RECORD OF DECISION

United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest Service 

Pacific Northwest 

Region 

December 2009 

Motorized Vehicle Use 

on the

Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest 
Vicinity Map 

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. 

High Cascades

Siskiyou Mountains

Wild Rivers

Gold Beach

Powers

Wild Rivers OREGON 

CALIFORNIA

Rogue River-Siskiyou

National Forest

OREGON

I

Medford

Grants Pass

5
Record of Decision 

MOTORIZED VEHICLE USE 

ON THE ROGUE RIVER-SISKIYOU NATIONAL FOREST 

RECORD OF DECISION 

MOTORIZED VEHICLE USE 

ON THE ROGUE RIVER-SISKIYOU NATIONAL FOREST 

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

Pacific Northwest Region 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

Douglas, Klamath, Jackson, Curry, Coos, 

and Josephine Counties in Oregon 

Del Norte and Siskiyou Counties in California 

December 2009 

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

 Responsible Official: Scott D. Conroy 

Forest Supervisor 

For Further Information 

Contact: Steve Johnson, IDT Leader 

Ashland Ranger Station 

645 Washington Street 

Ashland, OR 97520 

Phone: (541) 552-2900 

 
Record of Decision 

MOTORIZED VEHICLE USE 

ON THE ROGUE RIVER-SISKIYOU NATIONAL FOREST 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... ROD – 1 

Background .......................................................................................................... ROD – 1 

Purpose and Need for Action .................................................................................... ROD – 2 

THE DECISION ..................................................................................................... ROD – 2 

Description of Alternative 5 ....................................................................................... ROD – 2 

Mitigation Measures, Monitoring, and Implementation Strategy ......................................... ROD – 7 

DECISION RATIONALE ......................................................................................... ROD – 8 

Response to Purpose and Need ............................................................................... ROD – 9 

Response to Significant Issues ................................................................................. ROD – 9 

Other Issues ......................................................................................................... ROD – 11 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED .............................................................................. ROD – 11 

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE .................................................... ROD – 12 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ........................................................................................ ROD – 12 

FINDINGS ........................................................................................................... ROD – 13 

Forest Plan Consistency (NFMA) .............................................................................. ROD – 13 

Other Legal Requirements and Policies ...................................................................... ROD – 15 

IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................... ROD – 16 

RIGHT TO ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (APPEAL) ...................................................... ROD – 16 

AUTHORIZATION ................................................................................................. ROD – 17 

ATTACHMENTS 

A FOREST PLAN AMENDMENTS 

B REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES 

C ALTERNATIVE 5 MAP 
Record of Decision ROD - 1 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

RECORD OF DECISION 

MOTORIZED VEHICLE USE 

ON THE ROGUE RIVER-SISKIYOU NATIONAL FOREST 

INTRODUCTION 

As the Responsible Official, it is my decision to select and authorize Alternative 5 as described 

in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest without modification. This Record of Decision (ROD) documents 

my decision and rationale for Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

My decision and findings are based on the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Motorized 

Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, dated November 2009, which documents 

the results of an environmental analysis of four Action Alternatives and a No Action alternative. 

The FEIS was prepared by a Forest Service interdisciplinary team and is available on the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest website:www.fs.fed.us/r6/roguesiskiyou/projects/planning/index.shtml.

Background 

On November 9, 2005, the Final Rule for Travel Management: Designated Routes and Areas for 

Motor Vehicle Use (Travel Management Rule) was published in the Federal Register. This affects 

Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 212, 251, 261, and 295. These rules became 

effective in December 2005. The Travel Management Rule revises several regulations to require 

identification of roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use on National Forests and National 

Grasslands. 

Highlights of the Travel Management Rule include: 

 Each National Forest or Ranger District will designate those roads, trails, and areas open to 

motorized vehicles; the class of vehicle and, if appropriate, season of use for motor vehicle. 

 Once the designation process is complete, the Rule will prohibit motor vehicle use off the 

designated system or use that is inconsistent with the designations. 

 Decisions are to be made locally, with public input and in coordination with state, local, and 

tribal governments. 

The need to move quickly to complete the designation process was recognized early and broad 

spectrums of interest groups support this goal. In order to expedite and avoid process gridlock, 

route and area identification has focused on the change from the current situation. A tightly focused 

process was enacted that does not aim to solve all travel management issues at once. 
Record of Decision ROD - 2 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Purpose and Need for Action 

The purpose for action is to enact the Travel Management Rule. Motorized use is popular and an 

important form of recreation for many individuals, families, and groups. A designated and 

managed system is needed to provide this use. Increased demand for motorized use, lack of 

designated areas/routes, and the inconsistent direction contained in the Forest Plans, has led to 

resource damage and social impacts, user conflicts, and safety concerns (FEIS I-6). 

THE DECISION 

As the Responsible Official, it is my decision to select and authorize Alternative 5 (the 

Preferred Alternative) as described in the FEIS for Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue RiverSiskiyou National Forest without modification. This Decision is fully described in the following 

sections of this ROD. Also refer to ROD Attachment C – Alternative 5 Map. 

Description of Alternative 5 

Alternative 5 was developed from the results of analysis of the Action Alternatives analyzed in 

detail in the Draft EIS and the extensive comments received on the Draft EIS during the Comment 

Period. My decision to select Alternative 5 will provide for a designated and managed system, 

enact changes to reduce existing resource damage from motorized use, and reduce social impacts, 

user conflicts and safety concerns. 

By selecting Alternative 5 (the Preferred Alternative), the Forest will: 

 Formally designate approximately 3,176 miles of road where mixed use will be allowed. Mixed use 

is defined as designation of a National Forest System (NFS) road for use by both highway-legal and 

non-highway-legal motor vehicles. 

 Construct one motorized trail to provide loop route opportunities (approximately 1.2 miles). 

 Convert approximately 10 miles of NFS roads to motorized trails. 

 Prohibit public motorized use on approximately 7 miles of roads and 37 miles of trail currently open 

to motorized use in order to minimize or reduce resource damage. 

 Enact Forest Plan Amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel Management Rule. 

Two separate Forest Plans guide the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF). 

 Designate approximately 20 acres where motorized cross-country travel will be allowed. Prohibit all 

other cross-country motorized travel. 

Table ROD-1. Alternative 5 Summary and Change from the Current Condition 

Roads and Trails Current 

Condition Alternative 5 Change 

Total NFS Roads 5,311 miles 

NFS Roads “open” to the public 4,537miles 4,530 miles -7 miles 

Open roads that allow mixed use 3,208 miles 3,176 miles -32 miles 

Open roads that prohibit mixed use 1,329 miles 1,361 miles +32 miles 

Total NFS Trails 1,199 miles 1,211 miles +12 miles 

NFS Trails that allow motorized use 255 miles 230miles -25miles 

New trail construction 1.2 miles 

Convert ML1 road to trail 10 miles 

Total area open to cross country travel 274,670 acres 20 acres 
Record of Decision ROD - 3 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Forest-wide Elements of Alternative 5 

The Forest Service developed the following strategies to be used as part of Alternative 5 to improve 

implementation of the designated route system for motorized use: 

 Produce a primary Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) following national Forest Service 

standards that indicates which routes and areas are designated open to the public by type of 

vehicle per route and season open for use. This map will also identify areas where off-road 

travel for dispersed camping will be allowed. Authorized use, use restrictions, and operating 

conditions will be revised in future decisions as needed to meet changing conditions or 

management strategies (adaptive management). 

 Provide clear, consistent, and adequate signage that identifies routes designated open by type of 

vehicle per route and season open for use corresponding to the public MVUM and local travel 

map. Signing of dead-end routes leading to/stopping at rivers, streams, meadows, and other 

sensitive resources will be a priority to help protect resources from public wheeled motor 

vehicle damage. 

 Development of a public education strategy is desirable that may include public meetings, 

workshops, and other forums to educate forest users about the designated route system, to assist 

the public with reading the MVUM, to educate Forest users about the potentially adverse effects 

of their activities, and to discuss how the public can help with implementation of the designated 

system by volunteering for maintenance activities, enforcement of the rules, and education of 

other forest users. 

Access for permitted activities (such as livestock operations, maintenance of water developments, 

utility maintenance, timber management or harvest activities, ski area management, outfitter-andguide operations, forest product gathering, and special events) on National Forest System land is 

independent of general public access. Individuals or groups with special permits will be allowed to 

conduct their business according to conditions outlined in their permits. If a permit does not 

stipulate exemptions to the Forest’s travel regulations, the general travel regulations will apply. 

Title 36 CFR §228, Subpart A, Locatable Minerals, outlines rules and procedures through which the 

use of the surface of NFS lands in connection with operations is authorized by the mining laws (30 

U.S.C. 2 1-54). Implementation of the Travel Management Rule will not affect access that is 

reasonably incidental to mining. 

Except in Wilderness and other congressionally designated special areas, the following are exempt 

from prohibitions associated with each alternative when granted by the District Ranger or Forest 

Supervisor: 

 Limited administrative use by the Forest Service 

 Use of any fire, military, or law enforcement vehicle for emergency purposes 

 Authorized use of any combat or combat support vehicle for national defense purposes 

 Law enforcement response to violations of law, including pursuit (Note: emergency access 

and law enforcement pursuit does not necessarily require permission from the Forest 

Supervisor). 

 Use and occupancy of National Forest System lands and resources pursuant to a written 

authorization issued under Federal law or regulations. 
Record of Decision ROD - 4 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Parking a motor vehicle on the side of the road, when it is safe to do so without causing damage to 

NFS resources or facilities, is allowed under my decision, unless prohibited by State law, a traffic 

sign, or an order (36 CFR 261.54). NFS roads include all trailheads, parking lots, terminal 

facilities1, and turnouts associated with NFS roads. The “side of the road” is defined as that area 

within one vehicle length, not to exceed 20 feet, from the edge of the road surface. Parking on the 

side of the road may not damage the land, vegetation, or streams and no vegetation (live or dead) 

may be cut (FEIS page II-15). 

It is well recognized that National Forests have historically provided camping opportunities outside 

of developed campgrounds. This type of dispersed motorized use has historically occurred adjacent 

to open roads, adjacent to bodies of water, and at the termini of roads and trails. Under my 

decision, motor vehicle travel will not be allowed off of any designated motor vehicle route, except 

where designated to travel to and from a dispersed camping site. Specific areas where motorized 

off-road travel for the purpose of dispersed camping will be allowed will be displayed on the 

forthcoming MVUM (not included with this ROD). The use of established motorized routes to 

traditional dispersed campsites where no resource damage is occurring will continue. 

Under my decision, off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping will be prohibited within 

Botanical Areas, Research Natural Areas, or other areas deemed to have high resource values. 

Current closures will remain in effect for specific areas (i.e., Big Butte Springs Watershed, Ashland 

Watershed). In addition, off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping will be prohibited within 

1⁄4 mile (1,320 feet) of any potable water source or developed campgrounds. 

Access to designated gravel bars located along the lower Rogue, lower Illinois, Chetco, and Elk 

Rivers will be permitted. The Rogue River gravel bars include: Smith Orchard, Foster, 

Miller/Dunkelberger, Quosatana, Lobster Creek, and Hawkins. The one Illinois River gravel bar is 

located in the vicinity Oak Flat Campground. The Chetco River gravel bars include: Miller, Nook, 

Redwoods, and South Fork (upper and lower). All of these gravel bars are located on the Gold 

Beach Ranger District. The Elk River gravel bars are unnamed and include five bars located 

between the river and Road 5325 on the Powers Ranger District. 

At no time may any transportation use take place that would cause unacceptable resource damage. 

Additional site-specific closures and seasonal restrictions (such as emergency fire closures or where 

unexpected resource damage is occurring) may be implemented on a case-by-case basis for 

management, wildlife, and resource protection through authorized travel orders. 

Off-road motorized travel for game retrieval is prohibited. 

New additional text, specific to each respective Forest Plan for the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest, will amend current management direction for motorized vehicle use. Amendments to the 

Rogue River and Siskiyou Land and Resource Management Plans will provide consistency with the 

2005 Travel Management Rule. All roads and trails and areas will be closed to motorized use 

unless designated as open. 

 

 

1

 Terminal facilities are defined as a transfer point between the Forest transportation system and forest resources served by the

system, or between different transportation modes, including parking facilities, boat ramps, trailheads, log landings, and airfields. 
Record of Decision ROD - 5 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Since motorized use includes OHV use, this decision will repeal the 1989 and 1990 Off-road 

Vehicle Management Plans, contained as appendices to the respective Forest Plans, to be replaced 

with the Motorized Vehicle Use Map. 

District Specific Elements of Alternative 5 

Powers Ranger District Elements 

Motorized use will be prohibited on the 1-mile Big Tree Trail (#1150) south of Powers near the 

South Fork Coquille River. 

Gold Beach Ranger District Elements 

An amendment to the Siskiyou Land and Resource Management Plan to make motorized use of 

portions of the Game Lake Trail (#1169), the Lawson Creek Trail (#1173), the Illinois River Trail 

(#1161), the Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail (#1166), and two unnamed connector trails consistent 

with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through which it passes (Backcountry 

Recreation). See ROD Attachment A for actual changes to the wording of the Forest Plan 

Standards and Guidelines. 

Motorized mixed use will be prohibited on approximately 12.5 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 1376010, 1376011, 1376012, 1376013, 1376014, 1376015, 

1376019, 1376902, 1376906, and 1376908. 

Motorized use will be prohibited on approximately 14.2 miles of trail that include 6.9 miles on the 

Game Lake Trail (#1169), 4.1 miles on the Lawson Creek Trail (#1173), and 3.2 miles on a portion 

of the Illinois River Trail (#1161). 

Convert approximately 9.3 miles of roads currently designated as Maintenance Level 1 to motorized 

trails. These roads are located in the upper Lawson Creek drainage near Fairview Mountain (3.7 

miles on portions of Roads 3680351, and 3680353), near Signal Butte in the Hunter Creek drainage 

(3.9 miles on portions of Roads 3313103, 3680190, 3680195, and 3680220) and the Kimball Hill 

area in the Quosatana Creek drainage (1.7 miles on Road 3313117). 

Motorized use will be prohibited on approximately 0.8 miles of trail (#1164) in the Woodruff 

Meadow area.

Approximately 500 feet of paved road will be designated for motorized mixed use on a portion of 

Road 2308 (Burnt Ridge Road).

Wild Rivers Ranger District Elements 

Route-specific Forest Plan Amendments: An amendment to the Siskiyou Land and Resource 

Management Plan will make Standards and Guidelines for Management Area 32 consistent with 

current and historical motorized use of the Boundary Trail (#1207). See ROD Attachment A for 

actual changes to the wording of the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

 

 

2 The area that is the subject of this plan amendment is a recommended Research Natural Area (RNA). Formal designation as an 

RNA must be approved by the Chief of the Forest Service following preparation of an Establishment Record. Siskiyou National 

Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, page IV-81) 
Record of Decision ROD - 6 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Motorized use will be prohibited on approximately 10.2 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 4400445, 4400459, 4400460, and 4400480. 

Motorized mixed use will be prohibited on approximately 11.9 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 4201029, 4201881, 4300011, 4300910, and 4300920. 

Motorized use will be prohibited on approximately 6.4 miles of road to public use including 

portions of Roads 4300011, 4300910, 4300920, 4300925, 4201016, and 4103011. 

Convert approximately 0.3 miles of Road 2509640, currently designated as a Maintenance Level 1 

road, to a motorized trail. 

Motorized use will be prohibited on approximately 0.6 miles of Road 2600050. 

Motorized use will be prohibited on approximately 1.9 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on the Silver Lake Trail (#1184) and on approximately 11.1 miles of trail that currently allows 

motorized use on portions (or entirely) of the following trails: Taylor Creek (#1142), Big Pine Spur 

(1142A), Onion Way (#1181), Secret Way (#1182), Secret Way Spur (1182A), and Swede Creek 

(#1135). 

Motorized use will be prohibited on approximately 4.1 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on portions (or entirely) of the following trails: Mt. Elijah(#1206), Bigelow Lake (#1214), 

Bolan Lake (#1245), and Kings Saddle (#1245A). 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District Elements 

An amendment to the Rogue River Land and Resource Management Plan to make motorized use of 

the Boundary Trail (#1207), O’Brien Creek Trail (#900), Sturgis Fork Trail (#903) consistent with 

Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through which it passes. See ROD Attachment A for 

actual changes to the wording of the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Motorized use will be prohibited on approximately 3.8 miles of the Horse Camp Trail (#958) that 

currently allows motorized use. 

Construct and relocate approximately 1.5 miles of the Penn Sled Trail (#957) east of Applegate 

Lake that would allow motorized use for Class III vehicles. 

High Cascades Ranger District Elements 

There will be no changes on the High Cascades Ranger District. 

 
Record of Decision ROD - 7 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Mitigation Measures, Monitoring, and Implementation Strategy 

The Forest Service is required by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for 

implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA to identify relevant, reasonable mitigation 

measures that could improve the project. Mitigation, as defined in the CEQ Regulations (40 CFR 

1508.20) includes: 1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an 

action, 2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its 

implementation, 3) Rectifying or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance 

operations during the life of the action, 4) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing 

substitute resources or environments, and 5) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating or 

restoring the affected environment. 

In accordance with NEPA implementing regulations, practical means to avoid or minimize 

environmental harm from the alternative selected have been adopted (CFR 1505.2). Required 

Mitigation Measures identified in ROD Attachment B are specific to my decision to implement 

actions identified in this Record of Decision. Standards and Guidelines and mitigation measures 

identified in the Rogue River and Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans, 

as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan are also incorporated by reference as required measures. 

Authorized use of designated roads and trails will continue to be monitored. Current monitoring 

includes surveys of road and trail conditions by road engineers and recreation specialists on a 

regular basis. Monitoring will include an evaluation of consistency with the Rogue River and 

Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans and compliance with these travel 

management decisions, including any required mitigation measures. 

Monitoring will also identify potential effects on the following, with the objective of minimizing: 

(1) damage to soil, watershed, vegetation, and other forest resources; (2) harassment of wildlife and 

significant disruption of wildlife habitats; (3) conflicts between motor vehicle use and existing or 

proposed recreational uses of National Forest System lands or neighboring Federal lands; and (4) 

conflicts among different classes of motor vehicle uses of National Forest System lands or 

neighboring Federal lands (36 CFR 212.55). 

Designations will be revised as needed to meet changing conditions (36 CFR 212.54). Revisions to 

designations, including revisions to vehicle class and time of year, will be made in accordance with 

FSM 7712, 7715, and 7716. 

When a designated route is temporarily closed for more than 1 year, the MVUM will be updated to 

reflect the closure. When the route is reopened, the MVUM will be updated to reflect the 

reopening. No additional travel or environmental analysis is required to support these temporary 

changes, which do not affect the underlying designation. 

 
Record of Decision ROD - 8 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

DECISION RATIONALE 

During the travel planning efforts, I have gained an increased understanding and appreciation for 

the complexities and controversy surrounding travel management on the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest. For all Action Alternatives analyzed, the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 5) best 

meets the stated Purpose and Need for the Travel Management Rule and best addresses the 

environmental and social issues identified in Chapter I (FEIS pages I-14 to I-17). I thoroughly 

considered the site specific public comments and resource issues identified through the planning 

process and made a commitment to strike a balance between the various motorized and nonmotorized uses, while assessing whether my decision would inadvertently cause or perpetuate any 

adverse impacts on the natural and cultural resource values across the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest. I recognize that no single user or group will completely agree with my decision, 

but I do hope they can appreciate that their comments and concerns have been heard and considered 

in context of all the comments and resource issues associated with travel management on the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

By selecting Alternative 5, use on the Forest will in many ways continue as it has in the past. Users 

will continue to be able to camp in both dispersed and developed recreation sites. Under different 

authorizations and permitting, users will be able to continue to collect firewood, harvest Christmas 

trees, conduct mining, grazing and timber operations, and conduct other authorized uses on the 

Forest. Work associated with these activities will continue as they do now, through operating plans, 

plans of operation, special use authorizations, and established authorization processes. 

Alternative 5 was developed based on input received on the Draft EIS and reflects the most 

inclusive integration of site-specific comments received from our diverse forest recreational users. 

Alternative 5 provides for a diversity of motorized and non-motorized opportunities in a manner 

that reduces the potential for conflict between uses, improves public safety and maintains and 

protects important natural and cultural resource values. Some comments brought to our attention 

some environmental conditions that required additional analysis. Examples included management 

for controlling root disease for Port-Orford Cedar (FEIS pages III-79 through III-88) and the 

presence of naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) in serpentine soils (FEIS pages III-63 through III68) and its possible impact to public health and safety. 

Again, these points coupled with the on-the-ground knowledge of District specialists, field visits of 

areas across the Forest to ground-truth environmental concerns raised by the public, updating the 

baseline mapping—allowed me to have a high degree of confidence that Alternative 5 adequately 

and responsibly addresses the environmental issues associated with implementing the Travel 

Management Rule. 

I evaluated all alternatives and compared them to Forest Plan goals, objectives and resource 

standards, existing environmental conditions, and historical use and determined that Alternative 5 

best addressed the broad range of environmental concerns. 

My determination that the amendments to the Rogue River and Siskiyou Forest Plans are 

non‐significant is appropriate. This determination is based on the findings that these amendments 

will not change multiple use goals and objectives for long-term management nor will they directly 

affect levels of goods and services (FEIS pages III-149 to IV-155). 

 
Record of Decision ROD - 9 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Comments and minor mapping errors, identified through the public and internal review of the FEIS, 

have been captured and documented in Appendix A of the FEIS. I do not expect road and trail 

management objectives to remain static over time. Necessary changes or alterations to travel 

management will continue across the Forest through site specific project analyses and continued 

public collaboration and feedback. The Travel Management Rule recognizes that designations to 

travel routes are not permanent and that unforeseen environmental impacts, changes in public 

demand, or monitoring may lead to responsible officials revising designations and 36 CFR 212.54 

provides for revision of designations as needed to meet changing conditions. 

I choose the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 5), because it is the most responsive and balanced in 

addressing the environmental and social issues raised during the entire travel management process 

while meeting the purpose and need of the Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest and the intent of the Travel Management Rule. 

Response to Purpose and Need (FEIS III, D) 

As stated above, I selected the Preferred Alternative because, as discussed below, it achieves the 

stated Purpose and Need to a high degree, while minimizing adverse environmental effects. 

Mitigation Measures will provide a strong combination of physical, biological, social, and 

environmental benefits while reducing adverse resource effects to a level I consider acceptable. 

Enact the Travel Management Rule 

Alternative 5 will lead to the publication of a MVUM which will enact the Travel Management 

Rule. This will be accomplished via Forest-wide Plan Amendments that allow the MVUM to be the 

basis of allowable motorized use for roads, trails and areas. 

Provide a Designated and Managed System for Motorized Use 

Alternative 5 provides for a managed system of motorized use and authorizes the issuance of 

citations for use not in accordance with the MVUM. 

Provide Consistent Direction in the Forest Plans

Alternative 5 enacts site-specific Plan Amendments to provide for clear and consistent direction in 

the Forest Plans. These site-specific amendments are associated with the Lawson Creek, Game 

Lake, Lower Illinois, and Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trails and with the Boundary Trail and 

associated connecting trails, along the ridge associated with the boundary of the Rogue River and 

Siskiyou National Forests. These amendments are necessary to allow the Forest Plans to provide 

consistent direction so that these trails will continue to be authorized for motorized use. 

Response to Significant Issues 

NEPA requires Federal agencies to focus analysis and documentation on the significant issues 

related to a proposed action. The Interdisciplinary Team, with my involvement and approval, 

identified the following as the Significant Issues associated with the Proposed Action and analysis 

presented in the FEIS (pages I-14 through I-15). These Significant Issues have served as the basis 

for developing and comparing alternatives. 

 
Record of Decision ROD - 10 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Water Quality and Erosion (FEIS page III-6)

Under Alternative 5, there will be only minor amounts of new ground-disturbing activities and there 

will be no creation of new impervious areas. On the watershed scale, these changes would be 

immeasurable. At the 6th field subwatershed scale, the risk for cumulative effects would not 

change as a result of limiting public access or converting roads to motorized trails under Alternative 

5. 

The reasons for this conclusion include the elimination of cross-country travel in Alternative 5, 

which will improve subwatershed conditions in those areas where cross-country travel is currently 

occurring and thus reduce the risk for adverse cumulative effects. 

Botanical Areas and Special Plant Habitats (FEIS page III-17)

Alternative 5 is expected to maintain or reduce effects from motorized use. This will include a 

reduction in miles of routes open for public wheeled motor vehicle use adjacent to botanical and 

special plant habitats, and the prohibition of cross-country travel will further reduce potential effects 

to botanical resources. 

Public Safety (FEIS page III-20)

Activities described under Alternative 5 will not increase threats to public safety because the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest will follow Oregon and California State law and engineering 

analysis of mixed use. Though the volume of traffic may increase slightly in the foreseeable future, 

the change in composition of the traffic and the distribution of these vehicles is not expected to be 

noticeable. The majority of roads on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest are designed for 

low speeds and have low levels of traffic use. 

Although safety of National Forest users is always a concern, motorized vehicle use designation 

will not eliminate all hazards, either on roads, trails, or within areas. Route designation by itself 

will not affect public safety. Road and trail hazards are addressed through regular maintenance, not 

by designation. It is not uncommon for hazards to exist outside of the motor vehicle travel-way. 

Therefore, a safe experience for all users (motorized and non-motorized) cannot be guaranteed. 

Motorized Opportunities (FEIS page III-24)

As the number of users on National Forests and differing types of use continue to increase, there is a 

potential that user conflicts will also increase. However, motorized roads and trails will be 

administratively defined and published on a motor vehicle use map (MVUM) under Alternative 5. 

Recreationists will be able to better plan recreational pursuits based on an individual’s unique 

expectations and desires. As a result, the frequency of user conflicts between non-motorized and 

motorized recreation users will likely decrease in the short and long terms.

Roadless Character within Inventoried Roadless Areas (FEIS page III-39)

All Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs), identified in Appendix C of the Land and Resource 

Management Plans (LRMP), are managed according to the direction provided in the LRMP for their 

assigned land allocations. Some allocations permit motorized use within an IRA while others limit 

or prohibit motorized opportunities. Alternative 5 will reduce the amount of motorized use and the 

overall undeveloped nature of IRAs will improve. 
Record of Decision ROD - 11 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

There is no new road or trail construction within IRAs under Alternative 5. Since there will be no 

additional construction or allowance for increased use, there will be no additive impact that might 

contribute to adverse cumulative effects on roadless character. 

Other Issues 

Beyond the above listed five Significant Issues, eighteen other issues are also analyzed in the FEIS. 

All issues are based upon public and agency comments received during the scoping process or are 

related to satisfying Federal, State, and local requirements and standards, and were also taken into 

account in my decision. 

The FEIS documents discussion of additional issues and effects that were identified during the 

scoping process but were not found to be significant issues key to designing alternatives. In 

evaluating alternatives, these issues were found to have either variable effects or effects that were 

similar or common to all alternatives, or could be equally mitigated under all alternatives. Because 

of this, these issues will not be further discussed in this decision document (reference FEIS, Chapter 

III, Section E). 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 

In addition to my decision (the Preferred Alternative), three other Action Alternatives and a No 

Action Alternative were analyzed in the FEIS. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 102 (2) of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 USC 4332 (2)), the Forest Service 

analyzed these alternatives as options for meeting the purpose and need. 

The No Action Alternative was a proposal to ‘do nothing’ and maintain the ‘status quo’. The 

‘status quo’ would be the combination of all previous decisions by the Forest (allowing cross 

country travel, the creation of temporary roads associated with permits or other authorizations; and 

any previous decisions associated with the system of roads, trails and areas). This alternatives does 

not meet the purpose and need. 

Alternative 2, which represents the current situation associated with motorized use, was determined 

to be sufficient in representing the highest degree of motorized-use allowed. The Forest Service did 

not identify a reason to consider alternatives that would further relax control of motorized use in 

general. 

An initial proposal was developed based on results from analysis of the Forest’s transportation 

system. Forest and Ranger District staff identified changes they believed should be made based on 

information available regarding the potential effects of travel, as well as higher-level direction, 

public reports of problems, and knowledge of the Forest road and trail system. This led to the 

development of Alternative 3-Proposed Action, which the Forest Service used to initiate the 

NEPA process, facilitate meaningful public comment, and serve as a basis for identification of the 

issues. 

 
Record of Decision ROD - 12 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Alternative 4 is more restrictive on motorized use in exchange for putting more management 

emphasis on other resource values such as roadless character and botanical resources. Based on 

individual values, a case can be made for alternatives that would get more and more restrictive on 

human use (including non-motorized uses). This alternative was developed with increasing 

restrictions on motorized use while still remaining within a reasonable range of motorized use to 

address the stated Purpose and Need. 

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

It is required by law that one or more environmentally preferable alternatives be disclosed. The 

environmentally preferred alternative is not necessarily the alternative that will be implemented and 

it does not have to meet the underlying Purpose and Need for the project. It does however, have to 

cause the least damage to the physical and biological environment and best protects, preserves and 

enhances historical, cultural, and natural resources (Section 101 NEPA; 40 CFR 1505.2(b)). 

Of the Action Alternatives considered, I have determined Alternative 4 has the least impact in terms 

of causing damage to the physical and biological environments, therefore it is the environmentally 

preferred alternative. I believe that authorizing action for this project is clearly better than taking no 

action (doing nothing). My decision (Alternative 5) provides a responsible combination of physical, 

biological, social, and environmental benefits with acceptable resource effects, while attaining the 

stated Purpose and Need to a high degree. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

In August 2008, the formal process under NEPA was initiated. A scoping letter and Notice of 

Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement was mailed to all interested publics having 

been involved in the initial sensing process. The letter described the Proposed Action and Purpose 

and Need for the Project. In addition, Scoping Letters were sent to other agencies such as Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Forestry, Oregon Parks and Recreation, 

Medford Water Commission, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, 

Environmental Protection Agency, National Park Service, NOAA Fisheries, Bureau of Land 

Management, and various city and county government entities in southwest Oregon and northwest 

California. The Planning Team received 187 letters and over 11,000 form letters that were 

generated via an electronic site established to facilitate an electronic response (that contained a predetermined viewpoint). 

Government-to-Government consultation letters were mailed on August 18, 2008 to Confederated 

Tribes of Siletz Indians, Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community, the Klamath Tribes, 

Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, Smith River Rancheria, Coquille Tribal Council, and 

to the Quartz Valley Indian Tribe. 

A 45-day Draft EIS public comment period for Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue RiverSiskiyou National Forest formally began on March 28, 2009 with publication of a Notice of 

Availability in the Federal Register Vol. 74, No. 58 (FR page 13432). The 45-day comment period 

closed on May 11, 2009. A total of 11,359 comments to the Draft EIS were received by the Forest 

at the close of the Comment Period. Approximately 1,200 additional comments were received after 

May 11, 2009. 
Record of Decision ROD - 13 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

All comments received were reviewed and were considered as part of the comment analysis 

process. All comments were read and coded based on content and intent, by a Forest Service 

planning team, with District Ranger and Forest Supervisor oversight, review and concurrence. 

Pursuant to 36 CFR 215.6 (b), (1), A “Response to Comments” (Appendix A to the FEIS) 

documents the consideration and response of all substantive comments submitted in compliance 

with paragraph (a) of this section. 

FINDINGS 

Based on the information and evidence contained in the November 2009 FEIS and its Appendices, 

and as further documented within this Record of Decision, I find that my decision is consistent 

with the Rogue River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and the Siskiyou 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended by the Northwest Forest 

Plan; other amendments and other laws, regulations and agreements applicable to the 

management of National Forest System lands and resources. 

This action has been analyzed and designed under laws, regulations and agreements applicable to 

the management of National Forest System lands and resources, including: 16 USC 1604 (g)(3), 36 

CFR 219.14, 36 CFR 219.27 (b). I find this decision to be consistent with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality regulations for 

implementing NEPA, 40 CFR 1500-1508, July 1, 1986, the Multiple-use Sustained Yield Act of 

1960, and the National Forest Management Act of 1976. I also find this decision is in compliance 

with the Endangered Species Act 1973 as amended, and the Historic Preservation Act. 

Forest Plan Consistency (NFMA) 

SIGNIFICANCE DETERMINATION: FOREST PLAN AMENDMENTS 

Alternative 5 includes Forest Plan Amendments to both the Rogue River and Siskiyou National 

Forest Land and Resource Management Plans. The detail of these amendments is described in 

ROD Attachment A, incorporated by reference. 

An assessment of a proposed amendment’s significance in the context of the larger Rogue River and 

Siskiyou Forest Plans has been accomplished (FEIS pages III-149 through III-155). Note that the 

definition of significance for amending a Forest Plan (36 CFR 219.10(f) and FSH 1922.5) is not the 

same as the definition of significance as defined by NEPA. Under NEPA, significance is generally 

determined by whether a proposal is considered to be a major federal action significantly affecting 

the quality of the human environment, or whether the relative severity of the environmental impacts 

would be significant based on their context and intensity. Forest Service Manual 1926 provides 

criteria for evaluation of significance. Content from this direction is summarized on FEIS page III149. 

 
Record of Decision ROD - 14 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

For the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, there are two types of changes proposed as Forest 

Plan Amendments, overall Forest-wide amendments to the Forest Plans to enact the Travel 

Management Rule, and route -specific amendments in the form of changes to specific 

management direction and/or to Standards and Guidelines. Both types of amendments are needed 

under Alternative 5 to allow my decision to be consistent with land management plan direction. 

The result of this analysis, considering all required factors, supports my determination of nonsignificant change (amendment) to the Rogue River National Forest and Siskiyou National 

Forest Land and Resource Management Plans. These amendments, either individually or 

collectively, would not constitute an amendment that would be significant. This determination 

is based on the findings that these amendments will not change multiple use goals and objectives for 

long-term management nor will they directly affect Standards and Guidelines or levels of goods and 

services (FEIS pages III-149 to IV-155). 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1502.20, the National Forest Management Act requires a specific determination 

of consistency with the Rogue River and Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management 

Plans and their Standards and Guidelines. My decision (Alternative 5) has been developed to be in 

full compliance with NFMA. Overall, while there will be varying levels of impacts, with 

appropriate mitigation, I find that my decision will be in compliance with all applicable 

management direction. 

Rogue River National Forest Plan 

Pursuant to CEQ 1502.20, the Final EIS is tiered to the FEIS for the Rogue River National Forest 

Land and Resource Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 1990) as amended by the Northwest 

Forest Plan (USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 1994). 

Siskiyou National Forest Plan 

Pursuant to CEQ 1502.20, the Final EIS is tiered to the FEIS for the Siskiyou National Forest Land 

and Resource Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 1989) as amended by the Northwest Forest 

Plan (USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 1994). 

Northwest Forest Plan - Aquatic Conservation Strategy

According to the Northwest Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, the Aquatic Conservation 

Strategy (ACS) was developed to improve and maintain the ecological health of watersheds and 

aquatic ecosystems contained within them on public lands. Riparian Reserves are established as a 

component of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, designed under the Northwest Forest Plan 

primarily to restore and maintain the health of aquatic systems and their dependent species. 

Riparian Reserves also help to maintain riparian structures and functions and conserve habitat for 

organisms dependent on the transition zone between riparian and upland areas. 

The analysis of the existing conditions relative to Riparian Reserve Standards and Guidelines (1994 

NWFP ROD, pages C-31 through C-39) and the nine ACS Objectives is presented for each 

alternative considered in detail in FEIS pages III-54 through III-58. 

On the basis of the analysis referenced above, I conclude that my decision is compliant with all 

applicable Standards and Guidelines. 
Record of Decision ROD - 15 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Additionally, as an overall determination, the impacts associated with my decision (the Preferred 

Alternative) either directly, indirectly, individually or cumulatively, would not prevent attainment 

of Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS), and the nine ACS Objectives at any spatial scale. 

Other Legal Requirements and Policies 

In reviewing the FEIS and actions involved in my decision (the Preferred Alternative), I have 

concluded that my decision is consistent with the following laws, requirements and current or 

proposed policies: 

The Preservation of American Antiquities Act, June 1906: All surveyed and inventoried cultural 

resource sites associated with Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

will be protected from entry and excluded from any resource management activities. New sites 

discovered during operations will be protected by required Mitigation Measures (See ROD 

Attachment B). 

The National Historic Preservation Act: The Oregon State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) 

has been consulted concerning activities associated with Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) will be 

consulted about measures to protect significant archaeological sites from adverse effects, should any 

be identified. 

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 1969: NEPA establishes the format and content 

requirements of environmental analysis and documentation, such as Motorized Vehicle Use on the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. The entire process of preparing this environmental impact 

statement was undertaken to comply with NEPA. 

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended: Biological Evaluations and Assessments 

have been prepared to document possible effects of activities on endangered and threatened species 

associated with Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Appropriate 

coordination, conferencing, and consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA 

Fisheries have been completed. 

For the northern spotted owl, a determination of “may effect, not likely to adversely effect 

(NLAA)” was made for disturbance and the minor amount of clearing (it is estimated that several 

conifer trees less than 8 inches in diameter would be cut on the proposed Penn Sled trail). A 

determination of “may effect, not likely to adversely effect (NLAA)” was made for the marbled 

murrelet due to disturbance. A determination of “no effect” to critical habitat was made for both 

species. Correspondence from the USFWS (Letter of Concurrence # 13420-2010-I-0004) is part of 

the Project Record and available on request (FEIS pages III-96 and III-97). 

Alternative 5 has a “no effect” determination for coho salmon or coho critical habitat and will have 

no effect to Essential Fish Habitat for coho salmon and Chinook salmon. Due to these no effect 

determinations, formal consultation with NOAA Fisheries is not required (FEIS page III-119). 

 
Record of Decision ROD - 16 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Clean Air Act Amendments, 1977: My decision is compliant with National Ambient Air Quality 

standards through avoidance of practices that degrade air quality below health and visibility 

standards (FEIS pages III-58 to III-68.) 

The Clean Water Act, 1982: My decision will meet and conform to the Clean Water Act as 

amended in 1982. This act establishes a non-degradation policy for all federally proposed projects. 

My decision meets anti-degradation standards agreed to by the State of Oregon and the Forest 

Service, Region 6, in a 2002 Memorandum of Understanding. This will be accomplished through 

planning, application, and monitoring of Mitigation Measures including General Water Quality Best 

Management Practices (BMPs) USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, 1988. 

State Forest Worker Safety Codes: The Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Code for Forest 

Activities (OAR 437, Division 6) regulations will be met when my decision is implemented. 

Appropriate provisions will be included in all contracts for addressing State Forest Worker Safety 

Codes. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

Authorization of my decision is based on this Record of Decision, its attachments and the 

November 2009 Final Environmental Impact Statement. Implementation of this decision will allow 

the publication of a Motorized Vehicle Use Map, expected in early 2010. 

On-going monitoring conducted in association with management activities authorized by my 

decision provide opportunity for adapting management techniques as needed to better meet the 

intent of the selected alternative as planned and approved. In some cases this may involve minor 

modifications or corrections during implementation. Project monitoring could result in the need to 

propose changes to authorized project actions; these changes will be subject to the requirements of 

the NEPA and other laws concerning such changes. In determining whether and what kind of 

further NEPA action is required, the Responsible Official will consider the criteria in 40 CFR 

1502.9(c) and FSH 1909.15, sec. 18, and in particular whether the proposed change is a substantial 

change to the decision as planned and already approved, and whether the change is relevant to 

environmental concerns. 

RIGHT TO ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (APPEAL)

This decision is subject to administrative review (appeal) pursuant to 36 CFR 215. The 45-day 

appeal period begins the day following the date the legal notice of this decision is published in 

Newspaper of Record for the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, Medford's Mail Tribune. The 

Notice of Appeal must be filed with the Appeal Deciding Officer: 

Appeal Deciding Officer: Regional Forester 

Pacific Northwest Region 

Attn: 1570 Appeals 

P.O. Box 3623 

Portland, OR 97208-3623 

 
Record of Decision ROD - 17 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Appeals can also be filed electronically at: www.appeals-pacificnorthwest-regional-office@fs.fed.us

or hand delivered to the above address between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday 

except legal holidays. Appeals can be faxed to (503) 808-2255. The appeal must be postmarked or 

delivered within 45 days following the date the legal notice for this decision appears in Medford’s 

Mail Tribune newspaper. The publication date of the legal notice in the Mail Tribune newspaper is 

the exclusive means for calculating the time to file an appeal and those wishing to appeal should not 

rely on dates or timeframes provided by any other source. 

Electronic appeals must be submitted as part of the actual e-mail message, or as an attachment in 

Microsoft word (.doc), rich text format (.rtf), or portable document format (.pdf) only. E-mails 

submitted to email addresses other than the one listed above or in other formats than those listed or 

containing viruses will be rejected. It is the responsibility of those who appeal a decision to provide 

the Appeal Deciding Officer sufficient written evidence and rationale to show why my decision 

should be changed or reversed. 

The written notice of appeal must: 

 The Appellant’s name, address, and if possible, a telephone number of the appellant; 

 Signature or other verification of authorship upon request (a scanned signature for electronic 

mail may be filed with the appeal); 

 When multiple names are listed on an appeal, identification of the lead appellant (215.2) and 

verification of the identity of the lead appellant upon request; 

 Identify the decision document by title and subject, date of the decision, and name and title 

of the Responsible Official; 

 Identify the specific change(s) in the decision that the appellant seeks or portion of the 

decision to which the appellant objects; and the rational for those changes; 

 Identify any portion(s) of the decision with which the appellant disagrees, and an 

explanation for the disagreement; 

 State how my decision fails to consider substantive comments previously provided, either 

before or during the comment period specified in Title 36 CFR 215.6 and, if applicable, how 

the appellant believes the decision violates law, regulation, or policy. 

AUTHORIZATION

For further information concerning the specific actions conditionally authorized by my decision, 

you may contact: 

Steve Johnson, Team Leader 

 Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

 Ashland Ranger Station 

 645 Washington Street 

 Ashland, OR 97520 

 541-552-2900 
Record of Decision ROD - 18 Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

This page intentionally left blank 
ROD Attachment A Page A - 1 Forest Plan Amendments

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

MOTORIZED VEHICLE USE ON THE 

ROGUE RIVER-SISKIYOU NATIONAL FOREST 

RECORD OF DECISION 

ATTACHMENT A 

Forest Plan Amendments

For the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, there are two types of Forest Plan Amendments, 

overall Forest-wide amendments to the Forest Plans to enact the Travel Management Rule, and 

route -specific amendments in the form of changes to specific management direction and/or to 

Standards and Guidelines. 

FOREST-WIDE PLAN AMENDMENTS 

Rogue River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 

Management Direction/Objectives: 

Recreation and Facilities – LRMP Chapter 4 

In order to provide consistency with the Final Rule for Travel Management; Designated Routes and Areas

for Motor Vehicle Use (Travel Management Rule), the 1990 Rogue River National Forest Land and 

Resource Management Plan is herby amended to adopt and include direction with the 2005 Travel 

Management Rule and allowable uses associated with the Record of Decision for Motorized Vehicle Use 

on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF. This decision is designed to enact the Travel Management Rule in 

compliance with 36 CFR 212. 

Under this amendment, all roads and trails on the Rogue River National Forest will be closed to motorized 

use unless designated open to this use. This plan amendment also prohibits cross-country motorized use 

unless the area is designated for that use. Motorized use is designated per the Motorized Vehicle Use Map 

(MVUM) following national Forest Service standards that indicates which routes are designated open to the 

public by type of vehicle per route and season open for use. This map will be made available to the public 

free-of charge. There may be some changes as implementation occurs on the ground. Designation, use 

restrictions, and operating conditions may be revised in future decisions as needed to meet changing 

conditions or management strategies. This plan amendment, allows codification or the ability to issue

citations for use violations not in accordance with the MVUM. 

Because the Travel Analysis process was enacted to provide improved motorized use direction in 

compliance with current Forest Service policy and the 2005 Travel Management Rule, Forest Plan 

Appendix C, Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan, is removed, replaced with direction associated with the 

Travel Management Rule, this decision and the Motorized Vehicle Use Map. 

 
ROD Attachment A Page A - 2 Forest Plan Amendments

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Forest Management Direction for RECREATION, LRMP 4-24 regarding Backcountry Nonmotorized Areas (MS-3) is inconsistent with the Standards and Guidelines for MS 3 (LRMP 4-

43). The following Plan Amendment remedies this inconsistency. 

Current Wording Replacement Wording

Management Areas in which ORV use is prohibited 

include Backcountry Non-motorized Areas (except 

over-snow seasonal use in some areas), 

Wilderness, Wild River, Restricted Watersheds, 

and Research Natural Areas. 

4-24 

Management Areas in which ORV use is prohibited 

include Wilderness, Wild River, Restricted 

Watersheds, and Research Natural Areas. ORV 

use in Backcountry Non-motorized Areas is 

generally prohibited (except for roads and trails 

designated for motorized use and over-snow 

seasonal use in some areas). 

Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 

Forest Management Objectives: 

Resource Activities and Facilities – LRMP Chapter IV 

In order to provide consistency with the Final Rule for Travel Management; Designated Routes and Areas

for Motor Vehicle Use (Travel Management Rule), the 1989 Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan is herby amended to adopt and include direction with the 2005 Travel Management Rule 

and allowable uses associated with the Record of Decision for Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue RiverSiskiyou NF. This decision is designed to enact the Travel Management Rule in compliance with 36 CFR 

212. 

Under this amendment, all roads and trails on the Siskiyou National Forest will be closed to motorized use 

unless designated open to this use. This plan amendment also prohibits cross-country motorized use 

unless the area is designated for that use. Motorized use is designated per the Motorized Vehicle Use Map 

(MVUM) following national Forest Service standards that indicates which routes are designated open to the 

public by type of vehicle per route and season open for use. This map will be made available to the public 

free-of charge. There may be some changes as implementation occurs on the ground. Designation, use 

restrictions, and operating conditions may be revised in future decisions as needed to meet changing 

conditions or management strategies. This plan amendment, allows codification or the ability to issue

citations for use violations not in accordance with the MVUM. 

Because the Travel Analysis process was enacted to provide improved motorized use direction in 

compliance with current Forest Service policy and the 2005 Travel Management Rule, Forest Plan 

Appendix E, Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan, is removed, replaced with direction associated with the 

Travel Management Rule, this decision and the Motorized Vehicle Use Map. 

Rogue River and Siskiyou National Forests 

Since motorized use includes OHV use, the 1989 Siskiyou National Forest Off-road Vehicle 

Management Plan, Appendix E, and the 1990 Rogue River National Forest Off-road 

Vehicle Management Plan, Appendix C are repealed and are replaced by the Motorized 

Vehicle Use Map. 

 
ROD Attachment A Page A - 3 Forest Plan Amendments

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

ROUTE-SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS 

This section documents the specific management direction in the form of Standards and 

Guidelines that will be changed under the Action Alternatives as applicable. 

It is presented in a table format, referencing the section of the respective Forest Plans that will be 

changed. “Current Wording” describes the Forest Plan text as it currently states and includes a 

page reference from the respective Forest Plan. “Replacement Wording” displays the text 

changes following amendment of the Plan. 

Rogue River LRMP Specific Plan Amendment for Boundary Trail 

(Refer to Map A-1): 

BACKCOUNTRY NON-MOTORIZED - MS-3 

PROTECTION 

Current Wording Replacement Wording

#3. Motorized and mechanized vehicle use is 

generally prohibited in this management area 

except for approved mining operations. Seasonal 

motorized use (i.e., snowmobiling) may be 

permitted in certain portions of this management 

area. 

Page 4-43 

#3. Motorized and mechanized vehicle use is 

generally prohibited in this management area 

except for approved mining operations. Based on 

historical and ongoing use, the Boundary Trail 

(#1207), O’Brien Trail (#900), and Sturgis Fork Trail 

(#903) - Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District) are 

specifically designated for OHV Class III motorized

use. Seasonal motorized use (i.e., snowmobiling) 

may be permitted in certain portions of this 

management area. 

BOTANICAL AREA - MS-12 

PROTECTION 

Current Wording Replacement Wording

#6. Motorized vehicles will be allowed only on 

roads except in emergency situations. The 

exception is that snowmobile use may be allowed 

when snow depth is sufficient. 

Page 4-149 

#6. Motorized vehicles will be allowed only on 

roads except in emergency situations. Based on 

historical and ongoing use, the Boundary Trail 

(#1207), O’Brien Trail (#900), and Sturgis Fork Trail 

(#903) - Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District) are 

specifically designated for OHV Class III motorized

use. Snowmobile use may be allowed when snow 

depth is sufficient. 

RESEARCH NATURAL AREA - MS-25 

PROTECTION 

Current Wording Replacement Wording

#12. Off-road vehicle recreation use is prohibited. 

Page 4-292 

#12. Off-road vehicle recreation use is generally 

prohibited. Based on historical and ongoing use, 

the Boundary Trail (#1207), - Siskiyou Mountains 

Ranger District is specifically designated for OHV 

Class III motorized use. 

 
ROD Attachment A Page A - 4 Forest Plan Amendments

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Siskiyou LRMP Specific Plan Amendment for Boundary Trail (Refer to 

Map A-1):

RESEARCH NATURAL AREA - MA-3 

PROTECTION 

Current Wording Replacement Wording

MA3-2 Recreation activities and uses within an 

RNA should be discouraged if they threaten the 

values for which the RNA is established; this 

includes overnight camping, recreation use within 

200 feet of lakes, ponds and streams, and pack 

and saddle stock use. All recreation ORV use shall

be prohibited. If other recreation uses threaten 

research or education values, closures or permits 

should be instituted. 

Page IV-82 

MA3-2 Recreation activities and uses within an 

RNA should be discouraged if they threaten the 

values for which the RNA is established; this 

includes overnight camping, recreation use within 

200 feet of lakes, ponds and streams, and pack 

and saddle stock use. Recreational ORV use shall 

be generally prohibited. Based on historical and 

ongoing use, the Boundary Trail (#1207 - Wild 

Rivers Ranger District) is specifically designated for 

OHV Class III motorized use. If other recreation 

uses threaten research or education values, 

closures or permits should be instituted. 

Siskiyou LRMP Specific Plan Amendment for Game Lake, Lawson, 

Lower Illinois, and Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trails1 (Refer to Map A2):

BACKCOUNTRY RECREATION - MA-6 

PROTECTION 

Current Wording Replacement Wording

MA6-1 (paragraph 2) 

In areas designated “Non-motorized Backcountry,” 

the use of motorized equipment is prohibited 

except by: 

1. Authorized Forest Service personnel, or their 

agents, in the performance of approved 

administrative or management duties, and 

2. Mining operators, or their agents, within the 

provision of approved operating plans. 

Page IV-98 

MA6-1 (paragraph 2) 

In areas designated “Non-motorized Backcountry,” 

the use of motorized equipment is prohibited 

except: 

1. By authorized Forest Service personnel, or their 

agents, in the performance of approved 

administrative or management duties; 

2. By mining operators, or their agents, within the 

provision of approved operating plans; and 

3. Based on historical and ongoing use, portions of 

the Game Lake #1169, Lawson #1173, Lower 

Illinois #1161, Silver Peak Hobson Horn #1166 

Trails, and two unnamed connector trails are 

authorized for motorized use. 

 

 

1

This amendment also covers two unnamed connector trails. 
ROD Attachment A Page A - 5 Forest Plan Amendments

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Map A-1. Boundary and Associated Trails and Land Allocations 

Note: The area that is the subject of this plan amendment is a recommended Research Natural Area (RNA). 

Formal designation as an RNA must be approved by the Chief of the Forest Service following preparation of 

an Establishment Record. Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, page IV-81) 

 

Brush Creek

Elk Creek

Jenny Creek

Fan Creek

Lake Creek

Sturgis Fork Carberry Creek

Bigelow Creek

Little Creek

Windy Creek

Deer Creek

OBrien Creek

Craggy Creek

Oconnell Creek

Left Fork Sucker Creek

Rt Hd Fk Steve Fk Carberry Cr

Grayback Creek

Miller Lake Creek

Little Craggy Creek

Fourmile Creek

Rock Creek

Left Hand Fork Brush Creek

04 05 01 06

02

11

06

09

02 01

08

33

20 24

04

25 26

19

13

23

21

29

14

16

12

30

32

05

31

35

07

28

17 18

36

03

34

27

22

15

03

10

03

10

11

15

12

22

33

07

27

32

08

34

31

09

03

36

10

34

10

35

34

0 0.7 1.4 0.35

Miles F

Wild Rivers Ranger District

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District

Ranger District Boundary

Streams

Trail - Motorized Use Allowed

Forest Service Road

Rogue River LRMP

Botanical Area

Research Natural Area

Siskiyou LRMP

Late-Successional Reserve

Wilderness

Research Natural Area

Botanical Area

Backcountry Recreation

Backcountry Non-Motorized

Boundary Trail #1207

Trail #903

Trail #900
ROD Attachment A Page A - 6 Forest Plan Amendments

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Map A-2. Game Lake, Lawson, Lower Illinois, Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trails, and Unnamed 

Connector Trails and Land Allocations 

Illinois River

Collier Creek

Lawson Creek

Indigo Creek

Horse Sign Creek

Silver Creek

Fox Creek

North Fork Collier Creek

Nancy Creek

North Fork Indigo Creek

Pine Flat Creek

Old House Creek

11

11

11

11

01

30

03 04 05

02

17

26 25

29

29

20

02

34 36

36

35

32

08

22

35

35

09

16

06

23

27

21

14

26

03

13

10

10

15

12

35

28

25

12

13

36

33

24

08

26

23

12

14

14

17

34

15

01

09

18

05

31

02

30

04

19

07

07

27

02

16 18

32

01

06

26

33

25

31

14

36

03

10

13

25

28

15

24

22

13

12

27

01

34

31

03

10

30

15

23

24

24

23

22

19

19

22

27

20

34

21

06

21 07

19 20

31

22

Game Lake Trail #1169

0 1 2 0.5

Miles F

Unnamed Connector

Unnamed Connector

Lawson Creek Trail #1173

Lower Illinois Trail #1161

Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail #1166

Gold Beach Ranger District

Ranger District Boundary

Streams

Trail - Motorized Use Allowed

Forest Service Road

Siskiyou NF Land and Resource Management Plan

Late-Successional Reserve

Wilderness

Botanical Area

Backcountry Recreation - Non-motorized

Supplemental Resource

Unique Interest

Wild River
ROD Attachment B Page B - 1 Required Mitigation Measures

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

MOTORIZED VEHICLE USE ON THE 

ROGUE RIVER-SISKIYOU NATIONAL FOREST 

RECORD OF DECISION 

ATTACHMENT B 

Required Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measures are a required component of the Record of Decision and are identified 

and detailed within this attachment, and will be enacted for activities associated with 

Motorized Vehicle on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

The Forest Service is required by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for 

implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA to identify all relevant, reasonable mitigation 

measures that could improve the project. Mitigation, as defined in the CEQ Regulations (40 

CFR 1508.20) includes: 

 Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. 

 Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its 

implementation. 

 Rectifying or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations 

during the life of the action. 

 Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or 

environments. 

 Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the affected environment. 

Mitigation measures and standard operating procedures designed to avoid or minimize adverse 

effects (or implement positive impacts) for the Decision (the Preferred Alternative) are identified 

by resource topic area. 

Mitigation measures identified herein are specific to the implementation of actions under this 

Decision. Standards and Guidelines and mitigation measures identified in the Rogue River NF 

and the Siskiyou NF Land and Resource Management Plans, as amended by the Northwest 

Forest Plan, are also incorporated by reference as required measures. 

1. Public Safety 

o A sign plan will be implemented to adequately sign trail and road intersections and mixed 

use roads. 
ROD Attachment B Page B - 2 Required Mitigation Measures

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

o When signing is needed to warn highway traffic about the presence of non-highway-legal 

vehicles, a standard warning sign, (in a diamond shape, with reflective yellow background 

and black graphics and letters) with an all-terrain vehicle graphic (RL-170) and a yellow 

supplemental placard with the wording “SHARE THE ROAD” (W16-1) may be used. An 

additional placard with the wording “NEXT XX MILES” (W16-3a) or “BEYOND THIS 

POINT” (W16-3) may also be added. A rectangular yellow sign with black graphics and 

lettering showing a passenger car graphic and an appropriate non-highway-legal vehicle 

graphic and the wording “SHARE THE ROAD” (FW8-7) may also be used. See EM-7100-

15. 

2. Hydrology and Riparian Reserves 

o Design new trail construction to avoid springs, seeps, and wetlands. 

o Design new trail construction to avoid stream channel crossings where possible. If stream 

channel crossings are necessary to maintain the connectivity of the trail network, design trails 

to cross the stream channels perpendicular to the drainage to minimize the potential for 

sediment delivery. 

3. Erosion and Sedimentation 

o Stream crossing construction or reconstruction will generally not occur between October 15 

and June 15 when the potential for soil erosion and water quality degradation exists. This 

restriction may be waived by the Responsible Official under dry conditions and with a 

specific erosion control plan (e.g., rocking, waterbarring, seeding, mulching, barricading). 

o Minimize vegetation clearing to the maximum extent possible to maintain stream bank 

stability, while maintaining the safety of riders. 

4. Fish and Aquatic Species 

o For trail construction/reconstruction all State and Federal requirements for maintaining water 

quality will be met. Work requirements include the following: 

 Mechanized equipment will be inspected and cleaned before moving onto the 

project site in order to remove oil and grease, noxious weeds and excessive soil. 

 Hydraulic fluid and fuel lines on heavy mechanized equipment must be in proper 

working condition in order to avoid leakage into streams. 

 Waste diesel, oil, hydraulic fluid and other hazardous materials and contaminated 

soil will be removed from the site and disposed of in accordance with DEQ 

regulations. Areas that have been saturated with toxic materials will be excavated 

to a depth of 12 inches beyond the contaminated material or as required by DEQ. 

 Equipment refueling will be conducted within a confined area outside Riparian 

Reserves. 

 Use spill containment booms or other equipment as required by DEQ. 

 Equipment containing toxic fluids will not be stored in or near (within 300') of a 

stream channel. 

 
ROD Attachment B Page B - 3 Required Mitigation Measures

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

5. Terrestrial Wildlife 

Spotted Owl Restrictions 

o Work activities that produce loud noises above ambient levels will not occur within specified 

distances of any documented or generated owl site (Table B-1) during the critical early 

nesting period, March 1 and June 30, or until two weeks after the fledging period. This 

seasonal restriction may be waived if protocol surveys have determined the activity center is 

not occupied, owls are non-nesting, or owls failed in their nesting attempt. 

o The distances listed below may be shortened (with USFWS Level 1 Team concurrence) if 

substantial topographical breaks or blast blankets (or other devices) would muffle sound 

between the work location and nest sites. 

o The Ranger District or Forest Biologist has the option to extend the restricted season until 

September 30 during activities, based on site-specific knowledge (such as a late or 2nd 

nesting attempt). Design measures can be waived if site-specific biological evaluation by the 

biologist indicates seasonal protection is unwarranted. 

o Delay any project activities located within the nest patch until September 30 unless the 

biologist determines young are not present, or until two weeks after the fledging period. 

Table B-1. Spotted Owl Restriction Distances 

Activity Zone of Restricted Activity 

Heavy Equipment (including non-blasting quarry operations) 105 feet (35 yards) 

Chain saws 195 feet (60 yards) 

Motorized vehicle use 195 feet (60 yards) 

Impact pile driver, jackhammer, rock drill 195 feet (60 yards) 

Small helicopter or plane 360 feet (120 yards) 

Type 1 or Type 2 helicopter 0.25 miles*

Blasting; 2 pounds of explosive or less 360 feet (120 yards) 

Blasting; more than 2 pounds of explosives 1 mile 

 * If less than 1,500 feet above ground level.

Above-ambient noises further than these Table B-1 distances from spotted owls are expected to 

have either negligible effects or no effect to spotted owls. The types of reactions spotted owls 

could have to noise that are considered to have a negligible impact includes flapping of wings, 

turning the head towards the noise, hiding, assuming a defensive stance, etc. (USFWS 2003). 

 
ROD Attachment B Page B - 4 Required Mitigation Measures

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

Marbled Murrelet Restrictions 

Table B-2. Murrelet Restriction Distances 

Activity Zone of Restricted Activity 

Heavy Equipment (including non-blasting quarry operations) 300 feet (100 yards) 

Chain saws 300 feet (100 yards) 

Motorized vehicle use 300 feet (100 yards) 

Impact pile driver, jackhammer, rock drill 300 feet (100 yards) 

Small helicopter or plane 360 feet (120 yards) 

Type 1 or Type 2 helicopter 0.25 miles*

Blasting; 2 pounds of explosive or less 360 feet (120 yards) 

Blasting; more than 2 pounds of explosives 1 mile 

 * If less than 1,500 feet above ground level. 

Table B-3. Disturbance Criteria for the Protection of Marbled Murrelet 

Disturbance 

For Survey Areas A and B work activities (such as tree felling, yarding, road and other construction 

activities, hauling on roads not generally used by the public, muffled blasting) which produce noises above 

ambient levels will not occur within specified distances (see Table II-10) of any occupied stand or 

unsurveyed suitable habitat between April 1 – August 5. For the period between August 6 – September 

15, work activities will be confined to between 2 hours after sunrise to 2 hours before sunset. 

Disturbance 

Blasting (open air/unmuffled) – No blasting activities 1 April through 15 September within 1.0 mile of 

occupied stands or unsurveyed suitable habitat. This distance may be shortened if significant 

topographical breaks or blast blankets (or other devices) muffle sound traveling between the blast and nest 

sites or less than 2 lbs of explosives are used If so, then use described distance. 

Disturbance Recommended Delay project implementation until after September 15 where possible 

Disturbance 

Recommended Between 1 April and 15 September, concentrate disturbance activities spatially and 

temporally as much as possible (e.g., get in and get out, in as small an area as possible; avoid spreading the 

impacts over time and space). 

7. Invasive Non-native Species 

Invasive Plants 

o Mechanical trail construction and maintenance equipment will be power-washed and free of 

all soil and vegetative material before entering a project area and prior to moving from site to 

site (field washing). A field washing station will include a high pressure pump, containment 

mat, filter system, and a holding tank. Filtered solids will be properly disposed. A Botanist 

may decide to forgo the requirement for field washing if weed species and densities are 

similar at all work sites. 

o Noxious weed populations in existing quarries and stockpiles will be treated prior to any 

authorized use. 

o This Record of Decision incorporates by reference the Decision Notice signed by J. Michael 

Lunn, Forest Supervisor, on September 1, 1999 for the Environmental Assessment for 

Integrated Noxious Weed Management on the Rogue River National Forest (RRNF Weed 

Management Plan). 

 
ROD Attachment B Page B - 5 Required Mitigation Measures

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

o This Record of Decision incorporates by reference the Standards and Guidelines added to the 

RRNF and SNF LRMPs by the Regional Forester’s October 2005 ROD for Preventing and 

Managing Invasive Plants. These standards form the basis for many of the design elements 

and more specific mitigation measures described in this sub-section. 

 Limit activities at sites with known infestations of Oregon Dept. of Agriculture A, B, 

and T-listed noxious weed species (excluding bull thistle and Klamath weed). Treat 

known occurrences in accordance with the RRNF Weed Management Plan before 

project implementation if activities must occur in these areas. Continue annual 

treatments as long as activities continue in these areas. 

 Heavy equipment and machinery will be cleaned of dirt, mud, and plant parts before 

arriving at a project area. If working in a portion of a project area infested with 

Oregon Dept. of Agriculture A, B, and T-listed noxious weed species (excluding bull 

thistle and Klamath weed), wash and/or clean equipment and machinery on-site 

before moving or leaving the area. 

 Use the cleanest rock source possible, if aggregate is needed. If possible, do not 

grade or disturb road shoulders in the vicinity of noxious weed occurrences. If soil 

disturbance (grading, road reconstruction, road maintenance etc.) must occur, do so 

after infestations have been treated. If grading must occur, grade into an infestation, 

not away. 

Invasive Pathogens 

o Comply with Federal and State regulations regarding P. ramorum. Soil from infested sites 

shall not be transported outside the currently designated quarantine area unless subjected to 

approved and officially verified sterilization treatment. Movement of restricted or regulated 

plant materials to locations outside the quarantine area shall comply with current regulations. 

o Wash boots, tools, vehicles, and equipment prior to entering in uninfested project areas, 

when leaving infested areas to enter in uninfested areas, and when leaving the project areas to 

minimize the transportation of infested soil to uninfested areas. 

o Project areas should be compartmentalized by road system in areas with mixed ownership 

(Federal and private). A road system with infested areas and noninfested areas will be 

considered infested. Washing areas should be placed at optimum locations for minimizing 

spread, such as at entry/exit points of the road system with Federal control. Washing should 

take place as close as possible to infested sites. Wash water will be from uninfested water 

sources or treated with Clorox bleach. Wash water should not drain into watercourses or into 

areas with uninfected POC. 

 
ROD Attachment B Page B - 6 Required Mitigation Measures

Motorized Vehicle Use on the RRSNF 

This page intentionally left blank