings). Underburning would result in a very small amount of detrimental 

charring in areas where existing fuel loadings are high. This is estimated to occur only on a 

fraction of 1 percent. 

This alternative would comply with the regional and Forest Plan soil standards. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative has the least potential to increase the amount of detrimental soil disturbance. No 

soil tilling would be performed. Existing natural processes would continue. Recovery of 

existing soil compaction would proceed at a natural rate. Some small areas of charring may 

occur under fuel concentrations, but would be limited in scope and expected to be less than 5 

percent of the treated acres. This alternative would result in no net increase in the amount of 

area which exceeds the 20 percent detrimental soil condition standard. 

This alternative does not include grapple piling or commercial harvest. Underburning would 

result in a small amount of charring in areas where existing fuel loadings are high. This is 

estimated to occur only on a fraction of 1 percent of the area burned. There would be no net 

increase of detrimental soil conditions. The failure to thin young sawtimber component (from 9 

to 14 inches dbh) would increase per acre standing fuel loadings which would increase fire 

intensity and severity in the future especially in reburn conditions (Shank 2004). 

This alternative would comply with the regional and Forest Plan soil standards. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative proposes less harvest and less tractor harvest than Alternative 2. This alternative 

has unit specific mitigations and practices identified which would ensure that all activity units 

meet the soil standards (see Appendix B). These include design of logging systems, avoidance 

of specific areas, and soil tilling. Implementation of this alternative would result in 

approximately 95 acres of tilling to alleviate detrimental soil compaction, both existing and new. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 154 

This alternative includes approximately 8 additional acres of detrimental soil impact due to 

construction of roads. 

Some detrimental soil charring is expected to occur under grapple piles and at landings where 

YTA occurs. This detrimental charring would be of a low percentage (estimated to be 5 to 6 

piles per acre at 100 square feet/pile which yields 1.1 to 1.3 percent impacts which are mostly on 

existing trails and landings). Underburning would result in a very small amount of detrimental 

charring in areas where existing fuel loadings are high. This is estimated to occur only on a 

fraction of 1 percent. 

This alternative would comply with the regional and Forest Plan soil standards. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative proposes less harvest and less tractor harvest than Alternatives 2 and 4. This 

alternative has unit specific mitigations and practices identified which would ensure that all 

activity units meet the soil standards (see Appendix B). Implementation of this alternative would 

result in approximately 88 acres of tilling to alleviate detrimental soil compaction, both existing 

and new. This alternative includes approximately 6 acres of detrimental soil impact due to 

construction of roads. 

Some detrimental soil charring is expected to occur under the grapple piles and at landings where 

YTA occurs. This detrimental charring would be of a low percentage (estimated to be 5 to 6 

piles per acre at 100 square feet/pile which yields 1.1 to 1.3 percent impacts which are mostly on 

existing trails and landings). Underburning would result in a very small amount of detrimental 

charring in areas where existing fuel loadings are high. This is estimated to occur only on a 

fraction of 1 percent. 

This alternative would comply with the regional and Forest Plan soil standards. 

Cumulative Effects 

Analysis of the entire project area indicates that approximately 15 percent of the area has 

detrimental soil conditions. Existing detrimental soil conditions are primarily related to past 

harvest activities, road building, and activities on private land. Detrimental soil condition occur 

in areas where livestock congregrate, such as around water sources, bedding areas, salting areas, 

trails along fences, and at pasture corners. Soils in these areas are less productive because of 

detrimetnal compaction, displacement, post holing, bank sloughing, and trampling. Livestock 

grazing has contributed 1-3 percent of the detrimental soil conditions. There was a slight 

increase (10 acres) in detrimental soil conditions due to fire lines built during the suppression of 

the Hash Rock Fire. Rehabilitation of all fire lines has been completed. Detrimental soil 

conditions related to the fire itself were low and limited to localized charring. Post-fire 

monitoring within Harpo Timber Sale units that were burned indicates little soil damage caused 

by the fire and vegetative recovery of 75 to 80 percent has occurred. Other rehabilitation efforts 

associated with the Hash Rock Fire include culvert removal, road closure, and riparian/hardwood 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 155 

planting. None of these activities increased the amount of detrimental soil conditions across the 

project area. 

The most recently logged sales in the project area, Marks and Harpo, have had the harvest 

activities complete for several years. Post-harvest monitoring indicated that soil tilling was not 

needed to decrease detrimental soil conditions as a result of the harvest activities. 

The Pick-Up Salvage Sale (completed in 2002) removed already downed trees utilizing existing 

roads, skid trails, and landings. It did not contribute additional detrimental effects on the soil 

resource in the project area. The Cougar Salvage Sale (completed in 2006) removed dead trees 

and did not contribute additional detrimental effects on the soil resource. 

Mass Wasting 

Affected Environment 

Massive rotational slump and earth flow 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. Numerous seeps and springs are present all across the project 

area, confirming the scrambled nature of the landform. 

Based on an air photo interpretation, the project area has a series of dormant and active landslide 

terrain composed of scarps and debris lobes. Seven small active landslides (2.5 to 4 acres in 

size) are located on midslopes, within larger dormant landslide terrain, on the Clarno Formation. 

One active landslide (4 acres) is contained within a small draw on Road 3350-230, which crosses 

the active landslide midslope. A rock blanket has been constructed on the cutslope adjacent to a 

more recent fill failure, which occurred during the winter of 1997. The culvert in the draw 

failed, causing a new translational slide on the already active slope. This site has been 

reconstructed. Road 3350-230 is currently under a year-round wildlife closure and has a locked 

gate at the junction with Road 3350-200. A 1.5-acre rotational landslide is adjacent to Road 

3300-503 in the headwaters of Salmon Creek; this landslide was reactivated in 1998. One debris 

flow is in T. 13 S., R. 18 E., Section 13 near the Mill Creek Wilderness trail. The fourth debris 

flow is in a Harpo Timber Sale unit. The debris flow occurred in 1998. The fluid debris blocked 

Road 3350-200, flowing across the road and down the slope toward Road 3350-230. The fifth 

landslide is a road-related rotational slide on Road 2610-050 on the east side of Marks Creek (T. 

13 S., R. 19 E., Section 31). The fill has been repaired. The sixth active landslide is on Road 

2600-012 (T. 13 S., R. 19 E., Section 16) in the Shamrock area. This landslide terrain 

reactivated in 1998. The subsequent road failure was repaired in 2001. The draw has active 

tension cracks, jackstraw trees, and a sag pond. The seventh landslide (3.3 acres) is located in T. 

13 S., R. 18 E., Section 13, between Units 119 and 120. 

The majority of the project area (87%) is at a low to moderate risk for reactivation by 

management activities such as road construction or harvest, or by the continued weather pattern 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 156 

of higher precipitation. Eighteen acres are active landslide terrain. Approximately 13 percent of 

the project area is within mapped dormant landslide terrain. The dormant landslide terrain 

extends across the length of the project area and is 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 landslide originates on Clarno Formation within the project area. 

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 Jim Elliott and Sears Creeks with greater than 20 

percent cutbank erosion are adjacent to the toes of dormant landslides in the upper reaches. 

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 the project area. Above 4,500 feet elevation, the ground is generally 

still frozen and snow covered. Fewer debris flows and rotational slides occur in this region. 

Construction of roads across landslide debris has the potential to compact the debris, creating a 

dam-like feature, which may collect water upslope, increasing pore water pressure to the point of 

failure. Minimizing the height of cuts and fills and maintaining adequate drainage help to reduce 

potential sediment delivery. The construction methods and design criteria which incorporate 

geotextile, filter rock, reinforced rolling dips, adequately sized pipes, placement frequency, and 

surface aggregate will reduce the risk of road-related failures. When the unconsolidated 

landslide debris is saturated, there is a potential for movement with subsurface water flow down 

slope. Construction of roads and trails on active and dormant landslides may accelerate erosion 

by changing the subsurface flow patterns, causing increases in pore water pressure, and 

subsequent reactivation of slope movement. Portions of the existing road system were 

constructed on dormant and active landslides. 

Management activities have the ability to affect the stability of the land. 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 potentially releasing sediment into the stream systems, depending on 

proximity to the riparian areas. Careful alignment of trails and roads, in addition to streamside 

protection will help to reduce sedimentation. Changes in precipitation patterns and climate will 

have their own effects on the erosion rates. 

Although central Oregon is no longer affected by the past moist climate, which contributed to the 

generation of the landslide features shaping the mountains today, there is the potential to 

reactivate the dormant landslides. Soil compaction due to management activities across 

landslide debris may change the water flow through the soil pores, potentially affecting the 

stability of the slope. When the toe slopes of the deep seated landslides abut live streams, they 

are prone to active erosion. Through time, the landslide debris has reached an equilibrium on the 

hill slopes. As the stream erodes the toe slopes, the natural balance is upset. Accelerated erosion 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 157 

can occur, causing a decrease in water quality as additional sediment is introduced into the 

system. The goal is to not increase the pace of mass wasting events beyond the natural 

background. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

Under this alternative, no timber harvest, road construction, or other activities that would affect 

dormant and active landslide terrain would occur. The natural process of erosion under the 

current precipitation pattern would continue. There would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative 

effects. 

Alternative 3 

The proposed treatments of precommercial thinning and underburning would have no direct 

effects on increasing slope instability. Indirectly, the activities would encourage increased 

growth of the vegetation, which would increase the evapotranspiration and increase slope 

stability. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

The intensity and style of management activity on landslide terrain, in the vicinity of seeps and 

springs, may potentially change the drainage pattern which increases the risk for instability. 

Generally, commercial harvest does not measurably alter groundwater movement, except in the 

vicinity of seeps and springs. Commercial harvest is not expected to substantially reduce the 

amount of water taken up by the trees through evapotranspiration. Reducing the amount of 

evapotranspiration would leave more groundwater in the slope, which has the potential to change 

slope stability. 

The acres of dormant and active landslide terrain are spread across the project area. Alternative 

2 proposes management on more acres in dormant landslide terrain than Alternatives 4 or 5. 

Alternative 2 includes 1,423 acres of commercial harvest on dormant landslide terrain. 

Alternative 4 includes 1,062 acres of commercial harvest on dormant landslide terrain. 

Alternative 5 proposes the least amount of harvest on dormant landslide terrain; it includes 904 

acres. Helicopter and skyline logging systems are less likely to increase instability than a tractor 

logging system which tends to compact the soil, changing groundwater flow patterns, and 

potentially altering slope stability. 

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 higher precipitation 

or a rain-on-snow event like those that occurred in 1997, due to the potential increase flow of 

groundwater to the lower slopes. Alternative 5 would have slightly less of an effect than 

Alternative 4 and definitely less than Alternative 2. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 158 

There are areas of active landslides on or near Roads 3350-200, 3350-230, 2610-050 and 3300-

503. The use of these roads for haul is not expected to increase the potential for mass wasting. 

Road 3300-503 is expected to self-close, as the landslide scarp retreats into the roadbed. Under 

all the alternatives, Road 3300-503 and 3350-200 are proposed for reconstruction, which would 

reduce the potential for future failures by replacing culverts, modifying cross drains, and 

ensuring proper drainage is maintained. 

Cumulative Effects 

Potential risk for an increase in sediment transport due to mass wasting is low to moderate for all 

the action alternatives. There are no past, ongoing, or reasonably foreseeable activities that 

would reduce slope stability and increase mass wasting. 

Visual Quality 

Affected Environment 

The Forest Plan allocated some areas to visual management, including corridors along U.S. 

Highway 26, Forest Roads 27, 2630, and 2210, and recreation sites such as Bandit Springs 

Recreation Area. The Visual Quality Objectives for these areas are retention or partial retention 

which means that the general emphasis in these areas is to maintain the natural-appearing 

character of the forest. There is an estimated 7,564 acres in the project area that are included in 

these visual management allocations. Approximately 5,586 acres are included in the U.S. 

Highway 26 Scenic Corridor, 1,580 acres in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area, 55 acres in the 

Forest Road 27 corridor, 292 acres in the Forest Road 2630 corridor, and 51 acres in the Forest 

Road 2210 corridor. 

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, lodgepole pine, western larch, Douglas-fir, grand fir, 

white fir, and riparian species. They provide strong diverse lines and textural and color patterns 

broken up only by occasional filtered-view openings into the foreground landscape. 

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 

due to the change in fire regime caused by fire exclusion. Densely stocked forest and canopy 

closure, due to fire exclusion, 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 

understories is prevalent, especially along the travel and scenic corridors (within 0.25 miles). 

The depth-of-field view deep into the forest is restricted to mostly the immediate foreground area 

of the landscape due to the high level of vegetation. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 159 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

Under this alternative, the existing vegetation within the project area would not be altered or 

changed by any management activity. Scenery would remain essentially the same during the 

short-term duration (0-5 years) and may be adversely altered through time (5 years and longer) 

as multi-strata conditions continue to increase. Encroachment by shade-tolerant species would 

continue and stand densities would continue to increase. Views of open, park-like stands of 

older and larger ponderosa pine would become less frequent. 

Alternative 2 

Approximately 4,576 acres within visual corridors would be treated to enhance long-term scenic 

quality through commercial thinning, precommercial thinning, and underburning activities. 

After implementation, the proposed activities within visual management corridors would have 

short-term (0 to 5 years) effects on scenery. Stumps, slash, and smoke during burning activities 

would be evident. However, in the long-term, scenery would be enhanced and the vegetation 

would be moved to more sustainable conditions. Sufficient levels of residual trees would remain 

on site to meet desired conditions. Table 52 displays the amount of activities within visual 

corridors for all alternatives. 

Management activities would occur within the U.S. Highway 26 Scenic Corridor, Bandit Springs 

Recreation Area, and travel corridors along Forest Roads 27, 2630, and 2210 within retention 

and partial retention visual management allocations. Commercial harvest and precommercial 

thinning would occur within densely stocked stands. Treatments would enhance and maintain 

scenery by removing understory trees. This would allow the development of more large 

ponderosa pine and views of large ponderosa pine would become more frequent. 

There would be approximately 11.2 miles total of road work within the visual corridors. This 

includes approximately 3 miles of new road construction and closing the roads after timber 

hauling and 0.4 miles of new road construction and decommissioning the roads after timber 

hauling. 1.3 miles of existing roads would be decommissioned and 2.8 miles of existing roads 

would be closed following timber haul. Newly constructed road beds would be evident in the 

long run but would eventually become overgrown with vegetation. Decommissioned roads 

would be scarified, seeded, and water barred after use. However, only 0.2 miles of a newly 

constructed road would take off directly from the visual corridor on Forest Road 27. This new 

road would be apparent to the visitor, but it would be decommissioned following commercial 

harvest activities. The other proposed new roads would not take off directly from the visual 

corridors so new road construction would not be apparent to the casual visitor. 

“Filtered views” deep into the forested landscape, including views into the gentle rolling hills, 

would be created. This would enhance the existing scenery. Open, park-like stands of older 

structure ponderosa pine stands would be more readily seen along travel corridors. The “tunnel” 

effects currently found throughout the project area would be reduced and would become 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 160 

diversified with more openings in treated areas. After the short-term effects of treatment 

activities (disturbed soil, slash, scorched vegetation) have recovered, the diverse scenic views are 

expected to enhance a visitor’s experience along these corridors. 

Forest Plan direction would be met with the retention of residual trees, post-treatment clean up 

activities, and implementation of design elements. This alternative would better enhance the 

visual quality than the other alternatives. 

Alternative 3 

Approximately 4,414 acres within visual corridors would be treated to enhance long-term 

scenery through precommercial thinning and underburning activities. Under this alternative, the 

effect on scenery is expected to be less than the other alternatives since only small understory 

trees would be removed. 

Precommercial thinning and underburning would have short term effects on scenery, such as 

stumps, slash, scorched vegetation, and smoke. However, in the long-term, scenery would be 

enhanced and the vegetation would be moved toward more sustainable conditions. Sufficient 

levels of residual trees would remain on site to meet desired conditions. 

Management activities would occur within the U.S. Highway 26 Scenic Corridor, Bandit Springs 

Recreation Area, and travel corridors along Forest Roads 27, 2630, and 2210 within rRetention 

and partial retention visual management allocations. The long term (20 years and longer) scenic 

quality within the treatment areas may improve slightly or would remain the same as the existing 

condition. Less alteration to the scenery would occur due to the removal of smaller, understory 

trees. 

There would be no new road construction. 

“Filtered” views would only be created in two-storied stands which do not have a mid-canopy 

layer. Fewer views of open ponderosa pine would be visible than in the other action alternatives. 

The retention of green trees following treatment would maintain scenery. 

The Forest Plan direction would be met through retention of residual trees, post-treatment clean 

up activities, and implementation of design elements. This alternative would move less of the 

area toward the desired future condition for scenic resources than the other action alternatives. 

Alternative 4 

Approximately 4,657 acres within visual corridors would be managed to enhance long-term 

scenic quality through commercial thinning, precommercial thinning, and underburning 

activities. Management activities within the visual corridors would have a short-term effect on 

scenery due to slash, stumps, blackened vegetation, and smoke. However, in the long-term, 

scenery would be enhanced and the vegetation would be moved to more sustainable conditions. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 161 

Management activities would occur within the U.S. Highway 26 Scenic Corridor, Bandit Springs 

Recreation Area, and travel corridors along Forest Roads 27, 2630, and 2210 within visual 

management allocations. Commercial harvest and precommercial thinning would occur within 

densely stocked stands and would remove understory trees. Treatments would enhance and 

maintain scenery. This would allow the development of more large ponderosa pine and views of 

large ponderosa pine would become more frequent. 

There would be approximately 8.2 miles total of road work within the visual corridors. This 

includes approximately 0.8 miles of new road construction and closing the roads after timber 

hauling and 0.2 miles of new road construction and decommissioning the roads after timber 

hauling. 1.0 mile of existing roads would be decommissioned and 2.8 miles of existing roads 

would be closed following timber haul. Newly constructed road beds would be visible in the 

long run but would eventually become overgrown with vegetation. Decommissioned roads 

would be scarified, seeded, and water barred after use. One of the proposed new roads would 

take off directly from the visual corridor along Road 27; this road would be decommissioned 

following commercial harvest activities and would be apparent to the casual visitor for a period 

of time. 

“Filtered views” deep into the forested landscape, including views into the gentle rolling hills, 

would be created. This would enhance the existing scenery. Open, park-like stands of older 

structure ponderosa pine stands would be more readily seen along travel corridors. The “tunnel” 

effects currently found throughout the project area would be reduced and would become 

diversified with more openings in treated areas. After the short-term effects of treatment 

activities (disturbed soil, slash, scorched vegetation) have recovered, the diverse scenic views are 

expected to enhance a visitor’s experience along these corridors. 

Forest Plan direction for scenic resources would be met with the retention of residual trees, posttreatment clean up activities, and implementation of design elements. This alternative would 

enhance the visual quality of the project area. 

Alternative 5 

Approximately 4,572 acres within visual corridors would be managed to enhance long-term 

scenic quality through commercial thinning, precommercial thinning, and underburning 

activities. Management activities within the visual corridors would have a short-term effect on 

scenery due to slash, stumps, blackened vegetation, and smoke. However, in the long-term, 

scenery would be enhanced and the vegetation would be moved to more sustainable conditions. 

Management activities would occur within the U.S. Highway 26 Scenic Corridor, Bandit Springs 

Recreation Area, and travel corridors along Forest Roads 27, 2630, and 2210 within visual 

management allocations. Commercial harvest and precommercial thinning would occur within 

densely stocked stands and would remove understory trees. Treatments would enhance and 

maintain scenery. This would allow the development of more large ponderosa pine and views of 

large ponderosa pine would become more frequent. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 162 

There would be approximately 6.8 miles total of road work within the visual corridors. This 

includes approximately 1.2 miles of new road construction and closing the roads after timber 

hauling and 0.2 miles of new road construction and decommissioning the roads after timber 

hauling. 1.0 mile of existing roads would be decommissioned and 1.2 miles of existing roads 

would be closed following timber haul. Road beds would be visible in the long run but would 

eventually become overgrown with vegetation. Decommissioned roads would be scarified, 

seeded, and water barred after use. One of the proposed new roads would take off directly from 

the visual corridor along Road 27; this road would be decommissioned following commercial 

harvest activities and would be apparent to the casual visitor for a period of time. 

“Filtered views” deep into the forested landscape, including views into the gentle rolling hills, 

would be created. This would enhance the existing scenery. Open, park-like stands of older 

structure ponderosa pine stands would be more readily seen along travel corridors. The “tunnel” 

effects currently found throughout the project area would be reduced and would become 

diversified with more openings in treated areas. After the short-term effects of treatment 

activities (disturbed soil, slash, scorched vegetation) have recovered, the diverse scenic views are 

expected to enhance a visitor’s experience along these corridors. 

Forest Plan direction for scenic resources would be met with the retention of residual trees, posttreatment clean up activities, and implementation of design elements. 

Table 52. Acres of activities within the visual corridors. 

Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Commercial 0 1,539 0 1,379 1,123 

Precommercial

Thinning 

0 1,937 3,217 2,100 2,334 

Natural Fuels 

Underburning 

0 981 1,078 1,059 996 

Hardwood 0 119 119 119 119 

Total 0 4,576 4,414 4,657 4,572 

Note: The prescriptions for commercial activities also include precommercial thinning and activity fuels 

underburning. The prescriptions for precommercial thinning also include activity fuels underburning; 

Cumulative Effects 

There are no cumulative effects related to visual quality within the project area because there are 

no planned or reasonable foreseeable activities that would alter the visual quality. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 163 

Water Quality 

Temperature and 303(d) list 

Affected Environment 

Marks, Little Hay, and Hamilton Creeks are on the 2004/2006 state 303(d) list of Water Quality 

Limited Water Bodies for summer water temperature. The 2004/2006 Oregon 303(d) list was 

approved by EPA on February 26, 2007. Table 53 displays the 7-day average, maximum water 

temperatures for stations on Marks Creek and its tributaries measured from 1997 through 2006. 

Water temperatures over threshold are indicated in bold. Water temperatures from 1994 through 

1996 are on file at the Lookout Mountain Ranger District. The state standard (Oregon Water 

Quality Standards (OAR) 340-041-0002(56) and 340-041-0028(4)(c)) indicates the 7-dayaverage maximum temperature of streams identified as having salmon and trout rearing and 

migration should not exceed 18.0 degrees C (64.4 degrees F). 

U.S. Highway 26 is immediately adjacent to a number of reaches on Marks Creek. The loss of 

shade and channelization resulting from the highway is a major contributor to higher 

temperatures in Marks Creek. The 2004/2006 303(d) list references 2002 data from Marks 1 

(below Peterson Creek) and Marks 2 (above Little Hay Creek). The 1997 data, shown in Table 

53 for Marks 3 (below Buck Creek) and Marks 4 (below Cornez Creek), support the extension of 

the listing to the upper reaches of this creek. Monitoring indicates that the floating 7-day 

maximum average water temperatures in most of Marks Creek range from the low to mid 70's. 

Decreases in base flows due to evaporation from Marks Pond, irrigation withdrawals in lower 

Marks Creek, and shallow groundwater use by homeowners are probably also contributing to 

higher summer water temperatures. Maximum 7-day floating average water temperatures in 

Marks Creek tributaries range from the high 60’s to mid 70’s in Crystal and Peterson Creeks to 

meeting state and INFISH standards in Hamilton and McGinnis Creeks. 

Monitoring of Hamilton Creek started in 2001, the year after the Hash Rock Fire, to evaluate the 

effects of the fire above the 2600-200 road. By 2003, the water temperatures had fallen back 

below threshold. Based on recent water temperature monitoring, Hamilton Creek should not be 

on the 303(d) list because the high temperatures were a temporary effect of the Hash Rock Fire. 

Other streams in the project area were monitored that are not on the 2004/2006 303(d) list. The 

station on McGinnis Creek was established to evaluate the effects of the Hash Rock Fire. The 

fire intensity in this area was lower than in Hamilton Creek and the water temperatures never 

exceeded the threshold. However, McGinnis Creek shows the same 3-year water temperature 

recovery observed on Hamilton Creek. The stations on Salmon Creek were established to 

evaluate the effects of conifer removal from aspen. The conifer trees have since died from a bark 

beetle infestation. The upper Salmon Creek station (Salmon 2) is spatially intermittent. Salmon 

Creek appears to be over threshold. The temperature monitoring site on Crystal Creek is 

between 0.1-0.2 miles above it’s confluence with Marks Creek. Monitoring data indicates it is 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 164 

above threshold. Rush Creek was over threshold in 1997, but only had a 7-day average daily 

maximum water temperature of 63.83 degrees F in 1996. 

Table 53. Marks Creek 7-day average maximum water temperatures for 1997-2006. 

Station 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

7 Day 72.94 72.53 70.02 73.02 72.45 73.72 74.23 72.09 -- -- Marks 1 

days>64.4 83 64 57 63 76 39+ 91 63 -- -- 

7 Day 64.25 69.41 vandal vandal 73.07 75.6 74.78 70.88 -- -- Marks 2 days>64.4 0* 43 -- -- 74 62+ 86 63 -- -- 

7 Day 70.62 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Marks 3 days>64.4 62 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

7 Day 72.91 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Marks 4 days>64.4 69 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

7 Day -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 64.17 69.07 67.76 Salmon 1 days>64.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 30 47 

7 Day -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 61.33 64.04 70.59 Salmon 2 days>64.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ** ** 14 

7 Day -- -- -- -- 66.62 64.71 61.94 62.33 -- -- Hamilton days>64.4 -- -- -- -- 24 3 0 0 -- -- 

7 Day -- -- -- -- 64.21 63.10 62.26 62.92 -- -- McGinnis days>64.4 -- -- -- -- 1 0 0 0 -- -- 

7 Day 70.93 -- -- -- 68.39 ND 71.71 72.96 -- -- Crystal days>64.4 58 -- -- -- 17 -- 14 41 -- -- 

7 Day 66.51 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Rush days>64.4 14 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

7 Day 63.24 61.52 vandal vandal 60.90 64.76 66.69 60.54 -- -- Little Hay days>64.4 0 0 -- -- 0 3 16 0 -- -- 

ND = No Data (indicates defective temperature probe) 

vandal = vandalism (indicates temperature probes were stolen) 

* Marks 2 (above Little Hay Creek) – Samples 4/10/97-5/23/97 

** Salmon Creek 2 (above aspen stand) is spatially intermittent – data dropped when dry. 

No measurable increase in water temperatures, except in accordance with water quality 

standards, may result from management practices in the Spears project area on streams over the 

state water temperature standard threshold. The INFISH RMOs indicate there should be no 

measurable increase in the 7-day maximum average water temperature for the project area. 

Hamilton Creek water temperatures have recovered from the Hash Rock Fire and fell back below 

threshold in 2003. Little Hay Creek was under threshold during more than half of the years 

monitored. The 2003 temperature data does not look consistent with the temperature pattern of 

earlier and later years. This was probably due to a sampling error. The 2003 data should not 

have been used for determining impairment. Hamilton and Little Hay Creeks should not be on 

the 303(d) list based on temperature monitoring data. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 165 

Reductions in solar input resulting from shading are a primary factor affecting stream 

temperature. Shade functions generally occur within 100-200 feet of the channel (Beschta et al. 

1987). 

The February 12, 2007, Spears Vegetation Project Hydrology Report contains additional 

information on 303(d) listed streams, stream shading, and temperature. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

There would be no activities within the RHCAs for streams on the 303(d) list. No reduction in 

shading would result from this alternative. There would be no increase in water temperatures. 

The temperature of streams that are on the 303(d) list as described above would not change. 

Alternative 2 

There would be about 147 acres of commercial harvest in Class I, II, and III RHCAs. These 

activities would not reduce shade on fish-bearing streams or non-fish-bearing perennial streams. 

The only commercial harvest within an RHCA on a 303(d) listed stream is in Unit 841 along 

Marks Creek. Commercial harvest in this unit would be accomplished using a helicopter logging 

system. Commercial harvest would only occur in the outer 100 feet of the 300-foot RHCA and 

would not reduce shade on Marks Creek. 

There would be about 723 acres of precommercial and hardwood thinning in Class I, II, and III 

RHCAs. Precommercial thinning within RHCAs occurs in RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams. In 

the Hamilton Creek RHCA, precommercial thinning would occur in Units 708 and 873. In the 

Little Hay Creek RHCA, thinning would occur in Unit 402 which is an aspen unit. In the Marks 

Creek RHCA, precommercial thinning would occur in Units 567, 840, and 841, and hardwood 

thinning would occur in Units 502 and 507. The height of trees, at various slopes and distances 

that provide shade during the period when peak temperatures occur, were calculated. Thinning 

protocols were developed from this for fish-bearing and perennial nonfish-bearing streams and 

checked using a solar pathfinder. Only trees that do not provide shade would be thinned from 

units along perennial streams. Shade was not a consideration along intermittent streams since 

they should not affect peak water temperatures; however, some shade would be maintained in 

Class IV RHCAs to contribute toward meeting Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs). 

Shade monitoring of precommercial thinning within Class I and II RHCAs in 1998 found less 

than a one (1) percent change in shade readings when compared to shade readings taken prior to 

thinning (Fontaine 1998). Precommercial thinning would not reduce shade on streams, including 

303(d) listed streams. There is a risk of conifer thinning in aspen stands reducing shade for a 

short time (up to 6 months); however, water temperatures would still meet state standards. 

There is a risk of prescribed fire reducing shade for a short time (up to 6 months); however, there 

should not be any measurable increase in water temperatures. Short-term increases in 

temperature (up to 6 months) are allowed even on streams over threshold during activities 

designed to restore riparian vegetation (OAR 340-041-002(56) and 340-041-0004(5)(a)). 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 166 

Prescribed burning would occur within the RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams. Along Hamilton 

Creek, burning would occur in Units 708 and 873. Along Little Hay Creek, burning would occur 

in Units 861, 862, and 867. Along Marks Creek, burning would occur in Units 567, 832, 833, 

838, 840, 841, 842, 901, 921, and 922. Burning would be accomplished when moisture 

conditions favor a low-intensity burn which would result in a mosaic of burned and unburned 

vegetation. Prescribed fire would not be ignited within 50 feet of stream channels, although fire 

would be allowed to burn within this 50-foot buffer. Approximately 38 percent of the RHCAs 

on fish-bearing streams and 38 percent on perennial non-fish bearing streams are in units with 

prescribed fire. It is estimated that 20 percent of the area in the RHCA would burn with most of 

this being at low intensity and further away from the stream. There would not be any measurable 

increase in water temperatures on perennial streams. There is a potential to increase water 

temperature in intermittent non-fish bearing streams (Class IV) when they are flowing, but this 

should not result in a violation of state water quality standards because these streams go dry 

before peak water temperatures occur in the project area. 

There would be no measurable temperature change on any of the Class I-III streams, including 

303(d) listed streams, in the project area under any of the alternatives in the next 10 years. 

Activities proposed in RHCAs, including RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams, are designed to 

promote attainment of RMOs over time. Thinning conifers would increase the growth rates of 

residual conifers and hardwood and broadleaf species such as aspen, cottonwood, alder, and 

willow. Hardwood and broadleaf species are expected to increase in vigor and would provide 

additional shade. Increasing the growth rates of residual conifers would promote development of 

large trees that would become future large wood. As the amount of large woody material in 

streams increases over time, it would result in more pools which would help lower water 

temperatures. 

Alternative 3 

There would be 675 acres of precommercial thinning in Class I, II, and III RHCAs in this 

alternative. Precommercial thinning within RHCAs occurs in RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams. 

In the Hamilton Creek RHCA, precommercial thinning would occur in Units 708 and 873. In the 

Little Hay Creek RHCA, thinning would occur in Unit 402 which is an aspen unit. In the Marks 

Creek RHCA, precommercial thinning would occur in Units 567, 840, and 841, and hardwood 

thinning would occur in Units 502 and 507. The height of trees, at various slopes and distances 

that provide shade during the period when peak temperatures occur, were calculated. Only trees 

that do not provide shade would be thinned from units along perennial streams. This would not 

reduce shading on fish-bearing streams or non-fish bearing perennial streams. Shade was not a 

consideration along intermittent streams since they should not affect peak water temperatures; 

however, some shade would be maintained in Class IV RHCAs to contribute toward meeting 

RMOs. Precommercial thinning would not reduce shade on streams, including 303(d) listed 

streams, based on monitoring that showed this activity resulted in a change of less than one (1) 

percent (Fontaine 1998). There is a risk of conifer thinning in aspen and cottonwood stands 

reducing shade for a short time (up to 6 months); however, water temperatures would still meet 

state standards. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 167 

There is a risk of prescribed fire reducing shade for a short time (up to 6 months); however, there 

should not be any measurable increase in water temperatures. Prescribed burning would occur 

within the RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams. Along Hamilton Creek, burning would occur in 

Units 708 and 873. Along Little Hay Creek, burning would occur in Units 861, 862, and 867. 

Along Marks Creek, burning would occur in Units 567, 832, 833, 838, 840, 841, 842, 901, 921, 

and 922. Burning would be accomplished when moisture conditions favor a low-intensity burn 

which would result in a mosaic of burned and unburned vegetation. Prescribed fire would not be 

ignited within 50 feet of stream channels, although fire would be allowed to burn within this 50-

foot buffer. Approximately 36 percent of the RHCAs on fish-bearing streams and 33 percent on 

perennial non-fish bearing streams are in units with prescribed fire. It is estimated that between 

20 percent of the area in the RHCA would burn with most of this being at low intensity and 

further away from the stream. There should not be any measurable increase in water 

temperatures on perennial streams. There is a potential to increase water temperature in 

intermittent non-fish bearing streams (Class IV) when they are flowing, but this should not result 

in a violation of state water quality standards because these streams go dry before peak water 

temperatures occur in the project area. 

There would be no measurable temperature change on any of the Class I-III streams in the 

project area under any of the alternatives in the next 10 years. Activities proposed in RHCAs, 

including RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams, are designed to promote attainment of RMOs over 

time. Thinning conifers would increase the growth rates of residual conifers and hardwood and 

broadleaf species such as aspen, cottonwood, alder, and willow. Hardwood and broadleaf 

species are expected to increase in vigor and would provide additional shade. Increasing the 

growth rates of residual conifers would promote development of large trees that would become 

future large wood. As the amount of large woody material in streams increases over time, it 

would result in more pools which would help lower water temperatures. 

Alternative 4 

There would be about 127 acres of commercial harvest in Class I, II, and III RHCAs. This 

would not reduce shading on fish-bearing streams or non-fish-bearing perennial streams. The 

only commercial harvest within an RHCA on a 303(d) listed stream is in Unit 841 along Marks 

Creek. Commercial harvest in this unit would be accomplished using a helicopter logging 

system. Commercial harvest would only occur in the outer 100 feet of the 300-foot RHCA and 

would not reduce shade on Marks Creek. 

There will be about 675 acres of precommercial thinning in Class I, II, and III RHCAs. In the 

Hamilton Creek RHCA, precommercial thinning would occur in Units 708 and 873. In the Little 

Hay Creek RHCA, thinning would occur in Unit 402 which is an aspen unit. In the Marks Creek 

RHCA, precommercial thinning would occur in Units 505, 567, 840, and 841, and hardwood 

thinning would occur in Units 502 and 507. Based on thinning protocols that were developed by 

measuring the height of trees at various slopes and distances, trees that provide shade would not 

be thinned from units along perennial streams. Shade was not a consideration along intermittent 

streams since they should not affect peak water temperatures; however, some shade would be 

maintained in Class IV RHCAs to contribute toward meeting RMOs. Precommercial thinning 

would not reduce shade on streams, including 303(d) listed streams, based on monitoring that 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 168 

showed this activity resulted in a change of less than one (1) percent (Fontaine 1998). There is a 

risk of conifer thinning in aspen and cottonwood stands reducing shade for a short time (up to 6 

months); however, water temperatures would still meet state standards. 

There is a risk of prescribed fire reducing shade for a short time (up to 6 months); however, there 

should not be any measurable increase in water temperatures. Short-term increases in 

temperature (up to 6 months) are allowed even on streams over threshold during activities 

designed to restore riparian vegetation. Prescribed burning would occur within the RHCAs for 

303(d) listed streams. Along Hamilton Creek, burning would occur in Units 708 and 873. 

Along Little Hay Creek, burning would occur in Units 861, 862, and 867. Along Marks Creek, 

burning would occur in Units 567, 832, 833, 838, 840, 841, 842, 901, 921, and 922. Burning 

would be accomplished when moisture conditions favor a low-intensity burn which would result 

in a mosaic of burned and unburned vegetation. Prescribed fire would not be ignited within 50 

feet of stream channels, although fire would be allowed to burn within this 50-foot buffer. 

Approximately 38 percent of the RHCAs on fish-bearing streams and 38 percent on perennial 

non-fish-bearing streams are in units with prescribed fire. It is estimated that 20 percent of the 

area in the RHCA would burn with most of this being at low intensity and further away from the 

stream. There would not be any measurable increase in water temperatures on perennial streams. 

There is a potential to increase water temperature in intermittent non-fish bearing streams (Class 

IV) when they are flowing, but this should not result in a violation of state water quality 

standards because these streams go dry before peak water temperatures occur in the project area. 

There would be no measurable temperature change on any of the Class I-III streams in the 

project area under any of the alternatives in the next 10 years. Activities proposed in RHCAs, 

including RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams, are designed to promote attainment of RMOs over 

time. Thinning conifers would increase the growth rates of residual conifers and hardwood and 

broadleaf species such as aspen, cottonwood, alder, and willow. Hardwood and broadleaf 

species are expected to increase in vigor and would provide additional shade. Increasing the 

growth rates of residual conifers would promote development of large trees that would become 

future large wood. As the amount of large woody material in streams increases over time, it 

would result in more pools which would help lower water temperatures. 

Alternative 5 

There would be about 94 acres of commercial harvest in Class I, II, and III RHCAs. This would 

not reduce shading on fish-bearing streams or non-fish-bearing perennial streams. The only 

commercial harvest within an RHCA on a 303(d) listed stream is in Unit 841 along Marks Creek. 

Commercial harvest in this unit would be accomplished using a helicopter logging system. 

Commercial harvest would only occur in the outer 100 feet of the 300-foot RHCA and would not 

reduce shade on Marks Creek. 

There would be about 732 acres of precommercial thinning in Class I, II, and III RHCAs. In the 

Hamilton Creek RHCA, precommercial thinning would occur in Units 708 and 873. In the Little 

Hay Creek RHCA, thinning would occur in Unit 402 which is an aspen unit. In the Marks Creek 

RHCA, precommercial thinning would occur in Units 505, 567, 832, 833, 840, and 841, and 

hardwood thinning would occur in Units 502 and 507. Based on thinning protocols that were 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 169 

developed by measuring the height of trees at various slopes and distances, trees that provide 

shade would not be thinned from units along perennial streams. Shade was not a consideration 

along intermittent streams since they should not affect peak water temperatures; however, some 

shade would be maintained in Class IV RHCAs to contribute toward meeting RMOs. 

Precommercial thinning would not reduce shade on streams, including 303(d) listed streams, 

based on monitoring that showed this activity resulted in a change of less than one (1) percent 

(Fontaine 1998). There is a risk of conifer thinning in aspen and cottonwood stands reducing 

shade for a short time (up to 6 months); however, water temperatures would still meet state 

standards. 

There is a risk of prescribed fire reducing shade for a short term; however, there should not be 

any measurable increase in water temperatures. There is a risk of prescribed fire reducing shade 

for a short time (up to 6 months); however, water temperatures would still meet state standards. 

Short-term increases in temperature (up to 6 months) are allowed even on streams over threshold 

during activities designed to restore riparian vegetation. Prescribed burning would occur within 

the RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams. Along Hamilton Creek, burning would occur in Units 708 

and 873. Along Little Hay Creek, burning would occur in Units 861, 862, and 867. Along 

Marks Creek, burning would occur in Units 567, 832, 833, 838, 840, 841, 842, 901, 921, and 

922. Burning would be accomplished when moisture conditions favor a low-intensity burn 

which would result in a mosaic of burned and unburned vegetation. Prescribed fire would not be 

ignited within 50 feet of stream channels, although fire would be allowed to burn within this 50-

foot buffer. Approximately 36 percent of the RHCAs on fish-bearing streams and 35 percent on 

perennial non-fish-bearing streams are in units with prescribed fire. It is estimated that 20 

percent of the area in the RHCA would burn with most of this being at low intensity and further 

away from the stream. There would not be any measurable increase in water temperatures on 

perennial streams. There is a potential to increase water temperature in intermittent non-fish 

bearing streams (Class IV) when they are flowing, but this should not result in a violation of state 

water quality standards because these streams go dry before peak water temperatures occur in the 

project area. 

There would be no measurable temperature change on any of the Class I-III streams in the 

project area under any of the alternatives in the next 10 years. Activities proposed in RHCAs, 

including RHCAs for 303(d) listed streams, are designed to promote attainment of RMOs over 

time. Thinning conifers would increase the growth rates of residual conifers and hardwood and 

broadleaf species such as aspen, cottonwood, alder, and willow. Hardwood and broadleaf 

species are expected to increase in vigor and would provide additional shade. Increasing the 

growth rates of residual conifers would promote development of large trees that would become 

future large wood. As the amount of large woody material in streams increases over time, it 

would result in more pools which would help lower water temperatures. 

Cumulative Effects 

The Hash Rock Fire in 2000 resulted in measurable increases in water temperature in Hamilton 

and McGinnis Creeks and may have resulted in increases in Cornez and Reilly Creeks. Shade 

should have recovered in low-intensity burn areas, but it may take up to 20 years to fully recover 

in the high-intensity burn areas. Monitoring on Hamilton and McGinnis Creeks show water 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 170 

temperatures returned to below threshold values in 2003. The streams in the Upper Marks Creek 

subwatershed on the northwest side of U.S. Highway 26 are below the state water temperature 

standard threshold. 

Past logging, road construction, and grazing have reduced shading in the project area. This has 

been offset in some drainages by increased shading from dense overstocked stands of conifers. 

No reduction of shading on fish bearing and perennial non-fish-bearing streams is expected as a 

result of the proposed timber harvest or precommercial thinning based on design criteria. 

Possible short term reductions in shade resulting from conifer thinning in aspen and cottonwood 

stands and prescribed fire are not expected to produce any measurable increases in temperature. 

Past deciduous riparian plantings outside of exclosures in Crystal and Little Hay Creeks are 

being heavily browsed by livestock and wildlife. The allotment management plans for the 

Crystal Springs and Burn Allotment will be analyzed over the next 2 years with the Marks Creek 

and Wildcat Allotments scheduled to start in 2009. The updates to these allotments will not be 

completed until after the decision is made on the Spears Project. It is reasonably foreseeable that 

changes in livestock grazing will result in improved channel condition because of activities such 

as moving water troughs out of riparian zones, fencing or enlarging exclosures at spring source 

areas of water developments, and developing more water sources in the uplands. Changing 

livestock management is outside the scope of this document; however, it is reasonably 

foreseeable that there will be an improvement in riparian condition due to changes in the range 

utilization standards in the Grazing Implementation Monitoring Module (IIT 2000). Studies in 

the intermountain region (Clary 1999) indicate that the height of grasses and forbs that are to be 

left in key riparian areas indicate a level of grazing that allows a corresponding recovery of 

palatable woody vegetation. Bank stability and channel geometry interact with vegetation but 

may respond differently, depending on the extent of continued mechanical disturbance in the 

channel and the current channel condition. 

None of the alternatives are expected to produce measurable increases in the maximum water 

temperature. All alternatives meet state and INFISH water quality temperature standards. State 

Water Quality Rules also indicated that recurring activities, including rotating grazing pastures, 

are not to be considered new or increased discharges which would trigger an anti-degradation 

review as long as they do not increase in frequency, intensity, duration, or geographic extent 

(OAR 340-041-0004(4)(a)). 

There are no reasonably foreseeable activities that would affect stream shade. 

Sediment and Turbidity 

Affected Environment 

It is estimated that between 60 and 75 percent of the sediment in the streams in the Marks Creek 

Watershed and Veazie Creek Subwatershed is coming from in-channel erosion such as bank 

erosion, head cuts, and channel scour. Channel destabilization can result from changes in peak 

flows, sediment load, roads, and livestock impacts. Potential increases from in-channel sources 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 171 

resulting from harvest and natural disturbance induced increases in runoff are analyzed by the 

Equivalent Harvest Area (EHA) model. 

In the late summer of 2000, the Hash Rock Fire burned approximately 4,594 acres in the Marks 

Creek Watershed, predominately in the Mill Creek Wilderness. Turbidity and suspended 

sediment samples were collected in Marks Creek above the Little Hay Bridge between 1998 and 

2005. Samples collected since the fire were compared to samples collected prior to the Hash 

Rock Fire to see if projected increases occurred. Because of the low snow pack and lack of 

severe rainstorms the first few years after the fire, erosion, and sediment delivery to streams was 

less than expected. Peak flows were also substantially less than average. Analysis indicates that 

turbidity in 2001 and 2002 was higher than in samples prior to the fire with that in 2002 being 

lower than that in 2001. However, when the post-fire turbidity for Marks Creek was compared 

with that from Ochoco Creek, which was not affected by the fire, the ratio was found to be 

within the normal range of fluctuation that existed prior to the fire. Dredging in Marks Pond by 

home owners in the spring of 2002 appears to have affected some water quality samples. 

Adequate moisture in the spring and summer of 2001 and the spring of 2002 allowed substantial 

recovery of grasses and forbs in the low to moderate-intensity burn areas and some high-intensity 

burn areas. Needle fall in the high-intensity burn areas without crown fire also continued to 

increase effective ground cover. This combined with the lack of rilling during the first 2 years 

after the fire reduced the risk of higher sediment rates during the remainder of the recovery. 

While the Hash Rock Fire is still affecting flows in the most severely burned drainages, surface 

erosion has returned to pre-fire levels. Fire lines were hydrologically closed and seeded in 2000 

and should also have recovered. There is still a risk of sediment delivery from landslides 

occurring in the high-intensity burn areas on dormant landslide terrain, especially in Hamilton 

Creek, the West Fork Cornez Creek, and McGinnis Creek. Total reinforcement from live and 

dead roots reaches the low point 7 years after the fire (2007) and recovers as live root 

reinforcement increases (Ziemer 1981). These landslides should be fairly small and localized 

due to the drier climate in the project area. 

State water quality standards direct that turbidity levels should not exceed background levels by 

more than 10 percent. The Forest Plan indicates that this will be accomplished by maintaining 

stream bank stability and implementing Best Management Practices (BMPs). 

Turbidity is the degree to which suspended material in the water impedes light penetration. 

There is normally a close correlation between turbidity and suspended sediment in a given 

stream, but this correlation can change as organic material increases over the summer or if the 

percent of sediment from different sources in the drainage changes. Turbidity does not measure 

the amount of sediment being transported as bedload. 

From field observations, it can be seen that the further a sediment source is from a stream, the 

smaller the percentage that gets delivered to the channel. This is due to infiltration of the water 

carrying the sediment, deposition at slope breaks, and deposition in depressions, behind surface 

debris, and in vegetation. Delivery bands derived from Leven (1978) were used for this analysis. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 172 

Sediment from the uplands, direct and cumulative effects to water quality from accelerated 

sediment delivery related to timber harvest practices, fire, and road construction and use were 

evaluated by comparing the relative erosion and sediment delivery rates of the alternatives based 

on the Relative Erosion Rate (RER) model. 

The RER procedure evaluates sediment delivery. It evaluates direct changes to sediment load 

from current management practices and average rates that reflect previous practices and recovery 

rates. Only management activities within 600 feet of mapped streams are evaluated. Soil 

erosivity is based on the Forest Soil Resource Inventory; slopes are derived from the GIS Digital 

Elevation Model; delivery potential is calculated from a technique derived from PSWHA I 

(Leven 1978); and potential sediment yield and recovery are calculated using the “Guide for 

Producing Sediment Yield from Forested Watersheds” (Forest Service 1981), and WATSED 

(Forest Service 1992). Based on the low average annual precipitation in the project area, low 

volume per acre, and not operating in the rainy season, haul delivered sediment should be low 

(less than 10 percent of the road delivered sediment). Because of the amount and period of haul 

on individual roads, annual precipitation, and the low sediment delivery, haul delivered sediment 

was not calculated because of the low level. The RER does not calculate the actual sediment 

load but calculates a Relative Erosion Rate that is used to compare alternatives. 

The RER depicts potential sediment delivery based on the amount and type of ground 

disturbance, slope/erosion class (based on soil erosivity and slope), and distance to stream 

channels. The actual sediment delivery may be higher or lower than predicted depending on the 

amount of vegetative recovery before storm events and storm intensity. Elevated sediment 

delivery may occur even if no additional activities are accomplished if a large runoff event 

occurs such as that in January 1997. The first timber sale is to be offered in 2007. RER 

calculations assume all harvest activities, in Alternatives 2, 4, and 5, will take place between 

2008 and 2011. In the project area, a sixth of the harvest is assumed to occur in 2008, a third in 

2009 and 2010, and a sixth in 2011. Precommercial and hardwood thinning activities are 

assumed to be completed by 2013. Fuels treatments were modeled as being finished in 2015. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

Sediment and turbidity levels would not change. Over time, without disturbance, fuel loading in 

stands would continue to progress toward Condition Class 3, which has a higher risk of highintensity fire. In the long term, there is a potential for indirect effects associated with fuel 

loading that would carry high-intensity wildfire. If a large-scale, high-intensity fire was to occur,

there is a high probability of increased sediment delivery resulting in adverse effects to aquatic 

habitats. It is difficult to predict the time or the scale and intensity at which such an event might

occur, but it is highly probable that it would be larger and more intense than what happened 

historically due to increased ladder fuels and higher fuel loadings. Roads in the stream influence 

zone would not be inactivated (closed) or decommissioned. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 173 

Alternative 2 

Alternative 2 proposes harvest on 16.7 percent of the project area (14.4% tractor, 0.2% skyline, 

and 2.1% helicopter). It is estimated that 90 percent of the sediment delivered to streams from 

surface erosion comes from within 400 feet of the channel. This alternative proposes harvest on 

approximately 11.3 percent (1,421 acres) of total NFS lands in the project area within 400 feet of 

streams (8.3% tractor, 0.3% skyline, and 2.7% helicopter). Approximately 1,051 acres of tractor 

harvest, 38 acres of skyline harvest, and 332 acres of helicopter harvest are proposed within 400 

feet of streams. Megahan (1980) found that selective tractor harvest produced about 30 percent 

Table 54. Tractor harvest unit areas of concern within 200 feet of streams. 

Unit1 20-35% Erosive 

Soils (acres) 

>35% Slope 

(acres) 

Soil and Slope Concern (% Unit 

within 200 feet of stream) 

RHCA2

108 8.9 0.7 36 Y 

111 1.2 -- 23 Y 

1123 -- 0.6 25 N 

1253 5.0 1.0 74 Y 

129 -- <0.1 19 N 

139 2.8 1.2 12 Y 

160 1.1 0.8 38 Y 

163 3.2 0.6 18 Y 

166 1.5 1.0 67 Y 

174 -- <0.1 100 N 

1913 -- 1.1 27 Y 

193 -- 2.0 41 Y 

198 -- 0.1 5 N 

199 -- 0.8 22 N 

200 -- 0.4 4 Y 

2013 -- 4.2 46 Y 

515 0.1 -- 36 N 

5503 0.4 -- 28 N 

559 0.2 -- 10 Y 

563 -- <0.1 <1 N 

570 -- <0.1 2 N 

7043 -- <0.1 2 N 

711 -- 0.2 <1 N 

776 2.0 0.1 12 Y 

806 2.6 0.7 32 N 

810 -- 0.5 11 N 

846 1.4 0.2 37 Y 

879 0.3 -- 5 N 

1Units in bold have a risk of delivering sediment to streams. 

2

 Units with harvest in RHCA where soil erosivity or slope concern extends into the RHCA. 

3

 There is no harvest in Class IV RHCAs in these units. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 174 

less sediment than clearcutting. Skyline harvest produces about half of that caused by tractor 

logging, and helicopter less than a fifth. Tractor harvest units within 200 feet of streams that 

have the highest potential sediment delivery are shown in Table 54. The RER analysis indicates 

that about 46 percent of the potential new sediment originates from timber harvest. It is 

estimated more than 25 percent of this logging generated sediment would come from five tractor 

harvest units: 108, 139, 148, 163, and 776. Reshin and others (2006) in a study with samples in 

both eastern and western Washington found that a 10-meter (32.8 foot) setback of felling and 

yarding activities prevented sediment delivery to streams from about 95 percent of harvestrelated erosion features and said a wider setback may be advisable on portions of units where 

steep inner gorges extend beyond 10 meters. Lynch and others (1985) determined that a 30 

meter (98.4 foot) buffer from logging operations removed an average of 75-80 percent of the 

suspended sediment in storm water. This is consistent with post-harvest observations by the 

project hydrologist on the Ochoco National Forest, but suspended sediment delivery appears to 

be lower because of the lower precipitation rates east of the Cascades and higher infiltration rates 

in the project area. 

This alternative includes underburn activities on 40 percent (5,047 acres) of the project area 

within 400 feet of streams. Planned ignitions are designed to produce a mosaic burn. About 20 

percent of the units within RHCAs are expected to burn. Burning would not be accomplished all 

at one time, but is expected to take up to 10 years to complete depending on when thinning 

activities occur and when suitable weather conditions for fire ignition occur. Commercial 

harvest and precommercial thinning would reduce ladder fuels and reduce the number of stands 

at high risk from insects and disease. Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and fuels 

treatments overlay about 50 percent of the forested plant associations in the project area. Fuels 

treatments would be accomplished on about 51 percent of the area in forested plant associations 

outside the Mill Creek Wilderness. The reduction of surface and ladder fuels would reduce the 

amount of area susceptible to high-intensity wildfire. About 2,937 acres of activities (harvest 

and PCT) and 2,111 acres of natural fuels treatments are proposed within 400 feet of streams. 

About 28 percent of the new potential sediment originates from fuels treatments. 

This alternative constructs 3.3 mile of road within 400 feet of streams (0.16 mi/mi2). New and 

reopened roads would be closed or decommissioned after use. Stream crossings are a major 

sediment delivery site. Under this alternative, there would be two crossings on Class II streams, 

four crossings on Class III streams, and 28 crossings on Class IV streams. Road construction 

would result in 10 new crossings, one on a Class II and the other nine on Class IV streams. They 

can concentrate runoff and transport sediment down ditch lines, down the surface of the road, 

and can generate sediment on the approaches and at the crossing. Several miles of road (7.3 

miles) within 400 feet of streams would be decommissioned after use. In addition, this 

alternative would close 3.9 miles of road within 400 feet of streams after completion of the sale. 

The RER analysis indicates that about 28 percent of the potential new sediment originates from 

roads. Most sediment delivered to streams would come from stream crossings, road drainage 

close to streams, and harvest and fuels treatments adjacent to Class IV streams. 

Field observation and monitoring of the Trout Creek timber sale and the Hash Rock Fire have 

shown that intact RHCAs are effective at filtering sediment. Design elements prevent 

mechanical disturbance of stream channels and generally preclude placing landings and using 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 175 

ground-based equipment in RHCAs (see Chapter 2 for exceptions). This alternative proposes 48 

acres or about 4 miles of tractor harvest in Class 4 RHCAs (Class IV streams) by pulling cable 

from outside the RHCA. Based on past monitoring, design elements to protect stream channels 

from mechanical disturbance and maintain filtering in fuels units, and delayed burning in 

RHCAs with precommercial thinning slash, this alternative has a moderate risk of sediment 

delivery, but would still meet state water quality turbidity standards because filtering vegetation 

would be maintained in RHCAs. 

Alternative 3 

No timber harvest or road work is proposed in this alternative. All new potential sediment 

originates from fuels treatments. 

This alternative includes underburning activities on 37 percent (4,628 acres) of the project area 

within 400 feet of streams. Planned ignitions are designed to produce a mosaic burn. About 20 

percent of RHCAs are expected to burn. Burning would not be accomplished all at one time, but 

may take up to 10 years to complete. Precommercial thinning would reduce ladder fuels and 

reduce the number of stands at high risk from insects and disease. Precommercial thinning and 

fuels treatments overlay about 46 percent of the forested plant associations in the project area. 

Fuels treatments would be accomplished on about 47 percent of the area in forested plant 

associations outside the Mill Creek Wilderness. The reduction of surface and ladder fuels would 

reduce the amount of area susceptible to high-intensity wildfire. About 10 percent less new 

potential sediment originates from fuels treatments in this alternative than in Alternative 2. Most 

sediment delivered by this alternative to streams would come from fuels treatments adjacent to 

Class IV streams. The RER analysis indicates that Alternative 3 generates 74 percent less 

potential new sediment than Alternative 2. 

Based on the lack of mechanical disturbance in RHCAs and design elements to maintain 

filtration in RHCAs, Alternative 3 would meet state water quality turbidity standards. 

Alternative 4 

Alternative 4 proposes harvest on 13.4 percent of the project area (11.2% tractor and 2.2% 

helicopter). It is estimated that 90 percent of the sediment delivered to streams from surface 

erosion comes from within 400 feet of the channel. This alternative proposes harvest on 

approximately 9.6 percent (1,201 acres) of the NFS lands in the project area within 400 feet of 

streams (7.0% tractor & 2.6% helicopter). Approximately 879 acres of tractor harvest and 322 

acres of helicopter harvest are proposed within 400 feet of streams under this alternative. Tractor 

harvest units within 200 feet of streams that have higher potential sediment delivery are shown in 

Table 55. About 19 percent less new potential sediment originates from harvest treatments in 

this alternative than in Alternative 2. It is estimated more than 25 percent of logging generated 

sediment would come from four tractor harvest units: 108, 148, 163, and 776. 

This alternative proposes underburn activities on 40 percent (4,982 acres) of the project area 

within 400 feet of streams. Planned ignitions are designed to produce a mosaic burn. Only 

about 20 percent of the units within RHCAs are expected to burn. Burning would not be 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 176 

accomplished all at one time, but may take up to 10 years to complete. Commercial harvest and 

precommercial thinning would reduce ladder fuels and reduce the number of stands at high risk 

from insects and disease. Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and fuels treatments 

overlay about 49 percent of the forested plant associations in the project area. Fuels treatments 

would be accomplished on about 50 percent of the area in forested plant associations outside the 

Mill Creek Wilderness. The reduction of surface and ladder fuels would reduce the amount of 

area susceptible to high-intensity wildfire. New potential sediment originating from fuels 

treatments in this alternative are about the same as those in Alternative 2. 

Table 55. Tractor harvest unit areas of concern within 200 feet of streams. 

Unit1

 20-35% Erosive 

Soils (acres) 

>35% Slope 

(acres) 

Soil and Slope Concern (% Unit 

within 200 feet of stream) 

RHCA2

108 8.9 0.7 36 Y 

111 1.2 -- 23 Y 

1123 -- 0.6 25 N 

1253 3.6 0.1 64 N 

129 <0.1 19 N 

139 0.2 <0.1 85 Y 

163 2.8 0.5 18 Y 

166 1.5 1.0 67 Y 

174 -- <0.1 100 N 

1913 -- 1.1 27 Y 

193 -- 2.0 41 Y 

198 -- 0.1 5 N 

199 -- 0.8 22 N 

200 -- 0.4 4 Y 

2013 -- 4.2 46 Y 

515 0.1 -- 36 N 

5503 0.4 -- 28 N 

559 0.2 -- 7 Y 

563 -- <0.1 <1 N 

570 -- <0.1 2 N 

7043 -- <0.1 2 N 

711 -- 0.2 3 N 

776 2.0 0.1 12 Y 

810 -- 0.5 11 N 

879 0.3 -- 5 N 

1Units in bold have a risk of delivering sediment to streams. 

2

 Units with harvest in RHCA where soil erosivity or slope concern extends into the RHCA. 

3

 There is no harvest in Class IV RHCAs in these units. 

This alternative constructs 1.3 mile of road within 400 feet of streams (0.07 mi/mi2). New and 

reopened roads would be closed ore decommissioned after use. Several miles of road (6.5 miles) 

within 400 feet of streams, would be decommissioned. In addition, 3.8 miles of road within 400 

feet of streams would be closed after completion of commercial timber harvest. Stream 

crossings are a major sediment delivery site. Under this alternative, there would be one crossing 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 177 

on a Class II stream, four crossings on Class III streams, and 23 crossings on Class IV streams. 

Road construction would result in five new crossings on Class IV streams. They can concentrate 

runoff and transport sediment down ditch lines, down the road surface, and can generate 

sediment on the approaches and at the crossing. About 62 percent less new potential sediment 

originates from roads in this alternative than in Alternative 2. 

Most sediment delivered to streams would come from stream crossings, road drainage close to 

streams, and harvest and fuels treatments adjacent to Class IV streams. The RER analysis 

indicates that Alternative 4 generates 24 percent less potential new sediment than Alternative 2. 

Field observation and monitoring of the Trout Creek timber sale and the Hash Rock Fire have 

shown that intact RHCAs are effective at filtering sediment. Design elements prevent 

mechanical disturbance of stream channels and generally preclude placing landings and using 

tractor harvest in RHCAs (see Chapter 2 for exceptions). This alternative proposes 36 acres or 

about 3 miles of tractor harvest in Class IV RHCAs by pulling cable from outside the RHCA. 

Based on past monitoring, design elements to protect stream channels from mechanical 

disturbance, maintain filtering in fuels units, and delayed burning in RHCAs with precommercial 

thinning slash, this alternative would meet state water quality turbidity standards. 

Alternative 5 

Alternative 5 proposes harvest on 10.7 percent of the project area (8.9% tractor and 1.8% 

helicopter). This alternative proposes harvest on approximately 7.4 percent (931 acres) of the 

NFS lands in the project area within 400 feet of streams (5.5% tractor and 1.9% helicopter). 

Approximately 703 acres of tractor harvest and 228 acres of helicopter harvest are proposed 

within 400 feet of streams. Tractor harvest units within 200 feet of streams that have higher 

potential sediment delivery are shown in Table 56. The RER analysis indicates that this 

alternative generates 33 percent less potential new harvest generated sediment than Alternative 2. 

Three tractor units (108, 139, and 163) account for more than 20 percent of the projected harvest 

generated sediment delivery in Alternative 5. 

This alternative proposes underburn activities on 37 percent (4,685 acres) of the project area 

within 400 feet of streams. Planned ignitions are designed to produce a mosaic burn. About 20 

percent of the area within units in RHCAs are expected to burn. Burning would not be 

accomplished all at one time, but may take up to 10 years to complete. Commercial harvest and 

precommercial thinning would reduce ladder fuels and reduce the number of stands at high risk 

from insects and disease. Commercial harvest, precommercial thinning, and fuels treatments 

overlay about 47 percent of the forested plant associations in the project area. Fuels treatments 

would be accomplished on about 48 percent of the area in forested plant associations outside the 

Mill Creek Wilderness. The reduction of surface and ladder fuels would reduce the amount of 

area susceptible to high-intensity wildfire. About 7 percent less new potential sediment 

originates from fuels treatments in this alternative than in Alternative 2. 

This alternative constructs 1.3 mile of road within 400 feet of streams (0.07 mi/mi2). New and 

reopened roads would be closed or decommissioned after use. Nearly 6 miles of road within 400 

feet of streams would be decommissioned. This alternative would close 2.4 miles of open road 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 178 

within 400 feet of streams. Stream crossings are a major sediment delivery site. Under this 

alternative, there would be one crossing on a Class II stream, three crossings on Class III 

streams, and 21 crossings on Class IV streams. Road construction would result in six new 

crossings on Class IV streams. They can concentrate runoff and transport sediment down ditch 

lines, down the surface and can generate sediment on the approaches and at the crossing. The 

RER analysis indicates that this alternative generates 67 percent less potential new road 

delivered sediment than Alternative 2. 

Table 56. Tractor harvest unit areas of concern within 200 feet of streams. 

Unit1 20-35% Erosive 

Soils (acres) 

>35% Slope 

(acres) 

Soil and Slope Concern (% Unit 

within 200 feet of stream) 

RHCA2

108 8.9 0.7 36 Y 

111 1.2 -- 23 Y 

1123 -- 0.6 25 N 

1253 5.0 1.0 74 N 

139 0.2 <0.1 85 Y 

163 2.6 0.6 51 Y 

166 0.5 1.0 66 Y 

174 -- <0.1 100 N 

1913 -- 1.1 27 N 

193 -- 0.4 29 Y 

198 -- 0.1 5 N 

199 -- 0.8 22 N 

200 -- 0.4 4 Y 

2013 -- 4.2 46 Y 

515 0.1 -- 36 N 

559 0.2 -- 7 Y 

563 -- <0.1 <1 N 

570 -- <0.1 2 N 

7043 -- <0.1 2 N 

776 2.0 0.1 12 Y 

810 -- 0.5 11 N 

879 0.3 -- 5 N 

1Units in bold have a risk of delivering sediment to streams. 2

 Units with harvest in RHCA where soil erosivity or

slope concern extends into the RHCA. 

3

 There is no harvest in Class IV RHCAs in these units. 

Most sediment delivered to streams would come from stream crossings, road drainage close to 

streams, and harvest and fuels treatments adjacent to Class IV streams. The RER analysis 

indicates that Alternative 5 generates 35 percent less potential new sediment than Alternative 2. 

Field observation and monitoring of the Trout Creek Timber Sale and the Hash Rock Fire have 

shown that intact RHCAs are effective at filtering sediment. Design elements prevent 

mechanical disturbance of stream channels and generally preclude placing landings and using 

tractor yarding in RHCAs (exceptions are listed in Chapter 2, Design Elements). This alternative 

proposes 29 acres or about 2.4 miles of tractor harvest in Class IV RHCAs by pulling cable from 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 179 

outside the RHCA. Based on monitoring, design elements to protect stream channels from 

mechanical disturbance, maintain filtering in fuels units, and delayed burning in RHCAs with 

precommercial thinning slash, this alternative would meet state water quality turbidity standards. 

Reshin and others (2006) in a study with samples in both eastern and western Washington found 

that a 10-meter (32.8 foot) setback of felling and yarding activities prevented sediment delivery 

to streams from about 95 percent of harvest related erosion features and said a wider setback may 

be advisable on portions of units where steep inner gorges extend beyond 10 meters. Lynch and 

others (1985) determined that a 30 meter (98.4 foot) buffer from logging operations removed an 

average of 75-80 percent of the suspended sediment in storm water. This is consistent with postharvest observations by the project hydrologist on the Ochoco National Forest, but suspended 

sediment delivery appears to be lower because of the lower precipitation rates east of the 

Cascades and higher infiltration rates in the project area. 

Cumulative Effects 

The Bottom Line Survey indicates that about 3 percent of the stream reaches in the project area 

have greater than 20 percent cutbank and about 17 percent have between 10 and 20 percent 

cutbank. Road alignment on U.S. Highway 26 has resulted in channelization of reaches 2, 3 and 

6 of Marks Creek. After the Hash Rock Fire, headcut work and riparian planting were completed 

on McGinnis Creek and undersized culverts were replaced on Hamilton, Cornez, Reilly, and 

McGinnis Creeks. Headcuts were treated in Little Hay Creek in 2001 and McGinnis Creek in 

2002 which reduced sediment delivery. Riparian planting and exclosure fencing were also 

accomplished on Little Hay Creek in 2002 and 2003. Headcuts were treated and channel 

restoration work accomplished in Marks Creek on private property below the National Forest 

boundary by the Crooked River Watershed Council between 2002 and 2005. Increases in flow 

and loss of stream bank vegetation due to high-intensity burn on the Hash Rock Fire may still be 

resulting in bank erosion and channel widening in the more severely impacted drainages 

impacted by the fire, especially in Hamilton Creek, the unnamed tributary to the west of 

Hamilton Creek, and the west fork of Cornez Creek. 

Ground disturbance associated with trails, off highway vehicle (OHV) use, dispersed recreation, 

and firewood gathering may cause localized sediment delivery but is small on a watershed scale 

and was not included in the analysis. Sediment from routine road maintenance, which is 

included in the model, was overestimated because the model assumes annual maintenance on 

open roads. It is estimated that most of management derived sediment delivered to streams by 

surface erosion on NFS lands in the project area is coming from roads. Open road densities 

within 400 feet of stream channels, the source area of an estimated 90 percent of surface 

sediment delivered sediment, are shown in Table 57. Proposed road closure and 

decommissioning would reduce the cumulative sediment delivery in the long run but ground 

disturbance from ripping and installing drainage structures would increase sediment the first year 

or two. 

While livestock can affect sediment delivery, in the Spears project area their primary impact 

appears to be on riparian vegetation and channel condition. Degraded channel conditions in the 

headwaters of many streams and in spring areas in the project area have resulted from livestock 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 180 

concentration. Changing livestock management is outside the scope of this document; however, 

it is reasonably foreseeable that cattle will continue grazing in the allotments. Special grazing 

restrictions implemented in the Viewpoint Pasture after the Hash Rock Fire were successful 

based on monitoring. These special grazing restrictions have been lifted. The allotment 

Table 57. Open road densities within 400 feet of streams. 

Subwatershed Alternatives 1 and 3 Alternative 2 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Upper Marks 3.48 mi/mi2 3.16 mi/mi2 3.16 mi/mi2 3.26 mi/mi2 

Creek 36.2 miles 32.9 miles 32.9 miles 33.9 miles 

Lower Marks 3.82 mi/mi2 3.61 mi/mi2 3.62 mi/mi2 3.71 mi/mi2 

Creek 34.6 miles 32.7 miles 32.8 miles 33.6 miles 

0 mi/mi2 0 mi/mi2 0 mi/mi2 0 mi/mi2 Veazie Creek 0 miles 0 miles 0 miles 0 miles 

management plans for the Crystal Springs and Burn Allotments will be analyzed over the next 2 

years, with the Marks Creek and Wildcat Allotments scheduled to start in 2009. The updates to 

these allotments will not be completed until after the decision is made on the Spears project area. 

It is reasonably foreseeable that changes will result in improved channel condition. Upward 

trends in riparian condition are expected to continue due to changes in the range utilization 

standards in the Grazing Implementation Monitoring Module (IIT 2000). These utilization 

standards are used to determine when livestock are to be removed from pastures. Studies in the 

intermountain region (Clary 1999) indicate that the height of grasses and forbs that are to be left 

in key riparian areas indicate a level of grazing that allows a corresponding recovery of palatable 

woody vegetation. Bank stability and channel geometry interact with vegetation but may 

respond differently, depending on the extent of continued mechanical disturbance in the channel 

and the current channel condition. State Water Quality Rules indicated that recurring activities, 

including rotating grazing pastures, are not to be considered new or increasing discharges which 

would trigger an anti degradation review as long as they do not increase in frequency, intensity, 

duration, or geographic extent (OAR 340-041-0004(4)(a)). 

Equivalent Harvest Area (EHA) 

Affected Environment 

Peak annual flows resulting from snowmelt normally occur in March through April in the project 

area. However, peak annual flows resulting from rain-on-snow events in early winter have 

produced some of the highest flows in the project area over the last 50 years. High flows can 

result from intensive convective thunderstorms that cause flash floods during the spring and 

summer. Flash flooding is not a major factor in the Marks Creek Watershed due to vegetation, 

ground cover, and the buffering affect of the forest canopy. Peak flows are probably earlier and 

higher than historically due to loss of floodplain storage due to entrenched channels and soil loss, 

compaction, timber harvest, and road construction which cause flashier responses. This has been 

offset somewhat by increased understory canopy cover. 

The Hash Rock Fire burned approximately 4,594 acres in the Marks Creek Watershed in 2000. 

More than half of this was low intensity resulting in less than 10 percent mortality. Since at least 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 181 

15 percent of the canopy needs to be removed to increase water yield, the primary effect from the 

fire should result from the 4.2 percent of the watershed that burned at moderate to high intensity 

with most of this coming from the 2.7 percent that burned at high intensity. Less than 1 percent 

of the watershed had crown fire. The fire occurred above 4,500 feet primarily in the Mill Creek 

Wilderness on steeper ground. Due to the elevation of the area that burned, there was only a 

small effect on peak flows resulting from rain-on-snow events in early winter. The fire affected 

peak flows associated with spring snow melt but, due to the small increase in EHA from the fire, 

are only observable in those drainages directly affected by it. Increased peak flows in Hamilton 

Creek, the unnamed tributary to the west, and the west fork of Cornez Creek, the most severely 

affected drainages, are expected to last for at least 25 to 30 years. Peak flow increases in the 

other drainages directly affected by the fire should be within the normal range of variability. 

Base flows were probably higher prior to alterations which have occurred over the last 100 years. 

Stream entrenchment has reduced storage potential in alluvial aquifers. Upland storage has been 

lost due to road construction, erosion, and compaction. Prior to European settlement, frequent 

fires maintained lower evapotranspiration and interception rates and water storage in wetlands 

and beaver ponds contributed to base flows. Increases in base flow due to removing trees tend to 

be short term (5 to 10 years) and return to pre-disturbance levels as other vegetation utilizes the 

increase. 

The Hash Rock Fire caused increases in base flows in the drainages directly affected by the fire. 

The increases are most pronounced in Hamilton Creek and the next tributary to the west and to a 

lesser extent in the west fork of Cornez Creek, and upper McGinnis Creek. Increases in Reilly 

Creek, Buck Creek and the main stem of Marks Creek were small and within normal annual 

fluctuations. Increases in the base flow are expected to last for 15 to 20 years after tree reestablishment in high-intenstiy burn areas. 

Stream surveys have identified a number of headcuts on tributaries to Marks Creek in the project 

area making these streams susceptible to increased flows. Headcuts were treated and channel 

restoration work accomplished in Marks Creek on private property below the National Forest 

boundary by the Crooked River Watershed Council between 2002 and 2005. The Forest Service 

accomplished headcut work and riparian planting on McGinnis Creek and replaced undersized 

culverts on Hamilton, Cornez, Reilly, and McGinnis Creeks following the Hash Rock Fire. 

Headcut repair, riparian planting, and exclosure fencing were accomplished on Little Hay Creek 

in 2002 and 2003. 

EHA is used to evaluate the risk to water quality and stream bank stability. The Forest Plan 

assigned an EHA threshold of 30 percent to the Marks Creek and Lower Ochoco Creek 

Watersheds (Veazie Creek Subwatershed). The Marks Creek Watershed Analysis (1998) 

recommended the EHA be reduced to 25 percent based on watershed condition and sensitivity. 

The EHA threshold should not be interpreted as a point above which detrimental impacts will 

occur but as a point above which detrimental impacts may occur, should a 10-year or greater 

storm or melt event take place (Anderson 1989). 

The February 12, 2007, Spears Vegetation Project Hydrology Report contains additional 

information on EHA. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 182 

Environmental Consequences 

EHA calculations assume all harvest activities in Alternatives 2, 4, and 5, will take place 

between 2008 and 2011. Within the project area, a sixth of the harvest is assumed to occur in 

2008, a third in 2009 and 2010, and a sixth in 2011. Precommercial and hardwood thinning 

activities would be completed by 2013. The analysis assumed that fuels reduction activities do 

not remove enough canopy to produce a measurable increase in water yield. Table 58 shows the 

expected EHA values from 2007 through 2015. 

Alternative 1 

There would be no direct effects from this alternative. EHA would continue to recover from past 

harvest and the Hash Rock Fire. Increased peak flows in Hamilton Creek, the unnamed tributary 

to the west, and the west fork of Cornez Creek, the drainages most severely affected by the Hash 

Rock Fire, would persist for several years. Table 58 displays the expected EHA values over 

time. 

The majority of the project area is in Fire Regimes I and III, and fuel loadings have moved into 

Condition Classes 2 and 3. Over time, without disturbance, fuel loading would continue the 

progression toward Condition Class 3, which has the highest risk of high-intensity fire. In the 

long term, there is potential for indirect effects associated with fuel loading that would carry a 

high-intensity wildfire. If a large-scale, high-intensity fire did occur, there would be an increase 

in EHA commensurate with the size and intensity of the fire. It is difficult to predict the time, or 

the scale and intensity at which such an event might occur, but it is probable that it would be 

larger and more intense than what happened historically due to increased ladder fuels and higher 

fuel loadings. 

Effects common to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

The EHA would continue to recover from past harvest and the Hash Rock Fire. Increased peak 

flows in Hamilton Creek, the unnamed tributary to the west, and the west fork of Cornez Creek 

would persist during the period covered by this analysis. Timber harvest and precommercial 

thinning in the action alternatives would reduce interception and evapotranspiration, increase 

snow accumulation, and change snow melt rate and timing. The percentage of commercial 

timber harvest ranges from 16.7 percent of the project area in Alternative 2, to 13.4 percent in 

Alternative 4, to 10.7 percent in Alternative 5. There is no commercial harvest in Alternative 3. 

Fire would reduce interception by burning fuels and vegetation and would reduce 

evapotranspiration by killing or burning back grasses, shrubs and small trees; however, 

prescribed fire would not remove enough canopy to affect EHA or the timing and rate of 

snowmelt. These increases would be partially offset by an increased uptake of water by the 

remaining trees and vegetation. The reduction in interception and evapotranspiration and rate of 

snow melt resulting from prescribed spring and fall burning should not result in any measurable 

increase in flows from areas being treated due to the low intensity of the burn. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 183 

The 196 acres of thinning activities to improve cottonwood and aspen would help improve bank 

stability in stands adjacent to streams in the long term (starting within 5 to 10 years). 

The EHA model does not measure direct effects but is based on the principal that reduced 

canopy closure would reduce interception and evapotranspiration and would increase snow 

accumulation. Standing dead trees no longer transpire but still would affect interception and 

snow accumulation. In addition based on the aspect and elevation of the project area, reducing 

stand density would accelerate snowmelt. Restated, there would be more snow pack and it 

probably would come off faster. However, the EHA values for all of the alternatives are below 

the Forest Plan threshold of 30 percent and the recommended threshold of 25 percent in the 

watershed analysis. 

The probability of an event (flood) occurring can be increased by increasing the runoff efficiency 

of a drainage by road construction, increasing the snow pack through unit size and distribution, 

increasing snow melt rate by reducing canopy closure, or increasing the amount of water 

available by removing vegetation. Measurable increases in flow should start showing up when 

Table 58. EHA on National Forest System lands. 

 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

Marks Creek Watershed 

Alternative 1 14.44 13.68 13.11 12.71 12.33 11.92 11.42 10.45 9.62 

Alternative 2 15.00 16.86 18.87 19.71 19.34 18.81 17.59 16.48

Alternative 3 14.03 13.80 13.73 13.66 13.55 13.31 12.23 11.27

Alternative 4 14.79 16.23 17.82 18.48 18.16 17.70 16.50 15.43

Alternative 5 14.69 15.86 17.18 17.74 17.46 17.04 15.86 14.80

Upper Marks Creek Subwatershed 

Alternative 1 16.58 15.96 15.40 14.96 14.54 14.04 13.36 11.85 11.58

Alternative 2 16.92 18.07 19.31 19.78 19.35 18.69 16.99 15.52 

Alternative 3 16.26 15.99 15.82 15.66 15.41 14.95 13.35 11.98

Alternative 4 16.85 17.88 19.00 19.42 19.01 18.37 16.67 15.21

Alternative 5 16.77 17.58 18.48 18.80 18.42 17.82 16.14 14.69

Lower Marks Creek Subwatershed 

Alternative 1 11.79 10.85 10.27 9.93 9.60 9.31 9.02 8.73 8.43 

Alternative 2 12.62 15.36 18.31 19.62 19.32 18.95 18.33 17.67

Alternative 3 11.27 11.09 11.15 11.19 11.25 11.27 10.84 10.40

Alternative 4 12.25 14.19 16.35 17.32 17.12 16.87 16.30 15.70

Alternative 5 12.11 13.74 15.58 16.42 16.28 16.07 15.52 14.93

Veazie Creek Subwatershed (Lower Ochoco Creek Watershed) 

Alternative 1 2.17 2.07 1.99 1.92 1.84 1.74 1.69 1.59 1.51 

Alternative 2 9.74 17.34 18.13 18.72 19.26 18.64 17.88 17.08

Alternative 3 3.15 4.14 5.09 5.98 6.83 6.47 6.04 5.60 

Alternative 4 8.80 15.42 16.29 16.98 17.62 17.06 16.34 15.60

Alternative 5 8.29 14.40 15.27 15.93 16.60 16.06 15.37 14.68
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 184 

the EHA reaches about 20 percent (Hibbert 1965) and should be roughly proportional to the 

percentage of the area above that value. None of the alternatives would have a measurable 

increase on stream flows because the EHA value is below 20 percent in all alternatives. 

Alternative 2 

Commercial harvest and precommercial thinning would reduce ladder fuels and reduce the 

number of stands at high risk from insects and disease. Commercial harvest, precommercial 

thinning, and fuels treatments overlay about 50 percent of the forested plant associations in the 

project area. Fuels treatments would be accomplished on about 51 percent of the area in forested 

plant associations outside the Mill Creek Wilderness. 

The EHA is below the Forest Plan threshold of 30 percent and the recommended threshold of 25 

percent in the watershed analysis. Harvest and precommercial thinning under Alternative 2 

would not produce any measurable increases in flow (EHA < 20%) in the Marks Creek 

Watershed or the Upper Marks, Lower Marks, and Veazie Creek Subwatersheds. 

Alternative 3 

Precommercial thinning would reduce ladder fuels and reduce the number of stands at high risk 

from insects and disease. Precommercial thinning and fuels treatments overlay about 46 percent 

of the forested plant associations in the project area. Fuels treatments would be accomplished on 

about 47 percent of the area in forested plant associations outside the Mill Creek Wilderness. 

Precommercial thinning proposed under Alternative 3 would not result in measurable increases 

in flow in the Marks Creek Watershed or the Upper Marks, Lower Marks, and Veazie Creek 

Subwatersheds. 

Alternative 4 

Commercial treatments and precommercial thinning would reduce ladder fuels and reduce the 

number of stands at high risk from insects and disease. Commercial harvest, precommercial 

thinning, and fuels treatments overlay about 49 percent of the forested plant associations in the 

project area. Fuels treatments would be accomplished on about 50 percent of the area in forested 

plant associations outside the Mill Creek Wilderness. 

The EHA is below the Forest Plan threshold of 30 percent and the recommended threshold of 25 

percent in the watershed analysis. Harvest and precommercial thinning under Alternative 4 

would not produce any measurable increases in flow (EHA < 20%) in the Marks Creek 

Watershed or the Upper Marks, Lower Marks, and Veazie Creek Subwatersheds. 

Alternative 5 

Commercial harvest and precommercial thinning would reduce ladder fuels and reduce the 

number of stands at high risk from insects and disease. Commercial harvest, precommercial 

thinning, and fuels treatments overlay about 47 percent of the forested plant associations in the 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 185 

project area. Fuels treatments would be accomplished on about 48 percent of the area in forest 

plant associations outside the Mill Creek Wilderness. 

The EHA is below the Forest Plan threshold of 30 percent and the recommended threshold of 25 

percent in the watershed analysis. Harvest and precommercial thinning under Alternative 5 

would not produce any measurable increases in flow (EHA < 20%) in the Marks Creek 

Watershed or the Upper Marks, Lower Marks, and Veazie Creek Subwatersheds. 

Cumulative Effects 

The level of mortality due to the Hash Rock Fire is not expected to produce a measurable effect 

on peak flows at the watershed or subwatershed level, but it is expected to still be affecting flows 

in Hamilton Creek, the unnamed tributary to the west, and the west fork of Cornez Creek. Flows 

in Buck Creek, the east fork and main stem of Cornez Creek, Reilly Creek, and McGinnis Creek 

are within the normal range of variability. 

The EHA model evaluated water yield effects of past and proposed harvest, precommercial 

thinning, and underburning in the project area. It is estimated that about 90 percent of the 

forested land outside the wilderness and research natural area has been at least lightly harvested 

in the past. The model evaluated all timber harvest over the last 30 years plus the Marks Creek 

Fire (1968) and the Hash Rock Fire (2000). Overstory removal and regeneration harvest prior to 

the last 30 years is still affecting water yield, but has substantially recovered. Roads can reduce 

canopy and leaf area index but the area is small. The Forest Plan maximum recommended open 

road density of 3 miles per square mile results in less than a 1 percent EHA. This is less than the 

accuracy of the model and if roads were included only sections that were in forested plant 

associations may be evaluated. The primary effect of roads is increased runoff efficiency 

resulting from extension of the drainage system and erosion from the road surface and cut and 

fill slopes. Natural fuels underburning primarily kills seedlings and saplings and without 

connected precommercial thinning, does not remove enough of the canopy to affect the EHA. 

Insect, disease, and wind throw can reduce canopy but the concentration and area impacted are 

small and dispersed in the project and were not included in the model. The number and spacing 

of the downed trees removed in Pickup Salvage (2001) and beetle kill trees removed in Cougar 

Salvage and TC Salvage (2006) were so few and far apart that they did not affect EHA. Other 

management activities that remove trees that should not affect EHA are: removing safety trees 

from developed campgrounds, removing safety trees adjacent to system roads, removing conifers 

from aspen stands, juniper thinning in low precipitation zones, and the Christmas tree program. 

Harvest treatments on private lands below the National Forest boundary have been similar to 

those on the National Forest. There is currently no logging occurring on private lands in the 

project area. Based on species composition and past harvest activities, any future logging on 

private lands would probably be selective harvest. Since private land only accounts for about 5 

percent of the area in the project area, potential future timber harvest on private lands would 

have a minimal affect on water yield in the project area. 

Livestock grazing is not expected to affect peak or base flows. Livestock have little effect on 

EHA; their primary influence is on bank conditions which is one of the factors that determine 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 186 

what the channel response will be to changes in flow. Upward trends in riparian condition are 

expected to continue due to changes in the range utilization standards in the Grazing 

Implementation Monitoring Module (IIT 2000). 

Wildlife 

Goshawk 

Affected Environment 

Goshawks utilize a variety of forest conditions within their territories, but tend to favor stands 

with patches of moderate to high overstory canopy closure, interlocking crowns, mature to old 

structure, presence of canopy gaps and flyways below the overstory, and proximity to water for 

nesting areas (Schommer and Silovsky 1994, Crocker-Bedford 1990, Bull and Hohmann 1992, 

Reich et al. 2004, and Reynolds et al. 1992). 

There are 22,896 acres of primary nesting habitat within the project area. This figure is based on 

the abundance of forested stands with medium to large size trees (size class 4 and 5) in all seral 

stages (E, M and L) in grand fir and Douglas-fir PAGs, and in the late seral (L) stage in 

ponderosa pine. There are six known goshawk territories within the project area. Each of these 

territories include a variety of habitats and forest conditions. Post-fledging areas (PFAs) have 

been mapped around or adjacent to known goshawk nesting sites. PFAs are generally mapped in 

the best available forested stands (moderate to high canopy closure with medium and large sized 

trees common) around or adjacent to known nest areas. Nesting sites are also mapped within 

each territory. There is one nest site mapped where all known alternate nests can be reasonably 

accommodated within one nest site. If alternate nests are in separate locations, then additional 

nest sites are mapped. In this project area, five of the PFAs are associated with a single mapped 

nest site and one is associated with two separate nest sites. The January 29, 2007, Spears 

Wildlife Report contains additional information on goshawk. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

This alternative would not treat forest stands within PFAs or 30-acre nest sites. This alternative 

would not result in modification of existing habitat conditions. It is estimated that the project 

area would retain habitat suitability in the short term, but potentially be exposed to subsequent 

long-term risk of high intensity disturbance and loss of overstory trees due to continued 

competition for moisture and the presence or development of ladder fuels over time. 

Alternative 1 would result in short-term retention of the existing amount and distribution of 

goshawk habitat at the landscape scale. There are 22,896 acres of primary nesting habitat within 

the project area. This alternative would also retain existing amounts and structural conditions 

within all six PFAs in the project area, at least in the short term. Goshawks are expected to 

continue to utilize the PFAs and other suitable habitat. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 187 

Direct and Indirect Effects Common to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Acres outside the nest areas and within the PFAs that would be treated under any action 

alternative would be thinned from below. These activities are intended to improve forest 

condition by removing understory trees, with the result of enhancing longevity of dominant trees 

and growth of retained co-dominant trees. These activities would result in more open space for 

flight below the overstory canopy which would improve foraging habitat, but would reduce 

nesting and post-fledging hiding cover. All existing snags would be left that are not deemed to 

be a safety hazard. 

Precommercial thinning would be limited to small trees less than 12 inches dbh. However, the 

majority of trees to be cut during precommercial thinning would be less than 9 inches dbh. 

All action alternatives would implement underburning of natural fuels outside of thinning units 

within PFAs. This would occur in three PFAs, but the majority would be in the Crystal Springs 

PFA. Underburning activities within the PFAs would be designed to protect large overstory 

trees and, to the extent practical, snags and large down wood. However, it is predicted that snags 

and down wood that are in advanced stages of decay would be consumed by fire. This would be 

partially offset by the creation of snags and down wood due to fire-killed trees. However, the 

effect of fire on snag retention would likely result in a higher number of hard snags, with a 

concurrent reduction in soft and hollow snag habitat. Burning has the potential to remove large 

snags where they are present prior to treatment, while increasing the relative abundance of 

smaller snags that result from the fire. Prescribed burning would also stimulate production of 

herbaceous vegetation for several years after the fire, and shrubby vegetation 3-15 years after the 

fire. These changes in conditions would provide foraging habitat for some species that would be 

prey for goshawk (such as song birds), while potentially altering nesting habitat for some species 

(such as woodpeckers), which are also prey for goshawk. 

The amount of suitable primary nesting habitat for goshawks within the project area predicted to 

be present after implementation (based on seral structural stage and PAG) is displayed in Table 

59. The rate of development of future habitat can also be accelerated by thinning activities. 

Table 59. Primary reproductive habitat for goshawks post-treatment and after 50 years. 

Post-Treatment 50 Yr Projection Low End HRV High End HRV 

Alternative 1 22,896 25,552 20,819 34,599

Alternative 2 23,272 26,474 20,819 34,599

Alternative 3 23,243 26,530 20,819 34,599

Alternative 4 23,243 26,508 20,819 34,599

Alternative 5 23,350 26,531 20,819 34,599

Over time, as canopy closure recovers and trees in the stand attain diameter growth, primary 

nesting habitat would develop or be regained in treated areas, and would develop in other areas 

as well. All alternatives result in goshawk habitat remaining within the HRV both immediately 

after treatment and after 50 years of development post-treatment. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 188 

Alternative 2 

This alternative would commercially harvest timber on 421 acres and precommercial thin trees 

on 115 acres within PFAs. This alternative would implement underburning of natural fuels 

outside of harvest units within PFAs on approximately 144 acres. No units are within 30-acre 

nest sites. This alternative would result in modification of existing habitat conditions on a total 

of 678 acres within PFAs. It is estimated that commercially harvested areas and a portion of 

underburned areas within PFAs would have a short-term reduction in habitat suitability, but 

potentially subsequent long-term improvement through overstory maintenance and reduced risk 

of high-intensity disturbance. The remainder of the treated area within PFAs (understory 

thinning and some underburned areas) would likely retain existing habitat suitability or may be 

improved through opening up of understory canopy conditions (more flight paths and improved 

prey visibility). Acres of treatment within each PFA are displayed in Table 60. 

Table 60. Alternative 2 acres of activities within PFAs. 

Post-fledging 

Area 

Commercial 

harvest + 

Precommercial + Fuels Activity 

Only 

Total Acres 

Treated 

Claypool Spring 

(PFA 2497) 

64 0 72 136

Crystal Glade 

(PFA 0246) 

107 19 60 186

Jim Elliot Creek 

(PFA 1151) 

48 51 0 99

Little Hay Creek 

(PFA 1169) 

119 18 4 141

Nature Creek 

(PFA 9902) 

0 0 2 2

Reilly Creek 

(PFA 9903) 

83 27 6 116

This alternative results in a 376-acre net increase in the amount of goshawk habitat at the 

landscape scale after all activities are complete which would result in 23,272 acres of primary 

nesting habitat within the project area. This alternative would accelerate the development of 

future habitat, based on forest development projections, leading to a 922-acre net increase in 50 

years compared to no action. This alternative would alter existing amounts and structural 

conditions within all six PFAs on a total of 680 acres. Treatments would range from less than 1 

percent to 47 percent of each PFA. Goshawks may be disturbed by activities outside of the 

nesting season or outside of seasonally restricted areas during operations. However, because (1) 

less than 50 percent of any PFA would be treated, (2) no activities would occur within known 

nest sites, (3) activities are limited to thinning from below and prescribed burning, and (4) 

seasonal restrictions would be applied during the nesting season, all PFAs are expected to remain 

suitable for occupancy by nesting goshawks and their young. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 189 

Alternative 3 

This alternative would thin small trees on 265 acres in PFAs. Alternative 3 would implement 

underburning of natural fuels outside of thinning units within PFAs on approximately 234 acres. 

No activities are proposed within the 30-acre nest sites. This alternative would result in 

modification of existing habitat conditions on a total of 499 acres within PFAs. It is anticipated 

that this alternative would retain habitat suitability in the short term, with a long-term 

improvement through overstory maintenance and reduced risk of high-intensity disturbance, 

though the protection from risk of future loss of habitat may be less than that achieved under the 

more aggressive prescriptions under some of the other alternatives. Acres of treatment within 

each PFA are displayed in Table 61. 

Table 61. Alternative 3 acres of activities within PFAs. 

Post-fledging 

Area 

Commercial 

harvest + 

Precommercial + Fuels Activity 

Only 

Total Acres 

Treated 

Claypool Spring 0 46 90 136

Crystal Glade 0 80 106 186

Jim Elliot Creek 0 99 0 99

Little Hay Creek 0 0 32 32

Nature Creek 0 0 2 2

Reilly Creek 0 38 6 44

This alternative would result in a 347-acre net increase in the amount of goshawk habitat at the 

landscape scale after all activities are complete which would result in 23,243 acres of primary 

nesting habitat within the project area. This alternative would also accelerate the development of 

future habitat, based on forest development projections, leading to a 978-acre net increase in 50 

years compared to no action. This alternative would alter existing amounts and structural 

conditions within all six PFAs in the project area, on a total of 499 acres. Activities would range 

from less than 1 percent to 47 percent of each PFA. Goshawks may be disturbed by activities 

outside of the nesting season or outside of seasonally restricted areas during operations. Because 

(1) less than 50 percent of any PFA would be treated, (2) no treatments would occur within 

known nest sites, (3) activities are limited to precomercial thinning and prescribed burning, and 

(4) seasonal restrictions would be applied during the nesting season, all PFAs are expected to 

remain suitable for occupancy by nesting goshawks and their young. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative would commercially harvest timber on 245 acres and precommercially thin 

young trees on 218 acres in PFAs. Alternative 4 would implement underburning of natural fuels 

outside of thinning units within PFAs on approximately 144 acres. No units are within the 30-

acre nest sites. This alternative would result in modification of existing habitat conditions on a 

total of 607 acres within PFAs. It is estimated that commercially harvested areas and a portion 

of underburned areas within PFAs would have a short-term reduction in habitat suitability, but 

potentially subsequent long-term improvement through overstory maintenance and reduced risk 

of high-intensity disturbance. The remainder of the treated area within PFAs (understory 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 190 

thinning and some underburned areas) would likely retain existing habitat suitability or may be 

improved through opening up of understory canopy conditions (more flight paths and improved 

prey visibility). Acres of treatment within each PFA are displayed in Table 62. 

Table 62. Alternative 4 acres of activities within PFAs. 

Post-fledging 

Area 

Commercial 

harvest + 

Precommercial + Fuels Activity 

Only 

Total Acres 

Treated 

Claypool Spring 62 0 72 134

Crystal Glade 46 80 60 186

Jim Elliot Creek 6 93 0 99

Little Hay Creek 48 18 4 70

Nature Creek 0 0 2 2

Reilly Creek 83 27 6 116

This alternative would result in a 347-acre net increase in the amount of goshawk habitat at the 

landscape scale after all activities are complete which would result in 23,243 acres of primary 

nesting habitat within the project area. This alternative would also accelerate the development of 

future habitat, based on forest development projections, leading to a 956-acre net increase in 50 

years compared to no action. This alternative would alter existing amounts and structural 

conditions within all six PFAs in the project area, on a total of 607 acres. Activities would range 

from less than 1 percent to 47 percent of each PFA. Goshawks may be disturbed by activities 

outside of the nesting season or outside of seasonally restricted areas during operations. Because 

(1) less than 50 percent of any PFA would be treated, (2) no activities would occur within known 

nest sites, (3) activities are limited to thinning from below and prescribed burning, and (4) 

seasonal restrictions would be applied during the nesting season, all PFAs are expected to remain 

suitable for occupancy by nesting goshawks and their young. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative would commercially harvest timber on 111 acres and precommercial thin young 

trees on 326 acres in PFAs. A few harvest units overlap mapped PFAs: 306 and 858 in the 

Little Hay Creek PFA and 302 and 303 in the Claypool Spring PFA. Within these areas, harvest 

would retain clumpy distribution of dominant and co-dominant trees and variable thinning 

density in the understory, with the intent of promoting horizontal diversity in the stand and a 

high degree of interlocking crown structure as described in Management Recommendation for 

the Northern Goshawk in the Southwestern United States (Reynolds et al. 1992). Alternative 5 

would implement underburning of natural fuels outside of harvest units within PFAs on 

approximately 215 acres. No units are within 30-acre nest sites. This alternative would result in 

modification of existing habitat conditions on a total of 652 acres within PFAs. It is anticipated 

that the modified prescription included in this alternative would retain habitat suitability in the 

short-term, with a long-term improvement through overstory maintenance and reduced risk of 

high-intensity disturbance, though the protection from risk of future loss of habitat may be less 

than that achieved under the more aggressive prescriptions under some of the other alternatives. 

Acres of treatment within each PFA are displayed in Table 63. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 191 

Table 63. Alternative 5 acres of activities within PFAs. 

Post-fledging 

Area 

Commercial 

harvest + 

Precommercial + Fuels Activity 

Only 

Total Acres 

Treated 

Claypool Spring 44 20 72 136

Crystal Glade 0 126 60 186

Jim Elliot Creek 0 99 0 99

Little Hay Creek 67 43 3 113

Nature Creek 0 0 2 2

Reilly Creek 0 38 78 116

This alternative would result in a 454-acre net increase in the amount of goshawk habitat at the 

landscape scale post-treatment, 23,350 acres of primary nesting habitat within the project area. 

This alternative would also accelerate the development of future habitat, based on projections, 

leading to a 979-acre net increase in 50 years compared to no action. This alternative would alter 

existing amounts and structural conditions within all six PFAs in the project area, on a total of 

652 acres. Activities would range from less than 1 percent to 47 percent of each PFA. 

Goshawks may be disturbed by activities outside of the nesting season or outside of seasonally 

restricted areas during operations. Because (1) less than 50 percent of any PFA would be treated, 

(2) no activities would occur within known nest sites, (3) activities are limited to thinning from 

below and prescribed burning, (4) seasonal restrictions would be applied during the nesting 

season, and (5) the prescription includes measures to promote stand diversity, all PFAs are 

expected to remain suitable for occupancy by nesting goshawks and their young. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past harvest activities have occurred on 7,563 acres in the project area in the last 30-35 years. 

The majority of these harvest activities removed most or all of the overstory trees and goshawk 

habitat. These harvest activities occurred on approximately 3,260 acres in Lower Marks Creek, 

2,800 acres in Upper Marks Creek, and 7 acres in Veazie Creek. Some of these areas received 

harvest prescriptions that retained varied levels of abundance of large overstory trees. 

Prescriptions that retain approximately four to six live overstory trees would provide for some 

future large snag and log habitat as the younger stand develops into a mature stand, but would 

have largely eliminated goshawk habitat in the short term. These activities occurred on 

approximately 220 acres in Lower Marks Creek and 300 acres in Upper Marks Creek. 

Shelterwood harvests generally did not retain enough overstory trees to provide goshawk habitat 

in the short term. However, such stands do retain structure that may contribute to both the 

overstory and the snag and down wood components in the future as the stand develops around 

them. Shelterwood harvests occurred on approximately 260 acres in Lower Marks Creek and 

560 acres in Upper Marks Creek. Thinning, which has occurred on approximately 150 acres in 

the project area would have retained a portion of the overstory and may remain suitable for 

goshawks after treatment depending on residual canopy closure and stand structural diversity. 

The Hash Rock Fire burned approximately 4,594 acres in the Marks Creek Watershed, removing 

foraging and PFA habitat within one goshawk territory (Reilly Creek PFA 9903). The PFA has 

been remapped to include the best available remaining habitat around the nest and historic use 

area. Riparian planting and aspen restoration that has been completed in the project area has 

improved habitat by enhancing habitat for prey (primarily birds), or is likely to contribute to 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 192 

improved habitat conditions in the future. At the same time, continued utilization by both big 

game and livestock have likely impacted the development of riparian hardwood habitat and 

habitat for shrub-nesting birds, which may provide prey for goshawks. The removal of snags for 

firewood, for hazard abatement, or under salvage sales (e.g. Cougar Salvage) may have reduced 

habitat for woodpeckers, which also represent prey for goshawks. Road closures that have been 

implemented have reduced the likelihood of snag removal and disturbance to nesting goshawks, 

though continued uncontrolled recreational use by off highway vehicles (OHV) has likely 

contributed to disturbance at one known nest site. Though past management activities have 

altered the amount, quality, and distribution of suitable goshawk habitat, or habitat components 

that contribute to habitat for their prey, the amount of reproductive habitat available to goshawks 

at the landscape scale is within the HRV as shown in Table 59. 

Ongoing and reasonably foreseeable activities would continue to interact with goshawks and 

their habitat as described above. Ongoing firewood cutting, grazing, recreational use, riparian 

improvement and exclosure maintenance activities are not expected to result in altering habitat 

suitability. All six known PFAs are expected to remain suitable for occupancy by nesting 

goshawks and their young. 

Other Raptors 

Affected Environment 

Five raptor nests other than goshawk have been identified in proximity to proposed treatment 

areas, one long-eared owl, one osprey and three red-tailed hawks. In addition, two stick nests of 

unknown species have been recorded within unit 177, and adjacent to unit 212. These areas have 

been visited annually from 2003 to 2007 and have not been found to be occupied by nesting 

raptors during that time. These areas will continue to be monitored, and if nesting raptors are 

confirmed at these sites then units will be modified as needed and/or seasonal restrictions 

applied. Of the five known raptor nests, four were known prior to 2007 and one was discovered 

in 2007. There are no known nest sites or occupied territories of golden eagles or prairie falcons 

in the project area. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

Alternative 1 does not propose activities in or adjacent to raptor nest stands. This alternative 

would not affect reproductive activities at known raptor nests. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Every alternative includes a no treatment buffer of five chains (330 feet) around known hawk 

and owl nests. All four of the action alternatives also includes a seasonal restriction (March 1 to 

August 1), within 10 chains (660 feet) of active hawk or owl nests. For the known osprey, the 

seasonal restriction extends to 1/4 mile rather than 660 feet. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 193 

The action alternatives should not affect reproductive activities at known raptor nests. It is 

possible that the action alternative could cause disturbance to raptors that are not currently 

known to be present within the project area. Contract clauses will be included to allow for 

protection of newly discovered raptor nests in order to minimize potential impacts. The action 

alternatives should have generally beneficial effects to hawks and owls in the project area by 

improving habitat for prey species, and by increasing visibility for hunting. Alternatives are not 

likely to affect osprey, as they primarily feed on fish and the alternatives should not affect fish 

populations in the project area or nearby water bodies. 

All action alternatives would treat stands in proximity to three of the known raptor nests (other 

than goshawk). Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would include commercial treatments, while Alternative 

3 would employ only non-commercial treatments in these areas. In all cases, seasonal 

restrictions would be applied and nest trees and adjacent roost trees would be protected. These 

restrictions apply to harvest units 148, 302, 303, 304, 559, 560 and 729; precommercial thinning 

units 719, 722, 723, 874, 875, 952, and 955; hardwood units 401 and 402; and prescribed natural 

fuels underburning unit 962 under Alternatives 2 and 4. For Alternative 3 the restricted units 

would be the same except that the first five listed above would be precommercial thinning, not 

harvest. For Alternative 5, the restricted units would be the same as listed for 2 and 4, except 

that 729 would be prescribed natural fuels underburning only, 148 would be precommerically 

thinned as part of unit 211 (no harvest) and unit 719 would not be treated. 

Cumulative Effects 

Regeneration harvest activities have occurred on 7,563 acres in the project area in the last 30 to 

35 years. The majority of these treatment areas received harvest prescriptions (HCC, HOR), 

which would have removed most or all of the overstory trees and snag habitat. This intensity of 

treatment occurred on approximately 6,049 acres. Many species of hawks nest in large trees, and 

most owls nest in cavities in snags or hollow trees or in abandoned stick nests in trees. Where 

these structures have been removed, potential nesting habitat has been eliminated. However, 

these open areas do provide foraging opportunities for many species that forage over open 

ground, such as harriers, red-tailed hawks, kestrels, as well as flammulated, barn, great-horned 

and pygmy owls. Red-tailed hawks and pygmy-owls select trees along or near the edges of 

forest openings for nesting. Prescriptions that retain approximately four to six live overstory 

trees (HCR) would provide for some future large snag and log habitat as the younger stand 

develops into a mature stand, but would have eliminated habitat characteristics that would 

provide nesting habitat for most species of hawks and owls. As with the other intensive 

regeneration treatments, foraging habitat would be available in these sites for species that hunt in 

open areas. This intensity of treatment occurred on approximately 518 acres in the project area. 

Shelterwood harvest areas may provide nesting habitat for some species of hawks and some 

owls, but they would likely be too open for other owls and the forest dwelling accipiters. 

Ferruginous hawks, kestrels, flammulated owls and long-eared owls are known to prefer 

relatively open forests. Shelterwood treatments occurred on approximately 823 acres in the 

project area. 

It is expected that the Ochoco National Forest will continue to manage forested areas to move 

toward historic conditions. This would increase the abundance of open park-like ponderosa pine 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 194 

dominated stands on dry sites. The Ochoco National Forest will also continue to manage forests 

to increase the abundance of large tree structure in both single-strata and multi-strata structural 

classes on more mesic sites. This management trend is likely to continue until the multi-strata 

LOS and single-strata LOS are within the historic range of variability. This process would 

reduce the amount of habitat available for species that prefer dense forest canopy, while 

increasing the amount of habitat available for species that select more open stands. Thinning of 

stands with relatively small trees should promote the development of large tree habitat in the 

future. The recruitment of large trees and large snags would contribute potential habitat for 

species that nest high in tall trees, such as red-tailed hawks, or that require large snags to 

accommodate appropriately sized cavity nests, such as kestrels and many of the owls, or to 

support large platform nests, such as those used by osprey or eagles. 

Management Indicator Species 

The Forest Plan identified Management Indicator Species (MIS) to determine the effects of 

management activities on fish and wildlife habitat. Management indicator species are species 

whose presence in a certain location or situation at a given population level indicates a particular 

environmental condition. Population changes are believed to indicate effects of management 

activities on a number of other species. 

Pileated woodpecker was identified as an indicator for species that require mature forest and oldgrowth habitat. Primary cavity excavators and the common (northern) flicker were identified to 

represent species that utilize snags and old-growth juniper habitat. 

Pileated Woodpecker 

Affected Environment 

Pileated woodpeckers are an indicator species for dense and more mesic late and old structure 

(LOS) forests. They typically select for multi-strata mixed conifer LOS. LOS stands described 

in relation to wildlife habitat include forest stands that are at least 5 acres in size and that contain 

sufficient numbers of large trees and total stand density to meet established criteria used to 

describe LOS forest habitat. There are two patch size criteria which are relevant to analysis of 

wildlife habitat. The 5-acre minimum patch size distinguishes groups of large trees of sufficient 

size to provide a LOS forested habitat patch. When LOS stands are described in this document, 

it refers to areas that were determined to meet or exceed the 5-acre patch size, based on nearest 

neighbor analysis in GIS. The other relevant patch size is 100 acres, which responds to LOS 

forest habitat emphasis in the Eastside Screens and triggers the identification of connective 

corridor described in the connective corridor section of this document. The previous section on 

LOS applies to analysis for HRV comparison, and looks at large trees within pixels (1/6 acre), 

regardless of stand size. The acres of LOS stands described in the wildlife section refer to 

treatments within forested environments a minimum of 5 acres in size and meeting the following 

criteria for large tree abundance (trees per acre greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh) and total 

stand density (basal area in square feet per acre): grand fir at least 15 trees per acre, and 60 

square feet of basal area; Douglas-fir at least 12 trees per acre and 40 square feet of basal area; 

mesic pine at least 10 trees per acre and 40 square feet of basal area; xeric pine at least 10 trees 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 195 

per acre and 30 square feet of basal area; juniper woodland at least 5 trees per acre and 12 square 

feet of basal area. 

Pileated woodpecker habitat associates prefer dense forest conditions; they include Townsend’s 

warbler, hermit thrush, and red-breasted nuthatch. As dense mixed-conifer stands often contain a 

high density of dead or dying trees, habitat for this species also represents habitat for the blackbacked woodpecker, which is attracted to stands with abundant snags and activity by bark beetles 

and wood boring beetles. The best pileated feeding habitat is within stands dominated by large 

(>20 inch dbh) fir. Current conditions in the project area favor the pileated woodpecker, with 

multi-strata late and old structure forests being within or above the historical range of variability 

in moist and dry grand-fir, and Douglas-fir PAGs. The existing condition for pileated 

woodpecker reproductive habitat within the project area is within the HRV as shown in Table 65. 

Forest Plan designated Old Growth Management Areas (OGMAs) are generally to provide 

reproductive habitat areas, and pileated feeding habitat has been mapped outside of the 

designated old growth. There are three OGMAs in the project area. Two of these have feeding 

habitat designated around them. Though the Jim Elliot Creek OGMA is within 2 miles of the 

Hash Rock Fire perimeter, the fire did not affect the areas designated for management of pileated 

woodpeckers. The third is contained within the Research Natural Area, which provides 

sufficient feeding habitat (exceeds the minimum requirements specified in the Forest Plan) for 

pileated woodpeckers. The pileated woodpecker prefers closed canopy, late to old growth firdominated habitat. They prefer stands with old growth, grand fir, abundant snags, abundant 

down logs, and canopy closure of at least 60 percent. Pileated woodpeckers use other species in 

proportion to their availability as foraging substrate. They use snags of ponderosa pine, 

Douglas-fir, and western larch, and snags at least 15 inches dbh were preferred for foraging. 

Pileated woodpeckers forage on down logs, but avoid lodgepole pine. These birds have been 

observed to glean insects from live Douglas-fir and grand fir in June and July (late instar 

budworms) and from live western larch from November to January (carpenter ants). Pileated 

woodpeckers select large, live, grand fir trees for night roosting, though they will use live larch 

and snags of ponderosa pine, grand fir, and larch (average 28 inches dbh). Hollow interiors of 

trees or snags resulting from decay rather than excavation, and the presence of Indian paint 

fungus conks are prevalent in roost trees (Bull et al. 1992). Breeding bird survey data show no 

significant change in population for this species in the western states (Marshall et al. 1997). 

Within the project area, evidence of foraging by pileated woodpeckers has been observed on 

recently dead grand fir and potential roost holes were noted in large diameter, dead topped grand 

fir trees. Probable nest entrances have been observed in large diameter pine snags. The January 

29, 2007, Spears Wildlife Report includes more information on pileated woodpecker. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

This alternative would not treat LOS stands or forest stands within pileated feeding habitat or 

OGMAs. This alternative would maintain the existing acres of fir-dominated understory and 

canopy closure, at least in the short term. Of the approximately 1,400 acres of LOS stands that 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 196 

have been identified in the project area, 34 percent is in moist grand fir or Douglas-fir PAGs. 

These relatively more mesic areas are the most likely sites to sustain multi-strata LOS stands in 

the long term. Lack of treatment of the understory in these stands would perpetuate development 

of fir understory conditions which would increase pileated woodpecker habitat abundance and 

quality in the short term. Overtime, however, high stand densities may lead to mortality due to 

insects, disease, or high-intensity fire. The effect of such disturbances on pileated woodpecker 

habitat in the long term is dependent on the type, severity, and extent of the event(s). Extensive 

areas of high mortality that may potentially result from future, large-scale disturbance which 

would likely limit the amount of suitable nesting habitat in affected areas, whereas events 

resulting in mosaics including moderate and low intensity disturbance may continue to provide 

nesting habitat over time. 

This alternative would maintain the suitability of existing habitat for pileated woodpeckers in the 

short term. Over time, the suitability for nesting is expected to decline on sites that cannot 

sustain high densities of conifers. As trees on such sites succumb to insect invasion they would 

provide a foraging substrate for a variety of woodpeckers, including the pileated. If the mortality 

becomes extensive and live canopy closure is lost in large areas of severe insect infestations or 

fire intensity, then affected areas would become less suitable for this species. If the mortality 

remains moderate and patchy, then the affected areas may remain suitable for this species. This 

is most likely to be sustainable on the more mesic PAGs, especially grand fir sites. Projections 

indicate that pileated woodpecker habitat would be above the HRV in 50 years under this 

alternative in the absence of large scale disturbance. 

Direct and Indirect Effects Common to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Within pileated feeding habitat, Alternatives 2 and 4 would reduce canopy closure, which would 

likely reduce the suitability of these areas as foraging habitat for pileated woodpeckers. 

However, within the treatment units that overlap pileated feeding habitat, prescriptions were 

modified to ensure that grand fir and Douglas-fir remain in these stands, while reducing stand 

density so that the development of large trees would be promoted. The reduction in canopy 

closure is a trade-off for the long-term benefit of providing a greater abundance of large structure 

trees, snags, and logs in the future. At the same time, snags would not be marked for removal; 

although hazard trees (tress that pose a danger to workers within work areas) would be cut down. 

Under Alternatives 3 and 5, stand density would be reduced in stands treated within pileated 

feeding habitat, but to a lesser extent than would occur under Alternatives 2 and 4. Suitability of 

habitat would be retained as the understory thinning is not expected to substantially alter canopy 

closure or the potential for future development of stem rot, and thus future nest/roost sites. 

Underburning of natural fuels can result in varied effects to pileated woodpecker habitat. When 

fire burns under relatively cool conditions with higher fuel moisture the fire may creep around 

leaving unburned and lightly burned patches, and much of the larger woody debris would be 

retained. Some individual trees may be weakened, giving advantage to insects or pathogens that 

result in foraging opportunities for woodpeckers and which set individual trees on a path toward 

developing stem rot that would ultimately make them suitable substrate for the excavation of 

future nest cavities. Burning under this type of scenario would retain sufficient canopy closure 

to maintain habitat for pileated woodpeckers while providing for the development of foraging, 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 197 

roosting, and nesting habitat over time. On the other hand, if the burning occurs under warmer 

conditions with lower fuel moisture, the combustion of woody debris (including snags) may be 

more complete, canopy closure may be reduced, crown base height may be substantially raised, 

and resulting tree mortality may be immediate rather than prolonged (less time for development 

of stem rot). Burning under this type of scenario, may reduce suitability for use by pileated 

woodpeckers due to reduced cover and nesting/roosting sites, though a pulse of foraging 

substrate may result immediately after the treatment. Often a prescribed fire will burn under a 

combination of conditions due to variation in aspect, elevation, fuel types, and changing weather 

conditions. The end result is usually a mosaic of post-fire conditions that lead to a variable 

habitat quality for a range of species. 

Thinning of small diameter trees within the Stewart Springs OGMA would release selected large 

diameter trees from understory competition. Resultant slash would be pulled away from the base 

of the trees, hand piled, and burned. This activity would improve the longevity of the selected 

large trees by reducing competitive stress and the development of ladder fuels. Because these 

activities are limited to the drier portions of the OGMA (south and west facing slopes in 

Douglas-fir and dry grand fir PAGs), the areas of the OGMA with the highest potential for 

sustaining pileated woodpecker nesting habitat (north and east facing slopes in moist grand fir 

PAGS) would remain untreated. The low intensity thinning activity would occur in patches 

where large live ponderosa pine and larch trees exist. Unthinned patches would be retained 

where large trees are absent, or where they occur less abundantly. Much of the area would 

remain suitable as foraging habitat for pileated woodpeckers. 

Alternative 2 

This alternative would commercially thin timber on 253 acres in pileated feeding habitat. 

Because the canopy may be reduced to less than 60 percent crown closure after treatment, this 

alternative would reduce the suitability of these stands as foraging or nesting habitat for pileated 

woodpeckers, at least in the short term. Canopy closure is expected to recover to some extent, as 

the retained trees expand their crowns in diameter and depth in response to the release from 

competition that results from thinning. Thinning of mid-story trees would promote the 

development of large structure trees in the future, ultimately providing a source of recruitment 

for large snags and down logs. Thus, this alternative would facilitate the development of higher 

quality nesting and roosting habitat in the long term. The prescription calls for preferential 

retention of ponderosa pine and larch, but grand fir and Douglas-fir would also be retained as 

individuals or clumps within these stands. In patches where moderate or higher levels of 

mistletoe occur in one species, understory trees of another species would be retained. This 

should promote within stand diversity and limit the impact of mistletoe on stand development. 

Precommercial thinning outside of harvest areas would occur on 67 acres of pileated feeding 

habitat. Thinning of these small trees would help to promote the development of larger trees in 

the stand. Thus, this treatment would facilitate the development of higher quality foraging 

habitat in the long term. The prescription calls for preferential retention of ponderosa pine and 

larch, but grand fir and Douglas-fir would also be retained as individuals or clumps scattered 

within these stands, especially on north and east facing slopes and in draws. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 198 

Under burning (outside of thinning units) within pileated feeding habitat would occur on 94 

acres. This activity may reduce habitat suitability by reducing canopy closure and by altering the 

timing of mortality in grand fir and Douglas-fir. Fire is likely to result in an abundance of fire 

killed fir trees soon after the activity, providing a flush of foraging substrate, but later within 

stand mortality is expected to decline and foraging opportunities would also decline. 

No harvest or natural fuels burning would occur within OGMAs. Thinning of small diameter 

trees to release selected individual large trees would be conducted within portions of one OGMA 

(Stewart Springs) on approximately 70 acres. 

This alternative is expected to reduce the quality of pileated woodpecker feeding habitat on 414 

acres. Alternative 2 is expected to reduce the quantity of primary nesting habitat on 1,182 acres 

(26% of existing) within the project area in the short term. This alternative would result in about 

20 percent less primary nesting habitat for pileated woodpeckers in 50 years compared to no 

action, assuming that large-scale, high-intensity disturbances does not occur. Projections 

indicate that pileated woodpecker habitat would be within the HRV in 50 years under this 

alternative. Pileated woodpeckers generally would not be expected to nest within areas that are 

commercially harvested under this alternative for a period of 25-30 years on more mesic sites 

(grand fir and Douglas-fir PAGs). Precommercial thinning stands on such sites may remain 

suitable after treatment, depending on residual stocking. On xeric sites (ponderosa pine and 

juniper PAGs) primary nesting habitat would not occur whether treated or not. 

Alternative 3 

Alternative 3 has no commercial harvest in pileated feeding habitat. It includes precommercial 

thinning on 125 acres. Thinning of these small trees would promote the development of larger 

trees in the stand. This activity would facilitate the development of higher quality foraging 

habitat in the long term with minimal impact on foraging habitat in the short term. The 

prescription calls for preferential retention of ponderosa pine and larch, but grand fir and 

Douglas-fir would be retained as individuals within these stands, especially on north and east 

facing slopes and in draws. 

Prescribed natural fuels burning within pileated feeding habitat would occur on 125 acres. This 

activity may reduce habitat suitability by reducing canopy closure and by altering the timing of 

mortality in grand fir and Douglas-fir. Fire is likely to result in an abundance of fire killed fir 

trees soon after the treatment, providing a flush of foraging substrate, but later within stand 

mortality is expected to decline and thus foraging opportunities would also decline. 

No harvest or natural fuels burning would occur within OGMAs. Thinning of small diameter 

trees to release selected individual large trees would be conducted within portions of one OGMA 

(Stewart Springs) on approximately 70 acres. 

This alternative is expected to alter forest structure on 250 acres of pileated woodpecker feeding 

habitat, but retain suitability within those acres. This alternative has potential to reduce quantity

at least in the short term on these acres. The amount of primary nesting habitat would be 

reduced by 190 acres (4% of existing) within the project area in the short term. This alternative 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 199 

would result in about 4 percent less primary nesting habitat for pileated woodpeckers in 50 years 

compared to no action, assuming that large-scale, high-intensity disturbances do not occur. 

Projections indicate that pileated woodpecker habitat would be above the HRV in 50 years under 

this alternative. Precommercial thinned stands on mesic sites may remain suitable for nesting 

after treatment, depending on residual stocking and degree of crown scorch. On xeric sites 

(ponderosa pine and juniper PAGs) primary nesting habitat would not occur whether treated or 

not. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative would commercially thin timber on 131 acres in pileated feeding habitat. 

Because the canopy may be reduced to less than 60 percent crown closure after harvest, this 

alternative would reduce the suitability of these stands as foraging habitat for pileated 

woodpeckers, at least in the short term. Canopy closure is expected to recover to some extent, as 

the retained trees expand their crowns in diameter and depth in response to the release from 

competition that results from the thinning. Thinning of mid-story trees would promote the 

development of large structure trees in the future, ultimately providing a source of recruitment 

for large snags and down logs. Thus, this activity may facilitate the development of higher 

quality nesting and roosting habitat in the long term. The prescription calls for preferential 

retention of ponderosa pine and larch, but grand fir and Douglas-fir would also be retained as 

individuals or clumps within these stands. In patches where moderate or higher levels of 

mistletoe occur in one species, understory trees of another species would be retained. This 

would promote within stand diversity and limit the impact of mistletoe on stand development. 

Precommercial thinning outside of harvest areas would occur on 155 acres. Thinning of these 

small trees would help to promote the development of larger trees in the stand. Thus, this 

treatment would facilitate the development of higher quality foraging habitat in the long term. 

The prescription calls for preferential retention of ponderosa pine and larch, but grand fir and 

Douglas-fir would also be retained as individuals or clumps scattered within these stands, 

especially on north and east facing slopes and in draws. 

Prescribed natural fuels burning (outside of thinning units) within pileated feeding habitat would 

occur on 74 acres. This activity may reduce habitat suitability by reducing canopy closure and 

by altering the timing of mortality in grand fir and Douglas-fir. Fire is likely to result in an 

abundance of fire killed fir trees soon after the treatment, providing a flush of foraging substrate, 

but later within stand mortality is expected to decline and thus foraging opportunities would also 

decline. 

No harvest or natural fuels burning would occur within OGMAs. Thinning of small diameter 

trees to release selected individual large trees would be conducted within portions of one OGMA 

(Stewart Springs) on approximately 70 acres. 

Alternative 4 is expected to reduce the quality of pileated woodpecker feeding habitat on 360 

acres. This alternative is expected to reduce quantity of primary nesting habitat on 996 acres 

(22% of existing) within the project area in the short term. This alternative would result in about 

17 percent less primary nesting habitat for pileated woodpeckers in 50 years compared to no 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 200 

action, assuming that large-scale, high-intensity disturbances do not occur. Projections indicate 

that pileated woodpecker habitat would be within the HRV in 50 years under this alternative 

Pileated woodpeckers generally would not be expected to nest within areas that are commercially 

harvested under this alternative for a period of 25-30 years on more mesic sites (grand fir and 

Douglas-fir PAGs). Precommercial thinned stands on such sites may remain suitable after 

treatment, depending on residual stocking and degree of crown scorch. Primary nesting habitat 

would not occur on xeric sites (ponderosa pine and juniper PAGs). 

Alternative 5 

This alternative would not commercially harvest timber in pileated feeding habitat. The 

suitability of these stands as foraging habitat for pileated woodpeckers, at least in the short term 

would be retained. Development of large structure trees in the future would continue at a slower 

pace than might occur if the stands were thinned. 

Precommercial thinning outside of harvest areas would occur on 264 acres. Thinning of these 

small trees would promote the development of larger trees in the stand. The prescription would 

include retention of dense patches throughout treated stands in order to provide cover and 

foraging substrate. This activity would facilitate the development of higher quality foraging 

habitat in the long term with minimal impact on foraging habitat in the short term. The 

prescription calls for preferential retention of ponderosa pine and larch, but grand fir and 

Douglas-fir would be retained as individuals or clumps scattered within these stands, especially 

on north and east facing slopes and in draws. This activity may reduce habitat suitability by 

reducing canopy closure and by altering the timing of mortality in grand fir and Douglas-fir. 

Prescribed natural fuels burning within pileated feeding habitat would occur on 57 acres. Fire is 

likely to result in an abundance of fire killed fir trees soon after the activity, providing a flush of 

foraging substrate, but later within stand mortality is expected to decline and thus foraging 

opportunities would also decline. 

No harvest or natural fuels burning would occur within OGMAs. Thinning of small diameter 

trees to release selected individual large trees would be conducted within portions of one OGMA 

(Stewart Springs) on approximately 70 acres. 

Alternative 5 is expected to alter quality of pileated woodpecker feeding habitat on 320 acres, but 

retain suitability on those acres. This alternative is expected to reduce quantity of primary 

nesting habitat on 1,048 acres (23% of existing) within the project area in the short term. This 

alternative would result in about 18 percent less primary nesting habitat for pileated 

woodpeckers in 50 years compared to no action, assuming that large-scale, high-intensity 

disturbances do not occur. Projections indicate that pileated woodpecker habitat would be within 

the HRV in 50 years under this alternative. Outside of areas with modified prescriptions, 

pileated woodpeckers generally would not be expected to nest within areas that are commercially 

harvested under this alternative for a period of 25-30 years on more mesic sites (grand fir and 

Douglas-fir PAGs). Within areas with modified prescriptions (connective corridors, goshawk 

post-fledging areas, pileated feeding habitat, satisfactory cover, etc.) and within precommercial 

thinned stands on such sites habitat may remain suitable after treatment. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 201 

Table 64. Acres of treatment in pileated woodpecker feeding habitat. 

 Commercial 

Harvest 

Precommercial 

Thinning 

Underburn 

Natural Fuels 

Total Treatment 

Alternative 1 0 0 0 0

Alternative 2 254 67 94 414

Alternative 3 0 125 125 250

Alternative 4 131 155 74 360

Alternative 5 0 264 57 320

Table 65. Amount of pileated woodpecker habitat over time compared to HRV (acres). 

 Existing 

Habitat 

Habitat after 

activities 

Habitat after 

50 Years 

Low HRV High HRV 

Alternative 1 4,617 4,617 7,788 3,073 6,584

Alternative 2 4,617 3,435 6,258

Alternative 3 4,617 4,427 7,466

Alternative 4 4,617 3,621 6,450

Alternative 5 4,617 3,569 6,380

*Shaded cells represent amounts outside the HRV. 

Cumulative Effects 

Harvest activities have occurred on 7,563 acres in the project area. Pileated feeding habitats are 

generally delineated outside of previously harvested areas, though some acres within pileated 

feeding habitat have received some level of hazard tree removal, salvage harvest, or woodcutting 

in the past. The majority of the previous harvest resulted in removal of most or all of the 

overstory trees rendering these areas unsuitable for pileated woodpeckers. This intensity of 

treatment occurred on approximately 3,263 acres in Lower Marks Creek, 2,799 acres in Upper 

Marks Creek, and 7 acres in Veazie Creek. Prescriptions that retained approximately 4-6 live 

overstory trees would provide for some future large snag and log habitat as the younger stand 

develops into a mature stand, but would have removed pileated woodpecker habitat. This type of 

treatment occurred on approximately 220 acres in Lower Marks Creek and 298 acres in Upper 

Marks Creek. Shelterwood harvests would not have retained enough overstory trees to provide 

pileated woodpecker habitat. However, such stands do retain structure that may contribute to 

both the overstory and the snag and down wood components in the future as the stand develops 

around them. Shelterwood harvests occurred on approximately 261 acres in Lower Marks Creek 

and 562 acres in Upper Marks Creek. Removal of snags for firewood, for hazard abatement, or 

under salvage sales (e.g. Cougar Salvage) would have reduced habitat for woodpeckers. At the 

same time that pileated woodpecker habitat was being reduced within timber harvest units, fire 

suppression activities were being implemented across all plant associations. As a result of this 

fire exclusion, grand fir developed in the understory of many stands that were previously 

dominated by ponderosa pine and larch. In these stands, pileated woodpecker habitat has 

increased compared to historic conditions. 

Implementation of Viable Ecosystems and efforts to reduce hazardous fuel accumulations at the 

watershed and Forest level will continue to remove fir from many forested stands, resulting in 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 202 

increased domination of pine and larch, more open forest conditions and single stratum stand 

structure on more acres than is currently present. This will reduce the quality of pileated 

woodpecker habitat in the long term on these areas. At the same time, stands that have 

developed densities and species compositions that are not sustainable due to site capability, 

would be brought closer to a sustainable level. At the watershed scale, the abundance and 

distribution of pileated woodpecker habitat would be closer to the historic level. Habitat for 

pileated woodpeckers would be concentrated on sites that are more likely to sustain such stand 

densities and species distributions, and would be eliminated from sites that are less likely to 

sustain it in the long term. 

Ongoing and reasonably foreseeable activities would continue to interact with pileated 

woodpeckers and their habitat. Ongoing grazing, recreational use, and exclosure maintenance 

activities are not expected to result in effects to this species when combined with effects of this 

project. However, ongoing firewood cutting may combine with this project to further reduce 

habitat for pileated woodpeckers. When implemented within the rules established by the 

firewood synopsis, there should be no net cumulative effect. However, people continue to 

remove large snags illegally, accessing them cross country or on old timber harvest access 

routes. This project proposes to harvest up to 5,366 acres with ground-based equipment and 

proposes to construct/reconstruct up to 30 miles of road. Though all new roads are scheduled to 

be closed and additional existing roads are planned to be closed after project activities are 

completed, some people are likely to utilize these road beds for a period of time before closures 

are implemented (some people may breach closures after they are implemented) in order to 

access firewood. This project may contribute to increased accessibility and thus additional area 

vulnerable to illegal snag removal which would reduce potential nesting habitat for this species 

and other primary cavity excavators. 

Primary Cavity Excavators 

Primary cavity excavators are Management Indicator Species (MIS) listed in the Ochoco Forest 

Plan (FEIS p. 3-21) as wildlife species that consistently excavate their own cavities. 

The primary cavity excavators that occur on Ochoco National Forest are Lewis’ woodpecker, 

red-naped sapsucker, Williamson’s sapsucker, hairy woodpecker, downy woodpecker, whiteheaded woodpecker, black-backed woodpecker, three-toed woodpecker, pileated woodpecker 

and northern flicker. These species excavate cavities in wood that they use to nest in, and which 

may subsequently be used by other species (secondary cavity nesters). Two other groups of 

species, the nuthatches and chickadees sometimes excavate their own cavities and sometimes use 

existing cavities as secondary nesters. In this analysis, the black-capped chickadee and redbreasted nuthatch are represented by primary cavity excavators that use dense forest or riparian 

woodlands, while the mountain chickadee, pygmy nuthatch, and white-breasted nuthatch are 

represented by primary cavity excavators that use xeric open forest habitats. 

The existing condition of habitat for primary excavators in conifer forest focuses on three 

species, the white-headed woodpecker, the pileated woodpecker, and the northern flicker. These 

three species represent the range of forest conditions from open, single-story dry forest to dense 

multiple-story mesic forest. These species are indicators for the range of habitat conditions 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 203 

utilized by conifer forest-dwelling primary cavity excavators that would be present in the project 

area. The white-headed and pileated woodpeckers also have higher requirements than the other 

species of primary cavity excavators either in terms of snag numbers, size, or both. Whiteheaded woodpeckers are an indicator for open forest conditions in pine stands, while pileated 

woodpeckers are an indicator for dense forest conditions on more mesic sites. Though the 

northern flicker is a habitat generalist, it was chosen as a species to represent availability of snag

habitat in old-growth juniper woodlands. The discussion on northern flicker has an emphasis 

placed on the discussion of old-growth juniper, though total habitat for the species can occur 

across all forest types within the project area, and the preferred nesting habitat within this project

area is represented by the white-headed woodpecker. Species that select for special habitats such 

as aspen or that are listed as focal species for priority habitats in the Partners in Flight Northern 

Rocky Mountains Bird Conservation Plan are discussed in the section on neotropical birds. 

These include Lewis’ woodpecker and red-naped sapsucker. The aspen loving red-naped 

sapsucker is an indicator of two other primary cavity excavators that select for riparian 

woodlands: Williamson’s sapsucker and black-capped chickadee. The black-backed 

woodpecker is discussed in the neotropical birds section, because it is associated with a priority 

habitat listed there. The analysis of management indicator species and the neotropical birds 

section combined represent the needs and effects to all of the primary cavity excavators found on 

the Ochoco National Forest. The January 29, 2007, Spears Wildlife Report includes more 

information on primary cavity excavators. 

White-headed Woodpecker 

Affected Environment 

The white-headed woodpecker prefers ponderosa pine habitat that has more open stand 

conditions with large pine for foraging and large snags for nesting habitat. The white-headed 

woodpecker is an indicator of more xeric LOS forests. They typically select for single-strata 

ponderosa pine dominated LOS forests. Its habitat associates are generally called the pine birds, 

including the pygmy and white-breasted nuthatches and the flammulated owl. This habitat type 

is also a preferred habitat for the northern flicker in the Blue Mountains of Oregon (Marshall et 

al. 2003). This habitat is used by all of the other primary cavity excavators with the exception of 

the pileated woodpecker, red-breasted nuthatch, and three-toed woodpecker, which prefer mixed 

conifer habitat with a fir component, and downy woodpecker and black-capped chickadee which 

are largely restricted to riparian woodlands. Open forest conditions are also preferred by Lewis’ 

woodpecker, northern flicker, Williamson’s sapsucker, pygmy and white-breasted nuthatches, 

and mountain chickadee. Current conditions in the Spears project area are limiting for whiteheaded woodpecker, with single-strata LOS forests being below the HRV in dry grand fir, 

Douglas-fir, and ponderosa pine PAGs. The existing condition is currently deficient in whiteheaded woodpecker habitat within the project area when compared to the HRV as shown in 

Table 66. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 204 

Table 66. Amount of white-headed woodpecker habitat over time compared to HRV (acres). 

 Existing 

Habitat 

Habitat after 

activities 

Habitat after 

50 Years 

Low HRV High HRV 

Alternative 1 13,716 13,716 8,510 14,589 27,943

Alternative 2 13,716 17,176 10,938

Alternative 3 13,716 14,800 9,400

Alternative 4 13,716 16,848 10,720

Alternative 5 13,716 16,936 10,829

*Shaded cells represent amounts outside the HRV. 

The white-headed woodpecker prefers open canopy, late to old growth pine-dominated habitat. 

They prefer stands with live old ponderosa pine, abundant snags, and relatively open understory 

conditions. White-headed woodpeckers favor live ponderosa pine as foraging substrate, but have 

been observed in lodgepole pine, sugar pine, Engelmann spruce, and other species. They 

concentrate their foraging activities on live ponderosa pine, but they may also glean insects from 

other tree species. They generally select large diameter ponderosa pine snags as nest sites, 

though they are not always in tall snags (Dixon 1995 and Marshall 1997). Though the 

population has been reported as increasing across the western states (Wisdom et al. 2000), there 

have been local population declines in the Blue Mountains (Csuti et al. 1997) and on Deschutes 

and Winema National Forests (Marshall et al. 1997). Breeding bird survey data show no 

significant change in population for this species in the western states (Marshall et al. 1997). 

Within the project area, white-headed woodpeckers have been observed foraging in open 

forested areas, and potential nest holes have been noted in medium to large diameter pine snags 

and hollow live trees. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

The current trends in snag and large wood abundance would continue to occur. The amount of 

existing snags present within the project area would not be altered by implementation of this 

alternative, though continued competitive stress would likely result in mortality of trees and thus 

recruitment of snags and down wood. Concurrently, the build up of fuels and canopy conditions 

that favor crown fires and high fire intensity may ultimately facilitate a stand replacing 

disturbance event. Such events yield an abundance of snags in the short term, but may result in 

large areas devoid of snags in 50 to 100 years afterwards (after the majority of the initial pulse of 

snags has fallen down). Large snag recruitment would begin again after the new stand matures 

enough to provide such structure. This may take 150 years or more. 

This alternative would maintain the existing acres of fir-dominated understories and the trend 

toward fir dominated habitats. The no action alternative would favor the species that utilize firdominated habitats, by maintaining this habitat within the HRV. There would be a continued 

decline in white-headed woodpecker habitat which prefers open, pine dominated stands. This 

alternative would not move towards the HRV for the white-headed woodpecker and its 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 205 

associates. The trend of decreasing open forest and single-strata LOS would continue in the 

short term as understory trees fill in from below. Of the approximately 1,400 acres of LOS 

forests that have been identified in the project area, 66 percent is in dry grand fir or ponderosa 

pine plant associations. These relatively more xeric areas are the least likely to be able to sustain

multi-strata LOS in the long term. Mortality due to stand densities being above sustainable 

levels would result in loss of foraging habitat for white-headed woodpeckers (live pine) as the 

overstory pine trees succumb to stress from competition in overstocked stands. 

This alternative would not restore habitat for white-headed woodpeckers. This habitat type 

would remain below HRV. Over time, stand conditions area expected to decline on sites that 

cannot sustain high densities of conifers. As trees on such sites succumb to insect invasion they 

would stop producing seeds, sap, and invertebrates associated with foliage. These are listed as 

important food resources for this species (Marshall et al. 2003). If the mortality becomes 

extensive and live canopy closure is lost in large areas of severe insect infestations or fire 

intensity, then affected areas would become less suitable for this species. If the mortality 

remains moderate and patchy, then the affected areas may become more suitable for this species 

which prefers relatively open forest conditions. Projections indicate that white-headed 

woodpecker habitat would remain below the HRV in 50 years in the absence of large scale 

disturbance. 

Direct and Indirect Effects Common to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

All existing snags would be left that are not deemed to be a safety hazard. The amount of 

existing snags present within the project area should not be substantially altered by 

implementation of any of the alternatives. Thus, the percent tolerance for species evaluated 

under DecAID would not be affected in the short term. However, the alternatives do set treated 

stands on different courses for rate of large tree development. Snags and down wood may be 

consumed by prescribed fire. This would be partially offset by the creation of down wood due to 

fire-killed trees. The effect of fire on snag retention would likely result in a higher number of 

hard snags, with a concurrent reduction in soft and hollow snag habitat. Because of anticipated 

low-fire intensity, it is also likely that while large existing snags may be consumed by fire, the 

snags created by fire would tend to be in smaller size classes due to the vulnerability to fire 

mortality of smaller, thin barked trees. 

Reduction of understory tree density within treated areas would reduce the abundance of dense, 

fir-dominated understory conditions, and increase the abundance of more open stand structure 

with ponderosa pine contributing a relatively larger percentage of the species composition. This 

would result in reduced abundance of habitat for species that select for dense multi-layered 

forests, such as the pileated woodpecker and red-breasted nuthatch, while providing an increased 

abundance of habitat for species that prefer more open pine dominated stands, such as the whiteheaded woodpecker and white-breasted nuthatch. 

Alternative 2 

This alternative would treat 6,172 acres with commercial harvest. In these units all existing 

snags would be left that are not deemed to be a safety hazard during timber operations. The 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 206 

intent is to have at least the number and sizes of snags and down wood as prescribed in the 

Regional Forester’s Plan Amendment 2. All existing snags and down logs (>12 inches small 

end) are to be retained (with the exception of safety hazards). 

Underburning would occur on 5,511 acres outside of harvest and thinning units and on 9,953 

acres within harvest and thinning units. 

This alternative would help restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on most of the commercial 

harvest area. Where precommercial thinning occurs in two-storied stands with a component of 

large live ponderosa pine and suitable snags for nesting, this activity would help restore whiteheaded woodpecker habitat. Precommercial thinning in young stands promotes the development 

of large pine in the future, and thus habitat for white-headed woodpecker. This alternative treats 

11,356 acres by precommercial or hardwood restoration thinning. This alternative is expected to 

restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on 3,460 acres. This alternative would reduce the 

understory fir component on acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch. 

Alternative 2 is expected to restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on 3,460 acres moving this 

habitat type into HRV post-treatment. This alternative would result in about 29 percent more 

primary nesting habitat for white-headed woodpeckers in 50 years compared to no action. 

Projections indicate that white-headed woodpecker habitat would be below the HRV in 50 years 

under this alternative, unless maintained in the future. White-headed woodpeckers would be 

expected to nest within commercially harvested areas for up to 15 years on mesic sites (grand fir 

and Douglas-fir PAGs), or up to 30 years on more xeric sites (ponderosa pine PAGs). 

Precommercial thinned stands on such sites may be suitable after treatment, depending on 

residual stocking and degree of crown scorch. 

Alternative 3 

Alternative 3 has no commercial harvest, but would still treat forest stands on 9,899 acres with 

precommercial or hardwood restoration thinning. Small trees up to 12 inches dbh would be 

subject to precommercial thinning. Prescribed underburning would occur on 5,603 acres outside 

of thinning units and on 8,323 acres in precommercial thinning units. 

The effects of this alternative would reduce the amount of overstocked stands by thinning 

understory trees. This alternative would not create the open habitats preferred by the pine birds 

except on acres dominated by trees less than 12 inches dbh trees and in two storied stands with 

dense small tree cover under the large tree overstory. It would not reduce fir dominated mid and 

understories as much as the commercial harvest alternatives, as many of these trees are larger 

than 12 inches dbh. 

Where precommercial thinning occurs in two-storied stands with a component of large live 

ponderosa pine and suitable snags for nesting, this activity would help restore white-headed 

woodpecker habitat. However, this activity would not be as effective in multi-storied stands as 

commercial harvest, where the mid-story trees are thinned more aggressively. Thinning of 

young stands would promote development of future white-headed woodpecker habitat on pine 

sites. This alternative would have the least effect of the action alternatives on white-headed 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 207 

woodpecker habitat, because treated stands would likely retain a higher canopy closure and true 

fir component than would be present in commercially harvested stands of the other alternatives. 

This alternative is expected to restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on 1,084 acres. 

This alternative is expected to alter forest structure sufficiently enough to restore habitat for 

white-headed woodpeckers on 1,084 acres moving this habitat type into HRV post-treatment. 

This alternative would result in about 10 percent more primary nesting habitat for white-headed 

woodpeckers in 50 years compared to no action. Projections indicate that white-headed 

woodpecker habitat would be below the HRV in 50 years under this alternative. Stands may be 

suitable for nesting after treatment on mesic sites (grand fir and Douglas-fir PAGs) for up to 15 

years, or up to 30 years on xeric sites (ponderosa pine PAGs) depending on residual stocking and 

degree of crown scorch. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative treats 4,935 acres with commercial harvest. In these units all existing snags 

would be left that are not deemed to be a safety hazard. The intent is to have at least the number 

and sizes of snags and down wood as prescribed by the Eastside Screens. All existing snags and 

down logs (>12 inch diameter small end) are to be retained. 

This alternative would help restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on most of the commercial 

harvest area. Where precommercial thinning occurs in two-storied stands with a component of 

large live ponderosa pine and suitable snags for nesting, this treatment would help restore whiteheaded woodpecker habitat. Precommercial thinning in young stands promotes the development 

of large pine in the future, and thus habitat for white-headed woodpecker. This alternative treats 

11,131 acres by precommercial or hardwood restoration thinning. Underburning would occur on 

5,338 acres outside of thinning units and 9,824 acres within thinning units. This alternative is 

expected to restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on 3,132 acres. The effects of this 

alternative would reduce acres of overstocked stands and reduce the understory fir component on 

acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch. 

This alternative is expected to restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on 3,132 acres moving 

this habitat type into HRV post-treatment. This alternative would result in about 26 percent 

more primary nesting habitat for white-headed woodpeckers in 50 years compared to no action. 

Projections indicate that white-headed woodpecker habitat would be below the HRV in 50 years 

under this alternative, unless maintained in the future. White-headed woodpeckers would be 

expected to nest within areas that are treated for up to 15 years on mesic sites (grand fir and 

Douglas-fir PAGS), or up to 30 years on more xeric sites (ponderosa pine PAGs). 

Precommercial thinned stands on such sites may be suitable after treatment, depending on 

residual stocking and degree of crown scorch. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative treats 3,942 acres with commercial harvest. In these units all existing snags 

would be left that are not deemed to be a safety hazard. The intent is to have at least the number 

and sizes of snags and down wood as prescribed by the Regional Forester’s Plan Amendment 2. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 208 

All existing snags and down logs (>12 inch diameter small end) are to be retained (with the 

exception of safety hazards). 

This alternative would help restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on commercial harvest 

units that are not within goshawk PFAs, connective corridors, satisfactory elk cover in winter 

range, or in mesic north or east facing swales. In harvest units within these habitats, the harvest 

prescription is less aggressive, so would not do as well at promoting habitat suitability for whiteheaded woodpeckers, as the more intensive treatments elsewhere under this alternative or under 

Alternatives 2 or 4. Where precommercial thinning occurs in two-storied stands with a 

component of large live ponderosa pine and suitable snags for nesting, this treatment would help 

restore white-headed woodpecker habitat. Precommercial thinning in young stands promotes the 

development of large pine in the future, and thus habitat for white-headed woodpecker. This 

alternative treats 11,270 acres by precommercial or hardwood thinning. Underburning would 

occur on 4,702 acres outside of harvest and thinning units and on 9,503 acres within harvest and 

thinning units. This alternative is expected to restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on 3,220 

acres. The effects of this alternative would reduce acres of overstocked stands and reduce the 

understory fir component on acres dominated by ponderosa pine and western larch. 

This alternative is expected to restore white-headed woodpecker habitat on 3,220 acres posttreatment. This alternative would result in about 29 percent more primary nesting habitat for 

white-headed woodpeckers in 50 years compared to no action. Projections indicate that whiteheaded woodpecker habitat would be below the HRV in 50 years under this alternative, unless 

maintained in the future. White-headed woodpeckers would be expected to nest within areas that 

are commercially harvested under this alternative for up to 15 years on mesic sites (grand fir and 

Douglas-fir PAGs), or up to 30 years on more xeric sites (ponderosa pine PAGs). 

Precommercial thinned stands on such sites may be suitable after treatment, depending on 

residual stocking and degree of crown scorch. 

Cumulative Effects 

Harvest activities have occurred on 7,563 acres in the project area. The majority of the 

previously harvested areas received harvest prescriptions which removed most or all of the 

overstory trees limiting both nesting and foraging habitat in these areas for white-headed 

woodpeckers. This intensity of treatment occurred on approximately 3,263 acres in Lower 

Marks Creek, 2,799 acres in Upper Marks Creek, and 7 acres in Veazie Creek. Prescriptions that 

retain 4-6 live overstory trees may provide suitable habitat for white-headed woodpeckers as 

long as live ponderosa pine and at least 2.25 large snags per acre are present (Thomas et al. 

1979). This intensity of treatment occurred on approximately 220 acres in Lower Marks Creek 

and 298 acres in Upper Marks Creek. Shelterwood harvests may retain enough overstory trees to 

provide suitable white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat. Stands with at least 12 trees per acre 

greater than 21 inches dbh may be comparable to stands that are known to have been used 

successfully by nesting white-headed woodpeckers (Marshall et al. 2003). Such stands provide 

live large tree structure currently and may contribute to both the overstory and the snag and 

down wood components in the future. Shelterwood harvests occurred on approximately 261 

acres in Lower Marks Creek and 562 acres in Upper Marks Creek. Removal of snags for 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 209 

firewood, as hazard abatement, or under salvage sales (e.g. Cougar Salvage) would have reduced 

habitat for white-headed woodpeckers (Wisdom et al. 2000). Fire exclusion has resulted in 

grand fir developing in the understory of many stands that were previously dominated by 

ponderosa pine and larch. This has contributed to loss of open forest conditions and potential 

increases in predation (Marshall et al. 2003). As a result of past management practices, whiteheaded woodpecker habitat has decreased compared to historic conditions. 

Implementation of Viable Ecosystems and efforts to reduce hazardous fuel accumulations at the 

watershed and Forest level would continue to restore more open forest conditions in many 

forested stands, resulting in increased dominance of pine and larch and single stratum structure 

on more acres than is currently present. This would improve the quality of white-headed 

woodpecker habitat on these areas. At the watershed scale, the abundance and distribution of 

white-headed woodpecker habitat would become within the historic level in the short-term under 

all action alternatives. Keeping white-headed woodpecker habitat within HRV in the long term 

would require future maintenance. 

Ongoing and reasonably foreseeable activities would continue to interact with white-headed 

woodpeckers and their habitat. Ongoing grazing, recreational use, and exclosure maintenance 

activities are not expected to result in effects to this species when combined with effects of this 

project. However, ongoing firewood cutting may combine with this project to further reduce 

habitat for white-headed woodpeckers. When implemented within the rules established by the 

firewood synopsis, there should be no net cumulative effect. However, people continue to 

remove large snags illegally, accessing them cross country or on old timber harvest access 

routes. This project proposes to harvest up to 5,366 acres with ground-based equipment and 

proposes to construct/reconstruct up to 30 miles of road. Though all new roads are scheduled to 

be closed and additional existing roads are planned to be closed after project activities are 

completed, some people are likely to utilize these road beds for a period of time before closures 

are implemented (some people may breach closures after they are implemented) in order to 

access firewood. As described above for pileated woodpeckers, this project may contribute to 

increased accessibility and thus additional areas vulnerable to illegal snag removal, which would 

reduce potential nesting habitat for this species and other primary cavity excavators. 

Northern (Common) Flicker 

Affected Environment 

Northern flicker prefers open forests and forest edges, though they can be found in a wide variety 

of terrestrial habitats in Oregon. They tend to avoid very dense forested areas. They will nest in 

a variety of tree species with decay in them. In the Blue Mountains, they are known to nest in 

ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, western larch, and lodgepole pine. In central Oregon, flickers were 

found to select old-growth juniper over mid-successional juniper (Marshall et al. 2003). The 

most preferred habitat conditions for this species is provided for in open condition ponderosa 

pine and Douglas-fir PAGs which are analyzed above in the section on white-headed 

woodpeckers. The direct, indirect, and cumulative effects described for white-headed 

woodpeckers best represent the effects to northern flickers in the project area. The following 

discussion applies to the old-growth juniper habitat type and the role it may play in providing for 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 210 

the northern flicker within the project area, even though it is not necessarily the primary 

preferred habitat for the species within this project area. 

Of the approximately 1,400 acres of LOS stands that have been identified in the project area, a 

negligible amount were in western juniper PAG. However, juniper also occurs in the early-seral 

stages of the ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir PAGs, so individual old-growth juniper trees may 

occur in these sites as well as in the western juniper PAG. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

The current trends in snag and large wood abundance would continue to occur. The amount of 

existing juniper snags and live juniper with hollow spaces present within the project area would 

not be altered by this alternative. The build up of fuels and canopy conditions would continue, 

and would ultimately favor stand replacing fire events. This would not be an atypical fire regime 

in this habitat type. Such events yield an abundance of snags of varying heights and diameters. 

Juniper snags may tend to stand for many years following fire unless they are in a location that 

can be easily accessed by firewood cutters. Snag and cavity tree recruitment would begin again 

after the new stand matures enough to provide such structure. Development of snags and trees 

with stem rot (decay that allows excavation to be possible) of sufficient size to accommodate 

nesting flickers may take 200 years or more after a stand-replacing fire. 

This alternative would maintain the existing acres of juniper stands and dense developing 

understory conditions. This alternative would not move juniper woodland and juniper steppe 

PAGs towards the HRV for open stands of large structure juniper trees, and would not reduce the 

potential for stand replacing fire events. The trend of decreasing open woodland juniper LOS 

would continue in the short term as understory trees fill in from below. This alternative would 

not remove juniper from the understory of pine, Douglas-fir, or grand fir sites, so potential 

replacement trees for juniper LOS would not be reduced. The growth rate of potential 

replacement trees would not be improved under this alternative. Because old-growth juniper is 

not a an extensive habitat feature within this project area, and because northern flickers are 

expected to select for more favorable nest sites such as large diameter pine, fir, or larch where 

they are available, the effect of this alternative on old-growth juniper is expected to have a 

negligible effect on northern flickers. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Under the action alternatives, no old-growth juniper would be removed, except incidentally such 

as in clearing for road construction or landings. Some individual old-growth trees may be killed 

by prescribed burning if ground and ladder fuels are sufficient to carry the fire into them. 

However, the old-growth juniper trees are often on rocky areas that do not sustain fire spread. 

That is why the juniper has developed into old growth on those sites. The amount of existing 

juniper snags and large, live juniper with hollow spaces present within the project area would not 

be altered by implementation of the action alternatives. However, the number of potential 

replacement trees would be reduced, as young and small diameter juniper trees would be targeted 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 211 

for removal to achieve stand density objectives. The trees that are retained during thinning 

operations, whether juniper or other species, would benefit from the density reduction in both 

growth rate and reduction of risk of loss to high intensity disturbance (fire, insects, and disease). 

Thus, though there may be fewer small juniper trees retained under the action alternatives, most 

of the larger and older juniper trees would be retained. 

These alternatives would maintain the majority of the existing old-growth juniper trees, but 

would reduce the acres in dense developing understory conditions (including juniper). This 

alternative would move juniper woodland and juniper steppe PAGs towards the HRV for open 

stands of large structure juniper trees, and would reduce the potential for stand replacing fire 

events. The trend of decreasing open woodland juniper LOS would be slowed in treated stands 

as young trees are thinned from below. These alternatives would remove juniper from the 

understory of pine, Douglas-fir ,or grand fir sites, so potential future juniper tree density would 

be reduced, however the growth rate of retained trees (including potential replacement LOS) 

would be improved under these alternatives. Because old-growth juniper is not a an extensive 

habitat feature within this project area, and because northern flickers are expected to select for 

more favorable nest sites such as large diameter pine, fir, or larch where they are available, the 

effect of these alternatives on old-growth juniper is expected to have a negligible effect on 

northern flickers in this project area. 

Cumulative Effects 

There are no present or reasonably foreseeable future activities that would alter old-growth 

juniper habitats within the project area. Therefore, there are no cumulative effects related to oldgrowth juniper habitat. 

Snags and Down Wood 

The Eastside Screens provide direction on dead wood retention, including both snags and logs. 

The Interim Wildlife Standard, Scenario A, specifies that all sale activities will maintain snags 

and green replacement trees greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh (or the representative 

overstory tree if less than 21 inches), at the 100 percent potential population levels of primary 

cavity excavators. The Eastside Screens state that this should be determined using the best 

available science on species requirements as applied through current snag models or other 

documented procedures. Since the Eastside Screens were adopted, there are many sources of 

new information, some of which question the biological potential model. Many of these sources 

contribute to the best science on the subject of dead wood habitat and have been consulted during 

the environmental analysis. These sources are identified in the text and are listed in the 

References section of this documents. Other sources of information have been incorporated into 

the compilation of data and research findings included in the Decayed Wood Advisor (DecAID). 

Recently, the DecAID (Mellen et al. 2002) has become available for use. This work is an 

advisory tool to help land managers evaluate effects of forest conditions and existing or proposed 

management activities on organisms that use snags, down wood, and other wood decay elements. 

In this publication, it is possible to relate the abundance of dead wood habitat, both snags and 

logs, to the frequency of occurrence of various wildlife species that require dead wood habitat for 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 212 

some part of their life cycle. DecAID shows levels based upon “percentage of tolerance.” This 

tolerance can be viewed as representation of levels of “assurance” or confidence of providing 

habitat for a particular species. However, the data displayed in DecAID is merely a summary of 

the conditions present in research plots that have been studied and is dependent on available 

research data (within each habitat type and for each species). DecAID does provide data on snag 

abundance and distribution in unharvested study areas that can be used as a basis of comparison 

for reference conditions within various habitat types. It also provides data on wildlife use 

observed in studies that have been conducted which can be used to help predict species responses 

to varying snag and down wood levels in various habitat types. 

Affected Environment 

The Hash Rock Fire burned approximately 4,600 acres within the Marks Creek Watershed in the 

fall of 2000. The majority of these acres were impacted by low-intensity fire that tended to thin 

young trees from the understory and consume some of the large wood on the forest floor. The 

fire did burn moderate to hot in three locations in the Hamilton, Reilly, and McGinnis Creek 

drainages. In these locations, there were 20 to 30-acre hotspots that killed most of the overstory 

trees. Following the Hash Rock Fire increased mortality began to occur in all diameter classes of 

ponderosa pine. Initially, the mortality occurred within the perimeter of the Hash Rock fire 

although additional mortality began to show up outside the fire perimeter. As a result of the 

increase in snags within the watershed, habitat for primary cavity excavators and other species 

that depend on dead would habitat was increasing. 

Dead wood (standing or down) plays an important role in overall ecosystem health, soil 

productivity, and numerous species’ habitat. Many wildlife species depend on snags and 

downed wood for roosting, denning, or feeding. In the Blue Mountains of Oregon and 

Washington, 62 species of birds and mammals use snags in some portion of their life functions 

(Thomas et al. 1979). Snags come in all sizes and start as standing hard snags and through time 

begin to break down and eventually decay into soil nutrients. Various species utilize snags at 

various stages throughout the decay process. The goal is to manage for a variety of snag sizes, in 

various stages of decay and at various densities across the landscape to maintain viable 

populations of the variety of species that depend on them. Currently, the Ochoco National Forest 

is using the Viable Ecosystems Management Guide or 2.25 snags per acre (Thomas et al. 1979) 

to determine the number of snags to retain. The minimum number is 2.25 snags per acre, as 

described in Thomas and others (1979). The Viable Ecosystems Management Guide describes a 

range of snag densities that could historically exist across the landscape in different PAGs. 

Snag management guidelines were developed for the Marks Creek Watershed using a variety of 

information including scientific literature, standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan, local 

knowledge of the area, and information contained in the DecAID advisory tool. 

Snag and down wood levels are best analyzed at scales of subwatersheds or 20 square miles 

(Mellen et al. 2002). Wisdom and others (1999) recommend a subwatershed scale for sampling 

snags. The recent (2004) Cougar Salvage Project analysis collected information on size, density, 

and distribution for the approximately 38,800-acre Marks Creek Watershed. No information was 

collected for the non-forest portion of the watershed or the juniper woodlands portion. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 213 

The following methods were used to determine existing snag densities for the Marks Creek 

Watershed (from Cougar Salvage analysis). The desire was to conduct a total count of snags for 

the watershed using a conservative method that would not over estimate existing snag densities. 

Comparing survey data with information that was collected on the ground from the same 

locations and considering the survey techniques, indications are that the survey underestimated 

current snag levels by approximately 25 percent. 

First, low-level helicopter flights were flown over the entire watershed. Recently dead trees 

were counted. Recently dead was defined as having the majority of the crown with red needles. 

In general, individual trees were not inventoried and snags with no red needles were also not 

inventoried. Snags were recorded as greater than 20 inches dbh and less than 20 inches dbh. 

Species were recorded for fir and pine. Smaller groups of dead trees were recorded as points and 

when larger areas of scattered dead trees or larger groups of dead trees were surveyed, they were 

recorded as polygons. A district wildlife biologist and the forest wildlife biologist conducted the 

surveys. Ground truthing on selected sites indicated that aerial surveys under estimated snag 

densities when numbers of snags exceeded approximately 50. 

Second, snag densities were obtained from the district silviculturist for that portion of the Hash 

Rock fire that occurred within the Marks Creek Watershed. Snag density estimates for the burn 

area was obtained using stand exam information; CVS plot data, and burn intensities within the 

fire. Even though some survey data points from the helicopter survey occurred within the Hash 

Rock fire perimeter, the survey concentrated outside the Hash Rock fire perimeter. Observations 

that were made during the 2004 helicopter survey indicated that a large amount of mortality has 

occurred in stands within the Hash Rock fire perimeter and on the edges of the perimeter that 

was not initially dead following the fire. 

Finally, in an attempt to capture a portion of the dead trees existing prior to the 2004 helicopter 

survey, data from the Insect and Disease survey, conducted annually by the USDA Forest 

Service and the Oregon Department of Forestry was included. Information was included from 

the years 1999 through 2003. Information from the 2004 insect and disease survey that did not 

overlap with the 2004 helicopter survey was also included. 

The combined survey data provided snag information: (1) to evaluate existing conditions for the 

Marks Creek Watershed,(2) to develop retention guidelines for salvage areas, and (3) for 

comparison of direct and indirect effects of alternatives. Snags will be addressed as they relate 

to size, density, and distribution. 

Tables 67 and 68 summarize all information collected for dead trees within the approximately 

38,800 acre Marks Creek Watershed by PAG. The tables also display the VEMG guidelines and 

the prescribed retention levels by PAG. No information was collected for the juniper woodland 

community and non-forest portion of the project area. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 214 

Table 67. Surveys and retention levels for snags less than 20 inches dbh. 

PAG Existing 

Snags 

<20”dbh 

Watershed 

Acres 

Snags/Acre 

<20”dbh 

VEMG 

Range 

Prescribed

Retention 

Levels 

Moist grand fir 5,960 1,403 4.2 4.4 - 10.0 10/ac.

Dry grand fir 87,496 19,633 4.5 3.2 - 7.1 5.8/ac.

Douglas-fir 2,824 8,219 0.3 1.3 - 3.1 3.1/ac.

Mesic pine 563 2,155 0.3 1.2 - 2.7 2.7/ac.

Xeric pine 640 2,600 0.25 0 - 0.3 0.3/ac.

34,010

Table 68. Surveys and retention levels for snags greater than 20 inches dbh. 

PAG Existing 

Snags 

>20”dbh 

Watershed 

Acres 

Snags/Acre 

>20”dbh 

VEMG 

Range 

Prescribed

Retention 

Levels 

Moist grand fir 1,170 1,403 0.8 1.5 - 4.9 4.9/ac.

Dry grand fir 17,060 19,633 0.9 1.0 - 3.3 3.3/ac.

Douglas-fir 738 8,219 0.1 0.2 - 1.6 1.6/ac.

Mesic pine 152 2,155 0.1 0.2 - 1.6 1.6/ac.

Xeric pine 83 2,600 0.03 0.1 - 0.7 0.7/ac.

34,010 

Survey data (Tables 67 and 68) indicate that on the watershed scale the project area is currently 

below the low end of the range for snag density in both size classes in the moist grand fir, 

Douglas-fir, and moist pine PAGs. In the dry grand fir PAG, and in less than 20 inch dbh trees, 

the project area is slightly above the low end of the range for snag density, but slightly below the 

range for snag density in snags greater than or equal to 20 inches dbh. In dry pine PAGs, 

existing snag density is within the VEMG range in both size classes. The purpose of the 

watershed scale look at snag densities is to provide guidance for the management of snags at the 

project or unit scale. As a result of current levels being below or at the low end of the range, the 

prescription within treatment areas is to manage at the higher end of the range. 

Information obtained from DecAID was used to compare how snags may have been historically 

distributed across the landscape with the distribution that currently exists. Table 69 displays 

distribution data from unharvested plots in DecAID for the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat 

type. The ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type best describes the moist pine, Douglas-fir, and 

dry grand fir PAGs used in this analysis. Data for the moist grand fir PAG was also included. 

The moist grand fir PAG occurs on approximately 1,400 acres within the project area. 

Information is displayed for all snags greater than 10 inches dbh. Alternative 1 displays 

information for the project area. Acres are not included for the non-forest and juniper woodland 

portions of the project area. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 215 

Table 69. Distribution data for unharvested plots in DecAID for ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir 

habitat types (snags per acre). 

snags/acre No snags 0-4 snags 4-8 snags 8-12 snags >12 snags 

Unharvested Plots 

(DecAid) 

54% 24% 7% 10% 4%

Existing Condition 65% 24% 1% 0.07% 10%

DecAID predicts the following species will use ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir large tree vegetation: 

black-backed woodpecker, flammulated owl, northern flicker, white-headed woodpecker, 

pileated woodpecker, pygmy nuthatch, red-naped sapsucker, and Williamson’s sapsucker. 

Available information in DecAID on snag densities by species is limited and shown in Tables 70 

and 71 for the white-headed woodpecker and pileated woodpecker. Refer to the Primary Cavity 

Excavator section above for more information on white-headed and pileated woodpeckers. 

In this project area, the large snags in stands that are included in the dry grand fir PAG provide 

habitat consistent with large snags in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type described in 

DecAID because these stands are relatively dry and tend to have natural fire regimes that favor 

retention of early and mid seral fire tolerant species rather than late seral fire intolerant species. 

On the dry grand fir sites, the largest trees and snags are usually a mix of ponderosa pine, 

Douglas-fir, and larch, while the grand fir on these sites is more commonly present in the 

understory and mid-story layers as small or medium sized trees and snags. For this reason, the 

snag counts for snags greater than 20 inches dbh in the dry grand fir PAG listed in Table 68 is 

included in the count for existing snag density in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type. 

The difference between the snag count in Tables 67 and 68 in the dry grand fir PAG is applied 

toward the count for existing snag density in the East Side Mixed Conifer habitat type. The 

tolerance levels for snags greater than 10 inches dbh includes both snags less than 20 inches dbh 

and snags greater than 20 inches dbh. 

Table 70. Tolerance levels in ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir large tree (>10”snags). 

Tolerance Levels Pileated Woodpecker White-headed Woodpecker 

30% Snag Density (#/acre) -- 0.3 

30% Sample size 0 149 

30% # of studies 0 1 

50% Snag Density (#/acre) 30.4 1.7 

50% Sample size 105 149 

50% # of studies 1 1 

80% Snag Density (#/acre) -- 3.7 

80% Sample size 0 149 

80% # of studies 0 1 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 216 

Table 71. Tolerance levels in ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir large tree (>20”snags). 

Tolerance Levels Pileated Woodpecker White-headed Woodpecker 

30% Snag Density (#/acre) -- 0.5 

30% Sample size 0 75 

30% # of studies 0 1 

50% Snag Density (#/acre) 7.6 1.8 

50% Sample size 105 75 

50% # of studies 1 1 

80% Snag Density (#/acre) -- 3.8 

80% Sample size 0 75 

80% # of studies 0 1 

Using the rationale and methods stated, it has been determined that the existing condition is 

providing habitat at the 50 percent tolerance level in snags greater than 10 inches dbh for the 

white-headed woodpecker. For snags greater than 20 inches dbh, habitat is being provided at the 

30 percent tolerance level. 

For the pileated woodpecker in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type large tree structure 

DecAID data shows a needed snag density of 30.4 snags per acre for the 50 percent tolerance 

level for all snags over 10 inches dbh or at 7.6 snags per acre in the greater than 20 inches dbh 

size class. Within this project area neither of these snag densities currently exist, so habitat is not 

being provided at the 50 percent tolerance level. Data is not available in DecAID for a 30 

percent tolerance level for this species within this habitat type. DecAID advises that the data for 

the pileated woodpecker includes plots on mixed conifer sites. 

DecAID predicts the following species would use snags among live eastside mixed conifer 

vegetation: American marten, long-legged myotis, pileated woodpecker, silver-haired bat, and 

white-headed woodpecker. DecAID also predicts that the following species would use snags in 

ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir large tree vegetation type: black-backed woodpecker, flammulated 

owl, northern flicker, white-headed woodpecker, pileated woodpecker, pygmy nuthatch, rednaped sapsucker, and Williamson’s sapsucker. The range of small snag densities used varied 

from a low of 0.3 snags per acre greater than or equal to 9.85 inches dbh at the 30 percent 

tolerance level for the white-headed woodpecker to a high of 56.4 snags per acre greater than or 

equal to 9.85 inches dbh at the 50 percent tolerance level for the silver-haired bat. The range of 

large snag densities used varied from a low of 0.0 snags per acre greater than or equal to 19.7 

inches at the 30 percent tolerance level for the white-headed woodpecker to a high of 16.8 snags 

per acre greater than or equal to 19.7 inches dbh at the 50 percent tolerance level for the silverhaired bat (USDA 2006). 

The Forest Plan standards and guidelines for snags specify that across the Ochoco National 

Forest, snags must meet an average of 47 percent of biological potential. The Eastside Screens 

amendment requires managing snags at 100 percent of maximum potential for primary cavity 

excavators, which is a minimum of 2.25 snags per acre (Thomas et al. 1979). Viable Ecosystem 

Management Guide levels for snags were agreed upon with the Regional Office to meet the 

amendment standards and guidelines, except that snags would not be managed below a minimum 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 217 

of 2.25 snags per acre (USDA Forest Service 1997). The work by Thomas has been challenged 

by Bull and others. Bull and others (1997) state current direction for providing wildlife habitat 

on public forest lands does not reflect the new information available which suggests that to fully 

meet the needs of wildlife, additional snags and habitat are required for foraging, denning, 

nesting, and roosting. Rose and others (2001) and Johnson and O’Neil (2001) state that several 

major lessons have been learned in the period 1979 to 1999 that have tested critical assumptions 

of earlier management advisory models, including some assumptions used to develop Forest Plan 

standards and guidelines. Some assumptions include: (1) calculation of numbers of snags 

required by woodpeckers based on assessing their “biological (population) potential” is a flawed 

technique, (2) empirical studies are suggesting that snag numbers in areas used and selected by 

some wildlife species are far higher than those calculated by this technique, and (3) numbers and 

sizes (inches dbh) of snags used and selected by secondary cavity nesters often exceed those of 

primary excavators (Rose et al. 2001). 

This suggests that managing for 100 percent population levels of primary excavators may not 

represent the most current knowledge of managing for cavity nesters and that these snag levels, 

under certain conditions, may not be adequate for some species. In addition, the current 

direction provides recommendations for green stands only when 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. 

The use of DecAID is a culmination of the most recent science and data available. As stated by 

Rose and others (2001), DecAID is based on a thorough review of the literature, available 

research and inventory data, and expert judgment. Information in DecAID will be compared to 

the Viable Ecosystem Management Guide guidelines for this project. 

Other research regarding historical snag densities were reviewed to compare with information 

found within DecAID and prescribed retention levels. Harrod and others (1998) estimated 

historical snag densities in ponderosa pine dominated dry forests. Estimated snag densities 

greater than 6 inches dbh ranged from 5.9 to 14.1 per acre in pre-European settlement 

landscapes. Agee (2002) estimated lower snag densities than Harrod for the ponderosa 

pine/Douglas-fir forest series by estimating number of trees in 0.1 hectare clumps of 16 age 

classes and assuming that the oldest patch is killed by insects every 25 years. Agee (2002) 

assumed fire helped to decompose snag patches and after 5 fires at 10-year intervals, snags 

would be completely consumed. As a result, historical snag density was estimated at 2 snags per 

acre. Results from regional studies in eastern Washington and Oregon (all ownerships) by 

Ohmann and Waddell (2002) suggest there are currently 2.025 total snags per acre greater than 

10 inches dbh of which 0.405 snags were greater than 20 inches dbh. 

Snag densities reported by Harrod and others (1998) are within the 80 percent tolerance level 

range, and Agee (2002) are within the 50 percent tolerance level range for the wildlife data and 

below the 30 percent tolerance level for inventory data of those reported in DecAID for 

ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat types for large trees. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 218 

Retention levels were also compared with the Region 6 Interim Old Growth Definitions to 

determine if old-growth characteristics would be retained following harvest. The standard for 

meeting old-growth conditions in this document for the ponderosa pine series was that there 

needed to be 3 snags per acre greater than 14 inches dbh and/or 10 percent of the live trees in the 

stand containing “spire tops” (partially dead tops). For the Douglas-fir series, the standard was 1 

snag per acre 12 inches or greater dbh. 

Logs are an important component on the landscape. They provide organic and inorganic 

nutrients in soil development, provide microhabitats for invertebrates, plants, amphibians, and 

other small vertebrates, and provide structure for riparian associated species in streams and 

ponds. It has been shown that size, distribution, and orientation may be more important than 

tonnage or volume. Small logs provide escape cover or shelter for small species. It is still 

unknown what levels of down woody material are needed to provide quality habitat for 

associated species. Larger sized logs are also used more and by more species than smaller logs. 

(Bull et al. 1997). Log levels are prescribed in the Eastside Screens and are presented in Table 

72. 

Table 72. Log levels prescribed in the Eastside Screens. 

Species Pieces Per 

Acre 

Diameter Small 

End 

Piece Length and Total Lineal 

Length 

Ponderosa Pine 3-6 12 inches > 6 ft. 20-40 ft. 

Mixed Conifer 15-20 12 inches >6 ft. 100-140 ft. 

The project area has had a long history of activities that resulted in the removal of snags and 

logs. Primarily, past timber harvest and firewood cutting have resulted in lower numbers of 

downed logs than what is desired. No specific data was collected for down wood, although 

knowledge of the area indicates that downed wood levels are beginning to increase as a result of 

snags beginning to fall both within and outside the Hash Rock fire perimeter. 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

The no action alternative would retain all existing snags in the project area except those that 

would be removed by ongoing programs of work such and recreational site and highway 

maintenance operations. At the watershed scale, snags would be retained at the levels shown in 

Tables 67 and 68. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

No dead trees would be removed, with the exception of those that are deemed to be hazard trees. 

This project does not propose to harvest snags, so the amount of snags present within the project 

area should not be substantially altered by commercial harvest. Prescribed burning may alter 

snag abundance as described above, but fire effects are not expected to alter snag densities 

enough to affect the percent tolerance for species evaluated under DecAID. The project is not 

expected to reduce the habitat tolerance level for any species for which habitat is currently being 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 219 

provided due to use of Design Elements (see Chapter 2) intended to minimize loss of snags 

during burning operations. At the watershed scale, the percent of the area with no snags will not 

change (Table 69). There would be a negligible reduction in the percent of the area that contains 

greater than 0 snags per acre. This reduction would occur as a result of hazard reduction in areas 

such as around landings and equipment fueling areas. 

No removal of existing down logs are proposed under the action alternatives. However, there is 

potential for incidental effects to species that use down logs, especially in units that are harvested

with ground-based equipment, have grapple piling, include road construction, or include 

underburning. Individual logs may be moved or broken during harvest or road construction 

activities or may be consumed during prescribed burning operations. Existing levels are 

expected to increase in the future across the project area as standing trees and existing snags fall. 

Within the areas proposed for harvest (up to 6,172 acres), green trees would be removed that 

could have otherwise potentially fallen and become downed wood. This has the potential of 

affecting accumulations of down wood in the future, although the prescribed retention levels 

would retain sufficient numbers of trees to provide down wood recruitment in the future (Table 

73). Precommercial thinning would promote the development of larger trees and thus the 

potential for long-term recruitment of large down wood. 

Alternative 3 

No dead trees or down logs would be removed, with the exception of those trees that are deemed 

to be hazard trees. This project does not propose to cut snags, so the amount of snags present 

within the project area should not be substantially altered. There would be no commercial 

harvest operations or road construction, so there would be no direct effects to species that use 

down wood. Prescribed burning may alter snag abundance as described above, but fire effects 

are not expected to alter snag densities enough to affect the percent tolerance for species 

evaluated under DecAID. The project is not expected to reduce the habitat tolerance level for 

any species for which habitat is currently being provided due to use of Design Elements (see 

Chapter 2) intended to minimize loss of snags during burning operations. 

Cumulative Effects 

Refer the cumulative effects discussion for Primary Cavity Excavators for more detailed 

information on past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities that may affect or continue to 

have effects on species associated with snag habitat. Recently, the Cougar Salvage was 

implemented in the Marks Creek Watershed. That project removed approximately 595 dead 

trees in scattered patches on a total of 52 acres. These patches occurred in 37 locations and 

ranged from 1 to 5 acres each. Snag retention was applied as described above and displayed in 

Table 73. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 220 

Table 73. Cougar Salvage prescription for snags by PAG. 

Plant Association 

Group 

Snags/Acre <20”dbh 

Retention Levels 

Snags/Acre>20”dbh 

Retention Levels 

Dry grand fir 5.8 3.3

Douglas-fir 3.1 1.6

Moist pine 2.7 1.6

Actual retention levels varied within harvest locations although all locations met or exceeded 

prescribed retention levels. No retention levels are described for moist grand fir and xeric pine 

PAGs because there was no harvest proposed under the Cougar Salvage Project. The largest 

harvest area is 5 acres with the majority of locations being less than 1 acre. The Forest Plan 

direction of providing snag habitat on a 40-acre area was met on this project. The Spears project 

when considered along with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions (including Cougar 

Salvage) meets Forest Plan standards for snags and down wood retention. 

There are not any other timber sales planned for the project area. Firewood gathering is expected 

to continue to reduce snag and downed wood levels in close proximity to open roads. Prescribed 

burning, ground-based timber operations, and grapple piling in the action alternatives may 

combine to increase accessibility for cross country travel which could exacerbate the loss of 

snags to firewood cutting, and may alter the abundance and distribution of down wood. 

Connective Corridors 

Affected Environment 

Connective corridors have been identified to meet the requirements of the Regional Forester’s 

Plan Amendment 2 (see Map 17). There are at least two connective corridors between all 

allocated old-growth areas and LOS stands larger than 100 acres. Connective corridors also link 

to allocated old-growth areas or LOS stands in adjacent watersheds. The connections from east 

to west through the project area cross U.S. Highway 26. 

Alternative 1 

This alternative would not treat within mapped connective corridors. The structural complexity 

and canopy closure within mapped connective corridors would be retained. On mesic sites, the 

abundance of snags and down logs and the development of multiple canopy layers would 

continue on the current trend. On drier sites, large structure ponderosa pine and larch would 

decline in vigor due to competition from the developing understory, resulting in a gradual loss of 

large live tree habitat and an increase in large snag habitat. 

This alternative treats 0 acres in connective corridors. This alternative retains existing structural

character, visual cover, and climatic moderation at least in the short term. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 221 

Alternative 2 

This alternative includes 787 acres of commercial harvest and 535 acres of precommercial 

thinning within connective corridors. Prescribed burning of natural fuels outside of thinning 

units would occur within connective corridors on 645 acres. Within these areas, the structural 

complexity and canopy closure within mapped connective corridors would be reduced in the 

short term. It is anticipated that the level of retention post treatment would still provide adequate

cover and structure to facilitate travel by most species that would use these corridors. Some 

species that select for open forest conditions may find the habitat more favorable after treatment. 

However, treated habitat within the corridors may be less desirable for species that have limited 

mobility, that are vulnerable to predation, or that are sensitive to climatic conditions, at least in 

the short term. Where these activities occur within young stands, thinning designed to promote 

development of large trees would likely improve habitat conditions within the corridors in the 

long term. 

This alternative treats 1,966 acres in connective corridors. This alternative alters existing 

structural character and canopy cover, but improves resilience on 56 percent of the area within 

mapped connective corridors in the project area. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative includes 1,026 acres of precommercial thinning within connective corridors. 

Prescribed burning of natural fuels outside of thinning units would occur within connective 

corridors on 610 acres. Within these units the canopy closure within mapped connective 

corridors would be reduced in the short term. The level of retention post treatment would still 

provide adequate cover and structure to facilitate travel by most species that would use these 

corridors. These activities occur within young stands or understory trees only. Thinning 

designed to promote development of large trees would likely improve habitat conditions within 

the corridors in the long term. 

This alternative treats 1,636 acres in connective corridors. This alternative alters existing 

structural character and canopy cover, but improves resilience on 47 percent of the area within 

connective corridors in the project area. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative includes 700 acres of commercial harvest and 611 acres of precommercial 

thinning within connective corridors. Prescribed burning of natural fuels outside of thinning 

units would occur within connective corridors on 618 acres. Within these areas the structural 

complexity and canopy closure within mapped connective corridors would be reduced in the 

short term. It is anticipated that the level of retention post treatment would still provide adequate

cover and structure to facilitate travel by most species that would use these corridors. Some 

species that select for open forest conditions may find the habitat more favorable after treatment. 

However, treated habitat within the corridors may be less desirable for species that have limited 

mobility, that are vulnerable to predation, or that are sensitive to climatic conditions, at least in 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 222 

the short term. Where these treatments occur within young stands, thinning designed to promote 

development of large trees would likely improve habitat conditions within the corridors in the 

long term. 

This alternative treats 1,929 acres in connective corridors. This alternative alters existing 

structural character, visual cover, and climatic moderation, but improves resilience on 25 percent 

of existing LOS stands and on 55 percent of the area within mapped connective corridors in the 

project area. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative includes 382 acres of commercial harvest and 883 acres of precommercial 

thinning within connective corridors. Prescribed burning of natural fuels outside of thinning 

units would occur within connective corridors on 320 acres. Due to the modified prescription 

included in this alternative for units within mapped connective corridors it is expected that 

although canopy closure would be reduced in the short term, the level of retention post treatment 

should still provide adequate cover and structure to facilitate travel by most species that would 

use these corridors. These treatments occur within young stands or understory trees only. 

Thinning designed to promote development of large trees would likely improve habitat 

conditions within the corridors in the long term. 

This alternative treats 1,585 acres in connective corridors. This alternative alters existing 

structural character and reduces canopy cover, but improves resilience on 45 percent of the 

connective corridors in the project area. 

Cumulative Effects 

There are no ongoing or reasonable foreseeable activities within the project area that would alter 

connective corridors. The effects of past harvest and other activities were considered when 

identifying connective corridors. 

Neotropical Birds 

Affected Environment 

This section addresses the effects of the alternatives on neotropical migratory birds described in 

the Partners In Flight - Northern Rocky Mountains Bird Conservation Plan. This conservation 

plan identifies priority habitats and focal species by subprovince. The Ochoco National Forest is 

within the Blue Mountains Subprovince. Table 74 lists the habitats and species for the Blue 

Mountains Subprovince. The existing condition for neotropical birds is addressed by looking at 

focal species that represent communities of birds that occupy priority habitats. Current 

conditions are described in comparison to estimates of the historic abundance of habitat. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 223 

Table 74. Blue Mountains Subprovince priority habitats and focal species. 

Priority Habitats Focal Species for the Blue Mountains Subprovince 

Dry Forest White-headed woodpecker, flammulated owl, chipping 

sparrow, Lewis’ woodpecker 

Mesic Mixed Conifer Townsend’s warbler, Vaux’s swift, varied thrush, 

MacGillivray’s warbler, olive-sided flycatcher 

Riparian Woodland Lewis’ woodpecker, red-eyed vireo, veery 

Riparian Shrub Willow flycatcher 

Subalpine Forest Hermit thrush 

Montane Meadows Upland sandpiper 

Steppe Shrublands Vesper sparrow 

Aspen Red-naped sapsucker 

Alpine Gray-crowned rosy finch 

Nine of the seventeen species listed were analyzed using the data derived from the Viable 

Ecosystems Model. White-headed woodpecker was analyzed and is described above in the 

Primary Cavity Excavators section. In addition, gray flycatcher was analyzed as a surrogate for 

steppe shrublands (in lieu of vesper sparrow), and black-backed woodpecker was analyzed as an 

indicator for mature true fir forest conditions in Mesic Mixed Conifer priority habitat. The 

existing amount of priority habitat has been compared to the desired range of habitat identified as 

the HRV. This allows a comparison between what exists today compared to the balance of 

conditions that may have existed historically. Of the ten species discussed in this section, seven 

are currently above the minimum amount of habitat abundance and three are below. Generally, 

there is a relative shortage of habitat for those species associated with open forest conditions. 

These trends are primarily the result of past management practices and fire suppression activities. 

Table 75 displays the habitat amounts in the project area. Species whose habitat is currently 

below historic abundance are: chipping sparrow, olive-sided flycatcher, and gray flycatcher. 

Species whose habitat is currently within historic abundance are: flammulated owl, Lewis’ 

woodpecker, varied thrush, MacGillivray’s warbler, hermit thrush, and black-backed 

woodpecker. A species with habitat currently above the historic range is the Townsend’s 

warbler, which favors dense forest conditions with an abundance of fir. 

Species that require specialized habitats such as riparian vegetation, meadows, hollow trees, 

aspen, or alpine cannot be analyzed this way (based on forest structural/seral stages). None of 

the alternatives include reducing shrub or meadow habitat. The action alternatives include 

restoration activities for aspen stands and prescribed burning may result in restoration or 

alteration of upland shrub and grassland habitats. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 224 

Table 75. Comparison of existing habitat to HRV. 

Species HRV Low 

(acres) 

HRV Low 

(acres) 

Existing 

(acres) 

Status 

Flammulated owl 23,520 40,799 25,883 Within range 

Chipping sparrow 14,808 28,778 13,638 Below range 

Lewis’ woodpecker 10,253 18,012 10,414 Within range 

Varied thrush 3,421 9,508 5,019 Within range 

MacGillivray’s warbler 260 782 284 Within range 

Olive-sided flycatcher 14,695 28,044 14,040 Below range 

Townsend’s warbler 781 1,667 1,908 Above range 

Hermit thrush 2,122 3,908 3,525 Within range 

Gray flycatcher 1,933 4,254 1,208 Below range 

Black-backed 

woodpecker 

11,395 22,218 16,339 Within range 

Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

This alternative would continue to perpetuate the abundance of wildlife species associated with 

dense forests having true fir and Douglas-fir understories. The no action alternative would not 

directly change the existing acres of habitat. Under this alternative there would be a continued 

decline in habitat abundance for all species that select open forest and early seral conditions as 

denser, mid to late seral conditions continue to develop. In the long-term, Alternative 1 results in 

the least amount of habitat for species that select for open forest or early seral conditions. In the

long-term, this alternative would result in the most habitat of all the alternatives for these species

associated with denser, mid to late seral conditions. This alternative does not propose any 

treatments that would directly modify the existing amount of habitat therefore post treatment 

acres equals existing acres. Habitat would compare to HRV as described above and displayed in 

Table 75 in the short term. 

The red-eyed vireo, veery, and willow flycatcher are associated with riparian woodland and 

shrub plant communities. These habitats exist within the project area, but are small in size and 

fragmented. These species may be present and utilizing the habitats as available. The no action 

alternative would retain the current trends in displacement of riparian vegetation due to 

encroachment by young conifers. The red-naped sapsucker is a bird that uses aspen dominated 

vegetation and riparian woodlands almost similar to the vireo, veery, and willow flycatcher. The 

no action alternative does not propose aspen restoration activities involving thinning of conifers 

which are competing with aspen. 

This alternative maintains habitat for species that select for dense forest conditions and continues 

the decline in habitat conditions for species that use open forest conditions until one or more 

disturbance events (insects or fire) create open conditions in the future. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 225 

Direct and Indirect Effects Common to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

Of the remaining species listed in Table 74, the upland sandpiper is discussed below in the 

threatened, endangered, and sensitive species section of this report. This Region 6 Regional 

Forester’s Sensitive Species and its habitat are not affected by the project proposals as they 

occupy expansive wetland habitats which do not occur in the project area. The vesper sparrow 

inhabits steppe shrublands found at lower elevations and are not present within forested habitats 

or in the project area. The gray-crowned rosy finch inhabits alpine habitats that do not occur 

within this project area. Therefore, the proposed activities would have no effect to these species 

or their habitats. 

Measures prescribed to restrict activities within nesting seasons for goshawk and other raptors 

would result in reduced disturbance to nesting birds where their home ranges overlap with these 

areas. Some of the harvest, thinning and burning activities would be scheduled outside of the 

nesting season and would not result in disturbance to nesting birds. However, a portion of the 

project work would occur during the nesting season and some individuals would likely be 

impacted by management activities. Since most migratory birds occupy relatively small nesting 

season home ranges and are present in relatively large numbers, it is expected that suitable 

habitat outside of active treatment units will provide alternate cover for birds that are displaced 

during activities. The area outside of active treatment units will also provide source populations 

for reoccupation of areas after treatment activities are completed. Birds that are disturbed early 

in the nesting season may move out of the treatment area during operations and may re-nest later, 

or outside of the area of activity. In some cases, habitat outside of the unit may be limiting or 

fully occupied, in which case the displaced birds may become non-reproductive during the year 

of operation. These are short-term impacts to individual birds or pairs of birds. This is a tradeoff under the action alternatives for (1) the long term benefits of increasing the amount of habitat 

for the focal species (and the communities they represent) that are currently below the HRV, (2) 

the restoration of habitat for species that utilize herbaceous and shrubby vegetation, and (3) the 

protection of habitat against risk of future large scale or high intensity disturbance. The project 

also proposes treatments to promote the longevity, vigor, and extent of riparian hardwood 

habitats and the development or retention of stands of large diameter live pine. These treatments 

are consistent with the goals and objectives for these habitats as listed in the Partners In Flight, 

Landbird Conservation Strategy for the Northern Rocky Mountains (Altman 2000). 

Alternative 2 

This alternative would treat 16,942 acres. Some of this treatment would occur in habitat for 

neotropical birds during the nesting season and potentially impact nesting birds. This alternative 

results in increases in habitat for species that select for open forest and early seral conditions due

to stand density reduction and the favoring of early seral species. The amount of habitat relative 

to HRV changes to within the historic range for chipping sparrow, olive-sided flycatcher, and 

Townsend’s warbler due to increases in open forest and decreases in dense forest conditions. 

However, the amount of habitat moves to below the minimum for MacGillivray’s warblers, due 

to thinning of understory vegetation in moist grand fir sites. This effect on MacGillivray’s 

warblers should be short term as thick patches of understory vegetation should recover relatively 

quickly on these mesic sites, especially in riparian areas and other seasonally moist areas. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 226 

Habitat for gray flycatcher moves further below the low end of the HRV, primarily due to 

reduction in small tree and tall shrub structure on ponderosa pine and western juniper sites. The 

extent and duration of impacts on gray flycatcher nesting habitat will depend on how thoroughly 

small tree and shrub structure (ground fuels) are removed from potential habitat and subsequent 

maintenance treatments, such as repeated underburning. Past experience indicates that 

approximately 40-70 percent of the surface area within prescribed fire units is burned. As shrub 

cover may be reduced by scorch as well as consumption, it is expected that upland shrub habitat 

will be reduced on more than 40-70 percent of the area treated with prescribed burning, at least 

in the short term. There is potential for treatments to promote the development of gray 

flycatcher habitat where upland shrub regeneration is promoted and tall shrubs are allowed to 

develop after the initial treatments on xeric sites (dry pine and western juniper PAGs). In the 

long-term, Alternative 2 results in the greatest amount of habitat for all open forest and upland 

shrub species, as well as those that select for large tree size. Activities would cause a reduction 

in the amount of habitat for species that select for denser forests or late-seral conditions. 

Table 76. Habitat acres for Alternative 2. 

Species Low HRV 

(acres) 

High HRV 

(acres) 

Post 

Treatment 

(acres) 

HRV 

Flammulated owl 23,520 40,799 27,000 Within range 

Chipping sparrow 14,808 28,778 17,249 Within range 

Lewis’ woodpecker 10,253 18,012 14,329 Within range

Varied thrush 3,421 9,508 3,633 Within range 

MacGillivray’s 

warbler 

260 782 248 Below range 

Olive-sided 

flycatcher 

14,695 28,044 17,470 Within range 

Townsend’s warbler 781 1,667 1,294 Within range 

Hermit thrush 2,122 3,908 2,622 Within range 

Gray flycatcher 1,933 4,254 1,189 Below range 

Black-backed 

woodpecker 

11,395 22,218 16,581 Within range 

This alternative would alter the current trend in displacement of riparian vegetation due to 

encroachment by young conifers in the portions of this habitat type where prescribed fire or 

thinning occur. This would result in a beneficial effect to species associated with riparian 

woodland and shrub plant communities (red-eyed vireo, veery, and willow flycatcher). This 

alternative also proposes aspen restoration activities involving thinning of conifers which are 

competing with aspen clones. This would result in a beneficial effect to species associated with 

aspen dominated vegetation, such as red-naped and Williamson’s sapsuckers. 

This alternative reduces habitat for species that select for dense forest conditions and reverses the 

decline in habitat conditions for species that use open forest conditions, riparian hardwoods, and 

upland shrubs. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 227 

Alternative 3 

This alternative would treat 15,501 acres. Some of this treatment would occur in habitat for 

neotropical birds during the nesting season and potentially impact nesting birds. This alternative 

results in more habitat for species that select for open forest and early-seral conditions due to 

stand density reduction and the favoring of early seral species. As described above for 

Alternative 2, the amount of habitat relative to HRV changes to within the historic range for 

chipping sparrow and olive-sided flycatcher. However, habitat for Townsend’s warbler remains 

above the historic range, and moves to below the minimum for MacGillivray’s warbler. This 

effect on MacGillivray’s warblers should be short term as thick patches of understory vegetation 

should recover rapidly on these mesic sites, especially in riparian areas and other seasonally 

moist areas. Habitat for gray flycatcher moves further below the low end of the HRV, due to 

reduction in small tree and tall shrub structure on ponderosa pine and western juniper sites. In 

the long term, Alternative 3 results in the least (among the action alternatives) acres of habitat for

open forest species. This alternative promotes habitat for open forest species as well as those 

that select for large tree size, but not as much as in alternatives with commercial harvest. 

Proposed treatments would cause a short-term reduction in the amount of habitat for species that 

select for denser forests or later seral conditions, but canopy closure is expected to recover within 

15 to 20 years on relatively mesic sites. 

This alternative would alter the current trend in displacement of riparian vegetation due to 

encroachment by young conifers in the portions of this habitat type where prescribed fire or 

thinning occur. This would result in a beneficial effect to species associated with riparian 

woodland and shrub plant communities (red-eyed vireo, veery, and willow flycatcher). This 

alternative also proposes aspen restoration activities involving thinning of conifers which are 

competing with aspen clones. This would result in a beneficial effect to species associated with 

aspen dominated vegetation. 

Table 77. Habitat acres for Alternative 3. 

Species Low HRV 

(acres) 

High HRV 

(acres) 

Post 

Treatment 

(acres) 

HRV 

Flammulated owl 23,520 40,799 27,453 Within range 

Chipping sparrow 14,808 28,778 14,828 Within range 

Lewis’ woodpecker 10,253 18,012 11,679 Within range

Varied thrush 3,421 9,508 4,650 Within range 

MacGillivray’s 

warbler 

260 782 245 Below range 

Olive-sided 

flycatcher 

14,695 28,044 15,154 Within range 

Townsend’s warbler 781 1,667 1,772 Above range 

Hermit thrush 2,122 3,908 3,342 Within range 

Gray flycatcher 1,933 4,254 1,163 Below range 

Black-backed 

woodpecker 

11,395 22,218 16,551 Within range 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 228 

This alternative reduces habitat for species that select for dense forest conditions and reverses the 

decline in habitat conditions for species that use open forest conditions, but to a lesser extent 

than Alternatives 2, 4, or 5. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative would treat 16,740 acres. Some of this treatment would occur in habitat for 

neotropical birds during the nesting season and potentially impact nesting birds. This alternative 

results in increases in habitat for species that select for open forest and early seral conditions due

to stand density reduction and the favoring of early seral species. As described above for 

Alternative 2, the amount of habitat relative to HRV changes to within the historic range for 

chipping sparrow, olive-sided flycatcher, and Townsend’s warbler. The amount of habitat 

moves to below the minimum for MacGillivray’s warbler. Habitat for gray flycatcher moves 

further below the low end of the HRV primarily due to reduction in small tree and tall shrub 

structure on ponderosa pine and western juniper sites. As described above for Alternative 2, the 

level of impact on gray flycatcher nesting habitat will depend on how thoroughly small tree and 

shrub structure (ground fuels) are removed from potential habitat and subsequent maintenance 

treatments. Proposed treatments would cause a reduction in the amount of habitat for species 

that select for denser forests or later seral conditions compared to no action. 

Table 78. Habitat acres for Alternative 4. 

Species Low HRV 

(acres) 

High HRV 

(acres) 

Post Treatment 

(acres) 

HRV 

Flammulated owl 23,520 40,799 25,883 Within range 

Chipping sparrow 14,808 28,778 16,920 Within range 

Lewis’ 

woodpecker 

10,253 18,012 13,987 Within range 

Varied Thrush 3,421 9,508 3,812 Within range 

MacGillivray’s 

warbler 

260 782 247 Below range 

Olive-sided 

flycatcher 

14,695 28,044 17,146 Within range 

Townsend’s 

warbler 

781 1,667 1,421 Within range 

Hermit thrush 2,122 3,908 2,773 Within range 

Gray flycatcher 1,933 4,254 1,166 Below range 

Black-backed 

woodpecker 

11,395 22,218 16,616 Within range 

This alternative would alter the current trend in displacement of riparian vegetation due to 

encroachment by young conifers in the portions of this habitat type where prescribed fire or 

silvicultural treatments are employed. This would result in a beneficial effect to species 

associated with riparian woodland and shrub plant communities (red-eyed vireo, veery, and 

willow flycatcher). This alternative includes aspen restoration activities involving thinning of 

conifers which are competing with aspen clones. This would result in a beneficial effect to 

species associated with aspen dominated vegetation. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 229 

This alternative reduces habitat for species that select for dense forest conditions and reverses the 

decline in habitat conditions for species that use open forest conditions compared to no action, 

but to a lesser extent than Alternative 2. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative would treat 15,850 acres. Some of this treatment would occur in habitat for 

neotropical birds during the nesting season and potentially impact nesting birds. This alternative 

results in increases in habitat for species that select for open forest and early seral conditions due

to stand density reduction and the favoring of early seral species. As described above for 

Alternatives 2 and 4, the amount of habitat relative to HRV changes to within the historic range 

for chipping sparrow, olive-sided flycatcher, and Townsend’s warbler, and the amount of habitat 

moves to below the minimum for MacGillivray’s warbler. Habitat for gray flycatcher moves 

further below the low end of the HRV. Proposed activities would cause a short-term reduction in 

the amount of habitat for species that select for denser forests or later seral conditions compared 

to no action, but retains more closed forest habitat than Alternatives 2 and 4. 

Table 79. Habitat acres for Alternative 5. 

Species Low HRV 

(acres) 

High HRV 

(acres) 

Post Treatment 

(acres) 

HRV 

Flammulated owl 23,520 40,799 27,453 Within range 

Chipping sparrow 14,808 28,778 17,075 Within range 

Lewis’ woodpecker 10,253 18,012 14,141 Within range

Varied thrush 3,421 9,508 3,753 Within range 

MacGillivray’s 

warbler 

260 782 245 Below range 

Olive-sided 

flycatcher 

14,695 28,044 17,297 Within range 

Townsend’s warbler 781 1,667 1,395 Within range 

Hermit thrush 2,122 3,908 2,739 Within range 

Gray flycatcher 1,933 4,254 1,167 Below range 

Black-backed 

woodpecker 

11,395 22,218 16,632 Within range 

This alternative would alter the current trend in displacement of riparian vegetation due to 

encroachment by young conifers in the portions of this habitat type where prescribed fire or 

silvicultural treatments are employed. This would result in a beneficial effect to species 

associated with riparian woodland and shrub plant communities (red-eyed vireo, veery, and 

willow flycatcher). This alternative includes aspen restoration activities involving thinning of 

conifers which are competing with aspen clones. This would result in a beneficial effect to 

species associated with aspen dominated vegetation, such as sapsuckers. 

This alternative reduces habitat for species that select for dense forest conditions and reverses the 

decline in habitat conditions for species that use open forest conditions compared to no action, 

but to a lesser extent than Alternatives 2 or 4. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 230 

Cumulative Effects 

Regeneration harvest activities have occurred on 7,563 acres in the project area in the last 30 to 

35 years. Much of this harvest history resulted in a reduction of large pine and other LOS stands. 

Since the early 1990’s the emphasis has shifted from removal of large pine to re-establishment of 

large pine and larch, and other single-strata LOS stands. Forested areas would continue to 

managed to increase the abundance of open, single-storied ponderosa pine dominated stands on 

dry sites. This is the type of forest structure thought to be the historic condition on the majority 

of ponderosa pine sites. Forests would continue to managed to increase the abundance of LOS in 

both single and multiple layer structural classes on more mesic sites. This management trend is 

likely to continue until the multi-strata LOS and single-strata LOS is within the HRV that has 

been defined for this project area. This process would reduce the amount of habitat available for 

species that prefer dense forest canopy, while increasing the amount of habitat available for 

species that select more open stands. Thinning of stands with relatively small trees should 

promote the development of large tree habitat in the future. The recruitment of large trees and 

large snags would contribute potential habitat for species that nest high in tall trees, that require 

large branches, or large snags to accommodate appropriately sized cavity nests or colonial roosts. 

Ultimately, all species habitat would move toward an abundance and distribution that is thought 

to be within the historic range of variability based on site potential within the project area. 

Riparian planting and hardwood protection has been implemented at various locations 

throughout the project area. These actions have lead to improved riparian hardwood habitat in 

many areas. At the same time, elk populations have continued to climb and livestock grazing has 

continued to occur. The combined grazing and browsing pressure from wild and domestic 

ungulates has limited the extent and structure of riparian habitat in some areas. 

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species 

Affected Environment 

There are no endangered species known or expected to occur on the Ochoco National Forest. 

The northern bald eagle, a threatened species, is known to occur within the project area. 

The Canada lynx, a threatened species, is not expected to occur in the project area or on the 

Ochoco National Forest. Canada lynx occupies boreal forests where subalpine fir is common 

and lodgepole pine is a seral species. Their primary prey is snowshoe hare. Based on 

implementation of habitat descriptions contained in the second edition of the Canada Lynx 

Conservation Assessment and Strategy (Ruediger et al. 2000), there is inadequate primary 

vegetation to constitute any Lynx Analysis Units (LAUs) on the Ochoco National Forest. There 

are no other LAUs within 40 kilometers of the Ochoco National Forest; thus, no Key Linkage 

Areas were identified. On May 29, 2001 the Ochoco National Forest received concurrence from 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that implementation of any activities contained within the 

Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended, is “not likely to 

adversely affect the Canada lynx outside of an existing LAU” (McMaster 2001). Because 

habitat has been determined to not be present on the Forest in a quantity sufficient to apply the 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 231 

standards and guidelines contained in the LCAS, and the completion of informal consultation 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is contained in a separate document (McMaster 2001), 

the species will not be discussed further. 

here. 

Of the eight wildlife species on the Regional Forester’s list that are documented or suspected to 

occur on the Ochoco National Forest, four sensitive species have potential or suitable habitat 

within the project area. These species are: California wolverine (Gulo gulo), gray flycatcher 

(Empidonax wrightii), bufflehead (Bucephala albeola), and tricolored blackbird (Agelaius 

tricolor). 

The other four sensitive species do not have potential habitat within the project area and the 

proposed alternatives would have no effects to these species. They are: Peregrine falcon (Falco 

peregrinus anatum), upland sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda), western sage grouse 

(Centrocercus urophasiuanus), and pygmy rabbit (Brachylagus idahoensis). 

Peregrine falcon nests on sheer rock cliffs with horizontal ledges or caves and forages over a 

variety of habitats. Birds are a primary source of prey for this species. The nearest suitable 

nesting habitat for this species is in the adjacent Mill and McKay Creek watersheds and on the 

cliffs that overlook Ochoco Reservoir. These sites are currently occupied by prairie falcons. 

Nesting by peregrine falcons has not been confirmed on the Lookout Mountain Ranger District. 

There is no suitable nesting habitat for this species in the project area; this project would not 

impact nesting habitat and is not expected to affect individual members of this species. For these 

reasons, this project would have no impact on peregrine falcons. 

Upland sandpiper occupies large open wetlands, marshes, and wet meadow habitats. The nearest 

confirmed nesting area is in Big Summit Prairie, approximately 8 miles east of the project area. 

There is no suitable nesting habitat for this species in the project area; this project would not 

impact nesting habitat and is not expected to affect individual members of this species. For these 

reasons, this project would have no impact on upland sandpipers. 

Western sage grouse occupies open arid shrub steppe and grassland habitat in relatively treeless 

environments. They feed on forbs and insects when they are available, but sustain themselves on 

sagebrush leaves in the winter. There is no suitable nesting habitat for this species in the project 

area; this project would not impact nesting habitat and is not expected to affect individual 

members of this species. For these reasons, this project would have no impact on western sage 

grouse. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 232 

Pygmy rabbit occupies sagebrush habitats with deep loose soil conditions suitable for excavation 

and maintenance of burrows. Although they feed on grasses and forbs seasonally, big sagebrush 

is their primary food source. There is no suitable denning habitat for this species in the project 

area; this project would not impact reproductive habitat and is not expected to affect individual 

members of this species. For these reasons, this project would have no impact on pygmy rabbits. 

Northern Bald Eagle 

There are no known nest sites or essential habitat within the project area for bald eagles. The 

nearest known bald eagle nest sites are approximately 5 miles southwest and 6 miles southeast of 

the project boundary. Eagles have been observed foraging along Marks Creek and east of the 

project area along Ochoco Creek. There are large trees in the project area that may serve as 

perch trees, roost sites, or potential future nest sites. Improved nesting success and a population 

increase lead to a 1999 proposal to delist the bald eagle as a threatened species (Marshall et al. 

2003). 

California Wolverine 

There are no known California wolverine dens within the project area. Wolverines have been 

recorded 3 miles north of the project area in 1981, 1983, and 1994. Wolverine have also been 

recorded in and within 2 miles of the south end of the project area in 1979 (three locations) and 

1980. Wolverines are thought to avoid areas with dense young regenerating forest (Csuti et al. 

1997), large open areas, and areas with high road density and human use (Verts and Carraway 

1998 and Rowland et al. 2002). Wolverines are wide ranging and persist at extremely low 

population densities, making detection difficult. It is uncertain whether wolverines occur in 

Oregon as a self-maintaining population, or if the occasional sightings in this area represent long 

distance foraging or dispersal of populations centered farther to the north. The wolverine is a 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species of Concern and is classified as S2-OR (imperiled in 

Oregon) in the Natural Heritage Program ranking (Csuti et al. 1997). 

Gray Flycatcher 

Gray flycatchers have been documented on Ochoco National Forest with confirmed breeding on 

the Crooked River National Grassland and in the Maury Mountains/Camp Creek area. The 

Oregon Breeding Bird Atlas (Adamus et al. 2001) mapped an area, that includes the Marks 

Creek Watershed, as possible breeding habitat. Gray flycatchers nest in tall shrubs or small trees 

in very open areas or on the edges of shrub steppe and woodland ecotones. Breeding bird survey 

data indicate an increasing trend in gray flycatcher populations in Oregon, and eastern Oregon 

has some of the highest population densities in the species’ breeding range (Marshall et al. 

2003). The species currently holds a ranking by the Natural Heritage program as N3B - either 

rare throughout its range or found locally in a restricted range. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 233 

Bufflehead 

Bufflehead are a species of cavity nesting ducks that nest along shorelines of mountain lakes. 

Within the project area, buffleheads are most likely to be seen on private lakes or ponds, or in 

stock watering or borrow pit ponds during migration. Bufflehead have been seen on the Lookout 

Mountain Ranger District using ponds as migratory stop over sites. Because the only water-body 

of sufficient size to serve as a potential nesting area in the project area is surrounded by privately

owned residential property, it is unlikely that bufflehead will nest in this project area. There are 

no confirmed nesting records in Crook County, but there have been broods recorded in 

Deschutes County (Marshall et al. 2003). The Oregon breeding population is considered 

sensitive in Oregon because of small breeding population size, limited nesting structure, potential 

for disturbance due to recreational use, and potential for loss of nest sites through snag removal 

(Marshall et al. 2003). The species currently holds rankings in Oregon as SU sensitive 

(undetermined status) and by the Natural Heritage program as S2B-OR Imperiled in Oregon. 

Tricolored Blackbird 

Tricolored blackbirds are a colonial nesting species that prefer to nest in emergent vegetation 

such as cattails or tall sedges or in thickets of willows or other shrubs. Their breeding 

distribution in Oregon is unpredictable from year to year, but is often found in mixed flocks 

along with red-winged blackbirds (Csuti 1997). Very small breeding colonies have been 

confirmed in northwestern Crook County. The Oregon population, which represents only 1% of 

the total population of this species, declined during the 1980’s due to elimination of habitat, 

burning, plowing, loss of food source, pesticides, human disturbance (traffic), small colony size, 

and shifting local populations. The species currently holds rankings in Oregon as SP sensitive 

(peripheral or naturally rare) and by the Natural Heritage program as G3 Vulnerable - either rare 

throughout its range or found locally in a restricted range. 

Environmental Consequences 

Northern Bald Eagle 

Alternative 1 

This alternative would not directly alter habitat for bald eagles in the short term, but may lead to 

increased mortality of large ponderosa pine in the future which may reduce potential future 

nesting habitat. However, the lack of high quality foraging habitat (large water bodies with 

abundant fish and waterfowl resources) limits the potential of this project area to contribute to 

essential habitat for this species. There are no cumulative effects for the no action alternative, as

there are no action related effects to be combined with effects of past, present and reasonably 

foreseeable actions. Because this alternative may contribute to changing conditions which could 

result in future loss of nesting sites, this alternative is determined to be may affect, but not likely 

to adversely affect for bald eagles. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 234 

Alternative 2 

This alternative would improve habitat for bald eagles by creating more open forest conditions 

which would make prey and carrion more accessible. However, this alternative may also have 

some potential to result in disturbance to roosting or foraging eagles. This alternative is expected 

to increase longevity of large, live ponderosa pine which would maintain potential future nesting 

habitat. However, the lack of high quality foraging habitat limits the potential of this project area

to contribute to essential habitat for this species. Because this alternative has potential to 

improve the longevity of potential nest trees and potential to disturb individuals, the effect of this

alternative is may affect, but not likely to adversely affect for bald eagles. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative would improve habitat in the short term by creating slightly more open forest 

conditions which would make prey and carrion more accessible. However, this alternative may 

also have some potential to result in disturbance to roosting or foraging eagles. This alternative 

would lead to increased longevity of large, live ponderosa pine which would maintain potential 

future nesting habitat. However, the lack of high quality foraging habitat limits the potential of 

this project area to contribute to essential habitat for this species. Because this alternative has 

potential to improve the longevity of potential nest trees and potential to disturb individuals, the 

effect of this alternative is may affect, but not likely to adversely affect for bald eagles. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative would improve habitat for bald eagles by creating more open forest conditions 

which would make prey and carrion more accessible, but the project may also have some 

potential to result in disturbance to roosting or foraging eagles. This alternative would lead to 

increased longevity of large, live ponderosa pine in the future which would maintain potential 

future nesting habitat. However, the lack of high quality foraging habitat limits the potential of 

this project area to contribute to essential habitat for this species. Because this alternative has 

potential to improve the longevity of potential nest trees and potential to disturb individuals, the 

effect of this alternative is may affect, but not likely to adversely affect for bald eagles. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative would improve habitat for this species by creating more open forest conditions 

which would make prey and carrion more accessible. However, this alternative may also have 

some potential to result in disturbance to roosting or foraging eagles. This alternative would lead 

to increased longevity of large live ponderosa pine in the future which would maintain potential 

future nesting habitat. However, the lack of high quality foraging habitat limits the potential of 

this project area to contribute to essential habitat for this species. Because this alternative has 

potential to improve the longevity of potential nest trees and potential to disturb individuals, the 

effect of this alternative is may affect, but not likely to adversely affect for bald eagles. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 235 

Cumulative Effects 

Past activities, ongoing projects, and reasonably foreseeable activities that could potentially 

affect bald eagles include past timber harvest, salvage sales, recreational use, agricultural 

practices, and management of fish and game. Effects from these activities are not expected to 

combine with this project to result in cumulative effects. 

The 2006 Joint Aquatic and Terrestrial Programmatic Biological Assessment (BA) for Federal 

Lands within the Deschutes Basin administered by the BLM Prineville Office and the Deschutes 

and Ochoco National Forests addresses program activities that may affect, but are not likely to 

adversely affect listed species. The BA identifies project design criteria (PDC) that should be 

used for bald eagles to streamline consultation. This project meets the PDCs for bald eagle 

nesting and roosting areas because the alternatives were designed to retain all trees greater than 

21 inches dbh and retain potential roost snags. There is no essential habitat for bald eagles 

within the project area, and the project is not inconsistent with any PDCs recommended in the 

Programmatic BA, which is consistent with the Pacific Bald Eagle Recovery Plan. For these 

reasons, the determination for this project is may affect but not likely to adversely affect for all 

action alternatives. 

California Wolverine 

Alternative 1 

This alternative would not directly alter habitat for this species. Densely forested areas would 

remain so, at least in the short term and road density would remain approximately the same as it 

is today. Overtime, patches of forage and accumulations of down wood may develop in 

conjunction with increased insect/disease infestations or fire. These features may contribute to 

future wolverine habitat by increasing food resources for big game (a primary source of carrion) 

and by providing potential denning habitat associated with down woody debris. However, due to 

the lack of remoteness (due to high levels of human activity) and the lack of high potential 

denning sites (north and northeast facing cirque basins with talus slopes), the potential for this 

project area to provide suitable habitat for denning wolverines is very limited. There are no 

cumulative effects because there are no effects from this alternative that would add to the effects 

of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. Because this alternative may contribute to 

changing conditions which could result in changes in the availability of food and sites for 

denning, this alternative may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a 

trend towards federal listing or cause loss of viability to the population or species for wolverine. 

Alternative 2 

This alternative would alter habitat for the California wolverine. Some densely forested areas 

would be made more open, and road density would be reduced upon completion of the project. 

Over time, development of large down wood may be accelerated in stands where it is currently 

lacking. Forage availability would be increased for small mammals and big game. These 

features may contribute to wolverine habitat by increasing food resources and by promoting 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 236 

potential future denning habitat associated with large down woody debris. This alternative may 

disturb wolverines that may be moving through the project area during treatment activities. 

However, due to the lack of remoteness (due to high levels of human activity) and the lack of 

high potential denning sites (north and northeast facing cirque basins with talus slopes), the 

potential for this project area to provide suitable habitat for denning wolverines is very limited. 

Therefore, the effect of this alternative on wolverine is determined to be may impact individuals 

or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause loss of viability 

to the population or species. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative would alter habitat for this species. Some densely forested areas would be made 

slightly more open, and road density would remain approximately the same as it is today. Over 

time, development of large down wood may be accelerated in stands where it is currently 

lacking. Forage availability may be increased slightly in treated stands. These features may 

contribute to wolverine habitat by increasing food resources and by promoting potential future 

denning habitat associated with large down woody debris. This alternative may disturb 

wolverines that may be moving through the area. However, due to the lack of remoteness and 

the lack of high potential denning sites, the project area only has limited potential to provide 

suitable habitat for denning wolverines. Therefore, the effect of this alternative on wolverine is 

determined to be may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing or cause loss of viability to the population or species. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative would alter habitat for the California wolverine. Some densely forested areas 

would be made more open, and road density would be reduced upon completion of the project. 

Over time, development of large down wood may be accelerated in stands where it is currently 

lacking. Forage availability would be increased for small mammals and big game. These 

features may contribute to wolverine habitat by increasing food resources and by promoting 

potential future denning habitat associated with large down woody debris. There is potential for 

project activities to cause disturbance to wolverine that may be moving through the area. 

However, due the lack of remoteness and the lack of high potential denning sites, the potential 

for this project area to provide suitable habitat for denning wolverines is very limited. Therefore, 

the effect of this alternative on wolverine is determined to be may impact individuals or habitat, 

but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause loss of viability to the 

population or species. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative would alter habitat for this species. Some densely forested areas would be made 

more open, and road density would be reduced upon completion of the project. Over time, 

development of large down wood may be accelerated in stands where it is currently lacking. 

Forage availability would be increased for small mammals and big game. These features may 

contribute to wolverine habitat by increasing food resources and by promoting potential future 

denning habitat associated with large down woody debris. There is potential for project 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 237 

activities to cause disturbance to wolverine that may be moving through the area. However, due 

the lack of remoteness and the lack of high potential denning sites, the potential for this project 

area to provide suitable habitat for denning wolverines is very limited. Therefore, the effect of 

this alternative on wolverine is determined to be may impact individuals or habitat, but will not 

likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause loss of viability to the population or 

species. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past activities, ongoing projects, and reasonably foreseeable activities that could impact 

wolverine include livestock grazing, recreational use, and big game management. Impacts from 

these activities are not expected to add to the effects from this project to result in cumulative 

effects. 

For the reasons stated above, the determination for this project is may impact individuals or 

habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing for all action alternatives. 

Gray Flycatcher 

Alternative 1 

This alternative would not alter habitat for this species. Densely stocked dry forest and 

woodland areas would remain unsuitable for gray flycatchers. Overtime, large scale disturbances 

may develop which would re-set succession to an early seral stage in non-forested, juniper, and 

dry pine sites. Such events may contribute to restoring future gray flycatcher habitat by 

producing open settings and regenerating upland shrubs. However, there is also potential for 

future high intensity disturbance to promote dominance by weedy annuals such as cheat grass. If 

such species become dominant, fire regimes can change in a way which results in frequent 

reburning, which can prevent development of tall shrub structure and thus nesting habitat for 

gray flycatchers. Based on disturbance history within the project area, and vegetative responses 

observed within previous burned areas, future disturbance patterns are not expected to result in 

large scale or prolonged loss of gray flycatcher habitat. There are no cumulative effects for the 

no action alternative. Because this alternative may contribute to changing conditions which 

could result in changes in the availability of habitat for this species, this alternative may impact 

individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause 

loss of viability to gray flycatcher. 

Alternative 2 

This alternative would slightly alter habitat for the gray flycatcher. Some densely stocked dry 

forest and woodland areas would be thinned and/or burned. Initially, these activities are 

expected to reduce nesting structure as described in the section on Neotropical Migratory Birds. 

However, nesting habitat may be improved within treated areas on xeric sites (non-forest, 

juniper, and dry ponderosa pine PAGs) if overstory density is reduced sufficiently, and if suitable 

tall shrub nesting cover is retained. Based on previous experience with prescribed fire behavior, 

it is expected that patches of tall shrubs and occasional small trees would be retained in the post-
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 238 

fire mosaic, and that gray flycatcher habitat structure would be retained in patches distributed 

across treated areas. Therefore, the effect of this alternative on gray flycatchers is determined to 

be may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal 

listing or cause loss of viability to the population or species. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative would alter habitat for this species. Some densely stocked dry forest and 

woodland areas would be thinned and/or prescribed burned. Initially these treatments may 

reduce nesting structure as described in the section on Neotropical Migratory Birds. However, 

nesting habitat may be improved within treated areas on xeric sites (non-forest, juniper and dry 

ponderosa pine PAGs) if overstory density is reduced sufficiently, and if suitable tall shrub 

nesting cover is retained. Based on previous experience with prescribed fire behavior it is 

expected that patches of tall shrubs and occasional small trees would be retained in the post-fire 

mosaic, and that gray flycatcher habitat structure would be retained in patches distributed across 

treated areas. Therefore, the effect of this alternative on gray flycatchers is determined to be may 

impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or 

cause loss of viability to the population or species. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative would alter habitat for the gray flycatcher. Some densely stocked dry forest and 

woodland areas would be thinned and/or prescribed burned. Initially these activities are 

expected to reduce nesting structure as described in the section on Neotropical Migratory Birds. 

However, nesting habitat may be improved within treated areas on xeric sites (non-forest, juniper 

and dry ponderosa pine PAGs) if overstory density is reduced sufficiently, and if suitable tall 

shrub nesting cover is retained. Based on previous experience with prescribed fire behavior, it is 

expected that patches of tall shrubs and occasional small trees would be retained in the post-fire 

mosaic, and that gray flycatcher habitat structure would be retained in patches distributed across 

treated areas. Therefore, the effect of this alternative on gray flycatchers is determined to be may 

impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or 

cause loss of viability to the population or species. 

Alternative 5 

This alternative would slightly alter habitat for this species. Some densely stocked dry forest and 

woodland areas would be thinned and/or prescribed burned. Initially, these activities are 

expected to reduce nesting structure as described in the section on Neotropical Migratory Birds. 

However, nesting habitat may be improved within treated areas on xeric sites (non-forest, 

juniper, and dry ponderosa pine PAGs) if overstory density is reduced sufficiently, and if suitable 

tall shrub nesting cover is retained. Based on previous experience with prescribed fire behavior, 

it is expected that patches of tall shrubs and occasional small trees would be retained in the postfire mosaic, and that gray flycatcher habitat structure would be retained in patches distributed 

across treated areas. Therefore, the effect of this alternative on gray flycatchers is determined to 

be may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal 

listing or cause loss of viability to the population or species. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 239 

Cumulative Effects 

Past activities, ongoing projects, and reasonably foreseeable activities that could result in impacts 

to gray flycatchers include grazing and mining. Impacts from these activities are not expected to 

add to the effects from this project and result in cumulative effects to gray flycatcher. 

The Breeding Bird Atlas (Adamus et al. 2001) indicates that this species population is presently 

increasing and that this species is widely distributed across its range. Lower elevation areas, 

below the forest boundary are the core reproductive habitats for this species. For these reasons 

and the considerations described above, the determination is may impact individuals or habitat, 

but will not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing for all action alternatives. 

Bufflehead 

All Alternatives 

None of the alternatives would alter habitat for this species. The alternatives would have no 

effect on this species or its habitat. Therefore, the determination for all alternatives is no impact

to bufflehead. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past activities, ongoing projects, and reasonably foreseeable activities that could impact 

bufflehead include lake shore development and recreational use. The proposed alternatives 

would not effect lake shore development and are not expected to change recreational use that 

would have an effect on bufflehead. There would be no cumulative effects to bufflehead. 

Within the project area, habitat is marginal for this species, with low likelihood of occupancy by 

nesting pairs. Project activities would not alter lake or lakeshore habitat and is not likely to 

result in disturbance to nesting pairs. For these reasons, the determination is no impact to 

bufflehead for all action alternatives 

Tricolored Blackbird 

All Alternatives 

None of the alternatives would alter habitat for this species. The alternatives would have no 

effect on this species or its habitat. Therefore, the determination for all alternatives is no impact

to bufflehead. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past activities, ongoing projects, and reasonably foreseeable activities that could impact 

tricolored blackbird include development near wetlands and recreational use. Impacts from these 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 240 

activities are not expected to add to the effects from this project. There would be no cumulative 

effects to tricolored blackbird. 

The project would not alter vegetation that would provide habitat for nesting or migrating 

tricolored blackbirds. This project would have no impact on this species or its habitat. For these 

reasons, the determination is no impact for tricolored blackbird for all alternatives. 

Elk 

Affected Environment 

Elk are thought to be more sensitive to changes in habitat condition and road density than mule 

deer. Therefore, the analysis of habitat effectiveness for elk will be used to represent the habitat 

needs of mule deer. 

Long-term records indicate that elk were absent from the Ochoco National Forest in 1936 

(Bailey 1936). This is the oldest written record of elk populations on the Forest. Anecdotal 

information indicates elk did inhabit the Forest in the mid to late 1800’s but were probably 

extirpated by over-hunting and habitat losses due to heavy grazing pressure in the early 1900’s. 

Since that time, elk populations have made steady increases in populations and are now found 

throughout the Ochoco National Forest. 

The Spears project area lies within two Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) 

management zones, the Ochoco and Grizzly Game Management Units (GMUs). ODFW, in their 

state-wide “Oregon’s Elk Management Plan” established population management objectives 

(MOs) for all GMUs in the state. The population objectives for the Grizzly and Ochoco GMUs 

were 1,500 and 2,600 respectively, both of which were met in 1996 population estimates. 

ODFW population estimates for 2003 for these units were 1,500 and 4,600 respectively. The 

Ochoco GMU population peaked in 2000-2001, but has exceeded management goals each year 

form 1995 through 2003. While trend information is presented, it is important to note that many 

of the population dynamics exhibited on the Forest are affected by hunting scenarios and trends 

are not necessarily a reflection of habitat conditions. Mortality rates due to hunting may be the 

factor limiting total population. Bull/cow ratios are most significantly affected by hunting 

activities and it is hard to determine the effect from Forest management activities on this 

parameter. However, the abundance and distribution of escapement cover, the density of open 

roads, and degree of accessibility by off-highway vehicles are factors that likely affect survival 

of animals during hunting seasons. 

The Habitat Effectiveness Index (HEI) for elk was used to analyze the elk habitat condition and 

the effects of alternatives within the Spears Project Area. HEI is a measure of habitat suitability 

based on cover quality (relative abundance of marginal and satisfactory thermal cover), cover 

quantity (percent of the project area in existing cover), and open road density. The Forest Plan 

specifies goals within each of the management areas: General Forest, General Forest Winter 

Range, and Winter Range. For this analysis, visual corridors were combined into the three 

Management Areas with HEI goals, as they are not biologically distinct (i.e. elk do not know 

when they are in a visual corridor). The analysis also assumed that in General Forest 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 241 

commercial harvest in marginal cover (40-69% crown closure) would render the stand non-cover 

at least in the short term, but that precommercial thinning would retain enough canopy closure to 

maintain marginal cover. In General Forest Winter Range and Winter Range it was assumed that 

any treatment in marginal cover would result in taking the stand out of cover. This assumption is 

applied to these areas due to elevation and the prevalence of relatively dry PAGs within those 

areas (proposed activities will promote more open conditions on juniper, ponderosa pine, and 

Douglas-fir sites). The assumption was also made that any treatment in satisfactory cover (70% 

+ canopy closure) would change the stand to marginal cover at least in the short term in all three 

management areas. Values determined by the analysis, and specified in the Forest Plan are 

displayed in Tables 80-83. Table 80 displays the existing condition and Forest Plan goals. 

Tables 81, 82, and 83 display a summary of the results by alternative for General Forest, General 

Forest Winter Range, and Winter Range areas, post-treatment and after road closures are 

completed. 

The January 29, 2007, Spears Wildlife Report contains additional information on elk. 

Alternative 1 

No satisfactory cover or marginal cover would be treated under this alternative, and no roads 

would be closed. Percent cover and HEI would remain at the current levels for a period of time. 

Habitat effectiveness would continue to follow the current trend, with gradual development of 

additional cover as the canopy of untreated stands continue to close. At the same time the 

development of understory vegetation would gradually increase the risk of future loss of cover to 

fire, insects, and disease. The year-round open road density is expected to remain at 

approximately the current level. The winter open road density is expected to remain at 1.0 

miles/square mile between December 1 and May 1 with continued on-going implementation of 

the seasonal restrictions that are currently in place. 

Goals established in the Forest Plan for overall HEI would be met under this alternative. Open 

road density would remain slightly above the maximum included in the plan standards for 

General Forest. Current trends in cover and forage availability would continue. Satisfactory 

cover would not be impacted and road density would not be reduced. Elk would continue to use 

the area, but forage availability is expected to gradually decrease as the area dominated by dense 

forest cover continues to expand. Forage would return in areas where future disturbances such as 

insects, disease, or fire reduce forest canopy closure. 

Alternative 2 

Within General Forest, this alternative would reduce satisfactory cover by 895 acres, and 

decrease marginal cover by 609 acres. Total cover acres in General Forest would be reduced by 

1,504 acres, resulting in a 7 percent decrease of percent cover and no change to the cover quality 

index (an index included in the HEI analysis which represents the relative quality of cover based 

on canopy closure). Within General Forest Winter Range, this alternative would reduce 

satisfactory cover by 162 acres, and would reduce marginal cover by 742 acres. Total cover 

acres in General Forest Winter Range would be reduced by 904 acres, resulting in a 29 percent 

decrease in percent cover and no change to the cover quality index. Within Winter Range, this 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 242 

alternative would reduce satisfactory cover by 337 acres and marginal cover by 1,220 acres. 

Total cover acres in Winter Range would be reduced by 1,557 acres, resulting in a 32 percent 

decrease of percent cover and no change to the cover quality index. 

Seasonal restriction on harvest, thinning, fuels and related activities would be implemented 

between December 1 and May 1 in General Forest Winter Range and in Winter Range 

allocations. 

Alternative 2 would initially increase road density in the short term (during implementation) as 

follows: General Forest 0.1 miles per square mile, General Forest Winter Range 0.2 miles per 

square mile, and Winter Range 1.1 miles per square mile. After timber and follow-up operations 

are complete, road closures would reduce road density by 0.3 mile per square mile in General 

Forest, 0.2 miles per square mile General Forest Winter Range and 0.4 miles per square mile 

Winter Range (compared to existing conditions). Combined with the cover effects described 

above, HEI would be decreased from 39.2 to 33.6 in General Forest, decreased from 45.1 to 17.5 

in General Forest Winter Range, and reduced from 53.8 to 15 in Winter Range. 

Goals established in the Forest Plan for HEI would be met under this alternative. Open road 

density would increase temporarily above standards during implementation, but would then be 

reduced to below the maximum included in the plan standards for General Forest. Current ratios 

in cover and forage availability would be altered, resulting in a shift from 52 to 23 percent cover 

on General Forest Winter Range; from 52 to 20 percent cover on Winter Range and 36 to 29 

percent cover on General Forest. A ratio of 40 percent land in cover to 60 percent land in forage 

is thought to provide optimal deer and elk habitat (Thomas et al. 1979). Satisfactory cover 

would be reduced by 895 acres on General Forest, 162 acres on General Forest Winter Range 

and 337 acres on Winter Range, but road density would be reduced when closures are 

implemented on all three of these areas. Elk would continue to use the area, but cover would be 

limited in the short-term. Cover availability is expected to increase as forest canopy recovers 

and road closures are expected to partially compensate for loss of cover. 

Tables 81, 82, and 83 display changes in HEI values. Initial decreases are due to reductions in 

cover and increases in road density. Final HEI values reflect partial compensation that results 

from road closures. 

Alternative 3 

Within General Forest, this alternative would reduce satisfactory cover by 801 acres and increase 

marginal cover by 801 acres. Total cover acres in General Forest would not change and there 

would be no change in percent cover and the cover quality index. Within General Forest Winter 

Range, this alternative would reduce satisfactory cover by 141 acres, and would reduce marginal 

cover by 617 acres. Total cover acres in General Forest Winter Range would be reduced by 758 

acres, resulting in a 24 percent reduction in percent cover and no change to the cover quality 

index. Within Winter Range, this alternative would reduce satisfactory cover by 338 acres and 

marginal cover by 1,217 acres. Total cover acres in Winter Range would be reduced by 1,555 

acres, resulting in 32 percent cover and no change to the cover quality index. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 243 

Seasonal restriction on thinning, fuels, and related activities would be implemented between 

December 1 and May 1 in General Forest Winter Range and in Winter Range allocations. 

This alternative would not reduce road densities. HEI would remain at 39.2 in General Forest, 

and would be reduced from 45.1 to 37.6 in General Forest Winter Range, and be reduced from 

53.8 to 14 in Winter Range. 

Goals established in the Forest Plan for HEI would be met under this alternative. Open road 

density would remain slightly above standards for General Forest. Current ratios in cover and 

forage availability would shift from 52 to 28 percent cover on General Forest Winter Range and 

from 52 to 20 percent cover on Winter Range. Cover would stay at 36 percent on General 

Forest. A ratio of 40 percent land in cover to 60 percent land in forage is thought to provide 

optimal deer and elk habitat (Thomas et al. 1979). Satisfactory cover would be reduced by 801 

acres on General Forest, 141 acres on General Forest Winter Range, and 338 acres on Winter 

Range. Road density would not be changed by this alternative. Elk would continue to use the 

area, but cover would be limited in the short-term. Cover availability is expected to increase as 

forest canopy recovers, which should occur relatively quickly under this alternative. Tables 81, 

82, and 83 display changes in HEI values. Decreases are due to reductions in cover. 

Alternative 4 

Within General Forest, this alternative would reduce satisfactory cover by 870 acres and 

decrease marginal cover by 513 acres. Total cover acres in General Forest would be reduced by 

1,383 acres, resulting in a 6 percent reduction of percent cover and no change to the cover 

quality index. Within General Forest Winter Range, this alternative would reduce satisfactory 

cover by 152 acres, and would reduce marginal cover by 688 acres. Total cover acres in General 

Forest Winter Range would be reduced by 840 acres, resulting in a 26 percent reduction in 

percent cover and no change to the cover quality index. Within Winter Range, this alternative 

would reduce satisfactory cover by 332 acres and marginal cover by 1,201 acres. Total cover 

acres in WR would be reduced by 1,533 acres, resulting in a 32 percent decrease of percent cover 

and no change to the cover quality index. 

Seasonal restriction on harvest, thinning, fuels and related activities would be implemented 

between December 1 and May 1 in General Forest Winter Range and in Winter Range 

allocations. 

Alternative 4 would initially increase road density in the short term (during implementation) as 

follows: Winter Range 0.1 miles per square mile. After timber and follow-up operations are 

complete, road closures would reduce road density by 0.3 miles per square mile in General 

Forest, 0.2 miles per square mile in General Forest Winter Range, and 0.5 miles per square mile 

in Winter Range. Combined with the cover effects described above, HEI would be decreased 

from 39.2 to 33.6 in General Forest, decreased from 45.1 to 40.0 in General Forest Winter 

Range, and reduced from 53.8 to 15.5 in Winter Range. 

Goals established in the Forest Plan for HEI would be met. Open road density would remain 

slightly above standards during implementation, but would then be reduced to below the 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 244 

maximum included in the Forest Plan for General Forest. Current ratios in cover and forage 

availability would be altered, resulting in a shift from 52 to 26 percent cover on General Forest 

Winter Range; from 52 to 20 percent cover on Winter Range and 36 to 30 percent cover on 

General Forest. A ratio of 40 percent land in cover to 60 percent land in forage is thought to 

provide optimal deer and elk habitat (Thomas et al. 1979). Satisfactory cover would be reduced 

by 870 acres on General Forest,152 acres on General Forest Winter Range and 332 acres on 

Winter Range, but road density would be reduced when closures are implemented in all three of 

these areas. Elk would continue to use the area, but cover would be limited in the short term. 

Cover availability is expected to increase as forest canopy recovers and road closures are 

expected to partially compensate for loss of cover. Tables 81, 82, and 83 display changes in HEI 

values. Initial decreases are due to reductions in cover and increases in road density. Final HEI 

values reflect partial compensation that results from implementation of road closures. 

Alternative 5 

Within General Forest, this alternative would reduce satisfactory cover by 788 acres and 

decrease marginal cover by 246 acres. Total cover acres in General Forest would be reduced by 

1,034 acres, resulting in a 4 percent reduction of percent cover and no change to the cover 

quality index. Within General Forest Winter Range, this alternative would reduce satisfactory 

cover by 155 acres, and would reduce marginal cover by 680 acres. Total cover acres in General 

Forest Winter Range would be reduced by 835 acres, resulting in a 26 percent reduction in 

percent cover and no change to the cover quality index. Within Winter Range, this alternative 

would reduce satisfactory cover by 334 acres and marginal cover by 1,209 acres. Total cover 

acres in Winter Range would be reduced by 1,543 acres, resulting in a 32 percent decrease of 

percent cover and no change to the cover quality index. 

Seasonal restriction on harvest, thinning, fuels and related activities would be implemented 

between December 1 and May 1 in General Forest Winter Range and in Winter Range 

allocations. 

Alternative 5 would initially increase road density in the short term (during implementation) as 

follows: Winter Range 0.1 miles per square mile. After timber and follow-up operations are 

complete, road closures would reduce road density by 0.3 miles per square mile in General 

Forest; 0.2 miles per square mile in General Forest Winter Range; and 0.2 miles per square mile 

in Winter Range (compared to existing conditions). Combined with the cover effects described 

above, HEI would be decreased from 39.2 to 38.5 in General Forest, decreased from 45.1 to 40.0 

in General Forest Winter Range, and reduced from 53.8 to 14.5 in Winter Range. 

Goals established in the Forest Plan for HEI would be met under this alternative. Open road 

density would not change, but would remain slightly above standards during implementation, but 

would then be reduced to below the maximum included in the plan standards for General Forest. 

Current ratios in cover and forage availability would be altered, resulting in a shift from 52 to 26 

percent cover on General Forest Winter Range; from 52 to 20 percent cover on WR and 36 to 32 

percent cover on General Forest. A ratio of 40 percent of land in cover to 60 percent land in 

forage is thought to provide optimal deer and elk habitat (Thomas, 1979). Satisfactory cover 

would be reduced by 788 acres on General Forest, 155 acres on General Forest Winter Range 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 245 

and 334 acres on Winter Range, but road density would be reduced when closures are 

implemented on all three of these areas. Elk would continue to use the area, but cover would be 

limited in the short-term. Cover availability is expected to increase as forest canopy recovers, 

which should occur quickly under this alternative within treatment units where higher stocking 

levels are to be retained by prescription within PFA, pileated feeding habitat, connective 

corridors, satisfactory cover and mesic swales and drainages. Road closures are expected to 

partially compensate for loss of cover. Tables 81, 82, and 83 display changes in HEI values. 

Initial decreases are due to reductions in cover and increases in road density. Final HEI values 

reflect partial compensation that results from implementation of road closures. 

The analysis indicates that the project area meets HEI standards for General Forest, General 

Forest Winter Range, and Winter Range. 

Table 80. Existing percent cover, road density, HEI, and Forest Plan goal. 

Management Area 

(MA) 

Cover 

% of 

MA 

Road Density

mi./sq. mi 

HEI Forest Plan HEI 

Goal 

(2nd Decade) 

General Forest 36 3.1 39.2 28 

General Forest Winter Range 52 2.5 45.1 6 

Winter Range 52 1.8 53.8 6 

Table 81. HEI General Forest (Summer Range). 

 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4 Alt. 5 

Cover (acres) 7,970 4,659 5,263 4,730 5,086

Open Road Den, 

treat/closure 3.0 3.1 3.2/2.8 3.1 3.1/2.8 3.1/2.9

Percent Cover 36 29 36 30 32

HEI Value, 

treat/closure 

LRMP 

Goal: 28

39.2 31.2/ 

33.6 

39.2 32.0/

33.6

37.6/ 

38.5

Table 82. HEI General Forest Winter Range. 

 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4 Alt. 5 

Cover (acres) 1,655 751 897 815 820

Open Road Den. 

(mi./sq. mi.) 

treat/closure 

Winter 1.0 

Summer 3.0 

1.0*

 2.5

1.0*

2.7/2.3

1.0*

2.5

1.0*

2.5/2.3

1.0*

2.5/2.3

Percent Cover 52 23 28 26 27

HEI Value 

Treat/closure 

LMRP 

Goal: 6

45.1 15.0/

17.5

37.6 37.6/

40.0

37.6/

40.0
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 246 

Table 83. HEI Winter Range. 

 Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4 Alt. 5 

Cover (acres) 2,505 948 950 972 962

Open Road Den. 

(mi./sq. mi.) 

treat/closure 

Winter 1.0 

Summer 3.0 

1.0*

 1.8

1.0*

2.9/1.4

1.0*

1.8

1.0*

1.9/1.3 

1.0*

1.9/1.6

Percent Cover 52 20 20 20 20

HEI Value LRMP 

Goal: 6

53.8 10.2/

15.0

14 13.8/

15.5

13.7/

14.5

* 1.0 miles/square mile density is based on implementation of seasonal road closure program in winter range from 

December 1 to May 1 of each year. 

Cumulative Effects 

There were approximately 260 acres of satisfactory and marginal cover reduced by the Hash 

Rock Fire, but the habitat effectiveness values for cover quality and quantity did not change, due 

to the relatively small number of acres in relation to the total number of acres in the project area. 

Therefore, the Habitat Effectiveness Index (HEI) values did not change for the project area as a 

result of the Hash Rock Fire. 

Within the project area 13.5 miles of open road exist in Winter Range (MA-20), resulting in an 

open road density of 1.8 miles/square mile. There are also 12.2 miles of open road in General 

Forest Winter Range (MA-21), resulting in an open road density of 2.5 miles per square mile. 

Ongoing activities are planned that would reduce accessibility of roads in Winter Range (MAF20) between December 1 and May 1 of each year by reinforcement of existing closures. 

Seasonal restrictions would be required for road work within these allocations between 

December 1 and May 1 of each year. All alternatives have seasonal road closures in place to 

meet Forest Plan road density requirements. Monitoring would be conducted to confirm that the 

existing closure program is being effectively implemented to the extent necessary to meet this 

requirement. If this standard is not being met, then modifications will be made to the existing 

closure program to ensure that the seasonal standard is met. Uncontrolled recreational use, such 

as OHV use, and user-created roads can also lead to increased disturbance to elk. It is not 

possible to quantify this impact because uncontrolled recreational use and user-created routes are 

not mapped and may change annually. However, the Ochoco National Forest is in the early 

stages of developing a proposal to identify roads, trails, and areas that will be designated as open 

to OHV use. Once this proposal has undergone environmental analysis and is implemented, it 

should help to reduce uncontrolled recreational use and the amount of user-created routes and 

their impacts on wildlife. 

In the Marks Creek Watershed and Veazie Creek drainage approximately 5,098 acres were 

treated with commercial timber harvest within General Forest in the last 30 years. The majority 

of these treatments were regeneration harvests. These treatments reduced the abundance of both 

satisfactory and marginal cover for elk. At the same time fire exclusion has allowed the 

development of moderate to dense canopy closure (cover) in other areas. The proposed 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 247 

alternatives further reduce the percent cover in General Forest. Combined with the proposed 

action the net cumulative effect is that the percent cover will be as displayed in Table 81. 

Within General Forest Winter Range approximately 1,019 acres were treated with commercial 

timber harvest or post fire salvage in the Marks Creek Watershed during the last 35 years. The 

majority of these treatments were regeneration prescriptions. These treatments reduced the 

abundance of both satisfactory and marginal cover for elk. The proposed alternatives reduce the 

percent cover as described above. The net cumulative effect is that the percent cover be as 

displayed in Table 82. 

In Winter Range approximately 414 acres have been treated with commercial timber harvest in 

the Marks Creek Watershed and Veazie Creek drainage during the last 30 years. These 

treatments reduced cover for elk. The percent cover goal for Winter Range is relatively low 

based on site potential and estimated capability to produce cover. All action alternatives would 

further reduce cover within this allocation, the net cumulative effect is that the percent cover will 

be as displayed in Table 83. 

Short-term Uses and 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 action alternatives propose short-term harvest of timber, while enhancing the long-term 

health of forested stands. Existing conditions are outside the historic range of variability and 

may not be sustainable over the long term. Proposed activities including prescribed fire move 

conditions toward a balance of sustainable vegetative conditions. Soil and water are two key 

factors in ecosystem productivity and protection of these resources is provided by the design 

elements discussed in Chapter 2. Sustainable levels of timber, wildlife habitat, water quality, and 

other resources depend on maintaining the long-term soil productivity upon which vegetation 

relies. Quality and quantity of water from the project area would fluctuate as described 

previously, but no long-term effects to water resources are anticipated as a result of commercial 

harvest, precommercial thinning, and fuels reduction activities. All alternatives provide fish and 

wildlife habitat at levels necessary to maintain viable populations of the species within the 

project area. The amounts of suitable habitat vary with the level of activities in each alternative. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 248 

Unavoidable Adverse Effects 

All of the action alternatives considered result in some adverse effects. Many of these adverse 

effects can be reduced through implementation of the design elements identified in Chapter 2. 

Even after minimizing these adverse effects, there are still some adverse effects that cannot be 

avoid. Adverse effects that cannot be avoided relate to air quality, noxious weeds, and soils. 

Air quality. All four action alternatives include underburning activities that would produce 

smoke, including particulate matter such as PM 10. Chapter 2 includes design elements, such as 

only burning when anticipated weather conditions would be favorable for smoke dispersion, to 

reduce the adverse effects from burning. However, weather cannot always be predicted and 

unexpected changes in weather conditions during burning may result in smoke pooling in 

inhabited areas. These effects cannot be avoided. Prescribed fire would not be ignited or would 

be suspended during persistent inversion conditions, which would decrease the potential for 

smoke pooling in the Marks Creek area. 

Non-native Invasive Species (noxious weeds). The potential for introduction and spread of 

noxious weeds exists under every alternative considered, including no action, and cannot be 

completely avoided. All of the action alternatives result in some areas that are conducive to the 

introduction and spread of noxious weeds. Design elements have been included in every action 

alternative to reduce these adverse effects. However, proposed activities such as commercial 

timber harvest, log haul, road construction and reconstruction, grapple piling, and underburning 

still result in conditions conducive to the introduction and spread of noxious weeds. 

Soils. Additional detrimental soil conditions are expected as a result of implementing 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5. The use of tractor (ground-based) logging equipment would result in 

additional areas with detrimental soil compaction and displacement. Underburning and burning 

both grapple and landing piles would also result in small amounts of detrimental charring. The 

design elements in Chapter 2 and the unit-specific mitigation in Appendix B identify the resource 

protection measures that would minimize the unavoidable adverse effects to soils. Alternatives 

2, 4, and 5 were specifically designed to limit the amount of detrimental soil conditions 

consistent with Regional guidelines for soils. 

Road construction also results in adverse effects to soils that cannot be avoided. Road 

construction results in soil compaction and displacement. On roads that are decommissioned, the 

road surface can and would be revegetated, but soil productivity is still reduced because of 

compaction. These adverse effects to soils cannot be avoided. 

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 right-of-way or road.
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 249 

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. 

The construction of roads, to provide access to timber, is an irreversible action because of the 

time it takes for a constructed road to revert to natural conditions. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 

propose some level of road construction. 

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. 

Irretrievable commitments of natural resources involve the loss of production or use of resources 

for a period of time. This represents opportunities foregone for the period of time that the 

resource cannot be used. 

Timber stands that are not managed at this time present an irretrievable loss of growth potential. 

Although the lost growth is irretrievable, it is not irreversible because the stands may be 

managed at a later date. 

Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative effects have been discussed throughout this chapter. As discussed in the June 24, 

2005, Council on Environmental Quality Memorandum on Guidance of the Consideration of 

Past Actions in Cumulative Effects Analysis, past actions that warrant consideration because 

they are continuing to cause identifiable effects in the project area have been considered. For 

example, in the last 30-35 years there has been regeneration harvest on more than 7,000 acres. 

Regeneration harvest reduced the amount of LOS and wildlife habitat in the project area. This 

past harvest was considered in the sections on LOS and wildlife species such as the goshawk and 

pileated woodpecker. Past activities that have changed the environmental baseline have been 

included in the description of the affected environment. For example, in the analysis of effects to 

soils, past harvest activities using ground-based equipment resulted in detrimental soil 

conditions. The unit-by-unit analysis for soils contained in Appendix B describes the existing 

amount of detrimental soil conditions by alternative. Much of the detrimental disturbance was 

caused by past harvest. Other events in the project area such as the Hash Rock Fire of 2000 and 

the Marks Creek Burn in 1968 are also discussed where appropriate. 

Other Required Disclosures 

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.” 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 250 

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. Table 84 

briefly identifies the applicable standards and guidelines and how the alternatives are consistent. 

If the alternatives are not consistent with the standards and guidelines, a brief description of the 

needed Forest Plan amendment is included. In addition, the requirements at USC (United States 

Code) 1604(g)(3) were reviewed and the proposed activities are consistent. 

Alternative 1 is the no action alternative and is not included in Table 84 because no management 

activities would occur. 

All of the action alternatives are consistent with long-term management objectives as discussed 

in the Forest Plan as amended. However, Alternatives 2 and 4 would require three amendments, 

Alternative 3 would require one amendment, and Alternative 5 would require two amendments. 

These amendments are briefly discussed in the alternative descriptions in Chapter 2 and in Table 

84. 

Amendment 1 

The Eastside Screens (aka Regional Forester’s Forest Plan Amendment No. 2) contain standards 

that indicate there should be no net loss of LOS if either one or both of the LOS stages are below 

HRV. The eastside screens also indicate that some timber sale activities can occur within LOS 

stages that are within HRV, such as manipulating one type of LOS to move stands into the LOS 

stage that is deficit if it meets historical conditions. Currently, the amount of multi-strata LOS in

the Douglas-fir PAG is within HRV and single-strata LOS is below HRV. Timber harvest in 

multi-strata LOS within the Douglas-fir PAG is designed to reduce competition and maintain 

large trees in this area; these stands would be converted to single-strata LOS. Following 

treatment, multi-strata LOS would be below HRV. A Forest Plan amendment is needed to allow 

this activity in Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 because the Eastside Screens does not allow timber sale 

activities to move multi-strata LOS below HRV. 

These commercial harvest activities are designed to reduce stand density, improve growth of the 

residual trees, and reduce potential mortality resulting from inter-tree competition. Commercial 

harvest would more quickly restore historic seral/structural stage conditions and improve 

growing conditions for larger trees than no action, noncommercial thinning alone, or prescribed 

fire alone. Commercial harvest would also decrease the probability of wildfires and decreases 

the severity of wildfire impacts. No trees greater than 21 inches dbh would be cut and removed 

in any area except in isolated cases for safety reasons or for road construction. 

This amendment is consistent with the Regional Forester’s June 11, 2003, letter on guidance for 

implementing Eastside Screens. In that letter the Regional Forester encouraged Forest 

Supervisor’s to encourage site-specific Forest Plan amendment that would meet LOS objectives 

of increasing the number of large trees and LOS on the landscape. The commercial harvest 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 251 

proposed in multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG is consistent with the intent of the Eastside 

Screens to maintain and/or enhance LOS. 

Timing – The Forest Plan has been in effect since 1989. This amendment is occurring during the 

second decade of the plan period and is less likely to be significant. The commercial harvest 

treatments in Alternative 2, 4, and 5 are expected to be implemented within the next 5 years. 

Location and Size – In Alternative 2 approximately 309 acres would be treated out of the 988 

acres of multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG within the 39,200 acre project area. In 

Alternative 4, approximately 216 acres would be treated. In Alternative 5, approximately 224 

acres would be treated. In all three alternatives, the acres that are treated would remain LOS; it 

would change from multi-strata LOS to single-strata LOS. 

Goals, Objectives, and Outputs – There would be no change in the long-term relationships 

between the levels of goods and services projected by the Forest Plan Final EIS and the impacts 

of implementing any of these alternatives because of the small number of acres treated and the 

objectives of the treatments (to maintain LOS in the long term). 

Management Prescription – The amendment applies only to this project area and would not apply 

to future decisions within the project area. The amendment does not alter the desired future 

condition of the land or resources or the anticipated goods and services to be produced. Only a 

small acreage would be treated and options for future management of LOS would be maintained. 

Amendment 2 

The Eastside Screens contain standards that indicate timber harvest should be deferred in 

connective corridors when all the criteria for connective corridors cannot be met. A Forest Plan 

amendment is needed to implement Alternatives 2 and 4 to allow commercial harvest within 

connective corridors. Commercial harvest in these alternatives would reduce canopy closure to 

less than two-thirds of site potential. The Eastside Screens indicate that canopy closure should be 

maintained within the top one-third of site potential. Connective corridors within the project area 

represent the best connections given the existing conditions resulting from physical restrictions 

such as ridges, meadows, and previous harvest practices. Timber harvest in Alternatives 2 and 4 

within connective corridors are designed to maintain existing large trees and promote development 

of additional large trees. Alternative 2 includes 787 acres of commercial harvest in connective 

corridors. Alternative 4 includes 700 acres of commercial harvest in connective corridors. This 

activity will help develop LOS in corridors and would improve connectivity in the long term. 

This amendment is consistent with the Regional Forester’s June 11, 2003, letter on guidance for 

implementing Eastside Screens. In that letter the Regional Forester encouraged Forest 

Supervisor’s to encourage site-specific Forest Plan amendment that would meet LOS objectives 

of increasing the number of large trees and LOS on the landscape. The commercial harvest 

proposed in connective corridors is consistent with the intent of the Eastside Screens to maintain 

and/or enhance LOS. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 252 

Timing – The Forest Plan has been in effect since 1989. This amendment is occurring during the 

second decade of the plan period and is less likely to be significant. The commercial harvest in 

Alternatives 2 and 4 are expected to be implemented within the next 5 years. 

Location and Size – The project area contains 3,260 acres of connective corridors. Alternative 2 

includes 787 acres of commercial harvest in connective corridors. Alternative 4 includes 700 

acres of commercial harvest in connective corridors. The commercial harvest retains options for 

future management of connective corridors. Treatments would maintain existing large trees and 

would promote the development of additional large trees. 

Goals, Objectives, and Outputs – There would be no change in the long-term relationships 

between the levels of goods and services projected by the Forest Plan Final EIS and the impacts 

of implementing Alternatives 2 or 4 because of the few acres being treated and the objectives of 

the treatments (to maintain LOS in the long term). 

Management Prescription – The amendment applies only to this project and would not apply to 

future decisions. The amendment does not alter the desired future condition of the land or 

resources or the anticipated goods and services to be produced. Only a small acreage would be 

treated and options for future management of connective corridors would be maintained. 

Amendment 3 

The Forest Plan (p. 4-251) states that vegetative management (except livestock use) will not be 

allowed within MA-F6 Old Growth, until further research is available on the needs of the 

dependent species. All four action alternatives include precommercial thinning, hand piling, and 

underburning in the Stewart Springs OGMA. These activities are proposed to improve the 

longevity of large ponderosa pine on south and west facing slopes. The activities are consistent 

with the emphasis for the OGMA which is to provide habitat for wildlife species dependent on 

old growth stands. A Forest Plan amendment is needed because the activities are not consistent 

with the standard and guideline that indicates vegetative management is not allowed. 

Timing – The Forest Plan has been in effect since 1989. This amendment is occurring during the 

second decade of the plan period and is less likely to be significant. The proposed activities are 

expected to be implemented within the next 5-7 years. 

Location and Size – The project area contains three OGMAs. The alternatives includes activities 

on 70 acres out of 821 within OGMAs. No activities are proposed in the other two OGMAs 

within the project area. The proposed activities would maintain existing large trees. 

Goals, Objectives, and Outputs – There would be no change in the long-term relationships 

between the levels of goods and services projected by the Forest Plan Final EIS and the impacts 

of implementing any of the action alternatives because of the low number of acres being treated 

and the objectives of maintaining large trees. 

Management Prescription – The amendment applies only to this project and would not apply to 

future decisions. The amendment does not alter the desired future condition of the land or 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 253 

resources or the anticipated goods and services to be produced. Only a small acreage would be 

treated and options for future management would be maintained. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 254 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

MA-F6. Vegetative management will not be allowed until further research is available on the needs of the dependent species (Forest Plan, 

p. 4-251). 

Thinning, hand piling, and burning would occur in the Stewart Springs MA-F6 area to improve the longevity of large ponderosa pine on south and west facing slopes. A Forest Plan amendment is needed to implement this activity. 

Thinning, hand piling, and burning would occur in the Stewart Springs MA-F6 area to improve the longevity of large ponderosa pine on south and west facing slopes. A Forest Plan amendment is needed to implement this activity. 

Thinning, hand piling, and burning would occur in the Stewart Springs MA-F6 area to improve the longevity of large ponderosa pine on south and west facing slopes. A Forest Plan amendment is needed to implement this activity. 

Forest-wide. Protect active bird of prey nests from human disturbance until nesting, feeding, and fledging are completed. Nesting areas are divided into primary and secondary zones. In the 

primary zone, maintain the present habitat characteristics 

(Forest Plan, pp. 4-248 to 249) 

A no-treatment buffer of 5 chains (330 feet) has 

been established around 

all known raptor nests. Seasonal restrictions will be implemented 

between March 1 and 

August 1 within 10 chains (660 feet) of all known raptor nests. 

Same as Alternative 2. Same as Alternative 2. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 255 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Forest-wide. Do not allow timber sale harvest activities to occur within LOS stages that are below HRV (Eastside Screens, App. B, p. 9). 

The Douglas-fir PAG is currently within HRV for multi-strata LOS. Activities in this PAG would decrease the amount of multi-strata LOS below HRV and increase the amount of single-strata LOS. There would be no net loss of LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG. A Forest Plan amendment is needed because harvest activities would reduce multi-strata LOS 

below HRV in the 

Douglas-fir PAG. 

No timber harvest 

would occur in the Douglas-fir PAG. 

The Douglas-fir PAG is currently within HRV for multi-strata LOS. Activities in this PAG would decrease the amount of multi-strata LOS below HRV and increase the amount of single-strata LOS. There would be no net loss of LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG. A Forest Plan amendment is needed because harvest activities would reduce multi-strata LOS 

below HRV in the 

Douglas-fir PAG. 

Forest-wide. Maintain or enhance connectivity between LOS stands and Old Growth Management Areas (Eastside Screens, App. B., p. 10). 

Activities within connective corridors would enhance development of large trees over time. Commercial harvest would reduce canopy closure below the upper third of site potential. A Forest Plan amendment is needed to implement harvest activities within connective corridors. 

Activities within connective corridors would maintain overstory canopy closure within the upper third of site potential. Activities would enhance development of large trees over time. 

Activities within connective corridors would enhance development of large trees over time. Commercial harvest would reduce canopy closure below the upper third of site potential. A Forest Plan amendment is needed to implement harvest activities within connective corridors. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 256 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Forest-wide. Protect active and historical goshawk nest sites. Seasonal restrictions will be required for activities near sites that may disturb or harass pair while brooding and nesting (Eastside Screens, App. B, p. 13). 

Design elements seasonally restrict activities near goshawk nest sites. 

Design elements seasonally restrict activities near goshawk nest sites. 

Design elements seasonally restrict activities near goshawk nest sites. 

Forest-wide. 30 acres of the most suitable nesting habitat for goshawks will be deferred from harvest (Eastside Screens, App. B, p. 13). 

30-acre nest stands have 

been identified. No 

harvest would occur in 30-acre nest stands. 

No harvest would occur 

in this alternative. 

30-acre nest stands have 

been identified. No 

harvest would occur in 30-acre nest stands. 

Forest-wide. A 400-acre postfledging area will be established around goshawk nest sites. Retain LOS stands and enhance younger stands toward LOS condition (Eastside Screens, App. B, p. 13). 

400-acre post-fledging areas have been identified around known nest sites. Activities have been designed to maintain and enhance LOS conditions. 

400-acre post-fledging areas have been identified around known nest sites. Activities have been designed to maintain and enhance LOS conditions. 

400-acre post-fledging areas have been identified around known nest sites. Activities have been designed to maintain and enhance LOS conditions. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 257 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

TM-1b. Prohibit timber harvest in RHCAs except to acquire desired vegetation characteristics where needed to attain RMOs. Apply silvicultural practices in a manner that does not retard attainment of RMOs and that avoids adverse effects on inland native fish (INFISH, p. A-7). 

Timber harvest would occur within RHCAs to 

promote development of 

large woody debris (LWD) and to reduce competition with 

brushy, shrubby species. 

Harvest would be at least 25 feet from Class IV streams, 50 feet from Class III streams, and 200 feet from Class I and II streams. Harvest activities would not result in adverse effects to inland native fish 

because vegetation on 

the ground would filter sediment and future recruitment of LWD would be enhanced. 

No timber harvest 

would occur. 

Timber harvest would occur within RHCAs to 

promote development o

large woody debris (LWD) and to reduce competition with 

brushy, shrubby species

Harvest would be at least 25 feet from Class IV streams, 50 feet from Class III streams, and 200 feet from Class I and II streams. Harvest activities would not result in adverse effects to inland native fish 

because vegetation on 

the ground would filter sediment and future recruitment of LWD would be enhanced. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 258 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

FM-1. Design fuel treatment so as not to prevent attainment of RMOs, and to minimize disturbance of riparian ground cover and vegetation. Strategies should recognize the role of fire in ecosystem function and identify those instances where fire suppression or fuel management actions could 

perpetuate or be damaging to 

long-term ecosystem function or inland native fish (INFISH, p. A-11). 

Fire within RHCAs is designed to burn in a mosaic to retain vegetation for infiltration. An estimated 20 percent of identified units within RHCAs would burn to increase diversity. Streamside vegetation would be retained to filter sediment. Fuel treatments would contribute to meeting RMOs for LWD. Fuel treatments would not 

prevent attainment of 

other RMOs. 

Fire within RHCAs is designed to burn in a mosaic to retain vegetation for infiltration. An estimated 20 percent of identified units within RHCAs would burn to increase diversity. Streamside vegetation would be retained to filter sediment. Fuel treatments would contribute to meeting RMOs for LWD. Fuel treatments would not 

prevent attainment of 

other RMOs. 

Fire within RHCAs is designed to burn in a mosaic to retain vegetation for infiltration. An estimated 20 percent of identified units within RHCAs would burn to increase diversity. Streamside vegetation would be retained to filter sediment. Fuel treatments would contribute to meeting RMOs for LWD. Fuel treatments would not 

prevent attainment of 

other RMOs. 

FM-4. Design prescribed burn 

projects and prescriptions to 

contribute to the attainment of RMOs (INFISH, p. A-11). 

Fuel reduction activities were designed to reduce fuel loading to approximate historic levels and maintain or enhance the growth of residual vegetation. Fuel treatments would contribute to attaining RMOs. 

Fuel reduction activities were designed to reduce fuel loading to approximate historic levels and maintain or enhance the growth of residual vegetation. Fuel treatments would contribute to attaining RMOs. 

Fuel reduction activities were designed to reduce fuel loading to approximate historic levels and maintain or enhance the growth of residual vegetation. Fuel treatments would contribute to attaining RMOs. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 259 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

RF-2b. Minimize road and landing locations in RHCAs (INFISH, p. 7). 

Alternative design minimizes new road construction in RHCAs to 0.26 miles. Design criteria limits landing locations in RHCAs. 

No road work within 

RHCAs. No landings located in RHCAs. 

Alternative design minimizes new road construction in RHCAs to 0.11 miles. Design criteria limits landing locations in RHCAs. 

RF-2c. Initiate development and implementation of a Road Management Plan or a Transportation Management Plan. (5) Regulate traffic during wet periods to minimize erosion and sediment delivery and accomplish other objectives (INFISH, p. 7). 

A roads analysis was completed in 2002 and has been updated for this project. This alternative includes a design element to suspend haul during wet 

periods when haul is 

contributing sediment. 

A roads analysis was completed in 2002 and has been updated for this project. This alternative does not include commercial timber harvest or road work. 

A roads analysis was completed in 2002 and has been updated for this project. This alternative includes a design element to suspend haul during wet 

periods when haul is 

contributing sediment. 

RF-2d. Avoid sediment delivery to streams from the road surface by (1) outsloping of the roadway surface, or (2) routing road drainage away from potentially unstable stream channels, fills, and hill slopes (INFISH, p. 8). 

Design elements include installing relief drainage or erosion control devices to route drainage away from stream channels. Road reconstruction and culvert removal included to reduce sediment delivery to streams. 

This alternative does not include commercial timber harvest or road work. 

Design elements include installing relief drainage or erosion control devices to route drainage away from stream channels. Road reconstruction and culvert removal included to reduce sediment delivery to streams. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 260 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

RF-2e. Avoiding disruption of natural hydrologic flow paths (INFISH, p. 8). 

Design elements includes installing adequate relief drainage at stream crossings to avoid disrupting hydrologic flow. 

This alternative does not include commercial timber harvest or road work. 

Design elements includes installing adequate relief drainage at stream crossings to avoid disrupting hydrologic flow. 

RF-3a. Reconstructing road and drainage features that do not meet design criteria or operation and maintenance standards, or do not protect the watershed from increased sedimentation (INFISH, p. 8). 

Design elements includes installing adequate relief drainage at stream crossings. Road reconstruction and culvert removal included to reduce sediment delivery to streams. 

This alternative does not include commercial timber harvest or road work. 

Design elements includes installing adequate relief drainage at stream crossings. Road reconstruction and culvert removal included to reduce sediment delivery to streams. 

RF-3c. Close and stabilize or obliterate, and stabilize roads not needed for future management activities (INFISH, 

p. 8). 

Includes road work within RHCAs to stabilize roads and reduce sediment delivery. Within RHCAs, 8.4 miles of road would be closed, decommissioned, or reconstructed. 

This alternative does not include road work. 

Includes road work within RHCAs to stabilize roads and reduce sediment delivery. Within RHCAs 8.2 miles of road would be closed, decommissioned, or reconstructed. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 261 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

RF-4. Construct new, and improve existing, culverts, 

bridges, and other stream 

crossings to accommodate a 100-year flood where those improvement pose a substantial risk to riparian conditions (INFISH, p. A-8). 

Design elements require new and reconstructed roads with stream crossings to have 

adequate relief drainage. Two culverts on Rush Creek would be removed. 

This alternative does not include road work. 

Design elements require new and reconstructed roads with stream crossings to have adequate relief drainage

Two culverts on Rush Creek would be removed. 

RF-5. Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and 

potential fish-bearing streams 

(INFISH, p. A-8). 

Roads would be constructed and closed using proper drainage and surfacing to ensure fish passage. 

This alternative does not include road work. 

Roads would be constructed and closed using proper drainage and surfacing to ensure fish passage. 

Forest-wide. Project activities will be planned to reduce soil compaction and displacement to the lowest reasonable level. Strive to reduce compaction and displacement of the total activity area to get as close to 90 percent of the activity area in a noncompacted/nondisplaced condition. The minimum will 

be 80 percent (Forest Plan, p. 4-

196). 

Unit specific mitigations to reduce compaction and displacement have been identified. These include design of logging systems, avoidance of specific areas, and identification of tilling. 

This alternative would result in no net increase in the amount of area which exceeds the 20 

percent detrimental soil 

condition standard. 

Unit specific mitigations to reduce compaction and displacement have been identified. These include design of logging systems, avoidance of specific areas, and identification of tilling. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 262 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Forest-wide. Maintain viable 

populations of all threatened, 

endangered, and sensitive plant and animal species (Forest Plan, 

p. 4-120). 

Biological Evaluations (BEs) were completed. This alternative would not adversely affect any threatened or endangered species. This alternative would not cause a trend toward federal listing for any sensitive species. 

BEs were completed. This alternative would not adversely affect any threatened or endangered species. This alternative would not cause a trend toward federal listing for any sensitive species. 

BEs were completed. This alternative would not adversely affect any threatened or endangered species. This alternative would not cause a trend toward federal listing for any sensitive species. 

Forest-wide. Protect fragile sites such as shallow soil areas (scablands) and natural meadows (Forest Plan, p. 4-121). 

Design elements were incorporated in all alternatives to protect fragile sites. Groundbased machinery would 

be restricted in 

scablands, meadows, and RHCAs. 

Design elements were incorporated in all alternatives to protect fragile sites. No ground-based machinery would be used in scablands, meadows, and RHCAs. 

Design elements were incorporated in all alternatives to protect fragile sites. Groundbased machinery would 

be restricted in 

scablands, meadows, and RHCAs. 

Forest-wide. Identify and 

protect unique ecological 

situations, such as representative examples of aspen clones (Forest Plan, p. 4-121 

Several aspen stands and two cottonwood stands would be enhanced by reducing competition with conifers. Conifers would be cut or girdled. To protect regeneration from browse fencing and/or individual cages may be installed. 

Several aspen stands and two cottonwood stands would be enhanced by reducing competition with conifers. Conifers would be cut or girdled. To protect regeneration from browse fencing and/or individual cages may be installed. 

Several aspen stands and two cottonwood stands would be enhanced by reducing competition with conifers. Conifers would be cut or girdled. To protect regeneration from browse fencing and/or individual cages may be installed. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 263 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Forest-wide. Prevention of invasive plant introduction, establishment, and spread will 

be addressed in fire and fuels 

and vegetation management 

plans (2005 ROD for 

Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants, Standard 1). 

Chapter 3 includes a discussion of noxious weeds. Factors favoring the establishment and spread of weeds have 

been identified. 

Existing infestations were identified and considered during alternative development. Prevention measures have been developed and incorporated as design elements in Chapter 2. 

Chapter 3 includes a discussion of noxious weeds. Factors favoring the establishment and spread of weeds have 

been identified. 

Existing infestations were identified and considered during alternative development. Prevention measures have been developed and incorporated as design elements in Chapter 2. 

Chapter 3 includes a discussion of noxious weeds. Factors favoring the establishment and spread of weeds have 

been identified. 

Existing infestations were identified and considered during alternative development. Prevention measures have been developed and incorporated as design elements in Chapter 2. 

Forest-wide. Actions conducted or authorized by written permit 

by the Forest Service require the 

cleaning of heavy equipment (bulldozers, skidders, graders, 

backhoes, dump trucks, etc.) prior to entering National Forest 

System Lands (2005 ROD for Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants, Standard 2). 

To reduce the potential for transport or spread of noxious weeds, contracts would include a clause that equipment 

be clean of all plant or 

soil material (Chapter 2, design element). 

To reduce the potential for transport or spread of noxious weeds, contracts would include a clause that equipment 

be clean of all plant or 

soil material (Chapter 2, design element). 

To reduce the potential for transport or spread of noxious weeds, contracts would include a clause that equipment 

be clean of all plant or 

soil material (Chapter 2, design element). 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 264 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Forest-wide. Use weed-free straw and mulch for all projects on National Forest System Lands (2005 ROD for Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants, Standard 3). 

Straw materials that are used in sediment traps will be certified weedfree or be acquired from certified fields that 

produce weed-free seed 

for the grain or grass seed industry (Chapter 2, design element). 

Straw materials that are used in sediment traps will be certified weedfree or be acquired from certified fields that 

produce weed-free seed 

for the grain or grass seed industry (Chapter 2, design element). 

Straw materials that are used in sediment traps will be certified weedfree or be acquired from certified fields that 

produce weed-free seed 

for the grain or grass seed industry (Chapter 2, design element). 

Forest-wide. Use only gravel, fill, sand, and rock that is 

judged to be weed free by 

District or Forest weed specialists (2005 ROD for Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants, Standard 7). 

Ochoco NF material sources would be inspected to ensure materials are weed-free. Sale contract would include provisions requiring any material from other sources is weed-free (Chapter 2, design element). 

Ochoco NF material sources would be inspected to ensure materials are weed-free. Sale contract would include provisions requiring any material from other sources is weed-free (Chapter 2, design element). 

Ochoco NF material sources would be inspected to ensure materials are weed-free. Sale contract would include provisions requiring any material from other sources is weed-free (Chapter 2, design element). 

Forest-wide. Conduct road 

blading, brushing, and ditch 

cleaning in areas with high concentrations of invasive 

plants in consultation with 

District or Forest-level invasive 

plant specialists. Incorporate 

invasive plant prevention 

practices as appropriate (2005 

ROD for Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants, Standard 8). 

Pre-project weed surveys have been completed. A weed locator map has been 

prepared. Prevention 

measures have been incorporated during alternative development (Chapter 2, design elements). 

Pre-project weed surveys have been completed. A weed locator map has been 

prepared. Prevention 

measures have been incorporated during alternative development (Chapter 2, design elements). 

Pre-project weed surveys have been completed. A weed locator map has been 

prepared. Prevention 

measures have been incorporated during alternative development (Chapter 2, design elements). 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 265 

Table 84. Applicable Forest Plan Direction. 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 

Forest-wide. Native plant materials are the first choice in revegetation for restoration and rehabilitation where timely natural regeneration of the native plant community is not likely to occur. Non-native, non-invasive plant species may 

be used (2005 ROD for 

Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants, Standard 13). 

Use source-identified, locally-collected native grass species for revegetation, if available, or use native cultivars (Chapter 2, design element). Native seed has been 

propagated. 

Use source-identified, locally-collected native grass species for revegetation, if available, or use native cultivars (Chapter 2, design element). Native seed has been 

propagated. 

Use source-identified, locally-collected native grass species for revegetation, if available, or use native cultivars (Chapter 2, design element). Native seed has been 

propagated. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 266 

Clean Air Act 

The selected alternative is designed to be consistent with the Clean Air Act. The Oregon DEQ is 

responsible for assuring compliance with the Clean Air Act. In 1994, the Forest Service, in 

cooperation with the DEQ, the Oregon Department of Forestry, and the BLM, signed a 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to establish a framework for implementing an air quality 

program in Northeast Oregon. The MOU includes a prescribed fire emission limit of 15,000 tons 

of PM 10 per year for the national forests of the Blue Mountains (Malheur, Ochoco, Umatilla, 

and Wallowa-Whitman). (PM 10 are particulate matter that measure 10 microns in diameter or 

less, and are small enough to enter the human respiratory system.) All prescribed burning on 

these forests is coordinated with the DEQ through the State of Oregon smoke management 

program. All prescribed fire activities proposed in the action alternatives would be conducted in 

compliance with the State of Oregon Smoke Management System and would meet smoke 

management objectives for total emissions. The State of Oregon has proposed changes to the 

OAR Chapter 629, Division 48 Smoke Management Rules. At this time, the proposed changes 

are still in draft form and are not being implemented. When these administrative rules are 

finalized, the Forest Service will cooperate with the DEQ to ensure that requirements under the 

Cleain Air Act are met. 

Clean Water Act 

The Clean Water Act establishes a non-degradation policy for all federally proposed projects. 

The action alternative meets anti-degradation standards through planning, application, and 

monitoring of Best Management Practices (BMPs). The Oregon Forest Practices Act and ruls 

are considered a BMPs Program. The State of Oregon has compared Forest Service practices 

with the State practices and concluded that Forest Service practices meet or exceed State 

requirements. Site-specific BMPs have been designed to protect beneficial uses. Chapter 2 lists 

the design elements and resource protection measures that are common to all action alternatives. 

A number of these measures are BMPs. 

The Final EIS documents the analysis of effects to streams listed on the Oregon State 303(d) list 

of Water Quality Limited Water Bodies for summer water temperature. These streams are: 

Marks, Little Hay, and Hamilton Creeks. Implementation of any of the action alternatives would 

not result in any measurable increase in water temperatures in any fish-bearing or non-fish 

bearing perennial stream in the project area. Commercial timber harvest and precommercial 

thinning activities were designed so that they do not reduce shade. There is a potential to 

increase water temperature in intermittent non-fish bearing streams (Class IV) when they are 

flowing, but this would not result in a violation of state water quality standards because these 

streams go dry before peak water temperatures occur in the project area. 

All four of the action alternatives will comply with the Clean Water Act. 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 267 

Endangered Species Act 

Biological Evaluations (BEs) have been prepared to document possible effects of proposed 

activities on threatened and endangered species in the project area. There are no endangered 

species known or suspected to occur on the Ochoco National Forest. Threatened species that are 

known or suspected to occur on the Ochoco National Forest include bull trout, mid-Columbia 

River steelhead, northern bald eagle, and Canada lynx. Potential effects to these species were 

analyzed and the analysis is summarized in the BEs (February 9, 2007, Wildlife BE and January 

2007 BE for Aquatic Species) and in Chapter 3 of this Final EIS. The analysis documents that 

there would be no effect to bull trout or mid-Columbia River steelhead. The project may affect, 

but is not likely to adversely affect northern bald eagle and Canada lynx. Consultation with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been completed. Consultation with the National Marine 

Fisheries Service is not needed. 

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 either No Effect or No Adverse Effect to 

cultural resource sites through both protection and avoidance, with one exception. The Project 

Review for Heritage Resources under the Terms of the 2004 Programmatic Agreement between 

the Forest Service and the State Historic Preservation Office was signed on June 19, 2007. 

Under the terms of that agreement, the Project Review for Heritage Resources has been 

forwarded to the SHPO for review. This project complies with Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act. 

Environmental Justice and Civil Rights 

Civil Rights legislations, including the Civil Rights Act (CR) of 1964, Title VI, prohibit 

discrimination in Forest Service program delivery. The underlying principal behind the Civil 

Rights Act is that no activity shall negatively affect minorities, woman, or persons with 

disabilities by virtue of their race, color, sex, national origin, religion, age, disability, or material 

or familial status. Executive Order 12898 directs each Federal agency to make achieving 

Environmental Justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, 

policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations. 

There is no known potential for disparate or disproportionately high effects from any of the 

alternatives considered in this environmental impact statement to low-income or minority 

populations. None of the alternatives considered would discriminate or negatively impact any 

individual or subset of the population described above. 
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 268 

CHAPTER 4. CONSULTATION AND 

COORDINATION 

Preparers and Contributors 

The Forest Service consulted the following individuals, Federal, State, and local agencies, tribes, 

and non-Forest Service persons during the development of this environmental impact statement: 

Interdisciplinary Team Members 

Jeffrey Bell, Fuels Specialist, studied Technical Fire Management at Washington Institute and 

received credits from Colorado State University and Central Oregon Community College. Jeff 

has 32 years of firefighting experience. He started fighting fire in 1975 for the Oregon 

Department of Forestry as an AD firefighter. He began working for the USDA Forest Service in 

1978 in recreation and moved into fuels in the fall of the same year. He has worked as an engine 

supervisor, burn boss, fuels technician, fuels planner, area fire planner, suppression technician, 

and fire management officer. Jeff is currently a Battalion Chief. Jeff holds several fire 

qualifications including Operations Section Chief 2, Fire Behavior Analyst, Incident Commander 

Type 3, Prescribe Burn Boss I, and Prescribe Fire Manager. 

Paul C. Cuddy 

Jim David, Forest Soil Scientist, has a B.S. degree in Range and Wildlands Science (soils and 

hydrology emphasis) and a M.S. degree in Range Ecology from the University of California at 

Davis. His experience includes working in ranching, farming, contract inventory, California 

Division of State Lands, BLM, and the Forest Service. His experience includes 23 years of 

federal service with the Ely and Las Vegas Districts of the BLM in Nevada and the Ochoco 

National Forest in central Oregon. He has worked as the Forest Soil Scientist for the Ochoco 

National Forest and Crooked River National Grassland for the last 17 years. 

Erica Ellison, Recreation Specialist, graduated from the College of Forestry and Conservation at 

the University of Montana in 2005. She has a B.S. degree in Recreation Resources Management. 

Her curriculum focused on the management of scenic and recreation resources on private, state, 

and federal lands. It also included the study of characteristics, needs, activities, and behavior of 

recreation visitors. She worked seasonally for 3 years as a trail crew leader and wilderness 

ranger in the Absaroka/Beartooth Wilderness on Gallatin National Forest. She has worked for 

the Ochoco National Forest for the last 2 years. 

Katherine Farrell is the Project Leader. She has more than 18 years experience working for the 

Forest Service in planning. She has been involved in numerous planning efforts including timber 

sales, range allotment plans, Wild and Scenic River management plans, land exchanges, 

watershed analyses, and recreation projects. She is currently District Environmental Coordinator 

for the Lookout Mountain Ranger District of the Ochoco National Forest. 
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 269 

Barbara Franano, Fisheries Biologist, has B.S. and M.S. degrees in Biology (fish and wildlife 

emphasis) from West Texas State University in Canyon, Texas. Her experience includes 26 

years of government service working for the Wasatch-Cache, Uinta, and Ochoco National 

Forests, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and the Division of Wildlife Resources in Utah. She has 

worked as a fisheries and wildlife biologist and as a program manager for special uses. For the 

last 8 years, she has been the Fisheries Biologist for the Lookout Mountain Ranger District and 

Crooked River National Grassland, Ochoco National Forest. 

Caroline L. Gordon, Forest Geologist, earned her B.A. in Geology in 1977 from Central 

Washington University, Ellensburg, WA. She is a Registered Geologist in the State of Oregon 

and in the State of Washington. She began working for the Forest Service in 1978 as a Civil 

Engineering Technician. In 1984, she converted to the Geology series. Carrie specializes in 

providing general geology for planning areas/watershed analysis, managing the rock resource 

program, and conducting slope stability investigations. In addition, she assists administering 

small scale mineral material permits and plans of operation for small mining claims. She has 

worked on the Ochoco National Forest since 1992. 

Gayle Hammond, Road Manager, has an A.S. degree in Engineering Technology from LinnBenton Community College. She has been with the Forest Service 26 years working for the 

Malheur, Siskiyou, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests as an engineering technician. Her 

experience includes planning, location, survey and design, contract preparation and 

administration of roads and recreation sites. She is currently the road manager and transportation 

planner for the Ochoco National Forest. 

Theresa (Terry) Holtzapple, District Archaeologist, earned a B.A. in Anthropology from the 

University of Texas at Austin in 1975. Her experience includes more than 25 years of 

archaeological excavation and survey work in Texas, Alaska, and Oregon with University 

Research Centers, Texas State Parks and Wildlife Department Historic Sites and Restoration, 

National Park Service, and the Forest Service. She has worked on the Ochoco National Forest in 

cultural resource management since 1979. In 1985, she made a career shift and worked on a 

local ranch, the Paulina School, and the Post Store. She returned to the Ochoco National Forest 

in 1990. Terry is currently the District Archaeologist on the Lookout Mountain Ranger District 

and Crooked River National Grassland and an active member of the Archaeological Society of 

Central Oregon and the Crook County Historical Society. 

Mark G. Lesko, Botanist and Noxious Weed Coordinator, has B.S. in Forest Science from The 

Pennsylvania State University, and post-graduate education in botany from Oregon State 

University. His experience includes 27 years in forestry, ecology, lands and minerals, botany, 

and noxious weed management for The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of 

Oregon, BLM, and the Forest Service. For the last 9 years, he has been the botanist for the 

Lookout Mountain Ranger District and Crooked River National Grassland, Ochoco National 

Forest. 

Barb Marshall, Logging Systems Specialist, has a B.S. in Forestry from the University of 

Washington. She also attended St. John’s College and studied science and philosophy for 2 
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 270 

years. Barb has worked for the Forest Service on four National Forests. She has 27 years of 

experience in logging systems, reforestation, silviculture, and planning. She is currently working 

on the Ochoco National Forest in logging systems and timber sale preparation. 

Robert Rawlings, Silviculturist, earned a B.S. in Forest Management from Washington State 

University in 1979. He has more than 20 years experience in silviculture, including 8 years of 

forest inventory experience. Rob has been a certified Silviculturist since 1992. For the last 15 

years, Rob has been a Silviculturist on the Ochoco National Forest. 

James Seymour, Hydrologist, has a B.S from Colorado State University in Watershed Science 

with a concentration in Hydrology. His experience includes 27 years of government service as a 

hydrologist working on the Deerlodge National Forest in Montana, and the Olympic National 

Forest in Washington. Jim is currently the hydrologist on the Lookout Mountain Ranger District 

of the Ochoco National Forest. 

Dede Steele, Wildlife Biologist, has a B.S. degree in Wildlife Science and a B.S degree in 

Rangeland Resources from Oregon State University. Her experience includes 24 years of 

government service working for the Willamette, Ochoco, and Deschutes National Forests and for 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. She has worked as a District and Forest level Biologist, as an 

interdisciplinary resource planner, and as a Service Biologist. She is currently a District Wildlife 

Biologist on the Lookout Mountain Ranger District, Ochoco National Forest. 

Distribution of the Environmental Impact Statement 

Copies of this EIS have been sent to the following individuals, adjacent landowners, Federal 

agencies, federally recognized tribes, Sate and local governments, and organizations representing 

a wide range of views. This includes individuals that have specifically requested a copy of the 

document. 

Alex Berlin 

Susan Jane M. Brown 

Jim Buckley 

Newell Clarno 

Rodney and Lori Cook 

Diane Cross 

Carl and Mary Dutli 

Don and Jean Edwards 

Edwin and Connie Flower 

Don Geer 

Edward Honton 

Ron and Sally Jackson 

Don James 

Debra Krause 

Alex McDonald 

Ernie McKenzie 

Ron Miller 
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 271 

Bob Mullong 

Daryl Owens 

Carrie Woodward Puckett 

Tom Raglan 

Claude and Chris Rickman 

B. Sachau 

Ray Sessler 

Elmer H. Taylor 

Sarah Thomas 

Jimmy and Lori Wilson 

Clay Woodward 

Clint Woodward 

American Forest Resource Council, Charles Burley 

Anderes Timber Consulting, H. F. Anderes 

Archaeological Society of Central Oregon, Susan Gray 

The Bulletin 

Central Oregonian, Vance Tong 

Colorado State University Library 

County Extension Service, Tim DeBoodt 

Crook County Judge Scott Cooper

D.R. Johnson Lumber Co., Dan Bishop 

D.R. Johnson Lumber Co., Gerald Keck 

Deschutes Resource Conservancy, Scott McCaulou 

Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, Forrest Fleischman 

Interfor Pacific, Greer Kelly 

Mt. Bachelor Academy, Frank Bell 

Mt. Bachelor Academy, Bill Gowen 

Natural Resources Research Library, S.J. and Jessie E. Quincy 

Ochoco Lumber Company, John Morgan 

Oregon Chapter Sierra Club, Asante Riverwind 

Oregon Hunters Association 

Oregon Trout, Aubrey Russell 

Oregon Wild, Doug Heiken 

Oregon Wild, Tim Lillebo 

Ponderosa Ranch Homeowners, Bill Zelenka 

Prineville-Crook County Chamber of Commerce, Diane Bohle 

Sierra Club, Juniper Group, George Wilson 

Sierra Club, Juniper Group, Marilyn Miller 

The Wilderness Society, Bob Friemark 

Woodward Companies, Craig Woodward 

Federal, State, and Local Agencies 

Brett Hodgson, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 

Jeff Dillon, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 272 

Scott Hoefer, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Fisheries 

USDA, National Agricultural Library 

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 

USDI Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Federal Activities 

Tribes 

Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation

The Burns Paiute 

The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation 

The Klamath Tribes 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 273 

REFERENCES 

Adamus, P.R., K. Larson, G. Gillson, and others. 2001. Oregon breeding bird atlas. Oregon Field 

Ornithologists. Eugene, OR. CD-ROM. 

Agee, J.K. 2002. Fire as a coarse filter for snags and logs. In: Laudenslayer, W.F., Jr.; B. 

Valentine; C.P. Weatherspoon; and T.E. Lisle, technical coordinators. Proceedings of the 

symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western forests. 1999 November 

2-4; Reno, NV. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Southwest Research Station. Albany, CA. 

Ager, A. 2005. ArcFuels: Forest planning tools for managing wildfire fuels. International ESRI 

users conference. August 2005. San Diego, CA. 

Altman, B. 2000. Conservation strategy for landbirds in the northern Rocky Mountains of eastern 

Oregon and Washington. American Bird Conservancy, for Oregon-Washington Partners in 

Flight. Corvallis, OR. 128 p. 

Anderson, B. 1989. Unpublished. Background Information on the EHA Model. On file at the 

Ochoco National Forest, 3160 NE Third Street, Prineville, OR. 

Arno, S.F. 2000. Fire in western forest ecosystems. In: Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of 

fire on flora. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42. USDA Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Research Station. Ogden, UT. 2: 97-120. 

Asher, J.E., S. Dewey, C. Johnson, and J. Olivarez. 2001. Reducing the spread of invasive exotic 

plants following fire in western forests, deserts, and grasslands. In: Proceedings of the 

invasive species workshop: The role of fire in the control and spread of invasive species. Fire 

conference 2000, San Diego, CA. Misc. Publ. No. 11. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research 

Station: 102-103. 

Bailey. 1936. 

Baker, F.S. 1949. A revised tolerance table. Journal of Forestry, Vol. 47, Nbr. 3, 1 Mar 1949. pp. 

179-181(3). 

Barrett, J. 1981. Twenty-year growth of thinned ponderosa pine in the Methow Valley of northern 

Washington. Research Paper PNW-RP-286. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Barrett, J. 1982. Growth of ponderosa pine saplings thinned to five spacings in central Oregon. 

Research Paper PNW-RP-301. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

Portland, OR. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 274 

Barrett, J. 1989. Growth of ponderosa pine poles thinned to different stocking levels in central 

Oregon. Research Paper PNW-RP-311. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. Portland, OR. 

Bartuska, A.M. 2000. Letter dated November 6, 2000, to John Talberth, National Forest 

Protection Alliance. File designation: 2400. Comments on the report entitled “The economic 

case against national forest logging.” 9 p. On file at the Ochoco National Forest, 3160 NE 

Third Street, Prineville, OR. 

Beschta, R.L., R.E. Bilby, G.W. Brown, and others. 1987. Stream temperature and aquatic 

habitat; fisheries and forestry interaction. Pages 191-232 in: Salo, E.O., and T.W. Cudy, eds. 

Forestry and fisheries interactions. Contribution 57. University of Washington Institute of 

Forest Resources. Seattle, WA. 

Bjornn, T.C., and D.W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. American 

Fisheries Society Special Publication 19:83-138. 

Brown, M. 1995. Aspen decline in the inland northwest: a review of some relevant literature. 28 

p. 

Bull, E.L., and M.P. Hayes. 2001. Post-breeding season movements of Columbia spotted frogs 

(Rana luteiventris) in northeastern Oregon. Western North American Naturalist. 61:119-123. 

Bull, E.L., and M.P. Hayes. 2002. Overwintering of Columbia spotted frogs in northeastern 

Oregon. Northwest Science. 76:141-147. 

Bull, E.L., and J.E. Hohmann. 1992. Northern goshawks in northeastern Oregon. Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. La Grande, OR. 34 p. 

Bull, E.L., R.S. Holthausen, and M. Henjum. 1992. Roost trees used by pileated woodpeckers in 

northeastern Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management. 56:786-793. 

Bull, E.L., C.G. Parks, and T.R. Torgersen. 1997. Trees and logs important to wildlife in the 

Interior Columbia River Basin. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-391. USDA Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 55 p. 

Burns, R.M., and B.H. Honkala. 1990. Silvics of North America, Vol. 2, hardwoods. Agricultural 

Handbook 645, USDA, Forest Service. pp. 555-569. 

Carlson, C.E., and N.W. Wulf. 1989. Silvicultural strategies to reduce stand and forest 

susceptibility to the western spruce budworm. USDA Forest Service, Cooperative State 

Research Service. Agriculture Handbook No. 676. 

Clary, W.P. 1999. Stream channel and vegetation responses to late spring cattle grazing. Journal 

of Range Management. 52(3):218-227. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 275 

Cochran, P.H., J.M. Geist, D.L. Clemens, R.R. Clausnitzer, and D.C. Powell. 1994. Suggested 

stocking levels for forest stands in northeastern Oregon and southeastern Washington. 

Research Note PNW-RN-513. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

Portland, OR. 

Cochran, P.H., and J. Barrett. 1993. Long-term response of planted ponderosa pine to thinning in 

Oregon’s Blue Mountains. Western Journal of Applied Forestry. 8(4). 

Cochran, P.H., and J. Barrett. 1999a. Thirty-five-year growth of ponderosa pine saplings in 

response to thinning and understory removal. Research Paper PNW-RP-512. USDA Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Cochran, P.H., and J. Barrett. 1999b. Growth of ponderosa pine thinned to different stocking 

levels in central Oregon: 30-year results. Research Paper PNW-RP-508. USDA Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

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. 

Corkran, C.C., and C Thoms, 2006, Amphibians of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. 

Covington, W.W., P.Z. Fulé, M.M. Moore, S.C. Hart, T.E. Kolb, J.N. Mast, S.S. Sackett, and 

M.R. Wagner. 1997. Restoring ecosystem health in ponderosa pine forests of the southwest. 

Journal of Forestry, Apr. 1997: pp. 23-29. 

Crocker-Bedford, D.C. 1990. Goshawk reproduction and forest management. Wildlife Society 

Bulletin. 18:262-269. 

Csuti, B., A.J. Kimerling, T.A. O’Neil, and others. 1997. Atlas of Oregon wildlife. Oregon 

State University Press. Corvallis, OR. 492 p. 

David, J. 2001. Personal communication on changes in lithosol (scabland) soils on the Ochoco 

National Forest and Crooked River National Grassland. Based on unpublished data from 

Region 6 ecology plots in the Blue Mountains. 

DeClerck, F.R. 1997. Cattle as dispersers of hound’s tongue on rangeland in southeastern 

British Columbia. Journal of Range Management. 50:239-243. 

Demars, C.J., and B.H. Roettgering. 1982. Western Pine Beetle. Forest Insect and Disease 

Leaflet 1. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. Berkley, CA. 

DiTomaso, J.M. 1997. Risk analysis of various weed control methods. Proceedings: California 

Exotic Pest Plant Council Symposium. 3:34-39. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 276 

Dixon, R.D. 1995. Ecology of the white-headed woodpeckers in the central Oregon Cascades. 

M.S. thesis, Idaho State University. Moscow, ID. 148 p. 

Dumas, P.C. 1966. Studies of the Rana species complex in the Pacific Northwest. Copeia 

1966:60-74. 

Eddleman, L.E. 1996. Personal communication on the seed bank viability of knapweed species. 

Oregon State University. 

Eglitis A. 2006. Colonization of fire-damaged ponderosa pine by bluestain fungi and insects 

after the Hash Rock Fire of August 22, 2000. USDA Forest Service, Central Oregon Forest 

Insect and Disease Service Center. Bend, OR. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fid/pubsweb/colonization-fire.pdf 

Fettig, C.J., K. Klepzig, R. Billings, S. Munson, E. Nebecker, J. Negron, and J. Nowak. 2007. 

The effectiveness of vegetation management practices for prevention and control of bark 

beetle infestations in coniferous forests of the western and southern United States. Forest 

Ecology and Management. 238:24-53. 

Filip, G.M., and C.L. Schmitt. 1990. Rx for Abies: Silvicultural options for diseased firs in 

Oregon and Washington. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-252. USDA Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Finney, M. 2001 . Design of regular landscape fuel treatment patterns for modifying fire growth 

and behavior. Forest Science 47(2). pp. 219-228. 

Finney, M., S. Britten, and R. Seli. n.d. In prep. FlamMap, version 3. USDA Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory. Missoula, MT. Accessed 

April 10, 2007. http://www.fire.org. 

Fontaine, B. 1998. Trout Creek watershed monitoring, precommercial thinning within RHCA – 

results. 1950 Environmental Analysis - December 12, 1998 attachment to August 11, 1997 

monitoring report. USDA Forest Service, Ochoco National Forest, Prineville Ranger 

District. Prineville, OR. 

Gebert, K.M., C.E. Keegan III, S. Willits, and A. Chase. 2002. Utilization of Oregon’s timber 

harvest and associated direct economic effects. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-532. 

USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Geist, J.M., and H.A. Froehlich. 1994. Basis and principles of subsoiling in forest ecosystems. 

USDA Forest Service. 

Gordon, N.D., T.A. McMahon, and B.L. Finlayson. 1992. Stream hydrology. An introduction 

for ecologists. 526 p. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 277 

Graham, R.T., A.E. Harvey, T.B. Jain, and J.R. Tonn. 1999. The effects of thinning and similar 

stand treatments on fire behavior in western forests. General Technical Report PNW-GTR463. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR 

Graham, S. and F. Knight. 1965. Principles of Entomology. Fourth Edition. McGraw-Hill. 

Hadfield, J.S., D.J. Goheen, G.M. Filip, and others. 1986. Root diseases in Oregon and 

Washington conifers. R6-FPM-250-86. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 

Portland, OR. 

Hagle, S.K., and C.G. Shaw III. 1991. Avoiding and reducing losses from armillarian root 

disease. USDA Forest Service. Agriculture Handbook No. 691. 

Hann, Wendel, Havlina, Doug, Shlisky, Ayn, et al. 2003. Interagency and The Nature 

Conservancy fire regime condition class website. USDA Forest Service, US Department of 

the Interior, The Nature Conservancy, and Systems for Environmental Management. 

[frcc.gov]. 

Hall, F. 1989. Plant association and management guide for the Ochoco and southern Blue 

Mountain areas. USDA-FS-R6-ECOL-TP-000-90. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Region. Portland, OR. 

Halvorson, R. 2000. BLM Special Status Plant Habitat/ Distribution Narrative. Prineville, OR. 

Halvorson, R. 2001. Personal communication on BLM Special Status Plants. Prineville District 

BLM. Prineville, OR. 

Halvorson, R. 2002. Personal communication on BLM Special Status Plants. Prineville District 

BLM. Prineville, OR. 

Halvorson, R. 2003. Personal communication on BLM Special Status Plants. Prineville District 

BLM. Prineville, OR. 

Hardy, C.C., K.M. Schmidt, J.M. Menakis, and N.R. Samson. 2001. Spatial data for national 

fire planning and fuel management. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 10:353-372. 

Harrod, R.J., W.L. Gaines, W.E. Hartl, and A. Camp. 1998. Estimating historical snag densities 

in dry forests east of the Cascade Range. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-428. USDA 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 16 p. 

Harvey, A. 1991. Organic matter function in the western montane forest soil system. 

Proceedings: Management and production of western montane forest soils. 1991 Boise, 

Idaho. General Technical Report INT-280. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research 

Station. Ogden, UT. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 278 

Hawksworth, F.G., and C.G. Shaw III. 1987. Damage and control of major diseases of 

ponderosa pine. Proceedings: Ponderosa pine the species and its management. Spokane, 

WA, September 29 - October 1, 1987. 

Helliwell, R. 2001. Personal communication on Carex interior. 

Hibbert, A.R. 1965. Forest treatment effects on water yield. In W.E. Sopper and H.W. Lull 

(Eds.), Int. Symp. For. Hydrology, p. 527-543. Pergamon Press, New York. 

Hulbert, L.C. 1988. Causes of fire effects in tallgrass prairie. Ecology, 69(1): pp. 46-58. 

Ianni, D., F. Streier, M. Simpson, and M. Lesko. 1996. Personal communication on viability of 

Ochoco NF sensitive plant species. 

Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class Guidebook. May 2005. Version 1.2 

Interagency Implementation Team (IIT). 2000. Grazing implementation monitoring module. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, USDA Forest Service, 

and BLM. 

Johnson, C.G., Jr., and R.R. Clausnitzer. 1992. Plant associations of the Blue and Ochoco 

Mountains. R6-ERW-TP-036-92. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 

Portland, OR. 

Johnson, C.G. 1998. Vegetation response after wildfires in national forests in northeastern 

Oregon. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, OR. 

Johnson, H.J., and T.A. O’Neil. 2001. Wildlife habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. 

Oregon State University Press. 736 p. 

Kagan, J.S. 1996. Draft species management guide for Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii. 

Kilgore, B.M., and G.A. Curtis. 1987. Guide to understory burning in ponderosa pine in the 

Intermountain West. General Technical Report INT-233. USDA Forest Service, 

Intermountain Region. Ogden, UT. 

Knutson, D. M. and R. Tinnin. 1980. Dwarf mistletoe and host tree interactions in managed 

forests of the Pacific Northwest. General Technical Report PNW-111. USDA Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Larson, S., R. Oren, R.H. Waring, and J.W. Barrett. 1983. Attacks of mountain pine beetle as 

related to tree vigor of ponderosa pine. Forest Science. 29(2):395-402. 

Lehmkuhl, J.F., P.F. Hessburg, R.L. Everett, M.H. Huff, and R.D. Ottmar. 1994. Historical and 

current forest landscapes of eastern Oregon and Washington. Part 1: Vegetation pattern and 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 279 

insect and disease hazards. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-328. USDA Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Leitritz, E., and R.C. Lewis. 1980. Trout and salmon culture. California Department of Fish 

and Game, Bulletin 164. Sacramento, CA. 197 p. 

Leven, A.A. 1971. Q/D Note #1, A procedure for estimating delivery coefficients of surface 

erosion from source area to channel. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. 

Lynch, J.A., E.S. Corbett, and K. Mussallem. 1985. Best management practices for controlling 

nonpoint-source pollution on forested watersheds. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 

40:164-167. 

Lytjen, D. 2003. Personal communication on recently documented populations of Carex backii. 

Maercklein, M.B., and G.P. Orr. 1993. Cultural resource survey report for Marks Creek. 

OHIMS 06070100105P. USDA Forest Service, Ochoco National Forest, Big Summit 

Ranger District. Prineville, OR. 

Marshall, D.B. 1997. Status of the white-headed woodpecker in Oregon and Washington. 

Audubon Society of Portland. Portland, OR. 20 p. 

Marshall, D.B., M.G. Hunter, A.L. Contreras. 2003. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR. 752 p. 

Maze, J., and K.A. Robson. 1996. A new species of Achnatherum (Oryzopsis) from Oregon. 

Madrono. 43:393-403. 

McDowell, N., J.R. Brooks, S.A. Fitzgerald, and B.J. Bond. 2003. Carbon isotope 

discrimination and growth response of old Pinus ponderosa trees to stand density reductions. 

Plant, Cell and Environment. 26:631-644. 

McMaster, K.M., State Supervisor of the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office. 2001. Letter dated 

June 22 to L.A.C. Weldon, Forest Supervisor Deschutes/Ochoco National Forest and B. Bail, 

District Manager Prineville District BLM. Informal consultation on the proposed joint 

aquatic and terrestrial programmatic biological assessment for federal lands with the 

Deschutes Basin administered by Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests (1-7-01-844). 9 p. 

On file with Ochoco National Forest, 3160 NE Third Street, Prineville, OR 97754. 

Megahan, W.F. 1980. Nonpoint source pollution from forestry activities in the western United 

States: results of recent research and research needs. Conference on U.S. Forestry and Water 

Quality: What course is the 80’s. Proceedings: Water Pollution Control Federation, 

Richman, VA. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 280 

Mellen, K., B.G. Marcot, J.L. Ohmann, and others. 2002. DecAID: A decaying wood advisory 

model for Oregon and Washington. General Techinical Report PSW-GTR-181. USDA 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Miller, J.M., and F.P. Keen. 1960. Biology and control of the western pine beetle. Misc. Publ. 

800. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Washington DC. 

Montgomery, D.R., and J.M. Buffington. 1993. Channel classification, prediction of channel 

response, and assessment of channel condition. TFW-SH10-93-022. Prepared for the 

SHAMW committee of the Washington State Timber Fish & Wildlife agreement. Timber 

Fish & Wildlife. Seattle, WA. 

Mueggler, W.F. 1989. Age distribution and reproduction of intermountain aspen stands. 

Western Journal of Applied Forestry 4(2): 41-45. 

Munger, J.C., B. Barnett, and A. Ames. 1997. 1996 Sawtooth Wilderness amphibian survey. 

Report to the USDA Forest Service. 

Nakamura, F., and F.J. Swanson. 1993. Effects of coarse woody debris on morphology and 

sediment storage of a mountain stream system in western Oregon. Earth Surface Processes 

and Landforms. 18:43-61. 

Ohmann, J.L., and K.L. Waddell. 2002. Regional patterns of dead wood in forested habitats of 

Oregon and Washington. pp 535-560. In: Laudenslayer, W.F., Jr.; B. Valentine; C.P. 

Weatherspoon; and T.E. Lisle, technical coordinators. Proceedings of the symposium on the 

ecology and management of dead wood in western forests. 1999 November 2-4; Reno, NV. 

General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research 

Station. Albany, CA. 

Oliver, W.W. 1979. Growth of ponderosa pine thinned to different stocking levels in northern 

California. PSW-147. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. Berkeley, CA. 

Omi, P.N., and E.J. Martinson. 2002. Effect of fuels treatment on wildfire severity. Submitted 

to the Joint Fire Science Program Governing Board. 

Omi, P.N., E.J. Martinson, and G.W. Chong. 2006. Effectiveness of pre-fire fuel treatments. 

Final Report JFSP Project 03-2-1-07. Submitted to the Joint Fire Science Program 

Governing Board December 31, 2006. Downloaded from: http://jfsp.nifc.gov/projects/03-2-

1-07/03-2-1-07_final_report.pdf. 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1991. Fish population reports. Prineville, OR. 

Oregon Employment Department. 2004. Labor Trends, April 2006. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 281 

Patla, D.A., and C.R. Peterson. 1997. Idaho native species accounts: Columbia spotted frog. 

Idaho Herp News. 9:7-9. 

Peterson, D.L., M.C. Johnson, J.K. Agee, and others. 2005. Forest structure and fire hazard in 

dry forests of the western United States. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-628. USDA 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Phillips, R. 2004. Personal communication. Regional Economist. USDA Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, OR. 

Pilliod, D.S., C.R. Peterson, and P.I. Ritson. 2002. Seasonal migration of Columbia spotted 

frogs (Rana luteiventris) among complementary resources in a high mountain basin. 

Canadian Journal of Zoology. 80:1849-1862. 

Pollet, J., and P.N. Omi. 2002. Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on crown fire severity 

in ponderosa pine forests. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 11:1-10. 

Powell, D.C. 1999. Suggested stocking levels for forest stands in northeastern Oregon and 

southeastern Washington: an implementation guide for the Umatilla National Forest. F14-

SO-TP-03-99. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Pendleton, OR. 25 p. 

Powell, D.C. 2000. Potential vegetation, disturbance, plant succession, and other aspects of 

forest ecology. Technical Publication F14-SO-TP-09-00. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Region. Umatilla National Forest. Pendleton, OR. 88 p. 

Reich, R.M., S.M. Joy, and R.T. Reynolds. 2002. Predicting the location of northern goshawk 

nests: modeling the spatial dependency between nest locations and forest structure. 

Ecological Modelling. 176(1-2):109-133. 

Reshin, E.B., C.J. Clishe, A.T. Loch, and J.M. Bell. 2006. Effectiveness of timber harvest 

practices for controlling sediment related water quality impacts. Journal of the American 

Water Resource Association. October 2006. p. 1307-1327. 

Reynolds, R.T., R.T. Graham, M.H. Reiser, and others. 1992. Management recommendations 

for the northern goshawk in the southwestern United States. General Technical Report RM217. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Fort 

Collins, CO. 90 p. 

Roché, C.T., and B.F. Roché, Jr. 1988. Distribution and amount of four knapweed (Centaurea

L.) species in eastern Washington. Northwest Science. 62:242-253. 

Rose, C.L., B.G. Marcot, T.K. Mellen, and others. 2001. Decaying wood in Pacific Northwest 

forest: concepts and tools for habitat management. Pages 580-623 In: Johnson, D.H., and 

T.A. O’Neil, eds. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State 

University Press. Corvallis, OR. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 282 

Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied river morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs, CO. 

Roth, L.F., and J. Barrett. 1985. Response of dwarf mistletoe-infested ponderosa pine to 

thinning. Research Paper PNW-RP-331. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. Portland, OR. 

Rothermel, R.C., R.A. Wilson, Jr., G.A. Morris, and S.S. Sackett. 1986. Modeling moisture 

content of fine dead wildland fuels. Research Paper INT-359. USDA Forest Service, 

Intermountain Research Station. Ogden, UT. 

Rowland, M.M., M.J. Wisdom, D.H. Johnson, and others. 2002. Evaluation of landscape 

models for wolverines in the Interior Northwest, United States of America. Journal of 

Mammalogy. 84(1):92-105. 

Ruediger B., J. Claar, S. Mighton, and others. 2000. Canada lynx conservation assessment and 

strategy. 2nd ed. Forest Service Publication #R1-00-53. USDA Forest Service, USDI Fish 

and Wildlife Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, and USDI National Park Service. 

Missoula, MT. 142 p. 

Sanborn, P., M. Kranabetter, and Bulmer. 1999. Soil rehabilitation in the Prince George Forest 

Region: a review of two decades of research. Forest Research Note, British Columbia 

Forest Service. 

Saveland, J.M., and L.F. Neuenschwander. 1989. Predicting ponderosa pine mortality from 

understory prescribed burning. Symposium proceedings: Prescribed fire in the Intermountain 

Region. Washington State University. 

Schmid, J.M., S.A. Mata, and R.A. Obedzinski. 1994. Hazard rating ponderosa pine stands for 

mountain pine beetle in the Black Hills. Research Note RM-RN-529. USDA Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Forest and Experiment Station. Fort Collins, CO. 4 p. 

Schmidt, K.M., J.P. Menakis, C.C. Hardy, and others. 2002. Development of coarse-scale 

spatial data for wildland fire and fuel management. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR87. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fort Collins, CO. 41 p. + 

CD. 

Schmitt, C.L. 1999. Effects of stocking level control on the occurrence and severity of conifer 

diseases in the Blue Mountains of northeastern Oregon and southeastern Washington. Report 

BMZ-99-04. Blue Mountains Pest Management Zone. La Grande, OR. 

Schommer, T., and G. Silovsky. 1994. Goshawk monitoring, management and research in the 

Pacific Northwest Region. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, OR. 

72 p. 

Shank, D. 2004. Fire related soil impacts: Monitoring of the Eyerley, B & B, Booth West, 

Cabot Creek and Brush Creek Reburns. USDA Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 283 

Sheley, R.L. 2004. Discussion on patterns of noxious weed spread. Medusahead Conference. 

Burns, OR. 

Sheley, R.L. and L.L. Larson. 1994. Observation: Comparative live-history of cheatgrass and 

yellow starthistle. Journal of Range Management. 47:450-456. 

Sheley, R.L., M. Manoukian, and G. Marks. 1999b. Preventing noxious weed invasion. In: 

Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Pages 69-72 and 87. Oregon State 

University Press. Corvallis, OR. 

Sheley, R.L., J. Petroff, and M. Borman. 1999c. Introduction, p. 1. In: Biology and 

Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Page 1. Oregon State University Press. 

Corvallis, OR. 

Simpson, M., D. Zalunardo, A. Eglitis, and others. 1994. (draft) Viable ecosystem management 

guide. USDA Forest Service, Ochoco National Forest. Prineville, OR. 

Swanson, F.J., J.A. Jones, D.O. Wallin, and J.H. Cissel. 1994. Natural variability--Implications 

for ecosystem management. In: Volume II: Ecosystem management: Principles and 

applications. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-318. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Thomas, J.W., and others. 1979. Wildlife habitats in managed forests: the Blue Mountains of 

Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. Portland, OR. Agriculture Handbook 553. 512 p. 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 2001a. Bureau of Census, Decennial Census of Population and 

Housing. 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 2001b. Bureau of Census, County Business Patterns. 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 2001c. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2006. Joint aquatic and terrestrial 

programmatic biological assessment: for federal lands within the Deschutes and John Day 

River basins administered by the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests. Bend, OR. 129 p. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2006. DecAID: the decayed wood advisor, 

web application. Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, OR. Available at 

http://wwwnotes.fs.fed.us:81/pnw/DecAID/DedAIS.nsf.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1997. Letter from Tom Schmidt, Forest 

Supervisor, Review of Forest Plan amendments of the Regional Forester’s Amendment No. 2 

for eastside forests, August 22, 1997. Ochoco National Forest. Prineville, OR. 
References 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 284 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1992. WATSED, Water yield and sediment 

model. Range, air, watershed, and ecology staff unit. Region 1. USDA Forest Service and 

Montana cumulative watershed effects cooperative. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1981. Guide for predicting sediment yields 

from forested watersheds. Region 1 and Region 4. 

Verts, B.J., and L.N. Carraway. 1998. Land mammals of Oregon. Berkeley and Los Angeles, 

CA: University of California Press. 668 p. 

Vrilakas, S. 1990. Draft species management guide for Oryzopsis hendersonii. Unpublished 

report submitted to the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. 

Walstad, J.D., S.R. Radosevich, and D.V. Sandberg. 1990. Natural and prescribed fire in Pacific 

Northwest Forests. Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR. 

Wisdom, M.J., R.S. Holthausen, B.C Wales, and others. 2000. Source habitats for terrestrial 

vertebrates of focus in the Interior Columbia Basin: broad-scale trends and management 

implications. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-485. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 529 p. 

Wisdom, M.J., L.J. Bate, and E.O. Garton. 1999. Estimating snag and large tree densities and 

distributions on a landscape for wildlife management. General Technical Report PNW-GTR425. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Wright, E.F., C.D. Canham, and K.D. Coates. 2000. Effects of suppression and release of 

sapling growth for 11 tree species of northern interior British Columbia. Canadian Journal of 

Forest Resources. 30, pp. 1571-1580. 

Wood, J. 2003. Personal communication on Carex backii. 

Yates, G. 2001. Personal communication on Carex interior. 

Yohannan, J. 2006. Personal communication. Regional Economist, April 2006. 

Ziemer, R.R. 1981. Roots and the strength of forested slopes. Erosion and sediment transport in 

Pacific Rim steeplands. I.A.H.S. publ. no. 132, p. 343-361. 

Zimmerman, J., W. Johnson, and M. Eiswerth. 2002. Medusahead: economic impact and 

control in Nevada. Cooperative Extension Fact Sheet FS-02-37. University of Nevada. 

Reno, NV. 
Index 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 285 

INDEX 

303(d).................................................................................................................................. 163, 266 

Clean Water Act.......................................................................................................................... 266 

Community Wildfire Protection Plan ............................................................................................. 5 

Connective corridors.....................................12, 20, 23, 38, 194, 200, 208, 220-222, 251-252, 255 

DecAid ................................................................................................................................ 205, 211 

Endangered Species Act ............................................................................................................. 267 

essential fish habitat...................................................................................................................... 90 

Fish 

brook trout................................................................................................................................. 90 

rainbow trout............................................................................................................................. 90 

National Fire Plan ........................................................................................................................... 5 

Old Growth Management Area........................................................................... 8, 20, 23, 195, 255 

Jim Elliott.......................................................................................................................... 15, 195 

Stewart Springs .....................................................................................20, 23, 197-200, 252-253 

Roads Analysis.......................................................................................................... 19, 22, 24, 259 

Wildlife 

bald eagle ................................................................................................................. 230, 232-233 

bufflehead ....................................................................................................................... 233, 239 

California wolverine ....................................................................................................... 232, 235 

Canada lynx ............................................................................................................................ 231 

goshawk ................................................12, 16, 24, 37-38, 43, 186-192, 200, 208, 225, 249, 256 

gray flycatcher ................................................................................................................ 232, 237 

peregrine falcon ...................................................................................................................... 231 

pileated woodpecker .................................................12, 15, 24, 43, 194-203, 205, 215-216, 249 

Primary Cavity Excavators ..................................................................................................... 202 

pygmy rabbit ........................................................................................................................... 232 

sage grouse.............................................................................................................................. 231 

tricolored blackbird......................................................................................................... 233, 239 

upland sandpiper ..................................................................................................................... 231 

white-headed woodpecker ..................................................................24, 202-209, 215-216, 223

WUI............................................................................................................................... 5, 14, 68, 71 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 286 

APPENDIX A 

Description of Proposed Treatments 

Commercial harvest (HIM or HTH): This prescription would be used in overstocked stands 

with a surplus of merchantable sized trees, trees between 8 and 20.9 inches dbh. Most stands 

contain an existing component of large trees (greater than 21 inches dbh). Current stand 

conditions often include multiple canopies and dense stocking and may include all seral stages. 

The stands would be thinned from below to recommended stocking levels in Alternatives 2 and 

4. In Alternative 5, certain stands located within wildlife emphasis areas would have a higher 

residual stocking level. All alternatives would retain portions of the stand in an untreated 

condition (approximately 10 percent untreated in stringers or 1/2 to 1 acre patches). All 

alternatives would retain old/mature pondersa pine cohorts, regardless of size. Merchantable 

trees would be sold and removed from the stand. 

Recommended stocking levels vary depending on site quality, tree size, and species. For 

example, the desired density range for an uneven-aged ponderosa pine stand on a grand firpinegrass site is 89 to 133 trees per acre when the average diameter is 10 inches dbh. The basal 

area would be between 49 and 73 square feet per acre. If the average diameter were larger, then 

fewer trees would be retained but the residual basal area would increase. Fewer trees would be 

retained on drier sites relative to moister sites. Recommended stocking levels are derived from 

“Suggested Stocking Levels for Forest Stands in Northeastern Oregon and Southeastern 

Washington: An Implementation Guide for the Umatilla National Forest” (Powell 1999). 

Logging System: This proposal includes Tractor (T), Skyline (S), and Helicopter (H) logging 

systems. Tractor systems include the use of ground-based equipment such as tractors, rubbertired skidders, and feller/bunchers to move the logs to a landing where they can be loaded onto a 

truck. Tractor systems are usually prescribed in areas with slopes that are less than 35 percent. 

On steeper slopes, such as those more than 35 percent, skyline or helicopter systems are 

prescribed. Skyline systems include the use of a cable system to suspend the logs into the air to 

move them to a landing. Helicopter systems use a helicopter to lift logs into the air to move 

them to a landing. Helicopter systems are also used in areas less than 35 percent slope where 

there are concerns about using tractor systems. 

Yard Tops Attached (YTA): This activity includes moving cut trees with the tops still attached 

to a landing. The tops are then cut off at the landing area before the logs are loaded onto a truck. 

This activity is prescribed in areas where leaving the tree tops in the unit is likely to result in fuel 

loadings that are considered too high for activity-fuels underburning. This activity is only 

prescribed in combination with commercial harvest. 

Precommercial thinning (PCT): This activity cut small nonmerchantable trees generally less 

than 9 inches dbh. Diseased or damaged trees and juniper trees up to 12 inches dbh could 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 287 

The number of small trees left varies by stand depending on the overall stocking objectives and 

the amount of existing overstory. Where the objective in the stand is to have single-storied LOS 

and many large diameter trees exist, then few small understory trees would be retained (40 or 

less per acre). Where few overstory trees exist, such as in young plantations, then the 

precommercial thinning may retain 135 or more small trees per acre. Species retained are 

usually ponderosa pine and western larch. Species infected with/or susceptible to insects and 

disease are normally removed. Precommercial thinning can occur in combination with 

commercial harvest. Trees cut during this activity are usually left on site. Slash will be reduced 

by fuels treatments, such as underburning or lop and scatter. 

Hardwood thinning (HWD): This activity is prescribed to reduce conifer competition in 

hardwood stands by cutting down and/or girdling conifers (mostly ponderosa pine) that have 

encroached into these areas. Commercial harvest would not occur in these stands. In general, 

conifers up to 15 inches dbh would be cut. Most, if not all, conifers within 50 feet of any aspen 

(including sprouts) or cottonwood tree would be cut down and left in place, or girdled and left 

standing. Slash generated from these activities would be lopped or hand piled. The slash would 

not be burned. To prevent browsing, fencing and/or individual tree cages may be installed. Two 

types of fencing may be used. In some stands, livestock fencing would be installed; livestock 

fencing is four-strand barbed or smooth wire approximately 4 feet in height. In some stands, 

buck and pole fences may be installed to discourage livestock; buck and pole fences will be 

created from slash. In other stands, big game fencing would be installed; big game fencing is 

smooth wire or plastic netting approximately 7 feet in height. Individual tree cages are 

constructed of hard wire mesh 2 to 4 feet in diameter and 3 to 4 feet in height. Cages are placed 

to protect individual or clumps of sprouts. 

Grapple piling (GP): This activity involves the use of a machine such as an excavator with a 

grapple on an articulating arm. The machine operates on existing skid trails and reaches out to 

pick up and pile material. It is estimated that the machine would be able to reach 60 to 70 

percent of the anticipated slash, breaking up its continuity and lowering the overall amount. 

Grapple piles would be located on existing skid trails or landings, be approximately 5 to 10 feet 

high and 10 to 15 feet in diameter. These grapple piles would generally be burned within 2 to 3 

years of piling. Grapple piling will not occur within RHCAs. 

Hand piling (HP): This activity involves the hand piling of material 0-5 inches dbh and stacked 

in line with the slope. Hand piles would be less then 6 feet in diameter and no taller than 4 feet. 

In general, hand piling will be used along private land boundaries and in areas that have too 

much slash to be underburned safely and are too steep for grapple piling. Hand piles would 

generally be burned within 2 to 3 years of piling. 

Jackpot burning (JP): During a jackpot burn, concentrations of fuels are ignited. Jackpot 

burning would result in a mosaic of lightly and moderately burned areas. Jackpot burning is 

expected to kill some trees and create small openings (less than 1/10th of an acre), but is not 

expected to result in changes in species composition. The follow up underburn would remove 

additional surface and ladder fuels. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 288 

Underburning (UB): Prescribed underburning is the application of fire in pre-determined 

patterns under specified conditions to produce a desired average flame length and rate of spread. 

The most common ignition techniques are the strip head fire and the backing fire. A strip head 

fire involves igniting strips of fire across a slope, or with the wind, until one strip reaches the 

area burned by the strip ahead of it. Fire intensity and rate of spread is controlled by adjusting 

the distance between the strips, and the number of strips ignited at one time. A backing fire 

involves igniting a strip of fire and allowing that strip to “back” into the wind or downhill. Fire 

intensity and rate of spread is controlled by adjusting how often and where fire is ignited to keep 

it moving (Kilgore and Curtis 1987). Usually, prescribed fire units that face south and west are 

in prescription to burn in the spring. Units that face north and east do not usually dry out enough 

to burn in the spring, and are generally burned in the fall. Units that sit at lower elevations are 

generally burned in the spring, while units at higher elevations are generally not in prescription 

to burn until the fall. 

Road Construction: Roads will be constructed to a minimum standard which will 

accommodate a single user, i.e. logging and administrative traffic. New road locations will take 

advantage of existing openings and disturbed soils such as old skid trail locations. This will 

reduce clearing and new ground disturbance. Roads will be single lane with turnouts. The width 

of new roads will be 12-14 feet. 

Road Reconstruction: Reconstruction work is that necessary to bring a road back to its original 

standard, repair work necessary to support log haul, or maintenance work (surface blading, 

clearing, etc). Relocating segments of existing road also fall under reconstruction. 

Reconstruction includes: (1) Clearing and grubbing on grown in roads or heavy roadside 

brushing and limbing to provide a minimum 12-foot wide clearing for the movement of 

equipment and log trucks. (2) Heavy grading or minor excavation to re-establish the roadbed 

surface facilitating surface drainage, fill in gullies and deep ruts, and repairing larger slumps, 

slides, scarps, etc. (3) Placing rock to strengthen the subgrade in soft spots; to armor the road 

surface; and/or fill slope at stream crossings, drain dips, drainage outlets. 

Road Closure: Closed roads are in Maintenance Level 1. Level 1 is assigned to intermittent 

service roads when they are closed to vehicle traffic. The closure period must exceed 1 year. 

Basic custodial maintenance is performed to keep damage to adjacent resources 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. Traffic management strategies are "prohibit" and "eliminate." The distiction between 

closing and decommissioining is that the closed road is intended to be re-opened and used at 

some time in the future while the intent of a decommissioned road is no future use. The 

following items are examples of activities and considerations for closing and decommissioning 

roads: (1) Blocking and/or obscuring the entrance by constructing a berm, or barricade, (2) 

recontouring the road prism to natural slope within sight distance, (3) installing waterbars every 

100 feet within sight distance, (4) dragging or placing brush, logs, and rocks onto roadbed, (5) 

seeding areas of disturbed soils, (6) cutting a side ditch on intersecting road across the junction 

of the road, and/or (7) storm proofing or removing culverts. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 289 

Road Decommission: Activities that result in the stabilization and restoration of unneeded 

roads to a more natural state. This includes re-establishing vegetation and, as necessary, 

restoration of ecological processes interrupted or adversely impacted by the unneeded roads. 

Decommissioning may includes the following activities in addition to those mentioned above: 

(1) reestablishing former drainage patterns, stabilizing slopes, and restoring vegetation; (2) 

removing culverts, reestablishing drainage-ways, removing unstable fills, pulling back road 

shoulders, and scattering slash on the roadbed; (3) ripping and/or subsoiling the road surface; 

and/or (4) eliminating the roadbed by restoring natural contours and slopes. 

Alternative Specific Activities by Unit 

The following tables identify the specific activities that are prescribed in each unit, by 

alternative. The activities are displayed in sequential order. For example, in Unit 100 

precommercial thinning would occur and then underburning would occur. In Unit 110, the unit 

would be underburned, then commercial harvest would occur followed by precommercial 

thinning and a second underburn. 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

100 PCT UB 120.32

101 H HTH PCT UB 40.36

104 T HTH PCT UB 36.80

105 S HTH PCT GP UB 20.84

107 T HTH PCT GP UB 65.16

108 T HTH PCT UB 238.81

109 UB PCT UB 136.72

110 UB T HTH PCT UB 26.92

111 T HTH PCT GP UB 48.33

112 T HTH PCT UB 53.23

113 PCT UB 57.04

114 H HTH YTA PCT UB 17.00

115 T HTH PCT UB 47.64

117 S HTH UB PCT UB 16.34

118 T HTH PCT UB 36.57

119 PCT UB 24.95

120 T HTH PCT GP UB 157.30

124 UB PCT UB 90.92

125 T HTH PCT GP UB 56.21

126 T HTH PCT UB 30.59

127 T HTH PCT UB 45.73

129 T HTH PCT GP UB 31.54

133 UB 37.71

134 PCT UB 33.04

135 PCT UB 31.14
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 290 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

136 UB 32.10

137 UB 220.48

138 T HTH PCT GP UB 19.87

139 T HTH PCT GP UB 146.72

141 H HTH PCT UB 36.89

142 T HTH PCT GP UB 16.97

143 H HTH PCT UB 79.62

144 PCT UB 88.15

145 HWD 2.18

148 T HTH PCT UB 82.80

150 UB PCT UB 32.08

151 UB 27.69

155 H HIM YTA PCT UB 20.24

160 T HTH PCT GP UB 113.95

161 UB 14.56

162 T HTH PCT UB 27.14

163 T HTH PCT GP UB 159.69

166 T HTH PCT GP UB 36.49

171 PCT UB 16.58

172 H HIM PCT JP UB 42.52

173 PCT GP UB 20.11

174 T HIM YTA PCT UB 32.77

175 UB 54.37

176 T HIM PCT GP UB 19.42

177 H HTH PCT UB 39.29

179 H HTH PCT UB 22.20

181 T HIM PCT GP UB 26.67

184 H HIM YTA PCT UB 64.77

185 T HIM PCT GP UB 8.27

186 T HIM PCT GP UB 34.75

187 UB 9.73

188 H HIM YTA PCT UB 37.68

189 H HIM UB 71.61

190 PCT UB 57.71

191 T HIM PCT GP UB 10.49

192 PCT UB 69.17

193 T HIM PCT GP UB 59.68

196 PCT UB 59.49

198 T HIM PCT GP UB 34.19

199 T HIM YTA PCT UB 76.75

200 T HIM YTA PCT UB 20.79

201 T HIM YTA PCT UB 20.05
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 291 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

202 T HTH PCT UB 201.10

203 T HTH PCT UB 116.88

206 UB PCT UB 29.68

207 T HTH PCT UB 80.60

208 UB 106.99

209 PCT UB 41.73

210 UB T HTH PCT GP UB 29.41

211 PCT UB 77.85

212 T HTH PCT UB 38.04

214 PCT UB 49.63

300 T HIM PCT GP UB 48.79

301 T HIM GP UB 30.21

302 T HTH PCT UB 27.97

303 T HTH PCT UB 61.18

304 T HTH PCT UB 43.23

306 T HTH PCT GP UB 19.60

310 T HIM PCT GP UB 49.58

311 T HIM PCT GP UB 47.12

312 UB 62.88

313 UB 44.56

314 UB 126.22

315 PCT UB 53.99

316 PCT UB 42.72

317 T HIM PCT GP UB 38.08

400 S HTH UB PCT UB 9.62

401 HWD 12.33

402 HWD 13.71

403 HWD 15.36

404 HWD 4.88

405 HWD 9.45

406 HWD 0.93

407 HWD 7.91

408 HWD 13.63

409 HWD 7.97

410 HWD 2.70

411 HWD 2.60

501 JP UB 62.18

502 HWD 17.90

503 JP UB 26.42

505 PCT GP UB 18.64

506 PCT UB 17.52

507 HWD 3.84
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 292 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

508 PCT UB 34.21

509 T HIM PCT GP UB 25.66

510 PCT UB 241.74

511 UB 103.81

512 UB 30.23

513 UB 27.09

514 PCT UB 33.92

515 T HIM PCT GP UB 18.07

517 T HIM PCT GP UB 12.57

518 PCT UB 6.63

519 PCT UB 33.64

520 UB 47.10

521 PCT UB 74.68

522 UB 20.48

524 T HIM PCT GP UB 27.99

525 HWD 4.55

530 T HIM PCT UB 11.68

531 T HTH PCT GP UB 17.91

532 T HIM PCT GP UB 66.70

533 HWD 3.68

534 UB 25.24

535 T HTH UB 81.32

537 PCT UB 22.03

538 UB 65.36

542 T HIM PCT UB 70.70

544 PCT UB 6.25

546 T HIM PCT GP UB 30.88

550 T HIM PCT GP UB 50.78

551 PCT UB 48.01

552 HWD 13.45

555 PCT UB 26.54

559 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 102.77

560 T HIM PCT GP UB 63.90

562 UB 136.85

563 T HTH PCT GP UB 55.47

564 T HTH YTA PCT UB 7.36

565 T HTH PCT UB 48.31

566 PCT UB 17.93

567 PCT UB 79.54

568 PCT UB 20.61

569 T HTH PCT UB 4.00

570 T HTH PCT GP UB 25.61
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 293 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

571 PCT UB 20.09

572 T HIM PCT GP UB 60.33

577 HWD 1.37

700 T HTH PCT UB 61.44

701 H HTH PCT UB 49.48

703 H HTH PCT UB 57.68

704 T HTH PCT UB 109.93

705 T HIM PCT UB 39.57

707 T HTH PCT UB 62.35

708 PCT UB 106.55

711 T HTH PCT UB 29.54

718 T HIM PCT GP UB 17.46

719 PCT UB 17.57

722 PCT HP UB 121.37

723 PCT UB 47.61

727 UB 38.52

729 T HTH PCT UB 92.24

734 T HTH PCT HP UB 54.70

737 HWD 10.98

738 T HIM PCT GP UB 56.34

739 PCT UB 17.33

740 T HTH PCT GP UB 150.20

741 UB 53.53

742 T HIM PCT GP UB 49.57

743 PCT HP UB 39.72

744 PCT HP UB 39.73

745 HWD 2.89

747 UB 47.89

748 T HIM PCT GP UB 36.09

751 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 109.86

752 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 30.44

772 PCT UB 44.88

776 T HIM PCT GP UB 52.84

800 PCT 32.14

801 PCT 50.31

803 UB 333.68

804 UB 65.08

805 UB 107.84

806 T HTH PCT GP UB 29.00

807 UB 111.64

808 H HTH PCT UB 13.69

809 H HTH PCT UB 31.54
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 294 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

810 UB T HTH PCT UB 13.86

811 T HTH PCT GP UB 63.49

812 UB 57.88

813 PCT UB 80.66

814 H HTH PCT UB 14.27

815 T HTH UB 42.89

816 H HTH PCT UB 6.56

817 H HTH PCT UB 5.04

818 PCT UB 133.89

819 PCT UB 25.05

820 UB 25.60

821 T HTH PCT UB 61.18

823 UB 12.94

824 H HIM PCT GP UB 11.30

825 T HTH PCT GP UB 26.67

828 PCT UB 47.24

829 PCT UB 31.33

830 PCT UB 102.58

831 T HTH PCT UB 26.52

832 UB 54.91

833 UB 13.53

834 H HTH PCT UB 20.73

835 PCT UB 75.90

836 T HTH PCT GP UB 38.83

837 PCT UB 72.15

838 UB 52.20

840 PCT UB 74.45

841 H HTH PCT UB 19.06

842 UB 53.14

843 UB 22.87

844 PCT UB 436.98

845 S HTH YTA PCT UB 22.01

846 T HTH PCT GP UB 24.65

847 S HTH YTA PCT UB 13.36

848 T HTH PCT GP UB 16.40

850 PCT UB 128.43

851 H/T HIM PCT GP UB 70.73

852 PCT 22.58

853 PCT 8.70

854 UB 22.09

855 PCT 13.89

857 PCT UB 76.44
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 295 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

858 T HTH PCT GP UB 88.93

859 T HTH PCT GP UB 77.06

860 UB 106.80

861 UB 459.12

862 UB 27.23

863 T HTH UB 96.47

865 T HTH PCT UB 26.18

866 UB 53.21

867 UB 37.35

869 T HTH PCT UB 25.20

870 PCT 36.22

871 UB 27.80

872 PCT 12.38

873 PCT HP UB 48.25

874 PCT HP UB 152.54

875 PCT HP 39.72

876 UB 62.72

878 T HIM PCT GP UB 20.66

879 T HTH PCT UB 88.61

880 UB 30.63

882 PCT HP 44.70

883 PCT HP 23.09

884 UB 14.29

885 PCT UB 10.07

886 UB 29.34

887 T HIM PCT GP UB 19.39

888 T HIM PCT GP UB 63.52

891 T HIM PCT GP UB 23.22

892 T HIM PCT GP UB 4.60

893 PCT UB 26.36

894 UB 6.71

895 UB 30.53

896 PCT UB 26.61

898 UB 136.38

899 PCT 22.46

900 UB 36.03

901 JP UB 87.87

902 UB 37.70

903 UB 39.14

904 HWD 1.91

905 HWD 7.41

908 HWD 0.79
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 296 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

909 HWD 12.57

910 HWD 3.51

911 HWD 0.87

912 HWD 1.26

913 HWD 0.72

914 HWD 9.63

915 HWD 4.73

916 HWD 0.76

917 UB 8.48

918 UB 4.55

919 PCT UB 19.11

920 UB 62.52

921 UB 97.95

922 UB 199.63

923 UB 32.41

924 UB 78.93

925 UB 34.44

926 UB 14.31

928 UB 159.03

929 UB 6.26

930 UB 16.25

931 UB 9.63

934 UB 819.72

935 PCT 34.84

936 PCT 66.21

937 PCT 35.93

938 PCT 36.28

939 PCT 40.76

940 PCT 11.76

941 PCT 35.88

942 PCT 26.81

943 PCT 29.67

944 PCT 37.73

945 PCT 14.43

946 PCT 30.09

947 PCT 31.85

949 PCT 7.35

950 PCT 20.81

951 PCT 25.43

952 PCT 13.00

953 PCT 19.57

954 PCT 8.83
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 297 

Alternative 2 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

955 PCT 80.28

956 PCT 30.72

957 PCT 28.68

958 PCT 14.53

959 PCT 155.87

960 PCT 27.18

961 UB 39.60

964 PCT UB 20.95

967 UB 0.78

968 PCT UB 4.91

969 PCT UB 25.35

970 H HIM PCT UB 23.00

971 T HIM PCT UB 22.29

972 PCT UB 31.46

973 UB 4.47

974 UB 39.77

975 UB 6.82

976 PCT UB 16.49

977 PCT UB 48.48

980 UB 29.19

981 PCT HP UB 44.05

982 PCT HP 41.18

983 PCT HP 69.16

984 UB 18.91

985 T HIM PCT GP UB 6.98

Alternative 3

Unit Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities

Acres

100 PCT UB 120.32

101 PCT UB 40.36

104 PCT UB 36.80

105 JP PCT UB 20.84

107 JP PCT UB 65.16

108 PCT UB 238.81

109 UB PCT UB 136.72

110 UB PCT UB 26.92

111 JP PCT UB 48.33

112 PCT UB 53.23

113 PCT UB 57.04

114 PCT UB 17.00
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 298 

Alternative 3

Unit Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities

Acres

115 PCT UB 47.64

117 JP PCT UB 16.34

118 PCT UB 36.57

119 PCT UB 24.95

120 JP PCT UB 157.30

124 UB PCT UB 90.92

125 JP PCT UB 56.21

126 PCT UB 30.59

127 PCT UB 45.73

129 JP PCT UB 31.54

133 UB 37.71

134 PCT UB 33.04

135 PCT UB 31.14

136 UB 32.10

137 UB 220.48

138 JP PCT UB 19.87

139 JP PCT UB 146.72

141 PCT UB 36.89

142 PCT UB 16.97

143 PCT UB 79.62

144 PCT UB 88.15

145 HWD 2.18

148 PCT UB 82.80

151 UB 27.69

155 PCT UB 20.24

166 PCT UB 21.06

171 PCT UB 16.58

172 PCT HP 49.49

173 PCT UB 20.11

174 PCT UB 32.77

175 UB 54.37

181 JP PCT UB 28.90

184 PCT UB 64.77

185 PCT UB 8.27

186 PCT UB 34.75

187 UB 9.73

188 PCT UB 37.68

189 UB 71.61

190 PCT UB 57.71

191 PCT UB 10.49

192 PCT UB 69.17

193 PCT UB 59.68
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 299 

Alternative 3

Unit Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities

Acres

196 PCT UB 79.17

198 PCT UB 34.19

202 PCT UB 201.10

203 PCT UB 116.88

206 UB PCT UB 29.68

207 PCT UB 80.60

208 UB 106.99

209 PCT UB 41.73

210 JP 29.41

211 UB 77.85

212 UB 38.04

214 PCT UB 49.63

300 UB PCT UB 48.79

301 UB 30.21

302 PCT UB 27.97

303 PCT UB 61.18

304 PCT UB 43.23

306 UB 8.05

310 UB 49.58

311 JP PCT UB 84.00

312 UB 62.88

313 UB 44.56

314 UB 126.22

315 PCT UB 53.99

316 PCT UB 42.72

400 JP PCT UB 9.62

401 HWD 12.33

402 HWD 13.71

403 HWD 15.36

404 HWD 4.88

405 HWD 9.45

406 HWD 0.93

407 HWD 7.91

408 HWD 13.63

409 HWD 7.97

410 HWD 2.70

411 HWD 2.60

501 JP UB 62.18

502 HWD 17.90

503 JP UB 26.42

505 PCT HP UB 18.64

506 PCT UB 17.52
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 300 

Alternative 3

Unit Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities

Acres

507 HWD 3.84

508 PCT UB 34.21

509 JP PCT UB 25.66

510 PCT UB 241.74

511 UB 103.81

512 UB 30.23

513 UB 27.09

514 PCT UB 33.92

515 PCT HP 18.07

517 PCT UB 12.57

518 PCT UB 6.63

519 PCT UB 33.64

520 UB 47.10

521 PCT UB 74.68

522 UB 20.48

525 HWD 4.55

530 PCT UB 11.68

531 PCT UB 17.91

532 JP PCT UB 66.70

533 HWD 3.68

534 UB 25.24

535 UB 81.32

537 PCT UB 22.03

538 UB 65.36

542 PCT UB 70.70

544 PCT UB 6.25

546 PCT HP 30.88

550 UB 50.78

551 PCT UB 48.01

552 HWD 13.45

555 PCT UB 26.54

559 PCT UB 102.77

562 UB 126.45

565 PCT UB 48.31

566 PCT UB 17.93

567 PCT UB 79.54

568 PCT UB 20.61

569 PCT UB 4.00

570 PCT UB 25.61

571 PCT UB 20.09

572 PCT UB 60.33

577 HWD 1.37
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 301 

Alternative 3

Unit Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities

Acres

700 PCT UB 61.44

701 PCT UB 49.48

703 UB PCT UB 57.68

704 UB PCT UB 109.93

708 PCT UB 106.55

719 PCT UB 17.57

722 PCT HP UB 121.37

723 PCT UB 47.61

727 UB 38.52

734 PCT HP UB 54.70

737 HWD 10.98

738 JP PCT UB 56.34

739 PCT UB 17.33

740 JP PCT UB 150.20

741 UB 53.53

742 JP PCT UB 49.57

743 PCT HP UB 39.72

744 PCT HP UB 39.73

745 HWD 2.89

747 UB 47.89

748 JP PCT UB 36.09

751 JP PCT UB 109.86

752 JP PCT UB 30.44

772 PCT UB 44.88

776 JP PCT UB 52.84

800 PCT 32.14

801 PCT 50.31

803 UB 333.68

804 UB 65.08

805 UB 107.84

806 JP PCT UB 29.00

807 UB 111.64

808 PCT UB 13.69

809 PCT UB 31.54

810 UB PCT UB 13.86

811 PCT UB 63.49

812 UB 57.88

813 PCT UB 80.66

814 UB PCT UB 14.27

815 UB PCT UB 42.89

816 UB PCT UB 6.56

817 UB PCT UB 5.04
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 302 

Alternative 3

Unit Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities

Acres

818 UB PCT UB 133.89

819 UB PCT UB 25.05

820 UB 25.60

821 PCT UB 61.18

823 UB 12.45

824 PCT HP JP 21.15

825 JP PCT UB 26.67

828 PCT UB 47.24

829 PCT UB 31.33

830 PCT UB 102.58

831 PCT UB 26.52

832 UB 54.91

833 UB 13.53

834 PCT UB 20.73

835 PCT UB 75.90

836 JP PCT UB 38.83

837 PCT UB 72.15

838 UB 52.20

840 PCT UB 74.45

841 PCT UB 19.06

842 UB 53.14

843 UB 22.87

844 PCT UB 423.00

845 UB PCT UB 82.94

850 PCT UB 135.39

851 JP PCT UB 70.73

852 PCT 22.58

853 PCT 8.70

854 UB 22.09

855 PCT 13.89

859 PCT UB 77.06

860 UB 55.83

861 UB 459.12

862 UB 27.23

863 UB 96.47

865 UB 22.10

866 UB 76.20

867 UB 37.35

870 PCT 36.22

871 UB 27.80

872 PCT 12.38

873 PCT HP UB 48.25
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 303 

Alternative 3

Unit Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities

Acres

874 PCT HP UB 152.54

875 PCT HP 39.72

879 PCT UB 88.61

880 UB 30.63

882 PCT HP 44.70

883 PCT HP 23.09

884 UB 14.29

885 PCT UB 10.07

886 UB 29.34

887 JP PCT UB 19.39

888 JP PCT UB 63.52

891 PCT UB 23.22

893 PCT UB 26.36

894 UB 6.71

895 UB 30.53

896 PCT UB 26.61

898 UB 136.38

899 PCT 22.46

900 UB 36.03

901 JP UB 87.87

902 UB 38.79

903 UB 39.14

904 HWD 1.91

905 HWD 7.41

908 HWD 0.79

909 HWD 12.57

910 HWD 3.51

911 HWD 0.87

912 HWD 1.26

913 HWD 0.72

914 HWD 9.63

915 HWD 4.73

916 HWD 0.76

917 UB 8.48

918 UB 4.55

920 UB 62.52

921 UB 97.95

922 UB 199.63

923 UB 32.41

924 UB 78.93

926 UB 14.31

928 UB 159.30
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 304 

Alternative 3

Unit Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities

Acres

929 UB 6.26

930 UB 16.25

931 UB 9.63

934 UB 819.72

935 PCT 34.84

936 PCT 66.21

937 PCT 35.93

938 PCT 36.28

939 PCT 40.76

940 PCT 11.76

941 PCT 35.88

942 PCT 26.81

943 PCT 29.57

944 PCT 37.73

945 PCT 14.43

946 PCT 30.09

947 PCT 31.85

949 PCT 7.35

950 PCT 20.81

951 PCT 25.43

952 PCT 13.00

953 PCT 19.57

954 PCT 8.83

955 PCT 80.28

956 PCT 30.72

957 PCT 28.68

958 PCT 14.53

959 PCT 155.87

960 PCT 27.18

961 UB 39.60

964 PCT UB 20.95

967 UB 0.78

968 PCT UB 4.91

969 PCT UB 25.35

972 PCT UB 31.46

973 UB 4.47

977 PCT UB 48.48

980 UB 29.19

981 PCT HP UB 44.05

982 PCT HP 41.18

983 PCT HP 69.16
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 305 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

100 PCT UB 120.32

101 H HTH PCT UB 40.36

104 T HTH PCT UB 41.13

105 H HTH PCT GP UB 19.20

107 T HTH PCT GP UB 65.16

108 T HTH PCT UB 182.30

109 UB PCT UB 140.59

110 UB T HTH PCT UB 23.05

111 T HTH PCT GP UB 44.99

112 T HTH PCT UB 53.23

113 PCT UB 57.04

114 H HTH YTA PCT UB 44.37

115 PCT UB 47.64

117 H HTH UB PCT UB 16.34

118 T HTH PCT UB 36.57

119 PCT UB 24.95

120 T HTH PCT GP UB 152.09

124 UB PCT UB 99.62

125 T HTH PCT GP UB 50.98

126 T HTH PCT UB 30.59

127 T HTH PCT UB 36.63

129 T HTH PCT GP UB 31.54

133 UB 37.71

134 PCT UB 33.04

135 PCT UB 31.14

136 UB 32.10

137 UB 220.48

138 T HTH PCT GP UB 16.84

139 H/T HTH PCT GP UB 23.78

141 PCT UB 36.89

142 PCT UB 16.97

143 H HTH PCT UB 73.65

144 PCT UB 88.15

145 HWD 2.18

148 T HTH PCT UB 98.72

150 UB PCT UB 32.08

151 UB 29.50

155 H HIM YTA PCT UB 20.24

160 T HTH PCT GP UB 68.05

162 T HTH PCT UB 27.14
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 306 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

163 T HTH PCT GP UB 141.03

166 T HTH PCT GP UB 36.49

171 PCT UB 16.58

172 T HIM PCT GP UB 39.24

173 PCT GP UB 20.11

174 T HIM YTA PCT UB 32.77

175 UB 54.37

176 T HIM PCT GP UB 19.42

177 H HTH PCT UB 39.29

179 H HTH PCT UB 22.20

181 T HIM PCT GP UB 26.67

184 H HIM YTA PCT UB 73.04

186 T HIM PCT GP UB 34.75

187 UB 9.73

188 H HIM YTA PCT UB 37.68

189 H HIM UB 71.61

190 PCT UB 57.71

191 T HIM PCT GP UB 10.49

192 PCT UB 69.17

193 T HIM PCT GP UB 59.68

196 PCT UB 59.49

198 T HIM PCT GP UB 34.19

199 T HIM YTA PCT UB 76.75

200 T HIM YTA PCT UB 20.79

201 T HIM YTA PCT UB 20.05

202 PCT UB 201.10

203 PCT UB 116.88

206 UB PCT UB 29.68

207 PCT UB 74.37

208 UB 106.99

209 PCT UB 137.29

210 UB T HTH PCT GP UB 30.02

211 PCT UB 96.65

212 PCT UB 38.04

214 PCT UB 49.63

300 T HIM PCT GP UB 48.79

301 T HIM GP UB 30.21

302 T HTH PCT UB 26.31

303 T HTH PCT UB 50.75

304 T HTH PCT UB 43.23

306 T HTH PCT GP UB 19.60

311 T HIM PCT GP UB 47.12
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 307 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

312 UB 62.88

313 UB 44.56

314 UB 126.22

315 PCT UB 53.99

316 PCT UB 42.72

317 T HIM PCT GP UB 44.34

400 H HTH UB PCT UB 9.62

401 HWD 12.33

402 HWD 13.71

403 HWD 15.36

404 HWD 4.88

405 HWD 9.45

406 HWD 0.93

407 HWD 7.91

408 HWD 13.63

409 HWD 7.97

410 HWD 2.70

411 HWD 2.60

501 JP UB 57.53

502 HWD 17.90

503 JP UB 26.42

505 PCT HP UB 18.64

506 PCT UB 17.52

507 HWD 3.84

508 PCT UB 40.04

509 T HIM PCT GP UB 25.66

510 PCT UB 241.74

511 UB 103.81

512 UB 30.23

513 UB 27.09

514 PCT UB 33.92

515 T HIM PCT GP UB 18.07

517 T HIM PCT GP UB 12.57

518 PCT UB 6.63

519 PCT UB 33.64

520 UB 47.10

521 PCT UB 74.68

522 UB 20.48

525 HWD 4.55

530 T HIM PCT UB 11.68

531 T HTH PCT GP UB 17.91

532 T HIM PCT GP UB 48.85
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 308 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

533 HWD 3.68

534 UB 25.24

535 T HTH UB 81.32

537 PCT UB 22.03

538 UB 65.36

542 PCT UB 32.48

544 PCT UB 6.25

546 T HIM PCT GP UB 30.88

550 T HIM PCT GP UB 50.78

551 PCT UB 48.01

552 HWD 13.45

555 PCT UB 26.54

559 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 89.26

560 T HIM PCT GP UB 63.90

562 UB 136.85

563 T HTH PCT GP UB 55.47

564 T HTH YTA PCT UB 7.36

565 T HTH PCT UB 48.31

566 PCT UB 17.93

567 PCT UB 79.54

568 PCT UB 20.61

569 T HTH PCT UB 4.00

570 T HTH PCT GP UB 25.61

571 PCT UB 20.09

572 T HIM PCT GP UB 60.33

577 HWD 1.37

700 T HTH PCT UB 61.44

701 H HTH PCT UB 49.48

703 H HTH PCT UB 57.68

704 T HTH PCT UB 104.81

705 T HIM PCT UB 31.60

707 T HTH PCT UB 33.66

708 PCT UB 106.55

711 T HTH PCT UB 29.54

718 T HIM PCT GP UB 17.46

719 PCT UB 17.57

722 PCT HP UB 121.37

723 PCT UB 47.61

727 UB 38.52

729 T HTH PCT UB 92.24

734 T HTH PCT HP UB 54.70

737 HWD 10.98
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 309 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

738 T HIM PCT GP UB 56.34

739 PCT UB 17.33

740 T HTH PCT GP UB 150.20

741 UB 53.53

742 T HIM PCT GP UB 49.57

743 PCT HP UB 39.72

744 PCT HP UB 39.73

745 HWD 2.89

747 UB 47.89

748 T HIM PCT GP UB 36.09

751 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 109.86

752 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 30.44

772 PCT UB 44.88

776 T HIM PCT GP UB 52.84

800 PCT 32.14

801 PCT 50.31

803 UB 333.68

804 UB 65.08

805 UB 107.84

806 H HTH JP PCT UB 29.00

807 UB 111.64

808 H HTH PCT UB 13.69

809 H HTH PCT UB 34.89

810 UB T HTH PCT UB 13.86

811 T HTH PCT GP UB 63.49

812 UB 57.88

813 PCT UB 80.66

814 PCT UB 14.27

815 PCT UB 42.89

816 H HTH PCT UB 6.56

817 H HTH PCT UB 5.04

818 PCT UB 133.89

819 PCT UB 25.05

820 UB 25.60

821 T HTH PCT UB 41.06

823 UB 12.94

824 T HIM PCT GP UB 21.15

825 PCT UB 26.67

828 PCT UB 47.24

829 PCT UB 31.33

830 PCT UB 102.58

831 PCT UB 26.52
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 310 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

832 UB 54.91

833 UB 13.53

834 H HTH PCT UB 20.73

835 PCT UB 80.80

836 T HTH PCT GP UB 26.54

837 PCT UB 79.55

838 UB 52.20

840 PCT UB 74.45

841 H HTH PCT UB 19.06

842 UB 53.14

843 UB 22.87

844 PCT UB 436.98

845 H HTH YTA JP PCT UB 22.01

846 JP PCT UB 24.65

847 H HTH YTA JP PCT UB 13.36

848 T HTH PCT GP UB 16.40

850 PCT UB 128.43

851 H/T HIM YTA UB PCT UB 70.73

852 PCT 22.58

853 PCT 8.70

854 UB 22.09

855 PCT 13.89

857 PCT UB 76.44

858 T HTH PCT GP UB 43.26

859 T HTH PCT GP UB 77.06

860 UB 106.80

861 UB 459.12

862 UB 36.53

863 T HTH UB 87.17

865 T HTH PCT UB 11.37

866 UB 67.76

866 UB 19.16

867 UB 37.35

869 T HTH PCT UB 30.41

870 PCT 36.22

871 UB 27.80

872 PCT 12.38

873 PCT HP UB 48.25

874 PCT HP UB 152.54

875 PCT HP 39.72

876 UB 62.72

878 T HIM PCT GP UB 20.66
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 311 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

879 T HTH PCT UB 88.61

880 UB 30.63

882 PCT HP 44.70

883 PCT HP 23.09

884 UB 14.29

885 PCT UB 10.07

886 UB 29.34

887 T HIM PCT GP UB 13.55

888 T HIM PCT GP UB 63.52

891 T HIM PCT GP UB 23.22

892 T HIM PCT GP UB 4.60

893 PCT UB 26.36

894 UB 6.71

895 UB 30.53

896 PCT UB 64.83

898 UB 136.38

899 PCT 22.46

900 UB 36.03

901 JP UB 92.51

902 UB 37.70

903 UB 39.14

904 HWD 1.91

905 HWD 7.41

908 HWD 0.79

909 HWD 12.57

910 HWD 3.51

911 HWD 0.87

912 HWD 1.26

913 HWD 0.72

914 HWD 9.63

915 HWD 4.73

916 HWD 0.76

917 UB 8.48

918 UB 4.55

919 PCT UB 19.11

920 UB 62.52

921 UB 97.95

922 UB 199.63

923 UB 32.41

924 UB 88.71

925 UB 34.44

926 UB 14.31
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 312 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

928 UB 159.03

929 UB 6.26

930 UB 34.10

931 UB 9.63

934 UB 819.72

935 PCT 34.84

936 PCT 66.21

937 PCT 35.93

938 PCT 36.28

939 PCT 40.76

940 PCT 11.76

941 PCT 35.88

942 PCT 26.81

943 PCT 29.67

944 PCT 37.73

945 PCT 14.43

946 PCT 30.09

947 PCT 31.85

949 PCT 7.35

950 PCT 20.81

951 PCT 25.43

952 PCT 13.00

953 PCT 19.57

954 PCT 8.83

955 PCT 80.28

956 PCT 30.72

957 PCT 28.68

958 PCT 14.53

959 PCT 155.87

960 PCT 27.18

961 UB 39.60

964 PCT UB 20.95

967 UB 0.78

968 PCT UB 4.91

969 PCT UB 16.99

970 H HIM PCT UB 19.33

971 T HIM PCT UB 22.29

972 PCT UB 31.46

973 UB 4.47

975 UB 6.82

976 PCT UB 45.18

977 PCT UB 48.48
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 313 

Alternative 4 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

980 UB 29.19

981 PCT HP UB 44.05

982 PCT HP 41.18

983 PCT HP 69.16

984 PCT HP 56.29

985 UB 77.20

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

100 PCT UB 120.32

101 H HTH PCT UB 40.36

104 T HTH PCT UB 41.13

105 H HTH YTA PCT JP UB 19.20

107 T HTH PCT GP UB 54.96

108 T HTH PCT UB 238.81

109 UB PCT UB 153.86

110 UB T HTH PCT UB 26.92

111 T HTH PCT GP UB 48.33

112 T HTH PCT UB 53.23

113 PCT UB 57.04

114 H HTH YTA PCT UB 44.37

115 PCT UB 47.64

117 UB PCT UB 16.34

118 T HTH PCT UB 36.57

119 PCT UB 24.95

120 T HTH PCT GP UB 157.30

124 UB PCT UB 90.92

125 T HTH PCT GP UB 56.21

126 PCT UB 30.59

127 T HTH PCT UB 45.73

129 JP PCT UB 31.54

134 PCT UB 33.04

135 PCT UB 31.14

136 UB 27.89

137 UB 44.05

138 T HTH PCT GP UB 19.87

139 H/T HTH PCT GP UB 23.78

141 PCT UB 36.89

142 PCT UB 16.97

143 PCT UB 79.62
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 314 

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

144 PCT UB 88.15

145 HWD 2.18

150 UB PCT UB 32.08

151 UB 11.43

155 H HIM YTA PCT UB 20.24

160 PCT HP 113.95

161 UB 14.56

162 PCT UB 27.14

163 T HTH PCT GP UB 83.07

166 T HTH PCT GP UB 30.91

172 T HIM PCT GP UB 49.49

173 PCT GP UB 20.11

174 T HIM YTA PCT UB 27.13

175 UB 54.37

176 T HIM PCT GP UB 19.42

177 H HTH PCT UB 39.29

179 H HTH PCT UB 22.20

181 PCT JP UB 28.90

184 H HIM YTA PCT UB 64.77

185 T HIM PCT GP UB 8.27

186 T HIM PCT GP UB 34.75

187 UB 9.73

188 H HIM YTA PCT UB 37.68

189 H HIM UB 71.61

190 PCT UB 57.71

191 T HIM PCT GP UB 10.49

192 PCT UB 36.65

193 T HIM PCT GP UB 35.86

196 PCT UB 59.49

198 T HIM PCT GP UB 34.19

199 T HIM YTA PCT UB 76.75

200 T HIM YTA PCT UB 20.79

201 T HIM YTA PCT UB 20.05

202 PCT UB 201.10

203 JP PCT UB 116.88

207 PCT JP UB 74.37

208 UB 106.99

209 PCT UB 137.29

210 UB T HTH PCT GP UB 29.41

211 PCT UB 172.23

212 PCT UB 38.04

214 PCT UB 49.63
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 315 

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

300 T HIM PCT GP UB 48.79

301 PCT JP 30.21

302 T HTH PCT UB 27.97

303 T HTH PCT UB 61.18

304 T HTH PCT UB 43.23

306 T HTH PCT GP UB 19.60

310 PCT JP UB 37.30

311 T HIM PCT GP UB 43.50

312 UB 62.88

313 UB 44.56

314 UB 126.22

315 PCT UB 53.99

316 PCT UB 42.72

317 T HIM PCT GP UB 44.59

400 H HTH YTA UB PCT UB 9.62

401 HWD 12.33

402 HWD 13.71

403 HWD 15.36

404 HWD 4.88

405 HWD 9.45

406 HWD 0.93

407 HWD 7.91

408 HWD 13.63

409 HWD 7.97

410 HWD 2.70

411 HWD 2.60

501 JP UB 62.18

502 HWD 17.90

503 JP UB 26.42

505 PCT HP UB 18.64

506 PCT UB 17.52

507 HWD 3.84

508 PCT UB 34.21

509 T HIM PCT GP UB 25.66

510 PCT UB 241.74

511 UB 103.81

512 UB 30.23

513 UB 27.09

514 PCT JP UB 33.92

515 T HIM PCT GP UB 18.07

517 T HIM PCT GP UB 12.57

518 PCT UB 6.63
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 316 

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

519 PCT UB 33.64

520 UB 47.10

521 PCT UB 74.68

522 UB 20.48

524 T HIM PCT GP UB 27.99

525 HWD 4.55

530 T HIM PCT UB 11.68

531 T HTH PCT GP UB 17.91

532 T HIM PCT GP UB 66.70

533 HWD 3.68

534 UB 25.24

535 UB 81.32

537 PCT UB 22.03

538 UB 65.36

542 PCT UB HP 70.70

544 PCT UB 6.25

550 PCT GP UB 50.78

551 PCT UB 48.01

552 HWD 13.45

555 PCT UB 26.54

559 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 89.26

560 PCT JP UB 60.26

562 UB 88.79

563 T HTH PCT GP UB 17.92

564 PCT JP 7.36

565 T HTH PCT UB 48.31

566 PCT UB 17.93

567 PCT UB 79.54

568 PCT UB 20.61

569 T HTH PCT UB 4.00

570 T HTH PCT GP UB 25.61

571 PCT UB 20.09

572 PCT JP 60.33

577 HWD 1.37

700 T HTH PCT UB 61.44

701 H HTH PCT UB 49.48

703 H HTH PCT UB 54.88

704 T HTH PCT UB 106.91

705 T HIM PCT UB 39.57

707 T HTH PCT UB 33.66

708 PCT UB 106.55

711 PCT UB 29.54
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 317 

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

718 PCT JP UB 17.46

722 PCT HP UB 121.37

723 PCT UB 47.61

727 UB 38.52

729 UB 75.00

734 PCT HP UB 54.70

737 HWD 10.98

738 T HIM PCT GP UB 13.54

739 PCT UB 17.33

740 T HTH PCT GP UB 150.20

741 UB 53.53

742 T HIM PCT GP UB 49.57

743 PCT HP UB 39.72

744 PCT HP UB 39.73

745 HWD 2.89

747 UB 47.89

748 T HIM PCT GP UB 36.09

751 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 109.86

752 T HIM PCT GP/HP UB 30.44

772 PCT UB 44.88

776 T HIM PCT GP UB 52.84

800 PCT 32.14

801 PCT 50.31

803 UB 221.03

804 UB 65.08

805 UB 107.84

806 JP PCT UB 29.00

807 UB 111.64

808 H HTH PCT UB 13.69

809 H HTH PCT UB 30.12

810 UB T HTH PCT UB 13.86

811 T HTH PCT GP UB 63.49

812 UB 57.88

813 PCT UB 80.66

818 PCT UB 202.66

819 PCT UB 25.05

820 UB 25.60

821 T HTH PCT UB 50.16

823 UB 79.27

824 T HIM PCT GP UB 21.15

825 PCT UB 26.67

828 PCT UB 47.24
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 318 

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

829 PCT UB 31.33

830 PCT UB 102.58

831 T HTH PCT UB 26.52

832 PCT JP 54.91

833 PCT JP 13.53

834 H HTH PCT UB 20.73

835 PCT UB 75.90

836 PCT JP UB 54.16

837 PCT UB 56.82

838 UB 52.20

840 PCT UB 19.82

841 H HTH PCT UB 19.06

842 UB 53.14

843 UB 22.87

844 PCT UB 436.98

845 H HTH YTA PCT UB 22.01

846 H HTH YTA PCT JP UB 24.65

847 H HTH YTA PCT UB 13.36

848 T HTH PCT GP UB 16.40

850 PCT UB 128.43

851 H/T HIM PCT GP UB 70.73

852 PCT 22.58

853 PCT 8.70

855 PCT 13.89

857 PCT UB 80.07

858 T HTH PCT GP UB 62.13

859 T HTH PCT GP UB 77.06

860 UB 100.28

861 UB 200.29

862 UB 27.23

863 T HTH UB 60.85

866 UB 19.04

866 UB 53.12

867 UB 37.35

869 PCT UB 40.20

870 PCT 36.22

871 UB 27.80

872 PCT 12.38

873 PCT HP UB 48.25

874 PCT HP UB 152.54

875 PCT HP 39.72

876 UB 62.72
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 319 

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

878 PCT UB 20.66

879 T HTH PCT UB 88.61

880 PCT HP 30.63

882 PCT HP 44.70

883 PCT HP 23.09

884 UB 14.29

885 PCT UB 10.07

886 UB 29.34

887 PCT GP UB 19.39

888 T HIM PCT GP UB 63.52

891 T HIM PCT GP UB 23.22

892 T HIM PCT GP UB 4.60

893 PCT UB 26.36

894 UB 6.71

895 UB 30.53

896 PCT UB 26.61

898 UB 136.38

899 PCT 22.46

900 UB 36.03

901 JP UB 87.87

902 UB 37.70

903 UB 39.14

904 HWD 1.91

905 HWD 7.41

908 HWD 0.79

909 HWD 12.57

910 HWD 3.51

911 HWD 0.87

912 HWD 1.26

913 HWD 0.72

914 HWD 9.63

915 HWD 4.73

916 HWD 0.76

917 UB 8.48

918 UB 4.55

919 PCT UB 19.11

920 UB 44.45

921 UB 97.95

922 UB 199.63

923 UB 32.41

924 UB 78.93

926 UB 14.31
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 320 

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

928 UB 29.02

929 UB 6.26

930 UB 16.25

931 UB 9.63

934 UB 784.45

935 PCT 34.84

936 PCT 66.21

937 PCT 35.93

938 PCT 36.28

939 PCT 40.76

940 PCT 11.76

941 PCT 35.88

943 PCT 29.67

944 PCT 37.73

945 PCT 14.43

946 PCT 30.09

947 PCT 31.85

949 PCT 7.35

950 PCT 20.81

951 PCT 25.43

952 PCT 13.00

953 PCT 19.57

954 PCT 8.83

955 PCT 80.28

956 PCT 30.72

957 PCT 28.68

958 PCT 14.53

959 PCT 155.87

960 PCT 27.18

961 PCT JP 39.60

964 PCT UB 20.95

967 UB 0.78

968 PCT UB 4.91

969 PCT UB 25.35

970 PCT UB 17.10

971 PCT UB 22.29

972 PCT UB 31.46

973 UB 4.47

975 UB 6.82

976 PCT UB 45.18

977 PCT UB 48.48

980 UB 29.19
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 321 

Alternative 5 

Unit Pre-harvest 

Burn 

Logging 

System 

Commercial 

Harvest 

Noncommercial or Fuel 

Reduction Activities 

Acres 

981 PCT HP UB 44.05

982 PCT HP 41.18

983 PCT HP 69.16

984 UB 163.60

985 PCT 49.99

986 T HIM PCT GP UB 16.49

987 PCT UB 20.15

988 T HTH PCT GP UB 17.40

989 T HIM PCT GP UB 26.31
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 322 

APPENDIX B 

Unit-by-Unit Soils Analysis 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

101 H H H 40 10-40 20-30 None 20-30 Helicopter system wil

detrimental conditionmitigation needed. M

104 T T T 36 10-20 10-20 Low 10-20 Previously thinned, n

existing disturbance. Meets standard. 

105 S - GP H - GP H - YTA 21 30 10-20 Low 10-20 New roads needed to 

benchy. Grapple pile 

existing disturbance. 

107 T - GP T - GP T - GP 65 30 10-20 Low 10-20 New road constructio

disturbance. Till 4-5 

108 T T T 239 10-30 30-40 None 30-40 New road constructio

disturbance. No new Potential for winter lo

110 T T T 27 0-25 20-30 None 20-30 Use existing disturban

bottom. Potential for 

standard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 323 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

111 T - GP T - GP T - GP 48 0-30+ 20-30 Low 20-30 Existing soil damage 

30% and is 10-20% oexisting disturbance. Minimize disturbance interface. Intermittenstandard. 

112 T T T 26 20 20-30 None 20-30 New road is okay. St

disturbance. Meets st

114 H - YTA H - YTA H - YTA 17 20-40 10-20 Low 10-20 Existing unclassified 

below 20%. Meets st

till in bottom. 

115 T NCH NCH 47 20 low end 

10-20 

None 10-20 New road constructio

with 70 to 100 foot spexisting disturbance. 20 percent. Meets sta

117 S H NCH 16 10-40 10-20 Low 10-20 New road constructio

standard. Meets stand

118 T T T 37 10-20 20-30 None 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance. Meets st

120 T - GP T - GP T - GP 157 10-20 low end 

10-20 

Low 10-20 New road constructio

Some ripping potentiadisturbance. Meets st

125 T - GP T - GP T - GP 56 10-30 20-30 Low 20-30 New road constructio

increase. Meets stand

126 T T NCH 31 20 20-30 Low 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance. No net i

127 T T T 46 10-20 0-10 Moderate 0-10 New road constructio

on 70-foot spacing. Tstandard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 324 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

129 T - GP T - GP NCH 32 20-40 20-30 None 20-30 Stay on existing distu

portions. Meets stand

138 T - GP T - GP T - GP 20 20-40 20-30 None 20-30 Re-use existing distur139 T - GP H/T - GP H/T - GP 147 10-40 10-20 Low/ 

Moderate 

10-20 New road constructio

variable throughout u

portion, till skid trails 

standard. 

141 H NCH NCH 37 20-50 10-20 None 10-20 S/SE aspect unit. Hel

standard. 

142 T - GP NCH NCH 17 25 10-20 None 10-20 Reuse existing disturb

trails. Scarify and plaMeets standard. 

143 H H NCH 80 0-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Till 1 acre. Reuse exi

increase. Meets stand

148 T T NCH 83 15-35 10-20 None 10-20 Stay below 20 percen

Designated skid trails spacing with line pullshallow tillage. PotenMeets standard. 

155 H - YTA H - YTA H - TYA 21 20-40 10-20 Low/ 

Moderate 

10-20 Meets standard with h

160 T - GP T - GP NCH 114 10-20 20-30 Moderate 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance. Till 2-4 

162 T T NCH 27 10-20 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Till 1-2 acres. Meets 163 T - GP T - GP T - GP 160 10-30 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

166 T - GP T - GP T - GP 37 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Existing disturbance i

increase. Till 3-6 acr
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 325 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

172 H T - GP T - GP 43 30-40 0-10 None 0-10 if H 

10-20 T 

No grapple piling ove

activities to stay below alternatives. Meets st

173 GP GP NCH 20 10-30 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

174 T- YTA T T - YTA 33 10-40 0-10 Low 0-10 Reuse existing disturb

trails. Meets standard

176 T - GP T - GP T - GP 19 20-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Stay on existing distu

acre. No net increase

177 H H H 39 20-40 10-20 Low 10-20 Meets standard with h179 H H H 22 30-50 0-10 None 0-10 Meets standard with h181 T - GP T - GP NCH 27 10-50 20-30 Low 20-30 Till 1-3 acres. Reuse 

not grapple pile or till slope). On steep sectharvest or pull line. Nstandard. 

184 H - YTA H - YTA H - YTA 65 20-50 10-20 Low 10-20 Rehabilitate new road 

increase over 20%. M

185 T - GP NCH T - GP 8 30-50 10-20 None 10-20 Scarify and plant tem

over 20%. Meets stan

186 T - GP T - GP T - GP 35 20-50 20-30 None 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

On steep sections oveor pull line. Meets sta

188 H - YTA H - YTA H - YTA 38 30-50 0-10 None 0-10 Meets standard with h189 H H H 72 30-50 0-10 None 0-10 Meets standard with h191 T - GP T - GP T - GP 11 10-50 0-10 None 5-15 On steep sections ove

or pull line. Do not g(>35% slope). Keep Meets standard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 326 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

193 T - GP T - GP T - GP 60 10-50 0-10 None 0-10 Contains portions of s

over 35%. On steep sno harvest or pull linesteep areas (>35% slo

below 20%. Meets st

198 T - GP T - GP T - GP 34 10-30 10-20 Low 10-20 Till 1-2 acres. Keep d

Meets standard. 

199 T - YTA T - YTA T - YTA 77 10-30 0-10 High 5-15 Design skid trail syste

Reuse existing disturb

200 T - YTA T - YTA T - YTA 21 10-30 0-10 High 5-15 Design skid trail syste

Reuse existing disturb

201 T - YTA T - YTA T - YTA 21 30-50 0-10 None 0-10 Steep tractor. Stay be

Avoid portions of uniequipment. Line pull Meets standard. 

202 T NCH NCH 201 0-30 10-20 None 10-20 New road constructio

hazard because of rocdisturbance. Designafrom skid trails. Mee

203 T NCH NCH 117 0-30 10-20 None 10-20 New road constructio

hazard because of rocdisturbance. Designafrom skid trails. Mee

207 T NCH NCH 79 25 20-30 Low 20-30 New road constructio

hazard because of rocdisturbance. Designaof 80 to 100 feet. LinMeets standard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 327 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

210 T - GP T - GP T - GP 29 25 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

tilling on 2 acres. Me

212 T NCH NCH 38 15-50 20-30 Low 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance. Designaincrease. Meets stand

300 T - GP T - GP T - GP 49 0-20 20-30 High 20-30 85% of unit is tillable

disturbance. Till 2-4 

standard. 

301 T - GP T - GP NCH 30 10-40 30-40 Low 30-40 Spot till 2-3 acres. Ex

distributed. Reuse exstandard. 

302 T T T 28 0-20 20-30 High 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

303 T T T 61 0-20 10-20 Low 10-20 Reuse existing disturb

2610-153 road on soulandings closest to cre

304 T T T 44 0-20 10-20 Moderate 10-20 Reuse existing disturb

logging possible. Scacreek. Meets standard

306 T - GP T - GP T - GP 20 30-40 0-10 Low 5-15 Stay on existing distu

disturbance below 20

310 T - GP NCH NCH 50 10 - 

35 

20 - 30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

311 T - GP T - GP T - GP 46 10-40 30-40 Moderate 30-40 Good distribution of e

increase this entry. Tswales. Meets standa

317 T - GP T - GP T - GP 38 10-35 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

north half. 150-foot bMeets standard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 328 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

400 S H H - YTA 10 10 -

40 

20-30 Low 20-30 Re-use existing distur

Meets standard. 

505 GP NO GP NO GP 19 2- 20 20-30 High 20-30 No commercial harve

disturbance. No net i

509 T - GP T - GP T - GP 26 10-55 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

net increase. Meets s

515 T - GP T - GP T - GP 18 15-25 40-50 Low/ 

Moderate 

30-40 Till 2-3 acres. No net 

standard. 

517 T - GP T - GP T - GP 13 10-30 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Potential for winter lo

524 T - GP NCH T - GP 28 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 New road constructio

tilled. Till 2-3 acres. standard. 

530 T T T 12 5-20 50-60 Low 50-60 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

531 T - GP T - GP T - GP 18 10-40 40-50 Moderate 30-40 Reuse existing disturb

to reduce existing dam

532 T - GP T - GP T - GP 66 15-35 30-40 Low/ 

Moderate 

30-40 Till 3-5 acres. No net 

standard. 

535 T T NCH 81 10-30 30-40 Low 30-40 New road constructio

disturbance. No net i

542 T NCH NCH 71 10-50 20-30 Low 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance. Meets st

546 T - GP T - GP NCH 31 10-40 10-20 Moderate 10-20 Reuse existing disturb

trails. No increase abstandard. 

550 T - GP T - GP NCH 51 10-35 20-30 High 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Till 2-3 acres. Meets 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 329 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

559 T - GP T - GP T - GP 103 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 New road constructio

mostly in the lower 1/acres to offset road costandard. 

560 T - GP T - GP NCH 64 20-50 20-30 Low 20-30 Damage ranges from 

to 30-40% on lower s

bottom of unit toward

acres. Meets standard

563 T - GP T - GP T - GP 56 10-40 0-10 Low 0-10 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

564 T - YTA T - YTA NCH 6 20-30 0-10 Low 0-10 Stay on existing distu

10% increase. Meets 

565 T T T 49 0-30 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Good tillage opportun

Till approximately 5 a

569 T T T 4 0-15 20-30 High 20-30 No net increase. Till 

Meets standard. 

570 T - GP T - GP T - GP 26 10-30 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

net increase. Meets s

572 T - GP T - GP NCH 60 10-50 10-20 Moderate 10-20 Reuse existing disturb

some areas of steep g

700 T T T 46 10-30 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Till 4-6 acres. Meets 

701 H H H 33 30-50 0-10 None 0-10 Helicopter system wil703 H H H 58 30-60 0-10 None 0-10 Helicopter system wil704 T T T 109 10-20 10-20 Low 10-20 New road constructio

on existing damage to disturbance. Till apprdesired for rehabilitatMeets standard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 330 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

705 T T T 40 10-20 0-10 Moderate 0-10 New road constructio

and designate new sk20% damage. Can tilrehabilitation, not ma

707 T T T 62 10-25 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Till 1-2 acres. Meets 

711 T T NCH 30 10-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing skid tr

skid trails. No net incMeets standard. 

718 T - GP T - GP NCH 17 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Eastern portion of uni

damage. Western porAverage is approx. 20disturbance. Till 1-3 net increase. Meets s

729 T T NCH 91 10-30 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

net increase. Meets s

734 T T NCH 55 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

lower slopes. No net 

738 T - GP T - GP T - GP 56 10-50 20-30 Moderate 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance, including 

No net increase. Mee

740 T - GP T - GP T - GP 150 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

lower slopes. No net 

742 T - GP T - GP T - GP 50 0-30 20-30 High 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

net increase. Meets s

748 T - GP T - GP T - GP 36 10-30 10-20 Moderate 10-20 New road constructio

existing skid trails, canew skid trails to stay Meets standard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 331 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

751 T - GP T - GP T - GP 20 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

net increase. Meets s

752 T - GP T - GP T - GP 30 5 - 20 20-30 Moderate 20-30 New road constructio

trails. Designated new acres. No net increas

776 T - GP T - GP T - GP 53 20-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Stay on existing skid 

increase. Meets stand

806 T - GP H NCH 29 10-35 20-30 None 20-30 New road constructio

trails or pull line. No standard. 

808 H H H 14 10-50 10- 20 None 10-20 Helicopter system wil809 H H H 32 20-50 10-20 None 10-20 Helicopter system wil810 T T T 14 10-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Stay on existing skid 

increase. Meets stand

811 T - GP T - GP T - GP 63 10-30 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Stay on existing trails

standard. 

814 H NCH NCH 14 20-60 10-20 None 10-20 Helicopter system wil815 T NCH NCH 43 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Stay on existing trails

standard. 

816 H H NCH 7 40-60 0-10 None 0-10 Helicopter system wil817 H H NCH 5 20-50 0-10 None 0-10 Helicopter system wil821 T T T 61 10-35 10-20 Low 10-20 New road constructio

disturbance.. Till 2-3 over 20%. Meets stan

824 T - GP T - GP T - GP 12 10-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

needed. No net increline. Meets standard. 

825 T - GP NCH NCH 27 15-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 332 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

831 T NCH T 27 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

834 H H H 21 20-50 10-20 None 10-20 Helicopter system wil836 T - GP T - GP NCH 39 20-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

841 H H H 19 10-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Helicopter system wil845 S - YTA H - YTA H - YTA 22 20-45 10-20 Low 10-20 New road constructio

systems will meet stan

846 T - GP NCH H - YTA 25 15-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance. Till 1-2 

847 S - YTA H - YTA H - YTA 13 20-50 10-20 None 10-20 New road constructio

systems will meet stan

848 T - GP T - GP T - GP 16 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

851 H/T - GP H/T - GP H/T - GP 71 20-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

858 T - GP T - GP T - GP 89 10-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

ridge have more skid 4 acres. Meets standa

859 T - GP T - GP T - GP 77 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

863 T T T 96 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

865 T T NCH 26 5-20 30-40 High 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance. Till 3-5 Meets standard. 

869 T T NCH 26 10-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 333 

Unit Alt. 2 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 4 

Logging 

System 

Alt. 5 

Logging 

System 

Acres % 

Slope

% 

Existing 

Soil 

Damage 

Tillage 

Potential

% Post 

Activity 

Soil 

Damage 

Unit-spe

878 T - GP T - GP NCH 21 5-20 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

879 T T T 88 10-20 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

standard. 

887 T - GP T - GP NCH 14 10-35 20-30 Low 20-30 New road constructio

disturbance. Pull line

888 T - GP T - GP T - GP 64 10-40 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

891 T - GP T - GP T - GP 23 5-20 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

892 T - GP T - GP T - GP 5 20-40 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

970 H H NCH 19 20-50 0-10 None 0-10 Helicopter system wil971 T T NCH 22 5-20 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

Meets standard. 

986 NCH NCH T - GP 17 5-30 20-30 Moderate 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

net increase. Meets s

988 NCH NCH T - GP 18 15-40 10-20 Moderate 10-20 Reuse existing disturb

net increase over 20%

989 NCH NCH T - GP 26 10-30 20-30 Low 20-30 Reuse existing disturb

necessary. No net inc

T = tractor (ground-based) H = helicopter S = skyline H/T = tractor prebunch with helicopter yarding GP = grapple piling YTA = yard tops attached 

NCH - no commercial harvest
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 334 

APPENDIX C 

Response to Comments 

Introduction 

The Notice of Availability for the Draft EIS for the Spears Vegetation Management Project was 

published in the Federal Register on May 11, 2007 (Vol. 72, No. 91). A legal notice inviting 

comments on the Draft EIS was published in The Bulletin newspaper, Bend, Oregon, on May 18, 

2007. The 45-day comment period closed on June 25, 2007. Seven comment letters were 

received during the comment period, including one letter from a governmental agency. One 

letter from a governmental agency was postmarked after the close of the comment period. The 

two letters from governmental agencies have been included in Appendix D. 

This appendix restates a variety of the comments and provides a response. Every comment was 

read and considered, even though not every comment is restated here. All substantive comments 

received on the Draft EIS have been included in this appendix. 

The comments and responses have been grouped by subject. The order of the subjects follows 

the order topics are presented in the Final EIS. 

Chapter 1. Purpose of and Need for Action 

Purpose and Need for Action 

Comment: The FEIS should also include clearly articulated management objectives to ensure 

treatment activities contribute toward the restoration objectives. (DOI) 

Response: The purpose and need discussion in Chapter 1 of the Final EIS states the objectives 

for this project. The environmental consequences related to Late and Old Structure (LOS), earlyseral species composition, infestations by insects and disease, fuels, hardwood plant 

communities, and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) discuss how well each of the 

alternatives meet the objectives. 

Comment: There is no discussion in the Draft EIS about how the direction related to the 

Healthy Forests Initiative (HFI) and Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) was implemented. 

It seems this project should be able to take advantage of the authorities under HFI and HFRA. 

(AFRC) 

Response: The Draft EIS (p. 5) briefly discusses the HFI and HFRA as background related to 

why the purpose and need statements specific to fuels were developed. However, the authorities 

under the HFI and HFRA were not used for this project because the Forest Service decided to 

consider fuel reduction treatments across the Marks Creek Watershed not just within the portions 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 335 

of the project area identified as Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). At the time the proposed 

action was developed, the Wheeler County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) had 

not been completed. The Forest Service decided to propose treatments that would reduce the 

likelihood of fire transitioning into or out of the Ochoco Divide Research Natural Area (RNA) in 

the northeast corner of the project area; Wheeler County has since identified this area as WUI. 

The Forest Service decided to propose treatments in areas near the Mill Creek Wilderness and 

the Jim Elliott Old Growth Management Area to protect natural resources in those areas. 

Treatments were proposed along the 3350 road so that it would be available as an access route 

should a wildfire occur. Treatments were also proposed along the southern boundary of the 

project area adjacent to private ranch land that was not identified as WUI. Fuel reduction 

treatments in these areas are important and would not have been included if the HFI/HFRA 

authorities had been used. 

Comment: There is no direct linkage of any action alternative to the CWPPs. Why would a 

county go to the trouble of developing a CWPP only to have the work ignored when the Forest 

Service proposes activities in the WUI? (AFRC) 

Response: The Forest Service did not ignore the work the Counties put into developing their 

CWPPs. The Crook and Wheeler Counties CWPPs identified areas of priorities or levels of 

hazard. Neither CWPP identified specific treatment areas or projects within the Spears project 

area. However, the Crook County CWPP did identify some areas with a high rating for fuels 

hazard reduction. One of the reasons the Forest Service chose to propose activities in this project 

area was based on the Crook County’s hazard rating priorities. The Crook County CWPP also 

identified critical infrastructure in the Spears project area which includes transportation routes, 

power lines, communication facilities, and recreational facilities. As noted in the Draft EIS (p. 

5), information from the CWPP was considered during the design and selection of the treatment 

units. 

Comment: Do not let logging economics determine restoration priorities. The NEPA analysis 

must honestly disclose what “needs” treatment vs. what is actually being proposed so the public 

can see what is being sacrificed. (OW, SC) 

Response: Logging economics was not used to identify areas where work is needed. The 

Proposed Action includes a landscape look at the entire project area and identifies areas where 

treatments are needed based on the purpose and need for action. 

Comment: Alternatives within the Draft EIS must be revised to meet NEPA requirements for 

high quality science, expert advice, and site-specific accuracy. The Purpose and Need premises 

need to be revised and/or redefined to meet NEPA’s requirements that analysis and alternatives 

embody credible scientific research capable of successfully guiding the project towards effective 

restoration needed in the project area. (SC) 

Response: The Forest Service has the discretion to determine the underlying purpose and need 

for project proposals. For the Spears project, the Forest Service developed the Purpose and Need 

for action based on site-specific knowledge of existing conditions in the project area and relevant 

scientific information. As noted in the Draft and Final EISs, this included the 1998 Marks Creek 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 336 

Watershed Analysis, the May 2002 addendum to the watershed analysis, and the December 2002 

Bandit II environmental assessment. NEPA is essentially a procedural statute to ensure that 

environmental information is available to decision-makers and the public before actions are 

taken. NEPA does not require any specific outcome as suggested. 

Comment: Descriptions within the Draft EIS fail to incorporate or disclose pertinent scientific 

research and accurate site-specific conditions for the area’s PAGs, mixed fire severity forests, 

dependent wildlife, aquatic systems, rare biodiverse native species, restoration needs and 

possibilities, or addressing cumulative impacts across area forests. Merely listing scientific 

research without utilizing it or ground truthing site-specific conditions as required by the NEPA, 

violates environmental policy laws. (SC) 

Response: Pertinent scientific research and site-specific conditions are the basis for the 

environmental consequences discussion contained in Chapter 3. Scientific research that was 

used during the development of the EIS can be found in the References section between Chapter 

4 and the Appendices. The affected environment sections in Chapter 3 disclose the site-specific 

conditions of the project area; much of this information was derived from field work and surveys 

throughout the project area. Between Draft and Final EISs, scientific literature cited by the 

commenters was reviewed for applicability to this project. Many citations were not applicable to 

this project primarily because the studies occurred in habitats or areas that are vastly different 

from conditions in the project area. For example, studies conducted in coastal forests do not 

reveal information that would be useful for describing effects within this project area. This 

response to comments appendix discusses how applicable literature was considered. Based on a 

review of pertinent scientific literature, additional information and citations have been included 

in the Final EIS. 

Comment: Missing from the Purpose and Need is any mention of the wildlife species of 

concern that utilize this area. The Draft EIS must be revised to comprehensively address this 

issue, which is essential to managing for healthy LOS forests across the area. (SC) 

Response: The Forest Service has the discretion to determine which actions to propose and why. 

It is not necessary to revise the Purpose and Need to address wildlife species. Effects to wildlife 

was identified as a significant issue and led to the development of Alternative 5. Chapter 3 of 

the EIS discloses the effects to pileated woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, and goshawk, 

which are species that utilize LOS stands in this project area. Chapter 1 of the Final EIS 

describes the goal of maintaining forest health and managing the project area within the historic 

range of variability. Managing the project area for a variety of conditions, including LOS, will 

provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species. 

Decision Framework 

Comment: If Alternative 4, is selected the Department of Interior recommends that it 

incorporate some specific measures that minimize impacts to short-term habitat viability of LOS 

stands, goshawk post-fledgin areas (PFAs), and connective corridors. These measures include: 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 337 

 Incorporate the Alternative 5 connective corridors prescription to provide adequate cover 

and structure to facilitate travel by most species utilizing these corridors. 

 Consider maintaining all white fir and Douglas-fir trees greater than 14 inches dbh that 

provide a mid to upper canopy within connectivity corridors to maintain a variable multi-strata 

stand structure. 

 Leave portions of some units untreated to retain clumps, defective trees, and patches of 

higher densities of trees. 

 Incorporate the Alternative 5 goshawk treatment strategy. 

 Decrease the level of human disturbance within designated PFAs and elk security and 

calving habitat. (DOI) 

Response: The Responsible Official will decide whether to select an alternative or to select a 

modified alternative. The measures you suggest be incorporated into Alternative 4 would result 

in Alternative 4 being nearly identical to Alternative 5. 

All of the action alternatives leave portions of some units untreated to retain clumps and patches 

of higher density trees (Final EIS, p. 288). All of the action alternatives result in some variability 

because of the inherent variability that already exists. In addition, portions of planned units will 

be omitted during lay-out or marking for reasons such as the presence of springs or other wet 

areas, patches of steeper slopes, cultural sites, sensitive plant habitat, snag patches or wildlife 

trees, or logging feasibility. Generally, during layout of precommercial thinning patches are 

marked for no treatment, in other areas precommercial thinning may be done more intensively in 

order to release aspen or other hardwoods (Final EIS, p. 289). The result is that the intensity of 

treatment within planned units will result in variable spacing across each unit. 

Chapter 2 of the Final EIS specifies that all of the action alternatives include seasonal restrictions

for goshawk and elk. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 include some road closure and decommissioning 

activities that will reduce road density. The effects of these seasonal restrictions and road 

closure/decommissioning activities are described in the effects to elk and goshawk. 

Comment: The development of more open stands may require additional actions (e.g., road 

closures) to limit human disturbance within these areas. Mitigation to offset adverse affects 

resulting from the extensive road network could be accomplished through an assessment of usercreated and other roads, and closure and obliteration of targeted roads. Seasonal closures or 

additional road decommissioning should be considered to reduce road density and minimize the 

disturbance to wildlife while still providing access and recreation. (DOI) 

Response: A roads analysis was completed under the Bandit project in 2002 and updated as part 

of the Spears planning effort in February 2007 (Draft EIS, p. 19). The Roads Analysis Report 

recommended closing or decommissioning many roads; however, extensive travel management 

is outside the scope of the Spears Vegetation Management Project. Based on recommendations 

in the roads analysis, Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 propose closing or decommissioning all new road 

construction along with some existing roads associated with commercial harvest units. The 

alternative descriptions in Chapter 2 identify the roads, by road number, that will be closed or 

decommissioned as part of the Spears project. The amount of roads that will be closed or 

decommissioned varies by alternative. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 338 

There are some roads within the project area that are seasonally closed in accordance with the 

1992 Ochoco National Forest Travel Plan. These seasonal road closures are associated with 

Winter Range and General Forest Winter Range management areas; they are closed from 

December 1 to May 1 of each year. 

Comment: There is very little difference between the Proposed Action (Alternative 2) and the 

Preferred Alternative 4 except for the 20 percent decline in timber volume, jobs, and income. 

All the other indicators addressing the Purpose and Need for Action are nearly identical. A 

decision to select Alternative 4 over Alternative 2 would be arbitrary and capricious. (AFRC) 

Response: The Forest Supervisor for the Ochoco National Forest will decide which alternative 

to choose for implementation and why. The decision will be determined based on how well each 

alternative provides the best mix of results in regard to (1) the purpose and need for action, (2) 

significant issues, (3) types and levels of effects, and (4) public comments. The decision will not 

be based solely on the amount of timber volume, jobs, and income as suggested. 

Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action 

Comment: In devising alternatives, the agency has proposed an unreasonably narrow range of 

options. The agency could recognize that collaborative goals mandate management flexibility to 

address all issues in a given unit and project area. Alternatives should have been developed that 

utilize variable dbh limits across the area. (SC) 

Response: The agency has analyzed a range of reasonable alternatives based on the purpose and 

need for action. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 include a dbh limit of 21 inches. Alternative 3 includes 

a dbh limit of 9 inches with some exceptions up to 12 inches. Including additional alternatives 

with limits of 10, 12, or 14 inches would result in effects similar to Alternative 3. 

Alternatives Considered in Detail 

Comment: The agency apparently only developed Alternative 3 to legally insulate themselves 

once they choose logging. This becomes more apparent by the Draft EIS failure to present 

Alternative 3 with objective, scientifically supportive, comprehensive, and accurate analysis. 

(SC) 

Response: The agency developed Alternative 3 in response to comments that it develop a 

“restoration only” alternative that did not include commercial timber harvest, did not include the 

use of heavy machinery, and included a diameter limit on the size of trees that would be 

removed. Alternative 3 was analyzed to the same level of detail as the other alternatives and the 

expected environmental consequences are disclosed in Chapter 3 of the Final EIS. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 339 

Monitoring 

Comment: The Department recommends that the Final EIS provide for evaluating the 

effectiveness of restoration and management efforts, including an assessment of the wildlife 

trend over time as a result of actions within goshawk, elk, and LOS habitat. The Department 

recommends that the Ochoco NF collaborate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife when developing the monitoring and evaluation 

program, including the use of validation monitoring to assess the restoration methods. (DOI) 

Response: The Draft and Final EISs contain provisions for implementation monitoring. The 

validation monitoring suggested is more appropriate at the Forest Plan scale. 

Comment: The Forest should monitor sediment levels during and after the project is completed. 

(EPA) 

Response: Both the Draft and Final EISs discuss monitoring in Chapter 2. The Lookout 

Mountain Ranger District is collecting pre-treatment sediment data on Marks, Little Hay, and 

Peterson Creeks. Data being collected includes turbidity and total suspended solids vs. 

discharge. Sediment data from Ochoco Creek at the Ochoco Ranger Station and/or East Fork 

Mill Creek will be used as the control. The Spears Project is not expected to have a statistically 

distinct or measurable adverse affect to water quality. This monitoring will demonstrate whether 

the expected environmental effects were accurate. Based on previous monitoring efforts, it is 

likely that environmental effects will be as expected under any of the action alternatives. If 

monitoring indicates an adverse effect, a field review would be accomplished to try to identify 

the cause. Based on the size of the effect (for example percent increase in turbidity), contracts 

and other implementation plans can be modified to ensure water quality standards will be met. 

Comment: There is little discussion on how implementation monitoring is accomplished. 

(EPA) 

Response: Implementation monitoring would be accomplished by the sale administrator, the 

contract administrator, or engineering representative, and the burn boss. Sale administrators and 

contract administrators maintain daily diaries and also complete a final review to ensure 

implementation occurred as planned. The burn boss’ review is placed in the burn plan file. In 

addition, individual specialists accomplish spot reviews in certain areas of interest. For example, 

the District Fisheries Biologist has periodically been accompanying the burn crew to verify 

implementation of RHCA design elements and burn plan direction and to verify the burn is 

meeting RMOs. 

Comment: The EIS fails to provide monitoring methods for evaluating grazing impacts. (SC) 

Response: The Final EIS does not include monitoring related to livestock grazing because 

modifying livestock grazing is outside the scope of this project. The Final EIS includes 

implementation monitoring related to the proposed action and the action alternatives. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 340 

Separate from this proposal, livestock monitoring does occur. The Final Range Resource 

Implementation Monitoring Module (July 2002) which was developed to ensure compliance with 

PACFISH and INFISH management strategies, directs that pasture moves occur before 

thresholds are reached (stubble height, bank alteration, switch in preference to hardwoods, and 

utilization). The district monitors allotments at mid-season and end-of-season and accomplishes 

spot checks on pastures to ensure compliance with standards. The allotment management plans 

for the Crystal Springs and Burn Allotments are currently undergoing environmental analysis 

and a proposed action has been sent to interested and affected parties as part of the public 

involvement efforts. The proposal includes modifying livestock grazing to reduce use in riparian 

areas. At this time, there are no proposals to alter livestock grazing in the Marks Creek and 

Wildcat Allotments. Where the effects of livestock grazing overlap with the effects of the Spears 

Project, the cumulative effects have been described in Chapter 3 of the Final EIS. 

Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental 

Consequences 

Late and Old Structure (LOS) 

Comment: Management activities need to be applied to all age and size classes. Stand density 

is the key to increasing tree growth and reducing beetle infestations. Stand densities will still be 

too dense without taking out a few larger, poor vigor trees. These trees need to be removed to 

improve and/or maintain adequate forest health conditions. (OLC) 

Response: Reducing stand densities have, as stated, been proven to increase tree growth and 

reduce susceptibility to beetle attack. Recommended stocking levels are being used (Powell 

1999) which vary by site quality and tree size. In the Spears project area, trees 21 inches dbh or 

larger are not prescribed for removal (Draft EIS, p. 18) because this size class is deficient on the 

landscape and one of the purposes of the project is to maintain existing large trees and enhance 

the development of additional large trees. This objective will be accomplished by removing 

some of the adjacent smaller trees to reduce competition for site resources. There will be areas 

within some units which would still be above the recommended stocking level, even if all trees 

less than 21 inches dbh were removed. These patches of large trees will be retained for LOS 

character and as green tree replacements for future large snags. Thinning to reduce the 

susceptibility to insects and disease, i.e. “forest health,” is just one of the purposes of the Spears

Project. 

Comment: In June 2003, the Regional Forester sent a memo to the field stating project-specific 

forest plan amendments are authorized under the Eastside Screens. The Ochoco National Forest 

has the authority to do a project-specific forest plan amendment to allow harvest of trees larger 

than 21 inches dbh. It is hard to believe that given the need to reduce fuels that there are no trees

of certain species larger than 21 inches that ought to be removed. The Draft EIS does not even 

make an attempt to explain why the arbitrary decision was made up front not to harvest any tree 

larger than 21 inches dbh. The Draft EIS states “the Eastside Screens (part of the Forest Plan) 

already decided that all live trees greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh be maintained, unless the 

amount of LOS is above the HRV.” The screens did NOT make that decision. In the case of 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 341 

Spears, clearly there are site-specific instances where removing trees larger than 21 inches dbh is 

warranted. (OLC, AFRC) 

Response: The Ochoco National Forest is aware of the Regional Forester’s June 2003 memo on 

guidance for implementing the Eastside Screens. The Regional Forester states that the objective 

of increasing the number of large trees and LOS stands on the landscape remains. One of the 

purposes of this project is to maintain and increase LOS. Three of the four action alternatives 

include site-specific amendments to the Eastside Screens to allow timber harvest in the Douglasfir PAG to reduce competition and maintain large trees. Alternatives 2 and 4 also include sitespecific amendments within connective corridors to maintain existing large trees and promote 

development of additional large trees within these corridors. 

The decision to not harvest trees larger than 21 inches dbh is not arbitrary. The Eastside Screens 

specifically state “Maintain all remnant late and seral and/or structural live trees > 21” dbh that 

currently exist within stands proposed for harvest activities.” The Eastside Screens also indicate 

that “all sale activities ... will maintain snags and green replacement trees of > 21 inches dbh ... 

at 100% of potential population levels of primary cavity excavators.” The Responsible Official 

for this project decided that an amendment to the Eastside Screens to allow harvest of trees larger 

than 21 inches dbh would not be appropriate and would not meet the objectives for LOS because 

the project area is deficient in large trees and large snags. There are some stands in the project 

area that are overstocked with large trees; the project area is also deficient in the number of large 

snags. The less vigorous large trees in these stands are the green tree replacements and will 

eventually die and become large snags. 

Comment: There is virtually no difference between any of the action alternatives over the next 

50 years for LOS - the number one purpose and need for the project. (AFRC) 

Response: Effects to LOS (Late and Old Structure) are discussed on pages 48-57 of the Draft 

EIS. Projections of the amount of LOS (both multi and single strata) were made for a 50-year 

period. These projections include changes in species composition, density, and structure derived 

from growth, succession, and endemic levels of disturbance from insects and disease. They do 

not include future disturbance events such as widespread insect epidemics or stand replacement 

wildfire. They also do not include future management actions such as thinning or prescribed 

fire. All action alternatives are projected to increase the overall amount of LOS, for all time 

periods, over that projected for the no action alternative (Alternative 1). The following table 

displays a comparison of the overall amount of LOS for the no action and action alternatives. 

Table C-1. Total amount of LOS. 

Alternative Existing

Acres 

Year 20

Acres 

Percent change 

in LOS from 

Alt. 1 

Year 50 

Acres 

Percent change 

in LOS from 

Alt. 1 

1 5,575 8,283 11,368 

2 5,575 8,626 +4 12,065 +6 

3 5,575 8,416 +2 11,644 +2 

4 5,575 8,600 +4 12,011 +6 

5 5,575 8,565 +3 11,938 +5 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 342 

As discussed in the Draft EIS, the overall amount of single-strata LOS is below the historical 

range of variability (HRV) while the overall amount of multi-strata LOS is within the HRV. 

Single-strata LOS, once the most common type of LOS in the project area, is more adapted to the 

fire regimes, insects, and diseases present in the project area. Single-strata LOS is more resilient 

and less susceptible to loss than multi-strata LOS because it is less dense, has fewer ladder fuels, 

less ground fuels, more vigorous overstory trees, and a species composition less impacted by 

disease. The following table compares the projected amounts of single-strata LOS for the no 

action and action alternatives. 

Table C-2. Total amount of Single-strata LOS. 

Alternative Year 0 

Acres 

Percent change 

in LOS from 

Alt. 1 

Year 20 

Acres 

Percent change 

in LOS from 

Alt. 1 

Year 

50 

Acres 

Percent change 

in LOS from 

Alt. 1 

1 1,618 2,413 2,942 

2 2,547 +57 3,499 +45 4,122 +40 

3 1,618 0 2,535 +5 3,178 +8 

4 2,381 +47 3,341 +38 3,976 +35 

5 2,229 +38 3,243 +34 3,863 +31 

Alternative 3 does not convert any existing multi-strata LOS to single strata because only smaller 

trees (<9 inches dbh) would be cut and the stands would still have two or more canopy layers. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would initially convert between 611 and 929 acres of multi-strata LOS to 

single strata. The difference between Alternative 1 (no action) and Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 

narrows over the 50-year timeframe because no continued maintenance activities, such as 

prescribed underburning to prevent development of shade-tolerant understories or continued 

thinning to maintain growth rates, were assumed in the modeling. 

Comment: Use the HRV as a guide, but do not just focus on seral stage. (OW, SC) 

Response: The analysis of existing upland forest vegetation and comparison to the HRV is 

based on a seral/structural matrix which includes species composition (seral stage) as well as 

stand structure and density as displayed in the Draft EIS (p. 45). The matrix can include up to 15 

combinations of seral/structural/density conditions depending on the plant association group 

(PAG). Historic ranges have been developed for each condition described in the matrix, not just 

seral stage. 

Comment: Carefully plan and narrowly target treatments to protect specific groves of fireresistant, old-growth trees that are threatened by ingrowth of small fuels, but don’t focus on rigid 

density reduction targets. (OW, SC) 

Response: All types of stands within the project area (not just groves of old-growth trees) were 

considered for treatment based on a comparison of the existing condition of the entire project 

area and the historic range of conditions. Stand types considered range from young overstocked 

plantations proposed for precommercial thinning to open stands of medium sized pine proposed 

for maintenance underburning to maintain low fuel levels and prevent the development of shade-
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 343 

tolerant understories. LOS is one of the stand conditions considered for treatment; however, 

treatment is not proposed for all existing LOS. Density is just one of the factors considered 

when proposing treatment, along with species composition, stand structure, and occurrence of 

insects and disease. 

Comment: Leave all medium and large trees that show old-growth characteristics. Regardless 

of size, retain all trees with old-growth characteristics such as thick bark, yellowing bark, flat 

top, asymmetric crown, broken top, forked top, etc. These trees have important habitat value and 

human values regardless of whether they are 21 inches dbh. (OW, SC) 

Response: Old ponderosa pine cohorts are being retained in harvest prescriptions in order to 

maintain LOS characteristics (Final EIS, p. 289). This includes trees of all sizes, not just large 

trees 21 inches dbh or larger. These trees display thick, orange bark and are often flat-topped 

and deformed. 

Comment: Visits to project “units” with agency staff has repeatedly brought assurances that 

“no, we would not log mature sized older trees between 16 to 20.9 inches dbh such as those 

marked under Bandit.” However, as Spears units are not yet marked, and no sample ribboned 

units yet exist, the public is apparently supposed to accept on faith that these assurances are real. 

Response: During field visits the agency has not made the assurance stated above. The agency 

has discussed “old tree cohorts” or “legacy” trees. The trees that would be retained are mature 

trees that are orange-barked and are part of a cohort (i.e. group or clump) of orange-barked 

ponderosa pine regardless of size. 

Comment: Thin from below, retaining the largest trees, or use “free thinning” with a diameter 

cap so that some trees of all size classes are retained. Retain all large and old trees and most 

medium sized trees so they can recruit into the larger classes of trees and snags. Allow natural 

processes of succession and mortality to turn some of these medium and large trees into 

ecologically valuable snags and down wood. (OW, SC) 

Response: The prescriptions for this project are designed to retain all existing large (>21 inch 

dbh) trees and enhance the growth of smaller trees so that they can become large trees at a faster 

rate. All old tree cohorts or “legacy” trees are being retained regardless of size. The 

prescriptions favor early-seral/fire-resistant species (ponderosa pine and western larch) as well as 

reduce the impacts of existing diseases such as dwarf mistletoe and root rot. “Retaining most 

medium sized” trees would not achieve these objectives because many stands would still be 

overstocked, or the medium-sized trees are a fire-intolerant species, or infected with a disease. 

Allowing natural processes of succession would result in continued survival of shade-tolerant 

species (grand fir and Douglas-fir) at the expense of the shade-intolerant ponderosa pine and 

western larch. As evidenced in the project area and discussed in the Draft and Final EISs, the 

trend is for these species to continue to develop while large diameter overstory ponderosa pine 

are being eliminated from the stands due to competition and insect attack. Allowing natural 

processes of succession to continue without some form of disturbance would result in further 

departures from the HRV. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 344 

Comment: Use variable density thinning techniques to establish a variety of microhabitats, 

break up fuel continuity, and create discontinuities to disrupt the spread of other contagious 

disturbances. Retain patchy clumps of trees which is the natural pattern for many species. 

Ideally variability should be implemented at numerous scales ranging from small to large. (OW, 

SC) 

Response: Thinning prescriptions for this project contain a desired range of residual densities 

which vary by site quality and tree size. Additionally, the existing stocking within the units 

already varies considerably ranging from existing openings or lightly stocked areas to patches of 

large trees which exceed recommended stocking levels but will not be thinned. Many “no 

treatment” areas are also included within unit boundaries, such as areas around seeps and 

springs, steep pitches exceeding 35% slope, sensitive plant habitat, and raptor nest sites (see 

design elements in Chapter 2). At the mid scale, larger areas have been precluded from 

treatment. These include goshawk nest stands, allocated old growth areas, some RHCAs and 

portions of RHCAs, and portions of goshawk post fledgling areas. At the watershed scale, even 

larger areas, such as Mill Creek Wilderness and the Research Natural Area are precluded from 

treatment (Draft EIS, p. 8). After treatments, the project area will exhibit a variety of habitats. 

Comment: There is scientific uncertainty about the rates of tree mortality and how many young 

trees need to be retained to ensure proper recruitment of future stands of old trees and large 

snags. (OW, SC) 

Response: There are numerous studies pertaining to tree growth and mortality at various stand 

density levels (Barrett 1981, 1982, and 1989; Larson et al. 1983; Cochran and Barrett 1999a and 

1999b). Growth response to thinning has been shown to occur in all size classes of trees, 

including large old ponderosa pine (McDowell et al. 2003). Other studies have shown reduced 

susceptibility to many insect and diseases that are density related (Roth and Barrett 1985 and 

Filip and Schmidt 1990). The information contained in these studies was used during 

preparation of the Draft and Final EISs for this project. The information contained in these 

studies was used during preparation of the Draft and Final EISs and are discussed in the Chapter 

3 sections on LOS, early-seral species composition, and infestations by insects and disease. 

Comment: There is scientific uncertainty about whether logging has any significant beneficial 

effect on controlling insects and diseases like mistletoe. (OW, SC) 

Response: Maintaining tree vigor is commonly recognized as an effective method of reducing 

susceptibility to attack by bark beetles (Demars and Roettgering 1982 and Fettig et al. 2007). 

Numerous studies have shown increased growth and vigor of remaining trees following density 

management treatments (Oliver 1979; Barrett 1981, 1982, and 1989; Larson et al. 1983; and 

Cochran and Barrett 1999a and 1999b). Growth response to thinning has been shown to occur in 

all size classes of trees, including large old ponderosa pine (McDowell et al. 2003). Other 

studies have shown reduced susceptibility to many insect and diseases that are density related 

(Roth and Barrett 1985 and Filip and Schmidt 1990). Additional studies have demonstrated that 

thinning reduces dwarf mistletoe impacts and mistletoe ratings (Schmitt 1999 and Roth and 

Barrett 1985). The information contained in these studies was used during preparation of the 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 345 

Draft and Final EISs and are discussed in the Chapter 3 sections on LOS, early-seral species 

composition, and infestations by insects and disease. 

Comment: The NEPA analysis should discuss whether the project will push the landscape 

toward or away from the natural range of variability for large-scale habitat patches. Landscape 

analysis based on historic disturbance patterns suggests that historically the majority of old forest 

occurred in large patches. See Wimberly 2002 and Hemstrom et al. 1998. 1,000 acre and larger 

patches are rare on the landscape. (OW, SC) 

Response: The Draft EIS does discuss the HRV. All of the action alternatives move the project 

area closer to the HRV and will result in more acres of LOS over time. The literature cited in the 

comment relates to old forests in the Oregon Coast Range which is not applicable to this project 

area. 

Comment: Instead of striving for park-like, single-strata forests, the agency should consider 

working toward complex forests. Such an approach would retain all existing large and old trees, 

retain untreated patches at many scales, manipulate basal area as guided by PAGs, and generally 

tolerate more diversity in the stand. (OW, SC) 

Response: The Spears project is striving to increase the amount of park-like, single-strata 

forests; however, this is not the only desired vegetative condition within the project area. The 

Draft EIS (pp. 44-48) discusses the mosaic of vegetative conditions which occur within the 

project area, as well as the historic abundance of each condition. These conditions range from 

open grass/forb/shrub to dense, multi-strata stands with large trees. There are six forest and 

woodland plant association groups (PAGs) within the project area to which this mosaic of 

conditions is applied, resulting in more than 100 different vegetative conditions. Park-like, 

single-strata forests with large trees common (single-strata LOS) has been identified as a 

condition which was once common in the project area, historically ranging from about 8,000 to 

15,000 acres (approximately 23 to 43 percent of the forested area). Currently there are about 

1,600 acres of this condition (less than 5 percent of the forested area). Treatments which can 

move existing over abundant classes towards the deficient classes are part of the proposed 

activities. The Draft EIS also discloses that multi-strata LOS, a condition currently within it’s 

HRV across the project area, will be maintained overall within it’s historic abundance. In the 

Douglas-fir PAG, Alternative 4 (the preferred alternative) will reduce the amount of multi-strata 

LOS to approximately 14 percent below the historic range by thinning out understory trees and 

converting to single-strata LOS. Within 20 years, the amount of multi-strata LOS is projected to 

be back within the historic range due to continued growth. 

Prescribed stand treatments will be adjusted to account for variance in site productivity between 

the PAGs. An example is described in the Draft EIS on page 277. Recommended stand stocking 

levels vary with tree size and site productivity, in general more stocking will be retained when 

the trees are larger and/or the site is more productive (Powell 1999). All existing large trees are 

being retained as described in the Draft EIS (pp. 5, 18, 49, and 277). In addition, to retain LOS 

character, no old pine cohorts will be prescribed for harvest, regardless of size. Untreated 

patches will be retained in many units to meet the design elements contained in the Draft EIS on 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 346 

pages 25-38. These include areas such as those around seeps and springs, sensitive plant habitat, 

around raptor nests, and near cultural resource sites. 

Early-seral Species Composition 

Comment: Does the purpose of increasing early-seral species composition conflict with the 

purpose of maintaining and increasing LOS (late-seral)? (AFRC) 

Response: No. LOS (Late and Old Structure) is a condition in which large trees are common 

and can be composed of early, mid, or late-seral species composition. The purpose of 

maintaining and increasing the amount of LOS is achieved by maintaining and/or increasing the 

number of large trees. The purpose of increasing early-seral species composition is achieved by 

retaining early-seral species, such as ponderosa pine and western larch, which were more 

abundant historically. 

Comment: There is barely a noticeable difference between the action alternatives for early-seral 

species composition after 50 years. This is one of the stated purposes and needs for the project. 

(AFRC) 

Response: Effects to early-seral species composition are discussed in the Draft EIS (pp. 57-60). 

Projections of the amount of early-seral conditions, such as stands dominated by ponderosa pine 

or western larch, were made for a 50-year period. These projections include changes in species 

composition, density, and structure derived from growth, succession, and endemic levels of 

disturbance from insects and disease. They do not include future disturbance events such as 

widespread insect epidemics or stand replacement wildfire. They also do not include future 

management actions such as thinning or prescribed fire activities. Many of the vegetative 

components are so far outside the HRV, that it will take many decades and additional 

disturbances (either natural or management-induced) to return them to their former ranges of 

abundance 

All action alternatives would decrease the overall amount of late-seral condition (dominated by 

grand fir and/or Douglas-fir) while increasing the amount of area dominated by ponderosa pine 

and western larch over time, when compared to the no action alternative. The following table 

displays a comparison of the overall amount of area dominated by ponderosa pine and/or western 

larch for the no action (Alternative 1) and action alternatives. 

Table C-3. Area dominated by ponderosa pine and/or western larch. 

Alternative Year 50 

(acres) 

Acre change 

from Alt. 1 

Percent change 

from Alt. 1 

1 20,465 

2 23,098 2,633 +13 

3 21,436 971 +5 

4 22,843 2,378 +12 

5 22,576 2,111 +10 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 347 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5, given the modeling assumptions stated above, are projected to result 

in an increase in area dominated by ponderosa pine and/or western larch ranging from 971 to 

2,633 acres more than the amount predicted for Alternative 1. The proposed treatments are 

consistent with the purpose of this project to increase early-seral species composition. Increasing 

early-seral species composition moves the landscape towards the conditions which occurred 

historically. As disclosed in the Draft EIS, the overall amount of early-seral condition is 

currently within the HRV; however, the trend, without disturbance, is for late-seral species to 

increase with time as shade-tolerant understories develop. 

Comment: Because the project area consists of a mosaic of different forest types, aspects, soils, 

and historic as well as current stand conditions, a scientific and legally valid Purpose and Need 

would state: “Bring each unit area within its optimum range of historic seral species 

composition.” The Draft EIS must be revised to bring this Purpose and Need into compliance 

with legal requirements and the full range of scientifically supportable research. 

Response: The Forest Service has the discretion to determine the underlying purpose and need 

for project proposals. The purpose and need for this project are described in Chapter 1 of the 

Final EIS. Changing the purpose and need for action and attempting to estimate the range of 

historic seral species composition on a unit-by-unit based would not be consistent with scientific 

research. As stated in Chapter 1, Swanson and others (1994) indicate that managing an 

ecosystem within its range of natural (or historic) variability is a scientifically defensible way to 

maintain diverse, resilient, productive, and healthy systems. Swanson suggests that areas 

analyzed at intensive levels should be between 10,000 to 100,000 acres. Lehmkuhl and others 

(1994) found that using watershed boundaries yielded more realistic measures of historic and 

current landscape patterns. The May 2005 Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class Guidebook 

suggests that although it is possible to analyze individual stands using the FRCC Standard 

Landscape methods, analysis must begin at the landscape level because fire regimes operate at a 

landscape scale. This guidebook cautions that the specific size of the landscape for determining 

FRCC must be carefully selected: if the area is too small, a false picture of fire severity, 

frequency, and size will emerge. 

Historic range of variability (and departure from) was assessed at the watershed scale following 

the direction contained within the Regional Forester’s Forest Plan Amendment No. 2 (June 1995) 

and the best available science. The current mix of stand conditions for each PAG was analyzed 

and compared to the range of conditions that occurred historically. Departures from the historic 

range have been identified and used to formulate the purposes of the project. The units selected 

for treatment, as well as the treatment methods, have been designed to move the entire landscape 

towards the historic range and/or maintain stands in their desired condition. Determining the 

“optimum” condition of an individual unit must be done within the context of the larger 

landscape, since through time any particular small area could support a multitude of conditions, 

ranging from bare ground following a high-intensity disturbance to dense, late-seral conditions. 

It is the aggregate of all conditions that determines whether or not the landscape as a whole is 

within or outside of its HRV. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 348 

Infestations by Insects and Disease 

Comment: This area has an extremely high percentage of the large trees dying because of the 

beetle infestations. 

Response: The Hash Rock fire burned in August and September 2000, eventually burning 

18,000 acres in and adjacent to the Marks Creek watershed. Within the fire area numerous 

ponderosa pine trees were injured but not killed outright. These stressed/injured trees provided a 

substantial food base for the western pine beetle (Dendroctonus brevicomis LeConte). The 

beetle population increased and eventually reached the point where otherwise healthy pines 

outside the fire area began to be killed. Patches of beetle mortality outside of the burn area were 

first detected in the late winter of 2004 and by late summer 2004 were highly visible from 

Highway 26. Mortality patches ranged in size from small groups of 2-4 trees, up to 4-5 acres. 

Primarily large diameter ponderosa pines were attacked, although smaller pines within a patch of 

large pines were also killed. Spread of the beetle was enhanced due to the dry summers of 2001, 

2002, and 2003 as well as overstocked conditions in many of the stands. Beetle populations 

peaked in 2004 and the Regional Aerial Detection Surveys for that fall mapped over 3,800 acres 

of scattered mortality within the watershed. Beetle populations declined in 2005 and again in 

2006. The Draft EIS (p. 61) refers to this beetle outbreak. Additional detail has been added to 

the Final EIS. Reducing stand densities to reduce susceptibility to beetle attack is one purpose of 

the Spears project. 

Comment: Another of the stated purposes and needs for the project is the high risk to insects 

and diseases. We see very little difference between Alternatives 2 and 4. (AFRC) 

Response: Landscape susceptibility to insects and disease is discussed in the Draft EIS (pp. 60-

65). Predictions of the amount of high risk conditions, such as overstocked stands, were made 

for each alternative and projected out for 50 years. Projections do not include future disturbance 

events such as widespread insect epidemics or stand replacement wildfire. They also do not 

include future management actions such as thinning or prescribed fire activities. All action 

alternatives would decrease the amount of high risk conditions compared to the no action 

alternative. The following table displays a comparison of the amount of high risk area for the no 

action (Alternative 1) and action alternatives. 

Table C-4. Area in a high risk condition to insects and disease. 

Alternative

Year 0 

Acres 

Acre change 

from Alt. 1 

Percent change 

from Alt. 1 

Year 50 

Acres 

Acre change 

from Alt. 1 

Percent change 

from Alt. 1 

1 11,865 21,551 

2 8,800 -3,065 -25 19,425 -2,126 -10 

3 11,095 -770 -6 20,921 -630 -3 

4 9,191 -2,674 -23 19,653 -1,898 -9 

5 9,486 -2,379 -20 19,859 -1,692 -8 

Alternatives 2 and 4 are projected to result in a direct decrease in high risk area ranging from 

3,065 to 2,674 acres. After 50 years, the amount of decrease is predicted to be between 2,126 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 349 

and 1,898 acres less than that projected for Alternative 1. Both alternatives reduce the amount of 

high risk, although Alternative 2 reduces the risk on more acres. 

One purpose of the project is to reduce the susceptibility of the landscape to large-scale 

infestation by insects and disease. The amount of high risk conditions is currently above the 

historic range of abundance. All four action alternatives are predicted to initially bring the 

amount of high risk area to within the historic range. The projections also predict that, without 

future disturbances such as additional thinning or prescribed fire, the amount of high risk area 

will increase in the future and within 20 years will be back above the historic range. 

Comment: Insectivores, when adequate viable snag and other essential LOS habitat is available, 

are capable of eliminating up to 90 percent of concentrated bark beetle (and other insect 

pathogens) population increases. The loss of viable old growth and mature snag habitat that has 

occurred across the Marks Creek watershed has lead to continued reduction in the population 

levels of woodpeckers, resulting in largely unchecked insect population rises and consequently 

expanding areas of significant tree mortality from the recent increase of bark beetles across the 

area. (SC) 

Response: The biotic potential of forest insects such as bark beetles is far greater than that of 

their avian predators. It is a basic biological principal that in a predator-prey relationship, the 

predator does its most effective job of being a “natural check and balance” when prey 

populations are low, and becomes very ineffective as a regulator when prey populations are high. 

Studies by Burke in the Klamath Forest (cited by Miller and Keen 1960) reported that barely 50 

percent of the 700 trees colonized by western pine beetles were fed upon by woodpeckers. 

Woodpecker feeding was described as “light” on 13 percent of those trees, “moderate” on 39 

percent and “heavy” on 1 percent. Similarly, Hopkins (1909, also cited by Miller and Keen 

1960) reported that insectivorous birds are most important in situations where few trees are 

killed, but when many trees are being killed, the limited number of birds can have little or no 

effect on insect populations. A recent local study done on the Hash Rock Fire also showed that 

woodpeckers were not able to utilize all of the insect biomass that suddenly became available in 

that fire and the woodpecker populations lagged far behind their available food source (Eglitis 

2006) (graph shown below). Figure C-1 below shows the number of logs that showed evidence 

of woodpecker (WP) feeding compared to those that showed evidence of wood borers (WB) and 

bark beetles (BB). Furthermore, the “population regulation” done by woodpeckers is not entirely 

positive from the perspective of controlling bark beetles. Woodpeckers feed on beneficial 

insects as well as on bark beetles. Miller and Keen (1960) refer to the unpublished work of 

Person who found that hairy and white-headed woodpeckers fed upon the clerid predator 

Enoclerus lecontei more often than on the western pine beetle which was deeper in the bark than 

the predator. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 350 

 Figure C-1. Number of insect-infested sample logs with evidence 

 of woodpecker feeding, Hash Rock Fire, August 2000. 

The most important population regulator for most organisms is available habitat. For bark 

beetles, the availability of host material is a key condition influencing beetle outbreaks. 

Woodpeckers, predators, and parasites play a role in reducing the number of developing brood 

within a tree. Although they help stabilize beetle populations at low levels, their action alone 

cannot control outbreaks (DeMars and Roettgering 1982). 

It is not necessarily true that the population levels of all species of woodpeckers have been 

reduced within the Marks Creek watershed. Breeding bird survey data showed no significant 

change in population for the pileated woodpeckers (which prefer closed canopy multi-strata 

forest conditions in stands with fir trees present) in the Western United States, while local 

population declines of the white-headed woodpecker have been reported in the Blue Mountains, 

Deschutes and Winema National Forests. White-headed woodpeckers prefer open forest 

conditions in stands with ponderosa pine trees present. This information was disclosed in the 

Draft EIS (pp. 190 and 198). As noted in the Draft EIS (pp. 217-218), habitat for Lewis’ and the 

black-backed woodpecker are currently within HRV. Marshall and others (1997) reported 

statewide and rangewide declines for Lewis’ woodpecker due to effects of pesticides, removal of 

lowland oak habitat, and competition by European starlings. Since this species prefers open 

forest conditions, this project is not expected to impact this species, other than by increasing 

available suitable habitat (refer to tables 75-79). The black-backed woodpecker populations tend 

to be transitory, keying in on insect activity associated with fire or bark beetle outbreaks. 

Proposed treatments could moderate the severity of future fires, insect infestations, and other 

forms of mortality potentially reducing foraging habitat in some areas. On the other hand, 

prescribed fire proposed under the action alternatives is likely to generate variable levels of stand 

mortality and thus provide foraging substrate that could be utilized by this species. Effects of 

recent wildfire and proposed prescribed fire on snags is discussed in the Draft EIS (pp. 191, 199, 

200, 206, and 213). As noted on page 197, the red-naped and Williamson’s sapsucker are best 

represented by the priority habitat that includes riparian hardwoods such as aspen, and page 217 

notes that none of the proposed alternatives include reduction of riparian vegetation, but they do 

include restoration of riparian hardwood habitat. Marshall and others (1997) referred to stable 

populations for both red-naped and Williamson’s sapsuckers. The other species of woodpeckers 

that utilize the Ochoco National Forest are represented in the analysis by the species described 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 351 

above, as stated on page 197. They are: red-breasted sapsucker a vagrant visitor to the Ochoco 

and Blue Mountains and a common breeder from the Cascades to the Coast Range; downy 

woodpecker which is most abundant in riparian areas and lowland forests with deciduous 

vegetation; hairy woodpecker a habitat generalist; three-toed woodpecker a rare species localized 

to high elevation forests responding to fires and insect outbreaks as the black-backed 

woodpecker does; northern flicker a common habitat generalist (Draft EIS, pp. 204-205). There 

were no significant population declines cited for any of these five species. 

Comment: As long as new snags are retained and adequate forest stocking remains to ensure 

future snags over time, avian species (such as woodpeckers) populations will rise towards 

optimum historical levels and begin once more to keep insect populations and cycles in balance. 

Excessive removal of snags and/or trees within woodpeckers optimum habitat range of 14 inches 

dbh and above, would irreparably harm this process allowing insect populations to further 

increase and spread, while cavity nesters continue to plummet. The Draft EIS has failed to 

accurately address this issue. The Draft EIS must be revised to accurately disclose relevant 

scientific research and stand conditions in the watershed, and develop sound alternatives capable 

of meeting this purpose and need. (SC) 

Response: The action alternatives do not propose excessive removal of trees within woodpecker 

habitat. No live trees 21 inches dbh or larger are prescribed for harvest. Removal of live trees 

between 14 and 20.9 inches is prescribed when trees of that size class are present at greater than 

desired stocking levels. Using the example description presented in the Draft EIS (p. 277) of a 

ponderosa pine stand on a grand fir-pinegrass site, the desired basal area would range between 49 

and 73 square feet of basal area per acre. If all trees were, for example, 16 inches dbh, this 

amount of basal area would equal 35 to 53 trees per acre. At 20 inches dbh, this would equal 22 

to 33 trees per acre. Reducing stand densities by removing some of these trees will reduce 

competition for nutrients and will result in more vigorous trees. Maintaining tree vigor is 

commonly recognized as an effective method of reducing susceptibility to attack by bark beetles 

(Demars and Roettgering 1982 and Fettig et al. 2007). Removing some trees between 14 and 

20.9 inches dbh is not expected to cause a decline in habitat for cavity nesters. 

As stated in the Draft EIS (pp. 198-202) all existing snags and down logs (>12 inches small end) 

are to be retained in harvest operations (with the exception of safety hazards) and the amount of 

existing snags present in the project area should not be substantially altered by implementation of 

any of the alternatives. As noted in the Draft EIS (p. 208), the density of snags greater than 20 

inches dbh is low compared to HRV across all PAGs. In order to promote the development of 

snags exceeding 20 inches dbh, removal of some trees 14 to 20.9 inches dbh is prescribed. This 

is a trade-off between potential recruitment of more numerous small diameter snags in order to 

achieve development and recruitment of large diameter trees, snags, and down logs over time. 

The recruitment of snags as a result of not reducing stand density is described in the 

environmental consequences for Alternative 1 (Draft EIS, pp. 190 and 199), while the effect of 

thinning on large snag development is described in the environmental consequences for 

Alternatives 2 to 5 (Draft EIS, pp. 191-195, 200-202, and 213). Although table 67 shows that 

density in snags less than 20 inches dbh is below HRV in all PAGS except dry pine and dry 

grand fir, they are all within 1 snag per acre of being within the range. Within harvest areas 

there will be sufficient residual trees to provide target stocking level and potential for recruitment
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 352 

of snags following harvest. Alternative 5 retains additional trees in some units where they 

include north and east facing draws, PFAs, or connective corridors, so there is potential for 

recruitment of larger numbers of snags within selected units under that alternative. 

Comment: Within the 14 to 18 inch dbh range, given the lack of large downed logs and snags in 

the area, there is far less reasonable rationale for the commercial removal of trees of this size. 

However, the agency could assess and disclose their rationale in instances where it may believe 

that site-specific optimum HRV goals could allow for the commercial removal of some of these 

trees. This should be done infrequently and with great care to protect ecological resources and 

long-term restoration goals. (SC) 

Response: Alternative 5 approaches this strategy when viewed in context of percent of area 

treated commercially vs. non-commercially, and with modifications of commercial prescriptions 

on more mesic slopes adjacent to north and east facing draws and swales and within PFAs and 

corridors. In such stands the residual stocking level would be higher under that alternative as 

described in the Draft EIS (p. 277). 

The Forest Service chose not to use strict diameter limits during alternative development because 

of the existing variability of stand conditions and the purpose and need for action. One of the 

purposes of this project is to maintain and enhance large trees; another purpose is to increase 

dominance of early-seral, fire-tolerant species. In many cases, it is more desirable to leave a 

smaller diameter ponderosa pine tree rather than a grand fir or Douglas-fir tree just because it is a 

little bit larger. The project area also contains root rot pockets and mistletoe infection. 

Depending on the host species for these organisms, it is more desirable to leave non-host species 

in these areas regardless of whether the tree is 12 inches or 18 inches dbh. Using strict diameter 

limit would inhibit achieving the purpose and need for this project. As discussed elsewhere in 

this appendix, determining the “optimum” condition of an individual unit must be done within 

the context of the larger landscape. The proposed treatments in the action alternatives move the 

project area toward the HRV. 

Fuels 

Comment: When comparing the effects of fuel treatments, there is little significant difference 

between Alternatives 2 and 4. (AFRC) 

Response: All of the action alternatives include activities to reduce fuels. As displayed in the 

EIS, all of the action alternatives reduce the amount of departure from reference conditions in 

Fire Regimes I and III when compared to the no action alternatives. Fire Regime Condition 

Class is used to describe landscape fire regime and vegetation/fuel characteristics. At the 

landscape level, the differences between the alternatives are small. 

Comment: New evidence indicates that far more of the “dry” forests, rather than being typified 

low-severity fire regimes, were in fact dominated by mixed-severity fire regimes (including 

significant areas of stand replacing fire), so mixed-severity fire is an important part of the HRV 

that should be restored. Treatments in forests with naturally mixed-severity fire regimes should 

be carefully scrutinized to ensure those areas are really outside of the HRV and treatments are 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 353 

really needed. Treatments in mixed-severity fire regimes should be patchier and leave behind 

more structure, more snags, and large dead wood. (OW, SC) 

Response: The goal of the fuel treatments within the Spears project area is to reduce the 

potential for large fire events. The Forest Service recognizes that fires that burn within the 

project area will be of mixed severity, including areas of high severity. By strategically placing 

treatments that reduce fuels and create low-severity fire behavior, the opportunities for and 

successful suppression response will increase, which will help to protect homes and 

infrastructure within the project area. The Draft EIS (p. 66) discusses the percent departure from 

reference conditions by fire regime and condition class. The HRV for the project area recognizes 

that mixed-severity fire regimes are part of the landscape. Based on past experience in the Trout, 

Mill, Yobear, and Sheep Rock areas, prescribed fires are expect to burn in a mosaic pattern that 

consumes 40 to 70 percent of the surface area. These patchy fires are expect to leave behind 

both burned and unburned areas. 

Comment: The goal should not be a uniform low-severity fire regime, but rather a wide mix of 

tree densities in patches of varying sizes. (OW, SC) 

Response: The goal in the project area is not to have a uniform, low-severity fire regime. 

Rather the goal is to reduce the potential for high-intensity fires and the potential unwanted loss 

of trees, water quality, soil productivity, and wildlife habitat. The proposed treatments are 

expected to result in varying stand conditions throughout the project area. 

Comment: Treatments in the wildland urban interface (WUI) may also be a priority, but do not 

define the WUI too broadly, because fire hazard can be reduced by treating the area immediately 

adjacent to structures and this home ignition zone is usually on non-federal lands. (OW, SC) 

Response: The WUI in the project area was taken directly from the designations in the Crook 

and Wheeler County Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPPs). These CWPPs took into 

consideration private property, travel routes used by forest visitors and fire suppression vehicles, 

and infrastructure such as power lines and communication sites. As noted in the Final EIS, the 

Oregon Department of Forestry recently acquired a National Fire Plan grant that would result in 

performing fuel reduction activities adjacent to private homes. 

Comment: Thinning affects fire hazard in complex ways, possibly even making fire hazard 

worse because thinning: (1) creates slash; (2) moves fine fuels from the canopy to the ground 

and increases their availability for combustion; (3) increases ignition risk; (4) makes the forest 

hotter, drier, and windier; and, (5) makes site resources available that could stimulate the growth 

of future surface and ladder fuels. Fuel reduction must remove enough of the small surface and 

ladder fuels while retaining enough of the medium and large trees to maintain canopy cover for 

purposes of microclimate, habitat, hydrology, suppression of ingrowth, etc. (OW, SC) 

Response: The Draft and Final EISs recognize that both precommercial thinning and 

commercial timber harvest affect fire hazard. Some form of fuel reduction treatment is planned 

for all slash created by timber harvest and thinning operations to mitigate this short-term increase 

in fire hazard. Additionally, fuel reduction is planned in some areas with natural concentrations 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 354 

of fuel. The thinning activities proposed in all four of the action alternatives are not expected to 

open the stand enough to change average air temperatures or wind reduction. Using the 1992 

FIRE Behavior Field Reference guide PMS 436-4: A fully-sheltered, dense stand has a 

reduction factor of 0.1; a fully-sheltered, open stand would have a reduction factor of 0.2, and a 

partially-sheltered stand would have wind reduction of 0.3. So with a 20 ft. wind speed of 15 

mph the wind reduction in the stand be 1.5, 3, and 4.5 mph, respectively. These factors are 

commonly used by fire behavior analysts in fire spread predictions. The rate of fire spread and 

flame length under these conditions using a fuel model 9 which is typical of many stands in the 

project area with a south-facing 20 percent slope would be 1.0 chain per hour (ch/hr) with 1.3 

foot flame length (FL), 3.9 ch/hr with 2.1-foot FL and 7.5 ch/hr with a 2.8-foot FL. One chain 

equals 66 feet. 

Comment: In order to be effective, mechanical treatments must be followed by prescribed fire. 

And, the effects of such fires must also be carefully considered. (OW, SC) 

Response: The Forest Service recognizes that mechanical treatments must be followed by 

prescribed fire in most cases. With the exception of thinning in young plantations and in 

hardwood treatment areas, activity-created fuels would be treated with prescribed fire. In young 

plantations and in hardwood treatment areas, the slash from the mechanical treatment would be 

cut into small pieces and scattered within the stand. The effects of prescribed fire operations 

have been considered and are disclosed in Chapter 3 of the Final EIS. 

Comment: If using techniques such as yarding with tops attached, the agency should top a 

portion of the trees and leave in the forest in order to retain nutrients on site. (OW, SC) 

Response: Alternatives 2, 4, and 5, include yarding tops attached as part of the prescription in 

several units. This activity is prescribed only in areas where leaving the tops in units is likely to

result in excessive fuel loadings. These stands already have high levels of fuels that are retaining 

nutrients on site. 

Comment: There is actually a very low probability that moderate-intensity fire will affect any 

given stand during the relatively brief time period that fuel reduction is alleged to be reduced. 

Fuel reduction has little or no beneficial effect on low-severity fires or on high-severity fires. 

(OW, SC) 

Response: Recent fire history in this project area has shown that moderate to high-intensity fire 

is affected by fuel treatments that are maintained with fire. One example of this is the Hash 

Rock Fire that burned in August and September 2000. The fire breached the ridge separating the 

Mill and Marks Creek Watersheds with moderate to high fire intensity. When the fire reached 

the managed stands within the Marks Creek Watershed the fire transitioned to the ground and 

was suppressed before reaching private property and their structures. In 1995, the Mill 

Prescribed Natural Fire burned in portions of both the Mill and Marks Creek Watershed. Where 

the Hash Rock Fire burned up to the area “maintained” by the prescribed natural fire, it again 

transitioned to a low-severity, ground fire. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 355 

Comment: Let’s not pretend that historic fires were all low intensity. Throughout the dry 

forests of the west there is abundant evidence to support the existence of a mixed-severity fire 

regime instead of a universal frequent, low-severity fire regime. Schoennagel, Veblen and 

Romme (2004) conclude that a “one size fits all” approach to reducing wildfire hazards in the 

Rocky Mountain region is unlikely to be effective and could create new problems. Based on 

analysis of forest structure and fire scars, Hessburg and others (2005) determined that many 

drier, mixed ponderosa forests of the interior Northwest have a natural fire regime of mixedseverity fire. Hessburg and others (2005) indicate that a majority of the dry forest types sampled 

on public lands in the interior Columbia basin were typified by a fire regime of mixed severity. 

(OW, SC) 

Response: The Draft EIS (pp. 65-66), discloses that the majority (61%) of the project area is 

Fire Regime III, which is a mixed-severity fire regime. The Draft EIS also discloses that Fire 

Regime III is in condition class 1 which indicates a low amount of departure from reference 

conditions. The Draft and Final EISs do not take a one size fits all approach to reducing wildfire 

hazards. 

Comment: Many like to pretend that virtually all historic fires were low-intensity fires, and that 

low intensity fire reinforced an equilibrium pattern of park-like forests maintained by recurrent 

low-intensity fire. Many people then argue that fire suppression and lack of management have 

set the state for unnaturally intense fires. While there are grains of truth in this description, 

recent research is pointing to a much more complex picture of forest and fire regimes – one 

where eastside forests are dominated, not by an equilibrium pattern of low-intensity fire, but by a 

non-equilibrium pattern of mixed-severity fire. (OW, SC) 

Response: The Forest Service is not assuming that all historic fires were low-intensity or that 

the project area was all open, park-like pine stands. More than half the project area is classified 

as a mixed-severity fire regime (Draft EIS, p. 66). Fire regime and condition class do not fully 

address the potential for intense fire behavior. By definition, the mixed severity fire regime 

includes forest vegetation and fuels conditions which could support both low and high-intensity 

fires. The fire behavior potential is analyzed separately in the Draft EIS (pp. 71-73). The LOS 

section in Chapter 3 of the Draft EIS discusses HRV and discloses that a range of conditions 

occurred throughout the project area. 

Comment: The agency should consider the cumulative contributions of fire suppression, higher 

ambient CO2 levels, and native burning practices. These considerations could change our view 

of what caused the “historic range” and what “future range of variability” is possible given 

changed circumstances. Maybe the future fire regime will be different than the historic fire 

regime because fires are still being suppressed, native burning is not being practiced, and 

because CO2 levels are higher and will remain higher for centuries. See Nabhan et al. Land use 

history impacts on biodiversity - Implications for management strategies (Western U.S.): Final 

Report. (OW, SC) 

Response: The publication referenced (Nabhan et al.) is a report from a study done in the 

Southwest. Although the commenter does not relate the management implications of the 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 356 

literature in specific terms to the Spears project, the management implications have been 

considered. 

 1. Know the site’s history and its unique compositional elements; there is no single presettlement target for restoration. 

The site-specific forest vegetation and fuels conditions for the Spears area are described in the 

Draft EIS (pp. 44-48 and 71-72) and silvicultural report. Six plant association groups (PAGs) 

are described with over 100 seral/structural conditions. The HRV is unique to the Spears project 

area and is based on the proportion of each PAG within the project area. 

 2. Construct a reference envelope for each site, incorporating fire history, evidence from 

biofacts (tree rings, pollen, packrat middens), ethnohistory, and other tools. 

The forest vegetation classification system used in the Spears project is based on that described 

in Viable Ecosystems Management Guide, Ochoco National Forest (1994 and 1997). The 1994 

Viable Ecosystems Guide (pp. 3-11) describes the methods that were used to develop the 

landscape classifications, including the HRV. 

 3. Do not assume that thinning alone is enough to regenerate understory species richness 

or NTFP’s (the publication does not define this acronym); drought and arrested ecological 

processes produce time lags in recovery. 

The Spears project includes a number of proposed activities including thinning. Treatments are 

intended to meet the purpose and need described in Chapter 1 of the Draft EIS. 

 4. Strive to build into restoration programs objectives for ecological integrity, 

sustainability, and resilience in forest and woodland ecosystems by restoring natural processes 

and monitoring compositional changes in understory habitats. 

Site-specific monitoring is planned for the Spears area (Draft EIS, p. 38). The purpose and need 

includes managing forest vegetation conditions and processes consistent with improving 

sustainability and habitat diversity (Draft EIS, pp. 1-7). 

Projections for climate change and its impact in the Pacific Northwest over the next 10-50 years 

include the following for Terrestrial Ecosystems: “Likely impacts include shifts in species 

composition and timing of the growing season, but details are unpredictable.” And “Given 

current biomass densities, the anticipated drier summers will increase drought stress and 

vulnerability of forests to insects and diseases, and may ultimately lead to widespread fires that 

may systematically alter the hydrologic response in river basins over time.” (Scientific 

Consensus Statement on the Likely Impacts of Climate Change on the Pacific Northwest, 2004) 

Given the unpredictability of changes that may result from climate change and that consensus 

opinion may include conditions that support longer and more extreme wildfire burning 

conditions, it seems prudent to propose actions which not only restore forest conditions which 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 357 

are more sustainable under current weather conditions but also would reduce the extent of highintensity fire potential under hot and dry conditions whenever they may occur. 

Comment: Due to the nature of the area’s dry summer forests and often frequent lightning 

mixed-severity and high-intensity fires will likely always be a part of the region’s forest 

ecosystems. The failure of the Draft EIS to adequately disclose and incorporate scientific 

research on mixed severity forests similar to those in the project area violates the NEPA. The 

Draft EIS erroneously blanket asserts that forests in the Spears area were predominantly 

“frequent low severity fire” forests. (SC) 

Response: The Draft EIS (p. 5) states that the dominant disturbance factor, not fire regime, was 

frequent, low-intensity fire that eliminated the majority of seedlings and saplings. Fires likely 

burned at all intensity levels within the project area. Future wildfires are also expected to burn at

a variety of intensities. The discussion of fire regime condition class in the Draft EIS (p. 66) 

discloses that 61 percent of the project comprises Fire Regime III. This fire regime indicates that 

the fire frequency ranged from 35-100+ years and was of mixed severity (less than 75% of the 

dominant overstory vegetation replaced). 

The Forest Service did not ignore recent science related to mixed-severity fires. Omi and others 

(2006) indicate that treatment of surface fuels appears to be of primary importance for reducing 

the intensity and severity of subsequent wildfire. Surface treatments such as prescribed burns 

may be effective for as long as 10 years, especially if they raise the height to canopy and increase 

the mean tree diameter. The most effective treatments include mechanical thinning, but it is 

critical that slash from such activities be treated within a year or two. The thinning activities 

proposed in each of the action alternatives include a follow-up slash treatment. 

Comment: Portions of the area are indeed indicative of low-severity frequent fire mosaic 

patterns, but the Draft EIS blanket application of this formula fails NEPA’s site-specific and 

high-quality science requirements. Extensive mixed-conifer, high-elevation, north aspect forests, 

as well as localized variations in stand composition evidence an overall pattern throughout much 

of the project area of mixed-severity fire regimes. Scientific research on mixed-severity fire 

regimes is pertinent to the Purpose and Need of this project, yet the agency failed to incorporate 

or accurately disclose scientific recommendations addressing fuels and fire risk reduction 

thinning in mixed-severity stands. Research indicates that logging thinning efforts to reduce fuel 

loads and fire severity in mixed fire regimes are largely ineffective, and may actually increase 

fire risks and severity. (SC) 

Response: The Draft EIS does not apply a blanket application of low-severity, frequent fire 

regimes to the project area. The project area is comprised of a mix of Fire Regimes I, II, and III 

as disclosed in the Draft EIS (p. 66). Fire Regime I, which comprises 35 percent of the project 

area, is classified as a low-severity, frequent fire regime. This fire regime is characterized by a 

frequent fire return interval of 0-35 years and these fires burned at a low (surface fires most 

common) to mixed severity (less than 75% of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced). 

The north aspect, mixed conifer stands described above are categorized as a moist grand fir 

PAG. Even though there are patches of this PAG widely distributed across the landscape, it only 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 358 

accounts for about 4 percent of the project area. The moist grand fir PAG is within its historic 

range in single-strata LOS and above the historic range in multi-strata LOS (Draft EIS, pp. 41-

43). 

Comment: What constitutes a definition of fire-risk forest fuels? Once trees are above 8 inches 

dbh their bark becomes more fire resistant, and absent fine fuels they will not easily burn. Trees 

above 10 to 12 inches dbh, and definitely above 14 inches dbh, have bark that is inherently fireresistant (including fir species as well as pine). Trees of this size-class are not fuels and should 

not be subject to removal as part of a fuels reduction project. (SC) 

Response: Fuels are defined as “Any substance or composite mixture susceptible to ignition and 

combustion.” Trees that have limbs that are available to fire spread are a fuel. The size of the 

tree makes little difference if limbs are near adjacent fuels that can transfer heat through direct 

conduction, radiation, or convection. 

Thick bark is an adaptation for survival in fire regimes of low-intensity surface fires, but has 

little value in severe, stand replacement fires (Kaufman in Walstad et al. 1990). Specific 

adaptations and the capacity to survive a fire often change with age. Environmental conditions 

which influence survival include type of fire, frequency of recurrence, season of burn, fuel 

consumption, fire intensity, physical site characteristics and associated species in the 

composition (Gill (1981) in Walstad et al. 1990). 

The Spears Project has several purposes, not just reduction of fuels and the potential for highintensity wildfires. Trees are prescribed for removal based on several considerations including 

stand species composition, density reduction, incidence or susceptibility to insects and disease, 

as well as reducing potential for high-intensity wildfire. 

Comment: The Spears project as proposed is incapable of effectively addressing fuels issues. 

Spears would result in the further increase of fire risk, and the continued incremental degradation 

and decline of wildlife habitat and populations. The project fails to address fuels buildup across 

the district’s landscape, and fails to propose comprehensive, effective fuels reduction. The 

district has proposed to remove fire-resistant trees between 14 and 21 inches dbh from areas that 

are deficient in this size-class of trees, and proposes doing so in scattered disparate units that 

evidence no rationale strategy or overall awareness that would substantiate this project as being 

based upon fuels reduction or fire risk. (SC) 

Response: The Spears Project has several purposes; it is not solely a fuel reduction project. 

However, the potential for high-intensity wildfires within the project area is real and the 

proposed treatments can reduce the likelihood of a high-intensity wildfire burning large portions 

of the project area. In 2003, the Ochoco and Deschutes National Forests developed a joint Five 

Year Action Plan to Accelerate Vegetation Treatments that Improve Condition Class. This 2003 

fuels strategy is a tool to implement the National Fire Plan priorities. The Spears project falls 

under the Ochoco and Deschutes National Forests fuels strategy and is identified within a highpriority HUC that was the highest rated HUC on the Ochoco National Forest. This rating took 

into account Values at Risk, Fuels and Vegetation Conditions, Community Involvement, and 

Economic Opportunity. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 359 

The Spears Project proposes to effectively reduce fuels by: 

 1. Beginning the design of the project by identifying areas of fire risk and then 

prioritizing these areas according to proximity to private property, major routes of travel, and 

infrastructure improvements. Chapter 1 and Map 15 in the EIS describe the priority fuel 

treatment areas that were identified for this project. 

 2. Identifying treatments such as underburning or thinning, or a combination depending 

on the existing stand conditions. Underburning alone was prescribed in more open areas with 

mostly surface fuels. Thinning was prescribed in areas such as those with dense stands of trees 

of various sizes and ages, with thickets of younger trees, with numerous small trees in proximity 

to large trees, and other areas with abundant ladder fuels. 

 3. Maintenance underburning was identified in previously burned areas or in areas with 

relatively low levels of natural fuels accumulations. 

 4. Underburning that is selected for implementation will be conducted during favorable 

moisture and weather conditions to ensure that prescribed fires do not cause detrimental charring 

of soils or dry out soils and kill desirable vegetation. 

 5. Removing trees between 14 and 21 inches dbh when they are in excess of the 

recommended stocking levels, are of undesired species (such as shade tolerant fire-susceptible 

fir), or are diseased or damaged (such as mistletoe-infected Douglas-fir or ponderosa pine). 

Removing these trees will reduce the competitive stress on adjacent large trees helping maintain 

them longer, allow other mid-sized trees to grow to large size, help improve the fire resistance of 

the stand (by removing ladder fuels and reducing crown bulk density), and reduce the amount of 

disease within the stand. 

Comment: The failure of the Draft EIS to disclose and incorporate strategic landscape scale 

information and planning into this project violates the NEPA. The overall fire risk reduction 

pattern of the Spears project resembles “spots on a Holstein cow” with random units selected for 

their commercial logging volumes rather than selection based upon an underlying comprehensive 

fire risk reduction landscape scale strategy. Removing fuels in random spots will do little to 

alleviate the fire situation. Why are you not removing small diameter real fuels to create mature 

and LOS forest canopy shaded small fuels free corridors between roads and open areas to inhibit 

fires? The selection of units seems to have little to do with fire suppression and the Marks Creek 

Watershed will be nearly as fire prone after the project as before. (SC) 

Response: The Spears project does not remove fuels only in random spots. The Proposed 

Action and alternatives were developed to strategically place treatments to reduce the potential 

for high-intensity fires. The fuels strategy for this project considered a combination of areas that 

had not had recent treatments that were in close proximity to private property, major routes of 

travel, and critical infrastructure improvements such as communication sites and power lines. 

Fuel treatments were designed to reduce risk around these areas by combining proposed fuel 

reduction work with previously treated areas. This strategy will result in a semi-contiguous 

break in fuel continuity. These strategically placed landscape area treatments (SPLATS) were 

designed to optimize the potential for suppression resources to result in a successful and safe 

outcome. The SPLATS were designed utilizing concepts developed by Mark Finney (2001). 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 360 

The proposed activities in the Spears Project remove small diameter fuels, including surface and 

ladder fuels. As disclosed in the Draft EIS (pp. 71-73), all of the action alternatives reduce 

potential fire behavior and probability. The project area will be less fire prone as a result of 

implementing any of the action alternatives. 

Hardwood Plant Communities 

Comment: The primary cause of harm to hardwood communities is excessive livestock grazing 

and increased solar exposure from logging. Contrary to agency claims, conifer encroachment 

within the project primarily consists of young trees. This is rarely a root factor in hardwood 

decline, though an overabundance of young conifer trees (mostly <10” dbh) can be a 

contributing factor. Livestock damage, loss of moisture retention across the surrounding forest, 

diversion of area waters to livestock troughs and other uses, and consequent seasonally lowered 

water tables during the dry summer and fall months can result in the loss and/or poor health of 

hardwood trees. (SC) 

Response: The hardwood thinning proposed in the project does not include commercial harvest 

of larger trees. The proposed hardwood thinning would cut down or girdle conifer trees up to 15 

inches dbh when they occur within 50 feet of an aspen or cottonwood. Trees would be left on 

site, slash would not be burned, but would be lopped into smaller pieces and/or hand piled. 

Fencing and/or caging is proposed to address damage from not only livestock but also big game. 

In some hardwood units slash would be used to create barriers to livestock to protect the 

hardwoods as well as streambanks. 

The Final EIS recognizes that conifer encroachment is not the only factor affecting hardwood 

decline. The Final EIS states, “Aspen is sensitive to conifer encroachment and accompanying 

shade, browsing by livestock and big game, and reduced water tables.” Causes for the decline 

and loss of aspen and cottonwood are complex with different factors or combinations of factors 

affecting individual populations. While there are clones where livestock are the major factor, 

there are others where shade and loss of soil moisture due to conifer encroachment or lowering 

of the water table due to stream entrenchment are the primary cause. 

It is well established in the scientific community that aspen are very intolerant of shade (Baker 

1949, Brown 1995, Mueggler 1989 and Wright et al. 2000) and increased sunlight from thinning 

is expected to be beneficial to hardwoods (Draft EIS, p. 74). Mueggler says that aspen is a 

relatively short-lived, shade-intolerant species, that rapidly declines in abundance as conifers 

gain dominance in the overstory. Brown (1995) states that aspen start declining in vigor past 60 

to 80 years, rarely living past 200 years, and can be out competed by more tolerant or longer 

lived trees. He further states, “Protection from herbivery, via fencing or other obstructions or 

distractions to animals, has rarely been viewed as a regeneration technique all by itself. Though 

it often stimulates suckering, it does not change the influence of shading or apical dominance.” 

Comment: The Draft EIS fails to accurately assess the extent and severity of site-specific actual 

conditions and root causes of hardwood decline, and instead focuses on logging actions that 

would result in the further degradation of forest soils, riparian areas, and wildlife habitat essential 

for healthy hardwood communities. The Draft EIS fails to provide monitoring methods and 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 361 

information substantiating its erroneous claims that livestock grazing impacts are being 

effectively addressed. The planned logging will instead cumulatively compound and exacerbate 

livestock harms. Removal and/or significant reduction of livestock grazing in affected areas are 

the first and foremost effective method for accomplishing goals for hardwoods. Conifer removal 

must be confined to small diameter trees less than 10 to 14 inches dbh. Conifers greater than 14 

inches dbh that are impacting hardwoods areas can be girdled and left as snags for wildlife. 

Scientific research and ample in-the-forest evidence clearly demonstrates that mature and old 

conifers co-exist well with aspens and hardwood stands. The failure of the Draft EIS to 

incorporate scientifically supported effective measures that truly address root causes violates the 

NEPA. (SC) 

Response: None of the proposed alternatives include commercial logging in the 196 acres of 

hardwood stands where thinning is proposed. The proposed thinning activities include cutting or 

girdling conifer trees up to 15 inches dbh. These thinning activities would be completed using 

chainsaws, not heavy equipment. The discussion in the Draft EIS (p. 74) that states “removing 

conifer trees” refers to cutting them down or girdling. As discussed, the slash from these cut 

trees would be lopped (cut into small pieces) and scattered or would be arranged (moved around) 

to protect individual aspen sprouts or streambanks by creating a barrier that would discourage 

livestock trampling and browsing. As disclosed in the Draft EIS (pp. 74-75), several exclosures 

would reduce both livestock grazing and big game browse in aspen and cottonwood stands. As 

noted above, livestock are not the only factor affecting hardwood decline and restricting 

livestock grazing alone will not result in increases in hardwoods (Brown 1995). 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas 

Comment: The purpose and need for action includes increasing riparian vegetation and large 

tree structure in RHCAs. Recent experience has shown that riparian areas are particularly hard 

hit by catastrophic unnatural wildfires due to the excessive buildup of fuels in those areas. 

Would this purpose be counter productive in that respect? (AFRC) 

Response: No. The Draft EIS (p. 5) states: “The Forest Plan (p. 4-32) identifies a desired 

future condition where hardwoods such as cottonwood, aspen, alder, and willow will be more 

common along streams, meadows, and wet areas. In other words, the desired future conditions is 

to have well distributed and vigorous hardwood communities across the project area.” The 

purpose and need is aimed at increasing these types of riparian vegetation, not necessarily 

increasing the overall amount of vegetation in riparian areas. This purpose and need statement 

was developed because the amount and type of vegetation in riparian areas plays an important 

role in maintaining and improving both water quality and fish habitat. The increasing amount of 

conifers in RHCAs prevents woody vegetation such as alder, willow, aspen, and shrubs from 

expanding. Conifers within RHCAs compete with these species for nutrients. Many of these 

broadleaf species are shade-intolerant; throughout the project area conifers are shading these 

brushy, shrubby species, and they are losing vigor. 

Comment: The Draft EIS claims that commercial harvest in Class III and IV RHCAs would 

benefit riparian-associated trees and shrubs such as cottonwood, aspen, alder, and willow by 

reducing competition for nutrients and growing space. The claim is reflective of actions that 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 362 

adhere to INFISH provisions and scientific recommendations for restoration in RHCAs. They do 

not comport with the agency’s planned scientifically insupportable commercial logging of trees 

up to 21 inches dbh in RHCAs. There should be no removal of trees above 12 inches dbh from 

any riparian area. (SC) 

Response: Trees that would be commercially harvested within RHCAs would be from the outer 

100 feet of Class I, II, and III RHCAs and 25 feet of Class IV RHCAs. Those trees removed 

follow a prescription that retains trees larger than 21 inches dbh. In some areas, trees would be 

thinned to reduce crowding and increase growth rates so that the residual trees will grow into 

larger trees. In areas with aspen and cottonwood, conifers would be removed, but would not be 

commercially harvested. Deciduous riparian vegetation is generally shade-intolerant. Removing 

conifers near these species will reduce shade that is causing them to decline. However, shade is 

important to regulate stream temperatures and no trees that provided shade in Class I, II, or III 

RHCAs will be removed. No trees would be removed from streambanks as part of any 

commercial harvest or precommercial thinning activity. 

Comment: Given that stream shading is a primary factor affecting stream temperature, it will be 

of key importance to identify the vegetation providing critical stream shading. It is not clear 

from the brief description on page 84 of the Draft EIS what methodology will be used to make 

this determination. We recommend that the Final EIS give additional discussion to how 

vegetation that provides critical stream shade will be identified. (EPA) 

Response: The height of trees, at various slopes and distances that provide shade during the 

period when peak temperatures occur, were calculated. A thinning protocol was developed from 

this information. This protocol include no commercial harvest of trees within 200 feet of fishbearing streams (Class I and II) and no commercial harvest within 50 feet of perennial nonfishbearing streams (Class III) depending on aspect. The effectiveness of this protocol was 

determined using a solar pathfinder. Solar pathfinder shade monitoring of non-commercial 

thinning within fish bearing streams and perennial, nonfish-bearing streams using the district 

thinning protocol found less than an 1 percent change in within channel shade readings from pretreatment observations (Fontaine 1998). In the Spears project area, there is no harvest within 

200 feet of fish bearing streams and no harvest within 50 feet of perennial, nonfish-bearing 

streams to ensure that commercial harvest does not cut trees that provide shade. Depending on 

aspect, the no-harvest buffer on Class III streams is enlarged to100 feet. In units 101, 105, 115, 

143, 210, 304, 565, and 707, the no-harvest buffer has been enlarged to 100 feet in the Class III 

RHCAs to ensure that trees that provide shade are not cut. 

Aquatic Species 

Comment: The cited ODFW data on redband trout published in 1991 are somewhat dated to 

serve as documentation of population status. The U.S. Geologic Survey suggests considering the 

2001 and 2002 annual reports on the conditions for growth and survival of bull trout in Beulah 

Reservoir. These reports may be useful in understanding the impact of sedimentation on the 

redband trout. (DOI) 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 363 

Response: Although the ODFW 1991 Fish Population Report that was used in this document 

does appear to be dated, it is some of the best information available. In addition to the 1991 

ODFW report, the EIS used more up-to-date information on fish distribution. Map 3 includes 

information from the ODFW 2004 fish distribution survey as well as the fish observations 

documented during Level II stream surveys by Forest Service personnel. The newer information 

shows that the distribution of redband trout has expanded since the 1991 fish population report. 

A review of literature for redband trout revealed that the 1991 data is some of the most up-todate. In the 2005 Oregon Native Fish Strategy Report (p. 3), it states: “This Oregon Native Fish 

Status Report is the first statewide assessment of native fish in Oregon since completion of the 

Biennial Report on the Status of Wild Fish in Oregon in 1995 (Kostow 1995). This report can be 

considered a supplement to the 1995 report. ... For those species not covered in the Oregon 

Native Fish Status Report, the 1995 report contains the most recent assessment of those species.” 

The 2005 report did not assess the Columbia Basin redband trout, which includes redband trout 

in the Spears project area. The 1995 report indicates that “Redband trout populations in the 

Crooked River are fragmented, isolated from each other, and depressed throughout the basin due 

to barriers caused by dams, dewatering, and temperature extremes. ... Recent stream surveys 

indicate that remnant populations are primarily on public lands, in headwater areas (USFS and 

BLM lands), and in the Crooked River from Bowman Dam to Lake Billy Chinook.” The 1995 

report also states “Abundance estimates are not available for most populations in the Crooked 

River Basin.” The information contained in the 1995 report is essentially the same as the 

information cited from 1991. 

The two Annual Reports on Conditions for growth and survival of bull trout in Beulah Reservoir, 

Oregon were reviewed. These reports discuss the status of bull trout in Beulah Reservoir in 

relationship to temperature and time of use. Redband trout are mentioned as present in the 

reservoir and that they are prey species for bull trout. The reports do not shed any new 

information on sediment, stream temperature, or redband trout that would be useful in assessing 

the effects to redband trout in the Spears Project Area. 

Comment: Sedimentation is associated with decreased amphibian abundance. Disturbance of 

riparian and upslope habitat at broad scales may affect amphibian habitat at finer scales by 

influencing stream temperature, microclimate, and sediment input. These life-history 

requirements and activities that affect these requirements should be considered when maintaining 

amphibian habitat. Activities that increase sedimentation should be minimized adjacent to small, 

high elevation streams where tailed frog adults may congregate to breed. The U.S. Geologic 

Survey suggests considering the two references that may be useful in understanding the impact 

of sedimentation on this amphibian species. (DOI) 

Response: Although Corkran and Thoms (2006) note that tailed frogs occur in Central Oregon, 

tailed frogs are not known to occur in the Spears Project Area. 

The EIS contains design elements for Water Quality and RHCAs. RHCAs include seep and 

springs and are the areas were amphibian species are most likely to occur. Protections are in 

place for Class I, II, III, and IV streams as well as ponds and springs. For streams, the width of 

RHCAs are determined by whether it is fish-bearing and whether it is perennial or intermittent 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 364 

and range from 50 - 300 feet each side of the stream. There are an estimated 4,546 acres of 

RHCAs in the project area. In addition to streams, RHCAs also occur around ponds, lakes, 

reservoirs, wetlands, landslides, and landslide-prone areas. RHCAs for these areas have not been 

mapped and are not included in the estimated acres of RHCAs within the project area. However, 

the design elements do apply to these areas. 

The Stoddard and others (2004) paper relates to tailed frogs in third-order drainages in the 

Eugene and Salem Districts of the BLM on the east slope of the Oregon Coast Range. The 

climate and habitat in the Oregon Coast Range is different than habitat in the Spears Project Area 

and Central Oregon. This study suggests that 150 feet on each side of a stream are important to 

protect habitat. Class I, II, and III RHCAs include considerations for riparian-dependent 

resources of at least 150-feet on each side of these streams. This would help protect any 

potential tailed frog habitat as well as habitat for other amphibians found in the area such as 

Columbia spotted frogs. 

Corn and Bury’s (1989) study is based on Pacific giant salamander and Olympic salamanders. 

These species are not known to occur in the Spears Project Area. Corn and Bury state: “Lowgradient streams may retain fine sediments.” and “Logging and associated road construction 

often result in increased sediment loads in Coast Range streams. Mass soil movements on steep, 

logged slopes can deposit large amounts of sediment in low-gradient stream channels.” The 

climate in Central Oregon is much drier than the coast range. Within the project area, the 

average rain fall is approximately 20 inches per year compared to the rainfall in Salem which 

averages 39 inches and in Eugene which averages 46 inches. The EIS includes a discussion on 

mass wasting and mass soil movements are not expected as a result of implementing any of the 

action alternatives. This study was completed in 1989 well before RHCAs protections were put 

in place. The statement that “land managers place less emphasis on protecting the integrity of 

these small streams than in protecting larger streams with salmonid habitat.” is no longer 

accurate considering the INFISH emphasis on protecting habitat in small streams with or without 

native fish. 

Comment: Buffer streams from the effects of heavy equipment and loss of bank trees and trees 

that shade streams. Mitigate for the loss of LWD input by retaining extra snags and wood in 

riparian areas. Recognize that thinning captures mortality that is not necessarily compensated by 

future growth. (OW, SC) 

Response: The Draft and Final EISs contain design elements that indicate streams would be 

buffered from the use of ground-based machinery for logging or slash piling operations. The 

design elements also indicated that vegetation that is contributing to bank stability would not be 

removed and that there would be no reduction of shade on perennial streams. The proposed 

activities are designed to retain existing down logs and snags, unless they are a safety hazard. 

Snags that are safety hazards within RHCAs will be felled and left on site. Commercial harvest 

and precommercial thinning activities are expected to result in increased growth rates of trees 

within RHCAs which will contribute to future large woody debris levels. In Class I and II 

RHCAs, commercial harvest in the outer portion of the RHCAs would not remove any trees that 

would become future large wood because trees in the outer portions of these RHCAs are unlikely 

to reach the stream channel. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 365 

Where thinning occurs in aspen and cottonwood stands, trees up to 15 inches dbh would be cut 

or would be girdled. Trees that are cut would contribute to existing down wood levels. Trees 

that are girdled would eventually fall and contribute to future down wood levels. 

The proposed thinning activities are designed to reduce stand densities to the lower limit of the 

management zone. However, based on the existing variability within the stands and the existing 

number of large trees, not all areas that are treated will be reduced to this lower limit. At the 

lower limit, stands will be still be fully stocked and no reforestation will be needed. At the upper 

limit of the management zone, inter-tree competition will occur and competition-induced 

mortality is expected to occur. After treatment, some stands will still be at or near the upper 

limit and some mortality is expected in the future.

Comment: The Draft EIS analysis and disclosures concerning riparian, aquatic species, and 

water quality issues fail to accurately disclose pertinent scientific research, including failing to 

address ecological degradation issues INFISH RHCA buffer prohibitions on commercial logging 

were adopted to prevent. As this information is essential to evaluating the agency’s proposal to 

log within buffer areas, these omissions and analysis deficiencies violate the NEPA. (SC) 

Response: INFISH states that RHCAs are “portions of watersheds where riparian-dependent 

resources receive primary emphasis, and management activities are subject to specific standards 

and guidelines.” INFISH (p. A-1) specifically stated that “Adoption of these requirements 

during the interim period is not to be considered a ‘lockout’ of any project or activity from the 

RHCAs.” The INFISH amendment did not prohibit commercial logging or any other activities 

in RHCAs. 

INFISH did establish specific standards and guidelines related to timber management. Standard 

and guideline TM-1b indicates that silvicultural practices (which includes timber harvest) can be 

applied in RHCAs to achieve desired vegetation characteristics. These silvicultural practices 

need to be applied in a manner that does not retard attainment of Riparian Management 

Objectives and that avoids adverse effects on inland native fish. The Spears Project includes 

silvicultural practices (commercial harvest and precommercial thinning) within RHCAs to 

achieve desired vegetation characteristics. The purpose and need for this project indicates that 

desired characteristics within RHCAs include increasing broadleaf species by reducing conifers 

and increasing the number of large trees that will become large woody debris. The design 

elements in Chapter 2 include specific measures to reduce the environmental effects of activities 

in RHCAs. The Aquatic Species section in Chapter 3 indicates that the proposed activities will 

not retard attainment of RMOS and avoids adverse effects on redband trout. 

Comment: The conclusion in the Draft EIS for redband trout violates NEPAs reasonableness, 

scientific, and expert advice requirements. It also violates NFMAs provisions against extirpation 

of species from project areas. This conclusion relies upon the acceptance of extirpating redband 

trout from sections of affected waterways. As the Draft EIS analysis fails to assess fish habitat 

conditions in adjacent areas, and disclosures reveal that fish habitat is significantly impaired 

throughout the area, there is no assurance that other viable habitat exists. This conclusion 

violates CWA requirements, violates the Ochoco Forest Plan as amended by INFISH, and given 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 366 

the widespread ongoing cumulative impacts in the area, may indeed result in the extirpation and 

trend towards ESA listing of redband trout, in violation of the ESA as well. The Draft EIS must 

be revised. (SC) 

Response: This comment provides no scientific evidence or expert advice to support the claim 

that redband trout would be “extirpated” from the project area. Recent fish distribution surveys 

conducted by ODFW in 2004 demonstrate that habitat and distribution of fish has expanded 

since 1991. The activities proposed in all four action alternatives are not expected to reverse this 

trend. 

The Draft EIS (pp. 76-79), discloses the habitat condition for fish: pool frequency, water 

temperature, large woody debris, and width-to-depth ratio. The analysis for fish habitat in the 

Spears project area was completed using local data from stream surveys within the project area. 

The Draft EIS stated that during road work fish can move to other parts of the stream and avoid 

any sediment. The Final EIS has been updated to clarify that fish will temporarily move to other 

parts of the stream during the short duration (less than 1 day) that sediment delivery is expected. 

This road work will not cause an adverse effect to redband trout because it is a common behavior 

for fish to migrate through streams throughout the watershed. For example, when water 

temperatures are higher in the summer months, fish regularly seek refuge in cooler water in other 

streams within the watershed. Fish will naturally move up or downstream in the event there is 

any disturbance such as from big game, vehicles, or people. 

Comment: The EIS ignores the State standard of 55 degrees F water temperature for spawning 

use during 9 months of the year. The maximum water temperature for streams should be 55 

degrees, not 64 degrees. 

Response: The State standard (Oregon Water Quality Standards OAR 340-041-028(4)(a)) 

indicates that the 13 degrees C (55.4 degrees F) spawning use standard applies to salmon and 

steelhead streams with Figure 130B showing salmon and steelhead use and the dates during 

which the standard applies. Figure 130B Salmon and Steelhead Spawning Use Designations 

Deschutes Basin, Oregon does not show any salmon or steelhead use in any stream in the project 

area. The Oregon Water Temperature Standard was adopted by the Oregon Environmental 

Quality Commission (EQC) in December 2003 and approved by EPA in March 2004. The 

pertinent State water temperature standard for this project area is 64 degrees. 

Comment: The Draft EIS fails to reasonably assess and disclose likely harmful incursions into 

thinned RHCAs by OHVs and snowmobiles. OHV and snowmobile impacts to more open 

RHCAs are not adequately addressed. (SC) 

Response: Design elements restrict ground-based equipment off roads in RHCAs, with a few 

exceptions. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would not create new skid trails in most RHCAs. This 

substantially reduces the potential of thinning in RHCAs causing an increase in OHV or 

snowmobile use in RHCAs. OHVs can reduce effective ground cover, cause puddling, and 

cause channelization down ruts adjacent to streams as well as break down stream banks and 

disturb in stream substrate at fords. However, it is not possible to quantify the effects because of 

the dispersed character of the impacts and uncertainty of the extent and dispersion of future OHV 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 367 

use in the project area. Currently, most OHV use in the Marks Creek watershed is on old roads 

adjacent to Little Hay Creek and east of Marks Creek. Due to the lack of new skid trails in 

RHCAs and the higher stocking levels resulting from district thinning protocols to meet INFISH 

temperature RMOs, thinning in RHCAs is not expected to result in more OHV use. To comply 

with the 2005 Travel Management rule, the Ochoco National Forest is in the early stages of 

developing a proposal to designate roads, trails, and areas that are open for OHV use. As part of 

that effort, the Ochoco National Forest is likely to amend the Forest Plan and restrict crosscountry travel of OHVs. The implementation date for changing OHV use is expected to be in 

2009 and will likely be in effect before much of the precommercial thinning in RHCAs occurs. 

Snowmobile use occurs where there is adequate snow cover and does not reduce effective 

ground cover, cause puddling, cause channelization down ruts adjacent to streams, or break 

down stream banks and disturb in stream substrate at fords. 

Comment: The Draft EIS fails to reasonably assess and disclose likely harmful incursions into 

thinned RHCAs by livestock. Livestock grazing conclusions are not supported by facts, 

including scientific research documenting livestock grazing patterns, or by surveys assessing 

livestock’s harmful grazing patterns continuing to concentrate harms within RHCAs. The Draft 

EIS conclusions violate the NEPA by failing to disclose research that contradicts these 

pretentious conclusions. (SC) 

Response: Increased livestock use is discussed under cumulative effects for RHCAs and 

redband trout (Draft EIS, pp. 87 and 96). Livestock trailing in RHCAs is not expected to change 

because restricting ground-based equipment in RHCAs will limit the number of skid trails that 

livestock might use. Also, slash from thinning activities would discourage livestock use. In 

hardwood thinning units, fences and slash arrangement are expected to discourage livestock use. 

Air Quality 

Comment: There does not appear to be any discussion about the proposed changes to the OAR 

Chapter 629, Division 48 Smoke Management Rules. Granted these are State administrative 

rules but presumably the 1994 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for implementing the air 

quality program incorporates them. The proposed rule changes include new criteria for the 

identification of future smoke sensitive receptor areas. (AFRC) 

Response: The 1994 Memorandum of Understanding in still in effect. The proposed changes to 

the Smoke Management Rules are still draft and are not being implemented. When these 

administrative rules are finalized, should a change in smoke thresholds take place burning 

operations would be adjusted accordingly. This could include but not be limited to adjustments 

in scheduling. The Forest Service is always interested in exploring new ways of slash disposal. 

If a new opportunity or technology presents itself, it would be considered. The Forest Service 

would consider this “new information” or “changed circumstance” and determine whether the 

planned treatments should proceed or if they should be adjusted. 

Comment: Is the limit of 15,000 tons of PM10 still the case as it was in 1994 or has it changed? 

(AFRC) 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 368 

Response: The limit of 15,000 tons of PM10 is still the same as it was in 1994. 

Comment: The Draft EIS does not estimate the tons of emissions from Alternative 1-No Action. 

What would the emissions be if there is no treatment, i.e. no fuel reductions? The agency must 

estimate the emissions from possible wildfires under the No Action alternative. Doing nothing 

will lead to unnatural wildfires and the effects of doing nothing must be estimated to compare the 

effects of doing something. (AFRC) 

Response: The Draft and Final EISs disclose the expected effects of implementing the 

alternatives. Under Alternative 1, management activities would not produce any emissions 

because no prescribed burning would occur. Estimating the amount of emissions from a future 

wildfire under any alternative would be speculative because it is not possible to accurately 

predict when a fire might occur, how many acres it might burn, how many fuels might be 

consumed, and how many emissions might be produced. As stated in the EIS, the intensity of 

any wildfire within the project area and the amount of emissions it would produce would be 

higher under the no action alternative than if fuels were reduced. The EIS includes a section 

describing the effects on potential fire behavior and probability. This section displays the effects 

of doing something (i.e. the action alternatives reducing fuels) compared to doing nothing (the no 

action alternative). 

Forest Wood Products and Jobs 

Comment: The effects on local communities are important and need to be given more 

consideration. Take a harder look at the social and economic factors that would encourage more 

positive outcomes to the local communities with jobs and products for manufacturing facilities. 

It is important to keep facilities operating in Warm Springs, Gilchrist, and John Day. Secondary 

manufacturing in Prineville is still affected by the social and economic decisions being adopted 

in the alternatives being considered. (OLC) 

Response: Although social and economic considerations were not part of the Purpose and Need, 

the Ochoco National Forest does recognize that forest wood products contribute positively to 

social and economic conditions in the local and surrounding communities (Draft EIS, pp. 113-

118). One of the main reasons the Forest Service offers wood products from their vegetation 

management is the recognition that commercial timber harvest does provide economic returns, 

including jobs in the primary manufacturing industry directly, and indirectly in the secondary 

manufacturing industry (Draft EIS, p. 116). 

Comment: First, given the fact that mills today have to bring logs in from hundreds of miles 

away, some from other countries, the Forest Service should not be so local in its estimates of job 

impacts. That is, if what the Ochoco does results in positive job impacts in the Willamette 

Valley, that fact should not be taken lightly. (AFRC) 

Response: The Draft EIS estimate of jobs is based on State-wide economic relationships in part 

because of the recognition that many of the jobs associated with the alternatives may in fact be 

tied to wood products being processed outside of the local area. The economic effects were 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 369 

considered at the local level in part because of scale issues. At the local level, the effects of the

alternatives are meaningful and measurable, whereas at the state-wide scale, they are not. 

Comment: It is rather disingenuous for the Forest Service to be estimating jobs related to road 

work. Many of those jobs would find work elsewhere. In fact, many of the road jobs are less 

willing to work on federal lands due to all the contracting requirements. (AFRC) 

Response: The same can be said about all of the jobs and income associated with the activities 

and outputs. Table 42 (Draft EIS, p. 116), and the narrative on page 217, both explicitly 

recognize that these may not be new jobs but instead may just maintain existing jobs. However, 

it is important is to recognize that these alternatives will create and/or maintain economic 

activity. 

Non-native Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds) 

Comment: Take proactive steps to avoid the spread of weeds. Avoid and minimize soil 

disturbance. Retain canopy cover and native ground cover to suppress weeds. Commercial 

logging increases risks of weed infestations because of soil disturbance and canopy reduction. 

(OW, SC) 

Response: The EIS does include provisions to reduce the potential for weed spread. Chapter 3 

of the Final EIS discloses that commercial logging and road construction activities increase the 

risk of spreading weeds. To reduce this risk, pre-project surveys for noxious weeds has occurred 

and measures to reduce weed spread are included in the Design Elements in Chapter 2. In 

addition, some proposed treatments were modified specifically to retain canopy cover and 

minimize soil disturbance in areas where weed infestations are known to occur. Originally, units 

501, 503, and 901 included commercial logging, precommercial thinning, and underburning 

activities. The prescription in these units were modified to jackpot then underburning to reduce 

fuels while maintaining canopy cover and minimizing soil disturbance so that nearby populations 

of houndstongue are less likely to spread. 

Soils 

Comment: Protect soils by avoiding road construction, minimizing ground-based logging, and 

avoiding numerous large burn piles. Avoid the use of any heavy machinery. The Draft EIS 

violates the NEPA by failing to disclose pertinent science addressing logging machineries 

impacts to forest soils. (OW, SC) 

Response: Much of the Spears Project Area contains slopes that are less than 35 percent which 

is considered feasible for harvesting with ground-based equipment. No matter which logging 

system is used, roads are needed for access via trucks and equipment. Commercial harvest using 

ground-based equipment is usually the most economical. As stated in the Draft EIS (p. 18), 

helicopter harvest systems are proposed in areas with slopes greater than 35 percent and in areas 

where there are concerns about using ground-based systems. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 370 

The Draft EIS recognizes (p. 242) that timber harvest using ground-based systems, burning piles, 

and road construction results in unavoidable adverse effects to soils. The proposed activities 

have been designed to be consistent with the Regional soil quality standards. The Draft EIS did 

not ignore relevant scientific information related to ground-based logging impacts. The 

information related to ground-based logging impacts in the Draft EIS (p. 147) is based on local 

monitoring of timber harvest activities on the Ochoco National Forest. This is the best available 

information related to logging impacts for this project area. 

Comment: Machine piling and pile burning tend to cause significant adverse impacts on soil 

and water, especially when combined with road impacts and other logging disturbances. (OW, 

SC) 

Response: The adverse effects to soils have been disclosed in the Draft EIS (pp. 147-151). 

Grapple piling and pile burning is largely located on existing disturbance such as skid trails and 

landings, thus it contributes little additional detrimental soil conditions. Grapple piling can be a 

very low impact operation when confined to existing roads, skid trails, and landings. The 

machine does not have to produce additional disturbance especially with a 25-30 foot boom. 

Grapple piling contracts on the Ochoco National Forest include specifications to limit slash 

piling to the slash that can be reached from existing skid trails, roads, and landings. Where skid 

trails do not exist, the location of equipment routes is designated so that soil disturbance does not 

exceed 20 percent of an area. 

Comment: Soils have been significantly impaired throughout much of the area by past groundbased logging. Decades of increased solar exposure and livestock over-grazing have also 

harmed area soils. (SC) 

Response: The cumulative impact to soils from past logging has been included in the unit-byunit assessment of existing soil damage (see Appendix B). The Spears project has been designed 

so that there is no net increase in soil disturbance in areas that currently exceed 20 percent soil 

damage. Decades of increased solar exposure have very little effect on these soils as most 

surfaces were formed during the very hot and dry Altithermal period of the Holocene 

(approximately 4,000-8,000 years ago when Mount Mazama blew up forming the crater at Crater 

Lake). The cumulative effects related to livestock grazing on the soils resource were 

inadvertently overlooked during the preparation of the Draft EIS. The Final EIS has been 

updated to include the cumulative effects of livestock grazing on soils. 

Comment: Agency attempts to speed-up natural processes, such as utilizing sub-soiling, have 

been proven to compound existent harms in all but the must severe cases. (SC) 

Response: Tillage has been shown to have positive effects on decompacting many soils 

worldwide. Tillage is not a cure-all, but does improve soil productivity. Tillage effectiveness 

varies widely with soil texture, rock content, depth, water content, and type of tillage implement 

used. Geist and Froehlich (1994) indicate that some mechanical method to consistently 

ameliorate the compacted condition is desirable and feasible especially on coarse textured soils 

such as ash capped soils on the Ochoco National Forest. Sanborn and others (1999) state that the 

evidence indicates that decompaction and decompaction plus topsoil recovery, respectively, 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 371 

appear to be sufficient to restore productivity for landings constructed on coarse and medium 

textured soils. Local monitoring by the Ochoco National Forest Soil Scientist during the past 15 

years on tillage operations has shown that for the average tillage implement, such as a forest 

cultivator or tractor mounted subsoiler, effectiveness is about 70 percent for a single pass. 

Comment: The Draft EIS for this project fails to adequately assess and disclose unit soil 

conditions, pertinent soil research, and develop effective restoration and protection plans. (SC) 

Response: Appendix B in the Draft and Final EISs discloses unit-by-unit soil conditions and 

describes the specific amounts and units where soil tilling is expected to occur. The Draft EIS 

(p. 34) indicates that soil monitoring will evaluate the need for soil rehabilitation after harvest 

and grapple piling activities are complete. The Draft EIS also discloses the units where tilling is 

expected to occur based on the expected effects of harvest and grapple piling. As mentioned 

above, soil research has been considered, and soil tilling, an effective restoration method, has 

been identified. 

Comment: What is clear to anyone familiar with scientific research on LOS stands and soils, is 

that the health, vigor and longevity of such stands is extremely dependent upon healthy soils. 

(SC) 

Response: The Forest Service recognizes that it is important to maintain the health of soils and 

has developed regional soil quality standards in order to maintain site productivity. This project 

has assessed the effects to the soil resource, on a unit-by-unit basis. All four action alternatives 

have been designed to be consistent with regional soil quality standards. As disclosed in the 

Draft and Final EISs, there are some unavoidable adverse effects to soils as a result of the 

proposed activities. 

Comment: Protecting, maintaining, and restoring forest soils and hydrological functioning is 

supported by scientific research as the best way of reducing the risk of severe fires, especially 

within mixed fire severity ecosystems. The failure of the Draft EIS to accurately disclose and 

assess applicable scientific studies and recommendations, and the failure of its logging 

alternatives to meaningfully prevent additional degradation to soils, canopy cover, and 

hydrological patterns, violates the NEPA. (SC) 

Response: Scientific research does not support the above statement. The severity of fires relates 

to the amount of fuels on a given site, not the condition of the soil and hydrology in the area. 

The best way to reduce the risk of severe fires is to reduce the volume and horizontal continuity 

of fuels. The Draft EIS considers recent research on potential fire behavior and burn probability 

and discloses that reducing ground (i.e. surface) and ladder fuels result in reducing the area that 

supports higher flame lengths and higher rates of spread. 

Heavy fuel loadings increase the risk of increased oxidation and mineralization of nutrients such 

as nitrogen and potassium from fires. Reducing fuel loadings also reduces this risk. Heavy fuel 

loading are more likely to result in increased fire intensity and severity which can reduce site 

productivity (Harvey 1991). Soil monitoring on the Deschutes National Forest (Shank 2004) 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 372 

demonstrates that detrimental soil conditions that exceed 20 percent occurred in areas that had 

not been thinned that were burned by a wildfire and then reburned. 

Water Quality 

Comment: The Draft EIS indicates the 7-day maximum average temperatures in Marks Creek 

average as high as 75.6 degrees F. This reveals some of the area’s serious water quality harms 

and issues. (SC) 

Response: The statement on page 89 of the Draft EIS has been corrected to indicate that the 

warmest 7-day maximum average temperature was 75.6 degrees F in 2002. This temperature 

was recorded in Spears Meadow above Little Hay Creek. Temperatures in this area are 

influenced by U.S. Highway 26 and outflow from Marks Creek Pond which is located on private 

land. Forest monitoring has not identified stream reaches with water temperatures in the high 

70’s in the project area. Water temperatures in the project area range from below the DEQ 

threshold of 18 degrees C (64.4 degrees F) to the mid 70s (see Table 53 in the Final EIS). 

Comment: The NEPA analysis should acknowledge and consider roading, logging, and fuels 

affects to water quality. (OW, SC) 

Response: All of the proposed activities, including road work, commercial timber harvest, 

precommercial thinning, and fuel reductions treatments were analyzed for affects to water 

quality. Chapter 3 of both the Draft and Final EISs include a section on Water Quality where the 

expected effects are described. 

Comment: Impacts to water quality and public drinking water should be considered before 

logging roadless areas. (OW, SC) 

Response: The project area does not contain any inventoried roadless area. The effects to water 

quality have been disclosed in the Draft and Final EISs. The only approved public drinking 

water source on Forest Service administered lands in the project area is the well at Ochoco 

Divide Campground, which is outside the Mill Creek Wilderness. There are no known surface 

water diversions for drinking water in the project area. The proposed activities are not expected 

to affect any public drinking water source. 

Comment: To reduce the potential for fires, the project should retain sufficient stand density 

within historic optimum ranges to ensure adequate shading of forest soils and ground vegetation, 

and better surface moisture retention. (SC) 

Response: Historically, frequent, low-intensity fires combined with competition from grasses 

maintained open park-like stands over much of the project area. A ponderosa pine restoration 

study in the Fort Valley Experimental Forest by Covington and others (1997) found that growing 

season soil moisture was consistently higher in treated areas than in untreated areas. Thinning 

prescriptions in the Covington study are similar to the prescriptions for the Spears project. While 

the study was not conducted in eastern Oregon, the mean annual precipitation and mean annual 

temperatures are comparable with the project area. Mean volumetric soil moisture in the top 0-
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 373 

12 inches of soil was appreciably higher during the base flow period for the area, creating more 

favorable conditions for the survival of young trees and other vegetation. It is recognized that 

after thinning and burning a shallow layer at the soil surface may dry out due to loss of the litter 

layer, increased solar input, blackening of the surface from fire, increased wind velocity, and 

capillary action. A literature search did not locate any material that supported the statements 

from the Sierra Club that thinning would result in less soil moisture. The literature search also 

did not locate any studies that discussed surface soil moisture drying in forested ecosystems. 

Several studies were found on burning of tall and short grass prairie. Hulbert (1988) found that 

increases in temperature occurred primarily in the top few centimeters of soil. At the depth 

where roots and rhizomes occur, the daily flux between burned and unburned soil temperatures 

was small. Fire removal of the litter layer and the subsequent heating of the soil early in the 

growing season, when adequate soils moisture was available, was a major contributor in 

enhanced plant production after burning. 

Comment: Large pulses of sediment moving through the stream system can restrict pool depth 

and ultimately limit habitat capability. (SC) 

Response: The Spears project is not expected to cause large pulses of sediment to move through 

the system. The proposed activities are expected to result in some sediment entering streams as 

disclosed in the EIS. However, RHCAs have been shown to be effective at filtering sediment 

and sediment delivery from thinning and burning activities is expected to be low. Road work is 

also expected to result in some sediment increases and stream crossings are expected to be major 

sediment delivery sites (Draft EIS, p. 170). Road/stream crossings on Class II streams will result 

in sediment delivery. This sediment is not expected to adversely affect fish habitat or restrict 

pool depth. Based on monitoring during installation of a culvert on Badger Creek, a Class II 

stream, sediment delivery from road work is expected to last for less than 1 day and sediment is 

expected to settle within 200 feet of the work activity. 

Wildlife 

Comment: Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 propose construction of new roads. Careful placement of 

motorized travel routes needs to occur to limit disturbance to important wildlife habitat such as 

winter range, seasonal migration corridors, breeding sites, roosting sites, and foraging habitat. 

(DOI) 

Response: As described in the Draft EIS (pp. 19, 22, and 24) newly constructed roads and roads 

that are reopened will be closed or decommissioned after harvest activities are complete. 

Seasonal restrictions within important wildlife habitats described on pages 37 and 38 of the Draft 

EIS would also apply to road construction activities. The extent and location of road 

construction in fish and wildlife habitat was considered during roads analysis and alternative 

development and resulting changes are reflected in the alternatives, especially Alternatives 4 and 

5. 

Comment: Avoid impacts to raptor nests and enhance habitat for diverse prey species. Train 

marking crews and cutting crews to look up and avoid cutting trees with nests of any sort and 

trees with defects. (OW, SC) 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 374 

Response: Surveys of historic raptor nest areas are conducted prior to project implementation. 

Known nest areas are protected with primary (not habitat modifying) and secondary (restricted 

human activity during nesting season) buffers. Buffers are also established if nests are located 

during lay-out or implementation. Marking and lay-out personnel, and other district staff, are 

instructed to notify the District Biologist of any aggressive or defensive raptor activity. Such 

leads are followed-up by either a biologist or a biological technician to confirm species and nest 

location. The District Biologist then determines the coordination needs including buffers where 

appropriate. 

Comment: The agency failed to assess and disclose the current status and population trends for 

management indicator species, listed species, and regional species of concern in the area. The 

Draft EIS also fails to incorporate effective ecological and biodiverse recovery plans. (SC) 

Response: Listed threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) species are fully discussed in the 

Biological Evaluation in the project file. The determinations and rationale for the determinations 

are summarized in the Draft EIS (pp. 224-234). Population trend and status information are 

included in the species descriptions for those TES species potentially affected by this project 

(Draft EIS, pp. 226-227). As described in the Draft EIS (p. 197), the analysis of the management 

indicator species pileated woodpecker and white-headed woodpecker in combination with the 

analysis of focal species for priority habitats in the Rocky Mountain Bird Conservation Plan 

(discussed in the section titled “Neotropical Birds”) represent the needs of all primary cavity 

excavators found on Ochoco National Forest. Trend information is provided for pileated 

woodpeckers on page 190 and for white-headed woodpeckers on page 198. Comparisons of 

existing habitat acres and predicted historic range of variability (HRV) in habitat availability for 

the focal species are provided in the Draft EIS (p. 218). Other species of interest on the Ochoco 

National Forest include golden eagle, prairie falcon, bald eagle, elk, and mule deer. Golden 

eagles and prairie falcons were considered during analysis of raptors in the Wildlife Report in the 

project file. There are no confirmed records of occupancy by golden eagles or prairie falcons 

within this project area. The raptor species with confirmed nesting records were described in the 

goshawk and raptor sections of the Wildlife Report. A discussion related to raptors has been 

included in the Final EIS. The habitat needs of mule deer were considered during the analysis of 

elk habitat using the Habitat Effectiveness Index (HEI). The Final EIS includes information on 

mule deer in the section on elk. 

The Forest Service is not aware of any “effective ecological and biodiverse recovery plans.” 

Recovery plans are generally developed for listed threatened and endangered species. The 

Pacific Bald Eagle Recovery Plan was used during the consideration of effects to the bald eagle. 

The Forest Service does not prepare recovery plans for sensitive species or management 

indicator species. 

Comment: Effective fuels reduction can be accomplished by thinning thicket-like clumps of 

small diameter trees and brush when located near mature and old growth trees where there is risk 

of fire-spread into the forest canopy (outside of naturally dense and moist riparian areas, of 

course). (SC) 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 375 

Response: Thinning or removal of ladder fuels is an activity proposed in all action alternatives. 

Ladder fuels provide a mechanism for transfer of ground fire into the crowns of overstory trees. 

Removal of ladder fuels is just part of the overall fuels reduction strategy proposed in the Spears 

project. Many areas also currently have high levels of surface fuels which would support high 

flame lengths, high crown bulk densities which would support crown fires, and a species 

composition which is not resistant to fire. The Spears Project was developed to address all these 

factors which contribute to hazard of a high-severity fire and includes a suite of activities varying 

from maintenance underburning alone to precommercial thinning to commercial harvest. In 

addition to fuels reduction, the project also has other purposes such as reducing risk to insects 

and disease and moving towards historic stand conditions. 

The intent of the precommercial thinning within the Old-growth Management Area (OGMA) is 

intended to reduce the risk of fire-spread into large and old trees, and to reduce the stress on 

large and old trees from thick understory development at and near the root zone of the overstory 

trees. The areas selected for this treatment are limited to south and west facing slopes dominated 

by ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir, which are expected to be relatively dry and would naturally 

be more open. The methods and intent of this treatment are described in the Draft EIS (p. 191), 

along with the limitation for this treatment on drier portions of the OGMA. 

Comment: Effective fuels reduction can be accomplished by restoring forest stands to optimum 

historic forest conditions where there exists sufficient canopy closure, shading for area soils, 

adequate numbers of fire-resistant mature and old trees, sufficient numbers of large snags and 

large downed logs to provide habitat for forest insectivores, and ample stocking of young and 

medium-sized trees to provide for future mature and old-growth trees in the forest’s ever 

fluctuating systems. (SC) 

Response: Maintaining and enhancing the abundance of large trees is one of the purposes of the 

Spears project. Favoring early-seral, fire-resistant ponderosa pine and western larch is another 

purpose of the Spears project. Removal of large snags and down wood is not proposed other 

than snags which are determined to be safety hazards. Retaining appropriate numbers of young 

and medium-sized trees will be accomplished through the use of stocking level guides that 

provide for stand densities which are resistant to insects and competition-related mortality. 

As noted in the Draft EIS (pp. 277-279), the number of trees retained varies depending on 

predominant tree size and site productivity (dry vs. moist). As stated in the Draft EIS (p. 241), 

the action alternatives propose short-term harvest of timber while enhancing the long-term health 

of forested stands in order to move toward a balance of sustainable vegetative conditions. The 

intent of the project is to take actions of sufficient intensity to make meaningful improvements in 

forest resiliency, residual tree growth, vigor and/or longevity while also reducing fuel loads so 

that the extent, continuity, and/or severity of future wildfires may be moderated. If canopy 

closure were retained at the existing level, then desired responses would likely not be realized. 

Abundant stocking of young and medium sized trees can lead to loss of overstory large live trees, 

especially on dry sites. The alternatives provide a range of treatment extent and intensity, and 

thus a range of canopy closure and tree density options. Some alternatives retain higher levels of 

canopy closure and small to medium tree density. Other alternatives focus on reducing 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 376 

understory competition and the amount and continuity of material that could fuel a large-scale 

and/or high-intensity wildfire in order to provide for future mature and old trees. 

Goshawk 

Comment: The Final EIS should account for new information on goshawk habitat use. A recent 

review (Greenwald et al. 2005) of the most accurate information on goshawk habitat selection 

confirms that goshawks select late-successional forest structure (e.g. high canopy closure, large 

tree for forest type, canopy layering, abundant course woody debris). This review continues to 

support Reynolds’ 1992 recommendations to manage nest core areas and post-fledging areas for 

late-successional forest characteristics. Goshawks are habitat generalists only in the sense of 

using forests with a variety of tree species, but they are not habitat generalists in terms of 

selecting forest structure. They disproportionately select for late-successional forest. Goshawks 

are not opportunistic foragers. Rather they appear to select for prey availability as determined by 

late-successional forest structure. Goshawk are not limited by prey abundance. They select for 

prey availability, with absolute prey abundance being only a component of availability, latesuccessional forest structure being an important determining factor. Important features of 

goshawk habitat include: down woody debris, greater numbers of snags, late-successional forest, 

>40% canopy closure, greater densities of trees over 40 cm dbh. Goshawks avoided open areas. 

Protect existing mature and old-growth forest characteristics and ensure that such forests are 

allowed to develop in proportions similar to pre-settlement conditions. Thinning may not 

improve goshawk foraging habitat. (OW, SC) 

Response: The analysis contained in the Draft and Final EISs does not imply that goshawks are 

habitat generalists, nor does it imply that they prefer open habitats. As stated in the Draft EIS (p.

182) goshawks use a variety of forested conditions, but favor stands with patchy moderate to 

high canopy closure, interlocking crown structure, mature to old structure in a heterogeneous 

forested environment. The Draft EIS also states that PFAs are mapped in the best available 

forested stands with moderate to high canopy closure and medium to large sized trees common. 

Because of the recognition of potential impacts of treatments on canopy closure and crown 

structure (at least in the short term), all action alternatives were limited to treatment on 50 

percent or less of any PFA. With anticipated reductions in actual area treated between planning 

and implementation (exclusions for snag patches, areas with no merchantable trees, steep spots, 

buffers, RHCAs, areas with logging feasibility problems, etc.), it is likely that fewer acres would 

be treated than anticipated in the action alternatives. The maximum treatment area within each 

PFA is displayed in Tables 60-63. Impacts to goshawks and their habitat are disclosed by 

alternative in the Draft EIS (pp. 182-188). As stated in the Draft EIS (p. 183) thinning 

treatments within and outside of PFAs are intended to promote development of larger trees in the 

future and to improve the resiliency of existing large trees. Some medium-sized trees will be 

retained throughout treated areas. Discussions on pages 183-187 acknowledge, disclose, and 

discuss the short-term reductions in habitat suitability associated with treatments under each 

alternative. The purpose and need includes protecting existing mature and old-growth forests, 

promoting development of large trees, and moving toward pre-settlement conditions as described 

by the HRV. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 377 

Management Indicator Species 

Pileated Woodpecker 

Comment: New information on pileated woodpeckers indicates standards and guidelines are 

inadequate. The NEPA analysis failed to consider significant new information (Farris et al. 2005 

and Aubrey and Raley 2003) such as the fact that pileated woodpeckers need more and larger 

roosting trees than nesting trees. They may use only one nesting tree in a year, while they may 

use seven or more roosting trees. Determining pileated woodpecker population potential based 

on nesting sites alone will not provide adequate habitat for viable populations of this species. 

This new information is not recognized in current management requirements at the plan or 

project level. The EIS must address this new scientific information. 

Response: Pileated woodpecker habitat is described in the Draft EIS (pp. 188-190). As stated 

there, pileated woodpeckers are an indicator for dense and mesic LOS forests, and they prefer 

stands dominated by large fir, abundant snags and down logs, and canopy closure of at least 60 

percent. The discussion goes on to describe their use of snags for foraging and night roosting. 

The discussion of alternative effects on pages 190-196 is focused primarily on foraging habitat. 

The analysis is not limited to an evaluation of only nesting sites, and the provisions of habitat for 

this species is not based on population potential as alleged in this comment. The effects on 

primary nesting habitat described on pages 190-196 are based on seral/structural stages of forest 

vegetation (size class 4 and 5 in moist and dry grand fir, and in Douglas-fir PAGs with canopy 

closure of 50 percent or more), not based on nesting sites alone. 

Snags and Down Wood 

Comment: Recognize that thinning captures mortality and that most stands (especially 

plantations) are already lacking critical values from dead wood. Recognize that thinning 

captures mortality that is not necessarily compensated by future growth. “Capturing mortality” 

reduces future snag habitat that is already deficient. Increasing vigor via thinning delays 

recruitment of snag habitat. (OW, SC) 

Response: It was recognized in the Draft EIS that thinning reduces mortality and that prescribed 

burning can also alter snag abundance. It was also noted that there is a trade-off of small 

diameter snags and down wood, for the benefit of developing larger diameter snags and down 

wood in the future. Compare the effects discussion for Alternative 1 to those for the action 

alternatives on Draft EIS pages 190-195, 199-202, and 212-213. 

It is expected that less trees will die after treatment, but some level of mortality and tree fall will 

continue to occur. Snags and down logs will be recruited in the future. However, one of the 

objectives of this project is to improve vigor of residual trees and to delay mortality so that live 

medium and large trees continue to be present on the landscape and are growing well enough to 

become larger trees and eventually large snags and down wood. 

Comment: Retain abundant snags, coarse wood, and green trees for future recruitment of snags 

and wood, both distributed and in clumps. Retain wildlife trees such as hollows, forked tops, 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 378 

broken tops, leaning trees, etc. Hollow trees, natural tree cavities, peeling bark, and dead parts of

live trees, as well as fungi and mistletoe associated with wood decay, all provide resources for 

wildlife. (OW, SC) 

Response: Most snags and down wood will be left on site and are likely to be arranged in both a 

distributed and clumped fashion. Across the landscape there will be accumulations of down 

wood and snag patches outside of planned treatment units and within units in areas that are not 

harvested due to buffers, steep slopes, lack of merchantable trees, RHCAs, etc. Generally many 

trees with hollow centers, platform branches, broken or multiple tops or nest cavities will be 

larger than the size class being proposed for harvest by this project. In addition, trees with such 

characteristics will often not be of merchantable quality and thus will not be marked for removal. 

Many fir trees with brooms will be marked for removal where they are less than 21 inches dbh; 

however, broomed trees will be retained when greater than 21 inches and within buffers and 

other areas not commercially treated as described above. Alternative 3 would retain more 

mistletoe trees than the other alternatives, as would Alternative 5 within specific habitat areas 

such as connective corridors, PFAs, pileated woodpecker feeding habitat, and north and east 

facing draw bottoms. As stated in the Design Elements Common to All Alternatives (Draft EIS, 

p. 38) snags and large down wood will be retained. 

Comment: Logging proposals should strive to better mimic natural disturbance processes 

including pulses of dead wood. Clumping of snags and down wood may be selected by some 

species. We should be managing for levels of coarse woody debris that more accurately mirror 

levels characteristic of the natural disturbance regime. (OW, SC) 

Response: By retaining all existing snags and down logs (except hazard trees), this project 

should retain the majority of existing snag patches and woody accumulations during harvest 

operations. As disclosed in the Draft EIS, follow-up underburning has potential to modify snag 

and down wood abundance. Since this project area is in Central Oregon (not in a coastal 

rainforest), fire is a natural and ecologically important disturbance process, changes to dead 

wood abundance and distribution resulting from prescribed fire may mimic natural processes, 

depending on fire regime, condition class, and the environmental conditions under which the 

underburning occurs. 

Although retained trees are expected to exhibit increased resiliency to insects and disease in 

treated areas, these disturbance agents will remain in the landscape and some level of mortality 

will continue to occur both within and outside of treated areas. 

Comment: Felling and removal of large trees, whether they are alive or dead, removes large 

material that is normally handed down from one stand to the next. The loss of this material has 

serious adverse consequences. The NEPA analysis must account for all the values provided by 

snags and down wood and the effect of removing these legacy structures. (OW, SC) 

Response: Since this project does not propose to remove more than incidental quantities of 

snags and down wood, snag and down wood retention is not considered to be a significant issue. 

The Draft and Final EISs discuss the incidental effects to snags and down woods as a result of 

each of the action alternatives. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 379 

Comment: The NEPA analysis must recognize that mechanical treatments unavoidably reduce 

snag habitat, if for no other reason than the habitual removal of snags for safety reasons. The 

cumulative effects analysis must recognize the inherent conflict between forest management 

(past, present, and future) and snags and all their values. Even when snag removal is not an 

intentional design feature of a project, hazard tree felling normally occurs in all treatment areas, 

plus a safety buffer around all treatment areas, plus a safety corridor along roads, and other work 

areas. Non-federal forestlands do not retain enough snags, so federal managers need to retain 

more snags on federal lands to compensate. (OW, SC) 

Response: Cumulative effects disclosures in the Draft EIS (pp. 195-196, 203, and 213-214) do 

recognize the impact of roads on snag habitat. This project does not propose to remove snags 

beyond negligible amounts necessary for safety; therefore, the request to leave additional snags 

on federal land to compensate for the lack of snags on private land is irrelevant. Snags and down 

wood (at least 12” diameter small end) will be left as described in the Design Elements Common 

to All Alternatives on page 38 of the Draft EIS. 

In accordance with Forest Service Manual (FSM) 7733.3 Roadside Danger Tree Management 

and the Field Guide for Danger Tree Identification and Response, not all snags meet the criteria 

for a danger tree. OSHA did have input and concurrence in developing these guidelines. Danger 

trees are designated based on a combination of the tree’s potential to fail, its failure zone, and 

exposure of work and traffic activities. For example, a sound ponderosa pine snag may not be 

designated a danger tree; or work exposure may be minimized by locating areas such as landings 

outside the danger zone. 

Comment: Agencies recognize that current methods and assumptions concerning snag habitat 

standards are outdated, and the old snag standards do not ensure enough snags. The current 

direction of managing for 100 percent population potential levels of primary excavators may not 

represent the most meaningful measure of managing for cavity-nesters and these snag levels may 

not be adequate for some species. The agencies have not adjusted their management plans to 

account for this new information (Bull et al. 1997, Johnson and O’Neil 2001, and Rose et al. 

2001) nor have they developed new standards that are consistent with the latest scientific 

information. The agencies need to prepare an EIS to consider a replacement methodology for 

maintaining species and other values associated with dead wood. (OW, SC) 

Response: On September 29, 2004, the Forest Service published an interpretative rule to 36 

CFR 219.35 in the Federal Register (Vol. 69, No. 188). This rule requires consideration and use 

of best available science to inform project decision making that implements a land management 

plan. This Spears project is implementing the land management plan for the Ochoco National 

Forest. As required by this rule, the Forest Service has considered the best available science 

related to snag habitat standards and that discussion can be found in the Final EIS in the section 

on Snags and Down Wood. The best available science for snag and down wood levels are listed 

in the references section and includes Bull et al. 1997, Harrod et al. 1998, Wisdom et al. 1999, 

Johnson and O’Neil 2001, Rose et al. 2001, Agee 2002, Mellen et al. 2002, Ohman and Waddel 

2002, and USDA 2006. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 380 

The Ochoco National Forest has not updated its Forest Plan to account for this new information; 

however, this information has been utilized in the preparation of the Spears project. Developing 

methodology for use in assessing environmental effects is not a major federal action that requires 

the preparation of an EIS. 

Comment: The agency often tries to use DecAID (the Decayed Wood Advisor) as a substitute 

for the outmoded potential population methodology. The agency must recognize and account for 

the short-comings of DecAID and cannot rely on DecAID to provide project-level snag standards 

because: (1) DecAID is a tool designed for plan level evaluations, (2) DecAID itself has not 

been subjected to NEPA analysis and comparison to alternatives, and (3) DecAID is an 

inadequate tool for the purpose. 

Response: DecAID may be a better tool for forest-level planning than for site-specific planning; 

however, it is still a collection of some of the best available science relating to dead wood habitat 

and its use by wildlife. As such, it can provide pertinent information for understanding how 

wildlife species may respond to the presence or absence of snags and down wood at multiple 

scales, including watersheds. DecAID contains an assemblage of data from research that has 

been conducted relating to dead wood and the wildlife species that utilize dead wood habitat. So 

it is a useful tool for predicting which species may be using dead wood habitat within the project 

area, based on a comparison to similar habitat types for which data is available in DecAID. 

DecAID is an advisory tool to help managers evaluate effects of forest conditions and existing or 

proposed management activities on organisms that use snags and down wood. DecAID does not 

set any specific objectives, desired future conditions, or standards and guidelines that must be 

followed. As such, it is not a major federal action that requires the preparation of an EA or EIS 

under the NEPA. DecAID is used in the context of scientific literature and is used to estimate 

the environmental consequences of the alternatives. 

DecAID is an adequate tool for predicting species use of snags and logs across the habitat types 

and species for which data is included to facilitate discussions regarding species likely to be 

using dead wood habitat within the project area, and how the existing dead wood habitat in the 

project area compares to reference conditions based on available data. That is how DecAID was 

used in this analysis, as described in the Draft EIS (pp. 206 and 208-213). DecAID was not used 

to establish standards for snag retention, as this project does not proposed to remove snags or 

down wood. 

Comment: Large downed logs and old growth snags are largely missing from the area. (SC) 

Response: The Draft EIS discusses the current condition of snags and down logs in the project 

area. Predicted impacts of the alternatives on snag and down wood habitat are disclosed on 

pages 212-214. The reduction in the abundance of large snags and logs within the project area is 

included in the descriptions of the cumulative effects (Draft EIS, pp. 196, 203, 212-214 and 224). 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 381 

Elk 

Comment: We recommend that the Habitat Effectiveness model be run using all roads and 

trails, and that the Final EIS assess the cumulative impacts of these roads on wildlife and habitat. 

(DOI) 

Response: The HEI was run using all known (mapped) roads. The data was updated where 

roads were known to be open to vehicular travel. There are no designated motorized trails in the 

project area except for snowmobile trails, and these are not expected to interfere with elk habitat 

at the time and under the conditions in which they are used (high elevation trails are not in winter 

range for elk, and not in use by motorized equipment during the summer when elk are likely to 

be in the area). We have no way of calculating user-created roads, because their locations are 

not mapped, and they are not static. The Final EIS includes a discussion of the impact of usercreated roads and trails on elk. 

Cumulative Effects 

Comment: Cumulative impacts from past logging must also be assessed, accurately disclosed, 

and addressed in developing management plans. Past logging has cumulatively significantly 

reduced the number of mature and old trees from historic conditions (including large diameter 

snags), impaired area soils (livestock grazing contributes to this as well), riddled much of the 

area with excessive numbers of sediment producing and contiguous-forest fragmenting roads, 

and have resulted in the population declines of numerous forest-dependent wildlife and aquatic 

species due to degraded habitat conditions. 

Response: The Draft and Final EISs disclose and assess the cumulative effects of past actions. 

The purpose and need for action states the amount of LOS is well below the HRV and that the 

current departure from the historic LOS conditions is primarily a result of past timber harvest 

(which removed large trees from the landscape), the Hash Rock Fire (which removed an 

estimated 9,400 acres of LOS), and fire exclusion. Past timber harvest is included in the 

description of the affected environment in the LOS section. The affected environment 

description in the Soils section notes that roads, log landings, and skid trails are detrimentally 

compacted during timber harvest activities. Appendix B of the EIS displays the unit-by-unit 

assessment of the existing soils condition. This assessment includes past logging activities. The 

Wildlife section discusses the effects of past logging in the cumulative effects section. The 

Water Quality section notes that past timber harvest within the last 30 years was evaluated. 

Older timber harvest has substantially recovered and has little affect on water yield and, thus, 

was not included. 

The species that occupy this project area which have documented population declines are 

primarily associated with grassland/upland shrub habitats, riparian habitats, or open forest 

conditions, all of which have been affected by young conifers that have become established 

during the past several decades of fire exclusion. For example, the white-headed woodpecker, 

which prefers open ponderosa pine forests with very open understory conditions has had local 

population declines, habitat is currently below HRV, and the proposed action alternatives are 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 382 

expected to increase habitat for this species as described in the Draft EIS (pp. 198-202). In 

Central Oregon, chipping sparrows are associated with grassy openings and edges in open stands 

of ponderosa or lodgepole pine. In Oregon, significant population declines have been 

documented and in some parts of the state this species has disappeared from open woodland 

stands that have become closed-canopy due to the absence of fire and successional advancement. 

Habitat for the chipping sparrow is currently below HRV and the proposed alternatives are 

expected to increase habitat for this species as described in the Draft EIS (pp. 217-223). The 

olive-sided flycatcher also prefers open forest conditions, has a highly significant statewide 

decline, is currently below HRV in amount of habitat in the project area, and has increased 

habitat under the action alternatives as described in the Draft EIS (pp. 217-223). The gray 

flycatcher, an upland shrub obligate has habitat below HRV, and remains so under all 

alternatives as displayed in the Draft EIS (pp. 217-223); however, as noted in the TES section 

(Draft EIS, p. 226), this species has an increasing trend in Oregon. Impacts from the action 

alternatives to gray flycatchers are disclosed on pages 218-223 and 231-233. The 

MacGillivray’s warbler nests in riparian thickets, especially in willow and aspen east of the 

Cascades. As disclosed in the Daft EIS (pp. 217-223), the action alternatives have short-term 

impacts to habitat for this species, bringing habitat to below HRV. However, the treatments are 

expected to result in stimulation of brushy riparian habitat and riparian hardwoods, thereby 

improving habitat for this species in the long run. Refer to the response to the comment on 

woodpecker populations for further discussion on populations of Lewis’ woodpecker and whiteheaded woodpecker. 

The alternatives address the purpose and need at a variety of levels, with concurrent variation in 

levels of habitat protection or improvement for the variety of species in the project area and the 

habitat types they are associated with. In this project area, for the habitat types and species 

involved and the current conditions, the no action alternative is not the most protective for 

wildlife species with declining populations. 

Other Required Disclosures 

Comment: The failure to accurately assess site-specific stand conditions and the impacts of 

excessive logging violates the NEPA, with adverse impacts violating the NFMA and the CWA. 

(SC) 

Response: The Draft and Final EISs describe the current condition of the project area and 

includes a discussion of logging-related impacts. The direct and indirect effects of the action 

alternatives, including commercial harvest activities, are disclosed in Chapter 3. The Draft and 

Final EISs disclose that the project is consistent with NFMA and the CWA. 

NFMA 

Comment: The Draft EIS claims that “this action responds to the goals and objectives outlined 

in the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan as amended (Forest Plan), 

and helps move the project area towards desired conditions described in that plan.” However, 

the action alternatives all require significant amendments to the Ochoco LRMP, with logging 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 all resulting in violating forest plan standards. Clearly the information 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 383 

presented within the Draft EIS contradicts the above erroneous, inaccurate, and misleading claim 

– violating the accuracy and high quality requirements of the NEPA. Degradation caused by the 

proposed logging, resulting in substandard wildlife habitat conditions, would violate the NFMA. 

Logging volumes again take priority over wildlife habitat needs. These analysis distortions and 

omissions violate the NEPA. (SC) 

Response: The statements referenced in the Draft EIS are accurate. The purpose and need for 

action is based on the goals and objectives contained in the Forest Plan. The standards and 

guidelines contained in the Forest Plan are not the same as the goals and objectives. As 

disclosed in the Draft and Final EISs, non-significant Forest Plan amendments are needed to 

implement the action alternatives which will move the project area closer to meeting the goals 

and objectives contained in the Forest Plan. 

Comment: One amendment would allow logging in multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG, 

unnaturally converting these forests to single-strata LOS. The Draft EIS admits that “Following 

treatment, multi-strata LOS would be below HRV,” yet the agency still proposes this amendment 

in contravention to Ochoco LRMP standards. This action is inconsistent with LRMP standards 

and guidelines. (SC) 

Response: The existing amount of LOS was determined for each PAG and compared to the 

amounts which existed historically. As described in the Draft EIS (p. 48), all PAGs are within or 

above the historic range for multi-strata LOS while all PAGs except moist grand fir are below 

the historic range for single-strata LOS. Moist grand fir is above the historic range for singlestrata LOS. Implementation of Alternatives 2, 4, or 5 would convert varying amounts (309, 216, 

or 224 acres, respectively) of multi-strata LOS in the Douglas-fir PAG to single-strata LOS. 

There would be no net loss of LOS, and the overall amount (considering all PAGs) of multistrata LOS would remain within the historic range of abundance. Converting LOS from multi- to 

single strata is proposed in order to maintain the large trees which are an integral component of 

LOS. Reducing stand densities would improve tree vigor and increase resistance to insects and 

disease. Removing ladder and ground fuels and reducing crown densities would decrease risk of 

loss to high-severity fire. As discussed on page 244 of the Draft EIS, this is consistent with the 

Regional Forester’s June 11, 2003 letter on guidance for implementing Eastside Screens. These 

activities are also consistent with the intent of the Eastside Screens to maintain/enhance LOS. 

The Draft EIS clearly discloses that this action is not consistent with Forest Plan standards and 

guidelines, but is consistent with long-term Forest Plan goals and objectives. 

Comment: Logging within connective corridors, reducing “canopy closure to less than twothirds of site potential” is again in contravention to LRMP standards and wildlife habitat needs. 

This action is inconsistent with LRMP standards and guidelines. (SC) 

Response: Site potential for canopy closure is achieved when the site is at full stocking, in other 

words, all available growing space is occupied and the stand is supporting as many trees as it is 

capable of. Full stocking varies by site quality and dry sites can support fewer trees than mesic 

sites. At full stocking, the trees are intensely competing with each other for light, water, and 

nutrients. Risk of density-related mortality, or insect and disease related mortality induced by 

stress, is high in fully stocked stands. In fully stocked stands, individual trees grow very slowly 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 384 

or not at all unless some of the trees die and free up site resources. Often it is the largest trees in 

the stand that die because they are stressed by competition and susceptible to attack by insects. 

The proposed treatments are designed to maintain existing large trees and encourage the growth 

of additional large trees. In order to accomplish this, densities will be reduced to be within what 

is referred to as the “management zone.” The lower limit of the management zone is that level 

where sufficient stocking is maintained to utilize a significant portion of the site’s resources for 

tree growth. The upper stocking limit of the zone is that point where inter-tree competitioninduced mortality begins. The upper and lower limits of the management zone occur at 75 and 

50 percent of full stocking, respectively (Powell 1999). 

In order to manage stand densities within this management zone, it is necessary to reduce 

stocking in some stands or portions of stands to below two-thirds of site potential for canopy 

cover (or 67 percent of full stocking). This is proposed to maintain the existing large trees and 

enhance the growth of additional large trees. The Draft EIS (p. 245) clearly discloses that this 

action is not consistent with Forest Plan standards and guidelines, but is consistent with longterm Forest Plan goals and objectives. This action is consistent with the intent of the Eastside 

Screens to maintain and/or enhance LOS as well as the guidance contained in the Regional 

Forester’s letter of June 11, 2003 concerning implementation of the Eastside Screens. 

The Draft EIS (pp. 214-215) discloses that the level of retention of trees within connective 

corridors would still provide adequate cover and structure to facilitate travel by most species that 

would use the corridors. The Draft EIS also acknowledges that the treated habitat within 

connective corridors may be less desirable for species that have limited mobility, that are 

vulnerable to predation, or that are sensitive to climatic condition. 

Comment: Precommercial thinning, hand piling, and underburning in the Stewart Springs Old 

Growth Management Area are inconsistent with Forest Plan standards and guidelines protecting 

old growth areas and dependent wildlife. The Draft EIS discloses that these actions “are not 

consistent with the standard and guideline that indicates vegetative management is not allowed.” 

The Draft EIS fails to disclose that such management actions are not permitted to protect Forest 

Plan desired conditions for wildlife habitat. (SC)

Response: The Ochoco Forest Plan was published in 1989. More updated information is 

available today that supports the idea of reducing understory density in order to reduce 

competitive stress and thus promote the longevity of large and old trees within old-growth 

stands. The proposed Forest Plan Amendment responds to the new science and the desire to 

maintain live, large and old trees within designated Old-Growth Management Areas. As stated 

in the Forest Plan (p. 4-58) the desired condition for MA-F6 Old Growth may include vegetation 

manipulation in order to maintain stand structure and species composition. The Forest Plan 

specified prescribed burning as the treatment method, but often fuel loads have developed to the 

point that maintenance of live overstory trees is more likely to be successful if fuel abundance 

and continuity are reduced prior to implementation of underburning. The proposed Forest Plan 

amendment simply allows for treatment (thinning of small trees and hand piling of slash) prior to 

prescribed burning and is not inconsistent with the desired condition for wildlife habitat. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 385 

Miscellaneous 

Comment: In many locations across the proposed project area, road density currently exceeds 

2.5 mi/mi2 when considering only arterial, collector, and right-of-way roads. (DOI) 

Response: The Draft EIS does contain some calculations that show road density in some areas is 

greater than 2.5 miles per square mile. Open road density was calculated based on the miles of 

road in GIS with an “existing” road status and maintenance level of 2 through 5 which are roads 

maintained for both high-clearance and passenger vehicles. The calculations also include other 

roads that have routes in GIS. If the open or closed status is unknown, the road was assumed to 

be open. Road densities were calculated for different geographic areas based on Forest Plan 

standards for HEI (Draft EIS, p. 23) or as a measure to describe the cumulative effects on water 

quality (Draft EIS, p. 176). Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 will result in a reduction in open roads in the

project area. 

Comment: Road densities within the project area exceed LRMP standards. Alternative 4 would 

violate these standards further, increasing road density by adding 4.4 miles of new road 

construction, and reconstructing 11 miles of closed or poorly maintained roads. (SC) 

Response: The Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) speaks 

to a desired condition in Winter Range and General Forest Winter Range management areas for 

road and trail use limited to 1 mile per square mile during December 1 to May 1. During the 

remainder of the year, a greater density of up to 3 miles per square mile would be available 

(Forest Plan, pp. 4-83 and 4-85). Open road density is one of the “main factors influencing the 

Habitat Effectiveness Index (HEI)” (Forest Plan, p. 4-254). The standards and guidelines for the 

transportation system are included in the Forest Plan on pages 4-228 to 4-235. The only standard 

and guideline specifying a road density states, “Except for constant service through routes, use 

will be restricted during the period of December 1 to May 1. Access routes will be limited to one 

mile per section during that period, and three miles per section on the average, the remainder of 

the year.” (Forest Plan, p. 4-232). This standard and guidelines applies only to three 

management areas (MA-F18 Hammer Creek Wildlife/Recreation Area, MA-F20 Winter Range, 

and MA-F21 General Forest Winter Range). Road densities within the project area do not 

exceed Forest Plan standards. The Draft EIS (p. 239) discloses that summer time road densities 

in General Forest Winter Range are currently 2.5 miles per square and would increase to 2.7 

miles per square mile under Alternative 2. They would not increase for any of the other 

alternatives. The existing open road density in Winter Range during the summer is 1.8 miles per 

square mile. This open road density would initially increase under Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 and 

would decrease when roads are closed and decommissioned. None of the alternatives violate the 

Forest Plan standard and guideline related to road density. 

Comment: No new roads can be constructed as part of this project. Current excessive road 

density within the area has not been accurately assessed, as the Draft EIS fails to incorporate 

effective measures to reduce road density to LRMP standards. Proposing to create new roads in 

this area, which is already in violation of credible scientific recommendations concerning road 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 386 

density in LOS forest stands, is in contravention to the Purpose and Need, violates the Ochoco 

LRMP, and the Draft EIS analysis deficiencies violate the NEPA. (SC) 

Response: As discussed in the previous response, the project area does not exceed the Forest 

Plan standard and guideline related to road density. The road closure and decommission 

activities proposed as part of Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 would reduce open road densities in 

General Forest, General Forest Winter Range, and Winter Range management areas (Draft EIS, 

p. 239). 

Comment: The Ochoco NF has had difficulty effectively implementing and managing road 

closures, and OHV use on forested landscapes as evidenced by McKay Creek. Additional roads 

on the landscape will likely exacerbate impacts resulting from uncontrolled OHV use in the 

project area. Seasonal closures or additional road decommissioning should be considered. 

(DOI) 

Response: New road locations would be located, to the extent practicable, to facilitate blocking 

of the road to highway vehicles by finding junction locations where the terrain is not flat and 

vegetation would discourage driving around barriers. The current Forest Plan allows OHV to 

travel cross country on most of the Ochoco National Forest. Changing OHV access is outside 

the scope of the Spears project. Separate from the Spears project, the Forest Service is beginning 

the process to designate roads, trails, and areas for motorized travel. At this time, the Forest 

Service has not developed a proposed action so it is not possible to ascribe any particular effect 

to that effort. There are some roads and areas within the Spears project area that are seasonally 

closed to motorized use. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 include some road closure and 

decommissioning activities. 

OHV use does occur in this project area; however, that use is at lower levels than the use 

occurring in the McKay Creek Watershed. 

Comment: Only obliterate those roads that have adverse impacts on soils or water due to poor 

locations. Keep the system roads open for future administrative uses. (OLC) 

Response: A roads analysis for the project area was completed. The roads analysis identified 

roads that are in excess of needs for current and future uses. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 include 

decommissioning roads that are not needed for future uses; these roads are listed in the 

alternative descriptions in Chapter 2 of the Final EIS. The portions of roads proposed to be 

decommissioned are all in locations that contribute adverse impacts on soils, water quality, or 

wildlife. Most are adjacent to or within the RHCAs of perennial streams. 

Comment: Build the roads to the absolute minimum standard necessary to accomplish the job, 

and remove the road as soon as possible. (OW, SC) 

Response: All new construction and reconstruction of roads proposed for the Spears project are 

single purpose roads to extract commercial timber. Timber haul roads are built to the minimum 

standard to support logging equipment and log haul as required by FSM 2430. Reconstruction 

work is generally that necessary to bring deteriorated roads or deferred maintenance up to a 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 387 

standard to support logging use, such as drainage structures and subgrade reinforcement in soft 

or wet areas, or to brush out excessively grown in roads. 

Comment: We request that the Final EIS provide additional detail on how and under what 

circumstances roads will be closed or decommissioned. It may be helpful to make District 

written guidelines related to road closure and decommissioning available on the Forest Service 

website or as and appendix to the Final EIS. (EPA)

Response: Roads will be closed or decommissioned after timber harvest activities are complete. 

The alternative descriptions in Chapter 2 of the Final EIS identify which roads will be closed or 

decommissioned by road number. Appendix A has been updated to include a description of road 

work, including closing and decommissioning. Information from the District written guidelines 

have been summarized and are included in Appendix A. The District guidelines are available 

upon request. 

Comment: Prioritize treatment of the dense young stands that are most “plastic” and amenable 

to restoration. (OW, SC) 

Response: The action alternatives all propose treatment in young stands. Forty-five (45) of the 

proposed treatment units are young stands (>30 years old) totaling approximately 1,000 acres. 

These units are proposed for precommercial thinning and/or fuels treatment. Treatment in these 

units is proposed to reduce their density to maintain tree vigor, accelerate growth into larger size 

classes, favor ponderosa pine and western larch, and reduce the risk of a stand replacement fire. 

Comment: Do as much tractor logging as possible and only use skyline when needed. 

Helicopter logging of small diameter trees on the east-side is not economically feasible. (OLC) 

Response: Appendix A of the Final EIS discloses a description of the proposed treatments, 

including a description of logging systems. Tractor logging systems have been identified in 

areas that are less than 35 percent slope. Helicopter loggings systems are proposed on slopes 

greater than 35 percent or in areas where there are concerns related to using tractor systems. 

Comment: Proposed treatments fall within uninventoried roadless areas that needs special 

attention in the NEPA process. The Draft EIS dismisses the roadless issue because these areas 

are not inventoried, but they remain ecologically significant, so they must be analyzed in order to 

fulfill NEPA’s mandate for informed decision-making. Because unroaded areas are so rare and 

unrepresented, passive management should be the preferred approach in such areas. Where 

active management is considered, the Forest Service should use non-commercial or very lighton-the-land techniques to minimize the adverse consequences of logging on soil, water, weeds, 

and other roadless values. (OW, SC) 

Response: Roadless areas were designated as part of the Forest Plan. The project area does not 

contain any inventoried roadless areas. At this time, the direction contained in the 1982 planning 

rule (36 CFR 219) and the advice provided in a November 24, 2004, Lisa Freedman letter are the 

best sources of direction related to analyzing impacts to uninventoried roadless areas. The 1982 

planning rule states that roadless areas shall be evaluated and considered for recommendations as 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 388 

potential wilderness during the Forest Plan revision process as provided in paragraphs (a)(1) and 

(a)(2). Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 1909.12, Chapter 70 Wilderness Evaluation, provides 

direction on inventory criteria to be used in recommending to Congress areas for potential 

wilderness designation. The November 24, 2004, letter indicates that project-level analysis may 

identify an unroaded area that appears to meet the criteria for potential wilderness designation in 

FSH 1909.12 even though the area is not an inventoried roadless area. If an area meets the 

criteria in FSH 1909.12, and has the potential to be recommended for wilderness designation 

during the Forest Plan revision process, then project effects on the potential should be evaluated. 

The Draft EIS did dismiss the issue as not significant because the areas have already been 

developed or because the proposed activities do not alter the character of the areas. Between the 

Draft and Final EIS this issue has been considered again using the criteria in FSH 1909.12(71.1). 

For areas to qualify for placement on the potential wilderness inventory they must meet certain 

criteria, including (1) areas contain 5,000 acres or more, (2) areas contain less than 5,000 acres, 

but can meet one or more of the following (a) areas can be preserved due to physical terrain and 

natural conditions, (b) areas are self-contained ecosystems, such as an island, or (c) areas are 

contiguous to existing wilderness; and (3) areas do not contain forest roads. To be included the 

areas must meet either criteria 1 and 3 or criteria 2 and 3. 

The area identified by Oregon Wild near the Ochoco Divide RNA is less than 5,000 acres in size. 

The area is not an island and it is not contiguous to existing wilderness. Portions of the area 

identified contain roads that were constructed during the Snowshoe and Nature Timber Sales and 

these roads are not shown on the Oregon Wild map. Timber harvest is evident in this area. 

Oregon Wild has also drawn numerous small areas that are adjacent to the Mill Creek 

Wilderness. These areas appear to meet criteria (2)(c). As stated in the Draft EIS, most of the 

areas identified by Oregon Wild that are contiguous to the Mill Creek Wilderness are small. In 

the Bandit Springs Recreation Area (sections 26, 34, and 35), none of the proposed alternatives 

construct roads or include timber harvest in the areas identified by Oregon Wild as unroaded. It 

is not necessary for the Final EIS to analyze effects to these areas because there are no proposed 

activities and the existing condition would not change. 

In most “unroaded” areas identified by Oregon Wild there are already existing roads and 

evidence of past timber harvest that would exclude them from potential wilderness inventory, 

even though they are contiguous to an existing wilderness area. Listed below are proposed units 

that occur within or partially within these areas and the reason why they would not be considered 

for potential wilderness inventory. 

 Unit 718, in section 3, is already accessed by the 2600-240 and 2600-241 roads and is 

adjacent to a McGinnis Timber Sale unit. 

 Unit 711, in sections 8 and 9, is already accessed by the 2600-223 road and is in between 

two McGinnis Timber Sale units. 

 Unit 707, in sections 8 and 17, is already access by the 2600-206, 2600-208, and 2600-

209 roads, and is adjacent to a McGinnis Timber Sale unit. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 389 

 Units 847 and 848, in section 17, are already accessed by two existing unclassified roads 

that spur off the 2600-100 road. No construction or reconstruction is needed. The roads analysis 

recommends that both of these roads be added to the road system. 

 Unit 188 in Sections 18, 19, and 24, is already accessed by the 3350-102 and 3350-105 

roads. This is a helicopter unit and no road construction is needed. 

 Unit 704 is in Sections 18 and 19 and is already accessed by the 3350-102 and 3350-105 

roads. Road 3350-102 shows as reconstruction in the EIS because drainage structures are 

needed. Unit 704 in part borders a Harpo Timber Sale unit. 

 Unit 705 is in Section 18, an estimated 0.13 mile of new road would be needed to access 

this unit and Unit 845. Unit 705 is a tractor logging unit; portions of this unit border an existing 

Harpo Timber Sale unit. This unit is separated from the Mill Creek Wilderness by a ridge and it 

is unlikely that it would be considered as potential wilderness because of past development 

(timber harvest and roads) on the same side of the ridge as Unit 705. FSH 1909.12 indicates that 

boundaries should be located at prominent natural or semi-permanent human-made features. The 

“unroaded” area circles the existing Harpo Timber Sale unit and would not fit the criteria for 

locating boundaries at a semi-permanent human-made feature. 

 Unit 845 is in Section 18. This unit is a helicopter unit. This unit is separated from the 

Mill Creek Wilderness by a ridge and it is unlikely that is would be considered as potential 

wilderness because of past development (timber harvest and roads) on the same side of the ridge 

as Unit 845. 

 Unit 189 is in Sections 13 and 18. This is a helicopter unit and would be accessed by an 

estimated 0.15 miles of new road construction. This unit is separated from the Wilderness by the 

3350-209 road. The 3350-209 road runs parallel to the Wilderness boundary; portions of the 

road in this area have been decommissioned; however, road construction on this route is still 

evident. Road 3350-100 is near the southwest border of this unit. 

 Unit 191 is in Section 13. This unit is accessed by the 3350-200 road, which is currently 

open. This unit is also separated from the Wilderness by the 3350-209 road. 

 Unit 193 is in Section 13. This unit is accessed by the 3350-200 road, which is currently 

open. This unit also contains portions of an existing unclassified road; the roads analysis 

indicates that this unclassified road is not needed for long-term use and recommends that it be 

decommissioned. Unit 193 is separated from the Wilderness boundary by a Felix Timber Sale 

unit and portions of Road 3350-209 that are open to vehicle travel. 

 Unit 198 is in Section 13. This unit is accessed by the 3350-200 road, which is currently 

open. Unit 198 is separated from the Wilderness boundary by a Felix Timber Sale unit and 

portions of Road 3350-209 that are open to vehicle travel. This unit also contains the 3350-210 

and 3350-221 roads that have been decommissioned. 

 Unit 200 is in Section 13. This unit is divided by the 3350-209 road and is adjacent to a 

Felix Timber Sale unit. This unit also contains portions of the 3350-210 road that has been 

decommissioned. 

 Unit 199 is in Sections 12, 13, and 24. This unit is accessed by the 3350-200, 3350-201, 

3350-209 roads. Unit 199 is adjacent to a Felix Timber Sale unit. This unit also contains 

portions of two unclassified roads that are currently open. The roads analysis recommends that 

these roads be decommissioned. 

 Unit 201 is in Section 12. This unit is accessed by the 3350-200 road and is adjacent to a 

Harpo Timber Sale unit. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 390 

 Unit 172 is in Section 23. This unit is accessed by the 3350-214 and 3350-200 roads. On 

the north side of this unit it is separated from the wilderness boundary by the 3350-214 and 

3350-219 roads. On the south this unit borders a Harpo Timber Sale unit. 

 Unit 166 is in Section 23. This unit is accessed by the 3350-204, 3350-216, and 3350-

018 roads. This unit is adjacent to two Harpo Timber Sale units. 

 Unit 163 is in Sections 27 and 26. This unit is accessed by the 3350-018 and 3350-216 

roads. This unit is separated from the Wilderness boundary by existing roads and Felix and 

Harpo Timber Sale units. 

 Unit 811 is in Section 27. This unit is accessed by the 3350 road. The 3350 road also 

separates this unit from the wilderness boundary. This unit is also adjacent to areas harvested 

during the Harpo and Felix Timber Sales. 

Comment: A growing number of scientific studies indicate the significant value of roadless 

areas smaller than 5,000 acres and larger than 1,000 acres. Recent scientific literature 

emphasizes the importance of unroaded areas greater than 1,000 acres as strongholds. (OW, SC) 

Response: With the exception of the Ochoco Divide RNA, the project area does not contain any 

large blocks of land without roads or evidence of past timber harvest. The Spears project would 

not alter the roadless characteristics within the 2,000-acre Ochoco Divide RNA. 

Comment: By now the agency should be well-aware of conservation concerns. Despite agency 

verbal acknowledgement of issues and concerns, and pledges to incorporate these into responsive 

analysis and alternative development, the Spears project has resulted in an excessive and 

alarmingly harmful logging proposal. Given the years of dialogue, meetings, appeal 

negotiations, and field trips in the project area, agency staff should be familiar with conservation 

legal and ecological issues arising from this amplified project. We herein incorporate by 

reference all of our comments, FOIA’s, prior meetings and discussions, appeals, legal 

complaints, motions and judicial rulings on both the Bandit I and II projects as significant 

foundational components of these comments. (SC) 

Response: The Forest Service is aware of conservation concerns. During the environmental 

analysis for the Spears project, the Forest Service met with representatives of the Sierra Club 

twice at their request in order to listen to concerns and obtain site-specific information related to 

individual treatment units. The Forest Service agreed to develop at least one alternative to the 

proposed action that took into consideration conservation concerns; however, the Forest Service 

cautioned that the alternatives would also consider the overall objectives (i.e. purpose and need 

for action) for the project. The information shared at the meeting on August 30, 2006, was used 

along with written comments from Sierra Club, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Oregon Wild 

(formerly Oregon Natural Resources Council) to develop Alternative 5. 

The Forest Service also reviewed comments, appeals, and other material submitted during the 

Bandit planning effort, the tentative appeal resolution, and the June 6, 2005, Findings and 

Recommendations from the Bandit II lawsuit. Information that was applicable to the Spears 

project has been considered and used during the development of the EIS. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 391 

The tentative Bandit appeal resolution was considered during the development of Alternative 5. 

Bandit units 537.1, 545, and portions of 155.2 (Spears unit 139) would not be treated. In several 

Bandit units the resolution suggested that no new roads would be constructed in certain units 

unless it was replacing a creek road. The Spears Units that correspond to these are Units 111, 

120, 139, 141, 142, 155, 163, 302, 517, 704, 705, 808, and 809. Short spur roads would be 

constructed in Units 120, 517, and 705. The resolution suggested that no closed roads would be 

reconstructed in certain units; these units correspond to Units 120, 184, 185, 186, 565, 704, and 

705. No reconstruction activities are proposed to access Units 120. Reconstruction activities 

would occur on open roads to access Units 184, 185, 186, 565, 704, and 705. Short spurs would 

be constructed to access units 120, 185, and 705. The resolution also indicated that portions of 

units within 1/4 mile of the Wilderness boundary would be dropped in some units; these units 

correspond to Spears units 166, 193, and 198. Portions of unit 193 between the 3350-209 road 

and the Wilderness would not be treated. Road 3350-209 separates unit 198 from the Wilderness 

and this unit was not modified. The eastern tip of Unit 166 was dropped because of use by 

pileated woodpeckers. Certain “travel-way” units would not have been treated; these units 

correspond to Spears Units 509, 550, and 888. These units are not within identified connective 

corridors and would be treated. 

Comment: The Draft EIS does include a “no-commercial logging” alternative. The Draft EIS 

clearly notes this is not the preferred alternative, and its bias against this selection is apparent 

throughout its stilted scientifically distorted and inaccurate “analysis” – in violation of the 

NEPA. At no time during meetings with agency staff, decision-makers, or during field trips, has 

the agency indicated any serious possibility of choosing this alternative. Instead, agency staff, 

and Draft EIS claims, clearly emphasize the agency’s intent to log throughout the project area. 

(SC) 

Response: Alternative 3 was developed in response to public comments on the Spears project 

and comments received during the Bandit planning efforts. Alternative 3 was analyzed to the 

same level as the other action alternatives and the analysis was not distorted and does not violate 

the NEPA. The CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1502.14) instruct agency’s to identify their preferred 

alternative, if one exists, in the draft EIS unless another law prohibits the expression of such a 

preference. There is nothing that requires the agency to identify any particular alternative as the 

preferred. One of the reasons for identifying a preferred alternative is to let potentially interested 

and affected persons know where the agency is leaning and allows them to focus their comments 

on the most likely course of action. 

Comment: The Spears Draft EIS is an attempt to recreate the failed Bandit I and II projects. 

The Spears project has significantly increased the size of many former Bandit units, and added 

large blocks of new logging units throughout the area’s forests. One is left to wonder at the 

strange change of names. The sale was killed at least twice already using the Bandit project 

name. Why has the agency renamed it Spears? (SC) 

Response: The project was not “renamed” after the Bandit II Decision Notice was withdrawn 

and is not an attempt to recreate the Bandit II project. Starting from the available information, 

the existing conditions for the Marks Creek Watershed and Veazie Creek Subwatershed were 

reviewed and a purpose and need was developed for the area. This new purpose and need was 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 392 

used to develop a new proposal that became the Spears Project. Both names were selected based 

on geographic features. 

Comment: While eastside Forest Plans incorporate projected timber volumes, they do not 

address the inclusion of additional timber volume targets arising from westside Northwest Forest 

Plan forests. The agency’s requirement of eastside forests to meet westside timber targets 

violates federal environmental policy laws. Failure to disclose and analyze the impacts of this 

additional timber directive violates the NEPA. Eastside forests must not be further jeopardized 

by illegal and ecologically unwarranted agency expectations to assist in achieving westside 

timber targets. (SC) 

Response: The “additional” timber target does not violate the NEPA. The Allowable Sale 

Quantity or projected timber volumes for the Ochoco National Forest contained in the Forest 

Plan is 115 MMBF (million board feet) per year. The Ochoco National Forest has been 

averaging about 10-12 MMBF per year over the last 5 years. The recent direction from the 

Regional Forester to include additional timber volumes targets on the Ochoco National Forest is 

well within the projected timber volumes identified in the Forest Plan. The timber volume 

targets for the Ochoco National Forest increase to 13.9 MMBF in FY (fiscal year 2007), to 18.9 

MMBF in FY 2008, and eventually to 22 MMBF. There is no specific volume target for the 

Spears Fuels and Vegetation Management Project. As discussed on June 6, 2007, the timber 

target for the Ochoco National Forest includes timber harvest from the West Maury EIS, the 

Willow Pine EA, the Harvey Salvage CE, the Spears EIS, and the Westside Stewardship Project 

CE. 

Comment: The agency must disclose the timber economic drivers behind this project. NEPA 

requires full accurate public disclosure of all driving and underlying factors of public lands 

projects. Undisclosed regionally imposed timber volume target quotas, based in part upon new 

funding to achieve Northwest Forest Plan timber targets, have been placed upon each ranger 

district, across the eastside’s forests. As a consequence, timber sale volumes are illegally and 

detrimentally driving regional timber sale projects. Agency timber targets are determining 

logging levels, rather than scientifically sound ecological goals and objectives. (SC) 

Response: There are no timber economic drivers behind this project. As discussed above, the 

Ochoco National Forest has had timber targets for years and will continue to have timber targets. 

Comment: Numerous agency officials throughout the Pacific Northwest Region have informed 

our organizations that these undisclosed timber volume targets are driving many agency projects. 

Failure to disclose timber volume targets within this Draft EIS, and their influence on this 

project, deprives the public of information essential to evaluating this project. These failures 

violate the basic tenets of the NEPA, sabotaging the legal standing of this project. The recent 

“closet cleaning” internal agency letter by Regional Forester Linda Goodman must be disclosed, 

and timber expectations driving this project fully disclosed as well. (SC) 

Response: The purpose and need for action is disclosed in Chapter 1 of the Final EIS. The 

purpose and need for the Spears project does not include a driving factor related to achieving 

timber volume targets. There is no specific timber volume target for the Spears project. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 393 

However, as discussed above, the Ochoco National Forest does have timber targets and the 

Spears project will likely contribute to meeting that target. 

Comment: Conservation efforts have achieved many negotiated changes. Recently, negotiation 

attempts have hit agency walls. Many Forest Service staff across the region privately complain 

they are being pressured to meet new timber quotas, and no longer have the ability to modify 

timber sales. While the agency may believe it has this discretion, continuing to issue timber sale 

“purpose and need” statements and analysis documents that fail to publicly disclose timber 

volumes are a major purpose behind the project violates environmental policy laws. (SC) 

Response: The Spears Project was proposed more than a year before the Regional Forester’s 

memo was issued. The purpose and need statement for the Spears Project does not include a 

timber sale component and no specific volume target has been assigned to the Spears Project. As 

discussed on June 6, 2007, the Ochoco National Forest continues to have discretion to negotiate 

changes with conservation groups. 

Comment: Recent and previous successful negotiations with the Lookout Mountain Ranger 

District and our conservation organizations has brought successful mutual resolution of 

conservation issues with agency projects, including: changes to the Maury Mountain EIS 

grazing decision, Cougar Salvage sale, and the Pick-up Salvage project. These negotiations 

herald the potential that remains inherent in a more cooperative and inclusive NEPA process. 

We incorporate by reference the negotiated agreement tentatively resolving the appeal of Bandit 

II. (SC) 

Response: The Lookout Mountain Ranger District appreciates your willingness to share 

concerns and negotiate for mutual resolution of conservation issues. Meetings such as the two 

field trips to the project area help the Forest Service understand your concerns and issues. While 

it is important to understand concerns and to work toward mutual resolution when possible, the 

Forest Service must remain impartial and consider the needs and interests of all stakeholders. As 

has previously been discussed, Alternative 5 was developed to address conservation concerns 

related to wildlife habitats while considering the overall purpose and need for the project. The 

Forest Service remains willing to discuss mutual resolution of issues in the future. 

Comment: Why of all the areas within the Lookout Mountain Ranger District of the Ochoco 

National Forest - is the Marks Creek watershed and Bandit Recreation Area being chosen as a 

priority project area? It appears the Spears project area was arbitrarily selected, and chosen 

primarily because prior short-sighted agency efforts to log the area had been thwarted. (SC) 

Response: The Spears Project Area was selected because of the large amount of the area that is 

within the Wildland Urban Interface, private developments within the project area, U.S. 

Highway 26, and existing stand conditions described in the 1998 watershed analysis, 2002 

addendum to the watershed, and December 2002 Bandit II Environmental Assessment. The 

Spears Project Area was also identified as a high-priority for fuel reduction work in the 2003 

Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests “Five Year Action Plan to Accelerate Vegetation 

Treatments that improve Condition Class.” 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 394 

Comment: The EIS for this project fails to accurately address the widespread harmful 

cumulative impacts throughout the project area’s previously logged forests. (SC) 

Response: The effects of past logging were taken into consideration in both the Draft and Final 

EISs in either the affected environment descriptions for a given resource or in the environmental 

consequences discussions under the cumulative effects heading. For example, the affected 

environment section for Late and Old Structure (LOS) took into account the changes from 

previous logging operations when it describes the existing stand conditions and compared them 

to the HRV. Several of the cumulative effects for the wildlife sections discuss how previous 

logging activities are continuing to have an effect on wildlife habitat components. In the Soils 

discussion, the effects of previous timber harvest and road construction are included in the unitby-unit evaluation of existing detrimental soil conditions. 

Comment: Throughout the District there are numerous old clearcuts that have failed to 

sufficiently regenerate. These logged areas must eventually be addressed and action alternatives 

must be implemented to reforest them. Yet inadequately restocked areas abound. One of the 

main focused efforts of this project should be mandating ongoing reforestation work until such 

time as old clearcuts have been replaced by uneven-aged thriving forest stands. (SC) 

Response: This issue was raised early in the process of developing the Spears EIS. The Spears 

Project Area does not contain old clearcuts that have failed to regenerate. There are 112 

regeneration harvest units within the project area. The Draft EIS (p. 16) discloses that previously 

logged units within the project area have either regenerated, been planted, or were specifically 

harvested to create openings and no reforestation efforts are planned. Out of the 112 units, there 

are 10 which have not been certified as stocked (50+ trees per acre at least 4-1/2 feet tall). Of 

those 10, five of the units (38 acres total) were not planted because they were specifically 

harvested to provide telemark ski opportunities in the Bandit Springs Recreation Area. The other 

five units were planted in 2003 and contain between 258 and 285 trees per acre; however, the 

trees are not yet taller than 4-1/2 feet. There is no need to propose reforestation work in the 

Spears Project Area. 

Comment: The agency should address the status of the entirety of the Lookout Mountain 

Ranger District’s forest stands, developing an overall long-term management strategy that 

assesses ecological and wildlife habitat recovery goals and needs. (SC) 

Response: This comment is outside the scope of the Spears planning effort. However, the 

Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests have developed a 5-year action plan for accelerating 

vegetation treatments that improve condition class. In that plan, the Spears Project Area is a high 

priority for treatment. 

Comment: If the district truly is concerned about developing a project that effectively addresses 

fuels issues, the first step is to identify priority areas across the district, and develop an overall

comprehensive strategy. (SC) 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 395 

Response: In 2003, the Ochoco and Deschutes National Forests developed a 5-year strategy for 

fuel reduction efforts. The Spears Project Area was included in that strategy and was identified 

as the highest priority HUC on the Ochoco National Forest. 

Comment: Trees above 14 to 16 inches dbh are present but in deficient numbers to where they 

were historically. Despite the relative scarcity for this age class, there are many trees between 14 

to 21 inches dbh marked to cut in this area - while adjacent smaller diameter trees are marked to 

be retained (as per Bandit II markings). Fuel load and vegetation concerns are legitimate in 

portions of this area for trees below 10 inches dbh, and in limited circumstances for trees up to 

around 14 inches dbh; however, many of these are not marked for cutting. Visiting this area with 

agency staff, they said that Spears marking would be different than this previously Bandit 

marked area. This type of marking exemplifies some of the conservation concerns we have with 

the planned Spears timber sale. (SC) 

Response: As discussed during field trips in August 2006 and June 2007, the existing marking 

is a relict of the Bandit Timber Sale. Marking under the Spears project would look differently. 

The Bandit II marking did not include marking trees to be retained. Without understanding how 

projects like this are implemented the marking can appear misleading; trees that will be 

precommercially thinned (up to 9 inches dbh) are not marked to cut. Unit 302 was visited and is 

an example of where commercial-sized trees were marked for removal under the Bandit II 

project and it appears that many of the smaller trees would be retained because they are not 

marked. However, smaller trees would be removed during a later precommercial thinning 

activity. Thus, it appears that only larger trees are being removed and all the smaller trees will 

remain. 

Comment: We incorporate the appeal of Bandit II below directly into these comments, as the 

entirety of legal and ecological issues raised within it remain both applicable and compounded 

by the excessive extent of the proposed Spears logging. (SC) 

Response: The June 24, 2006, scoping comments also incorporated the appeal of the Bandit II 

Project. The appeal has been reviewed and relevant comments were considered. The Draft EIS 

discussed effects to various wildlife species such as the Canada lynx, goshawk, pileated 

woodpecker, wolverine, elk, and redband trout. The effects to neotropical migratory birds are 

disclosed in the EIS. The Draft and Final EISs discuss consistency with INFISH Riparian 

Management Objectives and standards and guidelines. The EIS also describes the effects to 

water quality, 303(d) listed streams, sediment production, and compliance with the Clean Water 

Act. The Spears EIS includes a discussion related to fuels and potential fire behavior. The 

effects to soils have been disclosed in the EIS. The EIS includes a discussion on noxious weeds. 

Throughout Chapter 3 of the Draft and Final EISs are sections discussing cumulative impacts. 

Chapter 2 contains numerous design elements that are common to all alternatives. These design 

elements were developed to reduce environmental impacts and are essentially mitigation 

measures. The EIS described the effects to LOS. The EIS discusses the adverse impacts that 

cannot be avoided. 

Comments such as the “Bandit II Timber Sale does not meet the stated purpose and need of the 

project” or “will not achieve desired future conditions” or “will not contribute to the health of the 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 396 

local economy” were not considered because the purpose and need and design of the Spears 

Proposed Action are not the same as the Bandit II project. Comments such as an EIS is needed 

were not considered because the environmental analysis for the Spears Project is being disclosed 

in an EIS. The EIS does not discuss pine marten or Pacific fisher because these species are not 

listed as threatened or endangered; are not listed as Sensitive for the Ochoco National Forest; and 

were not identified as management indicator species in the Ochoco National Forest Plan. The 

EIS does not discuss the adequacy of the Bandit II Environmental Assessment or Decision 

Notice because those documents are outside the scope of this effort. The Bandit II EA was 

consulted as a source of the existing condition. 

Comment: Among other issues is the veracity of agency basal area formulations driving much 

of the Spears logging alternative design. As most ecologically-based science is not translated 

into the numeric formulas derived and concocted by timber industry silvicultural practices, there 

is a need to exercise great care when attempting to employ timber industry formulas. The Draft 

EIS fails the NEPA by not addressing this serious contentious issue. (SC) 

Response: The recommended stocking levels (as disclosed in the Draft EIS, p. 277) are derived 

from “Suggested Stocking Levels for Forest Stands in Northeastern Oregon and Southeastern 

Washington: An Implementation Guide for the Umatilla National Forest” (Powell 1999). The 

guide was developed from a research note published by the Pacific Northwest Research Station 

(Cochran et al. 1994) establishing suggested stocking levels for forest stands in the Blue 

Mountains. The recommended stocking levels were not derived from timber industry 

silvicultural practices as suggested. 

Comment: The EPA has not certified the Oregon Forest Practices Act and regulations as BMPs. 

(EPA) 

Response: This statement has been removed from the Final EIS. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 397 

APPENDIX D 

Letters from Governmental Agencies 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 398 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 399 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 400 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 401 

United States Department of the Interior

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance 

500 NE Multnomah Street, Suite 356 

Portland, Oregon 97232-2036 

9043.1 

IN REPLY REFER TO:

ER07/415

Electronically Filed 

June 25, 2007 

Mr. Jeff Walter, Forest Supervisor 

Ochoco National Forest 

3160 NE Third Street 

Prineville, Oregon 97754 

Dear Mr. Walter: 

The Department of the Interior (Department) has reviewed the Ochoco National Forest (Ochoco 

NF) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposal to manage fuels and 

vegetation in the Spears Project Area encompassing 39,200 acres. The Department offers the 

following comments for use in developing the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for 

the project. 

GENERAL COMMENTS 

The Department supports the purpose and need identified in the DEIS. The Department’s 

primary concern for the Project is to assure that the proposed vegetation and fuels management 

actions allow for both short- and long-term maintenance and restoration of locally important 

wildlife habitats. Vegetative treatments, including prescribed fire, may impact habitat 

effectiveness for a variety of wildlife species and/or habitat within the Spears project area. These 

habitats include late and old structure stands, old-growth connective corridors, goshawk postfledging areas (PFAs), and elk security and calving habitat. Based on the information provided 

in the DEIS, the Department believes that the purpose and need identified by the Ochoco NF are 

best achieved by either Alternative 4 (Preferred Alternative) or Alternative 5. If Alternative 4, is 

selected the Department recommends that it incorporate some specific measures that minimize 

impacts to short-term habitat viability of Late and Old Structure (LOS) stands, goshawk PFAs, 

and connective corridors as described in this letter. The Department appreciates the effort made 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 402 

in Alternative 5 to address wildlife issues by adjusting the vegetation treatment prescription to 

retain valuable habitat features within the project area. We support strategic approaches to 

address and prioritize site specific management actions that maintain or restore habitat for 

goshawk, elk, and LOS dependent species. 

The planning area is heavily roaded by all levels of routes, ranging from arterial systems to user 

created local roads and off highway vehicle (OHV) trails. Seasonal closures for motorized travel 

and distance buffers have typically been the primary techniques to manage these disturbances to 

wildlife in the Spears project area. Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 propose construction of new roads. 

Careful placement of motorized travel routes needs to occur to limit disturbance to important 

wildlife habitat such as winter range, seasonal migration corridors, breeding sites, roosting sites, 

and forging habitat. In many locations across the proposed project area, road density currently 

exceeds 2.5 mi/mi2 when considering only arterial, collector, and right-of-way roads. High road 

densities adversely impact wildlife habitat. Seasonal closures or additional road 

decommissioning should be considered in project areas to reduce road density and minimize the 

disturbance to wildlife while still providing access and recreation. 

Specific Recommendations 

We request that the following recommendations be incorporated into the final action selected: 

LOS and Wildlife 

• Incorporate the Alternative 5 connective corridor treatment (1,585 acre) into the final 

action selected. The Alternative 5 connective corridors prescription is intended to 

provide adequate cover and structure to facilitate travel by most species utilizing these 

corridors. 

• Vegetation treatment in the connective corridors should leave a diverse assortment of 

species and maintain the largest trees. Consider maintaining all white fir and Douglas fir 

trees greater than 14 inches in diameter that provide a mid to upper canopy within stands 

within the connectivity corridors to maintain a variable multi-strata stand structure. The 

stand structure should maintain LOS dependent species dispersal conditions through 

moist and dry ponderosa pine stands designated within the corridors. 

• Leave portions of some units untreated particularly habitat for cavity nesters. Adjust 

prescriptions to retain clumps and defective trees, and patches of higher densities of trees. 

• Incorporate the Alternative 5 goshawk treatment strategy into the final action selected. 

This approach is anticipated to retain goshawk habitat suitability in the short-term, while 

providing a long-term improvement and reduced risk of high intensity disturbance. 

• When appropriate, decrease the level of human disturbance within designated PFAs and 

elk security and calving habitat. The development of more open stands may require 

additional actions (e.g., road closures) to limit human disturbance within these areas. 

Transportation System Planning 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 403 

• The road density target for the open road network within winter range and general forest 

winter range should be maintained at densities < 1.0 mi/mi2 in order to benefit wildlife 

and retain high wildlife use. The Ochoco NF has had difficulty effectively implementing 

and managing road closures, and OHV use on forested landscapes as evidenced by 

McKay Creek. Additional roads on the landscape will likely exacerbate impacts resulting 

from uncontrolled OHV use in the project area. Seasonal closures or additional road 

decommissioning should be considered in project areas to try to minimize the disturbance 

to wildlife from roads. 

• We recommend that the Habitat Effectiveness model be run using all roads (arterial, 

collector, right-of-ways, user created roads) and trails, and that the FEIS assess the 

cumulative impacts of these roads on wildlife and habitat. Mitigation to offset direct, 

indirect, and cumulative adverse affects resulting from the extensive road network could 

be accomplished through an assessment of the user created and other roads, and closure 

and obliteration of targeted roads to maintain, protect, and restore habitat quality, and to 

create suitable wildlife habitat patch size to support wildlife, while still allowing access 

and recreation. 

Restoration and Prioritization 

• The FEIS should include a spatial and temporal prioritization of all vegetation treatments 

within the project areas in order to maximize project habitat benefits for goshawk, elk, 

and LOS-obligate species. The FEIS should also include clearly articulated management 

objectives to ensure treatment activities contribute toward the restoration objectives. 

Monitoring and Adaptive Management 

• The Department recommends that the FEIS provide for (1) an assessment at appropriate 

time intervals to evaluate the effectiveness of restoration and management efforts; and (2) 

an assessment of the wildlife trend over time as a result of actions within key goshawk, 

elk, and LOS habitat. The Department also recommends that the Ochoco NF collaborate 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife when developing the monitoring and evaluation program. Due to the unique 

nature of the landscape and management history of the Project area, a critical component 

for effective and efficient maintenance and restoration of important wildlife areas will be 

the use of validation monitoring to assess the restoration methods. The Department, 

through the Service, is willing to assist the Ochoco NF in developing a monitoring and 

evaluation plan for the area. 

SPECIFIC COMMENTS

 

Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences, pages 85 and 96 

In the third full paragraph on page 85 it is stated that "Road work, including constructing, 

reconstructing, closing, and decommissioning, affects sediment delivery to streams. The 

construction of new road within RHCAs would increase the potential for sediment delivery to 

streams. New roads would provide additional soil disturbance and potential for sediment 

transport. Construction of roads in the Salmon Creek RHCA would not increase sedimentation 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 404 

to Salmon Creek because the new construction would be above an existing road that effectively 

blocks sediment from entering Salmon Creek." In the last paragraph of page 96 (Columbia 

spotted frog), it is stated that "Reconstructing roads within RHCAs ... reduces sedimentation 

from the existing condition by improving road surfaces and drainage." 

Sedimentation is associated with decreased amphibian abundance. At all spatial scales, the 

combined influences of habitat structure and physical location are important in determining 

amphibian occurrence. Because disturbance of riparian and upslope habitat at broad scales may 

affect amphibian habitat at finer scales by influencing stream temperature, microclimate, and 

sediment input, these life-history requirements and activities that affect these requirements 

should be considered when maintaining amphibian habitat. For example, activities that increase 

sedimentation should be minimized adjacent to small, high elevation streams where tailed frog 

adults may congregate to breed. The U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) suggests, for consideration, 

the references listed below that may be useful in understanding the impact of sedimentation on 

this amphibian species. 

References 

Corn, P.S., and R.B. Bury, 1989, Logging in western Oregon: responses of headwater habitats 

and stream amphibians. Forest Ecology and Management 29: 39-57. 

Stoddard, Margo, Hayes, J.P., and Erickson, Janet, 2004, Influence of Forest Management on 

Headwater Stream Amphibians at Multiple Spatial Scales. USGS Fact Sheet 2004-3018, 

February 2004. Available on the Internet at: http://fresc.usgs.gov/products/fs/fs2004-

3018.pdf.

Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences, Threatened, 

Endangered, and Sensitive Species, Redband Trout, page 88-96 

 

The cited ODFW data on redband trout published in 1991 are somewhat dated to serve a 

documentation of population status. In the near future, the USGS will be releasing a report that 

includes research findings with respect to redband species. Until this new research is released, 

the USGS suggests, for consideration, the references listed below that may be useful in 

understanding the impact of sedimentation on the redband trout. 

References 

Petersen, J. H., and E. E. Kofoot, 2002, Conditions for growth and survival of bull trout in 

Beulah Reservoir. Annual Report for 2001. Report for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 

Pacific Northwest Region, Boise, Idaho. 43 pages. 

Petersen, J. H., E. E. Kofoot, and B. Rose, 2003, Conditions for growth and survival of bull trout 

in Beulah Reservoir. Annual Report for 2002. Report for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 

Pacific Northwest Region, Boise, Idaho. 45 pages. 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 405 

The Department appreciates the opportunity to provide comment on the DEIS and would like to 

work with you to further protect fish and wildlife resources within the project area. If you have 

any questions regarding the Service’s comments, please contact Jerry Cordova or Nancy Gilbert, 

at the Service’s Bend Field Office at 541-383-7146. If you have any questions concerning 

USGS’s comments, please contact Vivian Pardo Nolan, USGS Biological Resources Discipline, 

at (703) 648-4258 or at vpnolan@usgs.gov. If you have any additional comments please contact 

me at (503) 231-6157. 

Sincerely, 

Preston Sleeger 

Regional Environmental Officer 
Appendices 

Spears Vegetation Management Project Final EIS ♦ Page 406 

APPENDIX E 

Maps