United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Pacific 

Northwest 

Region 

Forest 

Service 

April 2004 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Baked Apple Fire Salvage 

NORTH UMPQUA RANGER DISTRICT 

 UMPQUA NATIONAL FOREST 

 

 DOUGLAS COUNTY, OREGON 

 


Contents 

Introduction .........................................................................................1

Purpose and Need for Action ....................................................................2

Issues..................................................................................................3

Alternatives Considered in Detail...............................................................5

Decision and Changes between Draft and Final..............................................8

Active vs. Passive Management................................................................ 10

Meeting the Need for Action ................................................................... 11

How the Alternatives Address Issues and Reasons for Non-Selection ................. 12

Cumulative Effects from Ongoing and Proposed Activities .............................. 22

Consultation with USFWS and NOAA.......................................................... 22

Forest Plan Consistency......................................................................... 23

Legal Requirements and Policy................................................................ 23

Public Participation .............................................................................. 25

The Environmentally Preferable Alternative ............................................... 25

Mitigation Measures.............................................................................. 26

Monitoring ......................................................................................... 26

Consistency with NFMA Requirements....................................................... 28

Implementation................................................................................... 29

Appeal Rights...................................................................................... 30

Contact Person.................................................................................... 31
1

Introduction 

This Record of Decision (ROD) documents my decision and rationale for the 

selection of the alternative to be implemented for the Baked Apple Fire 

Salvage Project. The Apple Fire, which started on August 16, 2002, burned 

17,900 acres of early, mid, and late seral conifer forests on the North Umpqua 

Ranger District located on the west slope of the Cascade Mountains in 

southwest Oregon. This human-caused fire burned in steep terrain at a time 

when burning conditions were extreme. 

The 2002 fire season was the largest in recorded history on the Umpqua 

National Forest. The acres burned by the Apple Fire in 2002 represent 20 

percent of the total acres affected by fire on the Umpqua that year. In 

addition to the Apple Fire, thirteen other fires, all lightning caused, burned on 

the Umpqua National Forest and intermingled private lands in 2002. Together, 

the 2002 fires on the Umpqua resulted in 88,000 acres of various burn 

intensities, from high intensity stand replacement fires that burned tree 

crowns killing all the trees in a stand to low intensity ground fires that are 

often beneficial due to their thinning and fuel reduction effects. Many acres 

on the Umpqua also burned in a mosaic pattern of intermixed ground fire and 

stand replacement fire. 

By the time the Apple Fire was contained on September 8, 2002 it had burned 

with high intensity (as a stand replacement fire) across 5,460 acres; burned 

with a mosaic pattern on almost 1,890 acres; and underburned over 9,560 

acres. The Apple Fire burned within three land allocations established in the 

Record of Decision for amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land 

Management Planning Documents within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl 

(the Northwest Forest Plan). The affected land allocations include: late 

successional reserve (LSR), riparian reserve, and matrix. LSRs were established 

to provide for old-growth ecosystems and related natural processes. Riparian 

reserves were established for the protection and restoration of ripariandependant species and as connectivity corridors for many terrestrial species in 

the intervening lands between the LSRs. The matrix land allocation was 

identified in the Northwest Forest Plan as locations where most of the timber 

harvest and silvicultural activity would take place, following applicable 

standards and guidelines. The Baked Apple project is located outside of the 

LSR land allocation, thus none of the 2,947 acres of timber that was stand 

replaced by the Apple Fire in the South Cascades LSR is included. I opted not 

to propose any salvage in the LSR land allocation, allowing the natural 

disturbance and recovery process to function. In addition, much of what was 

burned by the Apple Fire in the LSR was in a roadless area, which would have 

added more analysis and controversy. We needed to move rapidly. 
2 

The 13,925 acre planning area is located within the Panther Creek 6th field 

subwatershed, which defines the planning area. Panther Creek flows into the 

Wild and Scenic North Umpqua River, about 20 air-miles east of the community 

of Glide, Oregon. The planning area includes all or portions of sections 9, 10, 

and 14 through 36, T26S, R1E; sections 19 and 30, T26S, R2E; and sections 2 

through 5, and 9 through 11, T27S, R1E, Willamette Meridian, Douglas County, 

Oregon. 

I determined that proposed salvage actions and their effects could best be 

analyzed and disclosed to the public through an environmental impact 

statement (EIS) following the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A 

Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS was published in the Federal Register on 

March 17, 2003. This was followed by an October 31, 2003 Notice of 

Availability in the Federal Register and release of the Baked Apple Fire Salvage 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The Final EIS (FEIS) accompanies 

this Record of Decision. 

Purpose and Need for Action 

I established a two-fold purpose and need for this project: 1) recover the 

economic value of the fire-killed merchantable timber before its value is lost 

to deterioration and reforest the area, and 2) to reduce existing and created 

fuels in the burned area. Both of these are responsive to 1994 Northwest 

Forest Plan direction for the matrix land allocation as well as direction 

established in the 1990 Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan for management areas 10 and 11 located in the planning 

area. Management areas 10 and 11 were established to produce timber in a 

sustained and cost-efficient basis (LRMP IV-128) and to produce big game 

winter range and timber in combination (LRMP IV- 132). 

The Northwest Forest Plan framed the basis for management in the matrix land 

allocation following stand replacing events (ROD B-9). In the matrix allocation, 

the economic benefits of timber production will receive greater consideration, 

the commercial salvage of dead trees will be less constrained (compared to 

other land allocations), and replanting disturbed area will be a high priority. 

The watershed analysis (a process required as part of the Aquatic Conservation 

Strategy of the Northwest Forest Plan) for the Middle North Umpqua 

watershed, which includes Panther Creek, defined a desired future condition of 

a healthy, productive forest that will provide a range of forest commodities. 

For matrix lands, the watershed analysis emphasized the provision of a 

predictable and sustainable level of timber into the future using a scientifically 

sound and ecologically credible plan (Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis 

p. 114). Two basic components establish the foundation for this management 

goal. The first component recommended in the watershed analysis is to reestablish landscape patterns associated with the local, natural disturbance 
3

regime. The second component is to manage stand structure and species 

diversity to fit the potential of the land. In doing so, forested landscape areas 

would contain a broad range of forest types, structures, and patterns indicative 

of its fire regime (Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis p. 115). The 

Aquatic Conservation Strategy, an integral aspect of the Northwest Forest Plan, 

is based on natural disturbance processes watershed analysis is used to help 

provide the context for projects. 

Salvaging some of the merchantable fire-killed timber from more than 2,000 

acres of killed merchantable timber in the planning area and reforesting the 

area complies with direction in the Northwest Forest Plan and moves the 

existing condition of a burned landscape toward the desired condition of a 

forested landscape capable of supporting timber production. 

Fuel treatments are based on the need to reduce activity-generated and 

existing dead fuels in order to keep fuel loads within parameters prescribed 

under Forest policy. Currently, fuel loads within some of the areas burned by 

the fire exceed acceptable levels. If all of this biomass were left standing, 

within 25 years, it is predicted that hundreds of tons of fuels would cover the 

ground on areas that currently have high fuel loads. Salvage activities would 

reduce the fuels that were created by the fire. Treating the created fuels 

would reduce these additional fuels to a level that would reduce the risk of 

contributing to future fire intensity and spread. 

I established an interdisciplinary team to help me develop a salvage proposal to 

meet the purpose and need. Experts from two Ranger Districts carried out 

extensive field reconnaissance, formal inventories, and public involvement in 

order to develop the proposed action. Once the proposed action was 

developed, I initiated the NEPA process, including scoping, which continued the 

extensive public participation effort. 

In brief, the proposed action included salvage on 1,075 acres with various 

levels of dead tree retention, treatment of logging created fuels using a variety 

of specific methods, road work on some timber haul routes, reforestation in 

both matrix and riparian reserve allocations, and site-specific mitigation 

measures and KV projects. Scoping on this salvage proposal generated a 

number of potential conflicts over the uses of natural resources, referred to as 

issues in NEPA. 

Issues 

In response to the proposed action, eight significant issues were identified by 

the public and the Forest Service. Significant issues were then used to develop 
4 

alternatives to the Proposed Action. These issues found in Chapter 1 on pages 

14-16 in the FEIS are: 

Current and Future Down Wood Availability 

Dead trees have multiple ecological roles including functioning as an important 

element in biological and physical processes, and providing for future soil and 

site productivity. The concern raised is that the salvage logging will decrease 

the current and future availability of down, dead woody material as trees that 

have commercial value are salvaged. 

Late Successional / Old–Growth Stand 

Some stands that experienced a less intense burn still function as latesuccessional habitat. The concern raised is that the proposed salvage in these 

stands has the potential to impact late-successional/old growth stands as 

logging corridors and landings result in the felling or damage to live trees in 

these underburned areas. 

Stand Structure and Diversity 

Dead trees, either standing or down on the forest floor, represent an important 

component of forest diversity. Many members of the public raised a concern 

associated with the 1995 Beschta et. al publication that salvaging will 

decrease stand structure and diversity by removing dead trees greater than 20 

inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) or removing dead trees greater than 

one hundred fifty years of age; and will decrease size class diversity by 

salvaging more than 50% of the dead trees within each size class. 

Sediment 

Salvage logging can increase the sedimentation of streams already impacted by 

fire. The concern raised was that the proposed salvage and related activities 

have the potential to impact some of the beneficial uses of the aquatic system 

through increased delivery of sediment to Panther, Limpy, Fairy, and Bachelor 

Creeks and their associated tributaries. 

Economics 

The proposed use of helicopter logging may result in low or no returns to the 

treasury or may not be economically feasible. The concern raised was that 

high costs of the proposed helicopter logging would reduce the amount of 

money returned to the federal treasury and reduce the amount of money 

available for restoration projects funded through Knudsen-Vandenberg funds. 

In addition, helicopter logging may not attract timber sale bidders. 
5

Fuel loads 

The areas not proposed for salvage (especially those designated as unplantable) 

and other untreated areas (including riparian reserves), will have high fuel 

loads in the future, increasing future fire risk. As time passes, it is estimated 

that 60-100 tons per acre of biomass (or more) will fall to the ground as the 

trees killed by the fire deteriorate. The concern raised was that if a fire were 

to occur and escape initial suppression, this high fuel loading would increase 

the risk of a high severity fire. 

Low road density areas 

Several groups (Umpqua Watersheds, Cascadia Wildlands, ONRC, and others) 

state that a 1,300-acre uninventoried roadless area lies within and adjacent to 

the headwaters of Limpy Creek and a 1,700 acre roadless area lies along the 

Wild and Scenic Corridor and in the Horseshoe Bend area. The Middle North 

Umpqua Watershed Analysis (USDA 2001, page 103) displays these areas as 

having low road densities, ranging from 0 to 1.5 miles of road per square mile 

of land. Although roadless designation is outside the scope of this project (it is 

decided at the Forest Plan or higher level), the concern raised was that the 

proposed project has the potential to impact the lands within these low road 

density areas. 

Landbirds 

Burning of logging-created fuels is best conducted (for soil protection) during 

the spring-time. The concern raised was that burning of logging-created fuels 

during the spring may impact landbirds slated for consideration and protection 

under the USDA Forest Service Landbird Strategic Plan (2002). 

Four additional issues were considered in the assessment of effects, but were 

not used as the basis for alternative development as they were resolved in 

other ways (see FEIS, Chapter 1). 

In addition to the above issues, five additional issues were considered that did 

not lead to the development of alternatives. These issues and their mitigation, 

where applicable, are discussed on pages 16-17 in Chapter 1 in the FEIS. 

Alternatives Considered in Detail 

Five action alternatives and a no action alternative were analyzed in detail in 

the FEIS pages 21-54. Alternatives considered include: 

Alternative 1: No Action 

No salvage would occur throughout the Panther Creek subwatershed and 

existing fuel loads would remain. Reforestation of burned areas would not 
6 

occur with KV funding. No temporary spur roads would be constructed and no 

road reconstruction of Road 4714 would occur. No logging-created fuels would 

be generated. 

Alternative 2: Proposed Action 

The proposed action was developed to meet the purpose and need. This 

alternative would salvage approximately 1,075 acres of burned stands within 

the Panther Creek subwatershed that, prior to the fire, were late-seral or midseral forest, retaining between 6 and 12 trees per acre for shade, large wood, 

and snag habitat; reforest and protect seedlings on acres that were salvaged; 

treat logging-created fuels; complete haul-related road work that includes 

commercial use of 55 miles of road, reconstruction (replacing plugged culverts 

and stabilizing slopes) of 2 sites along Forest Service Road 4714; construction 

(about 0.80 miles) and reconstruction (about 0.44 miles) of temporary spur 

roads, reconstruction or expansion of up to 36 landings, construction of about 3 

new landings, and use of 2 existing rock pits to facilitate logging and log haul. 

The areas prescribed for salvage would utilize a combination of helicopter, 

skyline and ground-based harvesting equipment. Felling of 2 snags per acre on 

all salvage units would occur to maintain soil productivity. 

Alternative 3: Sediment and Site Productivity (Issues 1 and 4) 

This alternative was developed to address the sediment issue and it differs 

from the proposed action by further focusing on maintaining soil productivity 

while reducing the potential of accelerated sedimentation to the aquatic 

system due to salvage. Soil productivity concerns were addressed by leaving 

additional ground cover (in the form of logging–created fuels) to provide shortterm recruitment of organic matter and to provide effective ground cover to 

reduce the potential of surface erosion that could contribute sediment into the 

aquatic system. Long-term soil productivity issues were addressed by retaining 

between 4-16 trees per acre greater than 30 inches diameter. Nine units would 

retain 4 trees per acre; two units would retain 6 trees per acre; 51 units would 

retain 15 trees per acre; and two units would retain 16 trees per acre to recruit 

large wood over time based on plant association group determination (see 

description below in Alternative 6). 

This alternative eliminated eight units that were in the proposed action, in 

order to retain large wood in areas where landslides may potentially occur. 

The units were also eliminated to reduce the risk of surface erosion. Loggingcreated fuels treatments were modified from underburning to hand pile 

burning in eleven units to maintain higher levels of effective groundcover, 

further reducing the risk of sedimentation from surface erosion. 
7

Alternative 4: Economics, Fire Risk, and Future Fuels Loads (Issues 5 and 

6): This is the Forest Service’s Preferred Alternative. 

This alternative differs from the proposed action by focusing on maximizing 

economic efficiency. In the proposed salvage units that are the same as the 

proposed action, 6 trees per acre would be retained (the Forest Plan Standard 

and Guideline for large wood would be met). In the DEIS, areas that were 

considered difficult to reforest and not included in the proposed action 

(Alternative 2) were included in this alternative in order to reduce fuels; these 

areas would retain 12 trees per acre to provide for future large wood, soil 

productivity and shade. In the FEIS, these areas were eliminated; as a Forest 

Plan Amendment would have been needed (none was proposed). Areas along 

roads were mapped to identify where hazard trees could be felled and removed 

by salvage. Logging systems were refined to maximize skyline and loader 

logging opportunities. To address fuels concerns, a prescription was developed 

for portions of riparian reserves adjacent to salvage units to harvest trees on 32 

acres and to hand treat fuels on 202 acres. 

Alternative 5: Retention of Snags, Large Wood, Ecosystem Recovery, and 

Low Road Density Areas (Issues 2, 3 and 7) 

This alternative differs from the proposed action by retaining high levels of 

snags and down wood, and by avoiding salvage in low road density areas. The 

silvicultural prescriptions are based on the recommendations made by Beschta, 

et.al. (1995). Alternative 5 would use a 30-inch diameter limit in all salvage 

units to represent 150 year-old trees. In addition, 50% of all snags would be 

left standing in all diameter classes under 30 inches. Only skyline and loader 

logging are proposed in this alternative. All proposed helicopter logging was 

dropped from this alternative to address worker safety concerns. The stands 

with the highest burn severity were also eliminated from consideration, 

especially those within Limpy Creek, as these areas are most susceptible to 

salvage-related impacts. No temporary spur road building is proposed for this 

alternative. No planting would occur in late seral riparian reserves to achieve 

diversity of vegetation type. All proposed salvage units would be hand piled 

and burned. This alternative also eliminates salvage units within the intensely 

burned Limpy Creek area and within the Horseshoe Bend low road density areas 

that groups such as Oregon Natural Resources Council and Umpqua Watersheds 

consider as uninventoried roadless areas that are at least 1,000 acres in size. 

Alternative 6: Restoring and Maintaining Landscape Patterns (Issues 1, 2, 3, 

4, 5, 6, and 8) 

This alternative differs from the proposed action by focusing salvage in areas 

that historically experienced higher intensity fires. This alternative ties into 

restoring and maintaining landscape patterns recommended in the Middle North 

Umpqua Watershed Analysis (pg. 119). It focuses salvage in a “Steep/Dry” 
8 

Landscape Area and refines the perimeter of this Landscape Area, which was 

recommended for even-age management in the Watershed Analysis, with an 80-

120 year rotation. Alternative 6 also eliminates some units or portions of units 

that contain primarily green trees. In total, 26 units would be eliminated from 

this alternative compared to the proposed action. 

 

Strategic fuel breaks were identified along the perimeter of the Steep/Dry 

landscape area. Additional units were also identified to be strategic fuel 

breaks and would retain 4 trees per acre. Several units that had previously 

experienced salvage would retain higher trees per acre, similar to those trees 

retained under the Beschta recommendations. These units would be hand pile 

burned to reduce impacts to landbirds. 

A guideline for retaining trees according to Plant Association Groups (PAGs) was 

developed to achieve future down wood needs in the largest diameter classes 

(FEIS p.121). In dry Douglas-fir PAGs, 4 trees per acre greater than 30 inches in 

diameter would be retained (or if 30 inch trees are not available the largest 

trees in the stand would be retained at a minimum of 4/acre) to meet the 100-

year desired condition of 98 lineal feet per acre of down wood and 1.5 snags 

per acre. This retention level, when added to existing levels that would be 

retained, would exceed Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for the current 

condition. In the dry western hemlock PAG’s, 15 trees per acre greater than 30 

inches in diameter would be retained to meet the 100-year desired condition of 

504 lineal feet per acre of down wood and 2 snags per acre. 

Decision and Changes between Draft and Final 

I have decided to implement Alternative 6 as described in the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Some aspects of Alternative 6, as 

detailed in the DEIS have been changed in the FEIS. The modifications of 

Alternative 6 now incorporated into the FEIS are: 

All 18 acres of harvest on lands found to be unsuitable due to poor 

regeneration potential have been dropped from Alternative 6. The dropped 

units are 25B, 49, 72, 73, 75, 86, and 87. This change in Alternative 6 between 

the draft and final EIS equates to a decrease of about 1 million board feet of 

timber. The total harvest volume for Alternative 6 in the FEIS is now estimated 

at 41.5 million board feet. 

The two road repair sites on the 4714 road, included under all the action 

alternatives except Alternative 6 in the DEIS, have been added to Alternative 6 

in the FEIS. 

All KV projects not specifically detailed in the body of the DEIS, but addressed 

as projects that would require a separate decision as described in the 
9

silvicultural prescription in the Appendix of the DEIS, are dropped from 

Alternative 6 in the FEIS. The dropped KV projects include road 

decommissioning, road reconstruction, and fuel reduction in unmerchantable 

plantations near the salvage units. None of the required KV which includes all 

work associated with reforestation that is specifically described and disclosed 

in the FEIS, will be dropped. 

My decision to drop all salvage harvesting in unsuitable soils was prompted by 

written input and discussions with some members of the public during the 45-

day DEIS review and comment period. Concerns focused on the impacts to site 

productivity from salvage of burned timber that would otherwise be available 

to eventually add soil organic matter, improve site growing conditions, and 

hasten natural regeneration on sites that are too rocky and shallow to 

effectively plant. Also I dropped all salvage harvesting on these unsuitable 

soils because a project-level Forest Plan amendment would be required and 

such an amendment was not proposed in the DEIS. 

My decision to add the two road reconstruction sites to Alternative 6 in the FEIS 

is based on the existing condition of damaged and plugged culverts combined 

with inherent slope instability posing substantial risk of environmental impact. 

All the other action alternatives included these two repair sites because those 

alternatives would have hauled timber over these sites and the repairs were 

necessary in order to safely haul on the 4714 road. Alternative 6 will not haul 

on the 4714 road so the timber sale contract will not be used to pay for the 

repairs. Regardless, I will pursue other means to pay for this work. 

My decision to drop the KV projects listed in the silvicultural prescription of the 

DEIS, that were not specifically analyzed in the EIS, is based on Forest Service 

Handbook direction. Due to truncated timeframes for the development of this 

EIS, the IDT was not able to thoroughly define the specifics of these KV 

projects and the potential effects of these connected actions in the analysis. 

Therefore I am compelled to drop them for lack of required analysis (FSH 

2409.19). 

The 18 acres of dropped harvest in unsuitable soils and the dropped KV projects 

have together resulted in changes in the economic analysis between the Draft 

and the Final EIS. The $1,205,504 KV costs factored into the economic analysis 

of Alternative 6 in the DEIS has declined by 40 percent, down to $713,441. The 

timber volume reduction from the dropped 18 acres resulted in a decline in 

gross benefit of nearly half a million dollars. However, all things considered, 

the total return to the United States treasury under Alternative 6 is slightly 

more in the FEIS than the DEIS economic analysis, $10,085,847 compared to 

$9,806,274, an increase of $279,573 in the FEIS. A similar small increase in the 

present net value (PNV) is also a result of the above modifications; $9,204,127 

was the PNV in the modified Alternative 6 in the FEIS compared to a PNV of 

$8,903,469 for Alternative 6 in the DEIS. 
10 

Active vs. Passive Management 

A concern that arose early in the process was whether or not to pursue active 

management in the burned area. Scientific literature was brought forward 

early in scoping. A large number of the scoping comments asked that we 

follow the recommendations from a 1995 paper by eight scientists titled 

“Wildfire and Salvage Logging—recommendations for ecologically sound post 

fire salvage management and other post-fire treatments on Federal lands in the 

west” (Beschta et.al. 1995). The authors of the Beschta Report provide their 

opinions on the issue of salvage logging in the form of general principles and 

recommendations. It is important to note that no scientific experiment or case 

study was conducted for preparation of the paper. The authors present their 

suggested policy principles and land management recommendations as 

generally applicable to Federal lands throughout the western United States, or 

at least the Interior Columbia and Upper Missouri Basins. The majority of the 

recommendations found in the Report recommend no active intervention. The 

report is centered on the idea that natural patterns and processes provide the 

best pathway to recovery. 

In response to Beschta et al., the science team leader of the Forest Service 

Wenatchee Forestry Sciences Lab states that the “custodial” approach 

advocated by Beschta may in many cases be less desirable than more active 

management...because of possible fuel buildup in the absence of timber harvest 

Everett (1995).” Dr. Everett also stated that every post-fire situation is 

different and should be handled on a case-by-case basis. Since then, several 

other scientists have also weighed in on both sides of the debate over active 

vs. passive management. 

The post fire salvage logging debate prompted McIver and Starr (2000) to 

review and discuss the existing body of scientific literature on logging following 

wildfire and found that information on the environmental effects of post-fire 

logging to be scanty at best. Only 21 studies have examined the wide range of 

post fire logging. Some of the findings from this literature review were 

relevant to the Baked Apple project and were helpful in focusing the planning 

and analysis in the Baked Apple EIS. Examples of relevant findings from this 

literature review include: logging on steep, sensitive soils is likely to have the 

greatest potential for exacerbating the erosion problems typically observed in 

burned watersheds; ground based logging causes the greatest immediate soil 

effects; logging residue can decrease erosion in post-fire logging sites; and post 

fire logging removes dead wood structure affecting wildlife, especially cavity 

nesting birds. McIver and Starr (2000) found that no studies have specifically 

looked at how post fire logging alters the size distribution of fuels and 

associated changes in future fire risk. 

In my judgment, active management is the responsible course of action 

specifically for the Baked Apple project located in the matrix land allocation. I 
11

base this on the economic need for immediate intervention. Meeting an 

economic objective is valid since Forest Plan decisions specify timber 

production as a goal in this land allocation. I also recognize the controversy 

surrounding the potential of a future fire and the effects of fuel accumulations, 

but fuel reduction remains subordinate to economics in my decision to apply 

active management. 

After I concluded that active management was appropriate, I weighed the pros 

and cons of each alternative based on how well the alternatives met the 

purpose and need and how they addressed the significant issues. The following 

is a discussion of those factors and my conclusions. 

Meeting the Need for Action 

The Need to Recover the Economic Value of Fire-Killed Timber and to 

Reforest Burned Areas 

All of the action alternatives respond to the need to salvage and to reforest 

following the fire, but to varying degrees. Alternatives 2, 4 and 6 all closely 

respond to the salvage and reforestation element of the purpose and need; all 

three harvest more than 40 million board feet of timber, while Alternatives 3 

and 5 salvage substantially less. Though Alternative 6 salvages fewer acres 

than Alternative 2 (158 fewer) and Alternative 4 (348 fewer), and it reforests 

fewer acres than Alternative 2 (74 fewer) and Alternative 4 (312 fewer), I feel 

Alternative 6 responds very adequately to the need for salvage and 

reforestation; this is especially true given the way that Alternative 6 responds 

to a number of the issues, as discussed later. 

The Need to Reduce Existing and Created Fuels in the Burned Area 

All the action alternatives respond in varying degrees and in different ways to 

the need for hazardous fuels reduction, yet Alternative 6 is best at minimizing 

future fires. The FARSITE model used by the interdisciplinary team to analyze 

this element of the purpose and need revealed that Alternative 6 would likely 

result in a smaller-sized fire, if one were to start in about 25 years, compared 

to all other alternatives. Alternative 6 leaves a wider range of fuel loads in 

salvage units than the other action alternatives, but it includes the application 

of fuel breaks in strategic locations, which is responsive to the overall 

objective of this element of the purpose and need. 
12 

How the Alternatives Address Issues and Reasons for 

Non-Selection 

Alternative 6 has clear advantages over some of the other alternatives in 

responding to several of the significant issues. Alternative 6 was developed as 

a result of the May 5 and May 6, 2003 interdisciplinary team meetings where 18 

members of the public commented on the five alternatives that had been 

developed to that point. As a result of these public and interdisciplinary team 

discussions, we developed Alternative 6 which blended aspects of the other 

action alternatives to create Alternative 6. 

Alternative 6 focuses on the watershed analysis recommendation of restoring 

and maintaining landscape patterns associated with the local, natural 

disturbance regime. Alternative 6 focuses salvage in the “Steep/Dry” 

Landscape Area described in the watershed analysis as naturally prone to 

stand-replacement fire, and it refines the perimeter of this landscape area to 

fit the 2002 stand-replacement event. In keeping with the theme of restoring 

landscape patterns associated with the natural disturbance regime of the area, 

Alternative 6 does not salvage in the moderate or gentle/moist landscape area 

where, as predicted in the watershed analysis, the fire burned primarily as a 

ground fire in larger, older stands killing individual trees and small pockets of 

stand replacement. 

Current and Future Dead Down Wood Availability 

Alternative 6 strikes the best balance between dead tree retention for 

ecological functions and fuel reduction to reduce future fire risk. Alternative 6 

does this by leaving a broad range of dead trees in the various salvage units. 

The oldest, most decayed logs (decay class 4 and 5) in our inventoried oldgrowth stands provided the basis for the retention levels prescribed in 

Alternative 6. The large wood we leave today will become the decay class 4 

and 5 logs in our salvage units in about 100 years, and the management goal is 

to approximate the levels we have found in our old-growth inventories. Decay 

rates and fall down rates were used to work our way forward in time to when 

these fire-killed stands will be about 100 years old and beginning to once again 

provide large down wood to the forest floor. The lowest level of dead tree 

retention will be 4 trees per acre in the steep, dry Douglas-fir plant association 

group where naturally frequent fire results in inherently lower levels of down 

wood on the forest floor. On the other hand, an average of 15 dead trees will 

be left per acre in the western hemlock plant association groups where there is 

typically more accumulated dead wood on the forest floor due to better site 

growing conditions and less frequent fire. 

In addition, Alternative 6 goes beyond these retention levels in 106 acres where 

higher levels of leave trees are prescribed. This additional retention, ranging 
13

from 24 to 175 leave trees per acre, will occur on units that were partially 

harvested in the past, so they have pre-existing lower wood levels due to 

management-related disturbances. 

Alternative 3 employs the same methods to derive the leave tree prescriptions 

as Alternative 6, but it does not include higher retention levels following 

recommendations from Beschta et al. (1995), nor does it include strategic fuel 

breaks to help future suppression efforts slow the expansion of fire in this fireprone landscape. 

The retention levels associated with Alternatives 2 and 4 were largely driven by 

silvicultural objectives of providing shade from dead tree boles. While 

consistent with standards and guidelines, the retention levels in Alternative 2 

and 4 are not based upon the natural disturbance regime, plant association 

groups, or the coarse woody debris dynamics model (Mellon and Ager 2003). 

The broad range of leave trees provided by Alternative 6, tailored to specific 

site conditions, was an important factor in my decision to select Alternative 6 

over the other alternatives. 

Alternative 5 leaves much higher levels of dead tree retention based on 

recommendations made by Beschta, et al. (1995). The levels prescribed in 

Alternative 5 range from 42 to 188 trees per acre which is problematic in terms 

of carrying too much risk and potentially leading to larger, more severe fires in 

the future. Similarly, the no action alternative would result in substantial 

future fire risk. These are risks I am not willing to take in the matrix land 

allocation. 

In response to the DEIS, some commenters found that the snag retention levels 

were excessive, exceeded forest plan requirements, and jeopardized the future 

survivability of the conifer forest. I share the concern about risks to future 

recovering forest stands should we get a future large fire. However, the snag 

levels usually left during forest management actions are minimums that assume 

the widespread availability of live trees, which can develop into or be used to 

create future snags. Following a high intensity fire, adequate numbers of live 

trees are not available. In this site-specific case, leaving additional snags 

makes sense, and it is fully consistent with the Forest Plan.

Other commenters felt that I should retain most or all of the larger, dead trees 

since it will take so long for a forest to grow back and provide the renewable 

supply of large down logs required by the Northwest Forest Plan. The retained 

trees in Alternative 6 will represent the largest size classes which are likely to 

persist well into the development of new stands. Future reburns may diminish 

that number, but leaving too much can lead to net losses of down wood on the 

landscape due to larger reburns. 
14 

In selecting Alternative 6 I have weighed the risks of contributing to future 

reburns against the role of large dead wood as habitat components to bridge 

the gap from today when ample wood is available, until future stands begin to 

add new dead wood. I feel that Alternative 6 does the best job of addressing 

and balancing the trade-offs surrounding this conflict. At the landscape scale, 

Alternative 6 maintains current levels of dead and down wood within the 

natural range of variability with well distributed patches of unsalvaged dead 

stands remaining on about 24% percent of the planning area. It also retains 

most of the scattered mortality within the moderate and moist Landscape 

Areas as biological legacies where it makes the most ecological sense to do so. 

Late Successional / Old–Growth Stands 

Alternative 6 addresses the issue of salvage within live, late seral /old-growth 

stands best among the action alternative. The concern is over the salvage of 

relatively small pockets of dead trees from within live, functioning latesuccessional/old growth habitat and the associated damage to that habitat, 

and the live trees that would need to be felled or that would be damaged 

during the process of removing dead trees. This is addressed in Alternative 6 

by only harvesting 33 acres of dead trees from within stands that have a lot of 

live trees. The other action alternatives (2, 3, 4, and 5) are all quite 

conservative in the amounts of salvage in such stands, but they all harvest 

more (57 acres, 50 acres, 137 acres, and 112 acres, respectively) than 

Alternative 6 does. 

During the DEIS comment period, some people noted the importance of live 

trees to recovering habitat while others wanted to move into green timber 

areas that were underburned to get ahead of the bug infestations, which they 

predicted would explode over the next several years. 

I am aware that many fire injured trees in the Apple Fire are damaged enough 

to predispose them to insect infestation and death. That process has already 

begun. Yet as disclosed by Dr. Goheen (of the SW Oregon Insect and Disease 

Technical Center) in the FEIS, bark beetle populations were at low levels when 

the fire started in 2002, and there is not a strong likelihood that a significant 

number of healthy vigorous trees either inside or outside the fire perimeter 

would be infested and killed (FEIS p.188). Also, based on Dr. Goheen’s 

suggestion and offer to help, I have included a monitoring element as part of 

this decision that will track tree mortality and insect populations. This 

decision does not preclude taking future action should monitoring show more of 

a problem than predicted in the FEIS. Meanwhile, additional insects and tree 

death will enrich habitat for a myriad of species; an important process that 

occurs following fire. Finally, by narrowing the scope of this project strictly to 

dead trees, I effectively streamlined the planning process so that salvage could 

occur at the earliest possible time given the planning regulations I must follow. 
15

I did not have the staff, the funding, or the time to expand the project into the 

realm of injured trees. 

Alternative 6 fully addresses the issue of impacts to old growth habitat and 

green trees. I have concluded that the limited benefits of logging these small 

scattered pockets of dead trees do not outweigh the costs of doing so in terms 

of old growth impacts and economic returns. 

Stand Structure and Diversity 

Alternative 6 partially addresses the issue of maintaining structural diversity by 

using the widest variety of leave tree prescriptions. This issue triggered more 

letters during the scoping process than any other. The concern was that 

salvaging would decrease stand structure and diversity by removing the largest 

dead trees and various other size classes of dead trees. Alternative 5 was 

developed to address this issue by using a 30-inch diameter limit in all salvage 

units to represent 150 year-old trees referenced in the Beschta et al report. In 

addition, 50% of all snags would be left standing in all diameter classes under 

30 inches. Thus, Alternative 5 responds to this issue the best of all action 

alternatives. 

Some commenters cited a variety of ecological reasons to retain higher levels 

of dead trees while others expressed concern for worker safety, increased risk 

of larger fires in the future, and loss of economic opportunity associated with 

higher levels of retention. 

I did not choose Alternative 5 because it was not responsive enough to the 

purpose and need in terms of capturing economic value, reforestation, and 

reducing fuels. Alternative 5 would only plant 220 salvage acres, it would only 

produce just over 5 million board feet, and it would leave too much fuels 

potentially leading to larger, more severe fires in the future. Alternative 6, on 

the other hand would reforest 864 acres of salvage units, salvage an estimated 

41.9 million board feet of timber, and result in a future fire modeled to be 324 

acres less (after the first day of burning) than that modeled for Alternative 5. 

Sediment 

Erosion increases following stand replacement fire, and salvage logging can 

further increase hillslope erosion and subsequent sedimentation of streams. 

Thus, the protection of water quality and fisheries was extremely important in 

deciding whether to salvage log and the methods and amounts of salvage, road 

work, and fuel treatments to apply. 

Panther Creek is listed by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality as 

water quality limited because of high summer water temperatures. Sensitive 

fish species (steelhead, cutthroat, and coho salmon)occupy streams in the 
16 

planning area and downstream in the Wild and Scenic North Umpqua River. 

Though increases in water temperature have already occurred and will 

continue for many years until riparian areas grow back, none of various salvage 

proposals would worsen the trends in stream temperature. In fact, 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 all take action to reforest burned riparian areas 

adjacent to salvage units to help improve the water quality situation in the 

future. The largest concern with the proposed action was sediment production 

from harvest, fuel burning, and road work. 

A roads analysis was accomplished for the Panther Creek watershed which 

recommended the decommissioning and the reconstruction of several road 

segments in order to improve the transportation system and watershed 

conditions in the long-term. Unfortunately, the impacts of carrying out such 

road-related restoration in terms of short-term sediment production proved to 

be too much based on guidance provided by NOAA Fisheries during our planning 

process when NOAA Fisheries had regulatory authority under the Endangered 

Species Act. Any minimal level of road work would have caused the project to 

stall with a “likely to adversely affect” determination for the coho salmon, 

listed by NOAA as a threatened species until four months after the publication 

of the DEIS. Thus, I reluctantly opted to forgo any of the substantial roadrelated restorative opportunities as part of this salvage sale analysis. Instead, 

only those road segments posing problems to safe timber haul were 

considered—this equated to only two small reconstruction sites and routine 

levels of road maintenance that occurs via the timber sale contract. 

Alternative 3 was developed to address the sediment issue, and it represents 

the most conservative approach of the action alternatives by not salvaging 

eight units totaling 103 acres where steep burned slopes present more risk of 

surface erosion and possibly mass wasting. Alternatives 2 and 4 contain all 

eight of these units while Alternative 5 includes five units (79.8 acres) and 

Alternative 6 includes three units (74 acres). Also in Alternative 3, 

underburning was changed to hand-pile burning within eleven harvest units 

totaling 212 acres to minimize losses of logging-created fuels and regenerating 

vegetation that both function to lessen surface erosion. Alternatives 2, 4, and 

6 all apply underburning (broadcast) burning to these eleven units, contingent 

on the results of fuel inventories after harvest. 

In the short term, Alternative 3 would exert less risk to aquatic resources from 

sedimentation associated with this project. The post harvest fuel inventories 

that will occur in the most sensitive harvest units will act to further lessen any 

risks to sedimentation and site productivity since the findings of the inventories 

may trigger changes to planned burned prescriptions based on availability of 

effective ground cover in the sensitive sites. Given the relatively minor 

differences in risk of sedimentation between Alternatives 3 and 6 (FEIS pages 

227-229 and 241-246), I have chosen Alternative 6 in order to gain further 

economic returns, plant more acres, and lessen fuel loads on more acres. 
17

Alternative 5 would use handpile burning almost exclusively, therefore 

removing less of the effective ground cover. This, in combination with the 

higher levels of dead tree retention also makes Alternative 5 a lower risk 

alternative in terms of stream sedimentation in the short term. I did not 

choose either Alternatives 1 or 5, because they result in too much risk of longterm sedimentation due to their higher levels of residual fuels potentially 

leading to larger, hotter fires and potentially more erosion and stream 

sedimentation in future years, if such fires occur. 

Of the five salvage alternatives, Alternative 4 has the highest short-term risk to 

fish and water quality due to sediment production, because of its larger 

treatment acreage, higher level of temporary road construction, and acres of 

underburning. This, in large part, is why I did not choose Alternative 4. 

Many comments were received during the DEIS comment period regarding the 

additional impacts of logging and fuels treatment following the impacts of the 

fire. Commenters pointed out that any additional impacts would not be 

consistent with the objectives of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy or the 

Clean Water Act. It was pointed out that there was not enough disclosure and 

analysis of the effects of logging and fuel burning in light of existing 

detrimental soil conditions that must be cumulatively assessed as required by 

Forest Plan standards. The FEIS provides more site-specific analysis and I have 

considered that in making my decision to select Alternative 6. 

In selecting Alternative 6, I have chosen to focus the salvage only in the steep 

and dry landscape area and to forgo salvage in other landscape areas. This is in 

keeping with the landscape plan developed in the 2001 Middle North Umpqua 

watershed analysis designed to restore and maintain landscape patterns to 

approximate the natural disturbance regime. The landscape plan was 

developed to address the Aquatic Conservation Strategy which is based on 

natural disturbance processes (Northwest Forest Plan, ROD B-9). 

I have considered the short-term risks of sedimentation to the aquatic 

environment of the streams within the 6th field planning area and to 

downstream environments of the 5th field watershed. I have reviewed the 

details of the affected aquatic environment in the FEIS, which thoroughly 

describes the existing physical and biological conditions of all aspects of the 

riparian and aquatic environment, and I have reviewed the direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects of the alternatives. I have also reviewed the site-specific 

Best Management Practices (FEIS 54-64) designed as mitigation to help 

ameliorate erosion and pollution associated with logging, timber haul on roads, 

temporary road construction, and fuel burning and that are responsive to the 

Clean Water Act and Forest Plan standards and guidelines. These practices will 

be implemented and their effectiveness monitored by timber sale 

administrators and watershed personnel as the various timber sales under this 

decision are implemented. Though these mitigations will lessen impacts, some 
18 

short-term impacts to the aquatic environment will be realized as a result of 

Alternative 6, as disclosed in the analysis of direct effects found in the aquatic 

section of Chapter 3 of the FEIS beginning on page 286. 

Though short-term impacts from erosion and sedimentation are expected 

within the 6thfield watershed of Panther Creek, long-term impacts lasting more 

than a decade will not be realized at the scale of the Middle North Umpqua 

5thfield watershed. Alternative 6 was designed to contribute to the 

maintenance and restoration of landscape patterns based on the watershed 

analysis, and it meets all standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan, as 

amended by the Northwest Forest Plan. 

In selecting Alternative 6, I will implement the best approach to capturing the 

economic value of the burned timber and reducing fuels while protecting water 

quality and fish habitat by limiting sedimentation. Alternative 6 is predicted to 

hold a future fire to the smallest acreage of the alternatives considered, it 

avoids salvage and fuel treatment in riparian reserves allowing natural recovery 

processes to operate, it plants using wide spacing within the riparian reserves 

adjacent to salvage units to speed shade and erosion recovery while allowing 

for future species and structural diversity, and it reduces fuels where it make 

the most ecological sense—in the steep/dry Landscape Areas established in the 

watershed analysis. I feel that Alternative 6 will result in the least long-term 

term risk to the aquatic environment of all the alternatives I considered in 

detail. 

Economics 

The economics of the alternatives were important considerations in my 

decision since forestry and forest products are very important to the local 

economy. In addition, if fuel reductions cannot be accomplished through 

economically viable salvage sales, there is no practical way to meet the long 

term need of reducing fuel levels after this fire. 

Alternative 4 was developed to address the issue of economics, as some people 

were concerned that the heavy use of helicopter logging in the proposed action 

might result in low or no returns to the treasury, may not be economically 

feasible, and may not attract bidders to the salvage sales. Alternative 4 

addressed these economic concerns by relying more on skyline logging systems 

than helicopter logging, lowering the level of leave trees within harvest units, 

adding a small area of riparian reserve salvage, and maximizing the roadside 

salvage of fire-killed hazard trees paralleling high use, open roads. And as I 

mentioned earlier, Alternative 4 in the DEIS also included salvage of dead 

timber on unsuitable soils (too shallow and rocky to plant), but I had to drop 

that out in the FEIS due to problems with Forest Plan consistency. 
19

Alternative 4 would have achieved the best net present value, the highest 

return to the treasury, and the most benefit to the local economy, creating the 

most jobs. Yet, I did not select Alternative 4 because it does not address the 

issues of old-growth impacts, stand structural diversity, and sediment as well 

as Alternative 6. 

I chose Alternative 6 because it is an economically efficient alternative. 

Alternative 6 has the best benefit /cost ratio of all the action alternatives. 

Alternative 6 is more efficient than Alternative 4 by some measures due to 

higher volume per acre cut (because it does not include expensive dead tree 

salvage within green units), lower amount of helicopter logging, and lower KVfunded sale area improvements. Alternative 6 also has the least chance of 

suffering deficit conditions due to the potential cumulative increases in log 

supply from other fire salvage projects entering the market at the same time 

(FEIS pages 295-297). It has the second highest net present value (NPV--

discounted dollar benefits minus discounted dollar costs), after Alternative 4 

and its NPV is close to that of Alternative 4 ($9,204,127 vs. $10,196,374). 

Fuel loads 

The most difficult issue to balance was the amount of burned area to salvage 

log to help lessen the risk of future reburns and realize economic benefits with 

the trade-offs of removing large dead wood in terms of its role in recovering 

soils, wildlife habitat, and reforestation. 

Alternative 4 was developed to address the issue raised during scoping 

regarding the risk of not treating fuels in areas such as riparian reserves and 

areas of shallow rocky soils designated as unplantable. I identified Alternative 

4 as my preferred Alternative in the DEIS, in part, because it did treat some of 

the “unsuitable” (unplantable acres) and it treated a conservative amount of 

acreage in the riparian reserve land allocation. Since much of the Apple Fire 

would not receive any fuels reduction due the riparian reserve and late 

successional reserve land allocations, I felt justified in taking a more 

preemptive approach to lessening future risks in the matrix land allocation and 

a small amount of the riparian reserve in the planning area. The riparian 

reserve and unsuitable soils salvage sparked much controversy among a number 

of constituents. 

It was also pointed out that Alternative 4 did not address a 1990 Forest LRMP 

prescription requiring that salvage in unsuitable soils be designed to meet 

wildlife objectives. To address this oversight, and include the salvage on 

unsuitable soils, a Forest Plan amendment would have been needed, which 

would have require more time. Time is critical as wood value deteriorates 

rapidly following a fire. Thus, I opted to make changes to Alternatives 4 and 6 

in the FEIS by dropping out the unsuitable areas. Commenters also highlighted 

the fact that Alternative 4 did not perform as well as some other action 
20 

alternatives at reducing the size of future fires. Substantial concern was 

expressed over the removal of large wood and the loss of ecological functions 

that large wood plays in the recovery of the future forest in harsh, unsuitable 

soils. Still more people argued that harvest in the riparian reserve land 

allocation was not warranted in light of the analysis presented in the DEIS. 

I agree that the conservative amount of harvest in the riparian reserve land 

allocation in Alternative 4 would not likely make a measurable difference in 

the area or degree of fire effects at the landscape scale. Though the analysis 

in the aquatic section of the FEIS reveals no significant impacts to riparian 

conditions with this minor amount of activity, our analysis tools were not 

sensitive enough to specifically show how the riparian reserve would benefit 

from the selective harvest and fuels treatment there. As a result of this input, 

I decided against Alternative 4. 

During the DEIS comment period, some people said that the reburn assumptions 

used in the analysis were exaggerated and unfounded, citing Beschta et al, 

1995 that there is no evidence supporting the contention that leaving large 

dead trees significantly increased the probability of reburn. 

Accumulations of large fuels will influence future fires and our ability to fight 

them. In fact, the length of time fire persists in a particular location, fire’s 

resistance to control, and the time it take to accomplish a burn-out are all 

significantly influenced by fuel loading. Accumulations of large-sized fuel such 

as fallen tree boles will burn much hotter and for a longer period of time, 

which impacts soil and affects erosion processes. Large fuel loads seriously 

hamper our ability to rapidly construct fire line and it diminishes our effective 

use of burn-out in front of a moving fire when a rapid burnout is critical. This 

all leads to the growth of fires. 

Commenters from the other side of the argument felt that the proposal would 

do little to significantly reduce the threat of repeated future catastrophic 

fires, that late successional reserves should also be logged to reduce fuel 

loading, that adjacent lands will be put at greater risk due to a lack of action 

in much of the Apple Fire, and that subsequent fires will burn hotter and 

create resource damage of far greater long-term consequence than the Apple 

Fire. 

I share these concerns, but I also know that fire occurs frequently on the steep 

dry landscapes of the Apple Fire relative to other locations on the Ranger 

District (FEIS p. 74-75). As such, our management of fuels can only go so far to 

lessen future fires and to accommodate future suppression efforts. We carried 

out a very aggressive salvage program following the 1987 Apple Fire with clear 

cuts, leaving little to no retention and included riparian areas in those 

clearcuts. The only retention of unsalvaged timber was the fire-killed stands in 

the visual corridor of the North Umpqua River. The 2002 Apple Fire killed the 
21

regenerating forests within the clearcuts and within the unsalvaged areas, too. 

This previous salvage effort did not appear to substantially alleviate the effects 

of the 2002 Apple Fire. 

In selecting Alternative 6, I considered the many discussions over the risks of 

future fires, the public concern and controversy surrounding salvage in riparian 

reserves and the benefits of such salvage as proposed in Alternative 4. I have 

concluded that Alternative 6, with its strategic fuel breaks, its use of a variety 

of leave prescriptions, and its focus on the steep/dry landscape area in the 

matrix land allocation is the best approach. 

Low Road Density Areas 

Although roadless designation is outside the scope of this project (it is decided 

at the Forest Plan or higher level), five conservation groups were concerned 

that the proposed project had the potential to impact the character of two 

areas they call uninventoried roadless areas, as they were not recognized as 

roadless areas in the 1990 Forest Plan. Such areas are referred to as low road 

density areas in the Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis. This issue, in 

part, drove the development of Alternative 5, which among other things, 

avoided harvest in the two areas mapped by Oregon Natural Resources Council. 

Alternative 1 would also result in no impacts to the character of these two 

areas. 

During the DEIS comment period, more analysis was requested on the impacts 

of the logging on the area’s future eligibility for wilderness designation. That 

analysis has been included in the FEIS (page 303), and I have considered it. 

I considered Alternatives 1 and 5, but did not select either. My principal 

concern with these alternatives is that they did not meet the economic needs. 

In addition, both these alternatives leave large areas with high fuel loading, 

leaving too much risk of a future reburn. Alternative 6 will not build any 

permanent roads into either of the areas identified by ONRC and other groups 

as uninventoried roadless, but the salvage of 465 acres in these areas will 

interject noticeable management activities as tree stumps replace dead 

standing and down trees, affecting the visual character and lessening the 

potential for solitude. 

I choose to salvage 465 acres of fire-killed stands in these areas in light of the 

fact that these particular low road density areas with their small size, narrow 

configurations, and their juxtaposition to the sights and sounds of a heavily 

managed landscapes, make them very unlikely candidates for either a roadless 

or wilderness designation to begin with (FEIS p. 300-303). Salvaging within 

these low road density areas is fully consistent with Forest Plan direction for 

the matrix land allocation, and this decision does not represent a difficult 

trade-off given the existing character of these areas. 
22 

Landbirds 

Activity created fuel burning is often conducted during the moist spring months 

to minimize soil impacts, but burning in the spring time has impacts to nesting 

birds. Underburning will occur when fuel moistures are adequate to meet the 

objective and such fuel moistures are most likely to occur during the spring or 

fall months. This decision applies no restrictions on spring burning. Action 

Alternatives 3, 5, and 6 all respond to this issue by underburning fewer acres 

compared to the proposed action, and Alternative 1 responds by no burning at 

all. Though the level of underburning in Alternative 6 is higher than that of 

these other action alternatives that also address the issue, I feel that overall, 

Alternative 6 is better at balancing the whole suite of issues considered in the 

FEIS. Impact to landbirds, while important to minimize, was not the principal 

driver in either the design or the selection of an alternative; the direct impacts 

to young birds in terms of fire-caused mortality will be a one-time impact that 

is not predicted to have long-term effects to populations (FEIS pages 153-157) 

Other issues were considered in the assessment of effects, but were not used 

as the basis for alternative development as they were resolved in other ways 

(FEIS, Chapter 2). 

Cumulative Effects from Ongoing and Proposed 

Activities 

In deciding to go forward with Alternative 6 of the Baked Apple Fire Salvage 

Project, I reviewed the other past, present, and proposed activities within the 

Panther Creek subwatershed (FEIS, p. 70-73). Of concern is how these actions 

may cumulatively affect water quality, fish habitat, and listed or sensitive 

species. During the analysis, I directed the IDT to consider the likely effects of 

past, present, and future activities in combination with the proposed activities 

of the Baked Apple Project including the recent fire suppression and fire 

rehabilitation activities. The thorough analysis of effects (FEIS, Chapter 3) did 

not indicate likely significant cumulative effects. 

Consultation with USFWS and NOAA 

A Biological Opinion was completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on 

April 16, 2004 on Alternative 6 of the Baked Apple Fire Salvage project. The 

Biological Opinion covers the Northern Spotted Owl and the Northern Bald 

Eagle meeting all requirements under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. 
23

Consultation with NOAA Fisheries on essential fish habitat for coho and Chinook 

salmon under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 

(MSA) is not warranted because a determination has been made that the 

project would not adversely affect essential fish habitat (FEIS p. 285). Oregon 

Coast coho salmon has been listed as a threatened species under the 

Endangered Species Act since August of 1998, but a court ruling in February, 

2004 rendered this listing unlawful and unenforceable by NOAA Fisheries. 

NOAA Fisheries is now in the process of reassessing the status of the Oregon 

Coast coho. 

Forest Plan Consistency 

This Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and its 

amendments have been reviewed and a determination made that this decision 

is consistent with it. The 1990 Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan, as amended, provided the framework for the development 

of all the alternatives. The actions in this project comply fully with the goals 

of the Forest Plan, as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan and its 

amendments, Management Area Direction (LRMP-IV-128 to 136), and Standards 

and Guidelines of the Umpqua National Forest Plan (Chapter IV of the LRMP) 

and Northwest Forest Plan for matrix (Attachment A pages C39-21) and riparian 

reserve land allocations (Attachment A pages C30-38). 

Legal Requirements and Policy 

In reviewing the EIS and actions involved in Alternative 6, I have concluded that 

my decision is consistent with the following laws and requirements: 

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

inventoried cultural resource sites in the Baked Apple project area will be 

protected from entry and excluded from any resource management activities. 

New sites discovered during operations will be protected by provisions in the 

timber sale contract (C6.24) and the mitigation measures on page 63 of the 

FEIS. 

The National Historic Preservation Act: The Oregon State Historic 

Preservation Officer (SHPO) has been consulted concerning proposed activities 

in the Baked Apple project area. A report documenting the inventory for this 

project has been submitted to the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office 

fulfilling the requirements of the 1995 Programmatic Agreement, No. 94-06-59-

16, between the Advisory Council on Historic Resources, State Historic 

Preservation Officer, and Region 6 of the Forest Service. An appropriate 

inventory was conducted for this undertaking and properties which may be 
24 

eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places have been 

located. Avoidance measures will be implemented as per stipulations in the 

Programmatic Agreement. 

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

format and content requirements of environmental analysis and 

documentation, such as the Baked Apple Fire Salvage Project. The entire 

process of preparing an environmental impact statement was undertaken to 

comply with NEPA. 

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended: A biological assessment 

has been prepared to document possible effects of proposed activities on the 

threatened Northern Spotted Owl and Northern Bald Eagle. As documented 

above, appropriate coordination and consultation with USFWS has been 

completed. 

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA), 1976: All alternatives were 

developed to be in full compliance with NFMA. 

Clean Air Act Amendments, 1977: Alternative 6 is designed to meet the 

National Ambient Air Quality standards through avoidance of practices that 

degrade air quality below health and visibility standards. The Oregon State 

Implementation Plan and the Oregon State Smoke Management Plan will be 

followed to maintain air quality. 

The Clean Water Act, 1982: Alternative 6 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. Alternative 6 meets anti-degradation 

standards agreed to by the State of Oregon and the Forest Service, Region 6, in 

a Memorandum of Understanding (Forest Service Manual 1561.5). This will be 

accomplished through planning, application, and monitoring of Best 

Management Practices (BMPs). Site-specific BMPs have been designed to 

protect beneficial uses. 

Satisfaction of State Forest Worker Safety Codes: The Oregon Occupational 

Safety and Health Code for Forest Activities (OAR 437, Division 6) regulations 

will be met when Alternative 6 is implemented. Salvage strategies are 

designed to provide for worker safety by providing for appropriately sized 

openings to facilitate safe operation of yarding equipment or by clumping dead 

trees that are retained. 

Other Policy or Guiding Documentation: A Biological Evaluation was prepared 

to assess potential effects to sensitive species as identified by the Regional 

Forester. This evaluation determined that while there may be impacts to 

individual sensitive species, those effects are not likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing or loss of viability of the population or species. 
25

Public Participation 

The NEPA scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) was used to invite public 

participation, to refine the scope of this project, and to identify preliminary 

issues to be addressed. The Forest Service sought information, comments, and 

assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies, the tribes, and other groups 

and individuals interested in or affected by the Proposed Action. The public 

was provided numerous opportunities to participate in the Baked Apple Fire 

Salvage Project. 

The Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde, Confederated Tribes of the 

Siletz, and the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians were contacted 

during the Apple and Tiller fires of 2002. While the above tribes were invited 

on a field trip, only the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe of Indians was 

able to attend an October, 2002 site visit to inspect the burned area. Personal 

contacts were made with representatives of all three tribes once scoping began 

to be sure all three tribes receive enough desired information about the 

proposed salvage project. No concerns were expressed by the tribes. The Cow 

Creeks specifically said they support logging with minimal road construction. 

The Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

In this ROD, I have described the selected alternative and given rationale for its 

selection. It is also required by law that one or more environmentally 

preferable alternatives be disclosed. Based on regulations, the 

environmentally preferable alternative is not necessarily the alternative that 

will be implemented and it does not have to meet the underlying need for the 

project. It does, however, have to cause the least damage to the biological 

and physical environment and best protect, preserve, and enhance historical, 

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

In the case of the Baked Apple Fire Salvage Project, I have determined that 

Alternative 3 is the environmentally preferable alternative. Alternative 3 

provides the lowest risk of additional watershed damage by dropping several 

steep units that were severely burned near the lower fish-bearing portions of 

Limpy Creek, uses more handpile burning than underburning to assume less 

erosion risk, and uses the ecologically derived leave tree process for leave 

prescriptions, while treating enough of the fuels to reasonably lessen the size 

of a future fire that could potentially lead to long-term effects to natural 

resources. 
26 

Alternative 1 is not environmentally preferable because it does not accelerate 

reforestation and it does not lower the risk of a future severe reburn. 

Alternative 5, like Alternative 1, is not environmentally preferable because it 

does little to accelerate reforestation and to lower the risk of a future reburn. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 6 are not environmentally preferable because they take 

more short-term watershed risks by applying more broadcast burning, and 

harvesting more acres of severely burned units. Alternatives 2, 4, and 6 do 

hold a future fire to a smaller size, but not appreciable smaller than 

Alternative 3. 

Mitigation Measures 

Mitigation measures are site-specific management activities designed to reduce 

the adverse impacts of timber harvest and associated activities. These 

measures, added to the design features built into Alternative 6, represent a 

suite of practical means that will minimize environmental harm. Mitigation 

measures will be implemented through project design, contract specifications, 

contract administration, and monitoring by Forest Service officers. 

As part of my decision, I am choosing to implement the mitigation measures 

identified in the EIS (FEIS, pp.54-64). I am confident that the selected 

mitigation measures will adequately lessen or prevent adverse effects for the 

following reasons: the selected mitigation measures are practices we have used 

successfully in the past; they are State-recognized Best Management Practices 

for protecting water quality; or they are based on current research (e.g., the 

snag management approach). I have decided to monitor the implementation of 

these measures and, in some instances, to monitor their effectiveness, as 

described in the following section. 

Monitoring 

Monitoring of the Apple Fire Salvage Project is designed to accomplish three 

purposes: 1) to assure that all aspects of the project are implemented as 

intended; 2) to determine, for certain critical activities, that the effects of the 

activities are consistent with the intent; and 3) to allow adaptation if it is 

found that activities are not being implemented correctly or are not having the 

desired effects. The monitoring elements, along with the mitigation measures 

and compliance with the timber sale contract represent the enforcement 

program for this decision. For example, if monitoring of logging operations by 

the sale administrator, soil scientist, or silviculturist finds that standards and 

guidelines, best management practices, mitigating measures, or the 

silvicultural prescription are not being met, additional measures will be 

prescribed to insure compliance. 
27

The following monitoring items described in pages 54-64 of the FEIS are a part 

of my decision. They are listed in order of priority. Those required by law or 

the Forest Plan are mandatory under this decision, while those funded by trust 

funds or other methods are discretionary as funding or staffing allows: 

Elements required by law or as a Forest Plan Standard: 

a Inventories will be conducted before fuels treatments in salvage units 

totaling an estimated 500 acres where ground cover was less than 85% EGC 

after the fire, in areas of severe regeneration limitations, and in areas of 

severe burn effects in order to determine if slash treatment is needed an/or 

sever burn effects to determine if there is a need to mitigate EGC with seeding 

or straw mulch. In these areas, no slash treatment using fire will occur if postharvest EGC in the form of logging slash is less than 85% and fuel loading is less 

than 25 tons per acre. Where post-fire fuel loads exceed 25 tons per acre, 

slash treatment will primarily consist of ‘lop and scatter’ treatments. Limited 

hand pile and/or jackpot burning may occur in large fuel concentrations. 

aGround cover following broadcast burning will be monitored to determine if 

an effective ground cover (EGC) of 85% exists following the fuels reduction 

treatments. The application of weed-free straw or seeding with native species, 

as available, would be required if fuel treatment reduces EGC below 85% 

(meets soils S&G #11, LRMP IV-71). 

a Logging operations will be monitored by the sale administrator, soil 

scientist, or silviculturist. If standards and guidelines, best management 

practices, mitigating measures, or the silvicultural prescription are not being 

met, additional measures will be prescribed to insure compliance (Federal 

Clean Water Act). 

a Burning will be conducted to meet air quality standards as outlined by 

Oregon DEQ, and air quality monitoring will be conducted in conjunction with 

the DEQ (Federal Clean Air Act). 

Element paid for by timber sale trust funds—KV and BD funds: 

aAfter harvest, use KV funding to monitor and treat remaining or new 

infestations of noxious weed for up to five years following sale closure. 

a Regeneration harvest units located in capable, available, and suitable lands 

should be examined the 1st, 3rd, and 5th growing seasons after planting or until 

reforestation is certified complete with a minimum of 125 trees per acre. 

a Post-harvest fuel surveys will be conducted on representative harvest units 

to determine if fuel disposal prescriptions need to be modified to meet 

objectives for fuel reduction or soil protection. 
28 

Elements to monitor as staffing and funding allows: 

a Monitor the live tree mortality and bark beetle populations in monitoring 

plots established in the winter of 2003 with the Oregon Insect and Disease 

technical Center. 

a The silviculturist will review marking guides with the presale crew prior to 

marking and monitor quality both during and after the unit is completely 

marked, on a sample of each type of prescription. If the number of leave trees 

per acre exceeds plus or minus 10 percent of the target, remarking or 

amending the silvicultural prescription will be necessary. 

a Continue water quality monitoring for DO, pH, temperature and turbidity in 

the Panther Creek subwatershed as funding and staffing allows. 

aContinue landbird monitoring on the forest to monitor local landbird 

population trends. 

a The interdisciplinary team or District staff will monitor attainment of 

project objectives following salvage/fuel treatment through a review of at 

least one timber sale in the Baked Apple Salvage EIS. Key elements of adaptive 

management will be tracked and implemented in future planning efforts. 

Consistency with NFMA Requirements 

In all other respects, I find this decision to be consistent with the Umpqua 

Forest Plan and with the requirements of the National Forest Management Act 

implementing regulations; specifically: 

Silvicultural Practices 

Alternative 6 includes no timber salvage on lands classified as not suited for 

timber production during forest planning (36 CFR 219.27(c)(1)). 

Even-aged Management/Clearcutting 

Alternative 6 includes reforestation and salvage of timber killed by a 

catastrophic wildfire. According to the requirements of 36 CFR 219.27(d) and 

16 USC 1604(k), the limits on opening size do not apply because the opening is 

a result of catastrophic conditions. The reforestation of the openings will 

result in even-aged stands where the fire killed all the live trees. 

Vegetative Manipulation/Management Requirements 

The selected action is consistent with the seven management requirements 

from 36 CFR 219.27 and the vegetation requirements from 36 CFR 219.27(b). 

Maintaining Viable Populations of Fish and Wildlife Species 
29

The selected action is consistent with the viable population requirements of 36 

CFR 219.19. 

Implementation 

I have reviewed the Apple Fire Salvage Project FEIS, and its associated 

appendices. I feel there is adequate information within these documents to 

provide a reasoned choice of action. I am fully aware of the possible adverse 

environmental effects that cannot be avoided, and the irreversible or 

irretrievable commitment of resources associated with Alternative 6. I have 

determined that these risks will be outweighed by the likely benefits (FEIS, 

Chapter 3). Implementing Alternative 6 will cause no unacceptable cumulative 

impact to any resource. There will be no significant impact to cultural 

resources, consumers, civil rights, minority groups, environmental justice, or 

women. There are no unusual energy requirements for implementing 

Alternative 6. 

Implementation may occur on, but not before the 15th business day following 

the date of appeal disposition. In the event of multiple appeals, the 

implementation date will be established following the last appeal deposition 

(36 CFR 215.9(b)). If no appeal is filed, implementation may begin on, but not 

before, the 5th business day following the close of the appeal filing period (36 

CFR 215.9(a)). 

Procedure for Changes during Implementation: 

Minor changes may be needed during implementation to better meet on-site 

resource management and protection objectives. 

In determining whether and what kind of further NEPA action is required, I will 

consider the criteria for whether to supplement an existing Environmental 

Impact Statement 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 intent 

of the selected alternative as planned and already approved, and whether the 

change is relevant to environmental concerns. Connected or interrelated 

proposed changes regarding particular areas or specific activities will be 

considered together in making this determination. The cumulative impacts of 

these changes will also be considered. 

The intent of field verification prior to my decision was to confirm inventory 

data and to determine the feasibility and general design and location of a road 

or unit, not to locate the final boundaries or road locations. For example, 

salvage unit prescriptions may be modified if site conditions dictate and if 

other resource objectives can be met. Minor adjustments to unit boundaries 
30 

may be needed during final layout for resource protection, to improve logging 

system efficiency, and to better meet the intent of my decision. Many of these 

minor changes will not present sufficient potential impacts to require any 

specific documentation or action to comply with applicable laws. 

Appeal Rights 

My decision is subject to administrative appeal (CFR 215.11). Organizations or 

members of the general public may appeal my decision according to 36 CFR 

Part 215. The 45-day appeal period begins the day following publication of this 

decision in the Roseburg News Review, the newspaper of record. The Notice of 

Appeal must be filed with the Appeal Deciding Officer: 

 

James A. Caplan 

Forest Supervisor, Umpqua National Forest 

Attn. 1570 Appeals 

2900 NW Stewart Parkway 

Roseburg, OR 97470 

Business Hours: 7:45am-4:30pm 

Fax: 541-957-3495 

Email: appeals-pacificnorthwest-umpqua@fs.fed.us 

It is the responsibility of those who appeal a decision to provide the Forest 

Supervisor sufficient written evidence and rationale to show why my decision 

should be changed or reversed. Only those individuals or organizations who 

submitted substantive comments during the comment period (36 CFR 215.13), 

may appeal under 36 CFR 215.6. The appeal must be filed with the Appeal 

Deciding Officer in writing. At a minimum, an appeal must include the 

following (36 CFR 215.14): 

1. Appellant's name and address, with a telephone number, if available; 

2. Signature or other verification of authorship upon request (a scanned 

signature for electronic mail may be filed with the appeal); 

3. When multiple names are listed on an appeal, identification of the lead 

appellant and verification of the identity of the lead appellant upon request; 

4. The name of the project or activity for which the decision was made, the 

name and title of the Responsible Official, and the date of the decision; 

5. Any specific change(s) in the decision that the appellant seeks and rationale 

for those changes; 

6. Any portion(s) of the decision with which the appellant disagrees, and 

explanation for the disagreement; 

7. Why the appellant believes the Responsible Official’s decision failed to 

consider the substantive comments and; 

8. How the appellant believes the decision specifically violates law, regulation, 

or policy. 
31

Contact Person 

For additional information concerning the specific 

activities authorized with my decision, you may contact: 

Debbie Anderson, 

Baked Apple Interdisciplinary Team Leader/ 

Umpqua National Forest Environmental Coordinator 

2900 NW Stewart Parkway 

Roseburg, OR. 97470 

541-957-3466, Business Hours: 7:45am-4:30pm 

Fax: 541-957-3495 

Email: danderson01@fs.fed.us 

Carol Cushing Date Signed 

District Ranger, North Umpqua Ranger District 

Date Published 

 

 
United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Pacific 

Northwest 

Region 

Forest 

Service 

April 2004 

Baked Apple Fire Salvage 

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

NORTH UMPQUA RANGER DISTRICT 

UMPQUA NATIONAL FOREST 

BAKED APPLE FIRE SALVAGE PROJECT 

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

Douglas County, Oregon 

April 2004 

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service, Umpqua National Forest 

Responsible Official: Carol Cushing, District Ranger 

 North Umpqua Ranger District 

 

For More Information Contact: Debbie Anderson, Team Leader 

 Umpqua National Forest 

 2900 NW Stewart Parkway 

 Roseburg, OR 97470 

 Phone: 541-957-3466 

Appeal Information: 

Abstract: This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) documents alternatives 

considered for timber salvage and fuels reduction within the Matrix land allocation of the 

2002 Apple Fire area on the Umpqua National Forest, North Umpqua Ranger District. The 

purpose of and need for action includes the need to recover the economic value of the burned 

wood before it decays and to reduce existing and created fuels within the planning area. 

Mitigation measures and management requirements for fish, water, plants, soil and cultural 

resources are also considered. Six alternatives are considered, including: Alternative 1, no 

action; Alternative 2, the proposed action, which was designed to capture the economic value 

of the fire-killed trees and reduce fuels loads, while meeting Forest Plan Standards and 

Guidelines; Alternative 3, which was designed to further minimize risk to aquatic ecosystems; 

Alternative 4, which was designed to maximize economic recovery and economic returns and 

further reduce fuel loads; Alternative 5, which follows the guidance of the “Beschta” 

prescription; and Alternative 6, which blends together portions of issues developed during 

scoping. The Forest Service has identified Alternative 6 as the preferred alternative. 
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.
Contents 

i

CONTENTS.......................................................................................PAGE 

SUMMARY.............................................................................. Summary – 1 

Introduction – Chapter 1 ..........................................................................1 

Changes Between Draft and Final ............................................................ 1 

The 2002 Apple Fire ............................................................................ 1 

Apple Fire Suppression and Rehabilitation.................................................. 3 

Planning Area Overview........................................................................ 5 

Purpose Of And Need For Action ............................................................. 8 

Proposed Action................................................................................. 9 

Decisions To Be Made Based On This Analysis ............................................ 10 

Relationship To Forest Plans, Roads Analysis, The Project Record, And The Middle 

North Umpqua Watershed Analysis......................................................... 11 

Scoping ......................................................................................... 14 

Issues............................................................................................ 14 

Issues That Did Not Drive Alternatives .................................................... 16 

Non-Significant Issues ........................................................................ 17 

Introduction – Chapter 2 ........................................................................ 19 

Changes Between Draft and Final .......................................................... 19 

Alternatives Considered, But Eliminated From Detailed Study........................ 19 

Alternatives Considered In Detail .......................................................... 21 

Alternative 1................................................................................... 21 

Alternative 2................................................................................... 23 

Alternative 3................................................................................... 29 

Alternative 4................................................................................... 35 

Alternative 5................................................................................... 43 

Alternative 6................................................................................... 48 

Best Management Practices, Management Requirements, Mitigation Measures, 

And Monitoring ................................................................................ 54 

Summary And Comparison of Alternatives ................................................ 65 

Introduction – Chapter 3 ....................................................................... 69 

 Changes Between Draft and Final .......................................................... 69 

Activities That Contribute To Cumulative Effects. ...................................... 70 

Terrestrial Environment ........................................................................ 73

Fire And Fuels ................................................................................. 73 

Fuel Loadings – Tracked As A Significant Issue ........................................... 79 

Fire Effects/Fire Behavior.................................................................. 107 

Terrestrial Wildlife Habitats ............................................................... 110 

Aquatic Conservation Strategy – Terrestrial Components ............................. 111 

Early-Successional Habitat With Snags – Tracked As A Significant Issue ............ 112 

Late-Successional Habitat – Tracked As A Significant Issue ........................... 116 

Coarse Woody Debris – Tracked As A Significant Issue ................................. 120 

Effects On Sensitive Wildlife Species ..................................................... 129 

Big Game ...................................................................................... 146 

Species Previously Known as Survey & Manage, Protection & Buffer Species...... 148 

Landbirds...................................................................................... 151 

Management Indicator Species ............................................................ 157 

Soils In The Project Area ................................................................... 159 

Unsuitable Soils .............................................................................. 162 
Contents 

ii

 PAGE 

Burn Severity ................................................................................. 164 

Soil Productivity.............................................................................. 165 

Effective Ground Cover ..................................................................... 169 

Nutrients ...................................................................................... 171 

Coarse Woody Debris ........................................................................ 173 

Detrimental Soil Conditions ................................................................ 175 

Soil Biology and Mycorrhizae............................................................... 178 

Carbon Cycle/Carbon Sequestration...................................................... 179 

Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) Plants................................... 180 

Species Previously Known as Survey and Manage Plants and Fungi .................. 183 

Noxious Weeds ............................................................................... 183 

Insects ......................................................................................... 186 

Deterioration of Fire Killed Trees ......................................................... 189 

Vegetative Regrowth and Forest Succession ............................................ 191 

Aquatic Environment ...........................................................................196

The North Umpqua River ................................................................... 196 

Beneficial Uses of Water.................................................................... 198 

Water Quality................................................................................. 198 

Stream Temperature ........................................................................ 198 

Water Chemistry ............................................................................. 205 

Peak Flows .................................................................................... 214 

Erosion and Sedimentation - Tracked as a Significant Issue .......................... 220 

Mass Wasting.................................................................................. 221 

Fluvial Erosion................................................................................ 232 

Surface Erosion............................................................................... 238 

Road-Related Erosion and Sedimentation................................................ 248 

Road Reconstruction Sites.................................................................. 252 

Road Prism Surfaces ......................................................................... 254 

Timber Sale Road Maintenance............................................................ 255 

Timber Haul................................................................................... 257 

Watershed Conditions And Fish Distribution............................................. 260 

Stream Habitats.............................................................................. 269 

Stream Substrate............................................................................. 270 

Large Woody Material ....................................................................... 272 

Pool Character ............................................................................... 272 

Low Velocity Refuge Habitat............................................................... 273 

Refugia ........................................................................................ 274 

Channel Condition and Dynamics.......................................................... 275 

Habitat Access................................................................................ 277 

Biological Evaluation for Fish and Aquatic Species..................................... 281 

Social Environment .............................................................................287

Economics – Tracked as a Significant Issue .............................................. 287 

Recreation .................................................................................... 297 

Hunting ........................................................................................ 297 

Vehicular Access ............................................................................. 298 

Visuals ......................................................................................... 299 

Low Road Density Areas – Tracked as a Significant Issue.............................. 300 

Air Quality..................................................................................... 303 
Contents 

iii

PAGE 

Unavoidable Adverse Impacts.............................................................. 307 

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources ............................ 308 

Short Term and Long Term Productivity ................................................. 308 

Specifically Required Disclosures.......................................................... 309 

Public and Worker Safety................................................................... 309 

Cultural Resources........................................................................... 311 

Unique Habitats .............................................................................. 312 

Wetlands and Floodplains .................................................................. 312 

Prime Farmlands, Rangelands, forestlands or Parklands .............................. 312 

Potential or Unusual Expenditures of Energy............................................ 312 

Conflicts with Plans or Policies of Other Jurisdictions................................. 312 

Consumers, Civil Rights, Minority Groups, and Women................................ 312 

Environmental Justice ...................................................................... 315 

Introduction – Chapter 4 .......................................................................315

Baked Apple Interdisciplinary Team ...................................................... 315 

Other Contributors and Reviewers ........................................................ 317 

Introduction – Chapter 5 .......................................................................315

Baked Apple Public Involvement Process ................................................ 319 

Tribes That Were Consulted................................................................ 320 

List of Persons and Agencies who Participated in the Planning Process Either 

at Open Houses, Public Forums, Meetings, Field Trips or Who Wrote Letters of 

Input ........................................................................................... 320 

Distribution of The Draft and Final EIS ................................................... 320 

Response to Comments ..................................................................... 325 

List of Tables ...................................................................................PAGE 

Table A. Acres Burned Within the 2002 Apple Fire by Land Allocation .................... 2 

Table B. Acres of Late Seral Forest Burned Within the N. Umpqua Watershed by Land 

Allocation............................................................................................. 5 

Table 1. Alternative 2 Salvage Units .......................................................... 26 

Table 2. Alternative 3 Salvage Units .......................................................... 32 

Table 3. Alternative 4 Salvage Units .......................................................... 39 

Table 4. Alternative 5 Salvage Units .......................................................... 46 

Table 5. Alternative 6 Salvage Units .......................................................... 52 

Table 6. Differences Between the Alternatives ............................................. 65 

Table 7. Comparison of Alternatives .......................................................... 66 

Table 8. Past Management Activities in the Panther Creek Subwatershed ............. 70 

Table 9. Fire Suppression and Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) 

Activities for the 2002 Apple-Fire and Present ............................................... 72 

Table 10. Reasonably Foreseeable Actions in the Planning Area .......................... 73 

Table 11. BTU/ft2 Produced by Fuel Model (90th Percentile Weather).................. 80 

Table 12. Resistance to Control Ratings by Fuel Loading (tons/acre) .................... 84 

Table 13. Alternative1: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/acre.......................................................................................... 86 

Table 14. Fire Behavior Associated with the 3 Variations of Fuel Model 11 ............. 87 

Table 15. Fire Behavior Associated with the 3 Variations of Fuel Model 12 ............. 89 

Table 16. Average Residual Fuel Tonnage for Alternative 2 ............................... 93 
Contents 

iv

PAGE

Table 17. Alternative 2: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre ......................................................................................... 94 

Table 18. Average Residual Fuel Tonnage for Alternative3 ................................ 96 

Table 19. Alternative 3: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre ......................................................................................... 97 

Table 20. Average Residual Tonnage for Alternative 4...................................... 98 

Table 21. Alternative 4: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre ......................................................................................... 98 

Table 22. Average Residual Tonnage for Alternative 5..................................... 100 

Table 23. Alternative 5: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre ........................................................................................ 101 

Table 23A. Comparison of 10-100 Hour Fuel Accumulations (Post Salvage) between 

Benchmark and Baked Apple Salvage ......................................................... 101 

Table 24. Average Residual Tonnage for Alternative 6..................................... 103 

Table 25. Alternative 6: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre ........................................................................................ 103 

Table 26. Comparison of Alternatives Using Fire and Fuel Parameters ................. 108 

Table 27. Desired Condition of Decayed Snags and Logs in 100 Years by Forest 

Plant Association Group (PAG) ................................................................. 121 

Table 28. Forest Plan Snag Requirements and Current Levels ............................ 122 

Table 29. Pre-field Review and Biological Evaluation Summary.......................... 130 

Table 30. Provincial and Local Population Trends, for Landbird Focal Species ........ 153 

Table 31. Determination of Effects to Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive 

Wildlife Species................................................................................... 158 

Table 32. Summary of Soil Landtype Characteristics Within Alternative 2 Proposed 

Salvage Units...................................................................................... 159 

Table 33. Erosion Hazard Distribution for the Proposed Action and Alternatives...... 161 

Table 34. Sensitive Soils in the Planning Area............................................... 162 

Table 34A. Burn Severity in the Planning Area and by Alternative....................... 165 

Table 34B. Existing Ground Cover and Post Harvest EGC Predictions in Units ......... 170 

Table 35. Estimated Detrimental Soils Conditions due to Compaction and Displacement 

Within the Salvage Units ........................................................................ 176 

Table 36. Sensitive Plant Species for the Umpqua National Forest ...................... 180 

Table 37. Noxious Weed Species Found in the Planning Area............................. 184 

Table 38. Acres of Tracked Noxious Weed Species By Alternative ....................... 185 

Table 39. Douglas-fir Percent Sound Board Foot Volume .................................. 190 

Table 40. Total Harvest Acres Planted and Percent of Harvest Area Planted by 

Alternative ........................................................................................ 194 

Table 41. Total Acres of Management Activities That Would Lead to Vegetative 

Regrowth and Forest Succession ............................................................... 195 

Table 42. Stream Temperature Data During the Warmest Seven-Day Periods of 

1999-2001.......................................................................................... 199 

Table 43. Riparian Reserve Conditions, Past and Present ................................. 200 

Table 44. Effective Shade Distances for Tree Diameter Classes Slated for Riparian 

Treatment Under Alternative 4 ................................................................ 203 

Table 45. Alternative 4 Fuels Treatment within the Riparian Reserves of Class III 

Streams ............................................................................................ 204 
Contents 

v

PAGE

Table 46. Summary of USGS Water Quality Sampling From 1995 and Post-Fire 

Sampling in 2003 ................................................................................. 207 

Table 47. Estimated Dust Abatement Applications by Road Segment for the Baked 

Apple Action Alternatives....................................................................... 208 

Table 48. Hydrologic Recovery Following Previous Timber Harvest and Prior to the 

2002 Apple Fire ................................................................................... 215 

Table 49. Susceptibility to Peak Flow Increases and Elevated Hydrologic Risk Due To 

Reduction Of Canopy Closure (<70%) due to the Apple Fire............................... 217 

Table 50. Estimated Channel Extension from Ditch lines in the Baked Apple Planning 

Area................................................................................................. 218 

Table 51. Landslides Identified by Aerial Photo Interpretation Within the Baked 

Apple Planning Area (from the 2001 Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis....... 222 

Table 52. Planning Area Acreage by SHALSTAB Risk Category ............................ 225 

Table 53. Acres of Salvage by Alternative Proposed for Harvest Within Areas 

Mapped by the SHALSTAB Model ‘At Maximum Risk’ For Rapid-Shallow 

Land Sliding ....................................................................................... 228 

Table 54. Large Wood Recruitment Due to BAER Projects and Future Recruitment 

Potential From Burned Late-Seral Riparian Areas........................................... 236 

Table 55. Levels of Effective Ground Cover (EGC) by Alternative ....................... 242 

Table 56. Timber Sale Road Maintenance Activities by Alternative...................... 255 

Table 57. Drainage Areas that Experienced Stand Replacing Fire in 2002 .............. 267 

Table 58. Environmental Baseline and Effects of the Baked Apple Action 

Alternatives on NOAA Indicators at the Scale of the Panther Creek 6th Field SubWatershed ......................................................................................... 279 

Table 59. Environmental Baseline and Effects of the Baked Apple Action 

Alternatives on NOAA Indicators at the Scale of the Middle North Umpqua 5th Field 

Sub-watershed .................................................................................... 280 

Table 60. Effects Determination for PETS Aquatic Species................................ 284 

Table 61. Ranking the Risk Associated With Each Alternative Within the Range 

of the Effects Determination ................................................................... 285 

Table 62. Douglas County Economic Sectors................................................. 288 

Table 63. Forest Service Planning Costs ...................................................... 289 

Table 64. Economic Efficiency Analysis....................................................... 290 

Table 65. Effect of Log Price Decline on NPV................................................ 291 

Table 66. Economic Impact Analysis .......................................................... 293 

Table 67. Primary Sectors for Job Creation.................................................. 294 

Table 68. Average Log Prices................................................................... 296 

Table 69. Pounds of Emissions Produced Per Ton of Fuel Consumed .................... 305 

Table 70. Smoke Management Options ....................................................... 305 

Table 71. Acres of Treatment and Predicted Emissions for Each Alternative .......... 307 

Table 72. Comments Received on the DEIS, by Subject of Concern, and the Forest 

Service’s Response ............................................................................... 328 

 
Contents 

vi

List of Figures ..................................................................................PAGE 

Figure 1. High Intensity Fire Area, 2002 Apple Fire............................................ 1 

Figure 2. Planning Area Overview ................................................................ 7 

Figure 3. Example of Salvaged Trees............................................................. 8 

Figure 4. Landscape Areas in the Middle North Umpqua.................................... 13 

Figure 5. No Action – Alternative 1 ............................................................. 22 

Figure 6. Alternative 2 – Proposed Salvage Units............................................. 24 

Figure 7. Alternative 3 – Proposed Salvage Units............................................. 30 

Figure 8. Fuels Treatment for Class I and II Streams ........................................ 36 

Figure 9. Fuels Treatment for Class II and III Streams....................................... 36 

Figure 10. Alternative 4 – Proposed Salvage Units ........................................... 37 

Figure 11. Alternative 5 – Proposed Salvage Units ........................................... 44 

Figure 12. Alternative 6 – Proposed Salvage Units ........................................... 50 

Figure 13. Fires Per Decade in the Baked Apple Planning Area............................ 74 

Figure 14. Fuel Model 5 .......................................................................... 76 

Figure 15. Fuel Model 10 ......................................................................... 76 

Figure 16. Umpqua National Forest Fire Regimes and 2002 Fire Perimeters ............ 78 

Figure 17. Snag Fall That Has Occurred in the Seven Years Since the 

1996 Spring Fire ................................................................................... 80 

Figure 18. Snag Fall That Has Occurred in the Seven Years Since the 

1996 Spring Fire ................................................................................... 80 

Figure 19. Baked Apple Unit 89, Fuel Consumption ......................................... 81 

Figure 20. Baked Apple Unit 15, Fire Effects ................................................. 81 

Figure 21. Baked Apple Unit 37, Fire Effects ................................................. 81 

Figure 22. The 2002 Apple Fire Smoke Column............................................... 82 

Figure 23. Fire Regimes in the Apple Area .................................................... 83 

Figure 24. Fuel Model 8 in an Unburned Stand ............................................... 85 

Figure 25. Fuel Model 11 ......................................................................... 87 

Figure 26. Fuel Model 12 ......................................................................... 88 

Figure 27. Calibration of FARSITE Model, with Logical Human Caused Ignition Point.. 90 

Figure 28. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 1.............................................. 91 

Figure 29. Predicted FARSITE Acres of Fire Spread in 25 Years............................ 92 

Figure 30. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 2.............................................. 95 

Figure 31. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 3.............................................. 97 

Figure 32. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 4.............................................. 99 

Figure 33. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 5............................................. 102 

Figure 34. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 6............................................. 105 

Figure 35. Fuel Models in the Middle North Umpqua Watershed ......................... 106 

Figure 36. Habitat Conditions in the Planning Area ........................................ 111 

Figure 37. Comparison of Alternatives Direct Impacts to Early-Successional Habitat. 114 

Figure 38. Comparison of Alternative Impacts to Early-Successional Habitat Based 

on Acres Being Planted With Conifer.......................................................... 114 

Figure 39. Comparison of Cumulative Impacts to Early-Successional Habitat and 

Related Wildlife Species ........................................................................ 115 

Figure 40. Comparison of Alternative Impacts to Late-Successional Habitat........... 117 

Figure 41. Proposed Salvage Units in Relationship to Late-Successional Forest by 

Alternative Within the Planning Area ......................................................... 119 

Figure 42. Cumulative Effects to Late-Successional Habitat Within the Larger 

Middle North Umpqua River Watershed....................................................... 120 
Contents 

vii

PAGE

Figure 43. Comparison of Leave Tree (Snags) Retention by Alternative ................ 123 

Figure 44. Comparison of Mean Snag Levels for the Planning Area ...................... 126 

Figure 45. Example of the Spatial Distribution of Dead Tree Patches Which Would 

be Salvaged by Alternative ..................................................................... 125 

Figure 46. Post-Fire Changes in Percent Ground Coverage of Down Wood From 

the Snag and Log Inventory..................................................................... 126 

Figure 47. Mean Decay Class 4-5 Snag and Log Levels for Two Main Plant 

Association Groups ............................................................................... 128 

Figure 48. Comparison of Landscape Levels of High Density (snag/acre) Dead Tree 

Patches/Habitat Left in the Planning Area................................................... 128 

Figure 49. Comparison of Potential Noise Disturbance Effects Caused by Timber 

Harvesting and Related Activities ............................................................. 133 

Figure 50. Comparison of Potential Future Habitat Loss and Cumulative Effects 

From Future Fire as Modeled by FARSITE..................................................... 134 

Figure 51. Comparison of Percent Area with dead tree patches 

(unsalvaged fire-killed forest stands) Within the Falcon Management Zones .......... 139 

Figure 52. Comparison of Direct Effects From Burning in Riparian Habitats to 

Reduce Fuels ...................................................................................... 145 

Figure 53. Comparison of Direct Impacts to the Orange-Crowned Warbler............. 156 

Figure 54. Erosion Hazard for the Planning Area............................................ 161 

Figure 55. Unsuitable Soils within the Baked Apple Planning Area....................... 163 

Figure 56. 2002 Apple Fire Soil Burn Severity Map.......................................... 164 

Figure 56A. Example of Salvage Areas with Severe Fire Effects and Regeneration 

Limitations ........................................................................................ 168 

Figure 56B. Fuel Treatment Prescriptions by Alternative ................................. 170 

Figure 56C. Severe Burn Effects and Regeneration Limitations by Alternative ........ 172 

Figure 56D. Average Leave Trees per acre on Poor Sites .................................. 174 

Figure 57. Riparian Width Contributing Shade Based on Tree Height and 50% 

hillslope............................................................................................ 202 

Figure 58. The Effective Shade Zone.......................................................... 202 

Figure 59. Clearcut Harvest within the Planning Area by Decade........................ 215 

Figure 60. Baked Apple Planning Area Susceptibility to Peak Flow Increases and 

Elevated Hydrologic Risk ........................................................................ 216 

Figure 61. The Debris Flow Process ........................................................... 221 

Figure 62. Period of Diminished Tree Root Reinforcement Following Timber 

Harvest After Severe Wildfire .................................................................. 224 

Figure 63. SHALSTAB Map Used to Predict the Occurrence of Shallow-Rapid 

Landslides ......................................................................................... 226 

Figure 64. Channels Treated with the Addition of Large Wood During Post-Fire 

Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) Efforts........................................... 234 

Figure 65. Riparian Areas of Late-Successional Forest That Experienced Stand 

Replacement Fire that are Expected to Provide Recruitment into the Mainstem ..... 235 

Figure 66. Estimates of Tons of Sediment from Surface Erosion for 2001 

Through 2006...................................................................................... 244 

Figure 67. Fish Distribution in the Portion of the Middle North Umpqua 5th Field 

Watershed Managed by the Forest Service................................................... 261 

Figure 68. NPV & Return to Treasury ......................................................... 291 

Figure 69. Logging Cost vs. B/C................................................................ 292 
Contents 

viii

 PAGE

Figure 70. Jobs Created by Alternative....................................................... 294 

Figure 71. Average Delivered Log Prices ..................................................... 296 

REFERENCES ........................................................................References – 1 

GLOSSARY .............................................................................. Glossary – 1 

INDEX........................................................................................ Index – 1 

 

APPENDIX AA – Letters from governments, etc ...........................Appendix AA – 1 

 

APPENDICES – available on-line, via CD, or by request (for paper copy). 

Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis Recommendations 

That Apply to the Baked Apple Fire Salvage .................................. Appendix – A 

Best Management Practices Checklist........................................... Appendix – B 

Issues Relating to Beschta et. al. 1995 ......................................... Appendix – C 

Terrestrial Specialists Reports.................................................... Appendix – D 

Aquatic Specialists Reports........................................................ Appendix – E 

Social Specialists Reports .......................................................... Appendix – F 
DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION 

 

Chapter 5 responds to the public comments that 

were received during the 45-day comment period 

on the Draft EIS. 

Purpose 

& Need 

1

Alternatives

2 

Affected 

Environment & 

Environmental 

Consequences 

3 

List of Preparers

4 

Chapter 1 describes the “purpose and need” for action, identifies the 

project area, summarizes the proposed action, lists public issues 

surrounding the proposed action and discusses other considerations. 

Chapter 2 presents and compares the alternatives, including the 

no-action alternative, and mitigation and monitoring measures. 

Chapter 3 describes the environment that could be 

affected by each alternative and the direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects likely to occur with implementation. 

Chapter 4 lists preparers of the FEIS. 

The Index provides page number 

references for key topics 

discussed in the FEIS. 

Response to 

Public Comments

5

References 

Glossary The Glossary defines terms used in 

the FEIS. 

Index 

The Reference section lists the 

literature cited in the FEIS. 
This page intentionally left blank. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

1

Figure 1. High Intensity Fire Area, 2002 Apple Fire

CHAPTER 1 

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 

INTRODUCTION

Chapter 1 describes the purpose and need for action and the proposed action for the 

Baked Apple Fire Salvage Project. The chapter also identifies the project area, outlines 

applicable management direction, addresses the scope of the decision, summarizes the 

scoping process, and lists the issues identified during scoping. This chapter also highlights 

the changes made between the Draft and Final EIS. 

This analysis is tiered to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the 1990 

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

1994 Record of Decision (ROD) for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land 

Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl 

(Northwest Forest Plan) and its amendments. This analysis also incorporates by reference 

the Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis (WA) (USDA 2001) and the Wildfire Effects 

Evaluation Project (USDA 2003) and the Burned Area Emergency Response Report (2002). 

CHANGES BETWEEN DRAFT AND FINAL 

The FEIS contains a number of refinements and clarifications based on comments received 

during the 45-day comment period, and as a result of other changes in the Region 

(changes to the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS), Survey and Manage Species, and a 

status change of the coho salmon from Threatened to Sensitive). Each chapter documents 

the changes that occurred between draft and final. For Chapter 1, commenters requested 

further information on total acres burned by the Apple Fire that would not be salvaged, 

information on other fires in the Middle North Umpqua watershed that occurred in 2002, 

additional information on the beneficial effects (financial) of the underburning that 

affected the lands in the planning area, and additional information on how the proposed 

action was developed. 

THE 2002 APPLE FIRE 

The Apple Fire, which started on August 

16, 2002, burned almost 17,900 acres of 

early, mid, and late seral forests on the 

North Umpqua Ranger District. The 

human-caused fire burned in steep terrain 

during “explosive” conditions, as 

temperatures soared into the 90’s, the 

relative humidity dropped into the teens, 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

2

with winds over 10 miles per hour. Burning conditions were considered extreme. 

Resources, including hand crews, engines, and helicopters, were quickly mobilized, but 

could not halt the spread of the fire that continued to torch trees and burn through tree 

canopies. Spot fires were being reported over a mile away from the main fire. The Dry 

Creek Community, located four miles to the East, was alerted and structure protection 

measures were put in place. Nearby campgrounds were evacuated, the Calf Segment of 

the North Umpqua River was closed to hikers, while the North Umpqua River was closed to 

rafters. After 14 hours, over 2,300 acres had burned. Additional personnel were ordered, 

including an Incident Management Team, who would take over management of the fire, as 

Forest resources were being stretched thin. The fire continued to actively burn, and by 

the end of the second day, a total of 5,100 acres had been scorched. The fire burned the 

hottest in Limpy Creek, where large swaths of forest over a 4,000 acre area were burned 

(Figure 1). Firefighting resources continued to arrive and fire camp was established on 

private land in Glide, Oregon. Over the next few weeks, over 1,200 people were 

mobilized to fight the fire. By the time the fire was contained (control lines surrounded 

the fire, preventing its further spread) in September 2002, the fire had burned with high 

intensity1

 over 5,460 acres, burned with a mosaic pattern on almost 1,890 acres, and 

underburned over 9,560 acres (roads and natural openings are not included in acreage 

totals) as shown in Table A. Suppression costs for the Apple Fire totaled over 

$16,500,000. 

Table A. Acres burned within the 2002 Apple Fire by land allocation. 

Seral Stage/Burn 

Intensity 

Acres Burned in 

Planning Area 

(Matrix Only) 

Acres Burned in Planning 

Area in Matrix Land minus 

the Riparian Reserves and 

Unsuitable Soils 

Acres Burned by 2002 

Apple Fire (Matrix and 

LSR Total, with riparian 

and unsuitable soils) 

Stand Replaced 

Late Seral (Burned 

and Scorched) 

2066 1200 2947 

Underburned 

Mid/Late Seral 3718 2300 9566 

Stand Replaced 

(Older Plantation) 991 655 1250 

Stand Replaced 

(Younger 

Plantation) 

968 648 1259 

Mosaic Burned 

(Plantation) 950 544 1163 

Underburned 

(Plantation) 513 328 726 

Hardwoods/ 

Natural Openings 146 110 395 

Roads 456 315 568 

TOTAL 9,808 6,100 17,874 

Table A shows that the 2002 Apple Fire burned 9,808 acres in the matrix land allocation, 

and 8,066 acres in the Late Successional Reserve. Within the Matrix and outside of 

 

1

 Fire intensity describes the rate at which a fire produces heat and is influenced by the amount of fuel (dead 

and live woody material) available, local weather conditions, and the topography of the site. It also refers to 

how the fire affected the canopy. In a high intensity fire, most, if not all of the canopy is burned, resulting in 

a stand replacement fire. In a moderate intensity fire, pockets of trees are stand replaced, while other parts 

are underburned. In a low intensity fire, most of the stand experiences a ground fire, with individual trees 

burned or killed by the fire. In a mosaic burn, there are pockets of low, moderate and high fire intensity. In 

an underburn, ground fuels are consumed, but the tree canopy remains primarily unburned. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

3

riparian reserves and unsuitable soils, a total of 6,100 acres burned. Salvage proposals in 

this FEIS would treat at most 1,273 acres under Alternative 4 (20.8%), followed by 1,075 

acres in Alternative 2 (17.6%), 934 acres in Alternative 6 (15%), 880 acres in Alternative 3 

(14.4%), and 435 acres in Alternative 5 (7.1%). 

When considering the entire 2002 Apple Fire (all land allocations), the proposal for 

salvage would affect less than 8% of the area burned, as displayed below (alternatives are 

listed in order of most fire area treated to the least fire area salvaged): 

Alt 4 = 7.12% 

Alt 2 = 6.01% 

Alt 6 = 5.23% 

Alt 3 = 4.92% 

Alt 5 = 2.43% 

Comments received during the 45-day public comment period requested estimates of the 

volume of the merchantable timber that burned at high intensity in the fire. The area is 

estimated to have had about 45 thousand board feet (MBF) of timber per acre (C. Adams, 

personal communication). This calculates to about 132,615,000 board feet of timber that 

was killed by the fire (2,947 acres of high intensity. When considering the older 

plantations that were stand replaced (with an average of 7,000 board feet per acre), an 

additional 8,750,000 board feet was killed. 

Comments received during the 45-day public comment period requested estimates of the 

value of the underburning that occurred during the fire. The acreage of underburn that 

had a beneficial effect of reducing fuels was originally disclosed on page 9 of the DEIS and 

is now disclosed on page 13. About 9,520 acres of land identified as late-seral prone to 

fire in the Watershed Analysis was underburned. In addition, about 3,663 acres of late 

seral stands not identified as prone to fire were underburned in the planning area, also 

reducing fuels. It currently costs the Forest between $364-$795 per acre to underburn a 

late-successional stand. For the 9,520 acres of late successional forest that underburned 

within the 18,000-acre fire area, this would equate to between $3.4 and $7.5 million 

dollars. For the 3,663 acres of mid-late seral forests that were underburned, the cost of 

accomplishing this would equate to between $1.3 and $2.9 million dollars. 

Apple Fire Suppression and Rehabilitation 

Within the Panther Creek subwatershed, suppression of the Apple Fire utilized primarily 

indirect suppression techniques, meaning that the fire was suppressed using methods that 

did not put firefighters directly next to the burning fire front. Suppression activities are 

summarized in Table 9 in Chapter 3. Suppression activities included construction of over 

10 miles of dozer line, which ranged from 8 to 16 feet in width and construction of just 

over 1 mile of 24 inch wide hand line. All lines were dug to mineral soil. Over 1,000 acres 

were intentionally burned during “burnout” operations, where fuels between the main 

fire and the suppression lines are burned in order to control and stop the spread of the 

main fire. Fire retardant, a mixture of water and chemicals that slow the spread of fire, 

was dropped on hot spots by helicopters carrying buckets of the retardant mixture from 

the mixing site, located in a rock quarry off Road 4714 (T27S, R01E, Sec. 9) to the fire. 

Safety zones, drop points, and helicopter landing spots were constructed; about 3.4 acres 

of land were cleared. Roads were brushed and graded so that safe driving conditions for 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

4

firefighting personnel were maintained and trees considered a hazard along roadways 

were felled. 

Rehabilitation (rehab) of fire lines was initiated in September 2002 after it was 

determined that the fire would no longer threaten the area; water bars were dug to slow 

potential erosion and divert water off of the fire line. Vegetation cut during line 

construction or burned sticks and branches were pulled onto the fire lines to restore 

nutrients to the soil and lessen surface erosion. Safety zones, drop points, and helicopter 

landing spots were seeded with western fescue to prevent erosion. Additionally, teams of 

resource specialists began to determine rehabilitation needs. A Burned Area Emergency 

Response (BAER) Plan (located in the Project Record) was established and funding was 

sought to begin rehab work. Table 9 in Chapter 3 displays the BAER work that was 

completed and will continue within the perimeter of the Apple Fire. Road maintenance, 

road reconstruction, reforestation, instream log placement, and adding wood to small 

stream channels was accomplished under the BAER plan during the fall of 2002 and winter 

2003. 

Resource specialists began reconnaissance of the Apple Fire in October of 2002 to 

determine if salvage of burned trees was feasible. Under the 1990 LRMP (USDA 1990), 

salvage is permitted on lands suitable for timber production (IV-42). Initial field 

reconnaissance focused on the burned area within the Matrix land allocation; initially over 

2,500 acres were looked at for potential salvage. Following intensive field reconnaissance 

over the winter of 2003, the Forest Service drafted a proposal for salvage that 

encompassed about 1,075 acres and initiated the environmental review process. 

Concurrently with this process, the Forest completed a report that documented the postfire conditions that existed across the forest. This document, the Wildfire Effects 

Evaluation Project (WEEP), describes the pre-fire and post-fire conditions of the forest 

following the record-setting fire season of 2002, which includes the effects of the fires in 

the North Umpqua Complex, the Apple Fire, and Tiller Complex (USDA 2003). 

Comments received on the Baked Apple Fire Salvage DEIS indicated a desire to see a 

display of the acreage of merchantable timber that was killed during the entire fire 

season of 2002 in the North Umpqua Watershed. Within in the North Umpqua watershed, 

the other 2002 fires that burned merchantable timber included the Limpy Fire and the 

Calf 2 Fire (Table B). The Johnson Butte Fire burned in the Steamboat subwatershed, 

which is within the Late Successional Reserve in Steamboat Creek. That fire burned about 

240 acres; 33 acres burned at high intensity. 

The 68,862 acres burned on the Tiller Complex fires occurred primarily within the Late 

Successional Reserve; about 10,500 acres burned at high intensity, but are in scattered 

pockets throughout the Complex. These fires are located from 5-12 miles south of the 

Baked Apple planning area. Currently, salvage on the Tiller complex is proposed on about 

375 acres in Matrix land. An additional salvage proposal for a portion of the Tiller 

complex within the LSR may be considered. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

5

Table B. Acres of late seral forest burned within the North Umpqua 5th field 

watershed by land allocation.

Fire Name Acres of Late 

Seral forest 

burned at high 

intensity 

Total Acres 

affected by 

fire (all 

intensities) 

Land Allocation Acres proposed 

for salvage 

Calf 2 51 346 Late Successional Reserve, 

Riparian Reserve 

0 

Limpy 92 859 Late Successional Reserve, 

Riparian Reserve 

0 

Apple 2,947 17,874 Matrix, Late Successional 

Reserve, Riparian Reserve, 

Congressionally Withdrawn 

Ranges between 

435 to over 1,400 

TOTALS 3,090 19,079 2.2% to 7% of 

the burned late 

seral stands in 

the Middle North 

Umpqua are 

proposed for 

salvaged. 

 

Planning Area Overview 

The proposed action is within the Middle North Umpqua 5th field watershed2

 on the North 

Umpqua Ranger District (Figure 2). The planning area is located within the Panther Creek 

6th field sub-watershed, which define the planning area. A small portion of the South 

Apple Facial subwatershed (1,760 acres) is also included; for simplicity, it will be 

incorporated into the description of the Panther Creek subwatershed. The planning area 

covers 13,925 acres of western cascade coniferous forest. Elevations range from 1,280 

feet at the confluence of Panther Creek and the North Umpqua River, to just over 4,500 

feet at the top of Bachelor Butte and over 4,900 feet near Lookout Mountain. 

Natural resources include clean water, timber, recreation, fish, wildlife and others. The 

forests range from dry Douglas-fir and western hemlock to white and silver fir in the 

higher elevations. Sugar pine was noted along the river corridor. Forested landscape 

patterns have been historically influenced by wildfire which occurred with regular 

frequency within the planning area. Small dry, rocky openings punctuate the forest, 

especially along the steep slopes and ridgetops. 

The Wild and Scenic North Umpqua River forms the northern edge of the planning area 

and is renowned for its fishery and recreational opportunities. Designated as a 

recreational river in 1988, the river and its’ corridor receive heavy use from white water 

 

2

 Fifth-field watersheds can range in size from 40,000 to 250,000 acres and are made up of multiple 6th field 

watersheds. Sixth-field watersheds can range in size from 10,000 to 40,000 acres, with some as small as 3,000 

acres. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

6

boaters and hikers. Beneficial uses of the North Umpqua River and its tributaries include 

public and private domestic water supply; industrial water supply, irrigation; livestock 

watering, anadromous fish passage, spawning and rearing; resident fish and aquatic life 

use; wildlife use and hunting; fishing; boating; water contact recreation; aesthetic 

quality; and hydropower. 

The planning area is bounded to the North by the North Umpqua River, to the South by the 

North Umpqua River/Little River Divide, to the East by Calf Ridge, and to the West by 

Panther Ridge. The planning area includes all or portions of sections 9, 10, and 14 

through 36, T26S, R1E; sections 19 and 30, T26S, R2E; and sections 2 through 5, and 9 

through 11, T27S, R1E, Willamette Meridian, Douglas County, Oregon. Within the planning 

area, the 2002 Apple Fire stand-replaced about 2,066 acres and underburned 3,705 acres 

of what was mid or late seral forest before the fire, and stand-replaced about 1,942 acres 

and mosaic burned about 935 acres of what were plantations prior to the fire. The rest of 

the planning area was either unburned or lies outside of the fire boundary. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

7

Figure 2. Planning Area Overview
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

8

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 

The proposed action is based on the need to recover the economic value of the burned 

wood in areas that were stand replaced in the Panther Creek subwatershed before it 

decays and to reduce existing and created fuels in the burned area. The overall goal for 

land management in the Middle North Umpqua watershed is to move it towards the 

desired future condition of a healthy, productive forest that will provide the range of 

forest commodities described in the watershed analysis document on a long-term, 

sustainable basis (USDA 2001). The difference between the existing conditions and the 

desired conditions defines the purpose of and need for action in terms of elements that 

can be measured. These ‘elements’ are: 

Element 1 – Timber Salvage and Reforestation 

The timber salvage proposal is based on the need to recover dead merchantable timber 

before its value is lost to decay and deterioration. Over 2,000 acres of the mid and late 

seral forest within the planning area burned at high intensity. The removal of some of the 

dead3

 trees (Figure 3) that burned would cover the cost of both the removal and the 

revegetation of the area, and would restore the area to the desired condition of a 

productive forest. The planning area is allocated as Matrix land in the Northwest Forest 

Plan, where timber harvest is a primary goal. Salvaging some of the burned dead trees 

and reforesting the area complies with direction in the Northwest Forest Plan and moves 

the existing condition of a burned landscape toward the desired condition of a forested 

landscape capable of supporting timber production. 

Element 1 will be measured by: 

• Volume and acreage of timber salvaged under each alternative 

• Acres of reforestation (and subsequent survival) 

 

Figure 3. Dead trees would be salvaged, such as those on the left, while green trees 

shown on the right would remain, except those felled for safety, in logging corridors, 

or on temporary roads. 

 

3

 This salvage proposal would remove only dead trees. Dead trees are those that have no visible green needles 

at the time of marking. The only green trees that would be felled would be those that are considered danger 

trees along roads or landings, those that are in logging corridors, or those that are in the path of temporary 

roads that would be constructed. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

9

Element 2 – Hazardous Fuels Reduction 

The slash treatment proposal is based on the need to reduce activity-generated and 

existing dead fuels in order to keep fuel loads within parameters prescribed by the Forest. 

Currently, fuel loads within some of the areas burned by the fire exceed 300 tons per 

acre. If all of this biomass were left standing, within 25 years, it is predicted that over 

700 tons per acre of fuels would cover the ground on areas that currently have high fuel 

loads. Salvage activities would reduce the fuels that were created by the fire. Treating 

the slash would reduce additional fuels to a level that would reduce the risk of 

contributing to future fire intensity and spread. 

Element 2 will be measured by: 

• Range of tons per acre of hazardous fuels remaining on the salvage units under 

each alternative 

• Predicted future wildfire size 

PROPOSED ACTION 

Comments received on the DEIS requested additional information as to how the proposed 

action was developed and why so many areas were never looked at. The proposed action 

was developed following extensive field reconnaissance of the fire area. The District 

Ranger provided direction to the team, both verbally during initial field reconnaissance 

and in the Project Initiation Letter (03/07/03). In the letter, she directed the team to 

focus salvage on merchantable timber within the most severely burned portions of the 

13,925 acre Panther Creek subwatershed that are within the Matrix land allocation. The 

Ranger directed the team to focus on a proposal that would specifically avoid all roadless 

areas, the wild and scenic river corridor and the visually sensitive areas within the 

corridor, spotted owl cores, all lands that are classified as unsuitable, unstable, or within 

riparian reserves, and avoids all known cultural resources. Additional project area 

guidelines were set by requiring the team to: 

• Minimize impacts to water quality by utilizing helicopter systems when possible. 

• Minimize impacts to water quality by maintaining full Riparian Reserves. 

• Utilize existing roads where possible - no new permanent roads were to be built. 

New temporary ridge-top roads may be constructed, used and decommissioned 

within one season. 

• Maintain unique habitats. 

• Minimize impacts to unsuitable and sensitive soils. 

• Ensure that down wood and snag requirements for wildlife needs and long-term 

site productivity are met. 

From the 2,500 acres initially evaluated, the team followed the District Ranger’s direction 

and eliminated riparian reserves, unsuitable soils areas, the Wild and Scenic River 

corridor, logistically unfeasible areas, areas with too small of trees, and other areas of 

concern. The resultant proposed action was developed and is described below. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

10

For the Baked Apple Fire Salvage Project, the North Umpqua Ranger District, Umpqua 

National Forest proposes to: 

• Salvage approximately 1,075 acres of dead trees in burned stands within the 

Panther Creek subwatershed that, before the fire, were late-seral or mid-seral 

forest (Figure 6). 

• Retaining between 6 and 12 trees per acre for shade, large wood, and snag 

habitat; 

• Reforest and protect seedlings on 957 acres that would be salvaged; 

• Treat logging-created slash4

 on 1,030 acres that would be salvaged; 

• Complete haul related road work that includes commercial use of 55 miles of road, 

and reconstruction (replacing plugged culverts and stabilizing slopes) of 2 sites 

along Forest Service Road 4714; 

• Construct (about 0.80 miles) and reconstruct (about 0.44 miles) temporary spur 

roads (non-system roads used for logging only, decommissioned after use); 

• Reconstruct or expand up to 35 landings, construct 4 new landings (totaling about 

3 acres), and use 2 existing rock pits to facilitate logging and log haul. 

The areas prescribed for salvage would utilize a combination of helicopter (601 acres), 

skyline (443 acres) and loader (30 acres) harvesting equipment. The proposed action is 

expected to yield about 44 million board feet of timber. Felling and retention of 2 snags 

per acre on all salvage units to provide down woody debris would occur to maintain and 

enhance soil productivity. Green trees, where they exist, are retained within the salvage 

units; however, some green trees would be felled for safety throughout the planning area 

along roads, around landings, and in skyline corridors. The proposed action specifically 

avoids salvage in riparian reserves, known cultural resources, late-successional reserves, 

wilderness areas and inventoried roadless areas. There are no salvage units within the 

North Umpqua Wild and Scenic River Corridor. No amendments to the Forest Plan are 

proposed. 

DECISIONS TO BE MADE BASED ON THIS ANALYSIS 

Based on the analysis documented in this environmental impact statement, the 

Responsible Official, the District Ranger of the North Umpqua Ranger District, will make 

the following decisions: 

• To implement this project as proposed; to implement a modified version 

(alternative) of this project which addresses unresolved issues; or not implement 

this project at this time; 

• To decide which management requirements, mitigation measures, monitoring and 

water quality best management practices are necessary to achieve resource goals, 

objectives and the desired future condition. 

 

4

 Slash treatment includes under/broadcast burning, grapple piling and burning the piles, hand piling and 

burning the piles, and yarding tops of the trees to the landing while still attached to the logs. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

11

RELATIONSHIP TO FOREST PLANS, ROADS ANALYSIS, THE PROJECT 

RECORD, AND THE MIDDLE NORTH UMPQUA WATERSHED ANALYSIS 

Forest Plan: The 1990 Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 

(LRMP) and its amendments to date, including the 1994 Record of Decision (ROD) for 

Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents 

Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl, provide broad management direction for 

the proposed action. The project area is identified as Management Areas5

 7, 10, and 11 in 

the LRMP. The proposed action would occur within the Matrix land allocation as described 

by the ROD; matrix land is where most scheduled timber harvest on the Forest is to occur. 

Riparian Reserves are also located in the project area. All applicable Standards and 

Guidelines were applied in deriving the proposed action and alternatives to the proposed 

action. 

Roads Analysis: A roads analysis for the planning area was completed in July of 2003. 

This analysis led to recommendations for future road work within the planning area; 

future road work would be considered under a separate analysis. 

Project Record: This FEIS hereby incorporates by reference the Project Record (40 CFR 

1502.21). Chapter 3 provides a summary of the Specialist Reports in adequate detail to 

support the rationale for the decisions and the appendices provide supporting 

documentation. The Project Record contains Specialist Reports and other technical 

documentation used to support the analysis and conclusions in this FEIS. The Specialist 

Reports incorporated by reference are for Forest Vegetation, Insects and Disease, Fire and 

Fuels, Air Quality Wildlife, Soils, Hydrology, Fisheries, Geology, Scenery, Recreation, 

Botany and Noxious Weeds, Cultural Resources, Safety, Roads, Logging Systems, and 

Socio-Economics. 

Incorporating these Specialist Reports and the Project Record helps implement the CEQ 

Regulations provision that agencies should reduce NEPA paperwork (40 CFR 1500.4), that 

EISs shall be “analytic rather than encyclopedic, and that EISs shall be kept concise and no 

longer than absolutely necessary” (40 CFR 1502.2). The objective is to furnish adequate 

site-specific information to demonstrate a reasoned consideration of the environmental 

impacts of the alternatives and how these impacts can be mitigated, without repeating 

detailed analysis and background information available elsewhere. The Project Record is 

available for review at the North Umpqua Ranger District Office, 18782 North Umpqua 

Highway, Glide, OR 97443, Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

Watershed Analysis: Watershed Analysis, one of the four components of the Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy (ACS), was completed in the Middle North Umpqua 5th Field 

Watershed in 2001. The ACS was developed to restore and maintain the long-term 

ecological health of watersheds and aquatic ecosystems. This strategy is applied over 

broad landscapes, as opposed to individual projects or small watersheds. The ACS seeks 

to accomplish this goal by maintaining the natural disturbance regime which operates over 

long time scales, on the order of decades or longer (USDA/USDI 1994). To help attain the 

goal of the ACS, a landscape plan was developed in the Middle North Umpqua watershed 

analysis that would re-establish landscape patterns associated with the local natural 

 

5

 Management Area 7 will be managed to protect outstandingly remarkable values as part of the North 

Umpqua Wild and Scenic River – no activities are proposed in the Wild and Scenic River Corridor; Management 

Area 10 is managed for producing timber on a cost-efficient sustainable basis; and Management Area 11 is 

managed to provide big game winter range habitat and timber production. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

12

disturbance regime (USDA 2001). The 2001 Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis (WA) 

documents historic, existing and desired conditions for the 5th field watershed; the Baked 

Apple Planning Area is part of this 5th field watershed. A summary of all recommendations 

and how they apply to the planning area are described in detail in the document titled 

“Recommendations that Apply to the Baked Apple Fire Salvage,” incorporated by 

reference and found in the Project Record. 

Goals and Desired Condition Described for the Watershed in the Watershed Analysis: 

The overall goal for land management in the Middle North Umpqua watershed is to move 

it towards the desired condition of a healthy, productive forest that provides a range of 

forest commodities on a long-term, sustainable basis (USDA 2001). Within the Matrix land 

allocation, the emphasis is to provide a predictable and sustainable level of timber into 

the future using a scientifically sound and ecologically credible plan (USDA 2001). 

The watershed analysis uses concepts similar to those in the Blue River and Augusta Creek 

management plans (Cissel et al. 1998 & 2002) to describe landscape patterns. These 

concepts were used for recommending future management actions designed to move the 

forest landscape patterns back toward the natural pattern established historically by fire. 

Using landscape planning and information specific to the watershed, the Middle North 

Umpqua watershed was divided into four ecologically different Landscape Areas based on 

the disturbance regime, broad environmental gradients, and forest types that are 

described in the WA. These include the Steep/Dry, Moderate, High Elevation, and 

Gentle/Moist Landscape Areas. 

Two primary Landscape Areas are found within the Baked Apple Planning Area (Figure 4). 

These are the “Steep/Dry” and “Moderate” Landscape Areas. The western portion of the 

planning area lies within the Gentle/Moist Landscape Area; however, only about 35 acres 

of proposed salvage units lie within this zone. A small portion of the High Elevation 

Landscape Area is located at the south end of the planning area. Only 11 acres of this 

landscape area are proposed for salvage. 

The 2002 Apple Fire demonstrated that the majority of the Limpy/Bachelor Creek area 

responded predictably as a Steep/Dry Landscape Area; a similar, stand replacing fire 

occurred in this area about 120 years ago. The landscape area map that was created in 

the Watershed Analysis can be adjusted to encompass the boundary of the 2002 Apple Fire 

to further refine the Landscape Area maps. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

13

Figure 4. Landscape Areas in the Middle North Umpqua 5th Field Watershed, which 

includes the Baked Apple Planning Area. 

The proposed salvage and related activities would implement many of the Middle North 

Umpqua Watershed Analysis recommendations; some of these recommendations, which 

are bolded, with a brief response in italics, are listed below: 

1) Fuels Reduction - The fire reduced fuels by underburning about 9,520 acres of 

land identified as late-seral prone to fire in the Watershed Analysis. In addition, 

about 3,663 acres of late seral stands not identified as prone to fire were 

underburned in the planning area, also reducing fuels. However, the fire created 

a future fuels hazard in the areas that were burned at high intensity. This 

project would reduce that future fire hazard. 

2) Timber Harvesting – Timber management in the form of salvage is proposed 

with this project. 

3) Road Analysis – A roads analysis was completed as described above.

4) Revegetation and use of native plants - About 20 acres of seeding with blue 

wild rye occurred within the fire area to help lessen noxious weed infestations. 

Native species are also proposed for use with this project during reforestation. 

Baked Apple

Planning Area 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

14

SCOPING 

Scoping (a process used to surface issues) for the Baked Apple Fire Salvage project began 

with several public forums and meetings after the fire was contained6

. A town hall 

meeting to share what the District had learned about the fire was held in Glide, Oregon on 

December 10th, 2002. Additional town hall meetings were held on March 4th, 2003 in 

Roseburg, Oregon and on May 5th, 2003, also in Roseburg. Interdisciplinary team meetings 

to review alternatives and integrate information specialists had learned were open to the 

public on May 6th, 2003 and on June 12th, 2003. Seven field trips occurred where the 

interested and affected persons viewed the fire salvage area, learned about resource 

concerns, and provided their ideas of how to proceed. 

Based on the potential effects of the proposed action, the District Ranger determined that 

an environmental impact statement was the appropriate format for disclosing potential 

impacts. The Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the 

Baked Apple Fire Salvage Project was published in the March 17, 2003 Federal Register (68 

FR 12662). Scoping continued and the project was first listed in the April 2003 Umpqua 

National Forest Quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA). 

Seventy-five comment letters were received during scoping. The Tribes (Cow Creek Band 

of Umpqua Indians, Confederated Tribe of the Grand Ronde Indians, and the Confederated 

Tribe of the Siletz Indians) were consulted; the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians 

indicated full support for the project. No other tribal interests responded to the 

proposal. Concerns from the public ranged from not salvaging fast enough, opposition to 

salvage, and a request to conduct restoration activities only. Numerous letters indicated 

support for managing the area using the “Beschta7

” approach. For full details, please see 

the scoping summary (available upon request) in the Project Record. 

ISSUES 

Significant issues associated with a proposed action are the focus of an environmental 

impact statement because they provide the basis for formulating and comparing 

alternatives to the proposed action (40 CFR 1502.14). Significant issues are based on 

unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources. Issues are points 

of debate, dispute or disagreement over the effects of the proposed action. 

Scoping identified a number of issues and concerns related to proposed salvage of timber 

in the Panther Creek subwatershed. These issues, together with applicable laws, 

regulations, and policies, were used to develop alternatives. In order to help quantify or 

 

6

 Numerous public meetings were held during fire suppression activities to inform homeowners and other 

interested persons of the status of the fire. Scoping for the salvage project began after the fire was 

suppressed. 

7

 The Beschta Report is a paper authored by several scientists. They reviewed past and current literature and 

developed a set of recommendations for land managers to apply. The paper offers a scientific framework of 

principles and practices to guide development of federal policy concerning wildfire and salvage logging and 

other postfire treatments. The paper is titled “WILDFIRE AND SALVAGE LOGGING - Recommendations for 

Ecologically Sound Post-Fire Salvage Management and Other Post-Fire Treatments On Federal Lands in the 

West” and is authored by: Dr. Robert L. Beschta, Oregon State University; Dr. Christopher A. Frissell, Oregon 

State University and University of Montana; Dr. Robert Gresswell, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Dr. Richard 

Hauer, University of Montana; Dr. James R Karr, University of Washington; Dr. G. Wayne Minshall, Idaho State 

University; Dr. David A. Perry, Oregon State University, Jonathan J. Rhodes, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish 

Commission.
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

15

qualify the issue, issues indicators are displayed; these indicators will help measure how 

each alternative responds to the issue. Issues that drove the development of alternatives 

for the Baked Apple Fire Salvage Project are as follows: 

1. Salvage logging will decrease the current and future availability of down, dead 

woody material as trees that have commercial value are salvaged. Dead trees 

have multiple ecological roles including functioning as an important element in 

biological and physical processes, and providing for future soil and site 

productivity. 

Indicator: Trees and/or snags retained per acre within salvage units. 

2. The proposed salvage has the potential to impact late-successional/old growth 

stands. Some stands that experienced a less intense burn have remnant 

components of old growth and can still be considered as functional latesuccessional habitat. The proposed salvage may result in felling or damage to 

large, live trees during logging or through the creation of logging corridors and 

landings. 

Indicators: Acres of underburned late-successional habitat salvaged; 

impacts to the character of late-successional habitat. 

3. The proposed salvage will decrease stand size and diversity by removing dead trees 

greater than 20 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) or removing dead trees 

greater than one hundred fifty years of age; and will decrease size class diversity 

by salvaging more than 50% of the dead trees within each size class. 

Indicators: Acres of units that do not retain 50% of the dead trees within 

each size class; upper diameter limit of salvage. 

4. The proposed salvage and related activities have the potential to impact some of 

the beneficial uses of the aquatic system through increased delivery of sediment to 

Panther, Limpy, Fairy, and Bachelor Creeks and their associated tributaries. 

Indicators: Percent of treatment acres with less than 85% effective ground 

cover; treatment acres at risk of slope instability. 

5. The proposed use of helicopter logging may result in low or no returns to the 

treasury or may not be economically feasible. The high costs of the proposed 

helicopter logging will reduce the amount of money returned to the federal 

treasury and reduce the amount of money available for restoration projects funded 

through Knudsen-Vandenberg funds. In addition, helicopter logging may not 

attract a bidder to the timber sale. 

Indicators: Benefit/cost ratio; net present value. 

6. The areas not proposed for salvage (especially those designated as unplantable) 

and other untreated areas (including riparian reserves), will have high fuel loads in 

the future, increasing future fire risk. As time passes, it is estimated that 60-100 

tons per acre of biomass (or more) will fall to the ground as the trees killed by the 

fire deteriorate. If a fire were to occur, this high fuel loading would increase the 

risk of a high severity fire. 

Indicator: Acres of potential high fuels loads not proposed for salvage. 

7. Several groups (Umpqua Watersheds, Cascadia Wildlands, Wilderness Society, 

Sierra Club, and ONRC) state that a 1,300-acre uninventoried roadless area lies 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

16

within and adjacent to the headwaters of Limpy Creek and a 1,700 acre roadless 

area lies along the Wild and Scenic Corridor and in the Horseshoe Bend area. The 

Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis (USDA 2001, page 103) displays these 

areas as having low road densities, ranging from 0 to 1.5 miles of road per square 

mile of land. Although roadless designation is outside the scope of this project (it 

is decided at the Forest Plan or higher level), the proposed project has the 

potential to impact the lands within these low road density areas. 

Indicators: Acres of low road density areas salvaged; miles of temporary 

spur road constructed or reconstructed; impacts to the character of low 

road density areas. 

8. Burning of logging-created slash during the spring may impact landbirds slated for 

consideration and protection under the USDA Forest Service Landbird Strategic 

Plan (2002). 

Indicator: Acres of spring burning by alternative. 

ISSUES THAT DID NOT DRIVE ALTERNATIVES 

In addition to the significant issues listed above, four other issues were considered. These 

four issues did not lead to more alternatives because mitigation was developed to address 

them. These four issues and their mitigation are listed below; they are discussed briefly 

in the EIS for full disclosure. 

Safety of workers, the public, and agency employees 

The proposed retention of dead trees along roads and within salvage units creates 

a risk to the public, forest workers, and agency employees. There are numerous 

safety requirements and mitigation measures that are designated in order to 

minimize this hazard, and are included in Chapter 2. This issue is mitigated, but 

will be tracked for disclosure purposes. 

Soil impacts 

In areas where full suspension cannot be achieved, the proposed use of skyline 

logging may cause gouges to the soil as some logs are yarded to the landing with 

one-end suspension. 

This was mitigated, as provisions in the Timber Sale Contract (current policy) allow 

the Forest to use management requirements and Best Management Practices that 

would minimize impacts to the soil from yarding-related gouging. This issue will 

be tracked for full disclosure. 

Loss of Vehicular Access 

Short-term road closures will reduce public and administrative access to areas that 

are presently accessible. For log haul, 2 sites, totaling 0.2 miles, of reconstruction 

along Forest Service Road 4714 would be accomplished, leading to short-term 

closures during reconstruction; however, long-term access to the area would be 

maintained. 

This issue is mitigated by maintaining alternate travel routes within the planning 

area. This issue will be carried through the analysis as the Forest Transportation 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

17

Systems Policy calls for public input, analysis and disclosure of the effects of roadrelated decisions. 

Effects of Noxious Weeds on Native Plant Diversity and Productivity 

Proposed salvage activities (including timber haul, project-related access, and 

road work) have the potential to spread noxious weeds that occur throughout the 

area, in particular, meadow knapweed. Continued vehicular access, project 

activities, and ground disturbance in the area would encourage spread of this and 

other noxious weeds. 

This issue is mitigated because management requirements will reduce the 

potential spread of this weed, and KV projects are designed to control current 

infestations. This issue will be tracked for full disclosure. 

NON-SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

One other issue was raised during scoping and was dismissed as a non-significant issue; 

non-significant issues are those that are outside the scope of the proposed action; are 

already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher level decisions; are 

irrelevant to the decision made, or are conjectural and not supported by scientific 

evidence. 

Rewarding Arsonists by Salvaging Burned Areas 

Several members of the public raised the concern over salvaging an area that was 

intentionally burned by what they believe was arson. Forest Service investigations 

into the exact cause of the 2002 Apple Fire are on-going, although it is known that 

it was human-caused. The motivation of the person who started the fire may 

never be known, nor will it be possible to determine if recovering the economic 

value of the burned wood is a “reward” to whomever started the fire. Therefore, 

this issue is determined to be a non-significant issue, as it is conjectural and not 

based on any scientific evidence. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose of and Need for Action 

18

This page intentionally left blank
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

 

69

CHAPTER 3 

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL 

EFFECTS 

INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the components and scope of the human environment that may be 

affected by implementation of the alternatives outlined in Chapter 2 and discloses the 

potential consequences of implementing each alternative including the mitigation 

measures, watershed best management practices and management requirements 

associated with each alternative. The description of the affected environment centers 

primarily on the issues outlined in Chapter 1, but it also briefly discusses other resources 

that may potentially be affected. A complete description of each alternative is found in 

Chapter 2. This chapter presents the scientific and analytic basis for the comparison of 

alternatives. The effects are discussed in terms of social and environmental changes from 

the current situation and include quantitative assessments where possible as well as 

qualitative assessments. All discussions are tiered to the Umpqua National Forest Plan 

Final Environmental Impact Statement, as amended. In addition, many of the discussions 

in this chapter utilize the information found in the 2001 Middle North Umpqua Watershed 

Analysis. 

CHANGES BETWEEN DRAFT AND FINAL 

Several regional changes to the Northwest Forest Plan were enacted in March of 2004. On 

March 22, 2004, the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture signed the Record of Decision 

for the Northwest Forest Plan, amending the 1994 document with the decision to clarify 

provisions relating to the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS ROD). The ACS ROD became 

effective immediately upon its signature. The primary changes made by the ACS ROD 

include the new provision that no finding of ACS consistency is required at the project 

level; and in order to comply with Riparian Reserve Standards and Guidelines that 

reference ACS objectives, the Forest must follow the procedures described in the ACS 

ROD. These procedures are found in the language amending page B-10 and page C-31 of 

the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan ROD. This FEIS complies with that new direction; changes 

to the language addressing ACS consistency and Riparian Reserves is found throughout 

Chapter 3. 

On that same day the ACS ROD was signed, the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture 

signed the Record of Decision to remove or modify the Survey and Manage mitigation 

measure Standards and Guidelines in the Northwest Forest Plan (S&M ROD). The S&M ROD 

becomes effective on April 21, 2004. The primary changes made by the S&M ROD include 

the elimination of portions of Survey and Manage Mitigation Measures for most species, 

the inclusion of some species onto the Regional Foresters Sensitive Species List (for Region 

6). There is also more reliance on the other habitat conservation elements provided by 

the Northwest Forest Plan to conserve and protect species formally known as Survey and 

Manage. This FEIS complies with the new provisions in the S&M ROD; changes to those 

species are found throughout Chapter 3. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

70

In addition to the ACS ROD and S&M ROD signing on March 22, 2004, the Regional Forester 

announced changes to the management of the Oregon Coastal coho Salmon. Because of a 

recent court opinion, consultation under ESA with NOAA Fisheries is no longer required for 

the Oregon Coast coho salmon Evolutionary Significant Unit. Because NOAA Fisheries will 

continue to study the coho, the Regional Forester added the Oregon Coast coho salmon 

ESU to the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List, due to its potential for Federal 

Listing under ESA. This project originally found that all activities under all alternatives 

would Not Likely Adversely Affect (NLAA) coho salmon. The appropriate finding similar to 

a NLAA for a Sensitive species is May Impact Individuals, but is Not Likely to Contribute to 

a Trend Towards Federal Listing. No changes in the alternatives occurred as a result of 

this change in species designation. All findings previously documented in the DEIS are still 

relevant in the FEIS. 

Other changes that occurred in this chapter of the FEIS include the addition of information 

requested during the 45-day public comment period; the correction and addition of 

information to portions of the soils section based on additional spatial analysis and review 

by the Regional Soils Scientist; the addition of monitoring information collected this past 

year on the Tree Mortality plots; and the addition of information on Tribal consultation 

and Environmental Justice. 

ACTIVITIES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO CUMULATIVE EFFECTS: 

Potential cumulative effects are analyzed by considering the proposed activities in the 

context of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions in the Panther Creek 

subwatershed. The following past management activities have occurred in the analysis 

area (Table 8). 

Table 8. Past management activities in the Panther Creek subwatershed. 

Activity Type Total 

Acres Acres by Decade/Type Notes 

Commercial 

Thinning 

(1971 – 1988) 

1182 1970’s – 854 

1980’s – 328 

Single-span 

skyline for all 

acres 

Planting 

(1975 – 1998) 4995 

1950’s – 539 

1960’s – 1221 

1970’s – 608 

1980’s – 977 

1990’s – 1650 

Pre-commercial 

thinning 

(1975 - 2003) 

3491 

1970’s – 423 

1980’s – 1118 

1990’s – 1906 

2000’s – 44 

Final Overstory 

Removal of 

Shelterwood 

334 1980’s – 344 

Single-span 

skyline for all 

acres 

Fertilization 

(1980 – 1993) 1798 1980’s – 935 

1990’s – 863 

Regeneration 

Harvest 5080 

 Acres stand replaced in 2002 

1950’s – 1011 3 

1960’s – 1436 832 

All recorded as 

skyline logged 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

 

71

Activity Type Total 

Acres Acres by Decade/Type Notes 

(1954 – 1996) 1970’s – 734 407 

1980’s – 1275 831 

1990’s – 624 380 

Burning/Fuels 

Treatment (1954 – 

1995) 

5816 

1950’s: 946 of broadcast burn 

1960’s:1377 of broadcast burn 

 22 of burning landings 

 56 of no fuels treatment 

1970’s: 200 of broadcast burn 

 74 of burning landings 

 853 of burning piles 

1980’s: 739 of broadcast burn 

 664 of burning piles 

 27 of burning landings 

 116 of no fuels treatment 

1990’s: 179 of broadcast burn 

 379 of pile burning 

 105 of no fuels treatment 

 40 of piling, but no burning 

 20 of mechanical biomass removal 

 19 of mechanical fuels disposal 

Summary by 

decade: 

1950’s – 946 

1960’s – 1455 

1970’s – 1127 

1980’s – 1546 

1990’s – 742 

1987 Apple Fire 2040 Apple Fire of 

1987. 

Fire salvage from 

1987 Apple Fire 241 241 from 1988 to 1990 Skyline and 

helicopter logged. 

Fire suppression 

from 1987 Apple 

Fire 

Dozer and Hand Line; retardant dropped by 

plane along WSR corridor. 

Road Building 94.6 

miles Began in 1953 

Road maintenance 

will continue 

throughout the 

drainage 

2002 Apple Fire 8835 These are the acres of the Apple Fire within 

the planning area (all burn intensities). 

Apple Fire of 

2002. 

Numerous other fires also burned during 2002. The North Umpqua Complex, started by 

lightning in July of 2002, included the Calf 2 Fire, which was directly to the east of the 

planning area, and burned about 543 acres. The Limpy Fire, located across the North 

Umpqua River near Limpy Rock, burned about 859 acres, and was also part of the 

complex. The Tiller Complex of fires burned almost 70,000 acres during the record 

breaking fire season of 2002; these fires occurred on the Tiller Ranger District, located 

about 8 air miles southwest of the planning area. 

Fire suppression activities that occurred as part of the 2002 Apple Fire may also 

contribute to cumulative effects. Table 9 displays the activities that occurred within the 

planning area as part of suppression activities and emergency rehabilitation associated 

with the Apple Fire. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

72

Table 9. Fire Suppression and Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) Activities for 

the 2002 Apple Fire – Past and Present. 

Activity Type Total Acres/Miles Notes 

Fire line construction 10.2 – dozer line 

1.02 – hand line 

Dozer line width ranged from 8 to 16 feet. 

Hand line was approximately 24 inches. All 

lines were dug to mineral soil. All firelines 

were rehabbed and water barred by October of 

2002. 

Burnout 1,033 acres Burnout conducted from 8/24/03 to 9/4/03. 

Retardant 

56,070 gallons 

ordered; 28,000 

gallons used. 

All retardant was dropped by a helicopter using 

a bucket. 

Constructed points 

5 Drop Points 

2 Helispots 

8 Safety Zones 

About 3.4 acres total disturbed; rehabbed by 

October of 2002. Seeded with western fescue. 

Road Maintenance 42.5 miles 

General road maintenance conducted 

throughout area; 4 additional miles treated 

outside planning area. 

Hazard Tree Felling 41 miles Hazard trees felled along main roads 

Ditches cleaned 22.5 miles; 50 

segments Ditches cleaned out 

Gates Installed 

22 miles of road 

closed; 5 segments; 

3 total gates. 

Gates installed; now open. 

Culverts cleaned 18.3 miles; 5 

segments Culverts cleaned out and checked. 

Road grading 1.86 miles; 2 

segments Road graded by Forest grader. 

Miscellaneous road work: 

Install down pipe 

Install grade sags 

Reconstruct fill 

Rock blanket/sag 

Scaling 

Slotted riser/collared 

Burn hole repair 

Deepen ditch 

Fill pullback 

1 site 

8 sites 

1 site 

1 site 

1 site 

1 site 

6 sites 

1 site 

11 sites 

A total of 31 points had road work as described 

below. Each site was less than 0.5 acre in size. 

A total of no more than 16 acres was 

disturbed. 

Scaling is removing loose rock from bank. 

Prevents culvert plugging. 

Reforestation 286 acres 

Planted seedlings, installed mulch mats on 118 

acres and tubes on 213 acres, including 

planting about 75 feet on either side of the 

lower 3 miles of Limpy Creek. 

Instream log placement 3 miles of Limpy Ck. 

and Bachelor Ck. 

78 pieces of large wood added to lower Limpy 

Ck; 26 pieces added to lower Bachelor Ck. 

using a helicopter. 

Felling of wood in Class 

III and IV channels 

6 miles of non-fish 

bearing streams 

Clusters of trees (1-10 pieces) were felled 

w/chainsaw into the channel to slow water 

velocities, capturing, storing, and metering 

sediment, and capturing additional wood. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

 

73

Reasonably foreseeable actions in the Panther Creek Watershed can also contribute to 

cumulative effects (Table 10). No private land is located in this 6th field watershed. For 

the Umpqua National Forest, the following activities are likely to occur over the next five 

years. 

Table 10. Reasonably foreseeable actions in the planning area. 

Activity Type Total Acres/Miles Notes 

Apple Seed Stand 

Improvement Project 

45 acres stem removal; 

67 acres fuels treatment; 

112 acres reforestation; 

0.25 miles temp road construction 

and decommissioning. 

Expected yield of about 

500,000 board feet; logging 

expected to begin during 

the summer of 2003. 

Reforestation About 1600 acres planned for FY04 

and FY05 for areas not included in 

Baked Apple or Apple Seed. 

Additional planting likely to 

occur in future years as 

funds are appropriated. 

Continued and Future Road 

Work 

Road maintenance to continue as 

needed; possible road 

decommissioning, culvert upgrade, 

etc., as a result of Baked Apple 

Roads Analysis. 

Occurring yearly. 

North Umpqua Trail 

Reconstruction 

Reconstruction/relocation of the 

Calf Segment. 

Reconnaissance has begun; 

no proposed action yet. 

Felix Timber Sale Haul down Road 4714. May not be reasonably 

foreseeable; depends on 

Rothstein ruling. 

Portions of the 2002 fires that occurred on the Tiller Ranger District are also proposed for 

salvage. The Ash Creek Fire Salvage proposes salvage on about 251 acres, while the Acker 

Salvage proposes salvage on less than 200 acres. In addition, the Late-successional 

Reserve (LSR) burned by the Tiller Fires may potentially salvage additional acres and 

create fuel breaks along roads. Monitoring of future tree mortality may eventually result 

in additional salvage on both the North Umpqua and Tiller Ranger Districts. 

TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT

FIRE AND FUELS 

Background and the Affected Environment 

Scoping identified that areas not proposed for salvage would have high fuel loads in the 

future, increasing future fire hazard. This issue is tracked in this chapter under the title 

of fuel loadings. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

74

Fire History 

The fire history for the Middle North Umpqua watershed and the planning area was 

determined in the Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis (2001) by collecting data in 

10 plots within the Blitzen (west of the planning area) and Panther subwatersheds. Of the 

89 stumps tallied, all had visible fire scars. Figure 13 shows the fires per decade in the 

planning area for the decades of 1970 through 2000. Within the planning area there is an 

average of 13 fires per decade and 1 fire per year. 

11

11.5

12

12.5

13

13.5

14

14.5

1970's 1980's 1990's 2000

Number of Fires

Figure 13. Fires per decade in the Baked Apple Planning Area. 

Only the fire scars with a high-count reliability were used for the determination of a fire 

return interval. Fire episodes were supported by pitch ring data and stand age class 

determinations. Years between fires ranged from 14 to 114 years. The mean fire return 

interval for the planning area is about 30 years (USDA 2001). 

Fire frequency for the planning area is based on fire occurrence records from 1970 

through 1996. In that time period, there were 103 fires recorded within or adjacent to 

the Middle North Umpqua watershed. These fires totaled about 19% of the District’s fires 

for that time period. Overall, there is a 7% chance of a fire occurring on any given 1,000 

acre parcel for any given year. Over the next fourteen years, it can be expected that a 

fire could occur within each 1,000-acre block within the watershed. The probability of 

one or more of these fires reaching 100 acres in size is 79%. There is a 32% chance that at 

least one of these fires will burn between 100-1,000 acres. 

The Middle North Umpqua Watershed appears to have unique characteristics to support 

frequent high intensity fires. Several items support this: 

• Based on analysis of the vegetation patterns and predicted stand ages on the 1946 

aerial photos, the watershed experienced high intensity stand replacement fires 

(several thousand acres in size) over a short time frame of 30 to 80 years. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

 

75

• The watershed was comprised of several thousand acres of mid-seral stands that, 

based on the stand patterns, were recovering from stand replacement fires when 

new stand replacement fires occurred. 

• The lightning frequency of this area is high. 

• The North Umpqua River drainage provides unique weather and wind patterns that 

do not occur elsewhere on the district. 

Fuel Models and Fire Regimes14

The WEEP (Wildfire Effects Evaluation Project) report (USDA 2003), describes the changes 

in fuels that have occurred on the Umpqua National Forest, including the area where the 

2002 Apple Fire burned. According to WEEP, fire suppression has prevented fire from 

playing its natural role for at least one or more fire cycles in the low severity fire regime 

areas and possibly one fire cycle in the moderate severity regimes. This has created a 

condition allowing for an increase in fuel buildup, increase in stand densities, and change 

in stand structure. Coupled with climatic changes, this has resulted in stand structure 

changes that can include an increase in fire intolerant species that would have been 

naturally thinned by fire, in the intermediate level between the shrub layer and the 

overstory canopy. These changes resulted in stands that are more susceptible to high 

intensity fires. Fire intensity is influenced by the amount of fuel available for burning, 

local weather conditions before and at the time of the fire, and topography of the burning 

site. The limiting factor in fire intensity is the amount of energy stored in a fuel. As a 

consequence, the greater the fuel loading (amount of available fuel) the more intensely a 

fire is likely to burn. This was true in Panther Creek, which had many areas with high fuel 

loads before the 2002 Apple Fire began (USDA 2003). 

FUEL MODELS: Fuels are classified by vegetation type, fuel size and loading, and 

potential fire behavior. Fuel loading can be described using models that can help predict 

what the fire behavior of a certain area would be like. These models are called Fire 

Behavior Prediction System (FBPS) Fuel Models and are assigned numeric values. Fuel 

Models 5 and 10 dominated the pre-fire landscape (Figures 14 and 15). Fuel Model 10 

represents most of the late-seral forested stands before the 2002 Apple Fire. Fuel Model 

10 stands are often overstocked with large amounts of dead fuel greater than 3 inches in 

diameter, creating a condition where fires burn in surface and ground fuels with greater 

intensity. Crown torching of individual trees is more frequent in these stands, making fire 

suppression difficult. 

Fuel Model 5 best represents the early seral vegetation in the planning area and includes 

shrub communities and even-aged young plantations. Fire can spread readily through the 

tree tops of these young stands: rates of fire spread can be high, and significant areas of 

mortality can occur in and adjacent to these stands. 

 

14 Fire Regimes are the historical frequency and severity of fire within a vegetative group. It includes 

characteristics of fire in a given ecosystem, such as the frequency, predictability, intensity, and seasonality of 

fire. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

76

Figure 14. Fuel Model 5. Figure 15. Fuel Model 10 

The 2002 fires burned across the landscape for several weeks, creating a mosaic pattern 

of low, moderate and high severity effects. These patterns were directly related to 

available fuels, terrain features, and the influence of local weather. The landscape areas 

can be used to visualize how the 2002 fires spread. The majority of the fire occurred in 

Steep/Dry landscapes, where stand replacing fires historically occurred. The 

Gentle/Moist and High Elevation landscape areas helped slow the spread of fire as it 

reached these areas, proving to be effective places to conduct suppression operations. 

Some of late-successional stands in the planning area, which were mostly Fuel Model 10, 

burned at low to moderate intensity; many of the understory fuels were consumed and 

the overstory was left mostly intact. In these areas, surface fuels were only partially 

consumed. Where fire burned at higher intensities in forested stands, which occurred in 

much of Limpy Creek, most if not all of the ground fuel was consumed and most of the 

green trees were killed. The 2002 fires had a major effect on plantations; within the 

planning area, 38% of plantations experienced stand replacement mortality. High stand 

densities and low crowns allowed fire to burn rapidly through these stands. 

Fire risk is the chance (probability) that a wildfire will start, either from natural or human 

causes, based on recent fire history. Fire hazard is determined by the characteristics of 

fuels combined with the influences of topography and weather. The fuels characteristics 

apply to both dead and live fuels, and include loading (tonnage), size and shape, 

compactness, horizontal continuity, vertical arrangement, fuel moisture content, and 

chemical properties. Topographic and weather influences, combined with fuels 

characteristics, determine the forward rate of spread of a fire and the intensity at which 

a fire will burn. 

FIRE REGIMES: Fire regimes are comprised of patterns of fire frequency, intensity, 

severity, seasonality, predictability, and spatial patterns over time across landscapes 

(Agee 1993). Fire regimes define the role of fire as an ecosystem process. Over half of 

the Forest is mapped as Fire Regime III (mixed severity), although a significant change can 

be noted along the North-South Umpqua Divide as the forest transitions into a more 

frequent, lower severity fire regime as seen in Figure 16. For the Apple Fire, the majority 

of the area falls within Fire Regime III, which is characterized as a mixed severity regime. 

Within the planning area, the 2002 Apple Fire burned 210 acres of Fire Regime I, 119 acres 

of Fire Regime II, 6,759 acres of Fire Regime III, no acres in Fire Regime IV, and 2,711 

acres of Fire Regime V (Figure 16). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

 

77

The National Fire Plan and 10-year Comprehensive Strategy (USDI/USDA 2001) describe 

general wildfire risk by Condition Classes15. In Condition Class 1, fire regimes are within 

historical ranges and vegetation composition and structure are intact; there is a low risk 

of losing key ecosystem components from the occurrence of fire. In Condition Class 2, fire 

regimes have been altered from their historic range by either increased or decreased fire 

frequency; there is a moderate risk of losing key ecosystem components from the 

occurrence of fire. In Condition Class 3, fire regimes have been heavily altered and the 

risk of losing key ecosystem components is high; multiple fire return intervals have been 

missed. Most of the planning area falls within Condition Class 2, as at least one fire cycle 

has been missed.

 

15 The condition class identifies the departure of current conditions from the historical fire regime. There are 

three condition classes that categorize and describe vegetation composition and structure. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

78 

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

FR I FR II FR III FR IV FR V

2002 Acres Burned

 by Fire Regime (Forest-wide)

Figure 16. Umpqua National Forest Fire Regimes and 2002 Fire Perimeters. 

(FR I) 

(FR II) 

(FR III) 

(FR IV) 

(FR V) 

2002 

Apple 

Fire 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

79

FUEL LOADINGS – TRACKED AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

The accumulation of fuel is an important consideration in predicting future fuel loads and 

fire hazards. Scoping identified that there would be a risk of leaving high fuel loads 

across the landscape, especially in areas that would not be salvaged. The indicators, or 

measures, selected to help assess the alternatives with respect to fuel loadings include 

the overall acreage of areas not salvaged and the potential for future wildfires to spread, 

as predicted by the model FARSITE. These indicators were selected because future fire 

behavior will be influence by the amount, arrangement and continuity of fuels; this 

project would alter those factors. Future fire spread was selected because that indicator 

helps predict how the project would alter fire behavior in the future. 

For this project, the snag fall and decay rate predictions were adopted from the Snagfall 

submodel of the SNFP (Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment) Growth and Yield Model 

(Wilson, 1999). Decay of fallen material is also incorporated into this model. In addition, 

this model also predicts the potential number of snags that would remain standing in the 

future. The snag fall rates that this model calculates do not take into account different 

species, as this resolution of data was not available. 

The model predicts that as the diameter of the tree increases, it takes longer for the snag 

to fall to the ground. According to the model, by year 25, approximately 94% of the trees 

that are in the 0”-10” size class will fall, over 80% of the 10”-16” size class, almost 60% of 

the 16” to 24” size class, over 40% of the 24”-40” size class, and about 30% of the over 

40” size class. With respect to decay rates, as the diameter of the fallen material 

increases, it takes longer for that material to decay, leaving higher levels of coarse wood 

on the ground for a longer period of time. These assumptions were used in predicting 

snag fall rates and decay rates for the Baked Apple Fire Salvage area. Where salvage is 

proposed to occur, fuel accumulations would decline through harvest and decay until 

about year 25. At that point, the remaining standing snags begin to fall more rapidly, 

increasing fuels on the site. These assumptions, along with the use of the Fire 

Management Analyst (FMA) program, helped calculate the predicted tonnage of fuels in a 

forest stand. Fuels were addressed as 10-hour (0.25”-1”), 100-hour (1”-3”), and 1000-

hour (>3”) fuels. The 1-hour fuel loading (0-1/4”) was omitted due to the high variability 

of accumulation over time. The FMA program does not include projected shrub and tree 

growth as these conditions could vary widely from area to area and depend on whether 

action is taken to replant areas or manipulate shrubs. 

Also modeled in the SNFP Growth and Yield Model was the potential British Thermal Unit 

(BTU) output per square foot of ground. This provides a frame of reference in terms of 

the potential energy release that a given Fuel Model could be expected to produce from a 

future fire in the area. The estimated BTU production does not include the heat produced 

by standing dead fuels (snags) or shrubs. Values where found utilizing the BEHAVE fire 

behavior prediction system. Table 11 displays the predicted amount of BTU output by 

Fuel Model. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

80

Table 11. BTU/ft2 Produced by Fuel Model (90th Percentile Weather) 

Fuel Model BTU/ft2

8 (conditions that existed pre-fire) 209 

10 (conditions that existed pre-fire) 1,411 

11 (conditions that exist post-fire) 803 

12 (conditions that exist post-fire) 2,385 

Affected Environment 

Fuel Loads Within the Planning Area 

Observations in the 1996 Spring Fire and a down wood inventory in the 2002 Apple Fire 

provide examples of how fuels change in forested stands over time and in response to fire 

intensity. Based on the Spring Fire, forested stands that experienced moderate and high 

intensity fire would have enough small fuels present after seven years to carry a fire 

again. Heavy fuels continue to accumulate in these stands as snags fragment and fall to 

the forest floor, but it is predicted that it would take decades for green trees to dominate 

these stand-replacement fire areas. Figures 17 and 18 are examples of the concentrations 

of snags present in some areas of the 1996 Spring Fire (about 12 air miles to the 

northeast) and demonstrate the potential surface fuel deposition that can be expected in 

the Apple Fire area after the snags begin to fall. 

 

Figures 17 and 18. Snag fall that has occurred in the seven years since the 1996 

Spring Fire. 

In the high intensity burn areas within the planning area, the surface fuel loading is 

almost non-existent due to the intensity of the fire, as shown in Figure 19. The duff layer 

is completely consumed and little effective ground cover remains. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

81

Figure 19. Baked Apple Unit 89; this stand experienced 100% tree 

mortality and complete consumption of the 1, 10, and 100 hour fuels. 

The light colored surface consists of Douglas-fir needle cast. 

Figures 20 and 21 are typical of the concentrations of snags present in some parts of the 

planning area and demonstrate the potential surface fuel deposition after the snags begin 

to fall. 

Figure 20. Baked Apple Unit 15. Figure 21. Baked Apple Unit 37. 

Fire Behavior 

Fire behavior is a function of weather, topography, slope and fuels. The North Umpqua 

River corridor functions as a channel for wind and provides the optimum conditions for 

high intensity fires, especially when combined with the steep dissected terrain and 

southerly exposures. Those areas that are not on a southerly exposure are subject to 

winds within the corridor. The winds are typically up canyon during the day and down 

canyon at night. When a high-pressure system on the east side of the Cascade Range and 

a low pressure system along the coast exist, conditions for strong east wind event within 

the river corridor are probable (USDA 2001). These wind events dry out fuels and if an 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

82

ignition source exists, the dried fuels and strong winds can produce intense fire behavior. 

During the 2002 Apple Fire the combination of dry, high fuel loads, an unstable 

atmosphere and hot weather conditions combined to create a plume-driven fire event, in 

which the convection column drove the fire and produced its own wind drafts as seen in 

Figure 22. 

 Figure 22. The 2002 Apple Fire Smoke Column (August). 

Once the fire started, strong winds and high daytime temperatures combined to carry the 

fire into the preheated fuels, contributing to high intensity burns that made rapid fire 

runs up slope and sometimes up the drainage, a phenomenon seen in the 1987 Apple Fire. 

This phenomenon helps explain some of the large patches of high intensity fire areas that 

occurred in the 2002 Apple Fire, as seen in Figure 23. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

83

Figure 23. Fire Regimes in the Apple Fire. The areas that burned intensely are shown 

in gray. The majority of the stand replacement fire area occurred within the mixed 

severity and high severity fire regimes. 

Fire behavior is expressed in terms of flame lengths, rates of spread, and fireline intensity 

associated with the Fuel Model. 

Flame Length: A flame length of 4 feet is generally considered the upper limit for 

direct action taken by hand crews and 6 feet is considered the upper limit for 

direct action taken by mechanized equipment (dozers). Flame lengths in excess of 

these limits usually result in indirect action taken to contain the fire. 

Rate of Spread: The rate that a fire spreads is dependant on the amount, 

arrangement and continuity of the fuels, weather, and topography. For Fuel Model 

11, the fire can spread from 1-11 chains per hour, on 40% slope or less. For Fuel 

Model 12 on less than 40% slope, fires can spread 6-17 chains per hour. The faster 

a fire spreads, the more difficult it is for ground suppression forces to attack the 

fire directly. 

Fireline Intensity: Fireline intensity is the amount of heat released at the flaming 

front of a fire expressed in British thermal units per foot per second (btu/ft2

/sec). 

Intensities in excess of 100 btu/ft2

/sec are generally considered too hot for direct 

action by personnel. Fireline intensities greater than 500 btu/ft2

/sec are 

considered too hot for direct action by mechanized equipment. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

84

Resistance to control is described by the use of a subjective rating using the U.S. Forest 

Service Manual 5151.14-2, Resistance to Control Calculation Matrix. 

Resistance to Control: Resistance to control is generally viewed as an estimate of 

the suppression force required to control a unit of fire perimeter. For example, 

“High” resistance to control means “slow work for dozers, very difficult for hand 

crews; hand line holding will be difficult.” The U.S. Forest Service Region 5 

developed a resistance to control rating scheme based on difficulty of hand line 

construction and an inventory of downed woody fuel loading by size class. That 

rating system is adopted here. High and extreme ratings, as shown in Table 12, 

were reached for the following loadings, as measured in tons/acre of fuel: 

Table 12. Resistance to Control Ratings, by Fuel Loading (tons/acre). 

0 to 3 inch diameter fuels 3 to 9 inch diameter fuels Rating (reflects total fuel 

loading of 0 to 9 inch 

fuels) 

5 tons per acre 25 tons per acre High 

10 tons per acre 15 tons per acre High 

15 tons per acre 5 tons per acre High 

5 tons per acre 40 tons per acre Extreme 

10 tons per acre 25 tons per acre Extreme 

15 tons per acre 15 tons per acre Extreme 

Presence of pieces greater than a 9-inch diameter reduces the above loading necessary to 

reach high and extreme rating. The number of large pieces (>9 inches) is more important 

than their loading in determining resistance to control (Brown et al 2001). 

Understanding the fire regimes under which the 2002 Apple Fire burned and the patterns 

and densities of fuels that it left in its wake helps predict potential surface fuel 

deposition that is expected to occur over time as the snags begin to fall. This knowledge 

helps facilitate fire behavior predictions. These descriptions also aid in predicting the 

potential number of down logs and other large material that will be deposited on the 

surface over time, which influences potential future fire intensity, resistance to control 

predictions, and the ability to suppress the fire. 

Fire and Fuels: Environmental Consequences 

Alternative 1 

Direct Effects 

In many areas surface fuels were consumed by the fire and are negligible. By year 1 or 2, 

any needles on the trees killed by the fire would drop, but would not present a fire hazard 

due to the lack of other surface fuels. For a fire occurring over the next 1 to 2 years, fire 

behavior would be minimal in terms of flame length and fireline intensity due the lack of 

current surface fuels in the burned area. As time passes the number of snags falling 

would increasingly contribute to the surface fuels present in the project area. Where 

fires burned at low to moderate intensity in late-successional stands (and green trees still 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

85

exist), fuel loads are expected to build to pre-fire levels quickly as mortality in the 

understory begins to occur. Fuels would continue to build until reduced by fuels reduction 

activities or another fire occurs. 

Alternative 1 would not reduce future fuel loads and thereby would not reduce the 

intensity of future fires that may occur in the same place. Alternative 1 would also not 

facilitate the removal of dead trees that may help slow the buildup of insect populations 

of bark beetles and woodborers (Amman and Ryan 1991; Simon et al. 1994). 

Where stand replacing fire occurred, fuel loadings are predicted to build toward pre-fire 

levels more slowly, as much of the original surface biomass was consumed. Smaller fuels 

would dominate the forest floor until trees begin to shed larger branches and portions of 

the trunks begin to weaken and fall. 

As fuels accumulate, the fuel sizes, loading (tonnage), compactness, horizontal 

continuity, and vertical arrangement would pose a high fire hazard or contribute to 

conditions that would inhibit or preclude safe firefighting practices. Under the no action 

alternative, existing fuel loads range from a low of 318 tons per acre to a high of 726 tons 

per acre (both standing and down wood). Immediately after the fire, the area became a 

Fuel Model 8 (Figure 24), similar in fuel loading to the unburned stand shown below. A 

Fuel Model 8 is expected to produce about 209 BTU/ft2

 if another fire was to occur. 

Figure 24. Fuel Model 8 in an unburned stand. 

Indirect Effects 

The results of modeling efforts are presented in Table 13 in terms of tons per acre in each 

of the fuel size classes at year 5, 10, 15 and 25, and the projected snags per acre 

expected to be standing in that particular year. Representative stands were used to 

display predicted fuel loads; ranges of future fuel loads are an issue indicator as described 

in Chapter 1. Additional stands were also modeled; these results are found in the Project 

Record. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

86

Table 13. Alternative 1: Potential fuel accumulations (tons/acre) and remaining 

snags/acre. 

Unit 45d Unit 73 

Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac 

5 4.20 3.62 56.99 102 5 1.04 1.51 38.79 74 

10 6.11 7.16 88.22 84 10 1.62 2.38 66.59 56 

15 8.30 8.44 102.40 66 15 1.92 2.85 86.64 44 

25 10.11 9.03 139.11 39 25 2.07 3.15 111.31 28 

Table 13 demonstrates the buildup of fuels over time primarily through snag fall. The 

initial rapid buildup of the 1,000-hour fuels (>3" diameter) up to year 5 is indicative of the 

generally large number of small (< 10" dbh) snags. By year 5 most of the areas would be 

in a condition, relative to surface fuels, that could be described by varying degrees of the 

Fuel Model 11 (Figure 25). For Fuel Model 11, it is expected that a future fire would be 

fairly active in the concentrations of down wood and herbaceous material that is 

intermixed. However, the spacing of the rather light fuel load, shading from overstory, or 

the aging of the fine fuels can contribute to limiting the fire potential. 

Shrub growth is likely to be extensive under the no action alternative, as regeneration 

efforts would only occur as appropriated funds are secured. Shrub growth within the first 

5 years would tend to slightly dampen the predicted fire indices (flame length, rate of 

spread, and fireline intensity) due to considerably higher fuel moistures than similar-sized 

dead fuels. This dampening effect would tend to increase as shrub growth increases for 

approximately 20 to 40 years until shrub decadence and the higher fuel moistures in the 

live portions of the shrubs reaches some equilibrium. After that point the dampening 

effect subsides as the shrubs become more available as part of the overall fuel bed. 

Based on fire history as discussed above, another fire in the project area is quite likely 

within the next 25 to 50 years. In the event of another fire, the fuel buildup as a 

consequence of Alternative 1 would affect fire behavior and resistance to control. 

The following photographs and tables depict the surface fuel conditions described in Fuel 

Model 11, the potential fire behavior of the condition and the estimated resistance to 

control. Additional photos of the fuel models (for low and high) are available in the Fuels 

Report, located in the Project Record. The fire behavior predictions were based on the 

BEHAVE Fire Behavior Prediction16 program, which is described in detail in the Fuels 

Report, located in the Project Record. 

 

16 The program uses the 10 and 100 hour surface fuels (1/4 to 3 inch fuels) predicted to be present, the 90th

percentile weather for the area, 5 slope classes and 3 validated variations of the Fuel Model (Low, Medium 

and High). Standard FBPS Fuel Models 11 and 12 were used for the “medium” category. The “low” and “high” 

Fuel Models 11 and 12 were derived from the standard FBPS Fuel Models by reducing or increasing the fuel bed 

bulk depth and changing the fuel loading in a manner that preserved the surface area to volume ratio for the 

fuel bed. The 90th percentile weather conditions are standard weather parameters used for modeling on the 

Umpqua National Forest and are as follows: 1-hour fuel moisture = 4%; 10-hour fuel moisture = 6%; 100-hour 

fuel moisture = 9%; 1000-hour fuel moisture = 12%; 20-foot wind speed = 5 mph; live herbaceous fuel moisture 

= 37%; and live woody fuel moisture = 80%. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

87

Figure 25. Fuel Model 11 (PSW-56/30WF-3, Medium FBPS Model 11). 

Table 14. Fire Behavior Associated with the 3 Variations of Fuel Model 11. 

Behavior 

parameter 

Variation 0% slope 10% slope 20% slope 30% slope 40% slope

Flame 

Length (ft.) 

L 

M 

H 

1-2 

3-4 

4-5 

1-2 

3-4 

4-5 

1-2 

3-4 

4-5 

1-2 

3-4 

4-5 

1-2 

3-4 

5-6 

Rate of 

Spread 

(chains/hr.) 

L 

M 

H 

1-2 

5-6 

7-8 

1-2 

5-6 

8-9 

1-2 

5-6 

8-9 

2 

5-6 

9-10 

2-3 

6-7 

10-11 

Fireline 

Intensity 

(btu/ft2

/sec) 

L 

M 

H 

8 

66 

144 

8 

68 

148 

9 

72 

157 

10 

80 

174 

11 

91 

197 

Resistance 

to Control 

L 

M 

H 

Medium 

Medium 

High 

Medium 

Medium 

High 

Medium 

Medium 

High 

Medium 

Medium 

High 

Medium 

Medium 

High 

Over the next 5 to 25 years, the majority of the surface fuel contribution is from the 

larger size classes as they begin to fall. The slowing in the rate of increase in the 10 and 

100-hour fuels is due primarily to their more rapid decay in comparison to the 1000-hour 

fuels and the slower fall down rate of the larger trees after the smaller trees have mostly 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

88

fallen. Snag fall in the various size classes generally follows a curve with the primary 

factors being the number of years after mortality and the snag fall rate for the size class. 

Within 25 years, snag fall and down wood accumulation would move the area into a Fuel 

Model 12, which would be expected to release about 2,385 BTU/ft2 of energy from a 

future fire in the area. It is expected that 284 to 485 tons per acre of fuels would 

accumulate (with some fuels deteriorating due to decomposition), influencing future fire 

behavior and the ability of fire suppression personnel to effectively and safely suppress a 

fire. For Fuel Model 12, rapidly spreading fires with high intensities capable of generating 

spot fires (fires that are ahead of the main fire and are started by burning embers that are 

carried by the wind) can occur. When fire starts, it is generally sustained until a fuel 

break or change in fuels is encountered (Anderson 1982). Fire behavior in a fuel model 12 

can be expected to exhibit greater intensities, greater than four foot flame lengths, 

leading to potential fire control difficulties. The following photographs and tables depict 

the surface fuel conditions described for Fuel Model 12 and the potential fire behavior of 

the condition; additional pictures of the low and medium Fuel Model 12 can be found in 

the Project Record. The fire behavior predictions were again based on the BEHAVE Fire 

Behavior Prediction program as described above. 

Figure 26. Fuel Model 12 (INT-98/Stand 23a, High FBPS Model 12). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

89

Table 15. Fire Behavior Associated with the 3 Variations of Fuel Model 12. 

Behavior 

parameter 

Variation 0% slope 10% slope 20% slope 30% slope 40% slope

Flame 

Length (ft.) 

L 

M 

H 

5-6 

7-8 

8-9 

5-6 

7-8 

8-9 

5-6 

7-8 

8-9 

5-6 

8-9 

9-10 

5-6 

8-9 

9-10 

Rate of 

Spread 

(chains/hr.) 

L 

M 

H 

6-7 

10-11 

12 

7-8 

10-11 

12-13 

7-8 

11-12 

13-14 

8-9 

12-13 

14-15 

9-10 

14-15 

16-17 

Fireline 

Intensity 

(btu/ft2

/sec) 

L 

M 

H 

193 

436 

583 

197 

446 

596 

211 

477 

638 

234 

529 

708 

266 

602 

805 

Resistance 

to Control 

L 

M 

H 

High 

Extreme 

Extreme 

High 

Extreme 

Extreme 

High 

Extreme 

Extreme 

High 

Extreme 

Extreme 

High 

Extreme 

Extreme 

Overall, under Alternative 1, resistance to control in years 1 and 2 would be minimal, 

from years 3 to 5 it would range from medium to high and after year 5 would range from 

medium to extreme. In the event of a future fire, the flame lengths and fireline intensity 

associated with Fuel Model 12 would preclude direct attack by handcrews or dozers. The 

fire’s rate of spread would exceed the production capability of a handcrew. Indirect 

attack, where fire lines are constructed away from the fire, generally on ridges or along 

roads would be required. Indirect attack results in larger fires, since the unburned area 

between the main fire and the fireline is intentionally burned in advance of the wildfire to 

eliminate fuel. 

The number of snags present would potentially preclude nighttime operations, normally 

the time when fire behavior is minimal and good progress on suppression activities may be 

conducted. In areas of numerous snags, ground suppression efforts may be precluded 

altogether. 

A deterministic fire growth model (FARSITE, as described by Finney 1998) was utilized to 

model the potential growth and effects of future wildfire and prescribed fire upon the 

landscape in future years; future wildfire growth is an issue indicator as described in 

Chapter 1. FARSITE is a graphically displayed computer model. It utilizes GIS (Geographic 

Information System) and the BEHAVE fire behavior prediction system to display these 

effects. 

A control scenario was run under the conditions of the first burning period (10:00 am till 

6:00 pm), and is represented by the yellow line in Figure 27 for the Apple Fire. The 

purpose was to calibrate the model using the original conditions (fuels, weather, and 

topography) that existed during the first burning period of the 2002 Apple Fire. Once the 

calibration matched the approximate perimeter of the first burning period, the model was 

run to predict fire spread, with a possible ignition point along a main road. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

90

Figure 27. Calibration of FARSITE Model, with Logical Human Caused Ignition Point. 

No suppression action or their effects are demonstrated. The model was run with the 

conditions predicted at 25 years with fuel conditions derived from the same snag fall 

down rates mentioned previously. Future stand growth and development, canopy closure 

and height to crown base were also modeled.17 This FARSITE analysis predicts the size of 

a future fire in the area in 25 years, based on no action. 

After examining the fall down rates and the results of the stand growth model, the 

existing condition of the no action alternative showed the area would be represented by a 

fuel model 12 with an overstory of mixed conifers; trees would be about 25 feet tall and 

the base of their crowns would be at least 8 feet off of the ground. These parameters 

were used in the FARSITE model to show the effects of fire, 25 years in the future as 

represented by Figure 28. 

Predicted Future Fire Behavior Under Alternative 1 

Figure 28 demonstrates that significant fire spread would occur in the event of a future 

fire under the no action alternative. Within the first 8 hours of ignition, it is predicted 

that a fire would burn about 1579 acres (Figure 28). 

 

17Stand growth was modeled using the Suppose version 1.16 of the Forest Vegetation Simulator, Western 

Cascades Variant version 6.21. FARSITE has been verified in the field, using prescribed natural fires in 

Yosemite and Glacier National Parks (Finney 1998). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

91

Figure 28. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 1. 

Under Alternative 1, the 2002 Apple Fire landscape would eventually become an area in 

which fire suppression activities would be difficult and hazardous. The likely scenario in 

the future would be to manage fires within the 2002 Apple Fire perimeter by retreating to 

ridge tops outside the fire perimeter and conducting suppression activities indirectly. The 

presence of numerous snags in the area would also contribute greatly to a decision to use 

indirect attack techniques to protect firefighters from falling snags. Alternative 1 would 

serve to compound fire suppression difficulties in the area as a whole. 

In general, the amount of fuel does not affect the probability of reburn or wildland fire 

ignitions. The meteorological and physical processes that generate lightning, and human 

behavior that leads to human-caused fires, determine when and where a fire ignition 

occurs. The real question is not whether there is a greater probability for reburn, but 

when reburns occur would they be of greater intensity and more destructive to natural 

resources (Everett 1995). Professional experience has shown that increased fuel loads can 

result in increased fire intensity and severity. In other words, given the same weather 

and topographic conditions, areas with higher fuel loads would burn hotter, have longer 

flame lengths, have greater potential to convert to crown fires, be more difficult to 

contain, pose greater risks to firefighters, kill more vegetation, and damage soils more 

severely than areas with lower fuel loads. The literature shows that when dead and live 

tree biomass increase, so does flame length and fireline intensity (Rothermal 1983) and 

while large woody fuels have little influence on the spread of the initiating fire, they can 

contribute to development of large fires and high fire intensity and severity (Brown, et al 

2001), especially where fuel loads are continuous. 

Alternative 1 has the potential to lead to additional large-scale fires across the landscape. 

The FARSITE model predicts that approximately 1579 acres would be consumed in a future 

fire during the first burning period (Figure 29), most of which would be expected to be 

high intensity. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

92

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4 Alt. 5 Alt. 6

Acres

Figure 29. Predicted FARSITE Acres of Fire Spread in 25 Years. 

The Late-successional Reserve (LSR) to the southeast of the planning area (east of Calf 

Ridge) would be at risk, as a future fire under Alternative 1 would extend well into the 

LSR and would likely reburn areas burned in 2002. A future fire would potentially reduce 

habitat and negatively affect the integrity and continuity of the LSR. Predicted fire 

behavior under the model shows that spotting may occur over 1⁄2 mile away. Any 

regeneration that occurs in the LSR may potentially be consumed. 

For future forest management options, Alternative 1 would complicate the reintroduction 

of fire as a tool to manage fuel loading and to meet ecological goals in the future. 

Prescribed fire in areas of high fuel loading risks escape, killing growing trees and would 

require costly preparation and numerous entries to be successful. Alternative 1 would not 

contribute to the effectiveness of prescribed burning or other potential future projects to 

improve forest health, desired vegetation conditions, fire resilience or suppression 

effectiveness across the landscape. 

Action Alternatives 

All action alternatives would have these fuel reduction objectives, based on current 

Umpqua National Forest Policy: 

• Treat activity-created fuels other than units designated for no treatment, to 

the level stated below. 

• Retain effective ground cover, large woody component and snags within 

treated units to levels prescribed. 

• Maintain air quality standards. Comply with Oregon state smoke management 

regulations. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

93

Activity-created fuels would be reduced according to the following guidelines18: 

0” – 1⁄4” fuels (1 hour fuels) = <1 ton per acre 

1⁄4” – 3” fuels (10 and 100 hour fuels) = 4-8 tons per acre 

3” – 9” fuels (1000 hour fuels) = 7-12 tons per acre 

 Total activity-generated fuels: = 12-21 tons per acre 

For a fire occurring over the next 1 to 2 years, fire behavior would be minimal in terms of 

flame length and fireline intensity due the lack of current surface fuels in the burned 

area. By year 5 most of the salvage areas proposed for treatment would be in a condition, 

relative to surface fuels, that could be described by varying degrees of the fuel model 11. 

For fuel model 11, it is expected that a future fire would be fairly active in the 

concentrations of down wood and herbaceous material that is intermixed. However, the 

spacing of the rather light fuel load, shading from overstory, or the decay of the fine fuels 

can contribute to limiting the fire potential. See Figure 25 and Table 14 associated with 

Fuel Model 11, as described previously. 

Alternative 2 

Direct Effects 

With implementation of Alternative 2 and the associated fuels treatments, the surface 

fuels present within the proposed harvest units would consist of approximate tonnages in 

each of the size classes, as described in Table 16, not including large material (down logs) 

left on site for wildlife, watershed and silvicultural purposes. After activity fuels 

treatment, harvest units would convert to a fuel model 11 as described above. The 

burned areas outside the proposed harvest units would be represented by a fuel model 12, 

as described in Alternative 1. The treatment of fuels within harvest units would break up 

the continuity and arrangement of fuels upon the landscape, giving fire managers more 

suppression options, should a future fire occur. 

A low intensity fire, (less than two foot flame lengths) would be expected in areas that 

support a fuel model 11. Fuel model 11 can be expected to exhibit slow burning ground 

fires. Fuel model 11, distributed as evenly as practical, would provide sufficient ground 

cover for soil protection purposes. Snags left standing for old forest structure, wildlife, 

watershed and silvicultural purposes would be distributed evenly, decreasing the hazard 

to firefighters. In addition this arrangement would provide opportunities for future 

prescribed burning in the area, should it occur. Alternative 2 would be expected to have 

the following residual fuels after harvest and activity-generated fuels treatments (Table 

16) and would meet current Forest goals for hazardous fuels reduction. 

Table 16. Average residual fuel tonnage for Alternative 2. 

10 hour fuels (1/4” to 1”) 1.6 tons per acre 

100 hour fuels (1” to 3”) 2.6 tons per acre 

1000 hour fuels (3” to 9”) 16.6 tons per acre 

 

18 Fuel profile standard from the Umpqua National Forest Hazard Reduction Guidelines. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

94

Indirect Effects 

The expected accumulation of fuel and the potential fire effects over the next 25 years 

has been modeled by the same methods described for Alternative 1. The results of this 

modeling are presented in Table 17. The table does not contain descriptions of all distinct 

areas within the project area, but demonstrates the range of conditions that are 

predicted to exist. 

Table 17. Alternative 2: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre (after 2 snags are felled for soil productivity). 

Unit 45d Unit 73 

Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac 

5 1.75 2.39 17.13 9 5 1.65 1.46 9.92 9 

10 1.32 1.82 13.88 8 10 1.42 1.62 11.01 8 

15 1.21 1.69 10.14 7 15 1.25 1.85 12.30 7 

25 1.98 2.66 15.63 5 25 1.94 2.52 15.92 5 

The preceding table demonstrates the decay of surface fuels and snag retention over 

time. Over time, snag fall accumulations overtake decay rates, resulting in a build up of 

fuels. This fuel build up is accentuated by year 25, especially where a large number of 

snags are retained. However, the fire behavior associated with these conditions remains 

minimal due to treatment and the decay of surface fuels. By year 5 most of the areas 

would remain in a condition, relative to surface fuels, that could be described by a “low” 

FBPS fuel model 11. Due to the relatively slow accumulation of surface fuels from the 

remaining snags the area would likely fit into the fuel model 11 definition, for up to 20 or 

more years. This type of fire behavior, in terms of flame length and fireline intensity, 

would enable direct attack to be taken on a fire by hand crews. 

Most of the snags left would be evenly distributed throughout the area and in addition to 

the relatively mild fire behavior predicted; the frequency of snags would permit safer 

nighttime fireline operations. Resistance to control falls into the “medium” category in 

most areas under Alternative 2. 

Under Alternative 2, shrub growth would be less than what is expected to occur under No 

Action, as reforestation would occur on about 957 acres, with an additional 600 acres 

planted along intensely burned riparian areas. As stated in Alternative 1, shrub growth 

within the first 5 years would tend to slightly dampen the predicted fire indices (flame 

length, rate of spread, and fireline intensity) due to considerably higher fuel moistures 

than similar-sized dead fuels, until the shrubs matured and decayed. The reforestation 

prescription of planting on a 10 foot by 10 foot spacing (riparian areas would be planted at 

14 feet X 14 feet), with 30% to 40% mortality expected would create stands that are fairly 

open. A future fire in these stands would not burn as rapidly as what occurred during 

2002, as stand densities would be less. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

95

Fire behavior would also be influenced by the condition of adjacent stands and by the 

remaining surface fuels and snags. Currently, there are no published studies that have 

examined how post fire salvage logging alters the size distribution of fuels and the 

resulting future fire hazard. Studies on fuels left after harvesting green trees suggests 

that post fire logging may increase short term fuel loads and the fire risk, due to 

increased fine activity fuels. This short-term increase is followed by a reduced 

intermediate and long term fire risk through removal of larger, dead fuels (Brown 1980). 

After a fire, the fine fuels would remain in adjacent stands, potentially increasing the risk 

of future fires. 

As depicted in Figure 30, a fire simulated after implementing Alternative 2 would burn 

about 622 acres during the first burning period. This is a 61% reduction in predicted acres 

burned than what occurs under the No Action Alternative. 

Figure 30. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 2. 

Alternative 3 

Direct Effects 

This alternative differs from the proposed action by further focusing on maintaining soil 

productivity while reducing the potential of sedimentation. Additional logging slash is left 

on-site to provide effective ground cover and reduce the potential for surface erosion. 

Less underburning is used to treat slash in this alternative in order to maintain high levels 

of effective ground cover. Because of this, Alternative 3 would retain higher fuel load, 

which may lessen the opportunity to reintroduce fire in the future. However, Alternative 

3 still serves to reduce fuel loadings and fire suppression difficulties in the area as a 

whole. 

After implementation of Alternative 3 the surface fuels present following salvage would 

consist of the following approximate tonnage in each of the size classes, not including 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

96

large material (down logs) left on site for wildlife or watershed purposes (Table 18). This 

would meet current Forest goals for hazardous fuels reduction. 

Table 18. Average residual fuel tonnage for Alternative 3. 

10 hour fuels (1/4” to 1”) 1.8 tons per acre 

100 hour fuels (1” to 3”) 2.1 tons per acre 

1000 hour fuels (3” to 9”) 16.1 tons per acre 

A direct effect of this alternative is that it distributes residual fuels as evenly as practical, 

providing sufficient ground cover (80% to 100%) for soil protection purposes. The residual 

tonnage is still low enough so that the accumulation of additional surface fuels from the 

predicted snag fall would not present a large fuel buildup or contribute to fire suppression 

difficulties in the short term (1 to 6 years). 

The fire behavior associated with the conditions present during the first 25 years would be 

minimal in terms of fireline intensity, flame length, and rate of spread and could be 

described by a “low” or “medium” FBPS fuel model 11 (Figure 25 and Table 14). This type 

of fire behavior, in terms of flame length and fireline intensity, would enable initial action 

to be taken on a fire by hand crews. The numerous snags likely to be present throughout 

the area may, however, inhibit or preclude safe nighttime operations. Fire behavior in 

adjacent stands would be similar to what was described under Alternative 2. 

Indirect Effects

The indirect effects of Alternative 3 would, in terms of fireline intensity and flame 

lengths, enable effective fire suppression action to be conducted for the first 25 years. 

Although the fire behavior would be conducive to suppression action, the risk from 

retaining numerous snags would be considerable and factor heavily into whether a future 

fire could be directly or indirectly suppressed. 

The accumulation of fuels over the next 25 years has been modeled by the same method 

as described for Alternative 1. Table 19 shows how snag fall rates overtake the decay 

rates of surface fuels at year 25. The relatively small increase in surface fuels between 

years 15 and 25 is due to the residual snags falling that are greater than 20” dbh. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

97

Table 19. Alternative 3: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre (after 2 snags are felled for soil productivity). 

Unit 45d Unit 73 

Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac 

5 1.62 2.39 16.77 4 5 1.99 3.01 17.13 14 

10 1.11 1.71 10.94 4 10 1.42 2.11 12.22 13 

15 0.97 1.20 8.21 3 15 1.29 1.63 10.87 12 

25 1.82 2.52 12.03 3 25 1.88 2.53 14.69 11 

Table 19 again demonstrates the long-term increase in surface fuels as time passes. The 

model shows an increase in fuels after year 5; this is primarily due to snag-fall in the small 

diameter trees. Under Alternative 3, shrub growth would be less than what is expected to 

occur under No Action, as reforestation would occur on about 770 acres, with an 

additional 600 acres planted along intensely burned riparian areas. The effects of shrub 

growth and reforestation would be similar to that described under Alternative 2, although 

almost 200 fewer acres would be reforested. In those areas, effects similar to those 

described under Alternative 1 would occur. 

As depicted in Figure 31, a fire simulated after implementing Alternative 3 would burn 

about 692 acres during the first burning period. This is a 57% reduction in predicted acres 

burned than what is predicted under the No Action Alternative, and is slightly more acres 

than what would burn under Alternative 2. 

Figure 31. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 3. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

98

Alternative 4 

Direct Effects 

This alternative differs from the proposed action by focusing on maximizing economic 

efficiency while still meeting resource objectives. To address fuels concerns, a 

prescription was developed for portions of riparian reserves adjacent to harvest units, 

which would slow fire spread as described in Chapter 2. 

After implementation of Alternative 4 the surface fuels present within harvest units would 

consist of the following approximate tonnage in each of the size classes (Table 20), not 

including large material (downed logs) left on site for wildlife or watershed purposes. 

This would meet current Forest goals for hazardous fuels reduction. 

Table 20. Average residual tonnage for Alternative 4. 

10 hour fuels (1/4” to 1”) 1.1 tons per acre 

100 hour fuels (1” to 3”) 1.3 tons per acre 

1000 hour fuels (3” to 9”) 14.1 tons per acre 

After fuels treatment, a direct effect from this alternative would be a significant 

reduction in surface fuels, creating a condition in the harvest units that would resemble 

those found in a Fuel Model 11, as described under Alternative 2. The direct effects to 

fuel loads and fire behavior within the harvest units would also be the same as Alternative 

2. A direct effect of this alternative is a reduction in fuel loads along roads; there is also 

a slight reduction in fuels in the outer portions of the 32 acres that would be salvaged and 

in the 202 acres that would have fuels treated in the Riparian Reserves. This reduction in 

fuel loads would lessen future fire behavior in these areas, resulting in greater flexibility 

in future fire suppression options and increased firefighter safety, compared to the other 

alternatives. 

Indirect Effects 

In the majority of harvest units, the dead trees left after harvest would have little 

indirect effects on fuels build up from 5 to 25 years. The areas not treated in the Riparian 

Reserves, however, would contribute to existing fuel loads. Table 21 displays the fuel 

accumulations over time, as a result of implementing Alternative 4. 

Table 21. Alternative 4: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre (after 2 snags are felled for soil productivity). 

Unit 45d Unit 73 

Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac 

5 2.17 2.90 19.07 6 5 1.39 2.03 14.66 5 

10 1.40 1.87 12.33 5 10 1.20 1.72 11.02 5 

15 1.19 1.59 10.49 5 15 1.12 1.68 9.88 4 

25 1.56 2.08 13.70 4 25 1.73 2.33 13.92 3 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

99

Table 21 shows the buildup of fuels over time, similar to that displayed for Alternatives 2 

and 3. Where fewer trees are retained, fuel loads would be less in the future. Under 

Alternative 4, shrub growth would be less than what is expected to occur under No Action, 

as reforestation would occur on about 951 acres, with an additional 600 acres planted 

along intensely burned riparian areas. The effects of shrub growth and reforestation 

would be similar to that described under Alternative 2. 

As depicted in Figure 32, a fire simulated after implementing Alternative 4 would burn 

about 669 acres during the first burning period; eliminating the unsuitable soils from 

salvage (a change between draft and final) would result in more fuels available for 

burning in the future. This would result in a slightly higher prediction of acres burned. 

This is approximately a 58% reduction in predicted acres burned than what occurs under 

the No Action Alternative, and burns slightly more acres than what burns under 

Alternative 2. 

Figure 32. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 4. 

Alternative 5 

Direct Effects 

Alternative 5 follows recommendations set forth in “Recommendations for Ecologically 

Sound Post-Fire Salvage Management and Other Post-Fire Treatments on Federal Lands in 

the West” (Beschta et al. 1995). This alternative retains the most snags of all of the 

action alternatives. 

All harvest units would receive post harvest fuels treatments either by hand or grapple 

piling. After completion of Alternative 5 the surface fuels present would consist of the 

following approximate tonnage in each of the size classes, not including large material 

(downed logs) left on site for wildlife or watershed purposes (Table 22): 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

100

Table 22. Average Residual Tonnage for Alternative 5. 

10 hour fuels (1/4” to 1”) 1.3 tons per acre 

100 hour fuels (1” to 3”) 2.2 tons per acre 

1000 hour fuels (3” to 9”) 7.7 tons per acre 

The lower post harvest fuel loadings associated with this alternative as described in Table 

22 are due to lower amounts of volume being removed, which would create less activitygenerated fuels. Forest plan goals for activity generated fuels would be met. The initial 

fuel loadings within harvest units after fuels treatment would be represented by fuel 

model 11. Areas not harvested and treated would be represented by conditions stated in 

Alternative 1. 

The direct effect of implementing Alternative 5 would be a short-term reduction in 

surface fuel loads over the 220 acres proposed for salvage and along roadsides (about 173 

acres). However, this alternative would not significantly reduce future fuel loads or 

reduce the intensity of future fires that may occur in the same place (Barker 1989; Kline 

1996, SAF 1996, USDA 1994). Additionally, a direct effect of retaining high levels of snags 

across the landscape would be a potential rapid buildup of insect pest populations 

(Amman and Ryan 1991; Simon et al. 1994), which could spread to green trees, potentially 

creating an additional fuels hazard if those trees were to die. 

Indirect Effects 

Over time, the indirect effects of implementing Alternative 5 would be the creation of a 

landscape where fire suppression activities would be difficult and hazardous. Under 

Alternative 5, the likely scenario in the future would be to manage fires within the 2002 

Apple Fire perimeter by retreating to ridge tops outside the fire perimeter and conducting 

suppression activities indirectly. The presence of numerous snags in the area would also 

contribute greatly to a decision to retreat and indirectly attack a fire to protect 

firefighters from falling snags. Alternative 5 would serve to compound fire suppression 

difficulties in the area as a whole. 

Alternative 5 would complicate the reintroduction of fire as a tool to manage fuel loading 

and to meet ecological goals in the future because of the high density of snags and down 

wood that would remain. Prescribed fire in areas of high fuel loading and high levels of 

snag retention risks escape and killing growing trees and would require significant 

preparation and numerous entries to be successful, should it occur. Alternative 5 would 

not contribute to the effectiveness of future prescribed burning or other potential future 

projects to improve forest health, desired vegetation conditions, fire resilience or 

suppression effectiveness across the landscape. 

In the majority of harvest units, the dead trees left after harvest would have a significant 

effect on fuels build up in the first 25 years. Table 23 displays the fuel accumulations in 

the future as a result of implementing Alternative 5. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

101

Table 23. Alternative 5: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre (after 2 snags are felled for soil productivity). 

Unit 45d Unit 73 

Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac 

5 3.98 4.13 24.12 77 5 5.32 6.77 40.02 39 

10 5.22 6.02 39.14 49 10 7.94 9.46 51.39 22 

15 7.14 9.66 55.63 38 15 9.66 11.29 69.23 18 

25 9.00 11.21 74.02 29 25 11.55 14.82 90.14 12 

Table 23 displays the accumulation of fuels likely to occur under Alternative 5. Retaining 

high densities of snags would result in heavy snag fall rates in the future as shown in units 

45d and 73. This would result in fuel loadings that would be represented by a Fuel Model 

11 within 5 years. Within 25 years, conditions would represent a Fuel Model 12, which 

would exhibit subsequently higher flame lengths, fireline intensities, and rates of spread. 

High flame lengths and fireline intensities may preclude direct attack by handcrews or 

dozers. The fire’s rate of spread would exceed the sustained line production capability of 

a handcrew. Indirect attack, where fire lines are constructed away from the fire on 

ridges or along roads, would be required. Indirect attack results in larger fires, since the 

unburned area between the main fire and the fireline is intentionally burned in advance of 

the wildfire to eliminate fuel. The high density of snags present would most likely 

preclude the use of nighttime operations, normally the time when fire behavior is at its 

minimum and significant suppression activities may be conducted. 

In response to comments received during the 45-day comment period, the Benchmark 

Fire, which occurred on the Tiller Ranger District in 1996 was examined. The area was 

salvaged utilizing a 50% retention prescription, similar to the Beschta prescription 

prescribed under Alternative 5. A fuels inventory was completed in 2003 for the 

Benchmark Salvage. The model used to predict the fuel loads for Baked Apple cannot 

account for fuels over 9” in diameter. The inventory completed for the Benchmark 

Salvage counted all fuels, including those over 9” in diameter. It is not possible to 

directly compare the two salvages, based on the limitations of the model. Therefore, 

only fuels under 9” in diameter are compared (Table 23A). 

Table 23A. Comparison of 10-100 hour fuel accumulations (post salvage) between the 

Benchmark Salvage and the Baked Apple Fire Salvage. 

Benchmark Salvage Fuels Accumulations 

between 1996 and 2003 (7 yr. time 

period) 

Baked Apple Salvage Unit 73 (10 years 

post salvage) 

Size in Inches Tons/Acre Size in Inches Tons/Acre 

10 hr. 2.69 10 hr. 7.94 

100 hr. 4.4 100 hr. 9.46 

1000 hr. 10.9 1000 hr. 51.39 

Table 23A demonstrates that higher fuels loads are predicted under Baked Apple, most 

likely because of differences in the stands (stand density, stem size, etc.). However, 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

102

overall, it can be concluded that fuel loads are likely to be higher in the long term under 

a Beschta-like prescription, due to the sheer amount of biomass that would be retained. 

Shrub growth is likely to be extensive under the Alternative 5, as salvage and subsequent 

regeneration efforts would only occur on about 220 acres. The effects of shrub growth 

would be similar to those described under the No Action Alternative, except on the 220 

acres that are reforested. These areas would respond in a manner similar to that 

described under the other action alternatives. 

As depicted in Figure 33, a fire simulated after implementing Alternative 5 would burn 

about 923 acres during the first burning period. This is a 42% reduction in predicted acres 

burned than what occurs under the No Action Alternative; however, this alternative would 

likely burn 300 acres more than what burns under Alternative 2. 

Figure 33. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 5. 

Alternative 6 

Direct Effects 

This alternative differs from the proposed action by focusing harvest in areas that 

historically experienced higher intensity fires. Strategic fuel breaks were identified along 

the perimeter of the Steep/Dry landscape area. After fuels treatment, harvest units 

would convert to a fuel model 11. The areas outside the proposed harvest units would be 

represented by the conditions representative of a fuel model 12 as stated in Alternative 1. 

The treatment of fuels within harvest units would breakup the continuity and arrangement 

of fuels upon the landscape giving fire managers options while attempting to suppress a 

future fire. 

After completion of alternative 6 the surface fuels present would consist of the following 

approximate tonnage in each of the size classes, not including large material (downed 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

103

logs) left on site for wildlife or watershed purposes (Table 24). This would meet current 

Forest goals for hazardous fuels reduction. 

Table 24. Average Residual Tonnage for Alternative 6. 

10 hour fuels (1/4” to 1”) 1.9 tons per acre 

100 hour fuels (1” to 3”) 2.4 tons per acre 

1000 hour fuels (3” to 9”) 15.8 tons per acre 

After fuels treatment, a direct effect from this alternative would be a reduction in 

surface fuels, creating a condition in the harvest units that would resemble those found in 

a Fuel Model 11, as described under Alternative 2. The direct effects to fuel loads and 

fire behavior within the harvest units would also be similar to those described under 

Alternative 2; however, the harvest units that would retain high densities of snags would 

resemble the stands treated under Alternative 5. In these units, the short term direct 

effect of harvest and fuels treatment would create conditions like those found in a Fuel 

Model 11. The effect of retaining higher levels of snags would be the creation of 

conditions that resemble a Fuel Model 12 within 25 years. The short term reduction in 

fuel loads would lessen future fire behavior in these areas, resulting in greater flexibility 

in future fire suppression options and increased firefighter safety. However, the areas 

that would move rapidly into a Fuel Model 12 would cause concern for management of 

future fires, as described under Alternative 5. 

Indirect Effects 

Over time, the cumulative effects of implementing Alternative 6 would be the creation of 

a landscape with strategic fuel breaks where fire is most likely to occur and the 

maintenance of coarse wood across the landscape by retaining varying amounts of trees. 

In the majority of harvest units, the dead trees left after harvest would have not have a 

significant indirect effect on fuels build up in the first 25 years. Areas that retained 

higher levels of down wood, however, would contribute to high fuel loads over time. 

Table 25 displays the fuel accumulations in the future as a result of implementing 

Alternative 6. 

Table 25. Alternative 6: Potential Fuel Accumulations (tons/acre) and Remaining 

Snags/Acre (after 2 snags are felled for soil productivity). 

Unit 45d Unit 73 

Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac Year 10 hr. 100 

hr. 

1000 

hr. 

Snags/ac 

5 2.08 2.77 18.26 4 5 1.04 1.51 38.79 74 

10 1.20 1.60 10.54 4 10 1.62 2.38 66.59 56 

15 .90 1.20 7.90 3 15 1.92 2.85 86.64 44 

25 1.13 1.51 9.92 3 25 2.07 3.15 111.31 28 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

104

Table 25 demonstrates in this alternative, units that retained higher densities of snags are 

predicted to have a continuous and large build up of fuels over 25 years due to continuous 

snag fall. Fire behavior on the 195 acres that use the “Beschta” prescription would 

resemble conditions described under Alternative 5. The numerous snags would factor 

significantly into a fire manager’s decision to fight the fire by direct or indirect 

suppression methods. In contrast, in units that retained 4-15 trees per acre (722 acres), 

the resulting future fire behavior would be conducive to suppression actions and would 

have fewer snags that would put firefighters at risk. 

Future reintroduction of fire as a tool to manage fuel loading within the 195 acres of high 

retention prescriptions would be difficult. Future prescribed fire in areas of high fuel 

loading risk escape and would require costly preparation and numerous entries to be 

successful. Within these areas, resistance to control in years 1 and 2 would be minimal, 

from years 3 to 5 it would range from medium to high, and after year 5 would range from 

medium to extreme. 

In the 722 acres of salvage units where 4 and 15 trees per acre would be retained, the 

fuels accumulation decreases due to decay until the 25-year level where snag fall starts 

the accumulation again. The fire behavior associated with these conditions would be 

minimal during the first 25 years, in terms of fireline intensity, flame length, and rate of 

spread, and would be described by a “low” or “medium” FBPS fuel model 11. This type of 

fire behavior, in terms of flame length and fireline intensity, would enable initial action 

to be taken on a fire by hand crews. The numerous snags in the areas where 12-15 snags 

per acre were retained may, however, inhibit or preclude safe fireline operations, 

especially at night. 

Under Alternative 6, shrub growth would be less than what is expected to occur under No 

Action, as reforestation would occur on about 864 acres, with an additional 600 acres 

planted along intensely burned riparian areas. The effects of shrub growth and 

reforestation would be similar to that described under Alternative 2. 

Alternative 6 is predicted to burn about 599 acres during the first burning period (Figure 

34); eliminating the unsuitable soils from salvage (a change between draft and final) 

would result in a negligible addition of fuels in the area (18 acres). This is approximately 

a 63% reduction in predicted acres burned than what occurs under the No Action 

Alternative. Additionally, this alternative burns 23 fewer acres than Alternative 2, 93 

fewer acres than Alternative 3, 70 fewer acres than Alternative 4, and 324 fewer acres 

than Alternative 5 because of the placement of strategic fuel breaks across the landscape. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

105

Figure 34. FARSITE Prediction for Alternative 6. 

Cumulative Effects – All Alternatives 

Fuels Structure/Condition 

Historically, fuel models for the reference period consisted primarily of Fuel Models 8 and 

10 in the mid and late seral stands. Fuel models 1 and 5, grass and brush respectively, 

totaled together 2% of the watershed. Fuel model 9 is comprised of a heavy leaf/needle 

layer often found in hardwoods and pure pine stands. Therefore, detecting fuel model 9 

through use of aerial photos is difficult and it is entered as a fuel model 10 based on 

predicted fire behavior in this fuel model. The composition of fuel models within the 

watershed are displayed in Figure 35. 

Fire suppression has been in effect through the Forest Service for approximately 80 years. 

Fire suppression using manpower was effective, but limited due to access. However, fire 

suppression through technology (road construction) began in the late 1940’s. Since the 

1940’s forest fuels have been allowed to accumulate without mitigation measures to keep 

the levels in check. 

Today, the condition and structure of fuels in the landscape surrounding the Baked Apple 

project can generally be described as a Fuel Model 10 (as described previously). Fire 

suppression has allowed heavy down and dead fuels to accumulate underneath a dense 

understory of trees and shrubs. As stated in the Middle North Umpqua Watershed 

Analysis, the current condition is a moderate severity fire regime with signs of transition 

to a high severity regime. Much of the landscape is in Condition Class 2 and 3. Some of 

the mid seral stands are supporting a Fuel Model 10 where historically these stands would 

typically support a Fuel Model 8 due to periodic low intensity ground fires. These fires 

would typically burn in areas where fuel concentrations exist and stand replace areas 

where drainage winds, weather and the steep dissected slopes occurred. This would 

include both sides of the North Umpqua River corridor. High severity fires can be 

expected particularly in areas where Fuel Model 10 from the reference condition has 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

106

maintained a Fuel Model 10 today. The Calf Creek Roadless Area and Late-successional 

Reserve (LSR) 222 lies to the east of the planning area; over 9,000 acres of this area 

burned during the 2002 fires. This area would also function as a Fuel Model 12, but future 

fires would be expected to be severe, as no fuel removal activities are planned. The 

68,000+ acres that burned during the 2002 Tiller Fires both consumed and created fuels. 

Salvage activities are proposed on approximately 450 acres (Ash Creek and Acker 

salvages). The salvage areas would alter fuel conditions, similar to those altered by this 

project. The areas not salvaged would likely accumulate wood similar to that which is 

projected to occur for the unsalvaged portions of the Apple Fire. 

Figure 35 shows a comparison on a thousand acre basis of reference fuel models and 

current fuel models within the watershed; Fuel Model 12, which is not displayed in the 

graph, was not present at a detectable level in the watershed prior to the 2002 fires. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

 Acres in Thousands (approximate)

FM 1 FM 5 FM 8 FM 10 FM 11

Fuel Models

Fuel Model Comparison Within the Middle North Umpqua Watershed

Reference Current

Figure 35. Fuel Models in the Middle North Umpqua Watershed. 

The cumulative effects of Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 in the Baked Apple Fire Salvage 

Project would be to move areas that would be salvaged into a Fuel Model 11 in the longterm. Alternatives 1 and 5 would have short-term changes to a Fuel Model 11, but in the 

long-term, Fuel Model 12 conditions would occur. Across the landscape, Fuel Models 10 

and 8 would dominate. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 would create areas of fuel breaks and 

would alter future fire behavior. Alternatives 1 and 5 would continue to contribute high 

fuel loads across the landscape, contributing to cumulative fire effects in the future. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

107

FIRE EFFECTS/FIRE BEHAVIOR 

A moderate severity fire regime generally describes the landscape surrounding the Baked 

Apple planning area. Moderate severity fire regimes can be described as infrequent fires 

(35-100 years) that are often partial stand replacement fires and include areas of high and 

low intensity. Analysis of historic fire patterns and the topographic character of the 

planning area indicate that it normally experiences high intensity fires. Fire suppression, 

timber harvest, and road building as described in Table 8 have contributed to cumulative 

effects to fire behavior across the planning area and the landscape. Fire suppression has 

limited the acres that burn within the watershed, has converted some stands from fire 

tolerant species to fire intolerant species, and has allowed for an increase in fuels within 

old growth stands. Timber harvest has broken up stand continuity throughout the 

landscape, changed stand structure and plant association, and has caused microclimate 

changes, particularly in temperature and humidity. Finally, road construction has 

provided natural barriers for fire spread and has aided in fire suppression by allowing 

direct access to fire starts. Cumulative, these activities have moved today’s Condition 

Class away from what previously occurred. 

These influences have affected the range of variability. Fire is less prevalent on today’s 

landscape than in prehistoric times, due to effective fire control policies. Ironically, 

success in fire suppression has allowed more uniform and increasing fuel loads across the 

landscape, shifting forest fire effects that were typically of low and moderate severity in 

historic fires to more severe fire effects today. The lack of fires interaction and increase 

in management interaction with the environment directly affects landscape burn patterns 

today. 

In late seral stands fire suppression has allowed forest fuels to increase altering the fuels 

condition. Today’s fuel model 10 contains a higher quantity of all size classes where 

reference fuel model 10 periodically burned and maintained lower levels of 0-3” material. 

Tolerance or resiliency to fire has decreased. This trend is expected to continue, as this 

project would not affect the surrounding landscape. 

Burn patterns would likely be contiguous and moderate to high intensity where topography 

is steep, dissected and south to southwest aspects. This would hold true particularly in 

the roadless areas where access is limited. The harvest activities associated with 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 in the Baked Apple Fire Salvage would break up the continuity 

of fuels and would create a patchy burn with a greater amount of low to moderate 

severity fire effects. The burn patterns for the majority of the watershed can be 

expected to be a combination of low, moderate, and high intensity creating a patchwork 

across the landscape. 

Comparison of Alternatives 

Table 26 displays the fuel models, fuel loadings, future fire behavior, future fire size, and 

residual tons per acre of activity-generated fuels that would occur as a result of 

implementing or not implementing the project. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

108

Table 26. Comparison of Alternatives using fire and fuels parameters. 

FUEL MODELS 

 Unit 45d 

Year Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6 

0 

(immediately 

after the fire)

8 8 8 8 8 8 

5 11 11 11 11 11 11 

10 12 11 11 11 12 11 

15 12 11 11 11 12 11 

25 12 11 11 11 12 11 

 Unit 73 

Year Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6 

0 

(immediately 

after the fire)

8 8 8 8 8 8 

5 11 11 11 11 11 11 

10 12 11 11 11 12 11 

15 12 11 11 11 12 11 

25 12 11 11 11 12 11 

FUEL LOADINGS – SALVAGE UNITS (range of tons per acre) 

 Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6 

Tons/ac 57-70 13-26 19-28 16-52 47-66 20-68 

FUTURE FIRE BEHAVIOR – PLANNING AREA 

Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6 

Intensity of 

fire 

High 

Intensity 

LowModerate 

Intensity 

LowModerate 

Intensity 

LowModerate 

Intensity 

High 

Intensity 

LowModerate 

Intensity 

APPROXIMATE FUTURE WILDFIRE SIZE PREDICTED BY FARSITE 

Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6 

Acres 1579 622 692 669 923 559 

AVERAGE RESIDUAL TONS PER ACRE OF ACTIVITY GENERATED FUELS 

Fuels Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6 

10 hour NA 1.6 1.8 1.1 1.3 1.9 

100 hour NA 2.6 2.1 1.3 2.2 2.4 

1000 hour NA 16.6 16.1 14.1 7.7 15.8 

Alternatives 1 and 5 

Fuels would continuously build up over the project area and outside the project area, at 

the rates described previously. Alternative 5 harvests less than 50% of the dead trees in 

the stands; although this would reduce fuels, the reduction is minimal and would not 

remove enough fuel to change the resulting fuel model. However, Alternative 5 generates 

the least amount of activity fuels, as less logging would occur. Alternatives 1 and 5 would 

create future fire behavior that would cause difficultly suppressing fires and would 

impede the ability of managers to use prescribed fire in the future. Total fuel loadings 

would remain high. Fire regimes would be low in the initial stages and transition to a 

moderate to high fire regime in the future as fuels accumulate and vegetation grows. 

Fuel models would be represented with a fuel model 11 in the short term and transition to 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

109

a fuel model 12 after about 5 years. Fire intensities associated with fuel model 12 would 

likely cause excessive soil heating, high mortality to vegetation and considerable amounts 

of emissions from smoke. Future fire growth would be large; Alternative 1 results in the 

largest wildfire in the future, followed by Alternative 5. Alternative 5 burns 656 acres less 

that Alternative 1 under a future fire scenario; this demonstrates that breaking up the 

arrangement and continuity of fuels through salvage would have an impact on future fire 

growth. 

Action Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 

Fuels would build up at slower rate due to removal of fuels through harvest. Fuels would 

be represented by a fuel model 11 within harvest units, due to the breaking up of the 

continuity and arrangement of fuels within the project area. Future fire behavior 

associated with the action alternatives after harvest and fuels treatment would be 

reduced, allowing for safer and more effective suppression operations within the project 

area. Implementation of future prescribed fire projects would be safer, easier and have 

greater benefits. Conditions outside the project area would exhibit fire behavior and 

fuels conditions described under the no action alternative. When a fire occurs outside the 

project area and advances toward the treated areas within the project area, effective 

suppression operations could be implemented utilizing the treated areas as control points 

or fire breaks due to diminished fire behavior caused by the removal and treatment of 

fuels. Fire regimes would be low in the initial stages and transition to moderate in the 

future, as fuels accumulate and vegetation continues to grow. Future fire growth is 

limited as more fuels are removed. Alternative 6 is most effective at limiting future fire 

growth, followed by Alternative 2, 4, and 3 (in terms of greatest to least effective). 

Effects of Fire Suppression Activities 

During the Apple Fire, suppression activities included construction of firelines. Fireline 

construction removes fuels to mineral soil in order to slow or stop fire spread. In addition 

fuels are cut to widen the area where fireline would be located. Methods for construction 

of fireline include use of mechanized equipment (dozers) and hand construction. Where 

fireline was constructed, extensive rehabilitation took place before the fall rains of 2002. 

Rehabilitation included placing woody material that was not consumed by the fire back 

into the fireline, which immediately increased effective ground cover. On steeper slopes, 

waterbars were constructed in firelines to divert water runoff away from burned areas. 

Firefighter safety zones that were constructed with mechanized equipment were 

rehabilitated by spreading native grass seed, which helped reduced erosion potential and 

noxious weed encroachment. 

Hazard tree falling also occurred as part of fire suppression activities. In most cases, 

these trees were left on site, adding to existing fuel loadings. In a small area of the fire, 

mostly along Road 4714, a feller-buncher was used to fell and stack the logs along the 

roadside. A self-loading log truck and a forwarder were the used to remove the hazard 

trees. This helped reduce the fuels along this road. Roadside brushing occurred along 

most of the roads in the planning area, increasing safety during travel and reducing fuels 

in preparation for burnout operations. The fuels created by this activity were piled and 

burned; this also helped reduce fuels along these roadsides. Finally, burnout operations 

were conducted on about 1,200 acres during the suppression of the Apple Fire. Most 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

110

burnout operations resulted in mosaic burns or underburns. This had a beneficial effect of 

reducing fuels throughout the burnout area. 

TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE HABITATS 

Scoping identified a number of concerns related to the impacts of the proposed salvage 

activities on terrestrial wildlife and/or components of their habitat. There is a concern 

that salvage logging would decrease the structural diversity of early-successional habitat 

by harvesting more than 50% of the trees within the salvage units. This issue is tracked 

under the title of early-successional habitat with snags. Scoping identified a concern that 

the proposed salvage harvest may impact some stands that are still functioning as latesuccessional habitat. This issue is tracked under the title of late-successional habitat. 

Scoping identified a concern that salvage logging would decrease the current and future 

availability of down, dead wood. This issue is tracked under the title of coarse woody 

debris and continues under the discussion of distribution of dead wood. Scoping also 

identified a concern that spring burning of slash may impact birds passing through the 

area. This issue is tracked under the title of landbirds. 

Background: Natural Range of Variability, Pre and Post Fire 

The Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis (USDA 2001) defines terrestrial habitats in 

terms of three successional stages and five habitat types. Before the Apple Fire, these 

habitats were near or within their estimated natural range based on acreage, but more 

fragmented than they historically were. Within the planning area, there is a large area of 

gentle/moist terrain located on the eastern slopes of Panther Ridge and around the 

tributaries and headwaters of Panther and Fairy Creeks. This landscape feature usually 

“dampens” the effects of wildfire (depending on weather) within the planning area. 

Because of this, the “natural range” of successional conditions is slightly different in the 

planning area from that of the larger Middle North Umpqua River watershed. The natural 

range for early-successional habitat within the planning area is lower than in the larger 

watershed and the range for late-successional habitat is slightly higher, as displayed in 

Figure 36. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

111

Figure 36. The Apple Fire increased early and decreased late-successional habitat 

(both estimated to currently be outside of the natural range) within the planning area. 

Mid-successional habitat decreased slightly but is still within its natural range 

(acreage-wise). The landscape is now slightly less fragmented due to a large patch of 

early-successional habitat in Limpy Creek. However, it is still more diverse and 

fragmented than the historic landscape was. 

AQUATIC CONSERVATION STRATEGY – TERRESTRIAL COMPONENTS 

Affected Environment 

The Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) was developed to restore and maintain the longterm ecological health of watersheds and aquatic ecosystem. This strategy is applied over 

broad landscapes as opposed to individual projects or small watersheds. The ACS seeks to 

accomplish this goal by maintaining the natural disturbance regime which operates over 

long time scales on the order of decades or longer (Northwest Forest Plan ROD B-9). To 

help attain the goal of the ACS, a landscape plan was developed in the Middle North 

Umpqua watershed analysis that would re-establish landscape patterns associated with 

the local natural disturbance regime (USDA, 2001). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

112

Changes in landscape patterns were analyzed in the watershed analysis by comparing the 

current patterns with historic patterns. The historic vegetation patterns were developed 

from historical vegetation mapping from 1914 and 1932. The 1946 aerial photos were also 

used to help establish the historic range of vegetation patterns. 

Figure 36 shows how fire changed the landscape-scale features of the watershed in 

relation to the estimated natural range. In some cases, fire caused certain features to 

fall outside of the natural range (e.g., late-successional forest habitat). In other cases, it 

moved the watershed to a more natural condition (e.g., less landscape diversity and 

fragmentation because many small patches were replaced with the larger fire area). 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

The 2002 Apple Fire caused greater impact to terrestrial habitats and their related 

objectives, when compared to the proposed salvage activities. The Baked Apple project 

affects two of three terrestrial habitat components: early and late-successional habitat. 

It does not impact mid-successional habitat. 

All action alternatives are designed to maintain the distribution, diversity, and complexity 

of the watershed’s landscape-scale features (ACS objective 1) by not moving early and 

late-successional habitat outside of or further away from their natural range by increasing 

or decreasing their landscape pattern acreages. By doing this, the action alternatives also 

maintain the spatial connectivity of these features within and between watersheds (ACS 

objective 2). Landscape connectivity is aided by riparian and unsuitable soil buffers. A 

direct effect of Alternative 4 is the removal of a portion of the 12 to 18 inch d.b.h. dead 

trees in the outer 180 feet of the Riparian Reserves that are adjacent to harvest units. 

This limited amount of removal (32 acres scattered across the Limpy Creek drainage) 

would not adversely affect connectivity for riparian dependent species (e.g., Pacific 

shrew). 

By following the landscape plan and timber harvesting recommendations in the watershed 

analysis (USDA 2001), the action alternatives would allow the forest within the planning 

area to move towards a desired range of landscape patterns and stand structures, which 

approximate the natural disturbance regime. Once attained, the planning area would 

provide the appropriate amounts of habitats to support well-distributed populations of 

native wildlife species (ACS objective 9). Of the action alternatives, Alternative 6 most 

closely follows the landscape plan by focusing the timber harvesting within the “steep and 

dry landscape area” as identified in the watershed analysis. Alternative 1 would result in 

no change to landscape patterns, and therefore no impacts. Cumulatively, past 

management actions (mainly clearcut harvesting) have caused the landscape-scale 

features (Figure 36) to move outside of their natural ranges. Proposed and foreseeable 

future actions are not anticipated to degrade these conditions further, but would maintain 

or restore these conditions in the future. 

EARLY-SUCCESSIONAL HABITAT WITH SNAGS – TRACKED AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

Affected Environment 

It was determined during scoping that the salvage of dead trees would decrease the 

structural diversity of the early-successional habitat that was created by the fire. The 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

113

measure selected to assess the impacts of the alternatives is the percentage of this type 

of habitat that would be salvaged to less than 50% if its current tree density. This 

measure was selected because it directly responds to the concern raised by the public, as 

cited in Beschta et. al. (1995). 

Early-successional habitat can have two different types of structure. It can have high 

densities of dead trees, such as after a stand-replacing fire as described by the “stand 

initiation structure stage” discussion in the Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis 

(USDA 2001). It can also be devoid of dead tree structure, such as in a clearcut unit or 

meadow. As shown in Figure 36, early-successional habitat was above its estimated 

natural range before the fire. This deviation from the natural range was mainly caused by 

clearcut harvesting (including post-fire salvaging from the 1987 Apple Fire), creating many 

acres of early-successional habitat almost devoid of large dead trees, as shown by a large 

snag inventory conducted in 2002 (Davis 2003). 

The Apple Fire increased the amount of early-successional habitat and pushed the acreage 

further away from its estimated natural range. However, about 2,066 acres of the earlysuccessional habitat the fire created has high densities of large dead trees (snags). This 

type of early-successional habitat (with high densities of dead trees) was “highly deficit” 

within the Middle North Umpqua watershed (USDA 2001) prior to the fire. About 165 acres 

of this habitat occurred within the Wild and Scenic River Corridor, as a result of the 1987 

Apple Fire. The amount of early-successional habitat with high densities of dead trees is 

now within its estimated natural range, even though total acreage of early-successional 

habitat is higher than it is estimated to naturally occur. The median density of standing 

dead trees (≥16 inch d.b.h.) within the proposed salvage units is around 51 trees per acre 

(USDA 2003). This tree density is similar to that found in unmanaged stands for the plant 

series found within the planning area and would be the normal expected density of large 

dead trees after a stand-replacing wildfire (USDA et. al. 1998). 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Salvage operations associated with the action alternatives would not change the acreage 

of early-successional habitat within the planning area. The total amount would remain 

higher than the estimated natural range. However, removal of standing dead trees alters 

the amount and structure (e.g., tree density) of the fire-created early-successional 

habitat with high densities of dead trees. Reducing the density of dead trees may have 

direct impacts to wildlife that depend on this type of post-fire habitat (e.g., 

woodpeckers, various landbirds). 

The issues raised during scoping that salvaging would decrease the structural diversity of 

early-successional habitat by harvesting more than 50% of the trees within the salvage 

units originates in the salvage recommendations of Beschta et al. (1995). The authors 

recommend “leaving at least 50% of the standing dead trees in each diameter class”; 

however, no scientific basis is given for this percentage. In order to respond to the issue, 

the direct impacts of the proposed activities are compared using the percentage of the 

total early-successional habitat (with high tree densities) within the planning area that 

would be salvaged to less than 50% of its current dead tree density (Figure 37). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

114

0

10

20

30

40

50

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

% Harvested

Figure 37. Comparison of alternatives, direct impacts to early-successional habitat 

based on percentage of the total post-fire habitat within the planning area that would 

have >50% of the standing dead trees harvested.

Alternative 1 has no direct effect on the structural diversity of early-successional habitat. 

Alternative 5 maintains relatively high densities of dead trees (≥50%) and therefore is 

considered to have an insignificant impact. Alternative 4 reduces dead tree densities to 

below 50% over the highest amount of that habitat type (45% of the existing 2,066 acres, 

or 1,138 acres), followed by Alternatives 2, 3, and 6 (in order of most to least impact). 

Under all alternatives, over 50% of the existing fire-created habitat within the planning 

area would not be harvested; these are the areas not proposed for salvage. This habitat 

type remains well distributed across the planning area with the Riparian Reserve network 

and as scattered patches. In addition, the retention of various amounts of dead trees 

within harvest units in all proposed action alternatives helps to maintain structure for 

wildlife within the harvest units (retention levels are based on the best available scientific 

data). For these reasons, the direct effect from these proposed management activities is 

not expected to have a significant impact on early-successional habitat and related 

wildlife (USDA 2001). 

Indirect Effects 

Reforestation can speed up the rate of vegetative succession and shorten the length of 

time that early-successional habitat is available to associated wildlife (e.g., grass/forb 

and shrub/forb species). The indirect impacts of the proposed alternatives are compared 

using the acreage of early-successional habitat being proposed for planting with conifer 

(Figure 38). 

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

Acres Planted

Figure 38. Comparison of alternative impacts to early-successional habitat based on 

acres being planted with conifer.

Alternative 1 has no indirect effect on early-successional habitat. Alternative 5 has the 

least impact because it replants the lowest amount of acreage to conifer. Alternative 4 

plants the most acreage, followed by Alternatives 2, 6 and 3 (in order of most to least 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

115

acres planted). Overall, by speeding up the successional timeframe, early-successional 

dependent species, such as the western bluebird, would potentially decrease quicker in 

populations and migrate to other areas where early-successional habitat is available. This 

cycle is a natural ecological process that would be affected by reforestation. However, 

this effect is insignificant as long as early-successional habitats are available on the 

landscape within the planning area over time and space within their natural range. 

Cumulative Effects 

Prior to the fire, slightly over 2,000 acres of early-successional habitat existed within the 

planning area; this habitat was “set back” by the fire. These areas did not contain 

salvageable trees and are not part of this proposed project, but they are planned for 

future reforestation. Recent actions include approximately 55 acres planted along the 

lower 3 miles of Limpy Creek and 287 acres of conifer planting on burned plantations. 

Proposed activities associated with this project include salvage logging, underburning, and 

planting of salvage units. Foreseeable future actions include 112 acres of planting from 

the Apple Seed project and reforestation of the approximate 1,600 acres of burned over 

plantations. 

Cumulative impacts are compared by showing how many acres of early-successional 

habitat would be impacted through the various types of past, present and foreseeable 

future management activities under each alternative. In addition, in some areas the same 

piece of ground (and habitat) would be impacted more than one time as different 

activities occur at different times (e.g., salvaging, burning and then planting). Therefore, 

levels of management intensity are also compared using the number of activities occurring 

on the same piece of ground (Figure 39). It is assumed that the amount and intensity of 

management activities is proportional to the impact on species that occur and/or depend 

on early-successional habitat (i.e. the more management, the higher the impact). 

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

Acres

Three Activities

Two Activities

One Activity

Figure 39. Comparison of cumulative impacts to early-successional habitat, and 

related wildlife species, based on total acres of past, proposed and foreseeable actions 

including salvage, prescribed burning and planting of conifer (level of management 

intensity is indicated by the number of activities that would occur on the same piece 

of ground).

Alternative 1 has the least amount of cumulative impacts and includes only the activities 

associated with the Apple Seed project and foreseeable tree planting. Alternative 5 has 

the second least amount of cumulative impact and does not propose any underburning, 

but only pile burning in the fall season. Following, in order of least to most cumulative 

impacts, are Alternatives 3, 6, 2 and 4. 

Due to the excessive quantity of early-successional habitat currently within the planning 

area (about 2.7 times higher than the upper estimate of the natural range), the 

cumulative impacts associated with the alternatives are expected to have negligible 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

116

affects on early-successional wildlife. The acreage of early-successional habitat that is 

not being impacted (salvaged or planted), covers about 17-28% of the planning area 

(depending on the alternative). This is still higher than the estimated natural range of 

variability for this type of habitat. 

LATE-SUCCESSIONAL HABITAT – TRACKED AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

It was determined during scoping that the salvage of dead trees would potentially impact 

late-successional/old growth stands that burned with less intensity (underburned or 

mosaic burned). In particular, some of the stands proposed for salvage contain large, old, 

live, green trees. Salvage may damage these trees and/or impact the “functionality” of 

the late-successional stands. The measure selected to assess the impacts of the 

alternatives is the acreage of late-successional habitat being salvaged by each alternative. 

This includes acres being treated for partial removal and hazard tree reduction. This 

indicator was selected because it quantitatively defines the potential for the proposed 

activities to impact this habitat type. 

Affected Environment 

The 2002 Apple Fire had a large impact on late-successional habitat. Within the planning 

area, the fire stand-replaced about 2,028 acres (27%) of the existing late-successional 

forest habitat. Approximately 5,471 acres of late-successional forest habitat currently 

exists within the planning area, sixty-one percent of which was underburned by the fire. 

However, portions of a few proposed units in some of the alternatives have enough green 

trees left that survived the fire, that they are still considered late-successional habitat. 

These units are designated for “partial removal” or harvesting of dead trees that are 

intermixed with the green trees. They occur mainly within the Panther, Fairy and 

Bachelor Creek drainages, where the fire burned more of a mosaic pattern, creating 

smaller patches of dead trees, as opposed to the large patch of dead trees created in the 

Limpy drainage. 

Ecological processes such as low-to-moderate intensity wildfire are essential for the 

development or maintenance of late-successional forest habitat into old growth. 

Disturbance creates the structure and diversity associated with late-successional/old 

growth forests by killing individual or small patches of trees, creating canopy openings (or 

gaps) which allow the establishment of trees beneath the overstory. Fire also creates 

standing dead trees (snags) and down logs on the forest floor, providing some of the 

overall habitat diversity in the area. 

The portions of the surviving late-successional habitat that may be impacted by this 

project occur along the edges of stand replacement patches or along road corridors. The 

potentially impacted areas range from 0.1 to 8 acres in size, with an average size of about 

2 acres. Their spacing averages about 0.5 miles between each other. The amount of 

forest openings (edges) surrounding these stands reduces their suitability for several latesuccessional species that prefer “interior” late-successional habitat. 

Environmental Effects

Direct Effects 

Salvage logging operations would simplify stand structure within the surviving latesuccessional stands by removing small patches and/or individual dead trees. Timber 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

117

harvesting also has the potential to damage remaining green trees. These impacts would 

degrade the quality of habitat for wildlife that depend on the dead wood component 

within these stands, such as the Vaux’s swift, which commonly nests in large hollow snags 

and trees. The direct impacts (habitat degradation) of the proposed alternatives on latesuccessional habitat are compared using the acreage of late-successional habitat being 

salvaged by each alternative. This includes acres being treated for partial removal and 

hazard tree reductions (Figure 40). 

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

Acres

Figure 40. Comparison of alternative impacts to late-successional habitat based on 

acreage of late-successional habitat being salvaged within units and roadside hazard 

tree reduction areas.

Alternative 1 has no direct impact on late-successional habitat and wildlife that depend 

on it (e.g., pileated woodpecker, clouded salamander, etc.). Of the action alternatives, 

Alternative 6 has the least amount of impact on this habitat because salvage units were 

designed to avoid the surviving late-successional habitat and focus on the large standreplaced patch in Limpy Creek drainage. Exceptions occur for ridge-top fuel break 

construction and roadside hazard tree reduction (this impact is reduced because the 4714 

road is not needed for harvesting/hauling activities in Alternative 6). Alternative 4 has 

the largest impact to late-successional habitat mainly because of the increased number of 

roadside hazard tree reduction areas. This alternative is followed (in terms of most to 

least impact) by Alternatives 5, 2, 3 and 6. 

Overall, the action alternatives impact a very small proportion (0.6% to 2.5%) of the 

remaining late-successional forest habitat within the planning area. They do not impact 

important corridors of habitat between large patches of late-successional forests within 

and adjacent to the planning area. Because of this and the small size and dispersed 

nature of the partial removal and hazard tree units and their adjacency to forest openings 

(edges), the direct impacts on the character of the late-successional stands from 

Alternatives 2-6 are considered to be insignificant to late-successional habitat and related 

wildlife. 

Indirect Effects 

Reforestation can speed up the rate of vegetative succession and achieve latesuccessional habitat quicker. This activity has an indirect beneficial impact on latesuccessional wildlife (e.g., northern spotted owl). A graphical comparison of indirect 

impacts by alternatives is shown in Figure 38, which displays the amount of reforestation 

proposed by alternative. Alternative 1 has the least indirect beneficial effect on latesuccessional habitat because it does not plant conifer. Alternative 4 has the greatest 

beneficial indirect effect because it replants the highest amount of acreage to conifer. 

This is followed by Alternatives 2, 6, 3 and 5 (in order of most to least beneficial impact). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

118

Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative effects on late-successional habitat are analyzed at two scales; (1) the Middle 

North Umpqua watershed-scale, which is a 52,973 acre watershed analysis area and (2) 

the 5th-field watershed scale (123,914 acres). The analysis considers past, present and 

foreseeable future impacts including fire-effects, reforestation and forest succession. The 

estimated natural range for late-successional forest habitat within the Middle North 

Umpqua River watershed is “wider” than adjacent watersheds due to the fire regime 

associated with it (USDA 2001), but slightly “narrower” than the planning area (as 

previously discussed). Large stand-replacing fires are not uncommon in this watershed, 

and wildfires have caused the amount of late-successional forest to drop by over 20%, as 

seen in the early 1900s. Clearcut timber harvesting further reduced late-successional 

habitat by 20% from the 1940s to the 1990s, taking it below its natural range. The listing 

of the northern spotted owl and the resulting Northwest Forest Plan curtailed this trend 

by the mid-1990s. 

Stands that were burned over in the early 1900s are beginning to transition back into latesuccessional forests, reversing the trend caused by logging. The Apple Fire caused a slight 

“dip” in this trend, slowing the watershed’s recovery by about a decade. The current 

amount of late-successional forest is now about 7% below the lower end of the estimated 

natural range for the watershed analysis area. Currently planned timber sales, including 

the proposed project, do not cause a negative trend for late-successional forest within the 

Middle North Umpqua watershed analysis area. 

At the 5th-field scale, the Northwest Forest Plan requires retention of late-successional 

forest patches in watersheds where little remains. This standard and guideline applies in 

5th-field watersheds, “...in which federal forest lands are currently comprised of 15% or 

less late-successional forest” (ROD C-44). The planning area occurs within the Middle 

North Umpqua River 5th-field watershed. Current levels of late-successional forest on 

federal forest lands within this watershed are at about 51% (Figure 41). The cumulative 

impact from proposed or foreseeable future actions (e.g., Felix and Meow Timber Sales 

and the Dry Creek hazardous fuels project) on late-successional forest within this 

watershed would potentially lower the current level by less than 1%; this is considered an 

insignificant cumulative impact to late-successional habitat. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

119

Figure 41. Late-successional forests (shown in green) and those stand-replaced by 

wildfires since 1996 (shown in red) within the 5th-field watershed are shown at the 

top of the figure. Proposed salvage units are shown in relationship to latesuccessional forests by alternative within the planning area. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

120

 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Late 1800s

1910s

1930s

1950s

1970s

1990s

2010s

2030s

2050s

2070s

2090s

% Watershed Area

High Range

Low Range

Pre-Fire

No Action

Action

Figure 42. Cumulative effects trend line showing the past changes and projected 

increases in the amount of late-successional habitat within the larger Middle North 

Umpqua River watershed. 

Under current management direction, and as a result of natural and managed forestsuccession, late-successional forests are expected to reach their reference levels by about 

mid-2050 (Figure 42). The no action alternative would not slow down this event, but 

would lengthen the time it takes to reach the high range by a couple of decades, due to 

no reforestation of harvest units and slower forest succession. No other cumulative 

effects are anticipated. 

COARSE WOODY DEBRIS – TRACKED AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

It was determined during scoping that the salvage of dead trees would potentially impact 

the current and future availability of down, dead woody material. Salvage would remove 

dead trees that are important for biological and physical processes, and as a source of 

future soil and site productivity. The measure selected to assess the impacts of the 

alternatives is the number of trees or snags retained per acre within the salvage units. 

This indicator was selected because it quantitatively defines the amount (snags per acre) 

of this habitat component that would be left following salvage, thus providing for current 

and future needs. 

Affected Environment 

The importance of dead trees (standing and on the forest floor) as wildlife habitat has 

been recognized for many decades (Grinnell and Storer 1924, Graham 1925). Snags and 

down wood are important in terms of both biological and physical processes, and as a 

source of future soil and site productivity. Snags (dead standing trees) also pose a humansafety hazard and dead wood in general serves as an ignition source and fuel for wildfires. 

Management of this natural resource for healthy forests and wildlife presents challenges, 

tradeoffs, and risks to other resources (Thomas 2002). 

Snag abundance on private forestlands is currently (and into the foreseeable future) 

inadequate to support viable populations of indigenous wildlife species that require this 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

121

habitat (Ohmann et al. 1994). At a landscape scale, dead tree patches have largely been 

missing from western Oregon forests because of fire suppression and post-fire timber 

salvaging; a noticeable change occurred with the 1991 Warner Creek Fire on the 

Willamette National Forest which was not salvaged. 

As a response to extensive areas of forested lands becoming devoid of large snags, the 

U.S. Forest Service (Region 6) established a snag management policy requiring Forests to 

develop guidelines to, "...provide [snag] habitat needed to maintain self-sustaining 

populations of snag-dependent wildlife species" (USDA 1975). In 1990, the Umpqua 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan modified this requirement and it was 

then amended by the Northwest Forest Plan in 1994. The intent of standards and 

guidelines in the Forest Plan for the Matrix land allocation is to provide a renewable 

supply of large snags and down logs well distributed across the landscape to maintain 

viable indigenous wildlife populations and ecological functions. It provides interim 

direction for levels of dead wood retention until the development and use of models 

allows for ecologically-based management prescriptions for coarse woody debris. 

On January 19, 2001 a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed by the U.S Forest 

Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine 

Fisheries Service (collectively known as the Provincial Interagency Executive Committee – 

PIEC) to refine and implement coarse wood requirements for regeneration harvesting 

within the Southwestern Oregon Province. The intent of this MOU is to apply local models 

and information on coarse woody debris for regeneration harvests within the Matrix on a 

trial basis of 5 years. The objective is to implement the guidelines in the MOU on “at 

least one regeneration harvest unit per administrative unit” for new projects. The MOU 

contains various examples on the use of landscape stratification (e.g., plant association 

groups, topography, etc.) for developing recommendations for coarse wood management. 

Data from Plant Association Group (PAG) tables used for down wood and snag guidelines 

for southwestern Oregon (in the MOU) help determine how much decay class 1 (hard) 

wood to leave after harvest. Decay rates and fall down rates were used to work forward in 

time to when the fire-killed stands will be 100 years old and beginning to once again 

produce large down wood to the forest floor. The desired condition in 100 years based on 

the PAG, and the retention levels needed to achieve the desired condition of adequate 

levels of Class IV and V snags and logs are described in Table 27. 

Table 27. Desired condition of decayed snags and logs in 100 years by Forest Plant 

Association Group (PAG). 

Forest Zone (PAG) Snags/Acre Down Wood Lineal 

Feet/Acre (>20” 

small end diameter) 

Prescribed Standing 

Dead Snags/Acre 

(>26” diameter) 

Douglas-fir 1 98 4 

Dry Western 

Hemlock 

2 504 15 

Moist Western 

Hemlock 

3 585 16 

True Fir (White Fir) 3 607 16 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

122

A landscape-scale survey of large snags and logs was conducted shortly after the Apple 

Fire was contained (October-November 2002). This survey used the methodology 

described in a General Technical Report (GTR) by Bate et al. (1999). This GTR provides an 

efficient and accurate sampling technique for land areas between 1,000-20,000 acres in 

size. The results of this survey described the affected environment for coarse woody 

debris in detail (Davis 2003). 

Potential Population Capacity 

Current management direction requires, as a minimum, maintenance of cavity nesting 

species at or above 60% potential population capacity (PPC) for the planning area. Blackbacked woodpeckers, a species closely associated with post-fire habitat, were recently 

observed in stand-replaced patches of the Spring Fire (burned in 1996) and within the 

2002 Apple Fire during unit field recon. This species requires management at 100% PPC 

(ROD C-46). The management objective is to meet or exceed these standards within 

harvest units, with per-acre requirements (snags/acre) met on average areas no larger 

than 40 acres in size (Table 28).

TABLE 28. Forest Plan snag requirements and current levels. Current levels are 

higher than needed to maintain maximum potential population capability (100% PPC) 

for cavity-nesting birds according to the Umpqua Forest Plan (USDA 1990, Appendix B73). 

SNAGS/ACRE IN HARVEST UNITS SPECIES 

60% PPC 100% PPC REQ’D CURRENT 

DBH 

(inch) 

DECAY 

CLASS 

Red-breasted Sapsucker 0.27 0.45 0.27 6.24 (15-16”) 15+ 

Black-Backed Woodpecker 0.07 0.12 0.12 19.42 (17-24”) 17+ 

Pileated Woodpecker 0.04 0.06 0.04 20.22 (≥25”) 25+ 

HARD 

(1) 

Downy Woodpecker 0.10 0.16 0.10 2.52 (11-14”) 11+ 

Hairy Woodpecker 1.15 1.92 1.15 0.40 (15-16”) 15+ 

Northern Flicker 0.29 0.48 0.29 3.02 (≥17”) 17+ 

SOFT 

(2&3) 

 TOTAL (Snags/Acre) = 1.92 3.19 1.97 51.82 

Environmental Effects

Direct Effects 

Harvesting of dead trees lowers the density of snags per acre that remain on the 

landscape. The minimum required snag retention within harvest units is 2 snags per acre, 

as two snags would be felled for large wood needs (Table 28). At least 0.43 snags per acre 

need to be hard snags (decay class 1) in order to provide for future down wood needs. To 

the extent practical and safe, all alternatives would leave existing soft snags within units. 

Figure 43 displays the percentage of trees per acre by retention level for each action 

alternative. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

123

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

Harvest Unit Acres

Leave 50%

14 Snag/Ac

13 Snag/Ac

10 Snag/Ac

4 Snag/Ac

2 Snag/Ac

Figure 43. Comparison of leave tree (snag) retention by alternative. Two additional 

trees are left in all action alternatives, for felling after harvest and burning to provide 

ground cover. Leave tree density ranges from 4-16+ per acre.

All action alternatives would leave enough hard snags within harvest units to meet or 

exceed the minimum Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines and MOU requirements for hard 

snags and future soft snags. This would maintain populations of cavity nesters at the 100% 

PPC level. No other direct effects are expected to occur. 

Indirect Effects 

Indirect effects occur from unplanned falling of snags for reasons of safety or logging 

systems. The extent of this effect is impossible to predict, however, the higher the 

density of leave trees, the higher the risk to forest workers. This usually results in higher 

levels of falling snags for safety. In all alternatives, retention trees felled for safety or 

logging systems would be left on site as down wood. Alternative 4 has the highest acreage 

of hazard tree areas, followed by Alternative 5 and Alternative 6. 

Cumulative Effects 

To assess the cumulative effects, the snag densities (correlates to % PPC) were averaged 

for the entire planning area. This looks at the snag habitat within all successional stages 

and burn intensities. Figure 44 displays the mean snag levels retained by alternative and 

compares those levels to the density of snags required to meet 100% PPC. 

Figure 44. Comparison of mean snag/acre levels normalized for the planning area. 

Note that 3.19 snags/acre is equivalent to 100% PPC. All alternatives leave over 50% 

of the existing dead tree patches unsalvaged. Mean densities of snags are well above 

the number required to achieve maximum PPC. 

0

5

10

15

20

PRE-FIRE ALT-1 ALT-2 ALT-3 ALT-4 ALT-5 ALT-6

MEAN SNAG/AC

(PLANNING AREA)

100% PPC (All Species)
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

124

The Apple Fire provided a “pulse” of snags that almost tripled the mean snag density for 

the planning area. Figure 45 displays the snag patches in the planning area prior to and 

after the fire, than displays the effects of the proposed activities on those snag patches. 

The proposed salvage impacts from 10-59% of this pulse, depending on the alternative. Of 

the action alternatives, Alternative 5 has the least cumulative impact on the overall PPC 

for the planning area, followed (in order of least to most impact) by Alternatives 3, 6, 2 

and 4. Cumulatively, each alternative is above the 100% PPC level for the planning area. 

At the landscape scale, within 1-5 miles of the planning area, snags remain from the 2002 

Limpy Fire, 2001 and 2002 Calf Creek Fires, the 1996 Spring Fire, and within the Latesuccessional Reserve that burned during the 2002 Apple Fire. No salvage has occurred and 

none is planned to occur on these fires. In addition, at a Forest scale, high densities of 

snags were created by the 2002 Tiller Complex Fires; currently only about 450 acres of 

salvage are proposed there.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

125

Figure 45. Dead forest patches containing high densities of large diameter trees 

(shown in brown). This figure shows the spatial distribution of dead tree patches 

which will not be salvaged by alternative. Harvest units contain from 4-58 dead 

trees per acre (units not shown in this figure). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

126

DISTRIBUTION OF DEAD WOOD 

Affected Environment 

DecAID (a tool for managing snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in 

forests of Washington and Oregon) is a summary of the current knowledge and best 

available data on dead wood in Pacific Northwest ecosystems (Marcot et al. 2002). It 

provides guidance about how to manage for levels of dead wood using wildlife data and 

information from unharvested forest inventory plots. This data can be applied to 

management decisions at a range of spatial scales, from stand-level to across landscapes. 

Planning areas should be sufficiently large to encompass the range of variation in wildlife 

habitat types and structural conditions. As described under coarse woody debris, scoping 

identified the importance of maintaining snags in all diameter classes across the 

landscape. As a general rule-of-thumb, Marcot et al. (2002) suggest that planning areas 

be at least 20 square miles in size (12,800 acres). A reasonable objective is to manage for 

the range of conditions within the planning area, based on the DecAID data, rather than 

focusing on a specific wildlife species. Balancing high density areas of dead wood with 

moderate and low density areas may be desirable over a landscape (Marcot et al. 2002). 

The Apple fire created a major change in local levels of dead wood (Figure 46). These 

changes are described in the Wildfire Effects Evaluation Project and Snag and Log Survey 

Report (USDA 2003). 

0

1

2

3

4

5

Early-Successional Mid-Successional Late-Successional

Avg Percent Cover

Unburned

Low-Moderate Burn

High Intensity Burn

Figure 46. Post-fire changes in percent ground coverage of down wood from the snag 

and log inventory (only down wood ≥16 inches diameter at small end and ≥16 feet in 

length were inventoried). 

Data from the large snag and log inventory (Davis 2003) was used to generate down wood 

percent ground coverage (a management index used by DecAID) within the planning area. 

Figure 46 shows current cover estimates for larger diameter (≥16 inches diameter) down 

wood; DecAID provides recommendations based on down wood ≥5 inches diameter. Based 

on general field reconnaissance, there is a significant amount of smaller diameter 

material in the unburned mid to late-successional and low-moderately burned latesuccessional areas; this material is lacking in the most intensely burned areas. 

Environmental Effects

Direct Effects 

DecAID recommends leaving a minimum of 2.3% dead wood coverage at the stand level for 

early-successional conifer stands in the western Cascades of Oregon. This percentage 

includes down wood, standing snags and live trees. DecAID uses taper equation 

information (Flewelling Profile Model in FVS) to estimate the percent coverage a tree (or 

snag) provides up to a 5 inch top. Based on data from the snag inventory and the average 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

127

size of trees to be left after salvage, each leave tree would provide approximately 0.3% 

cover per acre. In other words, leaving 4 trees per acre provides about 1.2% cover for the 

unit. Each action alternative leaves from 4-58 trees per acre (more in some units in 

Alternatives 5 and 6); this equates to 1.2%-17.4% increase in current levels of down wood 

coverage. The current average percent coverage within harvest units is 1.4% (Figure 46). 

Therefore, all alternatives would leave greater than 2.6% coverage (current levels plus 

cover provided by retention trees) after harvest and slash burning. Figure 44 graphically 

displays the levels of leave tree retention in each alternative. 

The Northwest Forest Plan (ROD C-40) requires leaving a minimum of 120 linear feet of 

decay class 1 and 2 (hard) logs per acre greater than or equal to 16 inches in diameter and 

16 feet long. The Umpqua National Forest LRMP (IV-69) requires leaving greater than 250 

linear feet of decay class 1-3 large woody material greater than 20 inches in diameter 

(dbh) and greater than 10 feet in length following regeneration harvests or catastrophic 

salvage. Of this amount, 60% may be left as “standing wood”. The retention of 4-58 trees 

per acre (varies with alternative) and the falling of 2 trees (greater than 26 inch dbh) per 

acre would meet or exceed these standards and guidelines. All alternatives meet or 

exceed forest plan standards and guidelines. Therefore, no direct effects to species that 

use this habitat are expected to occur. 

Indirect Effects 

Prescribed fire during slash disposal would likely consume some of the existing coarse 

woody debris, mostly the pieces in the later stages of decay (decay class 4 and 5). This 

would reduce the percent ground cover. Fire is expected to burn in a mosaic pattern, 

leaving some areas unburned. Overall, burning prescriptions would require the retention 

of 85% effective ground cover to minimize effects to soil. This management requirement 

would also help maintain coarse wood across the landscape. Alternative 1 has no indirect 

impacts. Of the action alternatives, Alternative 4 has the greatest indirect impact on 

coarse woody debris because it burns the most slash, followed in order from greatest to 

lowest impacts, are Alternatives 2, 6, 3, and 5. The indirect impacts from the action 

alternatives would not cause coarse woody debris to fall below Forest Plan standards and 

guidelines or levels recommended in DecAID. 

Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative effects on coarse woody debris are analyzed over time (the next 100 years) 

and also at the planning area scale. To determine the trend in dead wood levels over the 

next century, decay rate and snag fall down rate information from the Coarse Wood 

Dynamics Model (Mellen and Ager 2002) were used. The equations in this model are based 

on data from the western Cascades. In conjunction with data from Plant Association 

Group (PAG) tables used for down wood and snag guidelines for southwestern Oregon (in 

the MOU) to determine how much decay class 1 (hard) wood to leave after harvest, the 

equations were applied to achieve PAG inventory levels of decay class 4-5 down wood in 

the future. These levels were also compared to nearby data collected from the Little 

River Adaptive Management Area (AMA), which lies to the south of the planning area 

(Figure 47). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

128

Mean Levels of Decay Class 4-5 Logs (20"+ dia)

0

200

400

600

PSME TSHE

Feet/Acre

PAG

AMA

Mean Levels of Decay Class 4-5 Snags (20"+ dbh)

0

1

2

PSME TSHE

Snags/Acre

PAG

AMA

Figure 47. Mean decay class 4-5 snag and log levels for the two main plant association 

groups (PAG) that presently occur in the planning area and harvest units (PSME = 

Douglas-fir; TSHE = western hemlock). Comparison of PAG data and Little River AMA 

inventory data is shown. 

Retention trees left after harvest as snags or felled as logs would slowly decay and fall 

down over time, eventually making up the decay class 4-5 component within the future 

stands once the salvage units have grown back into late-successional habitat. The 

majority of the salvage units fall within Douglas-fir or western hemlock PAGs. The data 

indicates that 2 leave trees are needed in the Douglas-fir PAG and 15 leave trees are 

needed in the western hemlock PAG to achieve appropriate levels of decay class 4-5 

material in the future late-successional stands. All action alternatives meet or exceed the 

required amount of tree retention needed to maintain adequate levels of coarse woody 

debris over time, as the stands develop. 

At the planning area scale, data from DecAID and the Middle North Umpqua Watershed 

Analysis indicate that high density dead wood patches covered anywhere from 4%-12% of 

the area over time. This level fluctuates with stand development and disturbance events 

(e.g., wildfire or blowdown). The MOU for coarse woody debris management in southwest 

Oregon suggests retaining areas that have high amounts of dead wood. It states that 

these areas are ecologically important and that they average around 15% of a 6th-field 

watershed (MOU pg. 3-4). Figure 48 shows the cumulative impacts each alternative has on 

dead wood patches at the planning area scale. 

Figure 48. Comparison of landscape levels of high density (snag/acre) dead tree 

patches/habitat left in the planning area in relationship to the estimated range of 

natural variability. 

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

PRE-FIRE ALT-1 ALT-2 ALT-3 ALT-4 ALT-5 ALT-6

% PLANNING AREA I

N

SNAG PATCHES

LOW RANGE

HIGH RANGE
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

129

All alternatives maintain or exceed the estimated natural range levels for dead tree patch 

retention for the planning area. 

EFFECTS ON SENSITIVE WILDLIFE SPECIES 

Affected Environment 

A pre-field review was performed to determine which sensitive species are most likely to 

be impacted by the proposed action. Table 29 summarizes the presence or absence of 

sensitive species and/or their habitat within or adjacent (in terms of potential impacts – 

e.g., noise) to the actual proposed ground disturbance areas. It is based on the latest 

documented survey and sighting data, scientific literature review and GIS analysis. 

Impact or effect determinations are made on each species, based on this review. If an 

impact or effect is anticipated, further analysis and discussion is provided in the following 

section. The results of this review are found in detail in the Wildlife Biological Evaluation 

in the Project Record and are summarized below. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Env

130 

Habitat Present In or 

Adjacent to 

Proposed Units 

Species Present In or 

Adjacent to 

Proposed Units 

Impact/Effect 

Expected 

Conservation Strategy or 

Recovery Plan Common Name 

In Adjacent In Adjacent To Habitat To Species Type Consistent 

Loss of 

Viability 

or Trend 

Northern 

Spotted Owl NO YES NO YES YES YES Northwest Forest Plan YES NO See species discussion 

Bald 

Eagle YES YES YES YES YES YES Pacific Bald Eagle Recovery Plan YES NO See species discussion 

Peregrine 

Falcon YES YES PROBABLE YES YES YES Pacific Coast Recovery Plan YES NO See species discussion 

Harlequin 

Duck NO YES NO YES NO NO NONE N/A NO 

Nesting could occur along miles from nearest unit (1activities occur within the Panther Creek. Far enoug

Bufflehead NO NO NO NO NO NO NONE N/A NO 

Nests along lakes and pondNo activities are proposed within the planning area, wVery unlikely to occur in p

Yellow 

Rail NO NO NO NO NO NO NONE N/A NO 

Nearest population is KlamThere is none of this habitunits. It is very unlikely th

Oregon 

Spotted Frog NO NO NO NO NO NO NONE N/A NO 

No documented occurrencnot occur within the plannwithin the area proposed f

Foothill 

Yellow-legged Frog NO NO NO NO NO NO NONE N/A NO 

Known to occur 7 miles frowatershed. Also 15 miles elevations in warmer streastreams are buffered. Unl

Southern Torrent 

Salamander NO YES NO YES YES YES Northwest Forest Plan YES NO See species discussion 

Western 

Pond Turtle NO NO NO NO NO NO NONE N/A NO 

Known to occur 2 mi. from Also 20 miles down North the river corridor. No ponunits. Very unlikely this sp

Common 

Kingsnake NO NO NO NO NO NO NONE N/A NO 

Potentially could occur wino proposed activities withnatural oak meadows or rooccurs within the planning 

Canada 

Lynx NO NO NO NO NO NO 

Conservation 

Assessment & 

Strategy 

N/A NO 

Very unlikely to occur in precommended that land m

Conservation Assessment aCascade Crest. 

California 

Wolverine NO NO NO POSSIBLE NO NO NONE N/A NO 

Although it may possibly thabitat (e.g., denning) occthe planning area during pimportant travel corridors

Pacific 

Fisher NO YES NO POSSIBLE NO NO Northwest Forest Plan YES NO Presence is assumed, see s

Pacific 

Fringed Myotis YES YES PROBABLE PROBABLE YES YES Northwest Forest Plan YES NO Presence is assumed, see s

Pacific 

Pallid Bat NO NO NO NO NO NO Northwest Forest Plan YES NO 

This bat is a ground feedinforaging. Normally occurs unlikely that this species otypes in the planning area

Pacific 

Shrew NO YES NO PROBABLE YES YES Northwest Forest Plan YES NO Presence is assumed, see s

Table 29. Pre-field review and biological evaluation summary. Species for which an impact or effect is anticipa
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

131

Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina)

Affected Environment 

Nesting, roosting, and foraging habitat (NRF) for the spotted owl usually occurs in latesuccessional coniferous forests stands with large conifers and snags (>32 inches d.b.h.), 

trees with broken tops, large branches or cavities for nesting, a multi-layered closed 

canopy that facilitates thermal regulation and protection from predation and adequate 

amounts of large dead wood on the forest floor to support populations of prey (small 

mammals). Large contiguous blocks of NRF habitat are necessary for nesting success and 

survival. Within the southern Cascades, a 1.2-mile radius circle around an owl nest or 

activity center represents its home range. Forty percent NRF within 1.2 miles (1,182 

acres) is considered the minimum acceptable amount of home range habitat for long-term 

owl survival. Areas “critical” to the recovery of the spotted owl (critical habitat units) 

were designated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (under the ESA). There are no 

designated critical habitat units within the planning area. 

Dispersal habitat for spotted owls satisfies needs for foraging, roosting and protection 

from predators and is characterized by forests that have a minimum average tree 

diameter of 11 inches dbh. and > 40% canopy cover. Maintenance of dispersal habitat on a 

minimum of 50% of federal lands within a given area (e.g., planning area, sub-watershed 

or quarter-township) is a conventional threshold utilized to evaluate adequate dispersal 

habitat conditions. 

The planning area contained about 8,678 acres of NRF habitat before the 2002 Apple Fire, 

but now contains around 5,471 acres. Of this, about 61% was underburned by the fire. 

The amount of dispersal habitat before the Apple Fire was above 50% for the land area 

within the planning area, but is now around 43%. Much of the Limpy and Bachelor Creek 

drainages are no longer suitable owl NRF habitat. Overall, the 2002 Apple fire created a 

large gap or “hole” in spotted owl NRF habitat within the planning area. It is in this 

“hole” that the proposed salvage is mainly focused, although some harvest units occur 

along the edges of remaining habitat. A dichotomy exists in where interior mature and 

old forest habitat seems important to owl survival; however convoluted edges between 

this habitat and younger forest habitats seem important to reproductive outputs (Franklin 

et al. 2000). Habitat fitness appears to be highest for owls with home ranges that consist 

of a mosaic of young forest habitat types interspersed within a matrix of old and mature 

forest. Areas where the fire created patches of early-successional habitat scattered 

throughout the older forests, such as in the moderate landscape area of Panther Creek, 

may actually be beneficial to the owl. For further discussion of the 2002 wildfire effects 

to spotted owls and their habitat on the Umpqua National Forest, the reader is referred to 

the Wildfire Effects Evaluation Project report (USDA 2003). 

There are four spotted owl activity centers within the planning area. Three are owl pairs 

and one is a resident single. The 2002 Apple Fire decreased the amount of habitat to less 

than 40% within one of the three owl pair home ranges (MSNO #710). The other home 

ranges have >40% NRF habitat (including the resident single). Owl pair 710 may shift its 

home range towards the west where the resident single owl resides (MSNO #520). Core 

areas were delineated around the four activity centers in 1995, to include at least 100 

acres of the best nesting habitat (ROD C-10). Areas around these core areas are to be 

managed to reduce risks of natural disturbances such as wildfire (ROD C-45). The 

proposed project avoids these areas, however; the fire burned through 3 of the 4 core 

areas, causing some loss of NRF habitat within them. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

132

At a range-wide scale, spotted owl populations have been monitored since the mid-1980s. 

There are 8 Demographic Study Areas (DSAs) located throughout the range of the owl. 

These DSAs are long-term study areas designed to assess trends in spotted owl populations 

and habitat as directed under the Northwest Forest Plan (USDA/USDI 1994). A range-wide 

analysis of spotted owl population data in 1998 showed an annual decrease of about 3.9% 

for territorial females across their range (Franklin et al. 1999). More recent reports 

discuss significant declines in spotted owl populations in the northern portions of their 

range (e.g., Olympic Peninsula and Cle Elum, Washington). The reason for the decline is 

unknown, but may be related to the invasion of the area by barred owls (Strix varia), 

which currently outnumber spotted owls in that portion of the range (Forsman et al. 

2002). 

To assess the population trends on and around the Umpqua National Forest, data from 

four DSAs that surround the forest were used. These DSAs are the Tyee (located 27 miles 

west of the Forest), HJ Andrews (15 miles north of the Forest), Klamath (directly adjacent 

and southwest of the Forest) and the Southern Cascades DSA (directly adjacent and 

southeast of the Forest). 

Owl populations appear stable in the Tyee DSA (Forsman et al. 2002). Although there are 

a few cases where spotted owls have been displaced by barred owls within this DSA, there 

is little evidence that increasing presence of barred owls is causing the spotted owl 

population to decline (Forsman et al. 2002). 

In the HJ Andrews DSA, single owl occupancy has remained stable since 1995 although pair 

occupancy seems to have gradually declined since 1989. Continued losses of pairs would 

negatively impact productivity and may accelerate the rate of population decline. The 

data suggests that barred owls are becoming increasingly common in the study area and 

several pairs of spotted owls have been either displaced or are inhibited from responding 

(Anthony et al. 2002a). 

The spotted owl population within the Klamath DSA appears to be stable to slightly 

declining (Lint et al. 2002, Pers. Comm, Joe Lint). The barred owl population in 2002 was 

about 6% of the total adult spotted and barred owl population in this DSA. 

In the Southern Cascades DSA, the percentage of historic territories with both spotted 

owls and barred owls or barred owls only has increased from 3.3% to 17.3% (Anthony et al. 

2002b). The percentage of sites occupied by northern spotted owls (including territorial 

pairs) has declined since 1992. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Habitat loss is the primary factor impacting Northern Spotted Owl survivability (Forsman 

et al. 1984). The proposed project focuses salvage on the most severely burned stands 

within the planning area and salvages only dead trees. The majority of the salvage units 

are in stand-replaced NRF habitat, which are no longer considered suitable spotted owl 

nesting habitat. However, a few of the proposed units in some of the alternatives have 

enough green conifers (that survived the fire) in them that they might still function as NRF 

and/or dispersal habitat. Some units are also located directly adjacent to underburned 

NRF habitat. Salvage logging operations may cause further impacts and degradation to 

these NRF areas through alteration of stand structure and prey species habitat. The 

magnitude of these impacts is similar to those described for late-successional habitat. 

Figure 40 graphically shows a comparison of degradation effects to NRF habitat. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

133

Alternative 1 has no direct impact. Of the action alternatives, Alternative 6 has the least 

amount of impact. Alternative 4 has the largest impact, followed (in terms of most to 

least impact) by Alternatives 5, 2, 3 and 6. Overall, the action alternatives impact a small 

proportion (0.6% to 2.5%) of the remaining NRF habitat within the planning area. 

Non-habitat disturbing activities (e.g., hiking, recreation, etc.) are thought to be 

relatively insignificant threats (USDI 1995). Studies recently completed, and ongoing 

(Delaney et al. 1999 and Delaney and Grubb, ongoing research) indicate that this may be 

the case. Mexican spotted owls (Strix occidentalis mexicana) did not exhibit adverse 

nesting behavior, or significant reductions in reproductive success when exposed to sound 

stimuli from military helicopters and chainsaws (Delaney et al. 1999). Owls did not flush 

during incubation. When exposed to these noises, the owl did flush after juveniles left 

the nest and if the noise was within 105 meters. The birds quickly returned to predisturbance behavior within 10-15 minutes of the disturbance. The existing scientific data 

indicates that noise-disturbance results in insignificant effects that may affect, but would 

not likely adversely affect the spotted owl. However, it is standard operating procedure 

for US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regulatory agency biologists to assume (until 

proven otherwise) that human-caused noise disturbance during the early part of the owl’s 

nesting season (March 1 – July 15) causes adverse effects to spotted owls by disrupting 

their nesting behavior. Therefore, it is assumed that the disturbance from the proposed 

activities would negatively affect spotted owls. 

Because timber harvesting and associated activities would occur during the nesting season 

for the owl, potential disturbance effects were analyzed using standard distance buffers 

prescribed by USFWS to determine noise disturbance in this Region. A quarter-mile buffer 

was generated along all commercial use roads and harvest units, a 0.5 mile buffer was 

created around all helicopter landings and service areas as well as harvest units 

designated for helicopter logging and a 1.0 mile buffer was created around quarries where 

blasting of rock would likely occur (Figure 49). These buffers were combined and then 

overlaid on activity centers and NRF habitat to quantify the potential effect of noise 

disturbance. 

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

Disturbance Acres x100

# of Owl AC Disturbed

Figure 49. Comparison of potential noise disturbance effects caused by timber 

harvesting and related activities. Alternatives 2-5 may cause disturbance to all four 

owl activity centers (AC), whereas Alternative 6 may impact only two.

Alternative 1 has no direct impact. Alternative 6 has the least potential for disturbance, 

because it concentrates the salvage activities to a portion of the planning area that is 

mostly devoid of owl habitat and it eliminates log hauling along the 4714 road. 

Alternatives 2-5 have similar impacts and potentially disturb more owls (4 activity 

centers) and NRF habitat than Alternative 6. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

134

Indirect Effects 

Altering the structure and levels of dead wood within and adjacent to NRF habitat may 

cause indirect effects to the owl by altering the owl’s prey base. Again, the potential 

magnitude of this effect in NRF habitat is shown in the late-successional effects discussion 

(Figure 40). However, site specific levels of dead wood are highly variable in amounts and 

distribution (White et al. 2002). It is not unnatural to find areas devoid of down wood, 

while in other areas “jackpots” or large clumps of wood occur. Even though levels of 

dead and down wood would be reduced in harvest units, dead tree retention in Riparian 

Reserves and other unharvested areas provide appropriate levels of prey habitat within 

the planning area. The no action alternative would have no indirect impacts to the owl. 

The action alternatives would alter levels of prey species habitat and cause indirect 

impacts. However, all alternatives maintain levels of dead wood that are within the 

natural range of variation for the planning area and it is assumed that this would be 

sufficient to maintain a suitable prey base (USDA 2001). Therefore, this indirect impact is 

not considered adverse. 

Cumulative Effects 

Habitat loss is the primary threat to the spotted owl and as such is the most relevant 

potential cumulative effect to consider. Present and reasonably foreseeable actions that 

degrade or remove owl habitat in the vicinity of the project area include North Umpqua 

trail reconstruction, roadside hazard tree falling, the Apple Seed Project and fire salvage 

in Tiller. Habitat modification associated with the proposed project and the ongoing and 

foreseeable activities are of such limited scale that they are considered minor 

contributions to the cumulative effect of habitat loss and mainly alter/degrade habitat. 

The main effect to the owl in this area was from the 2002 Apple Fire (USDA 2003). Future 

fires also pose a significant threat to owls and their habitat. Based on fire modeling 

(FARSITE), the no action alternative has the potential to create a higher risk of larger fires 

into the future, resulting in future loss of habitat or setback in forest succession and redevelopment of habitat (Figure 50). 

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

1800

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

Acres

Figure 50. Comparison of potential future habitat loss and cumulative effects from 

future fire as modeled by FARSITE.

The no action alternative has the highest potential for cumulative affects on the spotted 

owl; FARSITE indicates a higher risk and a larger wildfire and loss or “set-back” of habitat 

in the future. Alternative 5 has the next highest risk, followed by (in order of highest to 

lowest risk and acreage burned) 3, 4, 2 and 6. 

At a range-wide scale for the owl, the Northwest Forest Plan analyzed historic activities 

that resulted in owl habitat loss. It also predicted future impacts to the species (e.g., 

timber sales, wildfires, etc.) and incorporated these impacts into the species viability 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

135

assessment for the owl. Management in accordance with the standards and guidelines of 

the Northwest Forest Plan greatly reduces the likelihood that present and future activities 

would result in a significant cumulative effect to the species. The proposed project is 

consistent with standards and guidelines in the Northwest Forest Plan and 

recommendations from the watershed analysis. Thus, the habitat loss from salvage 

activities is not considered to be of a significant threat to the species. 

Effects Determination 

Following consideration of the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the proposed 

activities and based on input from the local USFWS level one team wildlife biologist, it is 

determined that all of the proposed alternatives “may affect, and likely adversely affect” 

the northern spotted owl through noise disturbance. The no action alternative “may 

affect, and likely adversely affect” the owl if a future large-fire does occur, but there 

would be no disturbance from noise. There is “no effect” to critical habitat because the 

project is outside of designated critical habitat units. 

Northern Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)

Affected Environment 

This large eagle primarily nests in forested areas near large bodies of water and along 

rivers (Marshall et al. 2003). All nests in Oregon occur mainly in prominent, live conifer 

trees (primarily Douglas-fir in the western Cascades). The nest is constructed of large 

sticks and is usually reused each year. They are opportunistic feeders, but prey mainly on 

fish. If food is abundant year-round, they are known to become resident, otherwise they 

wander in seasonal migrations to find food (Marshall et al. 2003). Egg-laying occurs from 

mid-February to late April. Juveniles are usually fledged from June to August. 

Bald eagles were placed on the Endangered Species list in 1978 due to a reduction of 

numbers caused by DDT and other pesticides in their food supply. Since that time 

recovery of the eagle has been strong throughout the nation. At the landscape scale, 

available information indicates that bald eagle populations are increasing range-wide. In 

the Pacific Recovery Region, the number of occupied territories has consistently increased 

since 1986. Eagle productivity goals for the Recovery Region have been met since 1990, 

but distribution and nesting goals for some Recovery Zones within the Recovery Region 

have not been met (USDI 2003). 

In Oregon, for the 1998- 2002 time period, the state-wide population, distribution, and 

productivity goals were met. Eight out of ten Recovery Zones met or exceed their 

population goals and thus attained the 80% distribution level identified in the recovery 

plan. The state-wide average for productivity exceeded the goal of 1.0 young fledged per 

pair. However, some Recovery Zones were still below this goal (Pers. comm., Frank 

Isaacs). 

The planning area is located within the California/Oregon Coast Recovery Zone (#13). 

During the 1998-2002 time period, all recovery plan goals for this zone were met. The 

population goal for Recovery Zone 13 is 45 occupied territories; in 2002 there were 83 

occupied territories. The productivity goal is 1.0 young fledged per pair; from 1998-2002, 

the five year average productivity rate was 1.07 (Pers. comm., Frank Isaacs). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

136

Historic sighting data indicate that bald eagles forage along the North Umpqua River from 

November through February; however, recent observations concentrated near the 

confluence of Steamboat Creek and the river suggest the presence of a breeding pair in 

that area. Although there are no nests within the planning area, three observations of 

bald eagles have been documented within or directly adjacent to it. Two of these 

observations occurred in 2003. One eagle was observed perching in a snag along the south 

bank of the North Umpqua River within a burned forest stand and the other was observed 

flying over Fairy Creek, which is within the planning area and is about 1.5 miles from the 

river. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Management considerations for bald eagles from the Northwest Bald Eagle Recovery Plan 

are to prohibit logging of known nest trees or snags, perch trees/snags, and winter roost 

trees/snags. There are no nests or consistently used perch or roost trees/snags within any 

of the proposed salvage units. All potential salvage units within the Wild and Scenic River 

Corridor were dropped from consideration for harvesting. This corridor is the most heavily 

used area of the planning area by bald eagles. 

Potential direct effects of this project on eagle habitat are limited to falling of potential 

nesting or roosting trees. Because of the distance from the river, and the protection 

afforded the Wild and Scenic River Corridor, it is less likely that eagles would nest in the 

proposed project area (vicinity of the units). In addition, eagles usually nest in green 

trees and very few green trees would be felled (incidental to harvesting) by the proposed 

salvage. 

Recent observations of adult and juvenile bald eagles near Steamboat Inn indicate that a 

bald eagle nest may be in the vicinity of the planning area, approximately 4-5 miles to the 

northwest near the mouth of Steamboat Creek. Above-ambient noise levels associated 

with project work may have the potential to disturb or temporarily displace eagles, if they 

are roosting or foraging within close proximity to the activity. Project activities would 

occur over one mile away from the suspected nest area. Protection of the Wild and 

Scenic River Corridor also minimizes or avoids disturbance impacts. Due to these reasons, 

disturbance is considered to be an insignificant and/or discountable effect to bald eagles 

under all action alternatives. 

Indirect Effects 

Fish are a primary prey item for bald eagles and any current or future impacts to fish that 

result from this project would indirectly affect bald eagles. According to the Fisheries 

Biological Evaluation, the action alternative’s effects to adult fish are considered to be 

minor and not likely to adversely effect their populations. This is expected to have no 

detectable or meaningfully measurable effect on bald eagles and thus is considered to be 

insignificant. 

Cumulative Effects 

Present and reasonably foreseeable actions that affect the eagle or its habitat in the 

project area vicinity include the reconstruction of the Calf segment of the North Umpqua 

Trail. Habitat modification associated with this future proposed project could potentially 

have more impact on the eagle since it occurs within the river corridor. However, it is an 

impact on a limited scale that would not create major structural changes to the river 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

137

corridor forest. The cumulative effects of the action alternatives to eagles and their 

habitat are considered insignificant. 

Effects Determination 

Following consideration of the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the proposed 

activities as described above, it is determined that the action alternatives “may affect 

but is not likely to adversely affect” the northern bald eagle and its habitat. The no 

action alternative would have no short-term effect on this species, but maintains a higher 

risk of wildfire in the future and therefore has indirect impacts to the eagles prey (fish). 

However, this affect is not likely to be adverse. 

American Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum)

Affected Environment 

This bird is a long distance migrant that ranges from Mexico to Alaska. It nests on tall 

(usually greater than 75 feet) cliffs with ledges or potholes and usually lays from 3-4 eggs 

in late March to early April. Chicks are usually fledged by late July. It preys on small to 

medium sized birds, such as Stellar’s jays, woodpeckers, flickers, pigeons and shorebirds. 

This bird has high site fidelity and commonly uses the same nest ledge (eyrie) year after 

year. During the nesting season it becomes easily agitated by human-caused disturbances 

within close proximity to the eyrie (< 0.25 miles). 

The near total disappearance of this raptor from much of the United States caused its 

listing in 1970 under the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969 (pre ESA). 

Subsequent recovery efforts have established over 2,000 breeding pairs across the United 

States and about as many unpaired “floaters” across their range (White et al. 2002). As a 

result, the peregrine falcon was removed from the Federal List of Endangered and 

Threatened Species (List) on August 25, 1999, but remains on the Regional Forester’s 

sensitive species list. In addition, the falcon is still protected under the Migratory Bird 

Treaty Act of 1918 (USDA 1999). 

The ESA requires that recovered species removed from the List be monitored for not less 

than 5 years. A national monitoring plan was developed and implemented in 2003. The 

monitoring plan requires that surveys be conducted every 3 years, for a total of five 

surveys. Monitoring includes the collection of information on population trends and 

nesting success. At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a determination on the 

status of the falcon will be made. 

The planning area is within the Pacific Region survey area (Washington, Oregon, 

California, Idaho and Nevada). There are 30 national monitoring sites in Oregon. Results 

from the first year’s monitoring effort indicate that 77% of the sites were occupied and 

that 61% of these were successful in reproduction of offspring. Twelve new sites were 

also discovered in Oregon in 2003. Preliminary results from the 2003 survey indicate that 

the nesting population is increasing in Oregon (Pers. comm. Frank Isaacs). 

There are no known peregrine eyries or sightings within the planning area. However, 

portions of two adjacent falcon management zones extend into the planning area. Forest 

Service management direction (Regional Direction Letter dated August 25, 1999) states 

that if a proposed project may potentially impact the species or its habitat, protocol 

surveys should be conducted and nest site management plans used to guide activities 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

138

within primary, secondary and tertiary management zones. Surveys conducted in 2003 

show presence at both sites and successful reproduction at one eyrie. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Peregrine habitat on the Umpqua National Forest is managed in accordance with the 

Recovery Plan for American Peregrine Falcon (USDI FWS 1982) and Standards and 

Guidelines of the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Umpqua National Forest. 

Seasonal restrictions are usually applied to projects occurring within close proximity of 

the nest ledge (primary management zone). The planning area and proposed salvage units 

do not occur within primary management zones for either of the two sites that extend 

into the planning area. 

Because of the distance from known eyries, none of the action alternatives cause 

disturbances near eyries and do not directly impact the falcon’s nesting habitat. All 

alternatives would have no direct effects to this species. 

Indirect Effects

The planning area and proposed units occur within the tertiary management zone for the 

two sites. According to the site management plans, tertiary zones are to be managed to 

provide foraging habitat for the falcons. Foraging habitat within the tertiary zone should 

provide for a variety of vegetative conditions both spatially and temporally (Draft Umpqua 

National Forest Peregrine Falcon Management Plan). Managing for high densities of snags 

is one goal for forage habitat within this zone. At a minimum, snags should be managed 

to provide for the maximum (100% PPC) population potential for cavity-nesting birds 

within the area, as described previously. Retention of snags created by wildfire in 

patches across the landscape and managing the landscape successional-stages within the 

natural range of variability would result in appropriate levels of prey species for this bird. 

Altering early-successional habitat structure would have indirect effects on the falcon 

through changes caused in its prey base. However, this is expected to be minimal, 

because the falcons main prey are caught in flight above ground. Most bird species 

related to shrubby, grass/forb habitats that may be affected by planting stay near ground 

level and do not serve as prey for the falcon. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

139

Percent of Falcon Management Zone (3 mile radius) 

with High Snag Densities

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

% Area

Site 1

Site 2

Figure 51. Comparison of percent area with dead tree patches (unsalvaged fire-killed 

forest stands) within the falcon management zones (3 mile radius) for both falcon sites 

(Sites 1 and 2). 

The 2002 Apple Fire had a large effect on the prey base for these falcon sites through the 

creation of dead tree (snag) patches. The draft Umpqua National Forest falcon 

management plan recommends that some percentage (yet to be determined) of dead tree 

patches be maintained over time within falcon management zone. Figure 51 compares 

the change in percentage of area that contains dead forest patches within management 

zones (the area within a 3 mile radius of the eyrie). The no action alternative retains the 

highest amount of this habitat, while Alternative 4 retains the least. The main impact 

from the proposed action is on Site 1, but all alternatives maintain between 3.6%-5.4% of 

dead tree habitat within that management zone (Figure 43). The spatial distribution 

ranges from 0.7%-1.1% for Site 2. However, in both management zones, the amount of 

dead tree habitat has been increased from previous levels because of the fire. All action 

alternatives impact the peregrine falcon’s foraging habitat, but retain patches of dead 

trees within the management zones (within their natural range as discussed in previous 

sections). Therefore, all action alternatives would not likely contribute to a trend 

towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or the species. 

Cumulative Effects 

The effects of the wildfires have a greater influence on this species than the effects of 

the salvage. Forest-wide, there are approximately 5,847 acres of the prey species’ 

habitat created by the 2002 wildfires (dead tree stands), located within 8 different falcon 

management zones. Of this, approximate 20% is proposed for salvaging in the foreseeable 

future. The remaining 80% would remain unsalvaged and function as good prey habitat for 

this species. As a result, local populations may increase over the next decade. 

Impacts Determination 

Following consideration of the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the proposed 

activities, it is determined that the action alternatives “may impact individuals or habitat 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” for all alternatives. The no action alternative has no short-term impact, but 

maintains a higher risk of wildfire in the future and therefore future impacts to foraging 

habitat. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

140

Southern Torrent Salamander (Rhyacotriton variegatus)

Affected Environment 

This species occurs in small, cold (usually 46o-55oF), and clear, coniferous forest streams, 

springs and seeps with gravel-dominated substrates and low sedimentation (Nussbaum et 

al. 1983, Good and Wake 1992, Leonard et al. 1993). They have been reported from near 

sea level (Nussbaum et al. 1983) to 4,800 feet elevation (Hunter 1998), but the upper 

elevation range on the Umpqua National Forest appears to be around 3,550 feet (local 

survey data). Usually, this salamander is not found more than a few meters away from 

streams (Nussbaum et al. 1983). However, observations of adults have occurred up to 165 

feet from water (Good and Wake 1992, Vesely 1997). 

The southern torrent salamander is still present throughout its historic range, but most of 

its range has undergone large-scale road construction and timber harvesting and localized 

extirpations, and reductions in abundance are believed to have occurred (USDI, USFWS, 

Federal Register, 29 June 1995; USDI 2000). 

There are currently 20 known sites of this species on or near the Umpqua National Forest. 

No southern torrent salamanders were found during field reconnaissance, however many 

other species of salamanders were found (e.g., ensatina, Dunn’s and clouded). A 

historical torrent salamander site does occur within the planning area in a small seep 

which crosses the North Umpqua Trail and flows into the North Umpqua River. This site is 

within the Wild and Scenic River corridor and is not near (>0.25 miles) any proposed 

salvage unit. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Effects from the proposed project are prevented or minimized by buffering all streams 

and riparian habitats with Riparian Reserves. Riparian Reserves were considered to be 

adequate in maintaining viable populations of torrent salamanders during the Northwest 

Forest Plan species analysis (USDA/USDI 1994, Appendix J). In some areas, logging 

corridors would intersect these buffers and direct impacts to habitat or individuals is 

possible, but not likely as full suspension of logs over Riparian Reserves is prescribed. 

Prescribed burning would occur in Riparian Reserves in Alternative 4, but in the form of 

hand piles. Underburning is expected to burn at low-intensity resulting in a mosaic of 

burned and unburned areas. It is unlikely that fire would carry into the riparian areas and 

stream banks because fuels to carry fire are mostly absent within these areas as a result 

of the 2002 fire. No harvest related fuels (slash) would be created within the Riparian 

Reserves under Alternatives 2, 3, 5 and 6. In addition, a recent underburn in the Rumble 

Timber Sale (outside of the planning area) was allowed to back into the riparian area and 

southern torrent salamanders were easily found (unharmed) after the burning was 

completed (personal observations). The action alternatives are expected to have minimal 

impacts to this species. 

Indirect Effects 

Indirect effects may occur from increased sedimentation caused by harvest activities or 

through reduction of canopy closure, resulting in increased stream temperatures. This 

species rarely occurs in streams with maximum temperatures that exceed 61oF (Pilliod et 

al. 2003). These temperature increases are expected to occur as a result of the fire, 

regardless of salvage. Riparian buffers, including the partial harvest in the outer portion 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

141

of Class I and II Riparian Reserves in Alternative 4 would maintain existing stream shading 

to perennial headwaters within the planning area; therefore, no indirect effects would 

occur. 

Cumulative Effects 

The wildfires of 2002 impacted one of sixteen known sites for this salamander on the 

Forest. One of these sites was the North Umpqua River trail site, which burned at lowmoderate intensities. In comparison to the impacts from the wildfires, the impacts 

caused by action alternatives are insignificant. The current trend of habitat loss and 

management impacts has lessened across much of this salamander’s range due to a recent 

reduction in clearcutting, and increased awareness and protection of headwater habitats 

through riparian buffers (USDI 2000). High intensity wildfires may pose the most 

significant threat to this species. Because of this, Alternatives 1 and 5 have the greatest 

potential to cumulatively affect this species. 

Impacts Determination 

The no action alternative would not impact this species in the short term, but maintains a 

higher risk of high intensity fire in riparian habitat in the future than the action 

alternatives. All action alternatives may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely 

contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population 

or the species. 

Pacific Fisher (Martes pennanti)

Affected Environment 

A medium-sized member of the weasel family, the fisher is associated with low to midelevation (<4,000 ft.) late-successional/old growth forests in western Oregon (Aubry and 

Raley 2002), but is known to use closed-canopy forests of varying ages (USDA/USDI 1994 – 

Appendix J2-52). It is thought to avoid large (>3 acres) open areas. Fishers are closely 

associated with forested riparian areas, which they use for foraging, resting and as travel 

corridors (Heinemeyer and Janes 1994). Optimal conditions are defined as large patches 

of late-successional forest (≥245 acres) interconnected with other large forested patches. 

According to Aubry and Lewis (2003) prior to extensive European settlement, the fisher 

occupied most coniferous forest habitats in Washington, Oregon and California. Since that 

time human activities (e.g., logging, trapping and poisoning) have resulted in the 

apparent extirpation of fishers throughout much of their historical range in the Pacific 

states. Currently, this species appears to be on the brink of extinction in the Cascade 

Range (USDA/USDI 1994) and populations are considered extremely low in Oregon (USDA 

1994). 

Current populations of fishers in Oregon are restricted to two separate and genetically 

isolated populations in the southwestern portion of the state. One population occurs in 

the southern Cascade Range and the other in the northern Siskiyou Mountains. The 

population in the southern Cascade Range was reintroduced between 1961 - 1981 and is 

descended from fishers from British Columbia and Minnesota (Aubrey and Lewis, 2003). 

Fishers were reintroduced to help control porcupine damage to young tree plantations 

(fishers prey on porcupine). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

142

Aubry and Lewis (2003) document that loss of fisher populations from central and northern 

Oregon and Washington have resulted in the isolation of Oregon populations by >400 miles 

from those occurring in southern British Columbia. The authors conclude that the 

historical continuity in fisher distribution that once provided for genetic interchange 

among fisher populations in the Pacific states no longer exists. A July 3, 2003 finding 

documents that the west coast population of fisher may be a distinct population segment 

for which listing under the ESA may be warranted. A status review to determine if listing 

is warranted is currently underway (Federal Register 68:132 pg. 41169) 

A small fisher population, studied by Aubry and Raley (2002), between the Rogue-Umpqua 

Divide and Crater Lake National Park has had individuals disperse as far as 30 miles (Pers. 

comm. T.J. Catton). Fishers were recently documented on the Diamond Lake Ranger 

District of the Umpqua National Forest (Farrell et al. 1996) at an elevation of 4,300 feet. 

Current habitat conditions within the planning area are considered poor due to a lack of 

large patches of late-successional forests below 4,000 feet, as that habitat was consumed 

by the 2002 Apple Fire. The nearest potentially suitable habitat is located to the east and 

adjacent to the planning area (Calf Creek) within a Late-Successional Reserve (LSR-222) 

and roadless area. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Direct effects would be from salvaging large dead trees within the burned latesuccessional habitats. This removes or degrades potential denning habitat and the effects 

are similar to those discussed for the northern spotted owl. However, because the fisher 

is more closely associated with interior forest habitat that occurs in large forested blocks, 

this effect is expected to be insignificant and perhaps discountable because no salvage 

occurs, under any action alternative, within interior late-successional habitat (>100 

meters from an early-successional edge or opening). 

Indirect Effects 

Indirect effects could occur due to the salvage’s affects on prey habitat, or large, dead 

wood. These impacts are similar to those discussed under the northern spotted owl. 

Riparian and other harvest buffers would maintain a significant amount of large dead 

wood throughout the planning area, which would provide for well distributed prey species 

habitat. 

Cumulative Effects 

The largest impact to this species came from the 2002 wildfires, especially within the Calf 

Creek and Boulder Creek drainages, which contain some of the largest remaining blocks of 

potential fisher habitat in this area. Because of the rarity of this species and the high 

unlikelihood that it occurs within the planning area (especially in the recently burned 

portions where the salvage is focused) the action alternatives add insignificantly to the 

cumulative impacts for this species. 

Impacts Determination 

The “no action” alternative would not impact this species in the short term, but maintains 

a higher risk of high intensity fire, with loss or set-back of future habitat (than the action 

alternatives). All action alternatives may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely 

contribute to a trend towards Federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population 

or the species. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

143

Pacific Fringed Bat (Myotis thysanoides vespertinus) 

Affected Environment 

This bat is usually described as a cave-dwelling bat (Verts and Carraway 1998, Cristy and 

West 1993). However, fringed myotis are known to roost in rock crevices, bridges, 

buildings, large trees and snags (Cross et al. 1996, Weller and Zabel 2001). They mate 

from September to February and females form maternity colonies of up to several 

hundred individuals, which are usually in caves, but may occur in large hollow trees (Pat 

Ormsbee, pers. com.). Females produce only one young, usually born between late June 

and early July (Verts and Carraway 1998). A lactating female was captured during a study 

in a nearby drainage (about 10 miles to the west of the planning area) on June 29, 1995 

(Cross et al. 1995). 

Weller and Zabel (2001) documented that habitat use by this species is influenced by the 

availability of large (>12 inch d.b.h.), tall snags for roosting. Preliminary data from a 

recent study in the central western Oregon Cascades (Arnett and Hayes 2002) suggests a 

similar response by Myotis spp. and also a numerical response related to snag and roost 

tree availability. Roosts tended to be near stream channels (Weller and Zabel 2001), 

which are used for travel and foraging corridors, and also occurred in portions of stands 

that had lower canopy closures (probably easier roost access and sun exposure / microclimate relationships). Fringed myotis often utilized snags in semi-open areas and forest 

edges (Cross et al. 1996) and seemed to prefer snags over green trees for roosting. 

This species of bat uses multiple trees or snags as roost sites (Weller and Zabel 2001) and 

have been documented to use up to five different sites during an 18 day period (Cross et 

al. 1996). Roost switching is thought to be a normal behavior related to the ephemeral 

nature of some roost structures (e.g., snags fall down), changes in climate, avoidance of 

parasitic insects or predators or response to other disturbances. 

Fringed myotis commonly feed on insects along forest edges and stream corridors. It is an 

aerial forager, but is known to glean insects from foliage or the ground. Moths make up a 

large portion of their diet (Verts and Carraway 1998). 

There is a strong concern that loss of snags and large decadent trees from the widespread 

conversion of old-growth forests to young, even-aged plantations in this region has 

significantly reduced the availability of potential roosts for this and other bats (USDA/USDI 

1994 – Appendix J2-49). There are ten documented occurrences of Pacific fringed myotis 

on or near the Umpqua National Forest and it is likely that they do occur within the 

planning area. The creation of thousands of large snags in open canopy areas (by the 2002 

wildfires) may have increased the roosting habitat suitability in the planning area. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Timber harvesting is expected to directly impact roosting habitat through the felling of 

large dead trees and snags. This impact would be lessened by the retention of decayed 

snags (when safe), leave trees for snag habitat and through Riparian Reserve (and other) 

no-harvest buffers. Maintaining riparian corridors of dead trees would likely provide good 

roosting habitat for this species now and over the next few decades. In addition, this 

project proposes salvage on less than 50% of the stand-replaced late-successional stands 

that were created by the fire, resulting in the maintenance of large dead trees, well 

distributed across the planning area. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

144

Field reconnaissance located one large rock outcrop, at the top of Unit 71, with at least 

one small cave and some deep fissures that may be suitable for bats. The cave is difficult 

to get to and inaccessible unless ropes are used. Both cave and fissures have southerly 

exposures, and surrounding trees (dead and alive) are providing some shading and cover. 

In accordance with Forest Plan Standard and Guidelines (USDA/USDI 2001), bat presence is 

assumed until surveys can provide conclusive evidence that bats are not using the cave. 

Harvesting trees around this rock outcrop may cause disturbance to roosting bats 

(assuming occupancy) or perhaps alter the cave/fissure temperatures by exposing them to 

more direct sunlight. A 250 foot no-harvest buffer would be applied around this site if 

alternative 2, 4 or 6 are implemented. Alternatives 3 and 5 do not propose harvesting this 

unit. Harvesting operations would also cause disturbance to roosting bats within and 

adjacent to harvest units. 

Indirect Effects 

Indirect effects would likely occur as a result of changes in insect populations resulting 

from post-harvest and prescribed burning (fuels reduction) related vegetation changes 

(see discussion on impacts to early-successional habitat). These effects are not expected 

to be adverse and in some cases, may be beneficial. 

Cumulative Effects 

The effects of the wildfires in 2002 had greater impact on this species than the effects of 

the salvage (see impacts to late-successional habitat discussion). Approximately 20% of 

the potential roosting habitat created by recent wildfires on the Umpqua National Forest 

are proposed for salvaging in the foreseeable future. The remaining unsalvaged patches 

of dead trees (14,163 acres) are well distributed across and intermingled within the 

forested landscape. Overall, current and future levels of roosting habitat (as dead trees 

and snags) are now higher than they have been in previous decades, and would remain 

within a natural range after harvesting in all action alternatives. Disturbance impacts are 

short-term in duration. Therefore cumulative impacts from this and other projects are 

not expected to be significant for this species. 

Impacts Determination 

Following consideration of the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the proposed 

action, it is determined that the action alternatives “may impact individuals or habitat 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because it retains levels of dead tree roost habitat within the natural range of 

variability for the planning area. The no action alternative would not impact this species 

in the short term, but maintains a higher risk of high intensity fire and loss or alteration of 

future habitat (than the action alternatives). 

Pacific Shrew (Sorex pacificus cascadensis)

Affected Environment 

One of the largest shrews in the area, the Pacific shrew was formerly considered a 

subspecies of the vagrant shrew. It is endemic to Oregon and occurs in two segregated 

populations. One is located on the Coast Range and the other in the southern Oregon 

western Cascades. The Pacific shrew is found in humid forests, marshes, and thickets and 

is considered a riparian species (Gomez and Anthony 1998) but has been found as far as 20 

meters away from stream banks (Anthony et al. 1987). It is more commonly found in 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

145

early-successional forests and less often in late-successional stands. It requires down logs, 

brushy thickets, or ground debris for cover and feeding. 

The nearest documented occurrence of this species is approximately 2 miles to the west 

of the planning area. This species is believed to be well-distributed throughout the 

forest. The Apple Fire likely impacted this animal where the fire burned with high 

intensity in riparian areas. However, it is possible that individuals survived in areas and 

may still occur within the proposed salvage area. Because surveys result in a high rate of 

mortality to this species (traps often kill the shrews), no surveys are planned. It is 

assumed that this species occurs within the planning area. Field reconnaissance shows 

insect prey species are in abundance in the area and riparian vegetation is recovering in 

most areas. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Application of Riparian Reserve buffers would prevent or minimize timber harvesting 

effects to the shrew. The main impact to the shrew would likely come from the 

application of prescribed fire for post-salvage hazardous fuels reduction. The slash 

burning is expected to burn the ground unevenly, especially in moist riparian habitats, 

leaving unburned areas, which become available for animal survival (Bendell 1974). In 

addition, many small mammals often survive fire by moving into underground burrows or 

by moving to unburned areas (Forde 1983). There is a lack of ground fuel to carry the fire 

within Riparian Reserves and extensive burning is not anticipated within these buffers. 

However, it is still possible that the prescribed fire may kill or harm individual shrews. 

Slash burning may result in a temporary loss of cover and food for the shrew and increase 

its exposure to predation. However, the shrew’s ability to proliferate would help it to 

recolonize burned areas from areas that did not burn. A comparison of riparian acres, 

which may have some portions burned within them, is used to display the effects (Figure 

52). 

0

250

500

750

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

RR Acres

Figure 52. Comparison of direct effects from burning in riparian habitats to reduce 

fuels. Standard Riparian Reserve buffers of 180 feet for class 3-4 and 360 feet for 

class 1-2 streams were used. Not all acres shown are expected to burn due to a lack 

of fuels to carry the prescribed fire. 

Alternatives 1 and 5 have no impact on potential shrew habitat, as no riparian burning 

would occur. Alternative 4 has the greatest impact because hand pile burning would 

occur within the buffers and potentially over the most acres. Alternatives 2 and 3 

underburn about 100 acres less than Alternative 4, but this difference is insignificant. 

Alternative 6 has the least impact because it burns the least amount of acres. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

146

Indirect Effects 

Reforestation within riparian areas may have an indirect impact on this species and its 

prey base. Planting of conifer may impact the length of time that shrubby species 

dominate an area. However, riparian habitats are known to be very dynamic and usually 

have a good deciduous/shrub component along the margins of the stream channel. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 would use KV funds to plant riparian areas that experienced 

high intensity burning during the Apple Fire. This indirect impact would be negative 

because it would shorten the time that shrubby vegetation dominates the riparian area; 

however, in context of the naturally dynamic nature of the stream banks, this impact 

would likely be insignificant. 

Cumulative Effects 

Currently, there are approximately 1,919 acres of early-successional riparian habitat 

within the planning area. Considering the past, present and foreseeable future actions, 

which include the direct and indirect effects described above, up to about 75% of this 

habitat would either be burned to reduce fuels, planted with conifers, or both, potentially 

leading to short-term localized declines in shrew populations. However, these populations 

would eventually be reestablished by the survivors and through emigration from nearby 

unimpacted sites. Figure 52 can be used to compare the relative level of cumulative 

impacts between alternatives. 

Impacts Determination 

Following consideration of the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the proposed 

action, it is determined that the action alternatives “may impact individuals or habitat 

but are not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species”. The no action alternative would not impact this species in the short term, but 

maintains a higher risk of high intensity fire and future impacts to habitat. 

BIG GAME 

Affected Environment 

Roosevelt elk and black-tailed deer are the most common big game within the planning 

area. Black bear and mountain lion also occur within it. The planning area is located 

within the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Dixon Wildlife Management Unit 

(WMU) and accounts for 1.4% of its total area. The largest elk herds within this WMU 

occur 8-15 miles to the east and 15 miles to the south of the planning area (ODFW 

telemetry data), although smaller herds are not uncommon within the Panther Creek 

drainage and Panther ridge area. The planning area contains good Roosevelt elk habitat 

especially along its west and northwestern portions. However, the fire mainly burned in 

the eastern steep/dry portions of the planning area where deer are more abundant within 

and adjacent to salvage units than elk. 

The northwestern portion of the planning area is identified as a winter range management 

area under the Umpqua LRMP (USDA 1990). Limpy Creek is also identified, but mainly acts 

as a corridor for movement between the Calf Creek and Panther Creek drainages. The 

Forest Plan identifies these areas for providing big game winter range and timber 

production (USDA 1990, IV-132-133). At least 20% of these areas must be in optimal cover 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

147

conditions (late-successional forests). The current level is about 40% for the planning 

area. Timber salvage is permitted. Clearcut harvesting is the preferred technique and 

unit sizes should average 20 acres and maximize edge with areas of cover (USDA 1990, IV195). The average unit size (includes openings created by adjacent units) is 

approximately 11.5 acres under all action alternatives. Riparian buffers would maximize 

edge of dead tree habitat, which provides some cover. 

Environmental Effects

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Hauling and timber harvesting activities along roads may have direct effects to big game 

due to human disturbance (Toweill and Thomas 2002). However, this effect is temporary 

and animals return at night or times when activities are not occurring. Permanent 

abandonment is not common. Of the action alternatives, Alternative 6 requires the least 

amount of road use and has the lowest amount of potential disturbance to big game. 

Prescribed burning in the spring may have direct impacts to big game because of the 

limited mobility of the young to avoid these areas of human activity (Lyon et al. 2000). 

Alternatives that have more hand-pile burning in the fall (Alternatives 5 and 6) would have 

less impact than those that prescribe broadcast burning in the spring. 

The fire reduced hiding cover, which in conjunction with high road densities can impact 

use of foraging habitat. Deer and elk increases are well documented after fires if 

adequate cover is available (Fire Effects Information Systems (FEIS) database 2003). In 

general, fires that create mosaics of forage and cover are beneficial. Effective cover in 

the burned area was greatly reduced by the fire. In addition, standing dead trees may 

provide adequate cover within burns (FEIS 2003). Salvage would result in indirect impacts 

to big game from harvesting these dead trees and reducing their density, thus impacting 

their effectiveness as hiding cover. This impact is more severe in areas with high road 

densities and heavier salvage prescriptions. Riparian buffers would provide adequate 

areas for hiding, and are commonly used for travel, foraging and resting areas by big 

game. 

All of the action alternatives would have direct impacts on big game through harvest 

related disturbances and alteration of hiding cover. Disturbance impacts are temporal 

and big game would likely return once harvest operations are completed. Impacts to 

hiding cover would cause shifts in habitat use, but enough cover remains well distributed 

throughout the planning area, especially in draw bottoms, that this impact is not 

considered significant. 

Cumulative Effects 

The decline in forage habitat resulting from reductions in clearcut timber harvests, 

increases in road densities and current forest management emphasis on thinning forests 

has caused increased harassment and displacement of elk to private properties in some 

areas (ODFW 2003). However, the current road system19 with a road density of 4 miles of 

road per square mile of land in the Panther Creek watershed is probably the single largest 

factor affecting habitat effectiveness for big game in the planning area. Closures of roads 

(e.g., decommissioning) is known to increase the survival and productivity of Roosevelt elk 

populations (Cole et al. 1997). All alternatives maintain the current road network. During 

 

19 Roads affect big game in three basic ways. First, they physically remove land area from the habitat base. 

Secondly, they increase vulnerability to hunting and poaching. And finally, they decrease habitat utilization 

due to human disturbances (e.g., big game avoid foraging in areas with high hunting pressure). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

148

the road analysis, about 3 miles of existing roads within winter range received a 

recommendation for decommissioning. 

The main cumulative effect to big game has been caused by the wildfire. Fire can provide 

or improve forage resources for deer and elk within 1 or 2 years after burning. Presence 

of serviceberry in the understory is an important consideration because of its palatability 

and ability to resprout strongly from root crowns after fire (FEIS 2003). Deer seem to 

prefer foraging in burned compared to unburned areas, although preference may vary 

seasonally. Following fire most preferred elk forage species are enhanced by an increase 

in available nutrients. Fires increase forbs, grasses, and shrubs, create edge habitat and 

snags for cover. Because forage habitat is becoming limited (ODFW 2003), the fire has a 

cumulative beneficial effect because it would provide good forage in the next few years. 

Fire creates early-successional habitat where grasses, forbs and fruit-producing shrubs are 

more abundant and beneficial to black bear. Huckleberries are more productive on 

recently burned sites compared to unburned sites. Fire can also provide a medium for 

insect invasions, which also provides food. Another big game species, the mountain lion, 

may change its home range in response to wildfire, but generally their habitat is enhanced 

or expanded by fires that improve habitat for prey species. An increase in mountain lion 

numbers was documented after a fire increased the local deer population in a forest in 

British Columbia (FEIS 2003). 

When compared to the impacts of roads (adverse) and wildfire (beneficial), the action 

alternatives add insignificantly to the cumulative effects on big game. 

SPECIES PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS SURVEY & MANAGE, PROTECTION & BUFFER SPECIES, 

NOW CONSIDERED SENSITIVE SPECIES 

When the DEIS was released, the Forest Plan required protection of certain latesuccessional wildlife species, which may not have been fully protected by other standards 

and guidelines, when they occur outside of LSR's or Riparian Reserves. Additional 

amendments to the Northwest Forest Plan redefined Survey and Manage categories based 

on new information and species characteristics (USDA/USDI 2001). On April 21, 2004, the 

Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) will again be amended to remove Survey and Manage 

mitigations. 

As part of the analysis conducted to amend the NWFP, all 296 Survey and Manage species 

were reviewed by Special Status Species Program Managers to determine if they 

warranted inclusion in Agency Special Status Species Programs. Based on that review, 152 

of the 296 Survey and Manage species were eligible for inclusion in one or more of the 

Agencies’ existing Special Status Species Programs. For Survey and Manage wildlife that 

occur on the Umpqua National Forest, and are addressed in the Biological Evaluation for 

the Baked Apple Fire Salvage (dated - October 1, 2003 ) this entails the following changes: 

Red Tree Vole Æ Was a Category D species, List 4 under ONHP Æ Does not meet 

criteria for Sensitive species on the North Umpqua Ranger District. Prior to the 

S&M ROD, this species was removed from Survey and Manage status in the mesic 

portion of its range (in which the planning area occurs) on 12/19/03, based on the 

2003 annual species review. This species meets criteria for Sensitive Species in the 

northwest corner of Oregon’s Coast Range. 

Great Gray Owl Æ Was a Category A species, List 4 under ONHP Æ Does not meet 

criteria for Sensitive species. This species meets criteria for Sensitive species in 

California and Washington, but not in Oregon. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

149

Crater Lake Tightcoil Æ Was a Category A species, List 1 under ONHP Æ Meets 

criteria for Sensitive species. 

There are two species known to occur within the planning area; the red tree vole and the 

great gray owl. The Crater Lake tightcoil is unlikely to occur within the planning area. 

These species are now discussed in the context of Sensitive species; they are kept 

separate from the discussion of the other Sensitive species for tracking purposes between 

Draft and Final. 

Red Tree Vole (Arborimus longicaudus)

Affected Environment 

The Oregon red tree vole is endemic to moist coniferous forests of western Oregon and 

northwest California (USDA/USDI 2000). It inhabits conifer forests containing Douglas-fir, 

grand fir, Sitka spruce, western hemlock, and white fir (USDA/USDI 2000). Optimal 

habitat is old-growth Douglas-fir forest (Carey 1991). Aubry et al. (1991) found that red 

tree voles occur in old-growth forests significantly more than in younger forests, and also 

suggested that the parameters associated with age (such as large, live, old-growth trees) 

are important habitat components. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

Unit 79B would not be harvested in any alternative in order to protect the known red tree 

vole site. Therefore, no direct effects to the known nest trees would occur. Direct 

effects may occur to suitable habitat in units 78B and 79A during harvest operations if 

green trees are felled for logging corridors or safety. Some of the proposed salvage units 

that have partial harvest prescriptions are within suitable red tree vole habitat, even 

though these stands were burned during the fire. No red tree vole sign (nests or resin 

ducts) were found during general field reconnaissance. Most of these stands experienced 

significant heating to the canopy during the fire, but it is possible that this species 

survived and may still occur within these stands. Surveys were not conducted because 

they were not required. Alternative 6 was designed to avoid impacts to potential habitat 

by eliminating salvage in partial harvest stands and would have no direct, indirect or 

cumulative effects to red tree vole habitat. All other action alternatives may have direct 

and indirect effects to red tree vole habitat when green trees are incidentally felled 

during harvest operations. However, this affect is expected to be very limited in scope 

and scale. 

Great Gray Owl (Strix nebulosa) 

Affected Environment 

This owl is one of the largest owls in North America. Oregon and Northern California 

populations are considered to be on the southern edge of its range. It nests in latesuccessional forests (>60% canopy closure), but forages in early-successional habitat (e.g., 

meadows, clearcuts). Within the range of the northern spotted owl, it is most common in 

lodgepole pine forests adjacent to meadows, but is also found in other coniferous forest 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

150

types. The primary limiting factor affecting this bird in the western Cascades seems to be 

foraging habitat (Huff et al. 1997). In some locations, such as on the Willamette National 

Forest west of the crest of the Cascade Range, at least some shelterwood harvesting 

seems to be beneficial for the species by opening up otherwise closed canopy cover for 

foraging. 

There are no known nest sites for this bird within or adjacent to the planning area. This 

owl does occur directly adjacent to the planning area and probably forages within it. Four 

historical records of this owl occur along the ridges surrounding the planning area. The 

nearest sizeable natural meadow is Limpy Prairie, which is located in the extreme 

southern end of the planning area and about one mile from the nearest proposed salvage 

unit. Therefore, no surveys20 were conducted for this species; surveys are no longer 

required for this species. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

Forests with sufficient amounts of down logs and meadows tend to have larger populations 

of small mammals, which serve as prey for the great gray owl (USDA/USDI 1995). Forestry 

practices such as salvage of down logs can be expected to have an adverse impact on the 

species (USDA/USDI 1995). The Apple Fire created an abundance of foraging habitat for 

the great gray owl. This habitat is temporary, as forest succession takes place. All action 

alternatives would have indirect impacts to this species through changes in prey species 

habitat. To mitigate this impact, each alternative leaves various amounts of dead wood 

within the planning area to mimic the natural range of variation that prey species 

populations are accustomed to. Mitigations include no-salvage buffers and retention trees 

within units. Some modification of late-successional structure would occur as discussed 

earlier. This may have direct impacts on nesting habitat for this species, because they 

are known to nest along edges of man-made openings (e.g., clearcuts). These man-made 

openings do not require surveys, and surveys are no longer required. Overall, the impacts 

to great gray owls from implementation of the action alternatives are expected to be 

minor. 

Crater Lake Tightcoil Snail (Pristiloma arcticum crateris) 

Affected Environment 

This tiny snail is found above 2,000 feet elevation in moist conifer forests and among 

mosses and other vegetation near wetlands, springs, seeps, and riparian areas. It may be 

found on logs, among sedges, attached to decaying leaf surfaces, in litter, or inside other 

shells (USDI 1999). It requires perennially wet situations in mature conifer forests and 

only occurs within 33 feet of open water, generally in areas which remain under snow for 

long periods in the winter. 

The nearest known sites for this species are 18 miles to the southeast at elevations above 

4,900 feet. On this forest, they occur within the true fir vegetation zones (white and 

silver fir). The proposed salvage occurs primarily in a steep/dry area, below these forest 

types, within a highly dissected terrain that has experienced moderate to high intensity, 

 

20 The triggers for surveys were ground disturbing activities above 1,700 ft. elevations within mature stands 

(80 years plus) with greater than 60% canopy cover and within 1000 ft. of a natural meadow larger than 10 

acres. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

151

stand replacement fire. Mollusk surveys conducted in the planning area in the late 1990s 

failed to find this species. Pre-project clearance was complete for this species (during 

project analysis in 2003) through reference to the latest scientific literature, evaluation of 

species-habitat associations, field reconnaissance, presence of suitable or potential 

habitat in relationship to proposed salvage and ground disturbing activities. In addition, 

existing local survey records and data from the Interagency Survey and Manage Species 

database (ISMS) were reviewed and a species expert (Nancy Duncan) was consulted with. 

The proposed salvage met management requirements for these species before removal 

from Survey and Manage and it meets the requirements under the sensitive species 

program. The movement of this species to the Sensitive species list does not change the 

determination that habitat for this species remains poor to non-existent; no additional 

surveys are required. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

The probability of this species being present in the project area is very unlikely based on 

the current condition of the burned forest (no longer late-successional habitat) and the 

steep and dry nature of the terrain. The probability that this project would cause a 

significant negative effect on the species or its persistence in the area is very small. 

Riparian buffers along all streams and perennial waters under Alternatives 2, 3, 5, and 6 

makes it even more unlikely that this project might impact this species. The minimal 

impact caused by the 32 acres of riparian removal and the proposed slash treatment in 

Alternative 4 would not affect this species. Because of this information, it was 

determined that there was no need for surveys for this species. Overall, no direct, 

indirect, or cumulative effects (and therefore, No Impact) from any alternative are 

expected to occur to this species or its habitat. 

LANDBIRDS – TRACKED AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

The degree of fire-caused mortality of birds can depend on the season of burn (Smith 

2000). Mortality to adult landbirds is usually minor due to their ability to move from the 

fire, however mortality to nestlings and young does occur. Burning that occurs during the 

spring coincides with the nesting and fledging season for many landbirds, and therefore 

has more direct effects than burning that occurs in the fall, when birds are fully mobile 

and able to escape the flames and smoke. The spatial extent of the burning also relates 

to the magnitude of the effect. Broadcast burning has a higher likelihood of impacting 

birds than handpile burning 

It was determined during scoping that the heat, smoke and gasses from burning slash in 

the spring may impact migratory birds. The measure selected to assess the impacts of the 

alternatives is the number of acres burned during spring. This measure was selected 

because it helps predict impacts to birds migrating through the area. 

Continental and local declines in numerous bird populations have led to concerns for the 

future of migratory and resident landbirds. In the Cascades Mountains, 20 landbird 

species have demonstrated significant recent and/or long-term population declines (Sauer 

2003). As a result, the USFS developed a Landbird Strategic Plan (USDA 2000). In 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

152

addition, a Presidential Executive Order and a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for 

the conservation of migratory birds were signed in 2001. 

The direct impacts from the proposed project entail prescribed fire to reduce logging 

created slash within harvest units. Alternative 1 has no impact. Alternative 5 involves 

only handpile burning during the fall season, and therefore poses little risk to exposing 

young birds to direct fire effects. Alternatives 3, 6 and 2 vary in degree of risk, from less 

to more, respectively, based on differences in acreage planned for broadcast burning 

during spring and handpile burning during the fall. 

Because this project proposes burning on recently burned ground, the indirect and 

cumulative effects common to fire on birds are negligible when compared to effects of 

the wildfire. The issue of prescribed burning and its effect on landbirds applies 

specifically to the direct effects of fire. The following discussions elaborate on various 

indirect and cumulative impacts associated with landbird species that this proposed 

salvage is most likely to impact. 

The Landbird Strategic Plan sets forth goals and actions to assist the Forest Service in 

providing sustainable habitat for landbirds and is described in detail in the Wildlife 

Report. The landbird conservation plan for this area is the “Westside Coniferous Forest 

Landbird Conservation Plan” (Partners In Flight [PIF] 2000). This plan is not regulatory, 

but does provide recommendations for forest management at both the stand and 

landscape-scale. It recommends restoration and maintenance of forest conditions and 

habitat attributes necessary to sustain healthy bird populations over the long-term. The 

overall objective of the conservation plan is to reverse declining population trends and 

achieve stable or increasing trends within the next couple of decades throughout western 

Oregon and Washington. 

The plan calls for a complex array of forest conditions from early to late-successional 

habitat within the landscape. The proposed Baked Apple Fire Salvage contains a blend of 

reserves (e.g., riparian and sensitive soils) and mitigation measures that are designed to 

balance natural resource extraction with maintenance of a healthy ecosystem. Salvage 

impacts will mainly be on early-successional habitats created by the stand replacing fire. 

Structural and compositional attributes that appear to be most important for landbirds in 

early-successional forests are residual canopy trees, snags, deciduous vegetation and 

nectar-producing (flowering) plants. As discussed earlier, some impact to latesuccessional habitat would occur. Vaux swift (Chaetura vauxi), is a focal species listed in 

the conservation plan that may be affected by salvaging in late-successional habitat. The 

direct, indirect and cumulative effects for this species are related to salvage that occurs 

in late-successional habitat. The discussion on late-successional habitat fully discloses 

how each alternative may impact late-successional habitat, and Vaux’s swift. The 

following discussions disclose the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts expected to 

occur from the salvage on the four focal landbird species, which occur within the earlysuccessional habitats impacted by the proposed salvage. 

Of the 20 landbirds listed in the conservation plan, four occur within the earlysuccessional habitat impacted by the proposed project (Table 30) and are described 

below. Table 30 documents changes in relative abundance for the four landbird species 

that occur in the Baked Apple Planning Area. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

153

Table 30. Provincial and local population trends, in terms of relative abundance, for 

landbird focal species potentially impacted by the proposed project. Local data is 

from the nearby Fish Lake Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) route. 

Habitat Cascades Trend Local Trend 

Attribute 

Focal 

Species 1966-2002 1980-2002 1993-2002 1993-2002 

Residual 

Trees/Snags 

Olive-Sided 

Flycatcher -3.36 -3.57 -2.99 -1.98* 

Snags Western Bluebird -8.97 -10.75 -9.42* 

Not Recorded 

on Local 

Route 

Deciduous 

Vegetation 

Orange-Crowned 

Warbler -6.75* -0.52* -11.05 +12.76* 

Flowering 

Plants 

Rufous 

Hummingbird -2.03 -3.33 +4.41* -21.26* 

*Not statistically significant (p>0.1)

Olive-Sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi)

Affected Environment 

This bird is a long-distance, neotropical migratory bird21 that uses forest openings and 

edges. It is highly associated with combinations of late and early-successional habitat 

edges and more abundant in fragmented landscapes than unfragmented landscapes 

(McGarigal and McComb 1995, Hagar et al. 1995). Its presence in early-successional 

habitat appears to be dependent on the availability of snags or residual live trees for 

singing and foraging perches (Altman and Sallabanks 2000). The most important variable 

for nesting success in managed early-successional forests may be the presence of snags 

>40 feet tall (PIF 2000). 

This species may be dependent upon stand-replacing forest fires, which create optimal 

habitat for it (Hutto 1995). Abundance is higher in burned areas than in adjacent 

unburned late-successional forests. The 2003 breeding bird surveys (BBS) detected a 

higher abundance of this species in relationship to pre-fire data (1993-2002) from the 

adjacent Fish Lake BBS route. This species was only detected at stations with a mix of 

green and stand-replaced late-successional forest. Stand exam data from proposed 

salvage units indicate that upland dead tree canopy closures currently range from 17%-

58%. This data suggests that the proposed salvage units are currently suitable habitat for 

the olive-sided flycatcher. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Current scientific information for the olive-sided flycatcher suggests the need to avoid or 

minimize salvaging after stand-replacing fires (Altman and Sallabanks 2000). Altman 

(2000) recommends maintaining some portion (e.g., >2%) of the landscape as post-fire 

habitat. However, this species has been shown to respond positively to clearcut 

 

21 Neotropical birds are those that migrate to the tropical portions of the Americas. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

154

harvesting (Altman and Sallabanks 2000) as long as some singing and perching structures 

are retained. For this project, post-harvest canopy closures are predicted to range from 

1%-3% for units that retain 4 trees per acre, to 10%-31% in units that leave 50% of the 

existing tree density. Since there is no data indicating minimum densities of trees or 

snags per acre needed by this species, all post-harvest units could be suitable habitat 

after salvage logging. Perhaps the best comparison of direct effects is the percentage of 

the current post-fire habitat within the planning area that remains unsalvaged. This is 

shown in Figure 48, under the effects to “landscape distribution of dead wood” section. 

Alternative 1 (no action) has no direct impact on this bird. It maintains the highest 

amount of post-fire habitat, followed by Alternatives 5, 3, 6, 2 and 4. Alternative 6 

minimizes impacts to optimal habitat by avoiding salvaging of dead tree patches 

intermixed with late-successional forest and concentrating the salvage within the burned 

steep/dry landscape area. The impacts from the action alternatives are expected to have 

no significant adverse affect on this bird. 

Indirect Effects 

Retention of trees within harvest units that have suitable habitat for corvids (crows and 

ravens) and squirrels may create “ecological traps” to this species (Altman and Sallabanks 

2000). This might happen when harvest units occur within or adjacent to unburned 

forests that contain these predators, which prey on the eggs and nestlings of this bird. 

There are probably lower densities and poor habitat for these predators in burned forests 

following moderate to high intensity fires; therefore, there are less impacts to the 

flycatcher. The proposed project focuses on salvaging within the most severely burned 

areas of the planning area and the impact is not expected to be significant. 

Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative impacts of the proposed project are analyzed at a broader scale (the forest 

scale), using the recommendations from Altman and Sallabanks (2000). Because this bird 

is a long-distance migrant, the current and future condition of unsalvaged, standreplacement fire patches is important. Cumulatively, about 1.8% of the federally 

managed land on the Umpqua National Forest is post-fire, early-successional forest with 

high densities of dead trees. The action alternatives do not decrease this amount to less 

than 1.6%, including the proposed Tiller Fire Salvages and potential salvaging in the LSR 

on the Tiller Ranger District. 

The BBS post-fire data suggests a local increase in abundance for this species. This trend 

is expected to continue under all alternatives. As forest succession takes place, and snags 

begin to fall, populations would stabilize and eventually decrease once these burned 

stands develop back into older forests and this species moves to other areas on the forest 

that may become suitable habitat through future disturbances. 

Western Bluebird (Sialia mexicana)

Affected Environment 

The western bluebird is strongly associated with early-successional forest conditions in the 

grass/forb stage (McGarigal 1993) and known to nest in dense patches of fire-killed snags 

(Zarnowitz and Manuwal 1985). It responds positively to increases in snag density of both 

hard and soft snags. Nesting usually occurs in young (<5 years) clearcuts and productivity 

declines with increasing clearcut age (McCullough 1991). Hairy woodpeckers play an 

important role in creating nesting habitat for western bluebirds. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

155

Western bluebirds were detected at five BBS stations within the planning area. Eightypercent of these detections were in stand replaced late-successional patches below 3,500 

feet in elevation. Field reconnaissance detected five separate pairs within proposed 

salvage units. In comparison, no western bluebirds have been detected over the previous 

10 years before the fire (1993-2002) in the adjacent Fish Lake BBS route (OR-244). 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

The proposed project effects on this species are similar to those for the olive-sided 

flycatcher. The first year of BBS data suggests an increase in abundance for this species. 

This trend is expected to continue under all alternatives. 

Orange-Crowned Warbler (Vermivora celata) 

Affected Environment 

A long-distance, neotropical migratory bird that breeds in the coniferous forests of 

western Oregon and Washington, the orange-crowned warbler occurs primarily below 

4,000 feet elevation, predominantly in coastal forests. A foliage-gleaning insectivore 

associated with dense deciduous trees and shrubs (PIF 2000), it reaches peak abundance 

once a shrub layer has developed (5-10 years) and before an overstory conifer canopy 

develops. 

This bird was detected within the planning area at a higher abundance than it occurred 

over a ten year (pre-fire) period along the adjacent Fish Lake BBS route. Natural revegetation and re-sprouting of deciduous shrubs and trees is presently occurring 

throughout the burned portions of the planning area. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

The proposed action directly affects nesting and foraging habitat for this species. 

Salvaging of dead trees does not seem to negatively affect this species, based on the 

available data. However, ground disturbing logging impacts (e.g., skid trails, falling of 

trees) followed by broadcast burning have a direct impact to shrubby, deciduous ground 

vegetation. This impact may make harvest units unsuitable during these operations (1-2 

year period), especially if they occur during the nesting season. A reasonable comparison 

of direct impacts can be based on the acreage of intensive land management, where at 

least 2 activities (logging and broadcast underburning) are proposed to occur on the same 

piece of ground (Figure 53). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

156

0

400

800

1200

1600

ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

Acres

Three Activities

Two Activities

Figure 53. Comparison of direct impacts to the orange-crowned warbler based on 

acres with the highest level of management intensity (as indicated by the number of 

activities). 

Alternative 1 has no direct impact. Alternative 5 has the least impact and does not 

propose broadcast burning of salvage units; instead it proposes hand piling and burning 

slash, which allows for fall burning (outside of breeding season) to avoid impacts to 

nesting birds and other wildlife. Alternative 4 has the greatest impact as it burns 887 

acres in the spring, followed by Alternatives 2 (858 acres), 6 (631 acres) and 3 (519 acres) 

(in order of greatest to least impact). Overall, the direct effects of the salvage on this 

species would be short-term and populations would rebound, probably increasing 5-10 

years after salvage operations are finished. 

Indirect Effects 

Reforestation can speed up the rate of succession and shorten the time that shrubs and 

forbs dominate an area. The indirect impacts of the proposed alternatives on the warbler 

are previously described under the “indirect effects to early-successional habitat” section 

of this document (Figure 38). 

Cumulative Effects 

The cumulative impacts of the proposed alternatives are related to those previously 

described under the “cumulative effects to early-successional habitat” section of this 

document (Figure 39). Initial indications are that the local population of orange-crowned 

warblers has increased due to a pulse of habitat created by the fire. This increase may be 

delayed for 1-2 years during salvage operations, but would continue as forest succession 

continues. The local population would likely peak in 5-10 years, after completion of 

salvage operations, and then begin to decrease slowly as conifer trees begin to redominate the burned areas. Shrubby habitat would remain longer in areas not reforested, 

or in areas where conifer are planted at a wider spacing. Local populations would 

eventually leave for other suitable shrubby habitat areas on the forest. 

Rufous Hummingbird (Selasphorus rufus)

Affected Environment 

The rufous hummingbird is a long-distance, neotropical migrant bird that also breeds in 

this area. It is primarily associated with coniferous forest edges and openings with a 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

157

diversity of flowering plants for feeding and open spaces for aerial displays of courtship 

behavior. 

This bird was detected within the planning area at a higher abundance than it occurred 

over a ten year (pre-fire) period along the adjacent Fish Lake BBS route. The Apple Fire 

created a pulse of habitat for this species. Post-fire re-vegetation of many nectarproducing plants is occurring within the first spring following the burn. A more stable, yet 

small, component of this habitat also comes from natural openings (e.g., meadows and 

rock outcrops), which take up approximately 1% of the planning area. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

The proposed action directly affects nesting and foraging habitat for this species. 

Salvaging of dead trees may have a beneficial affect (by opening up areas for courtship 

behavior) and does not seem to negatively affect this species based on the available data. 

However, ground disturbing logging impacts (e.g., skid trails, falling of trees) followed by 

broadcast burning have a direct impact to nesting birds and their nesting/foraging 

habitat. This impact may make harvest units unsuitable during these operations (1-2 year 

period), especially if they occur during the nesting season. The magnitude of direct 

impacts on the hummingbird is similar to those for the orange-crowned warbler, as shown 

in Figure 53. 

Indirect Effects 

Reforestation can speed up the rate of forest succession and shorten the time that nectarproducing shrubs and forbs dominate an area. The indirect impacts of the proposed 

alternatives on the hummingbird are previously described under the “indirect effects to 

early-successional habitat” section of this document (Figure 38). 

Cumulative Effects 

The cumulative impacts of the proposed alternatives on the hummingbird are related to 

those previously described under the “cumulative effects to early-successional habitat” 

section of this document (Figure 39). Other cumulative effects would be the same as 

those described for the orange-crowned warbler. 

MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES 

The Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1990) identifies the 

following species/groups as management indicator species (MIS) for the Forest: northern 

spotted owl, pileated woodpecker, marten, bald eagle, peregrine falcon, Roosevelt elk, 

black-tailed deer, and cavity nesters. Environmental effects to late-successional habitat 

and coarse woody debris adequately disclosed effects to the pileated woodpecker, marten 

and cavity nesters (all of which are late-successional species dependent upon dead wood 

habitats). Effects to northern spotted owls, peregrine falcons and bald eagles were 

discussed under the sensitive species section. Effects to Roosevelt elk and black-tailed 

deer were discussed in the big game section. 

SUMMARY 

The most likely method for maintaining viable populations of wildlife within the planning 

area centers on restoring and maintaining (to the extent practical) landscape patterns, 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

158

forest stand structures and vegetative diversity to conditions similar to those under which 

native wildlife evolved. This management goal is consistent with the Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy (USDA/USDI 1994). 

To achieve this goal while providing forest commodities, the proposed project design took 

shape with consideration for the recommendations of the Middle North Umpqua River 

watershed analysis (USDA 2001) and input from the interdisciplinary team resource 

specialists. 

Certain actions can be taken to reduce potential impacts or effects to TES species and 

wildlife and allow maintenance of viable populations of existing native wildlife in the 

planning area. Mitigation measures for reducing impacts and maintaining viable wildlife 

populations are found in Chapter 2. Overall project effects are documented in Table 31 

for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Wildlife Species. 

Table 31. Determination of effects to Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive and 

Wildlife Species. (* effective 4/21/04). 

Conclusion of Effects, based on pre-field review, field 

verification, and determination of effects. 

Review Process Determination of effects 

by Alternative 

Birds 1 2 3 4 5 6 

Northern Spotted Owl LAA LAA LAA LAA LAA LAA 

Bald Eagle NLAA NLAA NLAA NLAA NLAA NLAA 

Peregrine Falcon MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

Harlequin Duck NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Bufflehead NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Yellow Rail NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Amphibians 

Oregon Spotted Frog NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Foothill Yellow-legged Frog NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Southern Torrent Salamander MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

Reptiles 

Western Pond Turtle NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Common Kingsnake NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Mammals 

Canada Lynx NE NE NE NE NE NE 

California Wolverine NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Pacific Fisher MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

Pacific Fringed Bat MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

Pacific Pallid Bat NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Pacific Shrew MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

Mollusks 

Crator Lake Tightcoil Snail * NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Key to determinations:

The threatened and endangered species determination calls follow the nomenclature established 

by the US Fish and Wildlife Service: 

NE= No Effect, NLAA= Not Likely to Adversely Affect, LAA= Likely to Adversely Affect 

For sensitive species, determinations follow the nomenclature established in the Forest Service 

Handbook: 

NI= no Impact; 

MIIH= May Impact Individuals or Habitat but will not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards 

Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species; 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

159

WIFV= Will Impact Individuals or Habitat with a Consequence that the Action May 

Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population 

or Species. 

* The Crater Lake tightcoil becomes a sensitive species on April 21, 2004. 

SOILS IN THE PROJECT AREA 

Affected Environment 

Information on the soils within the planning area was gathered from the Land Resource 

Inventory22 and Soil Resource Inventory23 for the Umpqua National Forest and verified 

through field reconnaissance of the units by soil scientists. These surveys included 

observations of fire effects, soil disturbance, slope stability, erosion hazards, effective 

ground cover, soil suitability and site severity. Within the analysis area there are 

eighteen soil land-types that are potentially affected by the proposed actions. Soils with a 

unique combination of physical, chemical and topographic characteristics are grouped into 

land-types. Typical surface horizon depths and Surface Erosion Potential are displayed in 

Table 32 (Umpqua NF, 1976. Soil Resource Inventory). 

Table 32. Landtype Characteristics of Proposed Salvage Units. 

Soil 

 LandTypes Representative Harvest Units 

Surface 

Horizon 

Depth 

(inches) 

Surface Erosion Potential

8 15, 18, 26B, 30, 46, 47, 25A-B, 27A-E, 28B, 

48A, 48B Variable Moderate 

41 42 6" Moderate 

42 44 8" Moderate 

46 

38, 39, 40, 41A-B, 42, 43, 44, 49, 56A-B, 57, 

58A, 58C, 59A, 62A-D, 75, 76, 77, 78A-F, 

79A, 88A-B, 89, 90, 96 

5" Moderate 

221 66, 68, 69, 72, 74A-B, 75, 76, 77 9" Variable 

244 2A 9" Low to Moderate 

245 27A, 28A-B, 30, 47, 91 9" Low to Moderate 

277 75 10" Low to Moderate 

321 9B-C, 45A-F 4" Moderate to High 

421 4, 9B-C, 45A 8" Moderate 

453 49, 58A, 59A-C 6” Variable 

461 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74B, 86, 87, 94, 95, 

96 5" Moderate 

467 80, 96 5" Low to Moderate 

468 44, 69, 74A, 78A-C, 78E-F, 79A, 88A-B 5" Low to Moderate 

478 78B 5" Low 

 

22 Unpublished Soil Survey of the Umpqua National Forest, Roseburg, OR. 

23 Radtke, Sherman and Rudolph V. Edwards, Jr. 1976. Soil resource inventory. R-6, Umpqua National Forest, 

Roseburg, OR.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

160

Soil 

 LandTypes Representative Harvest Units 

Surface 

Horizon 

Depth 

(inches) 

Surface Erosion Potential

525 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 25A-B, 37, 46, 48A-B, 71, 

86, 87 8" Low to Moderate 

541 16, 17, 18, 25A-B, 26A-B, 27D, 35, 48B 6” Low to Moderate 

543 58A, 62B, and 62D 6” Low to Moderate 

Landtypes that encompass all salvage units proposed are listed here. Some units are listed 

twice because the unit boundary crosses a Landtype boundary. Each land-type is 

described in detail in the Soils Report, located in the Appendix. 

As displayed in Table 32, the proposed salvage units represent a wide variety of Landtypes 

and erosion potentials. For example, landtypes 221 and 453 are combinations of two or 

more landtypes. In these complex landtypes, the erosion potential varies considerably 

depending on slope and soil characteristics. These landtypes do not have one defined 

erosion potential, and are considered “variable”. Unit’s 45A-F and 9B-C are located in 

landtype 321 which has a moderate to high surface erosion potential. 

Detailed analysis of all proposed salvage units was conducted using the Watershed Erosion 

Prediction Project (WEPP) model (to predict surface erosion) and the SHALSTAB model (to 

predict susceptibility to shallow rapid landslides). This analysis is discussed in the aquatic 

section of this Chapter. 

Erosion Hazard for the Baked Apple planning area is displayed in Figure 54. To make this 

map, each landtype was placed in an Erosion Hazard Class from low to high based on 

representative soil surface textures and slope steepness. Long term Erosion Hazard will 

not change based on the effects of the 2002 Apple Fire or the effects of this project. 

Short term erosion hazard was modeled and is described in the aquatics section of this 

chapter. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

161

Figure 54. Erosion Hazard for the Planning Area. 

Thirty-three percent of the planning area has a high erosion hazard and 66 percent of the 

planning area has moderate or low erosion hazard (Table 33). High erosion hazard 

predominates in areas proposed for harvest with a “high” erosion rating that varies from 

47% of the proposed treatment area (Alternative 5) to 66% (Alternative 6). Regardless of 

erosion hazard, the burned areas would experience an increase in erosion rates due to the 

loss of vegetation and fine organic matter from the fire. Most of this erosion is related to 

the fire effects. The proposed activities contribute a relatively small amount of surface 

erosion that is proportional to the total acreage of proposed treatments. 

Table 33. Erosion Hazard Distribution for the Planning Area and Action Alternatives. 

Alternatives No Action 2 3 4 5 6 Erosion 

Hazard 

Class acres % acres % acres % acres % acres % acres % 

LOW 1804 13 58 5 45 5 92 6 48 11 52 6

MODERATE 7561 54 323 30 274 31 487 34 180 42 257 28

HIGH 4560 33 694 65 561 64 842 60 204 47 608 66

Total acres 13925 1075 879 1421 434 917 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

162

This erosion hazard mapping gives a broad scale picture of surface erosion potential; a 

more site-specific prediction of surface erosion was completed using the WEPP model as 

described in the aquatics section of this chapter. 

UNSUITABLE SOILS 

Affected Environment 

The Umpqua National Forest (LRMP) describes the criteria used to determine soil 

suitability for tree harvest and states that harvest activities will occur only on lands 

classified as suited for timber production (LRMP IV-44 item 6). Unsuitable and/or sensitive 

soils are either unstable, “irreversible soil damage” lands, or have poor regeneration 

potential (Table 34). 

The steep, highly dissected landscape that dominates the planning area has soils that are 

susceptible to landslides. Some areas are so sensitive to vegetation manipulation that soil 

and water resources cannot be protected without creating “irreversible soil damage” 

(LRMP B-8). These unsuitable areas include debris avalanches, earth slumps (active and 

rotational), and watershed areas that are upslope from unstable features. All are 

classified as “unsuitable” due to “irreversible soil damage” potential (Table 34). When 

these unstable areas were found within the proposed planning area, they were excluded 

from salvage activities (Figure 55). 

Table 34. Sensitive Soils in the Baked Apple Planning Area. 

Irreversible Soil Damage and Poor 

Regeneration Soils Class Designation Harvest Salvage Sale 

Debris Avalanche TLA NONE 

Earth Slump (Active) TLS NONE 

Active Earth Flow TLF NONE 

Irreversible Soil 

Damage

Area of influence above soil 

movement CU NONE 

Very Shallow Soil TRR NONE 

Fragmental Gravels or Cobbles TRG NONE 

Poor 

Regeneration

Suitable with Severe 

Regeneration Limitation TES YES 

Soils with a very low moisture-holding capacity are classified unsuitable due to inherently 

poor regeneration potential. These soils are either very shallow (TRR) or rocky (TRG). All 

proposed harvest areas that included unsuitable soil areas greater that 5 acres in size 

were removed the proposed action and its alternatives (Figure 54). Proposed units where 

unsuitable soil areas were excluded include: 9A, 9B, 15, 17, 18, 19, 25A, 28A, 40, 41A, 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

163

41B, 42, 43, 44, 46, 48, 49, 56, 57, 62A, 62B, 63A, 66, 67, 68, 69, 72, 73, 74, 75, 78A, 

78B, 78F, 79A, 86, 87, 88A, 90, 93, 94. 

Areas of unsuitable soils mapped during field reconnaissance will be incorporated into the 

forest database of unsuitable soil, as directed by LRMP IV-44, 7A and 7B. Between Draft 

and Final, the responsible official determined that any salvage in unsuitable soils areas 

greater than 5 acres in size would require a Forest Plan amendment for this project. 

Since no amendment was proposed, these areas have been dropped from consideration 

under Alternatives 4 and 6. All Alternatives are consistent with Forest Plan Standards and 

Guidelines regarding salvage harvest in unsuitable soil areas. 

Figure 55. Unsuitable Soils Within the Baked Apple Planning Area, as shown for 

Alternative 6 (other alternatives are shown in the Soils Report).

Other soils that are suitable, but have severe regeneration limitations are considered 

“environmentally sensitive” (TES). TES soils in the planning area generally occupy 

droughty sites on ridge tops and steep south-facing slopes where soil depth and rock 

content limits water for plant growth. TES soils are suitable for timber harvest, but 

vegetative recovery on these sites is slow following disturbance such as fire and timber 

harvest. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

164

BURN SEVERITY 

The severity of the fire effects to the soil, or burn severity24, was mapped using satellite 

imagery (Figure 56). 

Figure 56. 2002 Apple Fire Soil Burn Severity Map.

Nine percent of the area burned within the planning area experienced high severity while 

more than 90% of the fire effects were either low or moderate (Table 34A). However, 

since tree mortality coincides with those areas that experienced more severe fire effects, 

high severity effects in harvest units range from 25% (alternative 5) to 42% (alternatives 3 

& 6) of proposed activity areas. 

 

24 Fire severity is defined in terms of low, moderate and high. Low severity fires cause some soil heating and 

scorch; it can consume some leaf litter, but the duff layer is largely intact. Coarse wood is charred or 

partially consumed and no effects occur to the mineral soil. Moderate severity fires cause soil heating, 

moderate ground charring, consume the leaf litter, and consume the duff layer. Coarse woods, except for 

large logs, are consumed and the mineral soil is not visibly altered. High severity fires cause severe soil 

heating, deep ground charring, completely consume the duff layer, and alter the top portion of the mineral 

soil, turning it reddish or orange. Large logs are consumed or deeply charred. Soils can become fused. 

Continuous areas of hydrophobic soil conditions can occur. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

165

Table 34A. Burn Severity in the Planning Area and By Alternative. 

Alternatives 

Severity 

Class No Action 

2 3 4 5 6 

acres % acres % acres % acres % acres % acres % 

LOW 4370 47 149 14 118 13 233 16 152 37 100 11 

MODERATE 4134 44 499 46 392 45 628 44 156 38 435 47 

HIGH 863 9 428 40 370 42 561 39 105 25 389 42 

Total Acres 9367 1075 879 1422 413 924 

The consumption of surface fuels and duff was widespread and accompanied by tree 

mortality in areas that experienced moderate and high burn severity. Field verification of 

the severity mapping indicated that high severity fire effects were actually less than 

indicated on the map (USDA 2003, Appendix A-7). Locations of high burn severity generally 

occurred in areas of heavy fuel loading, such as steep draws and riparian areas. These 

areas will not be salvaged. Within the salvage units, high severity areas were 

discontinuous across the units and these areas averaged less than 0.10 acres in size. 

SOIL PRODUCTIVITY 

Affected Environment 

Soil productivity is irreplaceable in human timescales and should be protected (Beschta et 

al, 1995). Organic matter in the soil surface horizon plays a role in the regulation of 

water availability, movement and storage, soil structure and soil stability. Site 

productivity and recovery is often dependent on the amount of surface organic matter 

remaining in post-fire watersheds (Jurgensen et. al. 1997). 

Oliver and Larson (1996) have documented that disturbances such as fire and harvest can 

release nitrogen into the soil. Immediate increases in readily available soil nitrogen can 

be attributed to the release of simple organic compounds from heat-disrupted soil organic 

matter and heat-killed microbial tissues (Choromanska and DeLuca 2001). The long-term 

consequences of nutrient losses on soil productivity are relational to how often and how 

severely the soil is burned. Soil productivity may actually increase where fire burns with 

low severity, as the available nutrients that were tied up in understory vegetation and 

forest floor organic matter are released to the surviving forest vegetation. However, 

management practices that remove remaining organic matter from low productivity sites 

after a wildfire may decrease soil productivity. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

166

SOIL PRODUCTIVITY MANAGEMENT DIRECTION 

To meet the goal of maintaining and enhancing soil productivity and stability in proposed 

activity areas, the following Umpqua National Forest LRMP (as amended) standards and 

guidelines were applied: 

Soil Productivity Standard # 2 (LRMP, IV-68) - Effective Ground Cover levels are 

prescribed to meet acceptable levels of surface soil loss. 

Soil Productivity Standard # 3 (LRMP, IV-68) - Surface Organic Matter to maintain 

soil productivity on sites with low nutrient levels and/or low water-holding 

capacity is provided by retention of additional snags and green trees on poor sites 

that experienced severe fire effects. 

Soil Productivity Standard # 4 (LRMP, IV-68 and ROD, C-40) - Large Woody Material 

to maintain long-term soil productivity is provided by retention of snags and logs in 

numbers that exceed minimum guidelines and vary according to site specific needs 

(Umpqua National Forest, 1991, Forest Plan Amendment No. 1 and USDA & USDI, 

1994). 

Soil Productivity Standard # 5 (LRMP, IV-68 and ROD, B-14 and C-30) - Soil Mass 

Movement Potential has been evaluated and the risk of accelerating mass 

movement is minimized by excluding high risk land features from activity areas 

and, where applicable, including these features in Riparian Reserves adjacent to 

activity areas. 

Soil Productivity Standard # 10 (LRMP, IV-71) – Mitigating measures will be 

developed and evaluated when detrimental soil conditions are expected as a result 

of the proposed action. 

To meet the goal of maintaining and enhancing soil productivity and stability at the 

landscape/watershed scales in the Baked Apple Project Area, the following Umpqua 

Forest Plan (LRMP) guidelines and Aquatic Conservation Strategy concepts are applied: 

Soil Productivity Standard # 1 (LRMP, IV-67) – the combined total amount of 

unacceptable soil conditions in proposed activity areas (compaction, displacement 

of surface soil and severe burning) should not exceed 20 percent, including areas in 

roads and landings. 

Watershed Cumulative Effects and Water Quality (LRMP, IV-64) – To reduce or 

avoid the combined effects of timber harvest activities and fire effects on erosion 

processes, an assessment of potential cumulative effects to aquatic resources will 

be done (see aquatics section). 

The Aquatic Conservation Strategy employs tactics to approach the goal of 

maintaining the “natural” disturbance regime, including the use of Watershed 

Analysis for characterizing watershed-scale ecological processes and desired 

conditions (ROD, B-9 and B-20). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

167

Both the Wildfire Effects Evaluation Project (WEEP) and the Middle North Umpqua 

Watershed Analysis characterize the current, historic and desired conditions for the Baked 

Apple Project Area in the context of the “natural” disturbance regime; The Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy is based on natural disturbance processes (ROD B-9). The pattern of 

vegetation in this forested landscape is largely shaped by fire. 

The 2002 Apple Fire removed ground cover and created conditions that elevated surface 

erosion rates; this is especially true in steep, severely burned areas. Surface erosion from 

rainfall begins immediately following a fire and decreases dramatically as vegetation 

reestablishes itself in 3-4 years (Emerson 2003 and Elliot et al, 2001). Vegetation acts as a 

barrier and shields to the soil from the impact of raindrops. In fact, any material on the 

surface helps protect the soil from the impacts of raindrops that displace the soil. 

Effective ground cover includes rocks, limbs, tree boles, vegetation, etc. A surface 

erosion modeling of planning unit soil and topography showed the average pre-fire erosion 

rate to be 1% of post-fire rates during the first winter following the Apple Fire (Detailed 

discussion of surface erosion is found in Aquatics Section). Increased effective ground 

cover from logging litter can reduce soil loss in post-fire watersheds. 

Modeling efforts generated existing ground cover estimates for all harvest units. The units 

(portions or all of the unit) which pre-harvest do not meet a minimum of 85% effective 

ground cover are: Units 9B, 15, 19, 25A, 25B, 39, 40, 43, 44, 45A, 45B, 45C, 48A, 48B, 57, 

58C, 59A, 59B, 62A, 62B, 62C, 62D, 66, 68, 69, 72, 73, 74A, 74B, 75, 76, 77, 78A, 78C, 

78D, 78E, 78F, 79A, 87, 88A, 88B and 89. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

The action alternatives affect soil productivity via vegetation growth, decay and fire 

disturbance, the inter-related processes that most affect nutrient cycles. Important soil 

resources affected include ground cover (duff), coarse woody debris and post-fire 

vegetation. In a simple way, these resources and processes interact in a “give-and-take” 

manner that affects the long-term storage and utilization of nutrients in the forest. Soil 

organic matter stores the nutrients that plants use and accumulate; fire releases or takes 

away those nutrients. 

Forested sites that are most susceptible to productivity losses are the ones that store the 

least amount of organic matter and have the lowest potential productivity. In the Baked 

Apple Planning Area, these sites are plentiful. These sites are mostly steep and rocky 

with shallow soils and a southerly aspect. Many were affected by fire disturbance 

recently (1987 and 2002 Apple Fires) and are inherently slow to recover. Figure 56A shows 

the distribution of proposed treatment areas with severe fire effects and regeneration 

limitations in Alternative 6, as an example. The high burn severity units as displayed are 

those where severity mapping covered more that 50% of the unit area. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

168

Figure 56A. Example of Salvage Areas with Severe Fire Effects and Regeneration 

Limitations. Alternative 6, With Selected Units Numbered, is Shown Here for 

Comparative Purposes. 

41B 

88B 

79A 

48B 

48A 44 

89 

68A 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

169

EFFECTIVE GROUND COVER 

Direct Effects

Post-fire logging slash would increase ground cover in harvest units. This increased cover 

from logging litter may reduce soil loss in post-fire watersheds to the extent that the 

newly forming duff fosters vegetation recovery, promotes infiltration and limits the 

overland flow of runoff (Shakesby et al, 1993). Overland flow is uncommon in soils with 

high infiltration capacity on steep slopes, except in the very shallow soils areas that are 

classified as unsuitable. These areas have been excluded from harvest. 

As long as post-fire ground cover is maintained, surface erosion is not likely to be 

significant or prolonged. Surface erosion begins immediately following a fire and drops 

off dramatically as ground vegetation re-establishes itself within 3 to 4 years (Emerson, 

2003 and Elliot et. al. 2001). Most all of the surface erosion following slash burns in an 

Oregon coast range study occurred the first year following fire with 65% of that first-year 

erosion occurring within 24 hours of the burn (Bennett, 1982). As vegetation regrows, the 

surface erosion rate typically decreases by 95% after the first winter (Robichaud and 

Brown, 1999). Post-fire surface erosion was observed within some of the proposed harvest 

units following the relatively light winter rains of the 2002/2003 rainy season. Pedestal 

formations, a sign of post-fire surface erosion, are evident in units 45A-C, 48, and 53. 

To meet acceptable levels of surface soil loss, effective ground cover levels are 

prescribed based on the erosion potential of different landtypes and slope gradients (Soil 

Productivity Standard # 2 (LRMP, IV-68)). Minimum litter and duff needed for postwildfire soils where harvest is proposed would meet the requirement for a steeply-sloping 

landtype with a very high erosion hazard, which is 85% effective ground cover (EGC), 

based on Forest Plan Direction. 

Soil surface organic matter to maintain soil productivity on sites with low nutrient levels 

and/or low water-holding capacity is also provided by a ground cover prescription for the 

highest erosion hazard lands, 85% EGC [Soil Productivity Standard # 3 (LRMP, IV-68)]. This 

prescription is applied to poor sites that experienced severe fire effects or have severe 

regeneration limitations (Figure 56A). 

Cable yarding and fuel treatments have the potential to decrease ground cover to the 

extent that slash, post-fire needle cast and recovering vegetation is displaced or 

consumed. This effect would be greatest where post-harvest underburn treatments are 

proposed. Risk of effective ground cover loss by alternative is proportional to underburn 

treatment acres (Figure 56B). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

170

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

23456

Alternatives

Treatment Acres

grapple pile

hand pile

underburn

yard tops attached

no treatment

Figure 56B. Fuel Treatment Prescriptions by Alternative. 

The yarding of trees would reduce ground cover along yarding corridors during operations, 

that represent as much as 5% of the cable harvest units and less than 1% of helicopter 

units. The burning of hand and grapple piles would affect a relatively small area of 

ground cover, as much as 4% of the area where this treatment is prescribed. 

Estimates of ground area covered by post-harvest slash were generated for all harvest 

units. Combining pre- and post-harvest ground cover estimates provided a list of harvest 

units that may not meet a minimum of 85% effective ground cover (Table 34B). 

Table 34B. Existing Ground Cover and Post-Harvest EGC Predictions in Harvest Units 

Proposed Harvest Units with 

Less Than 85% EGC, the 

First Winter After the Fire 

(No Vegetation Regrowth 

Considered) 

Proposed Harvest Units 

with More Than 85% 

EGC with post harvest 

slash added 

Proposed Harvest Units 

with Less Than 85% EGC

after addition of slash 

from proposed activities 

9B, 15, 19, 25A, 25B, 39, 40, 

43, 44, 45A, 45B, 45C, 48A, 

48B, 57, 58C, 59A, 59B, 62A, 

62B, 62C, 62D, 66, 68, 69, 72, 

73, 74A, 74B, 75, 76, 77, 78A, 

78B, 78C, 78F, 87, 88A, 89 

9B, 15, 25B, 57, 59B, 

66, 72, 73, 74A, 74B, 

75, 76, 77, 78A, 78B, 

19, 25A, 39, 40, 43, 44, 

45A, 45B, 45C, 48A, 48B, 

58C, 59A, 62A, 62B, 62C, 

62D, 68, 69, 78C, 78F, 87, 

88A, 89 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

171

The mitigation prescribed in Chapter 2 would maintain or enhance ground cover in harvest 

units with severe regeneration limitations, high burn severity or less than 85% post-harvest 

EGC (Figure 56A). 

Indirect Effects 

Post-fire logging followed by broadcast burning affects future stand structure and 

succession (Grifantini and others, 1991). Burning can aid the establishment of planted 

conifers by reducing competing vegetation. Burning can also favor fire resistant plants 

such as grasses and some pioneering plants such as Ceanothus species, which add 

nutrients to the soil (Sexton, 1994). Indirect effects of underburning slash and ground 

cover is proportional to underburn treatment acres (Figure 56B). 

Cumulative Effects 

Several areas proposed for salvage harvest underburned in the 1987 Apple Fire and 

reburned in 2002. Salvage harvest will increase ground cover while slash burning will risk a 

subsequent loss in ground cover. The combined effect of ground cover loss as a result of 

harvest and slash treatment is a loss in soil productivity that is proportional to harvest 

acres proposed by alternative, the greatest effects being in Alternatives 2 and 4 and the 

least in Alternative 5. Effects of slash treatment on ground cover loss are reduced in 

Alternative 3 and Alternative 6 by reduction in acres of underburn. On a harvest unit 

scale, that productivity loss is relatively large in those units located on poor sites (Figure 

56A). 

NUTRIENTS 

Direct effects 

Wildfires result in large nutrient losses that vary with burn severity and site potential 

(USDA, 2003). The burning of logging slash adds to wildfire losses, albeit a relatively small 

potential loss. Nutrient losses from slash burning occur from the consumption of nitrogen 

compounds and other nutrients contained primarily in the post-fire needle cast on the soil 

surface, with the loss being proportional to the heat of the slash fire. Nutrient losses can 

also occur via soil erosion. However, nutrient losses from eroded soil have an insignificant 

effect on site productivity, when compared to losses in the burned area associated with 

increased runoff of precipitation and channel erosion (Helvey and others, 1985). 

Nutrient losses are expected to be proportional to differences in site productivity, with 

relatively large losses on poor sites that have less nutrient storage in the soil (USDA, 

2003). The burning of slash would consume some of the post-fire nutrients in recovering 

vegetation and set back the vegetative recovery that keep nutrients on site. Soil surface 

organic matter that maintains soil productivity on sites with low nutrient levels and/or 

low water-holding capacity would be provided by a ground cover prescription for the 

highest erosion hazard lands [maintaining 85% EGC - Soil Productivity Standard # 3 (LRMP, 

IV-68)]. 

Slash burning has the potential to cause nutrient loss to the extent that post-fire needle 

cast and recovering vegetation is consumed. This effect would be greater where the postharvest underburn treatments area proposed. Risk of nutrient loss by alternative is 

proportional to both underburn treatment acres (Figure 56B) and where severe wildfire 

effects and low site potential overlap (Figure 56C). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

172

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

23456

Alternatives

Proposed Harvest Unit Acres

high burn severity

severe regeneration limitations

severe burn & regeneration limitations

Figure 56C. Severe Burn Effects & Regeneration Limitations by Alternative. 

The risk of nutrient loss associated with underburning and the harvest of poor sites is 

greatest for alternatives 2 and 4, less for Alternatives 6 and 3 due to reduced 

underburning, and least for Alternative 5 because of reduced harvest and less 

underburning acres (compare Figure 56C to Figure 56B). Risk reduction for underburning 

effects is accomplished through cool season (spring) burning and replacement of 

underburning with the hand-piling or lop-and-scattering of slash on poor sites. 

Indirect Effects

Slash burning has the potential to cause nutrient loss indirectly via the killing of a postfire regeneration of nitrogen fixing plants (Ceanothus species), if those species are 

present and are currently fixing nitrogen. These effects are proportional to underburning 

acres proposed. Alternatives 2 and 4 with the most underburning present the greatest 

potential for this indirect effect. On the other hand, long-term risk of nutrient loss 

associated with future fires is potentially decreased by the fuel reduction treatments 

proposed. Long-term risk reaches a maximum in approximately 25 years and is inversely 

proportional to post-harvest underburning acres proposed (Figure 56B). 

The salvage operations would create an organic layer that would promote microsite 

conditions beneficial to the soil biota and vegetation. The slash created through salvage 

under Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 would increase the ability of the soil to retain 

moisture and help to buffer surface soil temperature fluctuations that are expected to 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

173

occur in this post-fire condition. Alternative 1 would not likely see this benefit initially, 

as material accumulation would be slower. 

Cumulative Effects 

The combined effects of nutrient loss depend on the likelihood of fire returning to the 

Apple fire vicinity. In the event of a fire reburning the same area in the next several 

decades, the harvest and slash treatments proposed have the potential to increase the 

risk of nutrient losses (if burning intensity is hot and duration is long) in proportion to 

underburn acres proposed by alternative, the greatest effects being in Alternatives 2 and 

4 and the least in Alternative 5. Underburning effects are reduced in Alternatives 3 and, 

to a lesser extent, Alternative 6 through the use of alternate slash treatments, mitigation, 

or no treatment. 

Slash treatments would reduce the risk of fire spread in the future and potentially 

decrease productivity losses associated with future fires. Under this scenario, risk of 

productivity losses is decreased in proportion to acres of salvage harvest and fuel 

reduction treatments to the extent that the treatments prevent fire spread. The 

uncertainty about future fire events and the effectiveness of fuel reduction treatments 

explains these apparent contradictions in cumulative effects on soil productivity. 

COARSE WOODY DEBRIS 

Coarse woody debris (CWD) enhances microsite conditions and habitat, but is not in itself 

a great source of nutrients. Nutrients captured in coarse wood are brought to CWD 

habitat by animals and recycled by decomposers such as fungi. The environmental effects 

of log removal are primarily through wildlife habitat alterations. 

Direct Effects 

Compared to no action, the direct effects of the proposed salvage logging would reduce 

levels of snag and coarse wood in harvest units. In terms of both short and long-term soil 

productivity, the tree harvest represents some fundamental tradeoffs to the nutrient 

cycle that organic matter fosters: 

Tree bole removal would remove a long-term source of organic matter, while 

reducing the risk of severe fire effects in the future by reducing fuel loading; 

Harvest activities would increase ground cover immediately by placing logging 

slash on the ground, but would reduce the localized benefits of logs in proportion 

to the amount of coarse wood removed. 

Where harvest practices, tree retention and fuel reduction activities are the same for soils 

of different productivity, the magnitude of these direct effects on long-term soil 

productivity would be greatest on low productivity sites, where poor soils that are more 

susceptible to productivity loss are associated with reduced ground cover. 

The risk of long-term productivity loss associated with tree harvest is greatest on poor 

sites because decomposition rates are higher, duff layers are thinner in the absence of 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

174

fire and fire returns more frequently than other sites. The effects of tree removal by 

alternative are proportional to acres of harvest on lands with severe regeneration 

limitations and retention levels proposed for harvest units on poor sites (compare Figure 

56C to Figure 56D). The effects of CWD removal on poor sites are greatest for 

Alternatives 2, 4 and 6 due to similar harvest and retention levels on severe regeneration 

lands. These effects are intermediate for Alternative 3. Alternative 6 actually retains 

fewer trees on some poor sites and more on others than under Alternative 2. These 

effects are the least for Alternative 5 because of both reduced harvest and increased 

retention levels. 

All action alternatives would leave enough coarse woody debris within harvest units to 

exceed Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for maintaining long-term site productivity. 

Alternatives 3 and 6 retain large trees in amounts that reflect differences in the long-term 

potential productivity for different geographic areas (Plant Association Groups), a 

refinement of CWD retention guidelines for Matrix lands (USDA & USDI 1994, C-41). 

8.9 13.1 6.4

77.3

24

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

23456

Alternatives

Trees Per Acre

Figure 56D. Average Leave Trees per Acre on Poor Sites (units with severe burn and 

severe regeneration limitations). 

Indirect Effects 

Compared to No Action, the indirect effects of the proposed salvage logging and reduced 

levels of coarse wood are lower ground cover levels and less shade cast by the fire killed 

trees: 

Tree bole removal would remove a long-term source of organic matter that would, 

if left on site, “rain” debris and wood fragments on the soil surface for decades, 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

175

aiding vegetative ground cover and providing a substrate to sustain the nutrient 

cycle. 

Tree bole removal would remove a source of shade that would improve survival of 

planted conifers and natural seedlings. The sites most susceptible to reforestation 

failure are those have south aspects and shallow soils (see Figure 56A). 

Tree bole removal would reduce the risk of severe fire effects in the future by 

reducing fuels. 

Indirect effects of tree harvest are proportional to harvest acres and retention levels 

proposed for harvest units on poor sites (compare Figure 56C to 56D). 

Cumulative Effects 

In the western Oregon landscape, the combined effects of past timber harvest and post 

fire salvage have reduced the extent of dead tree patches, an important wildlife habitat 

as well as a component of long-term soil productivity (Umpqua National Forest, 2003b, p. 

44). Approximately 34% of Panther Creek was harvested prior to the 2002 Apple fire. 

Currently, there are approximately 1,900 acres of dead tree patches (early seral with 

snags) greater than 1⁄2 acre in size in the Panther Creek sub-watershed area, or 15 % of this 

sub-watershed area (Umpqua National Forest, 2003b, Table 5A, Appendix A-14). The 

action alternatives propose to harvest 435 to almost 1,400 acres of these dead tree 

patches, or from 4 to 12% of the sub-watershed area. 

The cumulative effects of proposed salvage harvest is proportional to the harvest acres 

proposed and inversely related to large tree retention levels (see Figure 43). In other 

words, less harvest and more retention would decrease these cumulative effects. The 

cumulative effect is greatest for alternative 4, increasingly less for alternatives 2, 6 and 

3, respectively, and least for alternative 5. There would be no cumulative effects 

associated with Alternative 1, as no action would occur. 

DETRIMENTAL SOIL CONDITIONS 

Direct effects

The construction of temporary roads and use of existing temporary roads in conjunction 

with loader logging would have a small effect on soil productivity because temporary 

roads would be subsoiled and covered with slash. Alternatives 2 and 3 reconstruct 0.44 

miles and construct 0.80 miles of temporary spur road, Alternative 4 reconstructs 1.27 and 

construct 1.05 miles of temporary spur roads, and Alternative 6 reconstructs 1.27 and 

constructs 0.93 miles of temporary spur roads. All old and new temporary roads used for 

this project would be rehabilitated. The rehabilitation treatments include subsoiling the 

road surface, replacing berms of displaced topsoil along the sides of the road, and placing 

harvest slash on the surface of treated roads (see Chapter 2 mitigation and the Soils 

Report in the Appendix for specificity). Site productivity would be mitigated by replanting 

of the road prism once it is rehabilitated. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

176

Observations of this practice at Diamond Lake RD and the SOAR25 (Soil Organic Amendment 

Restoration) study on North Umpqua RD, have shown that adding organic matter to 

rehabilitated roads increased the soil moisture content, reduced soil surface crusting, and 

decreased surface erosion. 

Direct effects of logging on soil compaction and displacement are proportional to the 

acres of loader logging proposed for each alternative. Loader logging would occur on 200 

acres under Alternative 4, 194 acres of Alternative 5, 50 acres of Alternative 6 and 30 

acres under Alternatives 2 and 3. Loader logging would occur on existing and new skid 

trails. The ridge-top landform where new skid trails are proposed have high soil strength 

in undisturbed areas and rehabilitation of loader skid trails is not anticipated to be 

needed. 

The combined detrimental soil effects of past, present, and foreseeable activities 

including compaction and displacement of topsoil are displayed in Table 35. Alternative 4 

would increase detrimental soil conditions because it proposes the most harvest acres. 

Alternatives 3 and 5 create the fewest acres of impact. These estimates of detrimental 

soil conditions include the impacts of previous and proposed harvest activities. 

Table 35. Estimated Detrimental Soils Conditions Due to Compaction and 

Displacement Within the Salvage Units. 

Proposed Harvest Historic Harvest within 

Proposed Units 

Combined past and Proposed 

Harvest Effects 

Alternatives 

Acres 

Soil 

Displacement 

& 

Compaction 

(acres) 

Acres 

Existing 

Displacement 

& 

Compaction 

(Acres) 

Acres 

Combined 

Displacement 

& 

Compaction 

(% of 

Alternative 

Acres) 

2 1075 42 230 12 54 5% 

3 880 36 197 10 46 5% 

4 1430 73 374 19 92 6% 

5 435 36 199 10 46 11% 

6 952 46 205 10 56 6% 

Alternative 4 has the greatest total soil compaction and displacement with 92 acres. 

Alternatives 3 and 5 have the fewest combined acres of impacts. To estimate detrimental 

soil impacts from previous and proposed activities, the following assumption about the 

area affected by different logging systems was used: Loader Logging - 10%, Skyline Logging 

 

25 This study is designed to determine the effectiveness of placing Class A biosolids (waste water treatment 

products) and wood chips on roads that have been decommissioned in order to improve site productivity.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

177

- 5%, Helicopter Logging - 2%. In general, existing detrimental soil conditions due to past 

harvest are relatively low in the proposed units and the planning area because the 

majority of the previous harvest used skyline harvest methods. 

Harvest units in all action alternatives are estimated to have compacted or displaced soil 

areas that cover less than 15% of the harvest unit, including 5% of area in existing roads 

and landings. These impacts are less than the 20% Guideline (Soil Productivity Standard # 

1 (LRMP, IV-67). 

The heat generated from burning of grapple slash piles would add to detrimental soil 

effects on those areas that have experienced severe burning from the 2002 Apple Fire. 

Piles would cover as much as 4% of the unit area where hand piling is prescribed. 

Underburning would not create severe burn effects because the slash is not as 

concentrated as it is in piles, and the broadcast burning would be done during the cool 

season. Areas of severe burning resulting from the burning of piles would be proportional 

to acres of hand and grapple piling by alternative (Figure 56B). Slash pile burn effects 

would be greatest for Alternative 4 and less for Alternatives 3, 5 and 6 where ground 

cover and post-fire vegetation is protected on poor sites by substituting slash piling for 

underburning. Alternative 2 would have the least amount of severe burn effects due to 

the piling and burning of slash. 

Indirect Effects 

The indirect effects of detrimental soil conditions are losses to soil productivity and 

vegetation recovery after the wildfire. The effects are proportional to both acres of soil 

compaction/displacement (Table 35) and acres of grapple slash piles by alternative 

(Figure 56B). These combined indirect effects would be greatest for Alternative 4 and less 

for Alternatives 3, 5 and 6 where ground cover and post-fire vegetation is protected on 

poor sites by substituting slash piling for underburning, as described in the fuels mitigation 

measures in Chapter 2. Alternative 2 would have an amount of loader logging comparable 

to other alternatives, but less severe burn effects because of fewer acres of slash piling 

and burning. 

Cumulative Effects 

The detrimental effects of the action alternatives would add incrementally to the effects 

of the 2002 Apple Fire burn severity and the legacy of detrimental soil conditions from 

past management. These detrimental effects include reduced ground cover and soil 

displacement during logging, severe burning of soil from the burning of grapple slash piles, 

and soil compaction from equipment operation. 

The concentration of proposed harvest in areas of high burn severity indicates that areas 

of high burn severity represent the single most prevalent detrimental soil condition in 

proposed activity areas (Figure 56C and Table 34A). Mitigation, as described in Chapter 2, 

is designed to enhance ground cover and minimize additional detrimental soil conditions 

in salvage harvest units, particularly on poor sites where risk of long-term productivity 

losses are greatest. 

The combined effects of past and proposed management activities on soil conditions 

would be small compared the effects of the wildfire on ground cover, nutrients and 

vegetation growth. The greatest potential cumulative effects of proposed management 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

178

activities to detrimental soil conditions would result from the underburning and grapple 

pile burning of harvest-related slash. New, temporary roads and landings would be 

rehabilitated. Mitigation of the detrimental effects of logging systems and site 

preparation would be applied by prescribing methods that minimize or rehabilitate 

compaction, displacement of topsoil, and severe prescribed fire effects. These mitigation 

measures include skyline and helicopter logging systems that minimize soil compaction 

and displacement. Alternative slash treatments are prescribed to replace broadcast 

burning, particularly on severe sites (no treatment, lop-and-scatter, pile burning, or 

jackpot burning). The cumulative effects of the proposed salvage logging, landing 

construction and fuel reduction activities on soil productivity would be small or 

undetectable. 

SOIL BIOLOGY AND MYCORRHIZAE 

Affected Environment

Soil biological processes and their importance in nutrient cycling and maintenance of soil 

structure have garnered much attention in recent years. The roles of mycorrhizal fungal 

populations in forest stand nutrition are well-known (Perry et al 1987). Soil fauna, such as 

soil bacteria, earthworms, beetles, termites, etc., help sustain site productivity by 

stirring surface organic matter, creating channels for drainage and aeration, and reducing 

organic matter into smaller pieces for continued decomposition (Perry et al 1987). 

During field examination of the Baked Apple proposed harvest units, the soil burn severity 

was determined using criteria from the Apple Fire Burned Area Emergency Response 

(BAER). Soil examinations in the fire area did not show fire alteration to a depth that 

would affect the long-term soil resource. Though the surface organic matter (duff) was 

lost in units with high severity burns, soil structure had not changed. Fine roots were 

present near the mineral surface and fungal mats did not appear to be heat altered. The 

long-term survival of these mats is not known, but it is anticipated that they may be able 

to subsist on the decaying matter left by the fire. Mycorrhizae is more heat sensitive than 

bacteria (Choromanska and DeLuca 2001), therefore, bacteria has likely been minimally 

affected below the mineral soil surface. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct and Indirect Effects: 

Reforestation of the harvested area would include inoculation of bare root stock with 

mycorrhizal fungi spores mixed with water and Terrasorb right before outplanting. 

Although the spores of mycorrhizae are considered ubiquitous, there would be a beneficial 

indirect effect of increased seedling survival by adding concentrations of mycorrhizae to 

the soils in the immediate root zone of the planted seedlings (Amaranthus et al, 1996). In 

addition, mulch mats would be installed. Larger seedlings (Plug+126 stock type) would be 

planted on harsh, droughty, and rocky sites. 

Cumulative Effects: 

Cumulative effects with regard to mycorrhizae would likely show a benefit in the survival 

of trees planted in the reforestation efforts. These trees would then promote conditions 

 

26 Plug one stock type are seedlings grown one year in a container at a nursery, then transplanted out into a 

bed of soil the second year. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

179

to increase the size of these fungal colonies, which, in turn would add to the nutrient 

cycle over time. 

CARBON CYCLE/CARBON SEQUESTRATION 

Affected Environment 

Carbon sequestration refers to the process of removing carbon dioxide from the 

atmosphere, breaking it down into elemental carbon, and storing it in living plants, dead 

wood, leaf litter, and soil organic matter. Forested ecosystems make an important 

contribution to the total global carbon budget, including absorption and release of carbon 

(standing biomass, coarse woody debris, and soil carbon). The effects of this project on 

carbon are difficult to predict; however, retention of coarse woody debris and snags, and 

maintenance of effective ground cover would maintain the carbon storage capacity at 

both the stand and landscape scales. 

Environmental Effects 

Directs Effects: 

Although not quantitatively measured for this project, the direct effect of harvesting on 

carbon storage would be a loss of carbon to the individual harvest units. This reduction in 

carbon (tree boles) would occur in addition to the losses to carbon that occurred from the 

fire (as organic matter burned). Alternatives 4, 2, 6, 3, and 5 (greatest to least impact on 

harvest units) would remove carbon stored in tree boles. Dependent upon the time 

needed for natural regeneration Alternative 1 would take the most time to establish 

vegetation (stands of timber), which would be beneficial to the long-term sequestration of 

carbon. All other alternatives would begin sequestration dependent upon the harvest and 

planting schedules proposed (see Silvicultural Prescription). 

Indirect Effects: 

However, the sequestration (addition) of carbon with planted and naturally regenerating 

trees and shrubs would begin to make up for this loss. If the wood proposed in this 

harvest is converted to a product such as homes or furniture, in two hundred years, 

carbon sequestered or stored by the reforested harvest units could exceed the carbon 

removed during harvest (Kimmins, 1996). Ultimately the fate of harvested carbon 

“determines whether or not logging... increases or reduces” carbon levels (Kimmins, 

1996). 

Cumulative Effects: 

Minimal cumulative effects to carbon storage would occur under all alternatives. The 

amount of above ground stored carbon (tree boles) in proposed units shall be reduced 

through harvest. However there is no intent to convert the proposed activity acres from 

forest to non-forested lands; thereby the short flux in carbon storage will not affect the 

amount of stored carbon, (Bouwman and Leemans 1995). The assumption by these authors 

was that deforestation would fail to protect soil as carbon not forest management. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

180

THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND SENSITIVE (TES) PLANTS 

Affected Environment 

A Biological Evaluation (BE) documenting effects to rare plants due to implementing this 

project is included in the project file and incorporated by reference. There are 33 

Sensitive plant species currently documented or suspected to occur on the Umpqua 

National Forest (Table 36). 

The Record of Decision (ROD) to Remove or Modify the Survey and Manage Mitigation 

Measure Standards and Guidelines was signed on March 22, 2004; it goes into affect on 

April 21, 2004. Many of the species formally known as Survey and Manage species are 

eligible or are already on the Pacific Northwest Region’s Sensitive Species List. As 

indicated on Table 2-4 (p. 48) of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 

(FSEIS), January 2004, the number of Survey and Manage plants and fungi eligible to be 

included, and not already listed, on the region’s Sensitive Species List include: 

Fungi 36 

Lichens 22 

Bryophytes 4 

Vascular Plants 0 

The possible (it will not be final until an amended Sensitive Species List is issued) numbers 

of newly-listed sensitive plants/fungi for the Umpqua National Forest are as follows: 

Fungi 9 

Lichens 9 

Bryophytes 1 

Vascular Plants 0 

The Biological Evaluation (BE) for Sensitive Plants fully complied with current Survey and 

Manage Standards and Guidelines and existing Special Status Species Policies when it was 

originally compiled. Because it fully complied with the new policies, further survey work 

is not necessary (S&M ROD and page 46 of the S&M FSEIS). 

Table 36. Sensitive Plant Species for the Umpqua National Forest. 

Common Name Latin Name 

Potential Habitat 

in Planning 

Area? 

Horizontal woody rock-cress Arabis suffratescens var. 

horizontalis (Greene) Rollins N 

Mt. Shasta arnica Arnica viscose Gray N 

Grass fern Asplenium septentrionale Y 

Wayside aster Eucephalusr vialis Y 

Lance-leaved grape-fern Botrychium lanceolatum N 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

181

Common Name Latin Name 

Potential Habitat 

in Planning 

Area? 

Mingan moonwort Botrychium minganense N 

Crater Lake grape-fern Botrychium pumicola N 

Brewer’s reedgrass Calamagrostis breweri N 

Umpqua Mariposa lily Calochortus umpquaensis N 

Crawford’s sedge Carex crawfordii N 

Twotooth sedge Carex serratodens N 

Tall bugbane Cimicifuga elata Y 

Mount Mazama collomia Collomia mazama N 

Clustered lady’s-slipper Cypripedium fasciculatum Y 

Umpqua frasera Frasera umpquaensis N 

Siskiyou fritillaria Fritillaria glauca Y 

Newberry’s gentian Gentiana newberyri var. newberryi N 

Whitney’s hazardia Hazardia whitneyi var. discoidea N 

California globe-mallow Illiamna latibracteata Y 

Dwarf isopyrum Isopyrum stipitatum Y 

Umpqua kalmiopsis Kalmiopsis fragrans sp. nov. Y 

Columbia lewisia Lewisia columbiana var. columbiana N 

Quill-leaved lewisia Lewisia leeana N 

Kincaid’s lupine Lupinus oreganus var. kincaidii N 

Howell’s montia Montia howellii N 

Adder’s-tongue Ophioglossum pusilum N 

Coffee fern Pellaea andromedifolia N 

Red root yampah Perideridia erythrorhiza N 

California swordfern Polystichum californicum Y 

Thompson’s mistmaiden Romanzoffia thompsonii Y 

Swaying bulrush Scirpus subtermanalis N 

Columbian water-meal Wolffia columbiana N 

Northern water-meal Wolffia borealis N 

One species, Kincaid’s Lupine is listed as Threatened throughout its range. Based on the 

review of aerial photographs, soil inventories, elevation zones, and plant associations for 

the area, it was determined that the project area may have potential habitat for the 

following Sensitive vascular plant species: grass fern; tall bugbane; clustered ladyslipper; 

wayside aster; Siskiyou fritillary; California globe mallow; Siskiyou false rue anemone; 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

182

North Umpqua Kalmiopsis; California swordfern; and Thompson’s mistmaiden. See the 

Botany Biological Evaluation for detailed information on these species. 

Field reconnaissance determined that there is one known occurrence of the Sensitive 

plant, Thompson’s mistmaiden, within the Baked Apple Salvage Timber Sale project 

boundary, near unit 59A. Thompson’s mistmaiden (Romanzoffia thompsonii V.M. 

Martalla) is a diminutive, herbaceous, annual plant belonging to the water leaf 

(Hydrophyllaceae) family. This is the only species of Romanzoffia that is annual and 

bulbless. It has small white flowers with a yellow dot at the inner base of each petal. 

The plant usually produces only a few rudimentary leaves and one to several small 

flowers, typically blooming in early spring, but sometimes blooming later if ideal 

conditions persist. The plants habitat occurs within small to large forest openings where 

shallow bedrock creates moist seeps. It roots in the mosses and other small vegetation 

that cling to the exposed bedrock. No other species are known to occur in the planning 

area. 

Environmental Effects 

Alternative 1 & 5 

Direct, Indirect & Cumulative Effects: 

Implementing Alternative 1 would not have any direct, indirect or cumulative impacts 

upon any listed Threatened, Endangered or Sensitive plant species. Plant communities 

will change through natural post-fire succession, which may have the potential to produce 

negative or positive effects to Sensitive plants over time, depending on which plant 

species reproduce throughout the area. If Alternative 5 is chosen then no direct, indirect 

or cumulative impacts would occur to any Sensitive plants because unit 59A is excluded 

from this alternative. 

Alternative 2, 3, 4 & 6 

Direct Effects: 

These alternatives propose harvesting unit 59A. A meadow below unit 59A has the 

Sensitive plant Thompson’s mistmaiden growing in it. The unit boundary is approximately 

70 feet from where the plant population is occurring. The unit is proposed to be 

helicopter or skyline logged so there likely would not be any logging equipment or direct 

trampling in the meadow. There is potential for trees to be felled on the plants and 

consequently skidded through the population therefore directional felling away from the 

meadow will be implemented as a mitigation measure on the western portion of the unit. 

Harvesting unit 59A would not result in direct impacts to this population of Thompson’s 

Mistmaiden. No direct impacts would occur to any other Sensitive plants because no 

known sites occur within the planning area. 

Indirect & Cumulative Effects: 

Harvesting unit 59A above the meadow where Thompson’s mistmaiden is growing may 

indirectly impact the population or the habitat, but will not likely contribute toward 

federal listing or cause a loss of viability to this species on the Umpqua National Forest. 

Indirect effects may occur if harvesting causes any drying effects to the vernally moist 

seeps that the plant depends on. This plant is not dependent upon shade or canopy, in 

fact, it always occurs in open sun within meadows with shallow bedrock. The plant 

colonizes areas where seeps stay moist in early spring. Cumulative impacts would not 

occur because no other projects in the past, present or foreseeable future would impact 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

183

this site. No other Sensitive plants were found within the planning area or were known to 

occur in the planning area prior to the fire; therefore, no indirect or cumulative impacts 

would occur to any other rare plants. 

SPECIES PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS SURVEY AND MANAGE PLANTS AND FUNGI 

Affected Environment 

The fungi Bridgeoporus nobillisimus (W.B. Cooke) Vok, Burdsall & Ammirati X, the Lichens 

Leptogium cyanescens (Rabenh.), Nephroma occultum Wetmore, and Pseudocyphellaria 

rainierensis Imshaug would be considered as sensitive under the new S&M ROD. Very 

little habitat for these mbotanical species exists within the Baked Apple Fire Salvage 

project area. This is mostly due to the high intensity fire that took place during the 

summer of 2002. Potential habitat was delineated and surveyed by the Diamond 

Lake/North Umpqua district botany crew during April, May and June 2003. The Survey 

and Manage Report, as amended is incorporated by reference and summarized here; see 

this report for detailed information on these species. Potential habitat occurs within the 

planning area for the following species: Leptogium cyanescens; Nephroma occultum; 

Platismatia lacunose; Psuedocyphellaria rainierensis; Ramalina thrausta; Schistostega 

pennata; Tetraphis geniculata; Cypripedium fasciculatum; and Eucephalus vialis. There 

are no previously known populations of any Survey and Manage botanical species within 

the planning area; consequently, none of these species, now that they will be considered 

Sensitive, are known to occur in the planning area. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects: 

The results of the surveys showed that there are no new sites of any of the above 

mentioned species. In addition, no species from other previously known as Survey and 

Manage species category B, D, E or F were located. Therefore, implementing any of the 

alternatives within the Baked Apple Fire Salvage Project would have no direct, indirect or 

cumulative impacts on any previous Survey and Manage, now Sensitive species. 

NOXIOUS WEEDS 

Affected Environment 

The noxious weed risk analysis is incorporated by reference and is found in its entirety in 

the Project Record. Eight species of noxious weeds listed by the state of Oregon and the 

Umpqua National Forest as invasive were found to be occurring within the Baked Apple 

planning area and are displayed in Table 37. 

Not all the species on the list will be treated, as some are too abundant and have become 

naturalized. The list is based on the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) state 

noxious weed list. “A” rated weeds are those species which are non-native invasive plants 

and at present can be treated and possibly eradicated through intensive control methods. 

“B” rated weeds are those plants which are non-native and invasive but have become so 

abundant that intensive control methods have been rendered infeasible, so control of 

seed spread has become the main management strategy. No detection species are found 

in the planning area. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

184

Table 37. Noxious weed species found in the planning area. 

Meadow knapweed was found to be the most abundant weed within the planning area, as 

was expected. This species was planted along roads and skid trails across the North 

Umpqua Ranger District in the 1960’s and 70’s to help mitigate erosion. The plant found 

the Umpqua to be very suitable for reproduction and colonization and has since spread to 

hundreds if not thousands of acres on the forest. It is mostly confined to roadsides, 

although it has been found spreading into clearcuts and areas blackened by fire. It is a 

perennial plant with a deep rooting fleshy taproot. The best treatments to prevent 

further spread, to date, seem to be biological controls and weed eating the flowering 

heads as they bolt. A research study is ongoing on the Umpqua NF and Roseburg BLM to 

find the most successful biological controls (insect species) to predate on Meadow 

Knapweed. 

Diffuse knapweed was found only in one spot at the end of a spur road, with about 50 

plants present. The site was pulled and will be monitored in future years. This is a very 

invasive species that could wreck havoc within the watershed if it were allowed to spread. 

It has become a scourge in areas of Idaho and Montana. 

Canadian thistle was located in several spots within the planning area along roadsides. 

This thistle species is widespread and nearly naturalized though does not appear to be as 

abundant at higher elevations and harsher sites. Canada thistle is not very abundant in 

the planning area and can easily be treated through pulling to keep it from spreading 

further. 

Bull thistle occurs throughout the watershed and across the entire Umpqua NF. This plant 

is still listed as a noxious weed by the State, but because of its abundance on the Forest, 

is not tracked or treated. It is basically considered naturalized at this point. 

Scotch broom is a weedy shrub found scattered along roadsides in a number of places 

within the planning area. It seems that the elevation and topography may be keeping this 

species from becoming a big problem in this watershed. 

Common Name Scientific Name Forest 

Rating 

Present in 

project area 

Tracked 

& Treated

High-Priority Species 

Diffuse knapweed Centaurea diffusa A YES YES 

Scotch broom Cystisus scoparius A YES YES 

Lower-Priority Species 

Meadow knapweed Centaurea debeauxii B YES YES 

Bull thistle Cirsium vulgare B YES NO 

Canada thistle Cirsium arvense B YES YES 

St. Johnswort Hypericum perforatum B YES NO 

Himalayan Blackberry Rubus discolor B YES NO 

Tansy ragwort Senecio jacobaea B YES YES 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

185

St. Johnswort, like bull thistle, is so abundant that no current treatment methods are 

feasible to hold the plant in check. However biological controls are still released, with 

little positive results observed. Ecologically, this species probably does the most damage 

to native plant habitat as it encroaches on unique meadows at almost all but the highest 

elevations. 

Himalayan blackberry was found to be more abundant than expected. Clumps of 

blackberry were found mostly along roadsides, but nearly throughout the watershed, 

although very scattered and patchy. It will be very important to treat this species now 

while it is still controllable. 

Tansy ragwort was surprisingly not abundant in the watershed. Only a few sites were 

found with relatively few plants at each site. It should not be difficult to keep Tansy 

under control within the planning area. 

The Baked Apple planning area is infested with approximately 65 acres of the six noxious 

weed species that are being tracked and mapped. Table 38 shows a breakdown of acres 

of weed species that are found within the boundaries of each alternative. 

Table 38. Acres of Tracked Noxious Weed Species By Alternative 

Weed 

Species 

Alternative 

2 

Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 Alternative 6 

Meadow 

Knapweed 59 35.5 51 38 25 

Diffuse 

Knapweed 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 

Himalayan 

Blackberry 1.5 0.75 1.5 1.5 1.5 

Scotch Broom 1 0.25 1 1 0 

Canadian 

Thistle 1 0.25 1 1 0.75 

Tansy 

Ragwort 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 0 

Environmental Effects 

Alternative 1 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects: 

Implementing alternative 1 would not result in direct, indirect or cumulative impacts in 

regards to the spread of noxious weeds across the landscape. Weeds would probably still 

spread through natural or unnatural vectors by way of wind or vehicle traffic. The area 

would be monitored and weeds would be treated as necessary using limited appropriated 

funds. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

186

Action Alternatives 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects: 

Alternative 2 has an estimated 63 acres of noxious weeds within the KV boundary; 

Alternative 3 has 38 acres; Alternative 4 has 55 acres; Alternative 5 has 42 acres; and 

Alternative 6 has 31 acres of noxious weeds within the KV boundary. Implementing the 

Best Management Practices (BMP’s) and mitigation measures stated in Chapter 2 would 

result in no direct, indirect or negative cumulative effects in relation to noxious weeds 

spreading on the landscape. Pre-treatment of weeds within the planning area during the 

summer of 2003 and repeated treatment in the summer of 2004 would drastically reduce 

the risk of weeds being spread by the proposed activities. In addition, weeds would be 

monitored for, then treated if they are present post-harvest for up to five years using 

Knutsen-Vandenberg funding, resulting in a beneficial cumulative effect of reducing weed 

populations over time. In terms of effectiveness, Alternative 2 is the most effective 

followed by (in terms of most to least effective) Alternatives 4, 5, 3, and 6. 

INSECTS 

Affected Environment 

Several species of bark beetles and woodborers are common native insects in the forests 

of Southwest Oregon. In response to comments submitted on the DEIS, the beneficial role 

of insects is described. Bark beetles and woodborers are native insects that are natural 

components of Southwest Oregon forest ecosystems. Their beneficial roles include the 

following: 

1) Subcortical beetles serve as food for other animals. Since they spend almost their 

entire lives in wood or at least under bark, they are well protected and represent rather 

specialized food sources. They are mainly fed upon by birds such as woodpeckers, and 

predacious insects. 

2) Bark beetles and woodborers are agents of diversity. Many bark beetles and 

woodborers are very host specific. They kill some tree species more readily than others, 

selectively leaving other species over their preferred hosts in areas where they are active. 

3) Bark beetles and woodborers play significant roles in promoting forest tree vigor. They 

often preferentially kill low vigor hosts and not more vigorous individuals. Bark beetles 

can regulate stand densities especially in situations where inter-tree competition causes 

significant vigor decline in some trees. Unfortunately, the choice of hosts by bark beetles 

and woodborers may not be consistent with some management objectives. Bark beetles 

tend to thin from above. Also, they often kill trees in groups rather than selecting well 

spaced individuals. 

4) Bark beetles and woodborers play important roles in nutrient recycling. They 

accelerate the rate of decomposition of dead wood by vectoring decay fungi, providing 

avenues of access for fungi through bark and into wood, and by reducing the wood that 

they feed on into smaller particles that are more readily decomposed. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

187

Bark beetles and woodborers prefer live hosts that are under some degree of stress. Some 

woodborers also attack dead trees. When bark beetle populations are at endemic27 levels, 

they almost always infest host trees that are injured, diseased, or of low vigor because of 

intense competition for water and/or other resources. Only when populations build to 

epidemic28 levels are healthy, vigorous trees likely to be attacked. The most significant 

bark beetles and woodborers known to occur in and around the area affected by the Apple 

fire are: 

• Douglas-fir beetle (Dendroctonus pseudotsugae) on Douglas-fir 

• Mountain pine beetle (D. ponderosae) on sugar pine 

• Fir engraver beetle (Scolytus ventralis) on white fir and, occasionally western 

hemlock 

• Cedar bark beetles (Phloeosinus spp.) on western redcedar and incense-cedars. 

• Flatheaded and roundheaded woodborers (Families Buprestidae and Cerambycidae) 

• Ambrosia beetles (Family Scolytidae) 

• Wood wasps (Family Siricidae) 

In the seven years prior to the burn, the cooperative Region 6/State of Oregon Annual 

Aerial Mortality Survey shows that tree-killing insect activity in the Apple fire area 

involved very low levels of mountain pine beetle on sugar pine and a buildup and collapse 

of Douglas-fir beetle. Douglas-fir beetle-killed trees were detected in substantial 

numbers both as scattered individuals and dead trees in groups of 10 to 50 in 1998, 1999, 

and 2000. Numbers decreased greatly in 2001 and had subsided to very low levels by 2002 

when the fire ignited. This Douglas-fir beetle episode was typical of what happened over 

much of the southern Cascades during the same time period and was attributed to 

population build-ups in numerous down Douglas-fir, windthrown or broken by significant 

storm events in the winter of 1996-97. 

The watershed analysis prepared for the Middle North Umpqua covers the drainages within 

the Apple Fire perimeter. It identifies mountain pine beetle and Douglas-fir beetle as 

endemic insects and indicates that outbreaks of the latter species may occur following 

large storms that cause substantial amounts of blowdown. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

It is well documented that both bark beetles and woodborers readily infest trees injured 

but not killed outright by fire (Miller and Keen 1960, Furniss 1965, Furniss and Carolin 

1977, Fischer 1980, Peterson and Arbaugh 1986, Thomas and Agee 1986, Harrington 1987, 

Weatherspoon 1988, Ryan 1990, Swezy and Agee 1990, Ryan and Frandsen 1991, Flanagan 

1996, Scott et al. 1996, Weatherby et al. 2001). In fact, the vast majority of fire-injured 

trees that die in the years immediately following a burn (often as much as the following 4 

or 5 years) are infested by bark beetles and/or woodborers. The particular insects 

involved vary by host conditions and species. Observations on numerous fires in 

Southwest Oregon and northern California have demonstrated that the same would hold 

 

27 An endemic level is one that naturally occurs. 

28 An epidemic is a temporary, wide-spread outbreak.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

188

true for the Apple fire area. There are clearly many fire-injured conifers within the 

perimeter of the Apple fire that were damaged sufficiently to predispose them to insect 

infestation. 

For this analysis, the Southwest Oregon Forest Insect and Disease Service Center 

guidelines were used to predict risk of bark beetle and/or woodborer infestation for a 

fairly large sample of still-living trees in the area affected by the Apple Fire. This rating 

system was selected because it is tailored to Southwest Oregon tree species and is 

conservative. Overall, this analysis suggests that about 40 percent of the still living 

conifers in the sample have a high probability of being infested by insects in the next 5 

years. This holds true for all alternatives because none of the alternatives plan to harvest 

live trees impacted by the Apple fire. Further, it indicates that some species and size 

classes have greater likelihood of being impacted by insects than others. 

In early spring 2003, there was little evidence of insect activity on either dead, fire-killed 

trees or live fire-injured trees within the perimeter of the Apple fire. However, it was 

predicted in the DEIS that bark beetle and woodborer activity could be substantial in the 

fire area once the season progressed and the flight periods for the insects arrived. 

Evaluating the situation now, shows that: 1) In the time since the fire, substantial 

numbers of fire-killed trees have indeed been infested by insects, mainly woodborers in 

the families Cerambycidae and Buprestidae; 2) About 20 % of trees in a monitored, 

random sample of trees that were injured but not killed outright by the fire have died, 

mostly exhibiting evidence of infestation by woodborers and/or ambrosia beetles; 3) 

Among the fire-injured trees that died, trees of thin-barked species that are particularly 

susceptible to fire damage suffered disproportionately [Pacific yew died in 100% of the 

sample, followed by western hemlock (72%), white fir (65%), western redcedar (46%), then 

Douglas-fir (7%)]; and 4) There has so far been little evidence of activity by the more 

aggressive scolytid bark beetles. 

It is very possible that a high proportion of all of the fire-killed trees would eventually be 

colonized by woodborers and this would likely lead to substantial degrade of wood. It is 

also likely that more of the currently-live fire-injured trees would succumb to borer 

attacks during the next few years. However, the insects that have so far been observed 

infesting trees within the fire area are all species that are adapted to breed in already 

dead or very severely weakened trees. Unless populations of the more aggressive treekilling scolytid bark beetle species, especially Douglas-fit beetle and/or mountain pine 

beetle, develop in future years, it seems unlikely that significant numbers of healthy, 

vigorous trees either inside or outside of the fire perimeter would be infested and killed. 

It is possible that this would happen in the next four years. Additional monitoring would 

be needed to determine if scolytid bark beetle activity in fact becomes significant. 

Indirect Effects: 

Forest age class, composition, structure, and pattern may change within the Apple fire 

area depending on the level of mortality caused by beetles over the next five year period. 

Late-successional habitat could be replaced by early-successional habitat dominated by 

high snag levels and pioneer tree, shrub, fern, and herb species, both at the small and 

large scale. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

189

Cumulative Effects: 

Predicting beetle population build-ups associated with the Apple Fire is impossible to do 

with precision; however, some probabilities can be suggested. There is a very high 

probability that there would be beetle population build-ups within the burn perimeter on 

fire-injured trees. Additional infestation of fire-injured trees and possibly of uninjured 

trees within the perimeter would be expected under all alternatives. 

There is a possibility that population build-ups would be sufficiently great to result in 

insect activity on hosts outside of the Apple fire area, especially within 2 miles of the fire 

perimeter. However, it is impossible to say definitively whether this would or would not 

happen. Build-up of bark beetle populations and significant infestation of surrounding 

trees has occurred in association with some fires in Oregon. When this has happened, it 

has almost always involved a fire that burned at a time when bark beetle populations 

were already elevated in and around the fire area at the time that the fire started. 

Though Douglas-fir beetle populations were relatively high up until a year ago in the fire 

area, populations had subsided by the time that the Apple fire actually ignited. If 

population build-ups are sufficient to result in beetle activity in stands surrounding the 

Apple Fire area, it is most likely to involve Douglas-fir beetle. There is also a lesser 

possibility of pine bark beetle population increase. Build-ups of other beetle species on 

other hosts are not likely. 

The only really accurate way to evaluate bark beetle/woodborer populations and their 

impacts associated with a fire is through careful, well-planned monitoring after the burn. 

The North Umpqua and Diamond Lake Ranger Districts, in cooperation with the Southwest 

Oregon Forest Insect and Disease Service Center, will continue to monitor actual 

occurrence of insect activity within the Apple fire perimeter. This will continue to be 

done using a combination of permanent plots, periodic field visits keyed to periods when 

infestation by various insect species is most likely to occur, and aerial surveys. 

DETERIORATION OF FIRE KILLED TREES 

Affected Environment 

Merchantable wood in trees killed by fires deteriorates fairly rapidly. The major agents 

involved in degrading and decaying wood are wood boring insects and wood decay fungi. 

In addition to degrading wood directly as they tunnel through wood, woodborers and 

sometimes bark beetles are also the vectors responsible for introducing most decay fungi 

into and spreading them through dead trees. Sap staining fungi (such as blue stain 

organisms) are introduced into trees at the time of death or shortly thereafter. Sapwood 

and heartwood decay fungi can be introduced at any time that insects are actively 

penetrating the bark or that windborne fungal spores are deposited on suitable infection 

courts. 

Dave Schultz, a Forest Service entomologist, summarized the most comprehensive study of 

deterioration rates he could find (Kimmey 1955, Schultz 1994). The summary lists the 

following conditions as affecting decay rates: 

• Tree species – Douglas-fir decays slower than others; 

• Tree size – large diameter decays more slowly; 

• Percent sapwood – sapwood decays quickly; 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

190

• Growth rate – greater rings per inch decays more slowly; 

• Climate – cold (<41 degrees) slows decay; 

• Elevation – high (no range given) has slower decay rates; 

• Aspect – north slope timber decays more slowly. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct and Indirect Effects: 

Wood boring insects and wood decaying fungi would rapidly deteriorate the sapwood. 

Heartwood is affected at a later time and tends to deteriorate more slowly. 

For the planning area, wood in the true firs and hemlocks is predicted to deteriorate most 

rapidly, while sugar pine would deteriorate at an intermediate rate. The wood in 

Douglas-firs and cedars would deteriorate most slowly. 

For the conifers in the planning area, the smaller/younger trees are expected to 

deteriorate more rapidly than larger/older trees. Large, old trees with high proportions 

of heartwood would remain sound much longer than young trees with larger proportions of 

sapwood. Trees that were experiencing slow growth rates (narrow growth rings) prior to 

being killed by the fire are expected to deteriorate more slowly than those that had fast 

growth rates (trees with wide growth rings). 

Cumulative Effects: 

A number of studies have been done on rates of deterioration of fire-killed conifers in the 

western United States (Kimmey and Furniss 1943, Kimmey 1955, Lowell et al. 1992, 

Hadfield and Magelssen 2000). Results of these studies differ in detail but all show that 

the amount of deterioration in fire-killed trees, even after just a few years, is quite rapid 

within the first 5 years. For example Douglas-fir, a tree species that is relatively resistant 

to degrade and decay, it is reported that 4 to 22 percent of the wood volume in dead 

trees deteriorates in the first year after a fire (Sessions et. al. 2003) and 24 to 72 percent 

deteriorates in the first 5 years (Table 39). For white fir, a tree species that is prone to 

rapid degrade and decay, it is reported that 12 to 25 percent of the wood volume 

deteriorates in the first year after the fire and 93 to 100 percent deteriorates in the first 

5 years. These deterioration rates can be considered worst-case as many of the 

conditions tied to slower decay are present in the sale area. The numbers for each year 

are percent sound board- foot volume remaining. 

Table 39. Douglas-fir Percent Sound Board Foot Volume 

Lowell and Cahill (1996) found significantly less volume loss in a study of fire-killed timber 

in Northern California and Southern Oregon coastal forests. They reported average 

DBH 2003 2004 2005

12 82 35 30 

20 85 45 44 

30 89 57 56 

40 92 66 64 

50 93 73 72 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

191

volume loss of less than 10% in the second year for all species (Lowell and Cahill 1996). 

Neither study described the time of year their data were taken. 

For analysis purposes, the rates given in Table 39 are assumed to be as of the fall of each 

year, after the hot, dry season. The assumption is that if the timber is logged before the 

fall of 2004, minor volume loss would be experienced. 

VEGETATIVE REGROWTH AND FOREST SUCCESSION 

Affected Environment 

The affected environment for forest vegetation encompasses the areas of proposed 

harvest, reforestation, and slash treatment within the Baked Apple Planning Area under 

six alternative scenarios. Most of these areas were subject to high intensity/moderate 

severity fire in 2002 and have very few live conifer trees left within them. In general, 

mature/old growth Douglas-fir had the highest level of survival within these areas. The 

affected environment includes both riparian and upland habitats. The maintenance and 

restoration of species composition and structural diversity of plant communities in 

riparian areas is part of ACS objective 8 (USDA/USDI 1994). 

The dry western hemlock and Douglas-fir forest zones dominate the upland and riparian 

habitats associated with Class 3 and 4 streams. The moist western hemlock zone is most 

common in riparian habitats associated with Class 1 and 2 streams. Forest structure 

before the Apple fire varied between the stand initiation (early-seral), stem exclusion 

(mid-seral), understory re-initiation (late-seral), and old growth (late-seral) forest stages, 

as defined by Oliver and Larsen (1996). After high intensity fire, these areas have been 

returned to the stand initiation (early seral) structural stage. 

The Douglas-fir zone occurs on the upper slopes and ridges usually with steep gradients 

and southerly aspects. Douglas-fir dominates the zone and common associates are 

incense-cedar, sugar pine, madrone, and chinquapin. Soils are generally shallow and 

rocky with low moisture availability. This zone is characterized by low to moderate site 

productivity. Because of harsher growing conditions, these areas are slow to revegetate 

after fire (USDA 2001). 

The dry western hemlock zone is the most common within the affected environment and 

has the highest plant diversity. Douglas-fir dominates the zone and common associates 

are western hemlock, incense-cedar, sugar pine, western redcedar, white fir, madrone, 

bigleaf maple, vine maple, rhododendron, dogwood, and chinquapin. This zone is 

characterized by low to moderate site productivity. 

The moist western hemlock zone encompasses the moister, low elevation environments 

and is strongly associated with the Class 1 and 2 riparian habitats within the affected 

environment. The zone is characterized by gentle slopes, northerly aspects, and high site 

productivity. The major tree species include Douglas-fir, western hemlock, western 

redcedar, bigleaf maple, and red alder. The shrub and herbaceous layers are diverse and 

consist of vine maple, willow, dogwood, rushes, sedges, and grasses. 

The overall goal for land management in the Middle North Umpqua watershed is to move 

it towards the desired condition of a healthy, productive forest that provides a range of 

forest commodities on a long-term, sustainable basis (USDA 2001). Within the Matrix, the 

emphasis is to provide a predictable and sustainable level of timber into the future using a 

scientifically sound and ecologically credible plan (USDA 2001). Two basic components 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

192

establish the foundation for the management goal as described above. The first 

component is to re-establish landscape patterns, which are associated with the local 

natural disturbance regime. The second component is to manage stand structure and 

species diversity to fit the potential of the land. If this is done, the watershed will 

contain a broad range of forest types, structures and patterns indicative of its fire regime. 

At the landscape-scale, the forest will maintain the same general balance of patterns and 

structures through time but individual stands will be changing continuously. This shifting 

mosaic of forest patterns and structures should maintain healthy, timber-producing 

stands, contribute to the diversity of plant communities and wildlife habitats, and 

maintain biodiversity across the landscape by providing the appropriate mix of habitats 

needed by indigenous fish, botanical and wildlife species (USDA 2001). 

The highest intensity fire was located in the Panther Creek subwatershed, particularly 

within the Limpy Creek subdrainage. This high intensity fire created a contiguous stand 

replacement event approximately 4,000 acres in size. This type of fire event was not 

atypical of the steep, dry dissected topography within the Limpy creek subdrainage. The 

watershed analysis states “The percentage of high-intensity fires over the last 150 years 

has been approximately 49% of the area, as opposed to 25% within adjacent watersheds.” 

Before the Apple Fire of 2002 occurred, the watershed analysis recommended using 

management tools to approximate large scale stand replacement fire in the 

Bachelor/Limpy Creek area through even aged silvicultural systems with rotations of 80-

120 years. 

Environmental Effects 

The USDA Forest Service’s Fire Effects Information System (FEIS), Forest Vegetation 

Simulator (FVS), scientific publications, 2003 Baked Apple stand exam information, field 

reconnaissance, Spring Fire stocking surveys from year 2000, communication with a 

journey level botanist and soil scientist, and professional judgment are used to evaluate 

the effects of the alternatives on vegetative regrowth and forest succession within the 

affected environment. Both natural processes and management actions are considered in 

the analysis. Natural processes include regeneration through seeding, adventitious-bud 

root crown/root sucker, surviving caudexes (stem), and surviving rhizomes. Management 

actions include planting, mulching, animal damage control, shade protection, slash 

treatment, and harvest. 

Capable, available, and suitable29 lands for timber production must meet the five-year 

regeneration requirement under the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) regulations 

at 36 CFR 219.27(c)(3). In most cases, reforestation through planting is necessary to meet 

this regulation due to the lack of a conifer seed source in harvest units that experienced 

high intensity fire. 

 

29 Capable lands are those productive forest lands, not identified as reserved or deferred, that are capable of 

producing commercial timber harvests. Available lands are those lands that have not been administratively or 

legislatively withdrawn from timber production. Suitable lands are lands that are to be managed for timber 

production on a regulated basis. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

193

Direct Effects: 

Hardwoods, Shrubs, Herbs, Ferns 

Natural regeneration of post fire pioneer species is presently occurring throughout the 

affected environment, under all alternatives. The quantity and quality of growth is 

positively correlated with the amount of light and moisture available to the pioneer 

species. Major native species in the upland habitats include madrone, chinquapin, 

bigleaf maple, Ceanothus sp., bracken fern, manzanita, vine maple, poison-oak, 

blackberries, thimbleberry, red raspberry, elderberry, rose, oceanspray, Ribes sp., 

fireweed, and rhododendron. Major native species in the riparian habitats include bigleaf 

maple, vine maple, willow, dogwood, California hazel, thimbleberry, fireweed, bitter 

cherry, spikenard, oceanspray, popcorn flower, tiger lily, goatsbeard, serviceberry, Ribes 

sp., elderberry, lady and maidenhair fern, and grasses. Red alder and Pacific yew are not 

regenerating, probably due to fire severity. 

Vegetative regrowth would be stalled for two to three years in areas targeted for harvest 

and subsequent prescribed burning under Alternatives 2-6. Natural regeneration 

processes similar to the present post-fire vegetative regrowth would begin again within a 

year after burning operations that are designed to meet effective ground cover standards 

and maintain large woody material on site. 

Pioneer non-conifer species would persist in the understory for 35 to 50 years in areas 

targeted for conifer reforestation, depending on site productivity. Modeling performed in 

the Forest Vegetation Simulator predicts greater than 60% canopy closures at 40 to 50 

years. Pioneer species may persist up to 100 years in areas not targeted for reforestation 

and not within close proximity of an adequate conifer seed source. Unsuitable soil areas 

centered in the high intensity fire landscape fit these criteria. These areas could remain 

early-successional shrub habitat for a long period of time and function as unique wildlife 

habitat. 

Conifers 

If high intensity fires are extensive, a conifer seed source may be limited due to lack of 

seed trees. Under these circumstances, seeds come from mature trees which survive fire, 

survivors in small unburned pockets, or from trees adjacent to the burned area. Where 

seed trees are scarce, it may take 50 to 100 years or more for Douglas-fir to restock the 

burned area (Spies and Franklin 1988; Sessions et. al. 2003). Microsites with adverse 

moisture and temperature conditions frequently limit establishment of Douglas-fir 

seedlings on southerly aspects (Hermann and Chilcote 1965). Prolonged droughts, which 

may extend from May through September, are frequent in southern Oregon. On drier sites, 

regeneration may be quite protracted and require a hundred years or more. This could be 

the case on steep, dry south and west aspects located in the large block of stand 

replacement under Alternative 1 and where no harvest or reforestation is proposed under 

Alternatives 3, 5, and 6. Broad age ranges may occur naturally on these poor, dry sites. 

Few stems initiate each year, but new stems can continue to initiate for many years 

where seed sources are distant or herbaceous or shrub competition is prevalent (Oliver 

and Larson 1996). This reforestation delay would not move the planning area towards the 

desired condition of a healthy, productive forest. 

Natural regeneration of pioneer conifer species (Douglas-fir, sugar pine, incense-cedar, 

western redcedar) is occurring within close proximity of live conifer seed trees. In 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

194

general, this is around the perimeter of the high intensity post-fire landscape or near 

small pockets of green trees. After the Tillamook Fire in northwestern Oregon, seedlings 

were restricted to areas around scattered survivors or near the burn edge (Wright and 

Bailey 1982). Stocking surveys conducted four years after the Spring Fire of 1996 confirm 

this phenomenon. The Spring Fire, located across the North Umpqua River from the Apple 

Fire, was similar to the Apple fire in that approximately 40% of the area received a high 

intensity fire in a large contiguous block. After four years, 62% of the stand replaced area 

(which was not salvaged) was not stocked to the minimum stocking level of 125 trees per 

acre required under current regulations for capable and available lands, and 30% had no 

conifer regeneration. Most of this area was not in close proximity of seed trees. 

Vegetative cover, in the form of grass, shrubs, and herbs, averaged 72%. 

The Beschta report entitled “Wildfire and Salvage Logging” states that if native species 

are failing to reestablish naturally, that failure will frequently be associated with other 

reasons than the absence of seed sources. There is little scientific literature that 

supports this statement (Evers 2002). 

Native conifer species tailored to the site conditions would be established through natural 

regeneration and planting within capable and available lands proposed for harvest and/or 

fuels treatment in all action alternatives. This will maintain species diversity to fit the 

potential of the land. Total harvest acres planted by alternative are depicted in Table 40. 

Riparian reserves that received high intensity fire would also be established through 

native conifer planting, except under Alternatives 1 and 5. Approximately 600 acres of 

riparian reserves would be planted under Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6. Thirty to forty 

percent mortality is expected, due to post-fire site conditions. Planting densities are 

designed to avoid pre-commercial thinning in the future. Planting would accelerate forest 

succession in the large contiguous block of stand replacement, possibly by 30 to 100 years 

and move the Baked Apple Planning Area and Middle North Umpqua Watershed towards 

the desired future condition. 

The extent of understory damage and subsequent mortality associated with logging and 

slash treatment is directly related to the amount of volume removed, logging system, and 

slash treatment method. It is estimated that less than 20 percent of the natural 

regeneration present in green stands would be damaged or killed, due to low volume 

removal, piling instead of underburning, and the helicopter, skyline, and loader logging 

systems proposed for harvest. 

Table 40. Total harvest acres planted and percent of harvest planted by alternative 

ALTERNATIVE ACRES PLANTED/PERCENT OF 

HARVEST PLANTED 

ACRES OF RIPARIAN 

RESERVES PLANTED 

1 0 0 

2 957 (89%) 600 

3 770 (87%) 600 

4 951 (64%) 600 

5 220 (51%) 0 

6 873 (94%) 600 

ACS objective 8 focuses on the maintenance and restoration of species composition and 

structural diversity of plant communities in riparian areas to provide for a variety of 

ecologic benefits. The reforestation of riparian reserves under Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

195

would accelerate the reforestation of about 600 acres of intensely burned riparian 

reserves by as much as 100 years. These alternatives would contribute to the over-all 

goal established by ACS objective 8 more than Alternative 1 and 5. Alternatives 1 and 5 

would not accelerate the successional process; natural regeneration would occur, but at a 

slower rate. 

Indirect Effects: 

Vegetative regrowth and forest succession within the affected environment affects many 

other resources and ecological processes within the Baked Apple Planning Area in the 

short and long term. These include hydrology, soils, wildlife, fire/fuels, fisheries, 

economics, recreation, erosion and sediment, and fire risk. These effects are discussed 

throughout this chapter, under the appropriate resource heading. 

Cumulative Effects: 

Other activities have taken place in the recent past or are planned to take place in the 

foreseeable future that add to the vegetative regrowth and forest succession process 

within the Baked Apple Planning Area. Past activities include native conifer plantings 

within 286 acres of burned plantations and 50 acres of the Limpy Creek riparian zone, 20 

acres of blue wild rye seeding to control meadow knapweed along road systems, and 3 

acres of fescue planting and blue wild rye seeding within rehabilitated fire safety zones 

used during the Apple Fire. Planned activities include 1600 acres of native conifer 

plantings within burned plantations in 2004 and 2005, and 120 acres of reforestation 

associated with the Apple Seed Timber Sale in 2004. 

These management activities coupled with the native conifer plantings proposed in 

Alternatives 2-6 would accelerate the vegetative regrowth and forest succession process 

and move the Baked Apple Planning Area towards the desired condition of a healthy, 

productive forest that provides a range of forest commodities on a long-term, sustainable 

basis. Table 41 outlines the cumulative number of acres where management activities 

have or would likely take place over the next 3 years by alternative. The number in 

parentheses is the percent area of management activity within the high intensity fire 

zone, inside the Baked Apple Planning Area. The high intensity fire zone within the 

planning area encompasses about 4,000 acres. 

Table 41. Total acres of management activities that would lead to vegetative 

regrowth and forest succession, with percent of activities that are within the high 

intensity burn area. 

ALTERNATIVE ACRES/PERCENT OF AREA WITH VEGETATIVE REGROWTH 

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY 

1 2,049 (51%) 

2 3,617 (89%) 

3 3,385 (84%) 

4 3,612 (89%) 

5 2,269 (56%) 

6 3,494 (86%) 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

196

AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT

THE NORTH UMPQUA RIVER 

The Umpqua River basin extends well inland into the Cascade Range, and it is one of the 

largest coastal river basins in Oregon. Panther Creek, the 6th field sub-watershed that is 

the focus of this analysis, is a tributary to the North Umpqua River. The North Umpqua 

River is noted for its cold water that originates from aquifers 30 in the High Cascade 

Mountains. This is especially true, where the North Umpqua flows through the Umpqua 

National Forest. The cool waters of the North Umpqua provide good conditions for all life 

stages of cold water fish species, such as salmon and trout. Though many tributaries to 

the North Umpqua River become warm and their flows recede in the summer, the river 

itself provides a cool refuge for juvenile fish. Many juvenile steelhead, for instance, leave 

their natal tributaries in mid-summer to rear in the North Umpqua River, because the 

river provides large quantities of cold water not found in tributaries (Fontaine 1988; 

Dambacher 1991). 

Most tributaries of the North Umpqua, that have historically been important for 

anadromous fish and water quality contribution, are in degraded condition because of 

riparian timber harvest, road construction, large woody debris removal, and changes to 

sediment supply and channel morphology (USDA 2001). Mainstem reaches of the lower 

North Umpqua River, the Umpqua River, and estuary have also undergone changes that 

may have reduced habitat suitability for native fish, such as increased water 

temperatures, the introduction of non-native predaceous fish, urban development, water 

withdrawals, pollution and impacts associated with logging and agricultural development. 

A 34-mile section of the North Umpqua River was designated as a recreational river under 

the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act in 1988. The Wild and Scenic River begins at Rock 

Creek, east of Glide, Oregon at river mile 36 and extends to Soda Springs dam at river 

mile 70. Panther Creek flows into the North Umpqua Wild and Scenic River at river mile 

58, about two-thirds through the designated reach. As defined by the Act, a National Wild 

and Scenic River must be undammed and must have at least one outstandingly remarkable 

value (ORV). The established ORVs for the North Umpqua Wild and Scenic River are: 

fisheries, water quality and quantity, recreation, scenic, and cultural. The underlying 

principles of the Act are to keep the designated River in a free flowing condition and to 

recognize the River’s importance to our natural and cultural heritage (USDA et. al. 1992). 

Sport fishing has long been a popular recreational activity throughout the Umpqua River 

basin. The North Umpqua is world-renowned as a high-quality fly fishing stream for 

summer steelhead, and fishing gear has been restricted to artificial flies since 1953. In 

addition to sport fishing, whitewater boating, sightseeing, camping, picnicking, trail use 

and bicycling are all major recreational uses of the river corridor. All of these activities 

have steadily increased over the last decade, along with the management of this growing 

recreational resource. 

 

30 Aquifers are sources of groundwater that in this area, are a result of very deep deposits of porous ash laid 

down during the eruptions of Mt. Mazama (now Crater Lake). Cold ground water held in these aquifers feed 

the headwaters of the North Umpqua and result in high quality, cold water many miles downstream. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

197

Key watersheds, established in the Northwest Forest Plan, in the vicinity of Panther Creek 

that flow into the North Umpqua River are: Williams Creek, 6.5 miles downstream of 

Panther; Steamboat Creek, 4.6 miles downstream of Panther Creek; Calf Creek, 4.2 miles 

upstream of Panther Creek; and Copeland Creek, 9 miles upstream of Panther. These key 

watersheds provide spawning and rearing refuge areas, to varying degrees, for the five 

species of anadromous fish within the North Umpqua: chinook and coho salmon, 

steelhead, coastal cutthroat trout, and Pacific lamprey. The mainstem North Umpqua 

River is used for spawning primarily by spring chinook salmon and winter steelhead. 

Tributary streams are used for spawning primarily by summer steelhead, coastal cutthroat 

trout, coho salmon, and Pacific lamprey. The mainstem North Umpqua is an important 

rearing area for juveniles of all native species. 

The Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis (USDA 2001) identified much of the area 

now in the Baked Apple planning area as naturally prone to stand-replacement fire due to 

the very steep, dissected topography, abundance of dry southerly facing slopes, and the 

influence of the North Umpqua River canyon that often funnels east winds down the 

canyon in the summer. Due to inherently steep stream gradients and hillslopes and the 

fire disturbance regime in this area, the Panther sub-watershed is not well suited as a 

refuge for anadromous fish species. Indeed, the Panther basin was not identified as a key 

watershed in the Northwest Forest Plan. 

While significant disturbance events such as the 2002 Apple Fire can cause substantial 

short-term impacts to aquatic ecosystems, these disturbances provide important inputs to 

the aquatic system that are needed by fish and other aquatic organisms (wood, rock, and 

nutrients). When water temperatures, peak flows, or debris flows kill fish and other 

aquatic life or force them downstream after a fire, populations of their species are 

retained in locations where conditions are not as impacted. Recolonization from these 

“source” habitats back into recovering habitats is how anadromous species have survived 

disturbances over the centuries. The North Umpqua River and the key watersheds listed 

above provide those source habitats. 

This aquatic analysis is primarily focused on the Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed, 

which is part of the much larger 123,914 acre Middle North Umpqua 5th Field watershed. 

Most of the effects of the fire and of the proposed salvage activities are expected to occur 

at the scale of the Panther Creek sub-watershed with generally lesser impacts to aquatic 

conditions expected downstream in the North Umpqua River. The Middle North Umpqua 

5th field watershed is composed of a series of smaller sub-watersheds that each flow, 

separately from one another, as face drainages into the North Umpqua River. Therefore, 

the only downstream effects within this particular 5th filed watershed would be within the 

North Umpqua River itself. 

The additive effects of the 2002 fires that burned in the North and South Umpqua 

watersheds and the proposed salvage projects in both watersheds are not likely to result 

in any measurable effects downstream in the main Umpqua River. Both fires burned in 

the headwaters of the North and South Umpqua, many miles upstream from the main 

Umpqua River where additive effects could be realized. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

198

BENEFICIAL USES OF WATER 

To meet the Clean Water Act and Standards and Guidelines in the Umpqua National Forest 

Plan (LRMP, IV-64), the beneficial uses of downstream waters must be identified and 

management activities planned so they will not interfere with or be injurious to the 

beneficial uses of downstream waters. Many of the beneficial uses are described above. 

The complete list of the beneficial uses of the North Umpqua River and its tributaries 

includes: 1) public and private domestic water supply; 2) industrial water supply; 3) 

irrigation; 4) livestock watering; 5) anadromous fish passage, spawning and rearing; 6) 

resident fish and aquatic life; 7) wildlife and hunting; 8) fishing; 9) boating; 10) water 

contact recreation; 11) aesthetic quality; and 12) hydropower. Within the Panther Creek 

sub-watershed, the beneficial uses are: 1) anadromous fish passage, spawning and 

rearing; 2) resident fish and aquatic life; 3) wildlife and hunting; and 4) aesthetic quality. 

Scoping identified increased sediment delivery as a potential risk to beneficial uses within 

planning area waters and downstream areas including the Wild and Scenic North Umpqua 

River. This significant issue is tracked in this chapter under the title of erosion and 

sedimentation. 

WATER QUALITY 

The management of water quality is addressed in the Northwest Forest Plan under Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy objective 4, which calls for the maintenance and restoration of 

water quality necessary to support healthy riparian and aquatic ecosystems. NOAA 

Fisheries (the regulatory agency responsible for implementing endangered species 

requirements for ocean-going fish) uses water quality as one of many assessment factors 

in the conferencing process for fish species with the potential for listing under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). Three water quality indicators are assessed during 

conferencing: temperature, chemical contamination/ nutrients, and sediment and 

turbidity. A complete list of the NOAA Fisheries assessment factors is found in Table 59 at 

the end of this chapter. Temperature and chemical contamination/nutrients are 

addressed in this section while sediment is addressed later in this chapter. Temperature 

and chemical constituents are largely influenced by the loss of riparian vegetation, which 

typically leads to declines in these water quality indicators.

STREAM TEMPERATURE 

Affected Environment 

The NOAA Fisheries indicator for water temperature used during conferencing is 

considered ‘not properly functioning’31 because maximum temperatures in the basin 

exceed those established as water quality standards. The Clean Water Act requires that 

each state identify waters that are exceeding the state’s water quality standards. Based 

on water quality standards, the seven day moving average of the daily maximum 

temperature shall not exceed 64o

F (17.8oC) for the protection of salmonid32 and resident 

 

31 Not properly functioning refers to riparian/stream/wetland ecosystems that clearly do not possess 

characteristics that allow it to function as it normally would if intact. 32 Salmonids belong to the family of fish that include salmon and trout. Some species are sea-going 

(anadromous) while others are not (resident).
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

199

fisheries during the summer rearing period. The seven-day moving average is defined as 

the average maximum temperature over seven consecutive days. Although pre-fire 

stream temperatures were typically within a range acceptable for salmonid spawning and 

rearing, Panther Creek was listed by the state as water quality limited due to exceeding 

the 64o

F standard. 

The removal of streamside vegetation during timber harvesting was a common practice 

throughout the Panther Creek drainage from initial entry into the watershed in the 1950’s 

through the 1990’s. Some significant riparian harvest along perennial streams resulted in 

periods of increased stream temperatures. Low summer base flow typical of the Western 

Cascades also plays a role in the high summer temperatures of this sub-watershed. 

The mouth of Panther Creek has been monitored during the summer months since 1996 

prior to the 2002 Apple Fire. Prior to the fire, the highest recorded temperature was 

71.1o

F in 1996. Tributaries in the Panther Creek sub-watershed were monitored from 1999 

to 2001 (Table 42). The maximum seven-day moving average at the mouth of Panther 

Creek was 68.8o

F during the summer of 2002 after the fire, which is the highest seven-day 

average recorded in the last four years. It is likely that the unmeasured tributary 

temperatures were also elevated as a result of the fire. 

 

Table 42. Stream Temperature Data (in degrees Fahrenheit) during the warmest 7-Day 

Periods of 1999-2001. The values shown are not directly comparable due to climatic 

variation between years. 

Tributary 

Name 

1999 

7-day 

Max 

Temp 

1999 

Daily 

Change 

 (∆oF) 

2000 

7-day 

Max 

Temp 

2000 

Daily 

Change 

(∆oF) 

2001 

7-day 

Max 

Temp 

2001 

Daily 

Change 

(∆oF) 

Bachelor Creek 

at Mouth 62.7 2.3 63.3 3.8 64.1 3.2 

Fairy Creek at 

Mouth 63.4 3.3 63.7 4.2 64.7* 3.9* 

Limpy above 

Bachelor 63.1 2.9 --- --- 62.4 3.1 

Limpy above 

Panther ND ND 68.1 7.4 --- --- 

Panther above 

Limpy 63.9 4.4 --- --- --- --- 

Panther Creek 

at Mouth 64.7 4.0 67.2 6.5 67.4 4.9 

 * Data suspect as thermograph may have been above water during lowest flow. 

 ∆o

F symbolizes change in degrees Fahrenheit. 

 ND-no data 

 

Large daily temperature fluctuations prior to the 2002 fire are indicative of increased 

solar radiation reaching the stream due to past riparian timber harvest, and/or channel 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

200

widening. Panther Creek at the mouth had the highest daily fluctuations prior to the 2002 

fire. 

Following the fire, stream temperature increases are expected to be proportional to the 

amount of riparian stand replacement fire (Table 43). Sixty-six percent of the riparian 

reserve in Limpy Creek was burned during the fire of 2002. Significant temperature 

increases are expected within this drainage. On July 29, 2003, afternoon water 

temperatures were recorded as follows: mouth of Panther Creek, 72o

F; mouth of Limpy 

Creek, 74o

F; mouth of Fairy Creek, 72.5 oF, mouth of Bachelor Creek, 68oF; and Limpy 

Creek above the confluence with Fairy Creek, 76o

F. Air temperatures that day peaked at 

the riparian sample sites at 104o

F at 1:30 in the afternoon. 

 Table 43. Riparian Reserve Conditions, Past and Present. 

7th field 

Drainage 

Estimated Range 

of Natural 

Variability of 

Early Seral 

Vegetation in 

Riparian Stands* 

RR Stand 

Replacing 

Fire in 

2002 

Previously 

Harvested 

Perennial RR 

Bachelor 1-29% 33% 43% 

Fairy 1% 26% 41% 

Limpy 0-29% 66% 30% 

Panther 5-18% 9% 42% 

South Apple 

Facial 1-20% 22% 8% 

*Interpreted from historic aerial photographs representing a time frame from the 

late 1800’s to 1946. The riparian stands within the planning area that were 

interpreted as being mid-seral in 1946 were early seral in the late 1800’s 

representing the high end of the range. The riparian stands mapped as earlyseral in 1946 represent the low end of the range. 

Stream temperatures in the Bachelor and Fairy drainages, which experienced less standreplacing fire, will also increase but to a lesser degree. Exposure to solar radiation may 

worsen over the next few years as additional green trees die due to the latent effects of 

ground fires that burned portions of tree crowns and tree boles. In addition, activities 

associated with the fire suppression such as hazard tree removal and felling of trees 

adjacent to channels may have impacted riparian canopy cover, but effects are negligible 

and undetectable at this scale. 

Dead late-seral tree boles will provide shade for streams. Post-fire stand examinations 

within riparian areas revealed an average of 60% to 68% canopy closure the first few 

months following the fire. A study following the 1987 Silver Fire on the Siskiyou National 

Forest revealed that dead trees provided 57% of the post fire shade along streams that 

had been intensely burned. Increased summer flows and inputs of cool ground water 

following the Silver Fire helped to lessen water temperatures downstream of the intensely 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

201

burned watersheds (Amaranthus et al. 1989). These conditions were due to the fact that 

burned watersheds discharge more water because dead trees do not use water; the 

unused water is discharged into streams. 

Low flow measured 2.2 cubic feet per second (cfs) at the mouth of Panther Creek, 

compared to 810 cfs in the North Umpqua above Steamboat a few miles downstream in 

August 2000. Panther Creek contributes only approximately 0.3% of the flow of the North 

Umpqua River at this location, thus temperature increases due to the fire of 2002 would 

be undetectable within the North Umpqua River. 

The planting of the burned riparian area along Limpy Creek during February of 2003, will 

help to substantially speed the recovery of shade compared to the rate of natural 

reforestation. The addition of large wood to both Limpy and Bachelor Creeks, with more 

recruitment on the way, will accumulate gravel within the stream channel leading 

ultimately to more intragravel stream flows compared to the more exposed flow over 

bedrock that occurred in many locations before wood additions. This may help lower 

stream temperatures once more stream substrate accumulates over time. 

The canopy removal due to historic timber harvest and the 2002 wildfire have increased 

water temperatures within the Panther Creek sub-watershed. Currently the stream 

temperature within the Panther sub-watershed is on the high end of the natural range of 

variability as a result of the 2002 fire. However, the chronic temperature elevation due 

to riparian timber harvest spanning four decades is probably outside the range of natural 

variability. The chronically elevated stream heating from riparian timber harvest over 

several decades has likely added increased stress on generations of aquatic organisms over 

a much longer period than periodic stand replacement events would have done alone. 

Based on criteria used by NOAA Fisheries for conferencing on fish species that may 

become federally listed, the temperature regime of the planning area is classified as ‘not 

properly functioning’ because rearing temperatures exceed 65o

F. 

An early study in the nearby Steamboat Creek watershed on the Umpqua National Forest 

found that solar radiation was the primary cause of summertime water temperature 

increases when streamside vegetation was removed (Brown 1969). Vegetation plays a 

vital role in reducing solar radiation reaching the stream. The width of the riparian 

vegetation providing effective shade is a function of vegetation height, with shorter trees 

providing a narrower shade zone than taller trees. Riparian vegetation providing shade is 

a function of slope, which together with vegetation height can be used to predict the 

width of the riparian area providing shade (Figure 57). For example, given 120 foot tall 

trees on a 50% slope, the width of the stream shading riparian area is 108 feet from the 

edge of the stream (Park 2003). The average hill slope gradient in the planning areas is 

represented by 50% for the purposes of this analysis. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

202

Figure 57. Riparian width contributing shade based on tree height and 50% hillslope 

(from Park 2003). 

In the Baked Apple planning area the period of greatest solar radiation occurs between 

10:00am and 2:00pm during the hottest portion of the year. During this four hour period, 

almost 60% of the total daily solar radiation is available (Park 2003). Thus, vegetation 

that intercepts solar radiation during this time period is critical in producing stream shade 

and reducing stream temperature. The primary shade trees, or trees that shade the 

stream between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., become the most important factor when 

determining effective shade (Figure 58). Primary shade trees provide shade throughout 

the day while secondary shade trees contribute to riparian shading only when the sun is 

lower in the sky. 

10AM to 2PM 6 AM to 10AM

2PM to 6PM

Primary Shade 

Tree Distance

Secondary Shade

Tree Distance

Figure 58. The effective shade zone is composed of primary and 

secondary shade trees. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

203

Environmental Effects on Stream Temperature 

Direct Effects 

Only Alternative 4 proposes reducing fuel hazard by felling trees within the riparian 

reserve adjacent to some of the harvest units. On class I and II streams33 the outer 180 

feet of riparian buffer (of the total 360 foot buffer on each side) would have trees up to 

18 inches cut, totaling 32 acres. Removal of these dead trees outside the effective shade 

zone would not reduce shade reaching streams as the trees are not currently providing 

any shade to the creek (Table 44). Ambient air temperature influences from removing 

dead trees from outside the primary shade zone would have no affect on the resulting 

stream temperatures. 

Table 44. Effective Shade Distances for Tree Diameter Classes Slated for Riparian 

Treatment Under Alternative 4. 

Under Alternative 4, the floodplain (or the inner 75 feet, whichever is greater) would be 

left untreated on class I and II streams, while the remaining portion of the inner 180 foot 

buffer would have trees in the 8 to 12 inch diameter class cut, leaving a minimum of 34 

trees per acre in those diameter classes. Trees less than 8 inches in diameter would be 

felled, the slash hand piled and burned while larger trees would be untouched. A 12-inch 

diameter class tree may provide shade for up to 80 feet. Only 5 feet within the secondary 

shade zone would have dead trees harvested under Alternative 4, totaling only two acres 

across the entire planning area. All trees larger than 12 inches would remain standing, 

and no trees would be removed within the primary shade zone. Therefore, stream shade 

reduction (Table 45) along class I and II streams under Alternative 4 would be 

immeasurable and stream temperature increases would be negligible at this scale. 

Under Alternative 4, class III streams would have a 50 foot no-cut buffer with the outer 

130 feet of the buffer width having a minimum of 34 trees per acre in the 8-12 inch 

diameter class remaining. The effective shade distance for a 12 inch tree is 80-feet 

(Table 44); therefore, a buffer approximately 30 feet wide would have some dead trees 

removed from the outside edge of the secondary shade zone that could provide some 

small amount of shade from dead tree boles. However, canopy closures are modeled to 

be reduced by only 3% as all larger trees would remain standing on the 15 acres that fall 

into the secondary shade zone. There would be no measurable direct effect on stream 

temperature in the class III streams under Alternative 4. The primary shade zone, which 

provides most of the shade, would not be directly affected by Alternative 4. 

 

33 Class I and II streams are perennial streams that have sea-run (anadromous) and resident fish, respectively. 

Tree Effective Shade Distance 

Diameter 

Class 

(inches) 

Tree Height 

(feet) 

Primary Shade 

Distance 

(feet) 

Secondary Shade 

Distance 

(feet) 

8 40-50 0-25 25-45 

12 45-90 0-40 40-80 

18 75-110 0-50 50-90 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

204

Table 45. Alternative 4 Fuels Treatment within the Riparian 

Reserves of Class III Streams. 

Alternative 4 Class III Riparian Fuels 

Treatment 

Drainage Proposed 

(acres) 

Within Primary 

Shade Zone 

(acres) 

Within 

Secondary 

Shade Zone 

(acres) 

Bachelor 43 0 1 

Fairy 20 0 3 

Limpy 171 0 11 

Panther 0 0 0 

Lower Apple 

Facial 0 0 0 

Implementing any of the other Baked Apple Alternatives would not increase stream 

temperature, since no trees would be removed with Alternative 4 that would effectively 

provide shade, and since no trees would be removed at all from the riparian reserve of 

the other alternatives. Based on the above discussion, the beneficial uses of water would 

not be directly impacted by stream temperature increases as a result of implementing any 

of the alternatives. 

Indirect Effects 

The riparian fuels treatment under Alternative 4 provides the greatest long-term risk 

reduction of an indirect effect to stream shade in the future of another severe wildfire 

removing stream shade. Alternatives 2, 3, and 6 provide the next greatest reduction in 

risk of such an indirect effect as fuel within harvest units would be reduced to fuel model 

11 (Table 26). Although Alternative 6 would have a small number of units with elevated 

fuel loadings, equating to a fuel model 12, the acres predicted to burn using the FARSITE 

model were nearly the same as for Alternatives 2 and 3. Alternative 6 also has fuel breaks 

which are predicted to decrease the risk of future fire spread. Alternative 5 would result 

in leaving fuel model 12 conditions within most harvest units. This alternative results in 

the most long-term risk of future stand replacement fire spreading into riparian areas of 

all the action alternatives. Alternative 1 has the greatest long-term risk of another 

wildfire, which could reduce stream shading and increase stream temperatures as fuel 

loading would remain high across the untreated landscape. 

Approximately 600 acres within the riparian reserve would be replanted under 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4 and 6 with a beneficial indirect effect of accelerating stream shade 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

205

recovery. Riparian reserves would not be replanted under Alternatives 1 and 5 with no 

resulting beneficial effect (Table 40). 

No indirect, downstream temperature increases are expected in the North Umpqua River 

as a result of implementing any Baked Apple Alternatives. Since no direct effects are 

anticipated on site, no indirect effects would occur further downstream in the Wild and 

Scenic River. 

Cumulative Effects 

The canopy removal due to historic timber harvest (detailed in Table 8 at the beginning of 

this chapter) and the 2002 wildfire, added to recent drought conditions have increased 

water temperatures within the Panther Creek sub-watershed. None of the action 

alternatives would add to these cumulative effects, however, within the Panther Creek 

sub-watershed since none of the alternatives has the potential of increasing stream 

temperatures. 

Neither the 2002 wildfire nor any of the Baked Apple alternatives would measurably affect 

downstream water temperatures within the North Umpqua River due to the small flow 

contribution of Panther Creek to the main river during the summer months. 

The indirect effects of the fuel loads left behind after implementation of the various 

alternatives could result in cumulative effects to water temperature when added to the 

stream heating effects of the past riparian harvest and present and reasonably 

foreseeable effects of the 2002 Apple Fire. If reburns occur in the next three decades, 

stream temperatures would not have fully recovered from the 2002 fire. The larger areas 

modeled to potentially burn under Alternatives 1 and 5 (Table 26) would have the greatest 

potential to affect cumulative water temperatures and the beneficial uses of water within 

the Panther sub-watershed. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 would all have a lesser and similar 

potential for resulting in cumulative effects to prolonging elevated water temperatures 

within the sub-watershed. 

Conclusions 

None of the alternatives would degrade the stream temperature indicator considered by 

NOAA Fisheries in the short-term. In the longer term, Alternatives such as 1 and 5 that 

leave more residual fuels may compromise the long-term goals of ACS objective 4 in terms 

of water temperature and the associated beneficial uses of water, if larger fires are 

triggered. Also in the long-term, alternatives that result in the most reforestation 

(Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6) provide the most benefit of shade recovery and achieving the 

long-term goals of the ACS objectives. 

WATER CHEMISTRY 

Affected Environment 

Changes in the chemical makeup of water are an aspect of water quality that can affect 

aquatic organisms as well as the other beneficial uses of water. In July of 1995, the 

United States Geological Survey (USGS) measured water quality parameters including 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

206

nutrient levels, dissolved oxygen and pH in a survey of the North Umpqua River and its 

tributaries from Lake Creek near Diamond Lake to below the confluence of Little River 

near Glide. Monitoring sites were located along the main stem of the North Umpqua River 

and several major tributaries, including Panther Creek at its mouth. 

Nutrients 

Elevated levels of nutrients can compromise water quality. Organic and inorganic 

nitrogen were not detectable at the sample site at the mouth of Panther Creek during the 

1995 survey (USGS 1996). Phosphorus concentrations were detected, likely due to the 

volcanic geology of the basin which tends to contribute this nutrient to stream waters. 

The environmental baseline for water chemistry used in the conferencing process by NOAA 

fisheries is currently considered to be ‘at risk’34 in Panther Creek since nutrient loads will 

likely increase over pre-disturbance conditions due to the fire. 

Erosion from management-related landslides, roads, and historic harvesting may have 

increased nutrient loading above background levels. However, forest fertilization has the 

greatest potential of increasing stream water nitrogen concentrations over other 

management activities. Fertilizer was routinely used in the Panther Creek drainage to 

promote tree growth. In the 1980’s, fertilizer was applied to 935 acres and to 836 acres 

during the early 1990’s in the planning area. Fertilizer use was curtailed after 1993 

because of water quality concerns, except for some hand applications outside riparian 

areas. Elevated nitrogen in the water column due to fertilization is short-lived and any 

increased nitrogen within the Panther Creek sub-watershed due to historic fertilization 

has long since dissipated. Increased nutrient loading may increase primary productivity35

and affect stream chemistry; however, the low nutrient concentrations measured prior to 

the fire do not suggest excessive nutrient loading due to prior management. 

Fire can potentially result in the addition of nutrients to streams. Fire converts nutrients 

previously tied up in living materials and decomposing plant materials into forms that are 

more susceptible to transport to the stream system. The loss of live vegetation that 

would utilize nutrients further increases the potential for nutrients to enter the water 

column. The effect of increased nutrient loading in streams following fire usually only 

lasts for approximately one year (Monleon et al 1997). 

A severely burned site is more susceptible to erosion of soil and loss of nutrients into 

stream waters. Prescribed fire is designed to produce a low severity burn and the 

magnitude of the risks to water quality are lower than a wildfire since fuel consumption is 

less (Landsberg and Tiedeman 2002). In general, nitrogen losses to the stream from site 

preparation (burning) appear to be relatively small. A literature review of the effects of 

fire on watershed nitrogen responses found that most studies only show a maximum 

concentration increase of less than 1 mg/l after fire or after the combined effects of 

harvesting and fire (Beschta 1990). This amount of increase is not considered significant 

in terms of impacts to the aquatic environment from stream water nutrient loading. 

 

34 At risk refers to aspects of aquatic ecosystems that are still functioning but existing conditions and 

landscape attributes make it more susceptible to degradation. 35 Primary production is the growth and production of biomass by plants.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

207

pH and Dissolved Oxygen 

Dissolved oxygen (DO) and pH values are affected by algae photosynthesis. The effects of 

forestry practices on algae growth may include increased solar availability from reduced 

riparian shade; changes in nutrient delivery; changes in the flow regime or loss of 

instream wood resulting in scour of streambeds. These factors potentially increase the 

algae population which leads to increased pH36. 

pH affects many chemical and biological processes in the stream. The Oregon Department 

of Environmental Quality has set the pH range of 6.5-8.5 as being optimum for aquatic 

organisms in the North Umpqua Basin. pH levels outside this range can reduce biological 

diversity in the stream because it stresses the physiological systems of most organisms and 

can reduce reproduction. 

Algae metabolism can increase pH levels. The Middle North Umpqua watershed has a low 

to moderate buffering capacity (USGS 1996). Buffering capacity is a measure of a 

stream’s ability to resist changes in pH. Reduction of the limited CO2 (or bicarbonate 

HCO3) in the water due to algae photosynthesis during the afternoon can increase pH 

significantly. Although Panther Creek sub-watershed did not exceed the state pH 

standard of 8.5, there were increases in afternoon pH levels in 1995 probably because of 

increased sunlight on the stream (Table 46). 

 Table 46. Summary of USGS water quality sampling from 1995 and post-fire 

sampling in 2003. 

Site Date Time 

Water 

Temp. 

(

o

C) 

Dissolved 

Oxygen 

(% saturation) 

pH 

7/25/95 1632 19 99 8.1 

7/26/95 0800 16 95 7.8 

Panther 

Creek near 

Mouth 

7/29/03 1554 22 93 8.1 

7/25/95 1648 17 102 8.2 

7/26/95 0705 13.5 97 7.5 

7/26/95 1135 15 103 7.9 

North 

Umpqua 

River above 

Apple Creek 

7/29/03 1609 18 98 8.1 

The amount of dissolved oxygen in water is critical to the health of most stream dwelling 

animals. The combined effects of re-aeration, temperature, photosynthesis and 

respiration37 of living organisms influence DO concentration within stream environments. 

Dissolved oxygen concentrations increase in surface water wherever the water flow 

becomes turbulent, such as in a riffle area or waterfall. This turbulence brings more 

water into contact with the air thus increasing the amount of atmospheric oxygen that is 

dissolved into the water, however the higher the stream temperature the lower the 

 

36 pH stands for the “power of Hydrogen”. During plant photosynthesis Hydrogen ions are created. More plant 

life in a stream equates to more Hydrogen ions and higher pH levels. 37 Respiration results in the use of oxygen and release of carbon dioxide and water in the course of animal 

metabolism.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

208

dissolved oxygen concentrations. Oxygen is also produced during photosynthesis of plants. 

Respiration of fish and other aquatic animals utilize oxygen out of the water as does the 

decomposition of dead plants and organisms. While photosynthesis occurs only during 

daylight hours, respiration and decomposition also continues during the night. Therefore, 

streams with significant plant life can have DO levels that fluctuate greatly over a 24-hour 

period. 

The water sampling at the Panther Creek site in 1995 met the benchmark set by Oregon 

Department of Environmental Quality to protect water quality during salmonid rearing and 

did not appear to show daily DO fluctuations. The Panther stream system has numerous 

steps and falls, which probably create the turbulence necessary to keep the water near 

saturation making any losses of DO due to increased algae levels difficult to ascertain. 

Post-fire pH and DO levels taken during July, 2003 when air temperatures were hovering 

at 100o

F were within DEQ standards. 

Chemical Contamination 

All action alternatives present some risk of water contamination due to the use of fuel 

products and dust abatement chemicals that have the potential to enter streams if spilled 

or misapplied. Dust abatement with calcium chloride, magnesium chloride, or 

ligninsulfonate would be applied to approximately 16.5 miles of road under alternatives 2, 

3, 4, and 6. Alternative 5 would treat 4.5 miles with this substance. Some road segments 

would receive more than one treatment (Table 47). These products would be applied to 

gravel road surfaces used for log haul at a frequency of 1 treatment for every 1-5 million 

board feet of timber hauled (depending on site specific road conditions). Excessive rates 

of application could potentially increase either the surface runoff or the migration of the 

material through the soil to stream channels. The primary risk of water contamination 

would occur with a spill near a waterway. Concentrations in excess of 10,000 ppm38 could 

be expected if a transport truck spilled into a perennial stream. 

Table 47. Estimated Dust Abatement Applications by Road Segment for the Baked 

Apple Action Alternatives. 

Road Segments with Dust Abatement Number of Applications by 

Alternative 

Road Begin End Miles 2 3 4 5 6 

4720 Intersect 

w/4714 

Intersect 

w/4720-005

0.76 4 4 4 1 4 

4720 Intersect 

w/4720-005 

Intersect 

w/4720-255

2.58 3 3 3 1 3 

4720 Intersect 

w/4720-255 

Intersect 

w/4720-410

3.96 2 2 2 0 2 

4720 Intersect 

w/4720-410 

Intersect 

w/4720-480

0.85 2 2 2 0 2 

4720 Intersect 

w/4720-480 

Intersect 

w/temp spur 

to unit 75

1.40 1 1 1 0 1 

4720-

005 

Intersect 

w/4720-005 

Intersect 

w/4720-025

1.12 2 2 2 1 2 

4720- Intersect Intersect 2.53 2 2 3 0 2 

 

38 ppm stands for parts per million, or 1 part of a contaminant per million parts of water. It is equivalent to a 

concentration of 1 milligram per liter. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

209

Road Segments with Dust Abatement Number of Applications by 

Alternative 

005 w/4720-025 w/temp spur 

to unit 48B

4720-

005 

Intersect 

w/temp spur 

to unit 48B 

Intersect 

w/4720-145

2.83 2 2 3 0 2 

4720-

005 

Intersect 

w/4720-145 

Intersect 

w/4720-155

0.48 1 0 1 0 1 

Total Miles Treated at Least Once 16.5 16.0 16.5 4.5 16.5 

 Cumulative Total Miles Treated as a result 

of Multiple Treatments 

35.2 34.8 40.6 4.5 35.2 

Table 47 represents an estimate of anticipated dust abatement treatments under the 

various alternatives. Actual number of treatments may very depending on weather and 

the numbers of seasons the timber sales operate. 

Calcium and magnesium chloride are highly soluble and move through the soil with water. 

Their movement is largely dependent on the rate of application, the rate and frequency of 

rainfall, the drainage characteristics of the area of application and the chemical and 

physical nature of the soil. During periods of long duration or high intensity rainfall, in 

areas of high surface runoff, or in areas of high soil permeability, calcium and magnesium 

can move considerable distances either as surface runoff or as soil leachate (materials 

dissolved in water that is within the soil). Surface runoff typically drains into streams, 

lakes, or ponds whereas leachates feed ground water. Under these conditions it is the 

constituent ions of calcium, magnesium, and chloride (Ca2+, Mg2+, and Cl-) that migrate 

through the environment. 

Calcium and magnesium ions are readily held by soil particles while chlorides tend to 

remain in solution and potentially infiltrate ground water or runoff into surface waters. 

Calcium and magnesium are very common elements in soil and water and because they 

readily bond with soil particles they typically do not migrate far from their point of 

application, which is the case of dust abatement chemical application (USDA, 1997). 

Because chlorides do not bond well with soil particles and tend to migrate, their effects 

are more widespread. Although chloride is present in all natural waters it usually occurs 

in concentrations of less than 50 ppm (parts per million). Trout begin to suffer significant 

effects from chlorides when concentrations reach 400 ppm. Concentrations in excess of 

10,000 ppm place all fresh water biota in immediate jeopardy. At typical application 

rates these concentrations would not be expected to occur (USDA, 1999). 

Ligninsulfonate is another type of dust abatement material that may be used with the 

action alternatives. Ligninsulfonates are the byproduct of pulp and paper mills. Lignin is 

extracted as a waste product from wood chips with the use of salts and sulfurous acid 

resulting in ligninsulfonate. Like calcium and magnesium chloride, ligninsulfonate move 

through the environment with water. With increasing amounts of rainfall ligninsulfonates 

are easily washed away. Clay soils hold these materials more tightly than other soil 

particles, but not tightly enough to hold then in the presence of flowing water. Although 

ligninsulfonates can be washed off the road surface, leaching from stabilized road soils 

has been found to be minor. Soils best suited for ligninsulfonate treatment are those with 

70-100 percent of the particles pass through a 0.75 inch sieve and 20% –50% are silt and 

clay (Schwendeman 1981). Roads in the Baked Apple planning area that would receive 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

210

dust abatement compounds are composed of materials that are conducive to the 

application and retention of these compounds. 

When introduced into a waterway, ligninsulfonate will increase the biological oxygen 

demand39 of the water and could impart a slight yellow tint to the water (Schwendeman 

1981). Ligninsulfonates have been shown to exhibit direct toxic effects on rainbow trout. 

The LC50 at 48 hours (concentration of ligninsulfonate which would be lethal to 50% of the 

test population within 48 hours) was calculated to be 7,500 ppm. Effects on growth have 

been observed at sub-lethal concentrations as low as 160 ppm because ligninsulfonates 

seem to impair the activities of several digestive enzymes. 

The discoloration of the water column that could occur may result in less light penetrating 

the water column and potentially affecting plant photosynthesis. The supply of oxygen to 

the system could be diminished, as ligninsulfonates bond with other materials, settle to 

the bottom and begin to decay. Concentrations in excess of biotic tolerance levels or 

concentrations that would be expected to impart color to the water column or increase 

the biological oxygen demand could be reached by excessive application rates or 

application during wet weather. 

Overview of Existing Water Quality Conditions 

The primary impact of the wildfire of 2002 on water quality is the increase in water 

temperature due to riparian canopy loss and possible channel widening due to anticipated 

elevated peak flows. Erosion will increase the nutrient loading to the stream; however, 

numerous studies were evaluated with few reporting notable changes in pH due to fire 

(Landsberg and Tiedemann 2002). pH and dissolved oxygen levels may fluctuate but will 

not be outside the natural range of variability, since stand replacement fires are a natural 

occurrence in this basin. Anticipated storage of sediment in the recently placed large 

wood in Limpy Creek will likely decrease algae and the associated pH swings since the 

wood will accumulate gravel and other sediments that harbor grazing insects that keep 

algae populations in check. Planning area streams have not been recently exposed to 

pollution from oil products or dust abatement chemicals since no timber sale projects 

have occurred in the planning area for seven years. 

Environmental Effects on Nutrients, pH, and Dissolved Oxygen 

Direct Effects 

Riparian canopy closure that provides shade would not be reduced nor would channel 

widening be increased due to any of the Baked Apple alternatives. Therefore, DO and pH 

levels would not be influenced by changes in stream temperature due to implementation 

of any of the Baked Apple alternatives. 

Nutrient input primarily occurs through sedimentation. The inputs of sediment and 

nutrients from burned plantations and riparian reserves will be many times greater than 

any of the minor sedimentation from logging and site preparation associated with the 

various action alternatives. No-treatment riparian buffers would encourage nutrient 

 

39 Oxygen is used when organic matter decomposes. This results in more “demand” for oxygen by aquatic 

organisms. In cases when demand is greater than the supply, then a die off could occur. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

211

consumption by both unburned and newly sprouted riparian vegetation before entry into 

the stream. 

Indirect Effects 

No indirect effects to downstream water chemistry in the North Umpqua River are 

expected as a result of implementing any of the Baked Apple alternatives. Any minor 

levels of increased nutrients in Panther Creek from this salvage project and its connected 

actions would be diminished by the much greater volume of water in the North Umpqua 

River. In the unlikely event that nutrient loading from this salvage project results in 

elevated nutrients and increased primary productivity in the North Umpqua River, the 

effects are expected to be short-term (Beschta et al. 1990). 

Indirect effects to the aquatic environment from changes in water chemistry are possible 

at a future time if fires were to start when fuel accumulations on the forest floor are 

higher than they are today. The alternatives that result in a higher risk of larger future 

fires increase the risk of reduced stream shading and nutrient loading resulting from such 

hypothetical future fires. Alternatives 1 and 5 present more risk of future indirect effects 

to water chemistry and the aquatic environment than the other Baked Apple alternatives. 

Cumulative Effects 

The indirect effects of the fuel load left behind after implementation of the various 

alternatives could result in cumulative effects to water chemistry when added to the 

present and reasonably foreseeable effects of the 2002 Apple fire. If reburns occur in the 

next three decades as a result of residual fuel loads, stream temperatures would not have 

fully recovered from the 2002 fire. The larger areas modeled to potentially burn under 

Alternatives 1 and 5 would have the greatest potential to affect cumulative water 

temperatures thereby affecting nutrient loading. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 would all 

have a lesser and similar potential for cumulative effects of prolonging elevated water 

temperatures and associated lower concentrations of dissolved oxygen and higher levels of 

nutrients and pH within Panther Creek. For such a cumulative effect to be experienced in 

the North Umpqua River, more fires within other drainages that flow into the North 

Umpqua would have to occur, but such widespread fires would not be a result of any 

aspect of any Baked Apple alternative. 

Environmental Effects of Water Contamination 

Direct Effects 

A dust abatement spill or petroleum spill could potentially result in direct effects to 

aquatic resources and the beneficial uses of water. The haul routes within the planning 

area are narrow and winding and increased truck traffic elevates the potential for an 

accident. Several haul roads parallel stream bottoms. If an accident were to occur near a 

stream, fuel or dust abatement chemicals could enter live waterways. This could result in 

immediate physical harm from a truck entering a waterway, water pollution that could kill 

or otherwise harm aquatic organisms, and the additional disturbance associated with 

cleanup. Those action alternatives with the most amount of haul present the most risk of 

water contamination. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

212

The risk of water contamination due to the application of dust abatement is minimized 

under all action alternatives by several mitigation measures that would be required under 

the timber sale contract. Dust abatement with chemical compounds under all action 

alternatives include maintaining an average 25 foot no treatment buffer at perennial 

stream crossings and maintaining a 1 foot no treatment area adjacent to the outside edge 

of the ditch line. Moreover, the application of dust abatement materials would occur in a 

window of time when no rain is forecast for at least three days. The buffering of 

applications away from perennial stream crossings has been found to effectively mitigate 

pollution of adjacent waters (USDA 1999). The rate of application of dust abatement 

compounds in the Baked Apple Planning area would be “typical” and therefore is not 

expected to contribute to adverse riparian or aquatic affects. 

The most commonly used dust abatement compounds by the Forest Service are calcium 

and magnesium chloride and ligninsulfonates. These compounds are typically used on a 

limited basis and at low application rates, as compared to study areas where the most 

noticeable effects have been seen. Based on the literature review and typical application 

rates for dust abatement purposes that would be used in the Baked Apple planning area, 

effects from these compounds to plants and animals in the riparian and aquatic 

environments would be negligible. 

Timber sale purchasers would be required to have spill prevention and recovery 

equipment on site, they would be required to develop spill prevention plans if substantial 

amounts of fuel or other pollutants are stored in sale areas, and traffic control measures 

would be required in the timber sale contract. All these requirements, detailed in 

Chapter 2 and in the Best Management Checklist (Project Record) function to diminish the 

chances of any direct effects to aquatic resources and the beneficial uses of water from 

project-related pollutants. 

Indirect Effects 

Pollution of off-site or downstream waters is possible if trucks transporting fuel or dust 

abatement compounds were to spill into a river or stream enroute to the project area. 

The likelihood of this occurring is proportional to the amount of fuel and dust abatement 

used in the various action alternatives. Alternative 5 would use the least of these 

materials and would result in the least risk of indirect effects to downstream beneficial 

uses due to water contamination. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 would present more risk of 

indirect effects to downstream beneficial uses because the amount of potentially 

polluting products transported to the project area is estimated to be more than three 

times the amount compared to Alternative 5. These alternatives present similar risks of 

an accidental spill contaminating off-site or downstream waters and the beneficial uses of 

those waters. The likelihood of an accidental spill is believed to be low; however no 

mitigation measures would be applied to the transport of potential pollutants outside the 

timber sale areas. 

Cumulative Effects 

Most past and on-going land management operations throughout the Umpqua River basin 

such as silvicultural activities, timber sales, and all forms of road work use a variety of 

potentially polluting products (such as petroleum, concrete, adhesives, cleansers, 

herbicides, etc) that pose a risk of entering waterways if spilled or mishandled. The level 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

213

of timber harvest and associated road work on Federal land located primarily in the upper 

elevations of the Umpqua River basin has diminished over the last two decades relative to 

the previous three decades. Therefore, the level of additive effects that can contaminate 

water from such actions has also diminished. 

The potential chemical treatment of Diamond Lake with rotenone40 (in the North Umpqua 

watershed) to kill tui chub fish, that are themselves contributing to the eutrophication 

and pollution of Diamond Lake, is reasonably foreseeable. The biological effects of such a 

chemical treatment, should it occur, would not be detected at all downstream from 

Diamond Lake since the lake level would be lowered by a substantial degree disallowing 

any contaminated water to flow downstream of Diamond Lake until the rotenone has 

broken down to undetectable levels (Diamond Lake Restoration Project DEIS). Thus, this 

reasonably foreseeable lake project would not be expected to contribute to any additive 

impacts to aquatic organisms in the North Umpqua River in the vicinity of the Baked Apple 

project or further downstream. 

Potential contamination of waters within the River basin associated with private industrial 

forestry operations, intensive agricultural operations (using pesticides, fertilizers, other 

petroleum products, and herbicides), and city and town development and use by people 

(sewage, plus all the above mentioned potential pollutants and others not mentioned) has 

not diminished. Water contaminations from these sources can be expected to increase as 

demand for food and natural resources increases with the human populations. Therefore, 

the lower areas of the Umpqua River basin are where the cumulative effects of all the 

additive forms and sources of water contamination would be most likely realized. 

The chances of any of the Baked Apple action alternatives resulting in any cumulative 

effects to water contamination hinges on whether a substantial spill of petroleum or dust 

abatement products occurs. Should a spill occur and clean-up measures fail, a cumulative 

effect could be realized. This is particularly true the further downstream an accidental 

spill occurs. 

Conclusions 

Based on the above discussion, none of the Baked Apple alternatives are expected to 

appreciably affect water quality over the long-term (decades, or longer), and none are 

expected to degrade the chemical contamination/nutrients indicator considered by NOAA 

Fisheries unless an accidental spill were to occur. The chances of such a spill are offset as 

much as possible by a series of best management practices required in the timber sale 

contract of the action alternatives. Any impacts to water quality associated with 

contamination of water due to timber sale operations would be short-term and likely 

localized at the 6th or 7th field watershed. As such, the broad-scale goals of the ACS would 

not be impacted. 

 

40 Rotenone is a chemical derived from a family of tropical plants that is used to kill unwanted, non-native 

fish. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

214

PEAK FLOWS 

Affected Environment 

The Aquatic Conservation Strategy calls for the maintenance and restoration of in-stream 

flows described in ACS objective 6. This ACS objective addresses the timing, magnitude, 

duration, and spatial distribution of peak flows. Peak flows also affect the sediment 

regime addressed in ACS objective 5 discussed later in this chapter. The road drainage 

network and associated peak flow changes are used as an indicator of the environmental 

baseline by NOAA Fisheries for conferencing. This indicator is classified as ‘not properly 

functioning’ in the Panther sub-watershed because of the road densities and amount of 

hydrologically unrecovered area in the sub-watershed following the fire. 

Stand structure influences snow accumulation and the rate at which snow melts. More 

snow can accumulate in openings than under forest canopies during snowfall events due to 

wind eddies in the openings. When rain occurs, the snow packs melt rapidly. Some of the 

most severe flooding in areas that receive snowfall is attributed to rain-on-snow events. 

Large channel-forming floods can be attributed to rain-on-snow or intense rain events in 

the North Umpqua sub-basin. These events trigger landslides and fluvial erosion. 

Research shows that statistically significant peak flows are associated with canopy 

removal and roads in smaller drainages (Jones and Grant 1996; Jones 2000). In the 

transient snow zone, where the air temperature frequently hovers around 0°

C during the 

winter, rain-on-snow events can occur fairly frequently. While the Umpqua Forest Plan 

stipulates the transient snow zone is between 2,000 and 5,000 feet in elevation (LMRP IV64), further analysis has identified the range of 3,600 to 4,600 feet in elevation as the 

area most likely to experience rain-on-snow events. Much of the Baked Apple planning 

area is within the transient snow zone. 

Much of the Baked Apple Planning area had been previously harvested creating openings 

that are susceptible to rain-on-snow events. Since initial entry during the late 1950’s all 

the drainages within the planning area have had significant harvest activity ranging from 

30% within Limpy Creek to 44% within the Fairy drainage (Figure 59). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

215

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

BACHELOR

CREEK

FAIRY

CREEK

LIMPY

CREEK

PANTHER

CREEK

Percentage of Subwatershed Harvested

1950's 1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's

 Figure 59: Clearcut Harvest within the Planning Area by Decade. 

Standards and Guidelines in the Umpqua National Forest LRMP require an analysis of 

hydrologic recovery if more than 25% of a watershed is harvested. A land area such as a 

harvest unit is considered to be hydrologically recovered when it has canopy closure of at 

least 70% with average tree diameters of at least 8 inches. These conditions provide snow 

interception and buffer warm wind movement. The Hydrologic Recovery Percentage 

(HRP) model is used to estimate the peak flow response to canopy removal. Following 

clear cutting or stand replacement fire, hydrologic recovery is minimal until the regrowing forest reaches an age of 10 to 15 years. Stands are considered to be fully 

recovered at approximately 30 to 39 years depending on the tree growth rate within the 

unit. The drainages of Panther Creek were more than 86% recovered from timber harvest 

prior to the Apple Fire (USDA 2003). 

Table 48. Hydrologic Recovery Following Previous Timber Harvest and Prior 

to the 2002 Apple Fire. 

Drainage Drainage 

Area (acres)

Pre-Fire 

HRP 

Bachelor Creek 2723 89 

Fairy Creek 2055 88 

Limpy Creek 3134 86 

Panther Creek 4255 90 

 

While pre-fire HRP values were nearly 90%, this procedure only takes into account the 

reduction in canopy due to harvest (Table 48). Natural openings such as rocky outcrops, 

meadows and areas un-recovered from the previous fire as well as roads are not 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

216

incorporated into the HRP analysis. Approximately 40% of the sub-watershed had less 

than 70% canopy closure before the 2002 wildfire. After the fire, openings with less than 

70% canopy closure increased to 58% in the Panther Creek sub-watershed (USDA 2003). 

The canopy closure in Panther Creek 6th field dropped approximately 18% due to the 2002 

wildfire. 

Following the 2002 fire year, a wildfire effects evaluation project (WEEP) was done that 

assessed the susceptibility to peak flow increases following the fires of 2002 (USDA 2003). 

A qualitative peak flow assessment was adapted from the Augusta Creek study on the 

Willamette National Forest (Cissel et al, 1998) to address potential bank erosion and 

channel scour. Peak flows were analyzed by assessing the potential of different areas of 

the watershed to accumulate and melt snow and to store ground water. Snowmelt was 

grouped by aspect with the highest melt rates for south and west facing slopes. Soil 

depth was used to assess ground water storage. Elevation zones, aspects and soil depths 

were merged to identify areas of high susceptibility to peak flow due to rain-on-snow 

events (Figure 60). 

 

Figure 60. Baked Apple Planning Area susceptibility to peak flow increases and 

elevated hydrologic risk due to reduction of canopy closure (<70%) after the 2002 

Apple Fire (white=low, yellow=moderate, and red=high susceptibility to peak flows). 

About 21 percent of the Panther Creek sub-watershed was modeled in the WEEP to have 

elevated peak flow risks where trees were killed on areas of shallow soils and southerly 

aspects at mid elevations (3,600-4,600 feet above sea level). Within the Panther subwatershed the risk for peak flow response is not equally distributed among the smaller 7th 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

217

field drainages (Table 49). Thirty-eight percent of Limpy Creek is at high risk for peak 

flows whereas the Panther 7th field drainage has only 9% in the high range. Peak flow 

response to the wildfire is expected to be greatest in the Limpy and Bachelor drainages. 

Streams within these areas or that are fed by them will likely have increased fluvial 

erosion, scouring, and habitat modification due to the fire. Streams with little intact 

riparian vegetation and channel roughness are likely to be most affected by the 2002 

Apple Fire. 

Table 49. Susceptibility to Peak Flow Increases and Elevated Hydrologic Risk Due 

To Reduction Of Canopy Closure (<70%) due to the 2002 Apple Fire. 

7th field 

Drainage 

2002 Stand 

Replacement 

Fire 

Moderate to 

High Rain on 

Snow 

Susceptibility 

Elevated 

Hydrologic Risk 

Bachelor Creek 28% 44% 26% 

Fairy Creek 25% 24% 12% 

Limpy Creek 61% 50% 38% 

Panther Creek 7% 25% 9% 

South Apple 

Facial 

31% 14% 8% 

In addition to canopy loss, ground compaction caused by tractor harvest and road 

construction, interception of ground water at road-cut slopes, and extension of the 

channel network due to road ditch lines and relief culverts all function to increase peak 

flows by altering the timing of water delivery to the stream network. Surface compaction 

reduces infiltration thus increasing surface runoff and potentially causing mass wasting in 

areas where overland flow is routed onto unstable slopes. Subsurface flow may be 

partially intercepted along road cuts and transferred to more rapid runoff via ditch lines. 

Such ditch lines may deliver fine sediment, as well as route ground and surface water 

directly into stream channels (Wemple et al. 1996). 

A stream crossing culvert inventory was completed throughout the Panther Creek subwatershed the winter after the fire. The Northwest Forest Plan includes a standard and 

guideline that calls for a determination of each road on the objectives of the Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy (ROD C-32). This inventory was done in the planning area to meet 

this standard and guideline and to provide information for the Baked Apple Roads Analysis. 

The ditch length draining directly into a stream was measured at every stream-crossing 

culvert (Table 50). Many of these ditches act as stream channels during rainfall and 

snowmelt events by accumulating water and rapidly routing water directly to stream 

channels potentially increasing peak flows. There are likely many ditch relief culverts 

with gullies connecting to the stream system that were not measured during this survey. 

Therefore channel extension due to the road system is liable to be underestimated. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

218

Table 50. Estimated Channel Extension from Ditch Lines in the Baked Apple Planning 

Area. 

Drainage Road Density 

(mi/mi2) 

Ditch Length 

(feet) 

% Channel 

Extension 

Bachelor Creek 4.6 14,654 13 

Fairy Creek 4.3 8,281 10 

Limpy Creek 3.7 7,711 6 

Panther Creek 4.7 39,862 21 

Lower Apple Facial 2.5 3,953 9 

Limpy Creek shows the least channel extension at 6%. Channel extension is greatest 

within the Panther Creek drainage at 21%. Peak flows in the planning area may be 

augmented due to channel extension of the road system increasing the risk of sediment 

transport and fluvial erosion. 

Jones and Grant (1996) reported that peak stream flows on the Willamette National Forest 

increased from 24% - 32% in basins the size of Panther Creek when greater than 15% of 

the basin was harvested and when 4% - 5% of the basin area was occupied by roads 

(equating to a road density of 3-4 miles/square mile). In the Panther Creek subwatershed following the fire, 58% of the drainage area now has less than 70% crown 

closure and road densities exceed 4 miles/square mile (USDA 2003a). 

The increase in peak flows associated with the canopy loss due to the 2002 wildfire is not 

thought to be outside the range of natural variability as this drainage has likely had many 

stand replacement fires over the centuries given its steep topography and dry slope 

aspects. The last major stand-replacing fire occurred in the late 1800’s, and it burned in 

the same vicinity on the same steep slopes of Limpy Creek leaving a similar landscape 

pattern as the 2002 Apple Fire (USDA 2001). The peak flow increase that can be 

attributed to the road system is outside the range of natural variability and is expected to 

remain as such over the long-term since any significant degree of road decommissioning is 

predicted to be minimal in this matrix land allocation. 

The environmental baseline for changes in peak flows used by NOAA fisheries in the 

conferencing process is currently considered to be ‘not properly functioning’. This is due 

to pronounced changes in peak flows due to the 2002 fire and the existing road system in 

comparison to an undisturbed watershed of similar size and geology. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

All Baked Apple harvest prescriptions remove only dead trees, except those green trees 

that present safety hazards or that must be cut to facilitate the logging such as tailholds. 

The dead trees targeted in this project, while retaining canopy as high as 58% in the 

uplands, do not have the ability to intercept snow compared to a forest canopy composed 

of an overstory of needles and leaves. While some interception of the snow may occur, 

the effects on peak flows would likely be immeasurable. Removal of these dead trees 

under all action alternatives would have no effect on peak flows within the subwatershed. Moreover, the incidental removal of individual scattered green trees that are 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

219

found to be safety hazards or that must be cut to facilitate the logging would not result in 

any direct effects on peak flow increases since the canopy closure that provides 

hydrologic recovery functions at the stand level not the individual tree level. Therefore, 

hydrologic recovery would not be affected under any alternative and the beneficial uses 

of water would not be affected due to peak flow increases within Panther Creek or the 

North Umpqua River. 

Indirect Effects 

The replanting of the harvested units would hasten the future recovery of canopy closure 

and the peak flow regime in the sub-watershed, resulting in a beneficial effect to the 

aquatic environment. All harvest units would be planted along with adjacent riparian 

areas, except in Alternative 5 where natural regeneration would occur in adjacent 

riparian areas. Also, about 1,600 acres of burned plantations under all action alternatives 

would be planted. Alternative 4 would harvest the most units; therefore, more acres 

would be replanted resulting in the most future benefit to hydrologic recovery. 

Alternative 5 proposes the least harvest and re-planting of the action alternatives with the 

least indirect benefits to aquatic systems due to hydrologic recovery. Money would be 

made available as a result of KV funds generated from the sales for replanting. While 

funds for reforestation would likely become available through various sources other than 

generated KV funds, the amount and when money would become available is unknown. 

Units associated with the various action alternatives would probably experience a 

minimum of a 3 to 5 year delay after the fire before reforestation occurs. Natural 

regeneration under Alternative 1 may take well over a decade to establish due to the 

severity of the wildfire and lack of a natural seed source in many locations within the 

burn. Alternative 1 would result in no indirect beneficial effects to aquatic resources 

from shortening hydrologic recovery times. 

Cumulative Effects 

The canopy removal due to historic timber harvest, the 1987 Apple Fire, as well as the 

extensive road network in the planning area have together affected peak flows to varying 

degrees over the last few decades. However, the harvest of dead trees under the various 

action alternatives of the Baked Apple project would not contribute to any cumulative 

effect in either Panther Creek or the North Umpqua River because the dead trees to be 

salvaged do not function to influence the peak flow process. The reasonably foreseeable 

reforestation (Table 10, in the beginning of this chapter) associated with the Apple Seed 

timber stand improvement project and other acres not connected to the Baked Apple 

alternatives would help to speed the watershed recovery process by at least a decade 

over Alternative 1. 

The indirect effects of the fuel load left behind after implementation of the various 

alternatives could lead to reburns in the watershed potentially resulting in cumulative 

effects to the aquatic ecosystem. If any reburns occur in the next three decades, 

hydrologic recovery would be set back extending the period of peak flows. Additional 

setbacks in hydrologic recovery when added to the years of elevated stream flows due to 

the loss of live trees with clearcutting and wildfires would expose even more generations 

of aquatic organisms to the impacts and stresses of elevated winter flows. The larger 

areas modeled to potentially burn under Alternatives 1 and 5 (Figure 29 in fire section) 

would have the greatest potential to add to cumulative peak flow increases. Alternatives 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

220

2, 3, 4, and 6 would all have a lesser and similar potential for resulting in cumulative 

effects to prolonging peak flows in Panther Creek. 

Conclusions 

Based on the above discussion, none of the Baked Apple alternatives are expected to 

affect the long-term goals set forth under Aquatic Conservation Strategy objective 6 by 

changing flow conditions, and none would degrade the drainage network/peak flow 

indicator considered by NOAA Fisheries in the short-term. In the longer term, alternatives 

that leave more residual fuels may interrupt hydrologic recovery of the 6th-field Panther 

Creek watershed with some minimal downstream effects in the North Umpqua River. 

Larger fires could also spread into the 5th-field Middle North Umpqua watershed 

potentially setting back hydrologic recovery at a broader scale. 

EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION - TRACKED AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

It was determined during scoping that the salvage of dead trees and related activities has 

the potential to impact the beneficial uses of the aquatic system through increased 

delivery of sediment to Panther, Limpy, Fairy, and Bachelor Creeks. The measures 

selected to help assess the alternatives with respect to erosion and sedimentation focus 

on two of the processes that result in sedimentation—the mass wasting process and the 

surface erosion process. These aspects of erosion and sedimentation were selected as 

indicators to be tracked through the analysis because the proposed salvage would have 

more influence on these aspects of erosion and sedimentation than the other forms of 

erosion and sedimentation analyzed here. Sediment is defined as that portion of erosion 

that enters a stream as solid material such as soil, rock and wood. 

The Aquatic Conservation Strategy calls for the maintenance and restoration of the 

sediment regime under which aquatic ecosystems evolved as described in ACS objective 5. 

Elements of the sediment regime include the timing, volume, rate and character of 

sediment input, storage, and transport. The Aquatic Conservation Strategy focuses on 

maintenance and recovery of ecosystems over broad landscapes with consideration given 

to how the aquatic and riparian dependent systems interact with and depend on natural 

disturbance processes over the long-term. 

Sediment and turbidity are expected to increase and potentially remain elevated during 

winter storm events as a result of the erosion following the 2002 Apple Fire. The 

sedimentation of aquatic systems would come in the form of mass wasting (landslides), 

fluvial (stream caused) erosion, and surface erosion. These three natural erosion 

processes are expected to contribute to post-fire increases in the sediment regime to 

immediate downstream areas and further downstream in the North Umpqua River. 

Increased erosion following a fire can be both episodic and chronic, depending largely on 

precipitation amount, duration, and intensity. Mass wasting is episodic and triggered by 

large storm events whereas surface and fluvial erosion tend to produce chronic levels of 

sediment and are less dependant on large storm events. 

In addition to the natural processes that result in sedimentation (surface erosion, mass 

wasting, and fluvial erosion) following fire, road-related sedimentation from the existing 

road network, and sedimentation related to logging, including log haul on roads, can be 

expected. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

221

MASS WASTING 

Affected Environment 

The dominant mechanism of sediment production to streams within steep, dissected 

landscapes such as the Baked Apple planning area is mass wasting41 from shallow-rapid 

landslides (MacDonald et al. 1991). Shallow-rapid landslides are generally initiated by 

infrequent high-intensity rainfall events during the late fall and winter months, usually in 

conjunction with rapid snowmelt within the influence of the transient snow zone 

(Swanston and Swanson 1976). The transient snow zone is between 3,600-4,600 feet in 

elevation in the Baked Apple planning area (Hydrology Report, Project Record). 

The mass wasting disturbance process exhibits a broad range of natural variability within 

steep, well-dissected forested landscapes of western Oregon. Infrequent high intensity 

rainfall events can initiate shallow-rapid landsliding including debris flows42 that can cause 

significant alteration to stream channels by scouring, transporting, and redepositing 

sediment and wood into higher order stream channels (Figure 61). 

Figure 61. The Debris Flow Process (from Lancaster et al. 2001) 

Debris flows are the primary mechanism for the introduction of large wood into a properly 

functioning aquatic ecosystem. High intensity rainfall events are infrequent, and 

statistically occur only several times within a span of a century. When such a climatic 

event follows a large wildfire, the volume of sediment can be at its upper range of natural 

variability and several orders of magnitude above its ambient baseline level. Mass wasting 

and associated sedimentation of streams is often exacerbated by management activities 

typically associated with timber harvest and road construction. Following disturbance by 

stand replacement fire, the potential for shallow-rapid landslides to begin contributing to 

 

41 Mass wasting is the down slope movement of intact masses of soil, rock, and organic debris under the 

influence of gravity. It includes debris avalanches, debris flows, rotational slumps and earth flows—

collectively termed landslides and soil creep. 42 Debris flows are rapid movement of a large quantity of material (wood and sediment) down a stream 

channel during storms and floods. This usually occurs in smaller streams and results in scouring of the 

streambed. Debris flows are also called debris torrents. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

222

the sediment budget may occur in about 3 years and continue for a decade or more due to 

diminished tree root strength. Once landslides occur they immediately set up a secondary 

process of surface erosion as gravity and rain displaces soil on oversteepened slopes into 

channels created by the landslide and debris flows. 

Human caused sources of sediment within the Middle North Umpqua watershed over the 

last 50 years have been mainly associated with timber harvest and the road network. 

Peak levels of clear cutting occurred in the 1960’s and again in the 1980’s. 

The rate of management-related landslides is an indicator of watershed condition used in 

conferencing with NOAA Fisheries. Prior to the 2002 Apple Fire, a chronological landslide 

inventory, based on aerial photo interpretation, was completed for the Middle North 

Umpqua watershed analysis using 1946, 1966 and 1997 photos. A total of 69 landslides 

were identified within the Baked Apple planning area--28 (41%) were natural occurring, 18 

(26%) were timber harvest related, and 23 (33%) were road-related (Table 51). Although 

management-related landslides seemingly account for almost 60 percent of the total 

landslides recognized in the Baked Apple planning area, this ratio is likely an overestimate 

since the slides in harvest units and along roadsides were more obvious on the photos 

compared similar sized natural slides that may be obscured beneath the dense tree 

canopy. 

Table 51. Landslides identified by aerial photo interpretation within the Baked Apple 

planning area (from the 2001 Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis). 

Before 1946 From 1946 to 1966 From 1967 to 1997 

N H R N H R N H R 

3 0 0 20 7 8 5 11 15 

 N=Natural landslide; H=harvest-related landslide; R=Road-related landslide 

The overwhelming majority of landslides identified in the 2001 aerial photo landslide 

inventory were debris avalanches that range in size from a minimum of <0.1 acre to a 

maximum of 3.5 acres. Debris avalanches typically only slide a short distance and remain 

on the hillslope rather than enter a stream. The mean area of these debris avalanches 

averaged less than 0.5 acre. Only a fraction of the displaced landslide debris resulting 

from these slope failures has actually been delivered into aquatic habitat, as most of it 

likely remained stored on the hill slope outside the influence of riparian habitat. 

Three debris flow tracts were identified in the photo inventory that caused significant 

alteration to stream channel morphology within the Baked Apple planning area. Debris 

flows typically travel substantial distances down slope from their initiation and enter 

streams. A massive debris flow some 9,000 feet in length and roughly 17 acres in surface 

extent scoured the main stem of Fairy Creek prior to 1966 due to a fill slope failure along 

Forest Road 2703. A second fairly large debris flow scoured about 7,000 feet of an 

unnamed tributary to Panther Creek also prior to 1966. This debris flow is thought to 

have initiated from a natural mass failure on the north flank of Lookout Mountain and a 

harvest-related landslide below Forest Road 2703-000. Both of these substantial debris 

flows likely occurred during the 1964 flood, a 100-year flood event in the North Umpqua 

sub-basin. Another smaller debris flow scoured roughly 3,000 feet of an unnamed 

tributary to Bachelor Creek sometime after 1976, but prior to 1989. This debris flow was 

initiated by a road fill failure along road 4714. These three debris flows likely introduced 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

223

large wood into the aquatic system, as opposed to the much smaller debris avalanches 

that stored much of the landslide debris, including entrained coarse wood on the hill 

slope. 

The environmental baseline for landslide rates, used by NOAA Fisheries for conferencing 

on fish species that may become federally listed, is classified ‘at risk’ because the 2001 

aerial photo inventory found more management-related landslides in the planning area 

than naturally occurring landslides (Table 51). 

Stream inventories have further demonstrated that several main stem channel reaches 

within the Baked Apple planning area were severely lacking in large wood, which can be 

partly attributed to the fact that roading and harvesting removed trees that would have 

been delivered to streams in landslides under a properly functioning condition. Moreover, 

the ‘at risk’ classification was assigned because the Apple Fire burned much of the 

existing, in-channel wood within some of the burned non-fish bearing channels of Limpy, 

Fairy, and Bachelor Creeks. On the other hand, however, the 2002 BAER channel wood 

treatments and the 1995 and 1997 Fairy Creek instream wood additions have helped 

ameliorate the depleted instream wood condition to a substantial degree. In addition, 

over the next 10 years, the Apple Fire will function to deliver important large wood, rock 

and sediment into the main stem stream channels of Limpy, Fairy, and Bachelor Creek 

that have been deprived of such materials. All of these factors weighed in on assigning 

the “at risk” environmental baseline for the landslide process in the planning area. 

SHALSTAB is a mechanistic, grid-based digital terrain model that can be utilized as a 

planning tool for delineating preferred sites of rapid-shallow landslides in a steep, welldissected landscape. An advanced version of SHALSTAB was utilized to prepare the 

effects analysis for the Baked Apple Project Planning Area (Dietrich and Montgomery, 

1998). This model helped satisfy the Umpqua NF LRMP Standard and Guideline requiring a 

risk and hazard assessment for soil mass movement and the protection of unstable areas 

at risk of failure from tree cutting and ground disturbance (LRMP IV-68). 

Soil and topographic parameters were input into the model that represent site specific 

conditions of the planning area in order to estimate the relative potential for shallowrapid landsliding across the dissected landscape of the Baked Apple project area (Geology 

Report, Project Record). SHALSTAB was the selected model for this analysis conducted by 

the interdisciplinary team (composed of several earth scientists and a fisheries biologist) 

because it is focused on the identification of shallow-rapid landslide potential—the type of 

landslide expected in the steep dissected topography where salvage is proposed. 

Shallow-rapid landslides initiate in swales—areas of concave topography located on steep 

slopes between the ridge crest and the initiation point of first-order stream channels 

(often referred to as headwalls). During high intensity rainfall events subsurface flow 

converges within swales leading to increased soil saturation. As soil pore pressures 

increase, soil shear strength is reduced resulting in slope failure under extremely wet 

conditions. 

Steep topographic swales gradually fill over the course of centuries with coarse-textured 

sediment transported by gravity (colluvium) from adjacent convex slopes. Colluvial 

swales undergo cycles of gradual filling and periodic instability (failure). Eventually, 

subsurface flow convergence leads to failure of all or a portion of the colluvial deposit 

(Montgomery et al. 1991). A failure results in an avalanche of material downslope. Such 

a failure may occasionally attain sufficient momentum (if enough water is present) to 

grow into a large channel scouring debris flow. Debris flows typically involve only a 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

224

portion of the colluvium stored in an individual swale, so debris flows can be released 

from a single swale over many years (Montgomery et al, 1991). 

Tree roots counteract shallow-rapid landslides by providing reinforcement that holds the 

soil in place. Following disturbance, dead tree roots decay and lose their reinforcing 

strength. The period of diminished soil strength due to the loss of tree root 

reinforcement coincides with the greatest period of susceptibility to shallow rapid 

landslides--approximately 3 to 20 years after the disturbance, depending upon the degree 

of vegetative re-growth (Figure 62). During the period of minimum root strength, 

reinforcement could be 20 to 40 percent of its undisturbed value (Sidle 1985; Denning, 

1994). 

Figure 62. Period of diminished tree root reinforcement following timber harvest or 

severe wildfire (Sidle 1985). 

Post-fire landslides that might mobilize into debris flows can only be expected to occur if 

the winter weather is extreme enough to cause them. A spike in the number of landslides 

would only occur if a substantial rain-on-snow winter storm follows a wet fall such as 

occurred during the winters of 1964 and 1997. If no such storm event occurs during the 

years of diminished root strength, then no substantial increase in sedimentation 

associated with shallow-rapid landslides can be expected as a result of the Apple Fire. 

Based on the SHALSTAB analysis, a total of 464 acres or 3.3% of the planning area (13,925 

acres) is considered to be ‘at maximum risk’ for rapid-shallow landsliding (Table 52). 

Elevated levels of risk for shallow-rapid land sliding are defined by hydrology ratio (q/T) 

values that are -3.1 or more on the negative scale (the larger the negative number the 

more unstable the area). 

 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

225

 Table 52. Planning area acreage by SHALSTAB risk category. 

SHALSTAB slope Current Condition 

Stability Risk 

Categories 

Hydrology Ratio, 

q/T values Acres Percent 

Chronically Unstable Less than -9.9 59 0.4 

High Potential 

Instability 

-9.9 to -3.1 403 2.9 

Moderate-High Potential 

Instability 

-3.1 to -2.8 650 4.7 

Moderate Potential 

Instability 

-2.8 to -2.5 1,616 11.6 

Low-Moderate Potential 

Instability 

-2.5 to -2.2 1,198 8.6 

Low Potential Instability -2.2 to 9.8 385 2.8 

Stable Greater than 9.8 9,612 69 

Totals 13,925 100 

The first two rows, chronically unstable and high potential instability, 

represent the “at maximum risk” areas adding up to 3.3 percent of the 

planning area. 

The SHALSTAB analysis integrates parameters of slope gradient and slope convexity with 

geotechnical soil values that include internal friction angle43, soil density when saturated, 

and cohesive soil properties to predict potential sites of slope instability. Slope gradient 

and slope convexity are represented with topographic data with 10 meter resolution. The 

site specific variables input into the SHALSTAB model resulted in a map that displayed 

relative degree of slope stability defined by risk categories (Figure 63). Field 

investigations were carried out to verify whether the sites identified by the SHALSTAB 

analysis qualified as unstable or potentially unstable ground, as per Forest Plan standards 

and guidelines (LRMP, IV-68-71). 

 

43 The internal friction angle is a measure of the sliding (frictional) resistance between interlocking soil 

particles of varying surface roughness along a hypothetical failure surface. Coarse-grained soils (with a sand 

and gravel component) typically have a higher friction angle than finer grained soils (silt and clay) when 

saturated, and therefore tend to be more stable. The soils within the planning area are predominantly 

coarse-grained. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

226

Area of tree mortality with ‘chronic instability’ (q/T < 9.8) hill 

slope dominated by rock outcrops 

Area of tree mortality with ‘high potential instability (q/T -9.8 

to -3.1) 

Area of live trees with ‘chronic instability’ (q/T < 9.8) hill slope 

dominated by rock outcrops 

Area of live trees with ‘high potential instability’ (q/T -9.8 to -

3.1) 

O Photo-interpreted landslide features: (N) natural (T) timber harvest-related 

Figure 63. The SHALSTAB map for a portion of the planning area (on the east slope of 

Limpy Creek) used to predict the occurrence of shallow-rapid landslides. Each pixel is 

10 meters square (40 pixels=1 acre). Clumped pixels of areas shown in red or yellow 

defined areas of potential instability that warranted field investigations. 

The accuracy of SHALSTAB is mainly based on the resolution of topographic data. The 10-

meter digital terrain model tends to underestimate slope steepness resulting in less slope 

convergence than actually exists on the ground. 

Once field verified, such unstable and potentially unstable areas were established as part 

of the riparian reserves land allocation under a Northwest Forest Plan standard and 

guideline (ROD B-14). Unstable and potentially unstable mapped areas were removed 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

227

from harvest consideration in units: 59A, 48, 56, 75, 73, 78B, 74, 62D, and 49 totaling an 

area of 33.6 acres. 

A portion of the sites were found to exhibit field signatures of recent or incipient slope 

failure, while others were not. All unstable areas mapped by SHALSTAB as ‘at maximum 

risk’ of instability and subsequently field verified during the intensive field investigations 

were removed from any harvest units in all alternatives. Since the predicted recurrence 

interval for slope failure within any colluvial swale is on the order of several centuries 

ranging upwards to a couple thousand years, field signatures of a past slope failure may 

not be evident during ground verification of predicted sites of instability. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Salvage logging operations under all action alternatives would not increase the amount of 

acreage at risk for shallow-rapid landslides, nor would it increase the likelihood of causing 

mass wasting over and above what the fire is expected to cause. The trees to be salvaged 

under Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are already dead, so the soil reinforcement function 

has already been severely reduced. The logging of the dead trees would not further affect 

the risk of mass wasting. To assist in alleviating any minor risks associated with soil 

gouging that could concentrate water, a mitigation measure in the timber sale contract 

would require the application of appropriate erosion control measures on any soil gouges 

that may reroute or concentrate runoff in order to spread water and allow for infiltration 

into the soil. Moreover, all logging operations would take place during the normal 

operating period, when soil is less susceptible to disturbance that could lead to localized 

changes in water routing. Therefore, in summary, the logging operations proposed under 

all action alternatives using helicopter, skyline, and loader logging systems would not 

directly affect slope instability beyond that already attributable to the Apple Fire. 

Under all action alternatives, logging may occur on unstable areas not found in the field. 

The direct effect of such tree removal would be the lack of dead trees incorporated into 

the landslide debris and the missed opportunity of realizing a natural source of large wood 

for stream channels. Field investigations during the development of the alternatives 

deleted all discernable area of potential mass wasting. However, it is not possible to 

pinpoint every potential unstable area since some sites may fail in the next several 

decades as surface hillslope configurations change with time following the fire. 

The SHALSTAB model results are used as a measure of the relative differences among 

alternatives with respect to various amounts of potential risk of cutting dead trees in 

areas that might slide, the potential of landslides traveling further without the entrained 

dead trees, and the potential that landslides would not deliver wood to downslope 

streams and riparian area (Table 53). This was selected as an indicator to help track how 

the various alternatives respond to the erosion and sedimentation issue and to help assess 

the differences among alternatives with respect to this significant issue. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

228

Table 53. Acres of salvage by alternative proposed for harvest within areas 

mapped by the SHALSTAB model ‘at maximum risk’ for rapid-shallow land sliding. 

The higher the number of acres the more risk of shallow-rapid landslides occurring 

without the important large tree component. The information in this table is a 

measurement of the effects of alternatives on the erosion and sedimentation 

process. 

Areas at risk of 

Instability Alternatives Total Acres 

Acres % 

1 n/a n/a n/a 

2 1,075 5.1 0.5 

3 880 0.8 0.1 

4 1,630 10.2 0.6 

5 435 6.1 1.4 

6 952 6.2 0.7 

The acres of instability shown in Table 53 represent the aggregation of many very small, 

scattered points that may or may not actually be unstable. The field work completed by 

the interdisciplinary team focused on all of the larger discernable swales. 

Though the SHALSTAB mapping has a relatively high degree of accuracy because of the 10 

meter resolution of the digital terrain model, not all sites identified by the model were 

determined to presently be at risk of slope instability for shallow rapid landsliding. 

Nevertheless, each alternative contains a different mix of proposed salvage sale units that 

have varying sensitivity and susceptibility to mass wasting potential with associated risk of 

removing dead trees that might someday be delivered in a landslide to a stream or that 

would function to slow the momentum of a debris flow (Lancaster et al. 2001). 

Alternative 3 was developed, in part, to reduce erosion potential (both chronic surface 

erosion and episodic mass wasting) and thereby lessen the potential for sediment delivery 

into aquatic habitat. This alternative has the least number of acres identified by the 

SHALSTAB model to be at maximum risk for shallow-rapid landslides. Only 0.8 acres 

(representing a number of small scattered locations) are indicated by the model to be at 

maximum risk for shallow-rapid landsliding where salvage logging operations are 

proposed. For Alternative 3, in addition to the areas drop from harvest that were field 

verified as having risk of slope instability, the areas mapped by SHALSTAB as having 

moderate to high risk of instability were also removed. 

In contrast, Alternative 4 has the greatest number of total acres (representing an 

aggregation of numerous small locations) mapped by the model to be at maximum risk for 

shallow-rapid landsliding. As discussed above, the logging would not cause more 

landslides. However the salvage of dead trees from areas that might become a landslide 

would result in less large wood entrained in landslides which could lead to landslides with 

more momentum that travel further and deliver more sediment and less wood into stream 

channels. Alternative 3 poses the least risk of this occurring of the action alternatives. 

Also, since Alternative 5 leaves substantial amounts of dead leave trees, its risk is also 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

229

considered low. As tree root reinforcement recovers in the next 15 years under the action 

alternatives, the extent (acreage) of ground at risk for shallow-rapid landsliding would 

gradually shrink and then stabilize to its pre-fire condition diminishing the differences 

among alternatives with respect to delivering wood within landslides. 

Neither the construction of temporary spur roads (1.24 miles in Alternatives 2 and 3, 

about 2.2 miles in Alternative 6, and 2.3 miles in Alternative 4 and 6) nor the new 

construction and/or expansion of helicopter landings (4.5 acres in Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 

and 3 acres in Alternative 6) would lead to any additional risks of causing mass wasting. 

These new construction areas are all located on stable, ridge-top ground where no risk of 

mass wasting occurs. Moreover, a mitigation measure is included with all action 

alternatives that requires erosion control measures such as sloping and water barring of 

these new construction sites following use, so that water would not be concentrated. This 

required mitigation in the timber sale contract (C6.6) negates any additional risk to mass 

wasting such construction might otherwise cause. 

The no action alternative would result in normal landslide processes that occurs following 

stand replacement fire. All dead trees would be retained on all unstable area and such 

dead trees would be available to perform their beneficial functions in the riparian and 

aquatic ecosystems should landslides occur as a result of the fire coupled with weather 

conditions necessary to trigger landsliding. 

Indirect Effects 

The potential indirect effects on aquatic ecosystems from mass wasting with the Baked 

Apple alternatives has to do with the amount of fuel left following implementation of the 

alternatives and the effect those fuels could have on the size of future fires. Substantial 

levels of fuel left after the salvage is fully implemented (including after the slash 

treatments are complete) could feed a larger, more destructive fire in the future. If such 

a fire or fires were to occur and result in broader zones of tree mortality, they would have 

the indirect effect of leading to more shallow-rapid land slides—potentially resulting in 

both negative and beneficial effects to riparian and aquatic environments. Under a 

scenario of multiple landscape burns, sediment input from landslides could attain its 

upper range of natural variability and be several orders of magnitude above its ambient 

baseline level. 

Implementation of Alternative 1, the no action Alternative, and to a lesser degree, 

Alternative 5 result in greater risk of leading to larger fires in the planning area compared 

to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 that all have a similar and somewhat lower risk of leading to 

large-scale future fires. The location of a worst case hypothetical fire start and worst case 

weather conditions (extreme fire weather was assumed) were held constant in order to 

model the size of such a fire after just one day of burning. In the year 2028, the FARSITE 

model (Finney 1998) predicted a 1,579 acre fire after the first burning period for 

Alternative 1 and an 823 acre for Alternative 5 after the first burning period. 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4 and 6 were predicted to vary between 599 acres and 692 acres under 

this modeled worst case scenario. 

Implementation of the Baked Apple Alternatives also has the potential indirect effect of 

affecting conditions downstream in the North Umpqua River. Alternatives 1 and 3 present 

the lowest risk of having landslides that lack trees; therefore, they would result in the 

lowest risk of indirect effects to downstream beneficial uses from sedimentation 

associated with mass wasting. Alternative 4 has the most acreage included in the harvest 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

230

(but not traceable in the field) to be at maximum risk for shallow-rapid landsliding. In 

this case, if landslides occur there is a slightly higher potential for the effects of mass 

wasting in the planning area to express themselves downstream in the North Umpqua 

River with sediment delivery from landslides lacking wood. The downstream indirect 

effects associated with Alternatives 2, 5 and 6 all pose slightly more risk of downstream 

sediment delivery than Alternatives 1 and 3. In all cases, the BAER instream work done in 

Limpy and Bachelor mainstems and the tributary BAER treatments (Figure 63) all lower 

the risk of mass wasting actually affecting conditions in the North Umpqua River. The 

wood additions are expected to help stop or slow debris flows (Lancaster et al. 2001) and 

help store sediment from such flows, so that it is delivered at a more natural rate. 

Cumulative Effects 

There is a potential that Alternatives 1 and 5 could result in cumulative effects to aquatic 

systems from increased mass wasting. This cumulative effect may result from the 

reasonably foreseeable indirect effects of residual fuels leading to larger future fires 

causing more mass wasting in the vicinity of the planning area. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 

could, also, result in such a cumulative effect but to a lesser degree. 

This indirect effect associated with residual fuel loads may become cumulative when 

added to the existing and future effects of the 2002 Apple Fire on mass wasting, the 1987 

Apple Fire, the past harvest history, and the ongoing effects of the road system with its 

undersized culverts and extensive ditch lines that could plug and divert water causing 

road and other hillslope failures. 

The past activities that could add to cumulative effects are listed in Table 8 at the 

beginning of this chapter. The 2002 Apple fire burned a total of 8,835 acres in the 

planning area. This significant disturbance event is expected to add to cumulative 

watershed effects including mass wasting over the next two decades. 

Of the 4,456 acres that were regeneration harvested from the 1950’s through the 1980’s, 

2,384 acres did not stand replace. These acres, largely unaffected by the fire, are 

expected to contribute little to cumulative effects from mass wasting since the root 

strength is recovered, while the 2,072 acres of burned clearcuts from that era may 

contribute to cumulative effects of mass wasting if any unstable areas exist, especially 

since no large wood is available to be part of the potential slide material. The 380 acres 

that recently burned from the 624 acres of clearcut in the 1990’s may contribute to 

cumulative effects from mass wasting for the next two decades (if unstable areas exist), 

while the acres regenerated in the 1990’s that escaped the burning (244 acres) could 

contribute to the potential of mass wasting until the end of this decade. All of the 

clearcuts from the 1987 Apple Fire within the planning area were reburned in 2002, so the 

potential exists for cumulative effects from mass wasting from those areas if unstable 

areas exist, and they would not have large trees available to help mitigate the 

sedimentation from any landslides. Only a small fraction of the old clearcuts that have 

not yet recovered root strength or that burned in 2002 would potentially be prone to 

landslide contributions to cumulative effects because only a small fraction of the 

landscape exists as colluvial swales where landslides initiate. 

All stand replacement areas were assessed in the SHALSTAB analysis. The potential for 

cumulative effects to aquatic systems from future landslides hinges on whether future 

fires actually escape during the period of concern (next 15-25 years) and whether any 

significant winter storms would occur to trigger additional mass wasting. If more 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

231

landslides occur from future events in the Panther basin and the face drainages in the 

planning area, their impacts could add to ongoing impacts of the 3 large channel 

impacting debris flows experienced in the Panther basin. These old debris flows still 

exhibit vertical stream banks and associated bank erosion. 

The Apple Seed timber sale has no mass wasting potential and the 67 acres of hand-crew 

fuel treatments would provide no new risk to mass wasting cumulative effects since so 

few green trees would be cut. The 0.25 miles of temp road construction is on flat terrain 

where water routing would be mitigated following construction. No contribution to mass 

wasting cumulative effects anticipated. 

None of the dozer lines, hand fire lines, or fire suppression construction points (Table 9) 

are expected to contribute to mass wasting cumulative effects due to the ridge-top nature 

of dozer lines and construction points and the limited size of hand lines. Moreover, all 

firelines and suppression construction points were rehabbed and water barred by October 

of 2002, so that water routing problems have been mitigated. 

Counteracting these potential cumulative effects to the aquatic and riparian environments 

are the BAER channel treatments that were carried out immediately after the fire. These 

treatments added large wood to the tributaries channels of Panther, Limpy, and Fairy 

Creeks and mainstems of Limpy and Bachelor Creeks, plus the 1995 and 1997 Fairy Creek 

large wood additions. These projects have strengthened the natural functions of the 

sediment regime by potentially slowing or stopping debris avalanches and debris flows 

(Lancaster et.al. 2001), capturing and storing sediment from all sources, and metering out 

the stored sediment over time to downslope and downstream locations. 

The road-related BAER work, which also occurred immediately following the fire in the 

fall of 2002 and the road work done during the summer of 2003 have also lessened risks 

that the existing roads would contribute to cumulative effects from mass wasting. 

Reasonably foreseeable road projects within the Baked Apple planning area, if 

implemented, may further reduce the potential risk of mass wasting associated with the 

road infrastructure. It is reasonably foreseeable that some road spurs would be 

decommissioned and numerous stream crossing culverts would be upgraded to pass flow 

during a 100-year storm event as recommended in the Baked Apple road analysis (USDA 

2003a). 

In addition, the reforestation with Apple Seed and other foreseeable reforestation efforts 

are expected to shorten the window of mass wasting risk due to accelerated rebuilding of 

root strength, provided the planting is successful. 

Conclusions 

Based on the above discussion, none of the Baked Apple alternatives would affect the 

sediment regime associated with the landslide process at the scale of either the 6th or the 

5th-field watershed. No alternative is expected to degrade the watershed condition 

indicator of management-related landslides considered by NOAA Fisheries. In the longer 

term, alternatives that leave more residual fuels could extend the time-frames of 

accelerated mass wasting if large wildlife spread across Panther Creek and into the larger 

Middle North Umpqua watershed at some point in the future. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

232

FLUVIAL EROSION 

Affected Environment 

Fluvial44 erosion is addressed in Aquatic Conservation Strategy objective 3, which calls for 

the maintenance and restoration of conditions of stream shorelines, banks and bottom 

configurations, and Aquatic Conservation Strategy objective 9, which calls for the 

maintenance and restoration of habitat to support native populations. Streambank and 

streambed erosion can influence the above ACS objectives at the scale of a 5th field 

watershed. 

Channel transport is the main mechanism that moves soil and nutrients from watersheds 

and is often accompanied by channel erosion. Although streambank cutting is primarily 

driven by encroachment of soil creep and other mass wasting processes with the effects of 

peak flows usually playing a lesser role, changes in the hillslope hydrology after a major 

disturbance such as the Apple Fire, can create conditions where peak flows become a 

major contributor to channel erosion and channel habitat impacts. 

Previous harvest and stream cleanout45 has augmented the effects of peak flows and 

increased channel scour throughout the planning area. Peak flow increases due to canopy 

removal by the 2002 wildfire will exacerbate fluvial erosion, and it is expected to 

continue for up to 40 years or until canopy closure is recovered across the landscape. 

Decreased evapotranspiration46 leads to more saturated soil conditions that encourage 

channel formation in streams that rarely flowed water prior to the fire. These channels 

are susceptible to erosion as they are less likely to be armored with rock (Helvey et al, 

1985). This process is already evident within the planning area (Hydrology Report, Project 

Record). Thirty-eight percent of Limpy Creek is at risk for peak flow increases and 

channel erosion followed by Bachelor Creek at 26%. These class IV tributaries are likely to 

experience bank sloughing and channel scour which is likely to degrade downstream 

habitat due to sedimentation and channel widening. 

Large Woody Material 

Large woody material (LWM) can have a profound effect on stream channel morphology 

and fluvial erosion processes. LWM can reduce stream velocities by interacting directly 

with the flow of water in the channel. By reducing water velocity, the shearing and 

erosive power of the water is reduced. This can be particularly important during high flow 

and bank full flow events. Large wood that falls into and is trapped in the channel can 

form jams and create areas of slack water that can act as sediment storage areas. 

Post-fire Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) funded the instream placement of large 

wood (Figure 64). One hundred and twenty-five logs were used along approximately 3.5 

miles of Limpy and Bachelor Creeks (Table 54). Structures consist of a single log to 

complex multi-log jams. These structures were designed and placed in areas of the 

channel where constrictions would naturally capture large wood and in areas where large 

 

44 Fluvial erosion occurs as a result of flowing water which detaches and transports soil particles from one 

place to another. 

45 Stream cleanout was done during the decades of the 1960’s through the 1980’s where instream wood was 

removed in order to lessen potential impacts to culverts and bridges. 

46 Evapotranspiration occurs when live plants remove water from the soil and use it for growth. Excess 

moisture is transported to the leaves where it evaporates into the atmosphere. Plants, such as large trees, 

“pump” large amount of water out of the soil. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

233

wood had been removed during past stream cleanout efforts. The structures were 

designed to capture, store and meter out sediments and gravels over time as well as 

capture additional large and small woody material migrating down stream. Fairy Creek 

has had approximately 80 pieces of large wood added to its channel in the early 1990’s 

and lower Panther and Limpy Creeks had wood structures placed in the 1980’s. LWM 

placed prior to the Apple Fire of 2002 survived the burn. Aquatic habitat diversity, from a 

large wood stand point, has been improved over pre-fire conditions. Beneficial sediment 

storage and routing within the stream channels are also improved. 

Natural recruitment of LWM will increase with time in the burn area as burned late seral 

large trees near mainstem channels become available for recruitment to the stream and 

riparian area (Figure 65). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

234

Figure 64. Channels treated with the addition of large wood during post-fire Burned 

Area Emergency Response (BAER) efforts. Note: Non-fish bearing tributaries are 

displayed alphanumerically where L=Limpy, F=Fairy and P=Panther.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

235

Figure 65. Riparian areas of late-successional forest that experienced stand 

replacement fire that are expected to provide recruitment into mainstem channels. 

The post-fire wood placement, in concert with the anticipated natural recruitment from 

the fire, is expected to move Bachelor Creek and Limpy Creeks back within the natural 

range of variability for large wood within 5 to 10 years. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

236

Table 54. Large wood recruitment due to BAER projects and future 

recruitment potential from burned late-seral riparian areas. 

Main stem Reaches 

Pieces of Large 

Wood added PostFire 

Late-seral Stand 

Replacement Fire 

Adjacent to Creek 

(miles) 

Bachelor 21 0.8 

Fairy 10 0.1 

Limpy 104 2.6 

Panther 4 0.4 

Some recruitment of wood into Panther Creek will occur as a result of the fire, providing 

some long overdue recruitment, however, only 0.4 miles of Panther Creek had late seral 

stand replacement fire next to the mainstem in the 2002 fire. Four pieces of large wood 

were added to the Panther Creek mainstem during post-fire rehabilitation using road 

equipment positioned on the road (Table 54). 

The Apple Fire will do little to increase large wood recruitment into the mainstem of Fairy 

Creek because of the 0.9 miles of riparian forest that burned parallel to Fairy Creek, only 

0.1 miles of late seral forest burned parallel to the creek that could recruit to help 

restore habitat and channel functions. 

Large wood was also added to many of the tributary streams of Panther, Limpy, Fairy, and 

Bachelor Creeks (Figure 64). These tributaries are class III and IV47 channels that 

experienced substantial amounts of stand replacement fire. Some tributaries were only 

partially burned and did not need additional wood added while others were in or adjacent 

to previous clear-cut harvest units and had no large wood available to add. Wood that 

was added to the tributary channels came from adjacent burned riparian areas. These 

burned trees were directionally felled into the stream with a chainsaw. Much of the 

preexisting wood in these reaches were completely incinerated or reduced in size to the 

point of being relatively ineffective. Clusters of trees added to the channels ranged from 

1-10 pieces. Where possible, clusters of trees were placed in areas of natural sediment 

deposition. Due to the high gradient nature of these first and second order channels this 

was not always possible. Wood clusters felled in the tributary streams in the Panther 

Creek sub-watershed are slowing water velocities, capturing, storing, and metering 

sediment, and capturing additional wood. A total of approximately 4 miles of channel 

were treated on 12 tributaries of Panther, Fairy, and Limpy drainages (Figure 64). 

 

47 Class IV streams are intermittent, meaning that they do not run water year round. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

237

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

None of the Baked Apple action alternatives would result in any direct effects to aquatic 

systems from increased fluvial erosion. This is because none of the action alternatives 

would result in any peak flow increases that could cause increased fluvial erosion. 

Alternative 1 would also have no direct impact to fluvial erosion processes since no 

harvest of trees would occur. 

Indirect Effects 

Fluvial erosion may occur when fire-caused debris flows deposit into downstream areas 

such as the main stems of Limpy, Bachelor, Fairy and Panther Creeks. While only dead 

trees are being removed with the various action alternatives, these trees do provide 

mechanisms to slow the momentum of flows (Lancaster et al. 2001) and potentially keep 

flows from delivering to downstream areas. The delivery to downstream areas could 

result in indirect effects to aquatic organisms and the beneficial uses of water. Areas at 

high risk for shallow-rapid landslides identified by the SHALSTAB mapping and verified in 

the field were removed from harvest treatments in all action alternatives. In addition, 

areas of high to moderate risk of landslides (Table 53) were removed from any harvest in 

Alternative 3 further decreasing the risk of a shallow-rapid landslide occurring without the 

large wood component in that alternative. Although high risk areas were removed, 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 6 that have the most areas harvested would present the most risk of 

a landslide turning into a debris flow that lacked large wood. Such debris flows would 

potentially travel further downslope and contribute to fluvial erosion that occurs when 

winter flows cut through stream deposits and transport sediment downstream. 

Alternatives 3 and 5 would present less risk for an indirect effect while Alternative 1 

would present no risk of such an indirect effect. 

In the long-term, the replanting of the harvested units would result in a beneficial 

indirect effect to the stream ecosystem by hastening recovery of the stream morphology 

associated with live riparian vegetation that plays a role in counteracting fluvial erosion 

processes with stream bank root systems and wood input. All harvest units would be 

planted (Table 40), plus about 1,600 acres of adjacent or nearby burned plantations under 

all action alternatives. Alternative 4 would harvest the most units; therefore more acres 

would be replanted resulting in the most future benefit to recovering channel conditions 

as a result of hastened riparian regrowth and associated truncated timeframe for 

recruitment of wood into streams. Alternative 5 proposes the least harvest and replanting 

of the action alternatives, resulting in the least indirect benefits to aquatic systems due 

to channel recovery associated with hastened riparian re-growth. In the adjacent riparian 

areas of units in Alternative 5, no planting would occur further slowing the recovery role 

played by streamside trees. 

While funds for reforestation would likely become available through various sources other 

than those generated as a result of the timber sale (known as KV funds), the amount and 

timing of when other planting money would become available is unknown. Salvage units 

would probably experience a minimum of a 3 to 5 year delay after the wildfire before 

reforestation occurs because planting would need to occur after the harvest and burning is 

completed. The planting of areas not proposed for harvest is on-going and dependant of 

the availability of funding. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

238

Natural regeneration under Alternative 1 may take well over a decade to establish due to 

the severity of the wildfire and the lack of a natural seed source. Alternative 1 would 

result in no indirect beneficial effects to aquatic resources and beneficial uses because 

the natural riparian recovery time would not be shortened. 

The fire will provide wood recruitment opportunities into stream channels in areas where 

late seral trees were killed near streams. This natural recruitment along with the large 

wood added during the post-fire rehabilitation activities will help ameliorate fire caused 

fluvial erosion by slowing streamflow velocity and increasing channel storage. 

Cumulative Effects 

Past actions described in Table 8 in the beginning of this chapter, such as riparian timber 

harvest and stream cleanout into the early 1980’s, and riparian salvage following the 1897 

Apple Fire, have together resulted in streams deficient of large wood and susceptible to 

fluvial erosion. The harvest of dead trees under the various action alternatives could 

possibly result in a cumulative effect if trees are removed from areas that may become 

landslides. If landslides occur in salvage areas not identified as unstable during the 

planning process then, in those instances, large wood would not be available in such 

future debris flows to function in helping slow, stop and store debris flow materials. 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 6 pose the most risk of such a cumulative effect occurring while 

Alternatives 3 and 5 pose less of a risk due to the fewer acres harvested and the way 

Alternative 3 was crafted using SHALSTAB maps to drop more areas of potentially unstable 

ground. Alternative 1 would have no risk of resulting in a cumulative effect since no 

salvage would occur. 

Conclusions 

Based on the above discussion, none of the Baked Apple alternatives are expected to 

cause any appreciable changes to the physical integrity of shorelines, banks and bottom 

configurations of streams or habitat for riparian dependant species due to fluvial erosion. 

This is true at the scale of both the 6th field and 5th field watersheds. The lack of any 

appreciable salvage in riparian areas and in unstable areas allows for the post-fire wood 

delivery processes to function. Large wood placement within the planning area’s streams, 

accomplished in 2002 during Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation, jump-started the 

wood recruitment process to help alleviate impacts to shorelines, banks and bottom 

configurations associated with the fire’s effect on fluvial erosion. 

SURFACE EROSION 

Affected Environment 

The influence of the alternatives on the surface erosion process is the second indicator 

that is highlighted and tracked through this analysis in order to assess and measure the 

effects of the alternatives on erosion and sedimentation, identified as a significant issue 

during scoping. This particular aspect of the erosion process was chosen as an indicator of 

the erosion and sediment issue, along with mass wasting, because the proposed salvage 

would have more influence on these aspects of erosion and sedimentation than the other 

forms of erosion and sedimentation assessed in this analysis. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

239

The planning area was mapped according to erosion hazard classes (low, moderate, and 

high) as required in Forest Plan standards and guidelines. Thirty-three percent of the 

planning area has high erosion hazard and 66% has been mapped as either moderate or 

low erosion hazard (Figure 54). The erosion hazard map gives a board scale picture of 

surface erosion potential. 

Surface erosion begins immediately following a fire and drops off dramatically as ground 

vegetation re-establishes itself within 3 to 4 years (Emerson 2003; Elliot et al. 2001). The 

amount of displaced soil from surface erosion that becomes sediment in live stream 

systems is substantially less than can be expected from landslides. Surface erosion is the 

wearing away of soil from one point on the earth’s surface to another. Accelerated 

erosion is defined as a rate of loss in excess of natural rates usually attributed to humancaused activities. 

The surface erosion process exhibits a broad range of natural variability within steep 

forested landscapes of the planning area. Significant disturbance events like the 2002 

Apple Fire play a large role in establishing the upper end of the range of natural 

variability for surface erosion. The Apple Fire burned much like the previous stand 

replacement fire in this landscape (USDA 2001). Extreme winter storm events within the 

first year following such a stand replacement fire would also factor into establishing the 

upper end of the range. Accelerated surface erosion is usually associated with increases 

in overland flow that results from decreases in water infiltration of the soil (Helvey 1980 

as cited by Mclver and Starr 2000). Limited infiltration is generally caused by fire-induced 

water repellency of the soil, called hydrophobic soil (Mclver and Starr 2000), which is 

related to very high soil burn severity. Field verification of all proposed salvage units 

revealed only small, scattered locations of soil with hydrophobic characteristics. 

Therefore, little to no overland flow of rainwater is expected within the planning area. 

Informal, ocular monitoring of turbidity levels in Limpy and Panther Creeks following 

rainstorms during the winters of 2002/03 and 2003/04 showed very low to unobservable 

levels of turbidity in these creeks. Though neither of these winters produced substantial 

rain-on-snow events, these observations validate that surface erosion is not expected to 

be the major process contributing sediment to streams. As such, the level of concern over 

the possibility that large quantities of surface erosion could be delivered to stream 

systems is relatively low. 

Following fire, surface erosion typically occurs as dry ravel (sloughing of soil, rock, and 

organic debris) immediately after a fire or during the first winter when rain splashes 

directly on unprotected soil causing soil particles to dislodge and deposit downslope. The 

first winter following the Apple Fire was relatively gentle with no rain-on-snow storm 

events. Field observations revealed incidences of surface erosion but sedimentation 

associated with surface erosion appeared to be minimal. The largest risk of sedimentation 

from surface erosion from the fire has already passed. 

Most all of the surface erosion following slash burns in an Oregon coast range study on the 

Siuslaw National Forest occurred over the first year following the prescribed fire with 65% 

of that yearly amount displaced within 24 hours of the burn (Bennett 1982). In this study, 

clearcut and burned slopes less than 60% slope gradient had one-eighth the surface 

erosion of slopes greater than 60%, and unburned clearcuts on slopes greater than 60% 

produced one-tenth of the surface erosion compared to slopes that were burned. 

The litter layer on the soil surface plays an important role in controlling surface erosion. 

It also retains ample amounts of water and thereby controls the rate at which rainwater 

reaches the soil surface (Martin and Moody 2001). Further, the well-developed structure 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

240

of many forest soils promotes rapid infiltration of rain water into the soil. Thus, overland 

flow of water during heavy rainstorms is rare in undisturbed forest soils. 

Though the 2002 Apple Fire did not result in any substantial levels or locations of 

hydrophobic soil conditions, the fire did removed much of the protective litter layer. This 

litter loss is expected to result in elevated rates of erosion from the hillslopes with some 

degree of delivery into streams. The A horizon (top soil layer) ranges from 4 to 10 inches 

in depth for the soils associated with proposed activities. Post-fire average surface 

erosion was modeled at 1/8 inch loss from the A horizon. Surface erosion losses due to 

the fire are estimated to range from less than 1/16 inch in some units to almost 2 inches 

in others. Documented signs of post-fire erosion such as pedestal48 formations from sheet 

erosion are most evident in units: 45A, 45B, 45C, and 48. 

Surface erosion and its associated sedimentation of streams would likely follow the same 

short-term trend as reported in a study conducted in Eastern Oregon by Robichaud and 

Brown (1999). These authors reported that following fire, surface erosion rates averaged 

17 tons per acre but this immediate spike in surface erosion dropped off by 94%, down to 

1.02 tons per acre the second year and down 97% to 0.45 tons per acre the third year. A 

similar trend is expected in the planning area provided that rainfall rates remain at 

average levels. The degree of surface erosion over the next few years would depend on 

winter rain intensities, localized burn severity, amount of ground cover, and the speed of 

vegetation regrowth. 

Standards and Guidelines in the Umpqua National Forest LRMP require a minimum amount 

of effective ground cover to be in place within the first year following a ground disturbing 

activity such as timber harvest (LRMP IV-68). Since proposed salvage is focused on the 

steep terrain of stand-replacement fire with high erosion hazard, the highest level of 

minimum ground cover listed under this Standard and Guideline (85% effective ground 

cover) has been established as the requirement for this project. This highest level of 

effective ground cover is most effective at lessening risk of surface erosion. 

Although stand replacement mortality has occurred across a substantial portion of the 

planning area not all ground cover has been lost. In areas where trees were killed but 

where the needles were not consumed by the fire, dead needles and small branches have 

fallen to the ground and have helped to buffer exposed soils from erosion. Field 

observations indicate this needle cast has reduced most of surface erosion compared to 

areas devoid of needle cast where soil pedestals can be observed in some places. The 

proposed salvage units considered in this EIS that currently have less than 85% effective 

ground cover prior to harvest are: 9B, 15, 19, 25A, 25B, 39, 40, 43, 44, 45A, 45B, 45C, 

48A, 48B, 57, 58C, 59A, 59B, 62A, 62B, 62C, 62D, 66, 68, 69, 72, 73, 74A, 74B, 75, 76, 77, 

78A, 78C, 78D, 78E, 78F, 79A, 79B, 87, 88A, 88B and 89. 

The Water Erosion Prediction Program, WEPP (Elliot and Hall 1997) was used to assist in 

alternative development and to estimate the rates of potential surface erosion for the 

proposed harvest units. The WEPP model provides estimates of erosion and sediment 

based on amount of effective ground cover, precipitation, soil texture, landscape 

condition and topography. These factors were evaluated within the proposed harvest 

units, as well as the buffer between the unit and stream. The pre-fire condition was also 

modeled but with 100% effective ground cover and older stand ages. Under the modeled 

 

48 Soil pedestals form through erosion as a column of un-eroded soil becomes surrounded by space once 

occupied by soil that eroded away. Pedestals form under the protection provided by a small stone or pebble 

that sheds rain allowing the formation of the pedestals. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

241

pre-fire condition, very little surface soil losses were predicted, which is consistent with 

the above cited studies done on surface erosion. In fact, the average pre-fire erosion and 

sediment rate was modeled as only 1% of the average post-fire rates of surface erosion 

during the first winter following the Apple Fire. These modeled results are consistent 

with the Oregon coast range study discussed above (Bennett 1982). The undisturbed, 

unburned scenario modeled with the highest rainfall levels (precipitation of 68 inches or a 

30 year event), produced only 18% of the surface erosion or sediment produced from the 

modeled lowest rainfall event (precipitation of 45 inches or a 1.5 year event) under a 

burned scenario. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

A broad-scale overview of the alternatives with respect to their potential to cause 

additional surface erosion following the fire is provided by comparing the amount of 

acreage proposed for salvage in the high erosion hazard class for each alternative. All 

action alternatives harvest disproportionately more area in the high hazard area compared 

to the amount of high hazard land in the planning area (Table 33). This is because fire is 

more likely to burn as a stand-replacement event on the steepest slopes, and slope 

steepness was a major factor used to develop the hazard classes. In general, Alternative 

4 salvages the most acreage in the high erosion hazard class followed by Alternatives 2, 6, 

3, and 5 which harvest progressively less. Alternative 1 would salvage nothing in the high 

erosion hazard ground. In general, the alternatives with the most harvest and treatment 

in the high erosion hazard ground pose the greatest risk of surface erosion. 

If harvest occurs under this proposal, the earliest it would take place would be during the 

fall of 2004 with most harvest occurring in 2005 when surface erosion from the fire will 

have substantially waned. What remains of the surface erosion potential from the fire 

along with new surface erosion from the logging would be mitigated in harvest units by 

the retention of harvest slash to function as effective ground cover. Bennett (1982) found 

that debris scattered across clearcut and slash-burned study slopes helped arrest surface 

erosion and McIver and Starr (2000) reported that logging litter reduced soil loss in postfire watersheds. 

The levels of effective ground cover within the salvage units immediately following 

implementation of the alternatives, including slash burning, are used as a measure of the 

relative differences among alternatives with respect to the potential risk of surface 

erosion that could occur as a result of salvaging dead trees and treating the slash (Table 

55). The level of effective ground cover was selected as an indicator to help track how 

the various alternatives respond to the erosion and sedimentation issue and to help assess 

the differences among alternatives with respect to this significant issue. 

The effective ground cover that existed within proposed salvage units during the fall and 

winter months immediately following the 2002 Apple fire varies by alternative (Table 55). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

242

Table 55. Levels of effective ground cover (in the form of logging slash only) by 

alternative. This Table does not display the effective ground cover present in the 

proposed salvage units that exists as herbaceous vegetative regrowth after the 

fire. 

Alternative 

Acres 

proposed 

for harvest 

Acres 

with less than 

85% EGC 

immediately 

after the fire 

Acres 

with less than 

85% EGC postimplementation

Percentage of acres left 

with 

less than 85% Effective 

Ground Cover after 

harvest activities 

Alt 2 1,075 576 282 31% 

Alt 3 880 515 236 36% 

Alt 4 1,257 582 416 27% 

Alt 5 435 110 99 13% 

Alt 6 917 476 227 31% 

 For instance, in Alternative 2, there were 645 acres with less than 85% effective ground 

cover as a result of the 2002 Apple Fire’s consumption of forest floor duff. By the spring 

of 2004, essentially all proposed harvest units have regained a large amount of effective 

ground cover in the form of pioneering vegetation (moss, grasses, and herbaceous 

vegetation). Salvage logging will set back the recovery of vegetative regrowth as logs are 

dragged during yarding, especially in skyline logging corridors and in areas of ground based 

skidding. Slash burning will also set back the recovery of the pioneering vegetation, 

especially in areas that are underburned (broadcast burned). Site preparation, logging 

systems and the building and subsequent decommissioning of temporary roads all can 

influence the surface erosion process, and the degree of these activities varies by 

alternative (Chapter 2, Table 6). In general, ground-based skidding (referred to as loader 

logging in Table 6) causes the greatest immediate soil effect, followed by skyline and 

helicopter logging (Klock 1975, as cited by Mclver and Starr 2000). 

The largest potential setback in vegetation succession and its role in effective ground 

cover is associated with broadcast burning. This is addressed by the application of 

mitigation measures incorporated into all action alternatives: 

1. Inventories will be conducted before fuels treatments where less than 85% EGC was 

found immediately following the fire, in areas of severe regeneration limitations 

(TES), and in areas of severe burn effects in order to determine if slash treatment 

is needed and to determine if there is a need to mitigate EGC with seeding or 

straw mulch. In these areas, no slash treatment using fire will occur if post-harvest 

EGC in the form of logging slash is less than 85% and fuel loading is less than 25 

tons per acre. Also in these areas, slash treatment will be ‘lop and scatter’ where 

fuel loading is greater than 25 tons per acre. 

2. Seed from native plants, and/or straw will be applied to increase ground cover in 

any units (regardless of the above designation) that does not meet effective 

ground cover within the first year following harvest. 

Logging slash will add effective ground cover, and in most cases it is expected to replace 

live vegetation as effective ground cover in locations that would be underburned. The 

underburning would occur during moist weather conditions when only partial consumption 

of logging slash would occur leaving the remainder to function as EGC. The predicted 

contribution of logging slash to EGC varies by alternative (Table 55). Based on the site 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

243

preparation mitigation measure listed above, a varying number of acres may need 

additional ground cover added in the form of seeding or straw mulch. 

Some salvage units have high surface rock and lower surface soil content and thus have 

experienced slower rates of herbaceous vegetative recovery. The high surface rock 

content in such units functions as effective ground cover, so the delayed vegetative 

recovery prior to salvage activities is not expected to lead to significant levels of new 

surface erosion associated with the salvage operations in these units. The cover provided 

by the high surface rock content is expected to minimize surface erosion. 

Under Alternatives 2, 3, 5, and 6 any surface erosion caused by the logging and site 

preparation must travel through untreated riparian reserves in order to reach streams. 

Field observations during the spring of 2004 showed that riparian areas have substantial 

levels of the recovering herbaceous vegetation and sprouting hardwoods to function as 

ground cover to help arrest the gravity driven and rain driven movement of surface 

erosion before it enters streams. 

Alternative 4 would apply a small amount of harvest (32 acres) and fuel treatments (202 

acres) within the riparian reserves adjacent to most harvest units. The associated 

disturbance within these buffers caused by these activities is expected to result in some 

soil disturbance and a loss of some ground cover within the recovering burned riparian 

areas. This is expected to be offset somewhat in Alternative 4 however, by the effective 

ground cover, in the form of logging slash that would be added by the salvage operation. 

Also mitigating the delivery of sediment to downstream perennial streams are the BAER 

channel treatments located in many of the burned intermittent tributary channels. The 

addition of log clusters throughout the length of many burned tributary channels will 

function to capture, store, and meter out the sediment transport to downstream areas 

over time. 

The detailed analysis of all proposed salvage units in terms of the potential sediment 

delivery from surface erosion using the Water Erosion Prediction Program (WEPP) varies by 

alternative (Figure 66). These predictions are believed to represent a worst case scenario 

in terms of the tons presented in the Figure. It is based on a 1.5-year rain event, which 

was the amount of rain experienced during the winter 2002-2003. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

244

1

10

100

1000

Tons Per Acre

Alt #1 0 762 46 20 8

Alt #2 0 394 24 10 4

Alt #3 0 470 28 12 5

Alt #4 0 398 24 10 4

Alt #5 0 644 39 17 6

Alt #6 0 425 25 11 4

2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006

Figure 66. Estimates of tons of sediment generated from surface erosion for 2001 

through 2006. Estimates are based on rain-years equivalent to 2002-2003 (1.5 

year-rain event or 45 inches of rain for the year). If more extreme weather were 

to occur, then the tons of sediment from surface erosion would be higher, but 

the relative differences among alternatives would remain similar. 

The rapid decline in surface erosion rates found by Robichaud and Brown (1999) were used 

to develop Figure 66, which displays how effective ground cover, recovering ground 

vegetation, and associated sediment decreases following fire. The 2004-2005 column on 

the timeline represents when alternative implementation is predicted to take place. 

These histograms represent the effects of the alternatives added to the effects of the 

fire. Based on Figure 66, Alternatives 2, 3, 4 and 6 would have the direct beneficial 

effect of reducing sediment from surface erosion compared to the no action alternative. 

This is due to increased levels of effective ground cover generated by harvest and 

retained during site preparation. 

Site preparation, logging systems and the building and subsequent decommissioning of 

temporary roads associated with the action alternatives all can influence the surface 

erosion process (Table 6, Chapter 2). In general, ground-based skidding causes the 

greatest immediate soil effect, followed by skyline and helicopter (Klock 1975, as cited by 

Mclver and Starr 2000). 

The activities in Table 6 would expose some areas of soil to surface erosion from rainfall. 

Surface erosion and associated sedimentation are anticipated to be short-term and 

localized. For the handpile burning displayed in Table 6, the localized erosion would not 

lead to sedimentation because it would be mitigated by the surrounding effective ground 

cover that would continue to exist between burned handpiles and any stream channels. 

Broadcast burning would pose more risk of ground cover losses and surface erosion than 

handpile burning, however, the risk of erosion and its potential to generate sediment due 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

245

to broadcast burning was mitigated in the development of burning prescriptions. All 

broadcast burning would be implemented when fuels are moist so that fuel consumption 

would not be complete in order to maintain adequate levels of unburned slash to function 

as effective ground cover. Additionally, effective ground cover would be monitored 

immediately following the broadcast burning of individual units to assess whether 

prescriptions for effective ground cover are being met and to assure that any adaptations 

to the burning prescriptions can be made, if needed. Based on the combination of 

mitigation and monitoring, broadcast burn treatments are not significantly increase 

surface erosion. 

An increase of erosion can occur when skyline and loader harvest are concentrated within 

yarding corridors. Best Management Practices included in all action alternatives require 

erosion control measures be in place before the beginning of the rainy season to reduce 

the transport of erosion. 

Most of loader logging would occur on existing roads or on new temporary roads. 

Proposed loader operations would be held to less than 10% detrimental conditions by 

spacing loader trails 100 feet apart and mitigated by meeting at least 85% effective 

ground cover following logging. Seven units included in some of the action alternatives 

(units 4, 15, 42, 48B, 59A, 75, and a portion of 27A) would require loader logging where 

equipment would operate away from existing roads. Loader operations would be held to 

less than 10% detrimental conditions by spacing loader trails 100 feet apart and mitigated 

by meeting at least 85% effective ground cover following logging. Monitoring of the 1996 

Lakeview and 2003 Downbeat Timber Sales on the Diamond Lake Ranger District has shown 

this practice to create an estimated 8%-10% detrimental soil conditions within harvest 

units. A mitigation measure incorporated into Alternative 2 and 6 requires that all 

equipment piling of slash would be restricted to loader trails, and existing permanent and 

temporary roads. None of the loader logging associated with any action alternative would 

result in a cumulative total amount of detrimental soil conditions over the 20% threshold 

required in the Standards and Guidelines of the Forest Plan (Table 35). The surface area 

occupied by loader trails is accounted for in the cumulative detrimental soil condition by 

alternative displayed earlier in this chapter (Table 35) under the heading of Site 

Productivity. The loader harvesting sites located off of existing roads would all be done 

on low to moderate erosion risk class ground, and where increased compaction is not 

expected to occur. 

Anticipated disturbance of the ground and herbaceous vegetation from skyline harvest is 

expected to leave 5% of the proposed activity area in short-term detrimental conditions 

(Soils Report, Project Record). 

The effects of temporary roads, which would be either reused or constructed (Table 6) 

and subsequently decommissioned, are expected in the short-term. This is based on field 

observations that revealed no signs of compaction based on no difference in soil structure 

or strength within temporary roads following decommissioning (Soils Report, Project 

Record). This lack of noticeable compaction is related to the shallow soil depth on the 

ridge top landforms where temporary roads would be built and the natural mitigation of 

frost heave from soil temperature swings on these landforms. These roads would be 

either scarified or subsoiled depending upon the soil depth and they would have slash 

covering the treated surface. This mitigation increases water infiltration, incorporation of 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

246

organic matter into the soil profile, and improved tilth49. Since some of these temporary 

roads from previous harvest activities were not properly decommissioned after use, their 

decommissioning following this project would result an overall reduction in detrimental 

soil conditions. 

Indirect Effects 

The potential indirect effects to aquatic ecosystems from sedimentation associated with 

the alternatives has to do with the amount of fuel left following implementation of the 

alternatives and the effect those fuels could have on the size and severity of future fires. 

Post-fire logging is expected to increase short-term fuel loads and the fire risk due to 

increased fine fuel beds of logging slash. These fine fuels are planned to be reduced 

through site preparation, which would occur between 2005-2008. Plus, the fine fuels 

would decay with time also diminishing this short-term risk. The salvage logging would 

decrease the intermediate and long-term fire risk of future fires due to the removal of 

large dead structure. Fuel build-up following the 2002 fire is predicted to start becoming 

more of a risk beginning in about 25 years. Residual fuels could cause a future fire to 

burn hotter and cover a larger area leading to more surface erosion and resultant 

sedimentation. The alternatives that harvest and treat the least acreage result in more 

residual fuel and more potential for such an indirect effect. 

Implementation of Alternative 1, the no action Alternative, and to a lesser degree, 

Alternative 5 both result in more risk of leading to larger fires in the planning area 

compared to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 that all have a similar and somewhat lower risk of 

leading to future, large-scale fires. In the year 2028, the FARSITE model (Finney 1998) 

predicted a 1,579 acre fire after the first burning period for Alternative 1 and an 823 acre 

fire for Alternative 5. Alternatives 2, 3, 4 and 6 were predicted to be similar to one 

another and vary between 599 acres and 692 acres under this modeled worst case 

scenario. 

Along with the risk of experiencing larger future fires, such fires would potentially burn 

hotter due to the residual fuels left behind after the Apple Fire. After 25 years, large 

residual fuel remaining after the 2002 fire like tree boles and tree tops that have 

fragmented and fallen to the forest floor would increase the length of time a future fire 

would burn on the forest floor. Extended fire residence time on the forest floor results in 

higher levels of soil burn severity, which in turn is a factor that could lead to increased 

surface erosion and sedimentation of planning area streams. 

This indirect effect associated with residual fuels may be most pronounced in some of the 

riparian reserves in steep terrain where large fuels tend to accumulate when falling 

woody material migrates into the concavities of stream bottoms. The effects of surface 

erosion and sedimentation associated with any future reburning of riparian reserves are 

expected to be the least in the alternatives that harvest more of the dead trees. Though 

Alternatives 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 all avoid harvest in riparian reserves, those that retain more 

leave trees or that harvest the fewest upland acres, (Alternatives 1, 3 and 5) would tend 

to eventually contribute more fuel to downslope riparian reserves and increase the risk of 

indirect effects from future riparian reserve reburns. Alternative 4 would probably pose 

the lease amount of risk from such an indirect effect since it retains minimal amounts of 

dead leave trees. 

 

49 Tilth is the physical condition of a soil related to its ability to allow seedling emergence and root 

penetration.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

247

In order to trigger any of these future indirect effects, a fire would have to get started 

and initial attack would have to be unsuccessful such that a fire escapes. This would 

depend largely on future weather conditions at the time when the elevated risks exist, 

and the staffing, techniques, and budgets available to suppress fires in the future. 

Cumulative Effects 

The surface erosion and sedimentation associated with the salvage logging, slash burning, 

temporary road construction, and landing construction detailed in Table 6 for the Baked 

Apple action alternatives have the potential of resulting in cumulative effects to the 

aquatic environment at the scale of the 6th field watershed when added to the potential 

sedimentation associated with the past clearcut acres that burned in the 2002 Apple fire. 

Of the 5,080 acres previously clearcut harvested in the watershed, 2,453 acres of these 

old clearcuts burned in the 2002 Apple Fire (Table 8). Also, the 241 areas of salvage 

following the 1987 Apple Fire, all reburned in the 2002 Apple Fire. The potential exists 

for cumulative effects from additional surface erosion and sedimentation in these areas 

since they lack any mitigating overstory trees and large wood. 

The recent fire suppression activities associated with the 2002 Apple fire and subsequent 

BAER activities (Table 9 at the beginning of this chapter) may also play a role in surface 

erosion cumulative effects. All of the firelines including the 10.2 miles of dozer line and 1 

mile of hand lines were rehabilitated with duff pull-back and water barred by October of 

2002. Hand lines present little chance of generating erosion and dozer lines were built on 

ridgetop locations where surface erosion is limited. These rehabilitated fire lines are 

expected to contribute little to sedimentation or cumulative effects. The various 

constructed points made during the suppression efforts equated to surface soil 

disturbance of about 3.4 acres which was rehabilitated by October of 2002. Since these 

areas were constructed on gentle to flat ground, they would contribute little to surface 

erosion cumulative effects. The recent reforestation of 286 acres during February of 2003 

on hill slopes and adjacent riparian areas including the planting of about 75 feet on either 

side of the lower 3 miles of Limpy Creek is expected to help offset surface erosion and 

sediment delivery, lessening overall potential of cumulative effects of sedimentation from 

surface erosion. 

Reasonably foreseeable actions in the planning area (Table 10 at the beginning of this 

chapter) can also contribute to cumulative effects from surface erosion. The logging and 

temporary road construction associated with the harvest of 45 acres in the Apple Seed 

Stand Improvement Project would result in limited amounts of sediment from surface 

erosion that could contribute to surface erosion cumulative effects. The foreseeable 

reforestation and road maintenance activities would both result in lessening the risks of 

additional surface erosion in the planning area. 

The potential for any of the action alternatives to cause a significant cumulative effect 

from surface erosion is considered to be low because the combination of vegetative 

regrowth and the logging slash left after implementation would minimize the effects of 

both erosion and sedimentation from the soil disturbed during logging and site 

preparation. The action alternatives would leave materials of a size class that is less 

likely to be consumed quickly through decomposition or wildfire. In addition, all action 

alternatives would reforest all harvest units and the adjacent riparian reserves with the 

exception of Alternative 5. The reforestation is expected to decrease the amount of time 

needed to reach natural background sedimentation rates. The expected slower recovery 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

248

of conifers in the riparian reserves under Alternative 5 would increase the length of time 

conifer vegetation would be available for arresting surface erosion. 

Conclusions 

Based on the above discussion, none of the Baked Apple alternatives would affect the 

sediment regime associated with the surface erosion process at the scale of the 5th field 

watershed over the time-frame of decades or longer. The various action alternatives 

would cause short-term adverse effects on the surface erosion process due to disturbance 

of recovering post-fire vegetation from logging and slash burning, yet this impact is not 

expected to last any longer than a few years. The salvage activities, including slash 

burning, are not expected to cause any appreciable change to the sediment regime from 

surface erosion over the long-term since vegetative recovery in the form of pioneering 

ground cover (moss, grasses, and sprouting hardwoods) recovers quickly to hold surface 

soils in place. 

ROAD-RELATED EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION 

Affected Environment 

Road networks in many upland areas of the Pacific Northwest are the most important 

source of management–accelerated delivery of sediment to anadromous fish habitats 

(FEMAT 1993). Road-related sediment can come as large pulses during major winter storm 

events such as occurred in 1955, 1964, and 1996. These infrequent high intensity storms 

cause water to back up behind undersized stream crossings that can fail and deliver the 

surrounding fill material directly to the stream or divert water out of channels and on to 

roads ultimately leading to all forms of erosion (discussed above in this Chapter). Such 

storms can also overwhelm the ditch lines and cross drains in a road system causing water 

to route to locations where it normally would not be, resulting in more erosion and 

sedimentation of streams. 

Road-related sediment delivery can also occur with timber sale log haul on gravel and 

native surface roads during wet periods if haul is allowed to proceed in wet conditions. 

Road maintenance or upgrades done to prepare roads for timber haul is another potential 

source of sedimentation from newly disturbed ditch lines or newly reconstructed sites that 

can deliver sediment directly to streams during the first couple of winters following the 

work. Finally, minor amounts of sedimentation can occur from the dust that is generated 

during dry season haul on gravel and native surface roads that parallel streams, if dust 

abatement is ineffective. 

Fire-Related Road Work 

Following the Apple Fire, emergency road repairs were carried out under the Burned Area 

Emergency Response (BAER) program that provides money to rapidly prepare for the 

aftermath of fire effects. BAER road work was conducted to protect resources and 

prevent road damage during the fall of 2002 prior to the onset of winter rains. Most of 

the BAER work conducted to improve road drainage was done on roads 4720 and 4720-005 

where the major fire effects occurred. Work to reduce the risk of stream crossing failures 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

249

occurred on six sites where grade sags50 were installed in the road to eliminate diversion 

potential. Another stream crossing culvert had a slotted riser51 installed to reduce risk 

associated with inlet plugging. 

In addition to the work on stream crossings, BAER work also included removing unstable 

side cast fills52 at fourteen locations. The total amount of unstable material removed was 

about 3,200 cubic yards (about 320 dump truck loads). Most locations posed some risk for 

mass wasting of road fills that would result in sediment delivery to streams. The focus of 

this BAER road work was on the more obvious and imminently failing sites. Most, if not all 

sites with significant risk on both the 4720 and 4720-005 roads were treated; little 

additional need exists for fill removal on those roads (Road Engineer Report, Project 

Record). 

BAER work also included road drainage maintenance work to prevent sediment delivery. 

Drainage work was focused on roads 4720 and 4720-005, where the Apple Fire had the 

greatest effect, and all needed work was completed. Ditch relief and stream crossing 

culvert inlets were cleaned of material restricting inflow, ditches were cleaned of 

sediment and debris that could impede or divert flow from reaching culvert inlets, and 

road bed surfaces were graded to eliminate rutting and the associated risk of excess flow 

down road surfaces that could bypass flowing into cross drains. One winter after the 

Apple Fire, very little new drainage maintenance needs have since been identified during 

field reconnaissance of the road system in the planning area. 

Finally, during BAER work on the 0.4 mile 4720-510 road, all the culverts were removed, 

the ditch was filled, and the road was out sloped to eliminate all drainage-related 

problems and reduce risk of mass wasting. 

Additional funding was made available to conduct further road maintenance in the Apple 

Fire area during the summer of 2003, which included work on roads that would be used if 

any of the action alternatives were implemented. Approximately 75 ditch relief culverts 

were installed on roads 4720 and 4720-005. Most of these installations replaced existing 

ditch relief culverts. The replacements are expected to result in reduce road-related 

erosion. This is because the new culvert outlets were located at or below the toe of 

existing fill slopes, whereas many of the old culverts were not installed as deep in the 

roadbed and discharged directly onto fill slopes, which were more subject to erosion. 

Many of the replaced culverts were deteriorated to the point of leakage, causing internal 

erosion of the fill. Prior to replacement, the potential sediment delivery from the old 

culverts was probably minimal, however as most replacement locations were located well 

away from streams, and most sediment discharge from the old culverts would have likely 

filtered out on the hill slopes before entering streams. This work was accomplished 

primarily to improve road functioning in the aftermath of the fire which will help the 

transportation system sustain itself following the fire as well as to lessen the impacts of 

the road systems on erosional processes. 

Approximately five of the new culvert installations on the 4720-005 were additional 

culverts placed in locations where no culvert previously existed. These were installed at 

locations to reduce the length of ditch that flows directly into stream crossings. 

 

50 Grade sags are constructed by excavating a low point across the roadbed to capture any stream flow that 

does not pass through the culvert, and route the water back into the stream. 51 A slotted riser is a cylindrical pipe with slots cut in it, installed vertically on top of a culvert inlet. 52 Side cast fills consist of material placed (filled) on a slope to make part of the road structure. These fills 

are sometimes unstable if placed on steep slopes or if logs or slash where buried in the fill at the time of 

construction. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

250

Both the 2002 BEAR road work and the 2003 road maintenance targeted at the Apple Fire 

area has and will continue to result in some reduction of sediment delivery compared to 

post-fire conditions prior to the completion of this work. 

Existing Condition of Stream Crossings 

A road management Standard and Guideline in the Northwest Forest Plan requires an 

assessment of each road’s influence on the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives (ROD 

C-32). This requirement was accomplished with a Roads Analysis done for the Baked 

Apple project (USDA 2003a). A total of 173 stream crossings were inventoried in the 

Baked Apple planning area in order to provide data for the roads analysis following 

completion of the BAER road work. The inventory comprehensively covered the Baked 

Apple analysis area to assess relative risk of sediment delivery due to crossing failures 

during peak flow events as required in the above Standard and Guideline. Another road 

management Standard and Guideline calls for the improvement of stream crossings that 

pose a substantial risk to riparian resources so that such crossings accommodate at least a 

100-year flood (ROD C-33). Those segments of roads within the planning area with 

crossings that stand to deliver large quantities of sediment as a result of possible failure 

were assigned a higher priority in the Baked Apple Roads Analysis for such improvement. 

Stream crossing failures occur when not all water and stream borne debris is able to pass 

through a culvert or other crossing structure, as designed. Depending on the 

configuration of the structure and the road grade, two general outcomes may result at a 

failure site—the flood water flows over or through the fill surrounding the culvert and 

stays within the stream channel or the flood water diverts down the road grade possibly 

entering a different channel. In the first scenario, the fill surrounding the crossing may 

erode away or even collapse when water is ponded behind the stream crossing because 

the fill material can’t withstand the pressures of saturation. This can result in substantial 

sediment impacts downstream. Older roads with buried logs and slash in the fill material 

are most susceptible to this type of failure. In the second scenario, where water leaves 

the stream and diverts down a roadway, the failure can lead to erosion of road ditches, 

road fill slopes, and hill slopes as floodwaters flow down and off of roadways. If the 

diverted water leaves the road and flows onto steep, inherently unstable hill slopes, 

landslides and debris flows may result. If the diverted water reenters a stream channel 

that is different than the one it originally exited, and if the new channel is smaller or less 

erosion-resistant than the original, significant fluvial erosion may occur in the new 

channel. 

During the Baked Apple stream crossing inventory each stream crossing was assessed for 

diversion potential, potential sediment delivery to streams as a result of crossing failure, 

and the relative probability of sediment delivery that could result from a 100-year peak 

flow event. Recent information from the February 1996 flood events, measured as a 100-

year event in portions of northwest Oregon and Washington, indicate that a very 

significant percent of Forest Service road-stream crossings are at risk of failure (Furniss et 

al. 1998). Knowledge from that and other flood events are the basis for the type of 

information needed from inventories and used in analysis (Flanagan et al. 1998). 

However, as yet, no meaningful statistical analysis of historic failures can be applied to 

more accurately predict future failures. As such, the relative risks among the 173 

inventoried stream crossings were assessed and possible quantities of associated sediment 

delivery were estimated given a 100-year flood in all streams of the watershed. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

251

To help make comparative rankings of roads, a numerical failure potential (from 1 to 5—

with 5 being the most likely to fail) was derived for each inventoried stream crossings and 

a volume of eroded material that could be delivered as sediment to a stream was 

estimated for each crossing (Engineering Report, Project Record). Probability rankings 

were also assigned to failure potential and the results from the 173 stream crossings 

inventoried indicate that: 

• An estimated 25,000 cubic yards of sediment could be delivered to streams as a 

result of failed stream crossings if a 100-year peak flow occurred at all locations. 

• 19,000 cubic yards of sediment could result at 78 locations where the expected 

mode of failure would be fills washing out or collapsing at the stream crossing. 

• 27 stream crossings have a failure potential rating of 5, 26 were rated as 4, 47 

were rated as 3, 25 were rated as 2, and 48 were rated as 1. 

• For a 100-year event, actual sediment delivery is likely to be less because: 1) A 

100-year peak flow at all locations is less probable than a 100-year peak flow 

measured at the mouth of the watershed; and 2) Sediment volumes are based on 

total sediment available for delivery associated with the sites, but not all would be 

delivered if emergency flood response efforts or repairs are implemented that stop 

the erosion processes. 

With many stream crossings in the watershed at risk of failure, and with the increased 

probability of large sediment input during peak flow conditions compared to the unroaded 

condition in which the aquatic system evolved, the sediment regime of the watershed 

likely has been or will be altered. The effect that roads have on the sediment regime in 

the planning area places the sediment regime outside the natural range of variability. 

Given the road densities in the planning area (4 miles of road per square mile in the 

Panther 6th field watershed), the environmental baseline is considered to be not properly 

functioning based on the fact that there are more than 3 miles of road per square miles of 

land—a threshold established by NOAA Fisheries. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

None of the Baked Apple Alternatives would increase the risk of stream crossing failures; 

therefore, no direct effects to the aquatic environment from sediment associated with 

stream crossing failures are expected. This is because salvage and fuels treatment 

operations would not significantly alter the amount of slash or other mobile debris in close 

proximity to stream channels that would be likely to float downstream. The activities in 

portions of Riparian Reserves under Alternative 4 are not expected to add to the plugging 

potential of “at-risk” culvert inlets since only the outside portions of stream buffers would 

receive treatment. 

Indirect Effects and Cumulative Effects 

No downstream, indirect effects associated with the Baked Apple alternatives concerning 

stream crossing failures are expected to occur downstream of either Panther Creek or the 

face drainages that flow into the North Umpqua River. Since no alternative would affect 

the condition of stream crossings, no Baked Apple alternative would result in any 

beneficial or other indirect or cumulative effect to the risk of stream crossing failures. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

252

ROAD RECONSTRUCTION SITES 

Affected Environment 

Two reconstruction sites would be worked on under Alternatives 2 - 6. Between Draft and 

Final, the Responsible Official decided to add the reconstruction sites to Alternative 6, 

but the funding for those sites would be secured through other sources, since no haul is 

proposed over those two sites under Alternative 6. Neither reconstruction site is included 

in Alternative 1. Both proposed reconstruction sites are located on road 4714, one at 

milepost 4.41 and the other at milepost 9.88. These are locations where damaged and 

plugged culverts, combined with inherent slope instability, pose substantial risk of 

environmental impact and loss of drivable road prisms due to slope failures. The haul of 

logs and road rock associated with Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 would further compromise 

these sites making them a potential safety concern during log haul if not reconstructed 

prior to implementation of these alternatives; Alternative 6 would not haul over this area, 

but the two sites would be repaired under this alternative to help alleviate existing and 

future problems. 

Reconstruction at milepost 4.41 on road 4714 would shift the road alignment about seven 

feet into the hill; remove and stabilize oversteepened, failing fill slopes; replace an 

existing, plugged 18-inch diameter culvert in a small intermittent stream with a larger 

diameter culvert; and remove and replace asphalt pavement on about 200 linear feet of 

the road surface. Approximately 400 cubic yards of excavated and cleared material would 

be hauled and placed in designated disposal areas. 

Reconstruction at milepost 9.88 on road 4714 would replace an existing, plugged and 

separated 18-inch diameter culvert fed by a spring source with a 28-inch span by 20-inch 

rise pipe arch; excavate and remove failing fill material containing decomposing and 

burned out logs; and rebuild the fill with pit-run rocky material. Approximately 300 cubic 

yards of excavated and cleared material would be hauled and placed in designated 

disposal areas. 

Two existing rock pits would be further developed to produce crushed aggregate, pit run 

aggregate, and riprap for the reconstruction sites. The Big Leopard quarry is located at 

T26S, R1E, S17, SE/SE, on the end of road 4714-050 and the Single Quarry is located at 

T26S, R1E, S34, SW/SW, on the end of road 4720-165. Development and all physical 

disturbances at both sites would be confined to the previously cleared areas (no clearing 

and grubbing of trees will be required.) 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

Alternative 1 has the potential to result in a direct effect to aquatic resources from 

ongoing chronic sedimentation and possible mass wasting sediment delivery that would 

continue due to a lack of treatment of the two sites at milepost 4.41 and 9.88. Depending 

on the funding mechanism secured (and the time it takes to secure the money) for fixing 

these sites under Alternative 6, the same short term adverse effects, as described under 

Alternative 1 may also occur. 

The plugged culvert at milepost 4.41 diverts intermittent flows down the ditch 

approximately 500 feet away. This diversion has the potential to cause hill slope gully 

erosion below the ditch relief culvert. Some of the diverted water is infiltrating into the 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

253

road fill material, contributing to a high risk of mass wasting that would likely affect most 

of the existing road width. Previous fill failures at the site have left an overly steep fill 

condition with actively failing road shoulders and eroding slopes. Expected future chronic 

erosion from the untreated site is on the scale of five to ten cubic yards of material per 

year. Delivery of eroded material to the stream is likely, given the proximity. 

At the proposed reconstruction site at milepost 9.88 all water percolates through the fill 

without entering the culvert, which has a plugged inlet and is separated in the middle. 

The resulting internal erosion of the fill, exacerbated by buried logs that were burned in 

the Apple Fire, is causing the fill to collapse, feeding more material to the erosion 

process. Sediment is delivered directly to the stream at an average estimated delivery in 

excess of five cubic yards per year. This site has high risk of fill failure, leading to direct 

delivery of more than 100 cubic yards of material into the small headwater, perennial 

stream. The result could include initiation of a debris flow. A slope failure immediately 

below the road at milepost 9.88 scoured the channel below this site a number of years 

ago. 

In the longer term, Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are expected to result in a direct 

beneficial effect to the aquatic environment by eliminating the on-going chronic sediment 

delivery problems at both sites and eliminating the future risk of catastrophic sediment 

delivery associated with the mass wasting potential directly below these sites. Short-term 

sediment delivery from the reconstruction sites at milepost 4.41 and 9.88 under 

Alternative 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 is likely during the first year following reconstruction as result 

of disturbed soil associated with implementing the work. Work would be conducted when 

little to no stream flow is expected to occur. All excavated slopes would be either 

covered with riprap or mulch and seeded with native grass or treated with other materials 

to minimize erosion. Should water be flowing at milepost 9.88 during reconstruction, 

sediment traps or filters would be installed downstream and trapped material removed 

after reconstruction is completed. At both sites, the resulting short-term sediment 

delivery would likely be less than the current rate of delivery without treatment. 

The use of the two existing rock quarries associated with this reconstruction work would 

not result in any direct impacts to the aquatic environment or the beneficial uses of 

water. A mitigation measure is incorporated in all action alternatives that requires 

drainage work at quarry work areas and quarry access roads to provide adequate drainage 

to minimize erosion and sediment delivery. Also, the existing rock pits proposed for use 

would not need any additional development; all work would occur within the existing 

perimeter of these two quarries. 

Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

No downstream, indirect effects associated with the reconstruction sites in Alternatives 2, 

3, 4, 5, and 6 are expected. This is because the reconstruction sites are well away from 

downstream fish bearing reaches of Panther Creek and the North Umpqua River. 

Alternative 1 would result in no indirect effects to downstream beneficial uses because 

neither of these alternatives would carry out any road reconstruction work. 

The work proposed to occur at the two rock quarries is not expected to result in any 

downstream effects because both quarries are located well away from streams. The 

required mitigation work at the rock quarries, further reduces the chances of any 

sedimentation of downstream areas associated with the proposed quarry work. No other 

indirect or cumulative effects would occur. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

254

ROAD PRISM SURFACES 

Affected Environment 

Road prisms, which include the roadbed itself, the road ditches, and the fill and cut 

slopes on either side of the road can deliver sediment to streams in two main ways. One 

mechanism is the transport of sediment in ditches and road wheel tracks (ruts) that 

discharge directly into streams at stream crossing during the wet season. The other is 

from road cross drains that discharge water onto a hill slope in close proximity to a stream 

where filtering by effective ground cover may not occur. Other delivery mechanisms from 

road prisms such as surface erosion from bare fill slopes located directly above stream 

channels or wind transport of dust particles are minor components and relatively 

insignificant in the planning area. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

None of the Baked Apple alternatives would result in any direct effects to the aquatic 

environment from sediment delivery associated with road cross drains. This is because 

the road drainage has been recently maintained (work done in the fall, 2002 and summer, 

2003) and would be maintained during salvage sale operations. Also, hill slopes and 

riparian reserves would continue to capture and filter out sediment below ditch relief 

culverts. Although Alternative 4 would treat riparian reserves adjacent to some harvest 

units, no substantial loss of effective ground cover is anticipated with the riparian 

treatments in this alternative. The various timber sales that would emanate from any of 

the action alternatives would occur during the normal operating season; with contract 

stipulations that require the ceasing of operations should they result in resource damage. 

Hence, no direct effects from road prism sedimentation, as a result of wet weather 

timber haul, are expected. Dust abatement would be applied under the timber sale 

contract to mitigate any dust that could deposit in streams, so no direct effects would be 

experienced from dust. 

A lack of road maintenance has been correlated to sediment increases from filled in 

ditches and plugged culverts; however, Alternative 1 would not result in any direct effects 

associated with an increase of road-related sediment because of the recent 2002 and 2003 

road maintenance activities. 

Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

No downstream, indirect effects to the aquatic environment associated with the use of 

road prisms under Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are expected. This is because the 

mitigation included before, during, and after such use would arrest most of the 

possibilities of direct effects of sedimentation making the possibility of indirect effects 

further downstream and later in time non-existent. No cumulative effects would occur. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

255

TIMBER SALE ROAD MAINTENANCE 

Affected Environment 

Some road maintenance work would be performed under the Baked Apple action 

alternatives on roads proposed for commercial use associated with the harvest. Drainage 

maintenance (properly shaping and sloping roadbeds, establishing proper ditch function, 

and opening plugged culverts) will be done prior to road use, performed as needed during 

operations, and thoroughly done after final use of each road. This work would occur on 

currently open roads and on currently closed roads that would be re-opened for timber 

haul and associated traffic. Timber sale road maintenance is necessary to reestablish 

functioning drainage systems where needed, to clear roadside brush and remove obstacles 

that impedes traffic or causes safety concerns, and to mitigate the wear and tear of roads 

from commercial truck traffic. 

The drainage work would include blading ditches and removing accumulated material 

from ditches, as well as blading native surface and aggregate surfaced roadbeds. Most of 

the length of roads 4720 and 4720-005 would need little drainage or blading maintenance 

work prior to commercial use, because this was accomplished with BAER activities. 

Haul roads other than 4720 and 4720-005, would require more maintenance work to make 

them suitable for timber sale use since they were not recently treated. These roads have 

not had drainage work, brushing, or blading performed for many years. Routine 

maintenance during timber sale use would depend on the amount of truck haul over the 

road, but typically consists only of one final blading and correction of any drainage 

problems that develop during use. Native-surfaced roads would have water bars installed 

and road barriers placed to prevent damage after commercial use is complete. Aggregate 

surfaced roads to be closed following use will be barricaded and treated with water bars if 

needed to prevent drainage problems. Asphalt patching work at several sites between 

milepost 4.90 and milepost 5.65 would also occur prior to commercial use on the 4714 

road. Timber sale road maintenance activities have been classified into four types in 

order to summarize the differences among the action alternatives (Table 56). 

Table 56. Timber Sale Road Maintenance Activities by Alternative. 

Maintenance Miles of Maintenance by Alternative 

Type* Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6 

1 5.9 5.9 6.1 3.7 4.6 

2 21.3 20.4 21.3 18.0 8.8 

3 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 

4 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 2.1 

Total Miles 

Maintained 

54.0 53.1 54.2 48.5 36.3 

*Type 1--Existing closed system roads (typically native surface) opened with the sale and needing 

drainage, brushing and blading work prior to use, minimal routine maintenance during use, 

followed by a final blading, water barring and barricading after use. 

Type 2--Existing open roads where drainage, brushing and blading work is needed prior to use, with 

minimal routine maintenance during use, followed by a final blading after use. 

Type 3--Routine maintenance required only, multiple bladings, with little or no work prior to use 

other than dust abatement. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

256

Type 4--Paved segment of road 4714, with light brushing, drainage maintenance, and asphalt repair 

work needed prior to use, very little routine maintenance or final maintenance. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

To address a Forest Plan Standard and Guideline (IV-83), a mitigation measure that limits 

ditch blading with the timber sale contract would apply to all Action alternatives to 

minimize ditch erosion. Timber sale administrators would implement this practice by 

designating only those areas where ditch blading is necessary, rather than allowing timber 

sale operators to proceed without such consideration. Consistent with the required 

mitigation measure, blading segments of ditch that flow directly into streams or where 

ditch relief culverts discharge in close proximity to streams, would be avoided. Where 

such ditch blading is absolutely necessary, a mitigation measure included in the timber 

sale contract to apply erosion control treatments to bladed ditches (such as mulching or 

placing sediment traps or filters in the ditches) would be implemented prior to the onset 

of winter weather. 

The reopening of existing closed roads and the blading activities on both open and reopened closed roads can result in short-term increased sediment delivery and a direct 

effect to the beneficial uses of water compared to doing no blading and no re-opening. 

This is due to the removal of vegetation and the loosening of soil surfaces making more 

material subject to erosion and water transport. However, by following Forest Plan 

Standards and Guidelines for only minimal ditch blading and by maintaining a functioning 

road drainage system without increasing flow from roads directly into streams, the road 

maintenance activities associated with the action alternatives would not significantly 

affect the timing, volume, rate, and character of sediment input, storage, or transport. 

Indirect Effects 

There is a potential for the Action alternatives to result in indirect effects to downstream 

aquatic conditions and the beneficial uses associated with timber sale road maintenance 

activities. However these effects are not considered significant because the small degree 

of potential sedimentation associated with such activities would be masked by the volume 

of flow in the North Umpqua River. Moreover, with preventative road maintenance that 

includes applying the standard and guideline for only minimal ditch blading and the 

application of erosion control measures on native surface roads following use, the 

sedimentation potential is expected to remain at low levels making the chances of 

indirect effects further downstream very low. 

Cumulative Effects of Road Work 

The limited amount of sediment delivery associated with the two road reconstruction sites 

and the road maintenance activities of treating roads before and after use is unlikely to 

result in a cumulative effect to the aquatic environment when added to road-related 

sedimentation associated with the past, present and reasonably foreseeable activities 

detailed in Tables 8-10 at the beginning of this chapter. Though the high road density in 

the planning area places the sediment regime outside the natural range of variability, the 

amount of short-term road-related sediment delivery from any of the Baked Apple action 

alternatives is very limited. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

257

The roads built to do commercial thinning and to complete regeneration harvest from the 

1950’s through the 1980’s that resulted in more than 4 miles of road per square mile of 

land can be expected to contribute to long-term risk of sedimentation. The various roadrelated, BAER activities displayed in Table 9 such as road grading, ditch cleaning, and site 

maintenance would contribute to short-term sedimentation over several years. The longterm contribution of sediment is reduced however by these BAER activities with an overall 

reduction in road-related sediment contributions. The reasonably foreseeable actions that 

may potentially contribute to cumulative road sedimentation include the Apple Seed 

Timber Stand Improvement project, the continued and future road work and the Felix 

Timber Sale. The temporary roads built for the Apple Seed project would be 

decommissioned and are not expected to contribute to long-term risk of sedimentation 

given their locations on flat to gentle ground. Soil disturbance associated with continued 

and future road work would contribute to short-term sedimentation over several years. 

The long-term contribution of sediment is reduced by continued road work with an overall 

reduction in road-related sediment contributions. The timber sale maintenance and haul 

on Road 4714 associated with the reasonably foreseeable Felix Timber Sale would 

potentially contribute to short-term sediment production in streams within the planning 

area. 

The potential for any of the action alternatives to result in a significant cumulative effect 

associated with road-related sedimentation is considered to be low or negligible since only 

short-term sedimentation is expected from the road reconstruction work and the road 

blading. These activities all have proven mitigation measures applied to them that reduce 

the actual direct effects to minimal levels; therefore, the cumulative effect of any action 

alternative on aquatic resources and the beneficial uses of water would be minimal as 

well. 

 

TIMBER HAUL 

Affected Environment 

Log truck tires detach pieces of crushed aggregate and finer materials from the matrix of 

the roadbed that would remain bound without the traffic. Steeper roads with little 

roadbed maintenance result in more dynamic “washboarding” and slipping with more 

detachment of bed materials. The transport of detached materials from the roadbed is 

accomplished by water running over the surface of the road and in the ditches. Without 

water on the road surface, there would not be much transport that could send sediment 

to streams. The transport of materials by water is much greater on rutted roads and 

loaded log trucks hauling in wet weather can create ruts. The presence of ruts increases 

the amount of material that would potentially deposit in a stream because concentrated 

water in the ruts detaches and transports road surface materials into ditches or directly 

into streams if the ruts direct the flow into streams. During rainstorms the ditches may 

also be flowing water, which aids in the transport of loosened road materials to streams. 

The season of haul under all action alternatives would be within the normal operating 

period with contract language stating that haul would be curtailed to avoid resource 

damage including road-related sediment production from timber haul. Haul could be 

curtailed during wet conditions anytime during the operating period if such damage is 

possible. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

258

All haul roads that would be used under all the action alternatives were assessed for their 

ability to withstand the haul associated with the Baked Apple project. Some roads (4714, 

4720 and 4720-005) planned for concentrated haul were assessed by collecting core 

samples from within the road bed and analyzed for the proportions of fine and coarse 

materials that make up the roadbed to determine if roads would withstand the projected 

amounts of haul. All haul roads were found to be adequate to support timber haul during 

the season of May 1st through November 15th (Geotechnical Engineering Report, Project 

Record) without having to add additional aggregate, as long as haul is shut down during 

times of intermittent wet weather that can potentially occur anytime during this period. 

Use of the roads outside this period would have required the addition of substantial 

amounts of aggregate to the roads to avoid roadbed damage and excess erosion. 

However none of the action alternatives would conduct winter haul (after November 15th). 

The timber haul analysis was based on typical weather patterns. “Unseasonable weather” 

could result in either a longer or a shorter acceptable season for haul, based on site 

specific road and weather conditions. The season of haul for all action alternatives would 

be the normal operating season established in the timber sale contract as May 1st through 

October 31st. An extended season haul up to November 15th, or possibly later would only 

occur if agreed to by the purchaser and the Forest Service. Season of haul would require 

weather and road conditions such that use of the roads would not lead to road or resource 

damage as stipulated in the timber sale contract. 

Segments of 4720 and 4720-005, which would be subjected to heavy truck traffic under 

the action alternatives, would be treated with dust abatement (calcium or magnesium 

chloride) to reduce surface wear, to mitigate traffic visibility problems, and to prevent 

road dust from entering streams. Without dust abatement excessive rutting and wash 

boarding would develop, leading to greater potential for surface erosion, especially on 

steeper road grades. Some segments of these roads with the greatest use would receive 

more treatments to lessen wear and sedimentation (Table 47). Dust abatement binds the 

aggregate surface together, greatly reducing the amount of detachment of surface 

particles, as well as making for a longer lasting road surface without washboards or 

rutting. Road blading would occur as part of the dust abatement application process. A 

mitigation measure would apply to all chemical dust abatement under all action 

alternatives requiring no treatment within of an average of 25 feet either side of road 

stream crossings on perennial streams, and no placement of chemical abatement material 

within one foot of the outside edge of all road ditch lines. 

 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

With Baked Apple, the controlled haul provision under the timber sale contract, use of 

dust abatement, and required blading to remove ruts as they develop during the haul 

would limit the amount of surface materials transported to streams from the roadbed. On 

sections of road without dust abatement, i.e. where restricted immediately adjacent to 

perennial stream crossings, blading may be required more often than where dust 

abatement is used. Blading would be kept as current as possible when wet weather is 

anticipated. 

If a light rain occurs on a non-rutted road surface for a short period of time, any detached 

particles are likely to be transport a short distance and be deposited back onto the 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

259

roadbed surface. With heavy sustained rainfalls on rutted roads, the material is likely to 

leave the roadbed. Most of the roads subject to heavy truck traffic (4720 and 4720-005) 

are insloped, and transported material is likely to move to the ditches. The 4720-255 

would also have substantial haul, but this road is outsloped, and far removed from 

streams. 

Very minimal sediment delivery from haul-related dust is expected under any action 

alternative because dust abatement would mitigate almost all effects. The no action 

alternative would result in no direct effects to the aquatic environment or the beneficial 

uses of water. 

Indirect Effects 

There is a potential for the Action alternatives to result in indirect effects to downstream 

aquatic conditions and beneficial uses associated with timber haul. However these effects 

are not considered significant because the small degree of potential sedimentation 

associated with such activities would be masked by the volume of flow in the North 

Umpqua River. Moreover, the avoidance of wet weather haul and other proven mitigation 

measures are expected to keep the sedimentation potential to low levels making the 

chances of effects to beneficial uses further downstream very low. 

Cumulative Effects 

The limited amount of sediment delivery associated with the timber haul is unlikely to 

result in a cumulative effect to the aquatic environment when added to road-related 

sedimentation associated with the past, present and reasonably foreseeable activities 

detailed in Tables 8-10. Though the high road density in the planning area places the 

sediment regime outside the natural range of variability, the amount of short-term roadrelated sediment delivery from any of the Baked Apple action alternatives is very limited 

and not considered significant. 

Conclusions 

By following standards and guidelines for only minimal ditch blading; by not increasing the 

transport of sediment into ditches that flow directly into streams; and by maintaining the 

proper function of road drainage structures and surfaces, the road-related activities and 

uses associated with the Baked Apple action alternatives would not significantly affect the 

timing, volume, rate and character of sediment input, storage, or transfer. There would 

be no appreciable change in the sediment regime caused by road-related activities in the 

Panther Creek subwatershed or at the scale of the Middle North 5th-field watershed. The 

road-related activities associated with the action alternatives would not degrade the 

sediment and turbidity indicator considered by NOAA Fisheries during conferencing. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

260

WATERSHED CONDITIONS AND FISH DISTRIBUTION 

The maintenance and protection of watershed conditions is addressed within several 

objectives of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy. The need to maintain and restore the 

distribution, diversity, and complexity of watershed and landscape-scale features to 

ensure protection of aquatic systems is the focus of ACS objective 1. NOAA Fisheries uses 

the assessment of four indicators of watershed condition during conferencing for fish 

species that have the potential for federal listing. Three of these indicators are 

addressed in this section—watershed road density, disturbance history, and condition of 

riparian reserves. The fourth watershed condition indicator, management-related 

landslide rates is addressed previously in this chapter under Erosion and Sedimentation. 

Affected Environment 

Panther Creek 6th field Sub-watershed 

Panther Creek is a major tributary to the North Umpqua River with a watershed area of 

12,167 acres. Within the sub-watershed there are approximately 87 miles of road 

equating to 4.0 miles of road per square mile. Panther Creek sub-watershed supports 

populations of both anadromous and resident salmonids (Figure 67) as well as several 

species of non-game fish. Salmonid species present include winter and summer Oregon 

Coast steelhead, resident rainbow trout, Oregon Coast coho salmon, and resident 

cutthroat trout. Some of the rainbow trout may have originated from introductions of 

hatchery trout into various ponds and sumps throughout the basin. There is also the 

potential for use by anadromous (ocean going) and fluvial cutthroat trout53 well up into 

the basin as well as Oregon Coast spring chinook in the very lower reaches of Panther 

Creek however, to date neither of these species has been documented in the Panther 

Creek sub-watershed. Oregon Coast (OC) coho, Umpqua River cutthroat trout, OC chinook 

salmon and the Umpqua chub are on the USDA Forest Service Region 6 sensitive species 

list54. 

The Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed is subdivided into four 7th field drainages. 

They are Panther Creek, Limpy Creek, Fairy Creek, and Bachelor Creek. In addition a 

small portion of the Apple Creek face is included in the Baked Apple Timber Sale planning 

area. This includes approximately 1,760 acres immediately northeast of the Limpy 

drainage that drains directly into the North Umpqua River. 

 

53 Fluvial cutthroat are a stock of cutthroat that spawn and rear in tributary streams and migrate to a larger 

river to spend their adult life, returning to spawn in the natal tributary). 54 Sensitive species are managed by the Forest Service to prevent the likelihood that these species would need 

to be listed under the Endangered Species Act.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

261

Figure 67. Fish distribution in the portion of the Middle North Umpqua 5th field 

watershed managed by the Forest Service, including Panther Creek. 

7th field Drainages of Panther Sub-watershed 

Panther Creek Drainage 

The Panther Creek 7th field drainage is 4,255 acres in size and is located in the northwest 

corner of the Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed. Panther Creek drainage is 

dominated by moderately steep, dissected land forms interspersed with areas of gentle 

terrain. Side slopes in Panther Creek can exceed 80 percent. The stream has 

approximately 1 mile of anadromous fish habitat and 1 mile of resident salmonid habitat. 

The lower 0.3 miles of Panther Creek is habitat for Oregon Coast coho salmon. 

Timber harvest activities and road building began in the 1950’s and continued up to the 

early 1990’s. Approximately 43% of the Panther Creek 7th field drainage has experienced 

timber harvest. About 41% of the riparian reserves along perennial streams have 

experienced harvest. The Panther Creek drainage has approximately 30 miles of road 

miles of road with a road density of 4.6 miles per square mile of land. 

This stream can be characterized by the impacted condition of its lower 1.5 miles. Much 

of the habitat in this lower reach is extremely over simplified, with very few pieces of 

large wood, very little deep pool habitat, and an overabundance of bedrock in both the 

stream channel and stream banks. While this channel appears to be very stable, it is 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

262

lacking the complexity that once existed, resulting in a less productive stream system 

overall. 

The proximity of the valley bottom road55, as well as extensive timber harvest and stream 

clean out along the stream channel, resulted in the removal of the majority of the 

existing and future sources of large wood. Over time, this lack of channel complexity 

allowed the erosive forces of winter and spring flows to scour much of the channel down 

to bedrock. Without restorative actions the recovery process would be delayed for 

decades due to the shortage of available large wood adjacent to the stream channel. 

Restoration efforts in the 1980’s included the installation of several log weirs in portions 

of lower Panther and lower Limpy Creeks. These structures have trapped sediment and 

gravels and have provided some complexity to the stream channel. 

Limpy Creek 

The Limpy Creek 7th field drainage is 3,134 acres in size and is located in the eastern 

portion of the Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed. Limpy Creek drainage is dominated 

by steep dissected land forms interspersed with smaller areas of gentle terrain. Side 

slopes in the Limpy Creek drainage can exceed 80%. The stream contains approximately 1 

mile of anadromous fish habitat and 1 mile of resident salmonid habitat. The lower 0.6 

miles of Limpy Creek is habitat for Oregon Coast coho salmon. 

Timber harvest activities and road building began in the 1950’s and continued up to the 

early 1990’s. Approximately 36% of the Limpy Creek 7th field drainage has experienced 

timber harvest. About 19% of the riparian reserves along perennial streams have 

experienced harvest. The Limpy Creek drainage has a total of 17.3 miles of road. This 

equates to about a road density of 3.5 miles per square mile. 

Limpy Creek has experienced the least amount of timber harvest of the four drainages. As 

with 2 of the other 3 drainages the lack of large wood and over abundance of channel 

scoured to bedrock is clearly evident in the lower reaches which have valley bottom roads 

adjacent to them. Pool habitat is generally limited in quantity and quality and there is an 

overall lack of complex habitat within these reaches. 

It is likely that the relatively large amount of timber harvest that has occurred in the Fairy 

and Bachelor drainages, which drain into Limpy Creek, have resulted in peak stream flows 

that are higher than historic flows during storm events. The extent of this flow change is 

unknown, but it may have contributed to the simplification of habitat over time. 

Limpy Creek below Fairy Creek and Panther Creek below the confluence with Limpy Creek 

(Figure 67) appear to be the most highly utilized anadromous habitat in the Panther Creek 

6th field sub-watershed. It is likely that low summer flows and limited pool habitat in the 

other anadromous drainages force a large portion of rearing steelhead out of their natal 

streams and into the larger waters of lower Limpy and Panther Creeks. Oregon Coast coho 

salmon spawn and rear in the lower 0.3 miles of Panther Creek below Limpy Creek and in 

the lower 0.6 miles of Limpy Creek below Fairy Creek. Coho migration is blocked by a falls 

at Fairy Creek. There is no data or anecdotal information that suggests coho migrate 

above this point. At this point there is a water fall that blocks migration both into the 

higher reaches of Limpy Creek, as well as into Fairy Creek. 

 

55 A valley bottom road parallels a stream (in the valley of the drainage). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

263

Restoration efforts in the 1980’s included the installation of several log weirs in portions 

of lower Panther and lower Limpy Creeks. These structures have trapped sediment and 

gravels and have provided some complexity to the stream channel. 

Fairy Creek 

Fairy Creek 7th field drainage is 2,055 acres in size and is located in the west central 

portion of the Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed. Fairy Creek is dominated by steep 

dissected land forms interspersed with smaller areas of gentle terrain. Side slopes in the 

Fairy Creek drainage can exceed 80 percent. The stream contains approximately 0.5 miles 

of anadromous fish habitat (steelhead and cutthroat) and 2.3 miles of resident cutthroat 

trout habitat. There are no Oregon Coast coho salmon or coho habitat in the Fairy Creek 

drainage. 

Timber harvest activities and road building began in the 1950’s and continued up to the 

early 1990’s. Approximately 49% of the Fairy Creek 7th field drainage has experienced 

timber harvest. Nearly 41% of the riparian reserves along perennial streams have 

experienced harvest. The Fairy Creek drainage has approximately 14 miles of road with a 

road density of 4.2 miles per square mile. 

Fairy Creek is probably the most impacted 7th field drainage in the Panther Creek subwatershed. This creek was subjected to many of the same management impacts as the 

Panther Creek drainage, with extensive timber harvest and a valley bottom road present 

along its lower 1.5 miles. Additionally, a large road-related debris flow occurred in the 

headwater reaches of the stream. This torrent was triggered by the large storm event of 

1964 and effectively scoured the channel and destabilized the stream banks for 

approximately 1.5 miles. Many of the stream banks in this area are still a chronic source 

of fine sediment from fluvial erosion. 

In 1993 and 1995 a total of 80 large logs were placed in the lower 0.5 miles of Fairy Creek 

to jump start the long-term restoration process in the stream. Since their placement some 

of these logs have captured additional woody material and are trapping and storing 

sediment. Over time it is expected that these structures will continue to collect additional 

woody material and continue to trap and store sediment and fine bed load materials. Log 

placement in Fairy Creek was coupled with riparian planting and road-related restoration 

(up-sizing culverts and pulling back overly steep fills). 

Although some restoration efforts have occurred, fish habitat in Fairy Creek is still in a 

simplified condition. As in the Panther drainage there is still an abundance of high 

gradient shallow riffle habitat. Additionally, observations indicate that Fairy Creek 

contains higher levels of fine sediment during winter storm events and base winter flows 

when compared to other streams in the Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed. 

Bachelor Creek 

Bachelor Creek 7th field drainage is 2,723 acres in size and is located between Fairy Creek 

and Limpy Creek in the southeastern portion of the Panther Creek 6th field subwatershed. Bachelor Creek is dominated by steep dissected land forms interspersed with 

smaller areas of gentle terrain. Side slopes in the Bachelor Creek can exceed 80%. This 

small stream is steep and rugged, and only provides approximately 0.1 mile of 

anadromous fish habitat near its mouth. It provides about 0.6 mile of resident salmonid 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

264

habitat above the blockage to anadromous fish. There are no Oregon Coast coho salmon or 

habitat in this drainage. 

Timber harvest activities and road building began in the 1950’s with a majority occurring 

in the 1960’s and late 1980’s. Approximately 47% of the Bachelor Creek 7th field drainage 

has experienced timber harvest. Nearly 38% of the riparian reserves along perennial 

streams have experienced harvest. The Bachelor Creek drainage has a total of 19 miles of 

road with a road density in the drainage of 4.5 miles per square mile. 

As in Panther and Fairy Creek drainages, Bachelor Creek has also experienced 

management-related impacts with riparian harvest and a valley bottom road adjacent to 

the channel. Levels of large wood have been limited in the upper portions of the 

mainstem where timber harvest allowed access for removal. 

While Bachelor Creek provides little habitat for anadromous fish it is important for its 

contribution to the resident trout population in the Panther Creek 6th field subwatershed. To the best of our knowledge, no barrier modifications have been made nor 

have any ponds or sumps been stocked within the drainage. It is possible that the resident 

trout populations present in this system have not been influenced by outside gene pools 

and represent a “pure” strain of resident fish that have evolved within the Panther Creek 

sub-watershed. 

Bachelor Creek is also important as a contributor to stream flow to downstream habitats 

in Limpy and Panther Creeks during the dry summer months. When compared to the flow 

of Limpy Creek above its confluence with Bachelor Creek, the flow provided by Bachelor 

Creek is typically almost twice that amount. The respective drainage areas of each are 

nearly identical. This flow contribution is important in that the majority of anadromous 

fish within the Panther sub-watershed rear in the lower one mile of Limpy Creek and 

lower Panther Creek. In addition Oregon Coast coho salmon spawn in lower Panther Creek 

below Limpy Creek and the lower 0.25 miles of Limpy Creek. 

Tributary Channels of the Various 7th field drainages 

Class IV first and second order stream channel conditions vary widely within the Panther 

Creek sub-watershed. These tributary streams have experienced management reflective 

of the management seen within their respective drainages. Class IV channels typically do 

not have valley bottom roads because they are located on steep terrain with narrow 

floodplains. The tributary channels have had a higher degree of harvest alongside and 

across the channels with no buffers, plus many have had roads built across them. Many 

of these channels have gradients in excess of 40% with side slopes up to and exceeding 

80%. Harvest through these streams has reduced or removed existing and future large 

wood. In these areas, fluvial erosion has caused channel down cutting and increased 

sediment delivery to downstream habitats. Other class IV channels that have had little or 

no harvest are in better condition, yet some sections of unharvested tributary channels 

show signs of excessive scour. Roads, and roads coupled with harvest above these areas 

of mature forest have impacted these channels. 

Apple Creek Face Drainage 

The part of Apple Creek drainage included in the Baked Apple Planning area is 

approximately 1,760 acres in size and is located northeast of the Limpy Creek drainage. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

265

This face drainage56 has less than 0.25 miles of non-fish bearing perennial stream and 

approximately 1 mile of class IV intermittent channel. These streams feed directly into 

the North Umpqua River. Harvest has occurred in this drainage mostly near the ridge top 

and on the upper slopes. The very steep side slopes that fall away towards the North 

Umpqua have largely remained un-harvested. Across this portion of Apple Creek Drainage 

there are approximately 6.8 miles of road, equating to 2.5 miles per square mile. Because 

of the steep nature of the landscape very little roading occurs in riparian reserves. 

Channel conditions range from fair to good. Most of the channels are in good condition 

with ample amounts of large wood. 

Summary of the Affected Environment of Panther Creek and its Drainages 

The Panther Creek sub-watershed has been extensively impacted by past timber harvest, 

roading, and associated management activities. Existing road densities are high within 

the Panther Creek sub-watershed at 4.0 miles per square mile of land area. Therefore, 

this NOAA Fisheries indicator is classified as ‘not properly functioning’ because road 

densities are greater than the 3 miles per square mile threshold. Although the subwatershed had experienced substantial hydrologic recovery over the last several decades, 

past harvest and management has maintained a strong signature across the landscape. 

The Apple fire of 2002, although within the range of natural variability, has set back the 

recovery significantly. Therefore disturbance history is also classified as ‘not properly 

functioning’ because of the amount of past and recent (Apple Fire) disturbance in this 6th 

field watershed. The final watershed condition indicator covered in this section is 

riparian reserves. Riparian reserves are considered ‘at risk’ within the Panther Creek subwatershed because they are less than 80% intact. Approximately 66% of Limpy and 33% of 

Bachelor Creek riparian reserve were stand-replaced; plus, the sub-watershed riparian 

zones have experienced timber harvest, road construction, and stream clean-out. 

The quality of habitat within the Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed varies within the 

7th field drainages and ranges from good to poor. The majority of the aquatic habitat 

within the drainages can be described as less than optimum. Several areas were in poor 

condition and in need of active restoration. Most of these areas with poor habitat 

conditions have valley bottom roads or harvest units adjacent to them and have had their 

large wood component removed. 

The large wood and log jams formerly present in this system served the function of storing 

sediment, creating pools, slowing high water velocities, providing spawning habitat for 

resident and anadromous salmonids, and providing a “stepped” channel profile along 

which much of the gradient drop was over short wood-created falls. This stepped channel 

type originally gave a large portion of the stream an overall lower gradient, contained 

more spawning and rearing habitat, and had better accessibility to spawning and rearing 

habitat than might otherwise be available. The removal of the large wood from the 

system reduced the complexity and roughness of many portions of the channel to the 

point where many of these channel segments were scoured down to bedrock. Although 

much of the bedrock is rough in nature and frequently provides adequate pool habitat in 

terms of quantity, most of the pools lack the complexity and diversity necessary to 

support all portions of a healthy aquatic ecosystem. 

 

56 Face drainages are typically small tributaries to a larger stream or river that typically drain a small area 

immediately adjacent to or facing a larger river. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

266

Observations of the Panther Creek system during storm events indicate that this system 

has a high level of turbidity when compared to other watersheds of similar size. Surveys in 

the Fairy Creek and Panther Creek drainages provide insights into the potential causes of 

this condition. Both of these drainages have areas of mass wasting and/or stream bank 

cutting. A majority of these areas appear to be management- related and are chronic 

sources of erosion and sediment during storm events. 

Excessive amounts of suspended and deposited sediment can limit spawning habitat and 

success. Survival and emergence of steelhead embryos and other salmonid species is 

reduced when fine sediments constitute greater than 20%-25% of the substrate (Bjornn 

and Reiser 1991). High proportions of fine sediment in the substrate reduce survival to 

emergence by entrapping newly hatched embryos, decreasing dissolved oxygen, and 

reducing intragravel water flow. 

The substrate composition of both the streambed and the stream banks can be a good 

indicator of the general character/health of the habitat found within the stream 

ecosystem. Substrates in the surveyed portions of the Panther Creek drainages were found 

to be relatively coarse ranging from cobble dominated to bedrock dominated. These types 

of substrates are generally considered stable. 

Pebble counts were made during stream surveys that provide a profile of the substrate 

composition. Pebble counts indicated that fine sediment, those particles 6 mm in 

diameter or less, did not comprise a major portion of the substrate profile within the 

basin. 

Several stream reaches appear to contain an abundance of bed rock in both the streambed 

and stream banks. The lower 1.5 miles of Bachelor Creek and the lower 1.3 miles of 

Limpy Creeks are dominated by bedrock. In certain cases, such as in Limpy Creek, it is 

likely that the dominance of bedrock can be attributed, in part, to the removal of large 

wood from the channel, which allowed the majority of the accumulated gravels and 

cobbles to be flushed from the system thereby exposing the bedrock. In other cases, such 

the lower 1.5 miles in Bachelor Creek, the dominance of bedrock can be attributed to the 

steep nature of the stream channel and the deeply incised narrow gorge through which 

the stream flows. 

In general, channels that are dominated by bedrock are extremely stable but not very 

productive biologically. These channel areas often lack the complexity of substrates that 

provide hiding cover for juvenile salmonids as well as interstitial spaces to support healthy 

and diverse populations of aquatic invertebrates. 

Post-Fire Watershed Conditions 

The Apple fire of 2002 burned across an area of 18,000 acres. Most of the 12,167 acre 

Panther Creek sub-watershed is within the fire perimeter. Much of the burn was mosaic in 

nature. Approximately 4,000 acres burned as a stand replacing fire. Most of the stand 

replacing burn area occurred in the Limpy Creek 7th field drainage with lesser amounts in 

the Panther, Fairy, and Bachelor Creek drainages. 

The 2002 fire is expected to cause changes to stream channel conditions within the 

Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed over the next 2 decades or longer. Stream channel 

conditions in Limpy and Bachelor Creek would be particularly susceptible to changes due 

to the extent of stand-replacing burn that occurred there (Table 57). 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

267

Table 57. Drainage Areas that Experienced Stand Replacing Fire in 2002. 

Percent by Area 7th field Drainages - % 

Panther Limpy Fairy Bachelor 

Riparian Areas 

Total Drainage 

9.2 

7.2 

66 

61 

26 

25 

33 

28 

Not only are changes expected to occur over time, some changes were apparent shortly 

after the fire such as the stream temperature and water quality changes described earlier 

in this chapter. An influx of sediment can be expected over the next decade or two, but 

observations during the first winter following the fire revealed that little to no 

sedimentation had occurred. 

Environmental Effects on Watershed Conditions 

Road Density 

None of the action alternatives would build any new permanent roads nor would any 

alternative decommission any permanent roads; therefore road density would not change 

in the sub-watershed as a result of any alternative. All action alternatives propose 

varying amounts of temporary road (Table 6 in Chapter 2). The minimum amount of 

temporary road that would be constructed is 1.24 miles, while the greatest amount would 

be 2.32 miles. Not all of the temporary roads are new construction because pre-existing 

temporary roads, which had not been restored in the past, would be used again and 

decommissioned following use with the Baked Apple sale. New temporary road 

construction ranges from 0.8 miles to 1.05 miles. Alternative 5 does not propose 

construction or use of temporary roads. 

The use of existing temporary roads or the building of temporary roads followed by their 

subsequent decommissioning immediately following use for the timber sale would not lead 

to any long-term effects on watershed conditions because none of the temporary roads 

have ditchlines, none would have permanent compaction and none would cut across 

hillslopes; all are on ridgetop locations where hydrologic processes would not be affected. 

Disturbance History 

The action alternatives would only remove dead trees (with a few exceptions), which do 

not have crowns to contribute to hydrologic recovery and do not have live roots to 

contribute to slope stability. All of the high risk unstable areas would not be salvaged in 

all action alternatives. In Alternative 3, the high-moderate risk areas were also removed 

from harvest consideration, further decreasing the risk of landslides occurring without the 

large wood component in this alternative. None of the Baked Apple alternatives are 

expected to result in any direct effects to the watershed disturbance process. 

The indirect and cumulative effects are equivalent to those displayed in detail in the peak 

flow section of this Chapter. This indicator is not expected to be affected by the 

implementation of any of the action alternatives. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

268

Riparian Reserves 

The Baked Apple project involves one alternative that would conduct activity within the 

riparian reserve. Alternative 4 would harvest timber from approximately 32 acres of 

riparian reserve in Limpy Creek. These harvest areas are within either class I or II streams 

and are designed to meet long-term riparian reserve objectives by lessening the risk of 

future fires in the portions proposed for treatment. There would be no harvest within 180 

feet of any class II or II stream channel. In addition to the small amount of riparian 

harvest, there would also be some fuel reduction within the riparian reserve on a total of 

233 acres designed to meet long-term objectives for the riparian reserve allocation. All 

riparian treatments under Alternative 4 would be directly adjacent to existing upland 

harvest units. No treatment would occur in the primary floodplain or within 75 feet of 

class I and II stream channels while class III and IV channels would be protected by a 50 

foot no activity buffer. Also, some logging corridors may occur across riparian reserves 

where riparian reserve trees could be knocked down or in some case would have to be 

fallen. In all such cases, the trees would be left in place within the riparian reserve. 

Direct Effects 

Implementation of Alternative 4 is not expected to directly impact the condition of 

riparian reserves. This is because the extraction of dead trees from the riparian reserve 

along class I and II streams would only take place on a total of 32 acres and the removal of 

these trees would occur outside of a 180 foot buffer. Most of the wood recruitment to 

streams occurs within the first 65 feet of the stream (Murphy and Koski, 1989; McDade et 

al 1990). In addition forest fuels reduction would occur across 233 acres of riparian 

reserve. A minimum 75 foot, no treatment buffer would be in place along class I and II 

streams and a 50 foot buffer along class III and IV stream channels. Coho salmon habitat 

is approximately 0.25 miles downstream of the nearest riparian treatment unit. This 

alternative was designed in part to meet the objectives of the riparian reserve land 

allocation, on a limited scale, by lessening the risk of the effects of future fires to riparian 

conditions. 

The other action alternatives would treat no riparian reserve acres, so no short-term 

direct effect to LWM recruitment is expected as a result of implementation. The 

incidental loss of standing riparian reserve trees due to logging corridors that bisect 

riparian reserves is expected to be of minimal direct impact to riparian reserves due to 

the limited scope and scale of such impacts and the fact that any trees that are knocked 

over or that are felled would remain within the reserve. None of the Baked Apple 

alternatives are expected to result in any direct effects to the availability of large wood 

resource entering streams. Since LWM is pivotal to the condition of pool character and to 

the maintenance of low velocity refuge habitats, and since LWM recruitment would not be 

directly affected by any of the Baked Apple alternatives, neither pool nor velocity refuge 

habitats would be affected by implementation of any Baked Apple alternative. 

There are two stream crossing reconstruction sites associated with the action alternatives. 

Both locations are on forest road 4714 in the Panther Creek drainage. One of the sites 

crosses an intermittent, class IV channel while the other crosses a perennial class III 

channel. Both of these crossings are high up in the watershed far from fish distribution 

and at least 3.5 miles from coho habitat. This reconstruction would impact the riparian 

reserve by removing approximately three, 14-inch to 16-inch green Douglas-fir trees from 

the existing fill slope. The cut logs would be placed back on the finished slopes. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

269

The direct, indirect and cumulative effects of these road treatments within riparian 

reserves are disclosed previously in the Road Construction Sites section of this Chapter. 

Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

Alternative 4 could potentially result in an indirect beneficial effect on the future 

condition of LWM in riparian areas and streams because it may result in potentially less 

riparian areas burned in the future compared to the other Baked Apple alternatives. The 

rest of the alternatives would be less likely to result in such an indirect effect, 

particularly Alternatives 1 and 5, which result in the most risk of future fires due to the 

residual fuels left after implementation. 

The potential of experiencing larger fires in the future due to greater amounts of residual 

fuels left as a result of no action (Alternative 1) or left following implementation of 

Alternative 5 has the potential of becoming part of a cumulative effect to riparian 

reserves when added to past management activities that harvested along riparian areas 

during the decades of the 1950’s through the 1980’s, the very long-term effects of roads 

that parallel and cross streams negating any recovery of riparian vegetation within such 

roads, plus the existing and future ongoing effects of the 2002 Apple fire within riparian 

reserves. 

Conclusions 

Watershed conditions would likely be maintained in the existing, post-fire conditions, and 

none of the Baked Apple alternatives would tend to cause any of the watershed condition 

indicators discussed above to be degraded as a result of implementation. In the longer 

term, alternatives that leave more residual fuels may lead to larger future fires 

potentially affecting watershed conditions of the 6th-field Panther Creek watershed with 

some minimal downstream effects in the North Umpqua River. Larger fires could also 

spread into the 5th-field Middle North Umpqua watershed potentially setting back 

watershed conditions at a broader scale. 

STREAM HABITATS 

The maintenance and protection of stream habitats is the focus of several objectives of 

the Aquatic Conservation Strategy. The maintenance and restoration of the physical 

integrity of shorelines, banks, and bottom configurations is addressed in objective 3. ACS 

objective 8 addresses the supply and distribution of large woody material and ACS 

objective 9 focuses on the long-term maintenance and restoration of habitat for riparian 

dependent species. NOAA Fisheries uses the assessment of five habitat elements during 

conferencing for fish species that may become listed. These habitat features rely, in 

part, on the presence of large woody material for proper functioning. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

270

STREAM SUBSTRATE 

Affected Environment 

The composition of the streambed substrate changes over time and usually reflects the 

disturbance history in a watershed. The environmental baseline used by NOAA Fisheries 

for conferencing places stream substrate ‘at risk’ in the Panther Creek sub-watershed 

because the area of streambed covered by gravel and cobble is less than the area of 

streambed that is bedrock. 

Stream surveys from the 1990’s indicated that the Panther Creek sub-watershed, including 

its four 7th field drainages, was dominated by relatively coarse substrate and bedrock. 

Interspersed within the coarse substrates are areas of smaller cobbles and gravels. These 

surveys reported that fine sediment was not adversely impacting the aquatic system. It is 

likely that there are more extensive areas of exposed bedrock stream channel than prior 

to management in the sub-watershed. Yet, widespread wild fires over the decades might 

have also resulted in areas of bedrock due to increased peak flows following fires. Timber 

was clear-cut, roads were built, and wood was removed from stream channels. As a 

result, increased peak flows/fluvial erosion coupled with destabilized hill slopes and lack 

of in-stream wood caused channels to be flushed of much of their gravels and cobbles. 

Stand replacing fire can affect in-stream substrates. Fine sediment can be more easily 

eroded from burned hill slopes while the risk of mass wasting is increased due to loss of 

tree root strength. In-stream large woody material can be incinerated thereby releasing 

trapped sediment and gravels to be flushed from the area. Elevated sedimentation of 

stream beds from the fire-related surface erosion across the sub-watershed would be 

expected to recover to pre-fire levels in 3 to 5 years. The elevated risk of mass wasting 

and fluvial erosion is expected to be longer lived. In years where precipitation is at or 

below normal and no significant rain on snow events occur, mass wasting and increased 

fluvial erosion would not be expected to be problematic. Conversely, if the subwatershed were to experience high intensity, long duration rain or rain-on-snow there 

would likely be a higher incidence of mass wasting and fluvial erosion. These events, plus 

the scale and intensity of the fire in the sub-watershed, are within the range of natural 

variability. 

Large amounts of sediment and other fines delivered to the stream could affect a change 

in the composition of the substrate. By filling in the interstitial spaces57 of the stream bed 

substrate, the overall character and health of the stream can be affected. Substrate can 

also be flushed from a stream channel by peak flows. The instream wood additions 

occurring in the fall of 2002 will help to moderate water velocities in the winter and trap, 

store, and meter fine sediment and larger gravels that enter the stream, improving 

aquatic habitat for fish and other aquatic organisms. 

 

57 Interstitial spaces are the cracks and crevices between gravel and cobble bed materials that are important 

habitats for aquatic organisms such as aquatic insects and juvenile fish. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

271

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

None of the Baked Apple alternatives are expected to result in any direct effects to 

stream substrate. Stream channel substrates in the harvest areas are very coarse, 

dominated by cobbles, small boulders, and bedrock. These types of channels are very 

stable and resilient to disturbance. In all action alternatives highly sensitive hillslope 

areas would be eliminated from salvage activities to reduce the potential of mass wasting 

occurring without the large wood component. In Alternative 3 the high-moderate 

probability areas for mass wasting were removed from salvage areas. By leaving the dead 

trees on these sites the potential for mass wasting is not decreased but if a mass wasting 

were to occur the snags would be incorporated with the slide and potentially delivered to 

the stream as LWM. Moreover, the large wood associated with the slide would act to 

slow, store, and meter out the sediment over time improving the long-term character of 

the substrate. 

Alternative 4 proposes a small amount of riparian treatment. Riparian fuel treatments as 

prescribed in Alternative 4 would have minimal ground disturbance and would not occur 

on a widespread basis. There would be no fuels treatments in the active floodplain or 

within 75 feet (whichever is greater) of class I and II streams. Along class III and IV 

streams there would be no fuels activity within 50 feet of the stream channel. Riparian 

harvest in this alternative would only occur outside a 180 foot buffer. 

The mechanisms that could cause a change in stream substrate are not expected to be 

significantly altered by any of the Baked Apple action alternatives. Peak flows are 

expected to increase as a result of the fire, but not due to the implementation of any of 

the Baked Apple alternatives. Surface erosion has already begun to subside because 

eroded materials are beginning to be retained by the regrowth of herbaceous and woody 

vegetation. Large wood has been placed in stream channels which will trap, store, and 

meter out sediments over time. Stream banks would be protected by maintaining 

adequate stream side buffers. Finally, mass wasting, the most significant mechanism that 

could directly affect substrate character is not expected to be affected by any of the 

action alternatives. 

Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

Alternatives 1 and 5 that result in more risk of larger fires in the future compared to the 

rest of the alternatives, could indirectly affect stream substrate by leading to more 

erosion and potential sedimentation of stream substrates. This would depend on whether 

future fire starts escape, and whether such fires are followed by intense winter weather. 

Cumulative effects to stream substrates are not expected under any alternative since the 

scope and scale of the potential direct and indirect effects associated with the Baked 

Apple project are very limited and not likely be of a magnitude to result in a cumulative 

effect. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

272

Affected Environment 

LARGE WOODY MATERIAL 

The presence and future availability of large woody material in riparian areas and streams 

is key to attaining stream habitat complexity and stability to ensure the proper 

functioning of aquatic systems. Stream surveys indicate that LWM in the Panther Creek 

6th field sub-watershed is below the range of natural variability due to past management 

activities. The environmental baseline used by NOAA Fisheries for conferencing places 

LWM in the ‘at risk’ category for the Panther sub-watershed because past riparian harvest 

continues to limit recruitment. The BAER inchannel work and the new recruitment 

potential associated with the Apple Fire is expected to improve the trend in Limpy and 

Bachelor Creeks, moving these drainages within or near the natural range of variability 

and within a baseline of properly functioning in the next decade. 

Within the main stem channel of Limpy Creek, twenty-four log structures were 

constructed. Within the lower 0.5 miles of Bachelor Creek, six log structures were 

completed. One hundred and twenty-five logs were used along approximately 3.5 miles of 

stream. Structures consist of a single log to complex multi log jams. These structures 

were designed and placed in areas of the channel where constrictions would naturally 

capture large wood and in areas where large wood had been removed during past stream 

clean-out. The structures are designed to capture, store and meter out sediments and 

gravels over time as well as capture additional large and small woody material migrating 

downstream. Fairy Creek has had approximately eighty pieces of large wood added to its 

channel in the mid 1990’s, and lower Panther and Limpy Creeks had several wood 

structures placed in the 1980’s. Large woody material placed in Fairy and Panther stream 

channels prior to the Apple Fire of 2002 survived the burn. 

POOL CHARACTER 

Pools within streams are important habitats, particularly for fish. The environmental 

baseline used by NOAA fisheries for conferencing places pool characteristics ‘at risk’ in 

the Panther sub-watershed due to a reduction in pool habitat by area of stream. Timber 

harvest and road building have been contributors to the over all reduction of pool 

character because of the effect to sediment routing, flow regime, and large wood 

recruitment--important factors in pool formation and maintenance. Removal of large 

wood from the stream channels has played a major role in the decrease in pool habitat. 

Pool habitat in the sub-watershed will likely degrade over the short-term due to the 

effects of the fire on stream morphology. The accelerated sedimentation process 

following the fire may fill some existing pool habitat. This can be expected to be offset in 

part by the post-fire wood additions in both main stem and tributary channels. 

The addition of large wood into Limpy and Bachelor Creeks will help the streams to create 

new pools and may enhance existing pools. Large wood will trap sediment and gravel and 

help create scour, dam, and plunge pools. Large wood placed in smaller tributary 

channels will also trap and store sediment, as well as moderate flow velocity from these 

lower order channels. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

273

LOW VELOCITY REFUGE HABITAT 

Low velocity refugia exist in areas where the stream gradient is less than 3%. These 

habitats are important to fish, especially in the winter when they seek out such areas in 

order to survive peak flows. The environmental baseline used by NOAA fisheries for 

conferencing places low velocity refuge habitats ‘at risk’ in the Panther sub-watershed 

due to limited availability of such refuges within low gradient sections of Panther, Limpy, 

and Fairy Creeks. 

Stream surveys indicate that planning area channels are predominantly moderate to high 

gradient, incised channels interspersed with short segments of lower gradient channel. 

Large woody material is the driver for maintaining properly functioning refugia within the 

low gradient sections of main stem reaches of Limpy, Bachelor, Fairy and Panther Creeks. 

Given the large wood placement in Limpy and Bachelor Creeks as well as the new 

recruitment potential from the fire along these streams (Table 54), both are expected to 

move within the natural range of variability for low velocity refuge habitat within a 

decade. Velocity refuge habitat in lower Fairy and Panther Creeks is expected to remain 

static due to less large wood present now and less recruitment potential in the future. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

The Umpqua National Forest LRMP has a Standard and Guideline that calls for the 

retention of streamside trees and snags likely to fall into the stream in the future (IV-33). 

Alternative 4 would harvest some standing dead timber from the riparian reserve land 

allocation to reduce fire risk. Implementation of Alternative 4 is not expected to 

measurably impact current or future levels of LWM. This is because the extraction of dead 

trees from the riparian reserve along class I and II streams would only take place on a 

total of 32 acres and the removal of these trees would occur outside of a 180 foot buffer. 

Most of the wood recruitment to streams occurs within the first 65 feet of the stream 

(Murphy and Koski 1989; McDade et al 1990). In addition forest fuels reduction would 

occur across 233 acres of riparian reserve. A minimum 75 foot, no treatment buffer would 

be in place along class I and II streams and a 50 foot buffer along class III and IV stream 

channels. Coho salmon habitat is approximately 0.25 miles downstream of the nearest 

riparian treatment unit. 

Alternative 4 would be consistent with the Forest Plan direction. The other action 

alternatives would treat no riparian reserve acres, so no affect to LWM recruitment is 

expected. None of the Baked Apple alternatives are expected to result in any direct 

effects to the availability of large wood resource entering streams. Since LWM is pivotal 

to the condition of pool character and to the maintenance of low velocity refuge habitats, 

and since LWM recruitment would not be directly affected by any of the Baked Apple 

alternatives, neither pool nor velocity refuge habitats would be affected by 

implementation of any Baked Apple alternative. 

Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

Alternatives 2, 4, 5 and 6 possess slightly more risk of experiencing fire-related landslides 

that lack dead trees because the high-moderate slope stability areas were not assessed or 

removed from potential harvest areas in these alternatives. Landslides lacking wood 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

274

could result in the indirect effects to downstream aquatic environments of gaining 

sediment, but not gaining the important wood component. The harvest prescriptions in 

Alternative 5 that leave 50 percent of all size classes of dead trees would partially offset 

the potential of this indirect effect in Alternative 5. The actual risk of having landslides 

with no wood due to salvage of the dead trees has not been quantified; however the risk 

of such an event is considered to be low and small in scale depending largely on the 

winter weather over the next decade. 

Alternative 3 is very unlikely to result in such an indirect effect because this alternative 

was designed to minimize the risks of landslides occurring without the dead tree 

component. Alternative 1 would not result in such an indirect effect since Alternative 1 

would remove no dead trees anywhere. 

Alternative 4 could potentially result in an indirect beneficial effect on the future 

condition of LWM in riparian areas and streams because it may result in potentially less 

riparian areas burned in the future compared to the other Baked Apple alternatives. The 

rest of the alternatives would be less likely to result in such a beneficial indirect effect. 

Cumulative effects to the stream habitat elements are not expected under any alternative 

since the scope and scale of the potential direct and indirect effects associated with the 

Baked Apple projects are very limited and not likely be of a magnitude to result in a 

cumulative effect when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions. 

REFUGIA 

Affected Environment 

Within the Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed, Bachelor Creek has historically 

provided cooler water throughout the summer months to Limpy and Panther Creeks. In 

addition to the cool water, summer base flows are typically almost twice those emanating 

from Limpy Creek above the confluence with Bachelor, even though these two drainages 

are similar in size as measured upstream from this confluence. The cool water and 

sustained summer base flows from Bachelor combine to provide refuge habitat in the subwatershed. 

Past management has degraded overall stream habitats. Therefore, refugia is classified as 

‘at risk’. The short-term effects of the fire may also add to this risk rating. The 

combined conditions of temperature, sediment/turbidity, and substrate are major aspects 

of refuge habitats. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects 

No alternative would result in any direct changes in the nature of the refuge habitats in 

Panther Creek. Alternative 4 would treat a total of 233 acres in riparian reserves and 

would only remove timber from 32 acres of riparian reserve. No timber would be removed 

from within 180 feet of any stream channel. Upslope spring sources and other sensitive 

areas would be protected. 

No indirect downstream effects to refugia in the North Umpqua River are expected under 

any Baked Apple alternative since the harvest of dead trees would not affect stream 

temperatures, peak flows, or appreciably affect sedimentation rates in Panther Creek. 

The cumulative effects to the stream habitat elements are not expected under any 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

275

alternative since the scope and scale of the potential direct and indirect effects are 

essentially nil. 

Conclusions 

Based on the above disclosure regarding stream habitats considered during conferencing 

with NOAA Fisheries, none of the Baked Apple alternatives would affect the physical 

integrity of the aquatic system including shorelines, banks, and bottom configurations 

(ACS objective 3) at the scale of the Panther Creek 6th-field. Moreover, none of the Baked 

Apple alternatives would appreciably affect recruitment of large woody material (ACS 

objective 8) and the habitats that are affected by the LWM (ACS objective 9 in Panther 

Creek. Finally, none of the Baked Apple alternatives would tend to cause any of the NOAA 

habitat indicators discussed above to be degraded as a result of implementation. 

Alternatives that result in the most riparian reforestation (Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6) 

contribute most to the long-term goal of ACS objects 3, 8, and 9 at the scale of the 

Panther Creek 6th-field watershed. 

CHANNEL CONDITION AND DYNAMICS 

Affected Environment 

The Aquatic Conservation Strategy addresses the need to maintain and restore channel 

and stream bank conditions via objectives 3 and 8 and floodplain connectivity and 

inundation in ACS objective 7. NOAA Fisheries uses the assessment of three stream 

channel elements during conferencing for fish species that have the potential to be listed 

under the ESA. These channel elements discussed in this section are primarily affected by 

disturbance in the watershed that would result in both sedimentation and peak flow 

increases. 

Width to Depth Ratio and Channel Type 

Disturbance is usually expressed in a stream channel by channel adjustments that 

compensate for the disturbance. One type of channel adjustment is channel widening. 

Channel widening can occur when excess sediment enters the stream system; when flow 

levels are artificially increased; when riparian vegetation is removed; or when large wood 

is removed from the channel. In general, once these channels widen there is a significant 

reduction in fish habitat. 

Past management has likely increased width to depth ratios in the Panther Creek subwatershed causing this NOAA indicator to be ‘at risk’. There is evidence of channel 

downcutting in many of the tributary channels and channel widening in some of the main 

stem channels. The 2002 Apple Fire has affected vegetative cover and would, thereby, 

affect peak flows. Stream beds and banks are well armored by bed rock, boulders, and 

cobbles and very stable. It is likely that some localized widening may occur in main stem 

channels, but over all width to depth ratios are not expected to change with any 

significance due to the fire. 

Stream Bank Condition 

Stream banks in the sub-watershed are generally well armored. Past management, 

however, has resulted in some active erosion of stream banks causing this NOAA indicator 

to be ‘at risk’. There are several areas, particularly in Panther Creek and Fairy Creek that 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

276

have some areas of unstable stream bank. These areas appear to be management- and 

road-related such as the banks of Fairy Creek that are still affected by the debris flow 

that initiated off the 4703 road several decades ago. Limpy and Bachelor Creeks have 

well armored stream banks. Bed rock, boulders, and cobbles make up a preponderance of 

the stream banks here. Factors that can affect stream banks are the same as those that 

can affect width to depth ratios. Large wood has been added to stream channels 

throughout the planning area, which will help to ameliorate some of the stresses placed 

on the stream banks caused by the Apple Fire of 2002. 

 

Floodplain Connectivity 

Streams in the sub-watershed have been down cut and scoured and in many cases have 

lost their connection with the surrounding floodplain. ACS objectives 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 

9 focus on the maintenance and restoration of the complexity, physical integrity, and 

spatial and temporal connectivity within broad landscape areas and large watersheds. 

This NOAA indicator was considered to be ‘not properly functioning’ in the Panther Creek 

6th field sub-watershed in the Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis (USDA, 2001). 

Work that has been done since the Apple Fire has elevated this rating to functioning at 

risk. This is mainly due to the placement of large wood in Limpy and Bachelor Creeks. In 

addition, floodplain connectivity conditions are expected to improve over time as a result 

of the fire. More large wood will fall into stream channels trapping and storing more 

sediment. In turn, this is expected to aggrade the stream bed, and over time, reconnect 

the stream with its floodplain. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects 

There are no project activities that would directly affect channel width to depth ratios, 

stream bank conditions or floodplain connectivity. Only Alternative 4 proposes treatment 

within the riparian reserve; no harvest would occur within 180 feet of any stream channel, 

and at least a 75 foot or 50 foot no fuel activity buffer would be maintained on fish 

bearing and non-fish bearing streams respectively. None of the action alternatives, which 

only harvest dead trees, would increase peak flows or result in any landslides over and 

above those caused by the fire. Therefore, none of these stream channel indicators could 

be directly affected. 

Indirect and Cumulative Effects 

No downstream impacts are expected with the implementation of any Baked Apple 

alternatives on any channel conditions in the North Umpqua River; channel conditions in 

the North Umpqua River would remain unchanged. 

The accelerated reforestation of riparian trees within the intensively burned (stand 

replacement) areas as a result of riparian tree planting under Action alternatives 2, 3, 4, 

and 6 may result in an indirect beneficial affect to future channel conditions. The 

conifers planted along streams as a result of these alternatives are expected to start 

providing important stabilizing functions at least a decade sooner than Alternative 1, 

which would not generate funds to plant riparian areas, or Alternative 5 which would rely 

solely on natural regeneration within riparian areas. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

277

Cumulative effects to the stream habitat elements are not expected under any alternative 

since the scope and scale of the potential direct and indirect effects associated with the 

Baked Apple projects are very limited and not likely be of a magnitude to result in a 

cumulative effect. 

Conclusions 

Given the lack of impacts to these channel condition indicators, all Baked Apple 

alternatives are expected to maintain the current condition of the three habitat elements 

discussed in this section. 

HABITAT ACCESS 

Affected Environment 

The maintenance and protection of the spatial connectivity within and between 

watersheds is the focus of ACS objective 2. This objective states, in part, that network 

connections must provide chemically and physically unobstructed routes to areas critical 

for fulfilling life history requirements of aquatic and riparian-dependent species. NOAA 

Fisheries uses the assessment of physical barriers as the indicator for habitat access during 

conferencing on fish species that may become federally listed. This indicator focuses on 

barriers created with the road system. 

Roads cross fish bearing streams at three locations in the planning area. These locations 

were inventoried in 2001 as part of a Forest-wide inventory of potential fish passage 

problems. An open-bottom arch crossing on Panther Creek at milepost 0.10 of road 4720 

was found to possibly restrict some fish passage for early life stages. Steelhead and 

cutthroat are present upstream of the crossing, coho are not. The location is considered 

to be a natural barrier to coho, even without the road crossing. The road crossing may 

add to passage difficulties for juvenile fish of any species. Another open-bottom arch 

crossing on Fairy Creek at milepost 0.80 of road 4720 was found not to pose a barrier to 

fish. The third crossing is on Fairy Creek at milepost 1.40 of road 4720-005. The pipe 

arch located there was found to be a barrier to fish passage, although resident cutthroat 

trout inhabit the stream above and below the culvert. Steelhead trout are present below 

the crossing, but not upstream. This pipe restricts steelhead access to about 1/3 mile of 

habitat in Fairy Creek. The upper extent of coho distribution is approximately 2 miles 

down stream from this access barrier. 

Road effects on aquatic connectivity of non-fish bearing streams was assessed with data 

from the Baked Apple stream crossing inventory that identified, whether crossings 

adequately emulated a natural streambed for aquatic organism passage. Of 173 stream 

crossings inventoried, 16 were found to emulate natural crossings without impact to 

aquatic connectivity. Those crossings had bottomless arches, fords, or at one site, a 

bridge. The remaining crossings are typically round metal culverts that do not retain 

gravel or other streambed material and may be considered to affect connectivity as a 

result. Seventeen culvert outlets are “perched,” with a freefall of water to the 

streambed below, effectively preventing any accessibility for upstream movement of most 

aquatic organisms. Spatial and temporal connectivity of aquatic organisms such as 

salamanders within the Panther Creek sub-watershed are reduced by the condition of 

road-stream crossings. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

278

Watershed analysis and subsequent assessments identified that passage through stream 

crossings is ‘properly functioning’ in the Panther Creek sub-watershed because all human 

made facilities in the watershed allow upstream and downstream fish passage at all flows 

for one-year old salmonids. Within the sub-watershed there are no culverts which 

currently block the upstream or downstream migration of adult fish. There are, however, 

culverts in the sub-watershed that block the free movement of juvenile fish less than a 

year old and aquatic salamanders or invertebrates. 

Environmental Effects 

None of the Baked Apple alternatives, including the no-action alternative, would either 

worsen or improve habitat access conditions. No alternative would result in any direct, 

indirect, or cumulative negative or beneficial effect to this indicator. Removal of stream 

crossing culverts and fills, or replacing culverts with streambed simulation type structures 

would restore some connectivity, but no such work is considered with any of the Baked 

Apple alternatives. Cumulative effects to the stream habitat elements are not expected 

under any alternative since the scope and scale of the potential direct and indirect effects 

associated with the Baked Apple projects are very limited and not likely be of a 

magnitude to result in a cumulative effect. 

Conclusions 

Given the lack of any effects on habitat access, all Baked Apple alternatives are expected 

to maintain the current condition of habitat access. 

Summary of Aquatic Indicators Used in the NOAA Fisheries Conferencing Process 

Tables 58 and 59 summarize the environmental baseline condition and the effects of 

implementing any of the Baked Apple Fire Salvage alternatives on the Panther Creek 6th

Field Subwatershed and on the Middle North Umpqua 5th Field Watershed respectively. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

279

Table 58. Environmental Baseline and Effects of the Baked Apple Action Alternatives 

on NOAA Indicators at the Scale of the Panther Creek 6th field Sub-watershed. 

Environmental Baseline Effects of Baked Apple Alternatives

Relevant Indicators Properly 

Functioning

At Risk Not Prop. 

Functioning

Restore Maintain Degrade ACS Obj

Water Quality

Maximum Temp X (1,3) X 2,4,8,9 

Sediment & 

Turbidity 

 X (1,2,3) X 4,5,6,8,9

Chemical/ Nutrients X (3) X 2,4,8,9 

Habitat Elements

Physical Barriers X (1) X 2,6,9 

Large Woody 

Material 

 X (1,2) X 3,6,8,9 

Substrate X (1) X 3,5,8,9 

Pool Character X (1) X 3,5,6,9 

Low Velocity Refuge X (1,3) X 1,2,3,6,8,

9 

Refugia X (1,3) X 1,2,9 

Channel Condition 

and Dynamics

Width/Depth Ratio X (1) X 3,8,9 

Streambank 

Condition 

 X (1,2) X 3,8,9 

Floodplain 

Connectivity 

 X (1,2) X 1,2,3,6,7,

8,9 

Flow/ Hydrology

Changes in 

Peak/Base Flows 

 X (1,3) X 2,5,6,7 

Drainage Network X (1) X 2,5,6,7 

Watershed 

Conditions

Road Density X (1) X 1,3,5 

Disturbance History X (1,2,3) X 1,2,3,5,8,

9 

Riparian Reserves X (1,2) X 1,2,3,5,8,

9 

Landslide Rates X (1,2) X 1,5 

1 = Data from Surveys/Watershed Analysis; 2 = Data came from field review for a project; 3 = Professional 

Judgment; 4 = Data from Environmental Analysis or Environmental Impact Statement; 5 = Data from Water 

Quality Management Data/DEQ 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

280

Table 59. Environmental Baseline and Effects of the Baked Apple Action Alternatives 

on NOAA Indicators at the Scale of the Middle North Umpqua 5th Field Watershed. 

Environmental Baseline Effects of Proposed Action

Relevant Indicators Properly 

Functioning

At Risk Not Prop. 

Functioning

Restore Maintain Degrade ACS Obj

Water Quality

Maximum Temp X (1,3) X 2,4,8,9 

Sediment & Turbidity X (1,2,3) X 4,5,6,8,9

Chemical/ Nutrients X (3) X 2,4,8,9 

Habitat Elements

Physical Barriers X (1,3) X 2,6,9 

Large Woody Material X (1,2,3) X 3,6,8,9 

Substrate X (1,3) X 3,5,8,9 

Pool Character X (1,3) X 3,5,6,9 

Low Velocity Refuge X (1,3) X 1,2,3,6,8

,9 

Refugia X (1,3) X 1,2,9 

Channel Condition 

and Dynamics

Width/Depth Ratio X (1) X 3,8,9 

Streambank Condition X (1,2,3) X 3,8,9 

Floodplain 

Connectivity 

 X (1,2) X 1,2,3,6,7

,8,9 

Flow/ Hydrology

Changes in Peak/Base 

Flows 

 X (1,3) X 2,5,6,7 

Drainage Network X (1) X 2,5,6,7 

Watershed 

Conditions

Road Density X (1) X 1,3,5 

Disturbance History X (1,2,3) 1,2,3,5,8

,9 

Riparian Reserves X (1,2,3) X 1,2,3,5,8

,9 

1 = Data from Surveys/Watershed Analysis; 2 = Data came from field review for a project; 

3 = Professional Judgment; 4 = Data from Environmental Analysis or Environmental Impact Statement; 5 = Data 

from Water Quality Management Data/DEQ 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

281

BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION FOR FISH AND AQUATIC SPECIES 

The potential of increased sediment caused by the implementation of the Baked Apple 

project has been the focal point of this aquatic analysis. Panther Creek and its tributaries 

provides habitat for Oregon Coastal coho salmon as well as other sensitive anadromous 

and resident fish species. Current coho distribution is in the lower 1/3 mile of Panther 

Creek and the lower 1/3 mile of Limpy Creek. 

Sediment, as a product of natural erosion following a disturbance event such as a fire, can 

originate from 3 major sources; surface erosion, fluvial erosion, and mass wasting. All of 

these sources of erosion are expected to increase under conditions found in the post fire 

sub-watershed. Across much of the sub-watershed the environmental baseline has been 

reset. Several factors directly affecting erosion under the new baseline are; changes in 

peak/base flow conditions, rain fall and snow fall interception, and effective ground and 

canopy cover. In addition, the sediment regime and routing has changed as a result of the 

2002 fire. 

Sediment is being produced and delivered by the existing network of roads in the planning 

area. Well maintained road surfaces with adequate and properly functioning drainage 

structures are less susceptible to erosion and will, therefore, supply less sediment to area 

stream channels. 

Post-fire BAER activities within the sub-watershed have been implemented to help 

moderate the effects and magnitude of these factors. Road drainage has been improved, 

overly steep fills have been pulled back, stream crossings were improved or upgraded, and 

large wood was placed in impacted stream channels within the fire perimeter. Two 

hundred and eighty six acres of trees have been planted in the burn area, including 2 

miles of riparian reserve along Limpy Creek. 

Both short-term and long-term erosion processes were considered in this biological 

evaluation process. Surface erosion across the burned landscape is expected to be short 

lived. In less than 5 years, as ground cover increases and vegetation returns, surface 

erosion is predicted to return to background levels. By the summer of 2004 when logging 

would begin under the action alternatives, these buffers will have recovered substantial 

herbaceous vegetation along with hardwood sprouting to function as ground cover to help 

arrest the rain and gravity driven and rain driven movement of surface erosion before it 

enters streams. Road surface erosion will continue to occur in the sub-watershed. Post 

fire BAER work has addressed the high priority sites to reduce the potential for road 

surface erosion and road failure in the burned landscape. Road work associated with the 

salvage sale would include 2 reconstruction sites at stream crossings, some ditch and 

culvert cleaning, road blading, dust abatement, and a small amount of temporary road 

construction in all alternatives with the exception of Alternative 5. All of the planned 

temporary roads are located on ridge top sites and would be decommissioned after use. 

The two reconstruction sites, in headwater channels, included in all action alternatives, 

would eliminate chronic sources of sediment. The short-term sediment delivery from 

reconstruction of these sites would likely be less than the currently existing rate of 

delivery without treatment. 

The amount of timber that would be hauled from the salvage area varies by alternative. 

The risk of either an accident or increased road wear and potential sedimentation can 

increase as truck traffic increases. If an accident were to occur adjacent to a live stream 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

282

or riparian area there could be a direct input of petroleum products or dust abatement 

chemicals to the stream or to an area of soil. The cleanup activity that would remove 

contaminated soil could lead to more bare ground and surface erosion. Best Management 

Practices requiring that spill containment be readily available on the site and traffic 

control measures be implemented during harvest are incorporated into all action 

alternatives. These BMPs will lessen the risks of spills occurring and lessen the impacts if 

they do occur. 

Alternative 5 likely has the lowest risk as it would require the fewest loads to be hauled. 

Alternatives 2, 3, and 6 have similar risks as they would require a similar number of loads. 

Alternative 6 requires the greatest number of loads hauled and therefore has the greatest 

risk. Due to road use mitigations that would be in place during sale activities the 

probability for an accident occurring would be low. Road maintenance and dry season haul 

would minimize the impact truck traffic would have on the road surface. 

By following standards and guidelines for only minimal ditch blading, by not increasing the 

transport of sediment from ditches that flow directly into stream crossings, and by 

maintaining the proper function of road drainage surfaces and structures, road use 

associated with Baked Apple Salvage would not significantly affect the timing, volume, 

rate, and character of the sediment input, storage, or transport. 

Fluvial erosion is expected to increase due to increases in peak flows as a response to the 

Apple Fire of 2002. Although an increase of fluvial erosion is expected it is not expected 

to be severe. The stable and generally well armored nature of the stream channels in the 

burn area are expected to keep this erosion to a minimum. The channels that are most 

likely to experience fluvial erosion are the first order streams (class IV channels). Large 

woody material placed in stream channels in response to the fire will help to reduce 

water velocity during peak flows and will trap, store and meter out sediments. In addition 

as vegetative ground cover recovers and trees are replanted and grow peak flows are 

expected to experience continued recovery. Alternative 5, of the action alternatives, 

likely retains the greatest risk of long-term fluvial erosion and increased peak flows as it 

replants the fewest acres of burned forest and retains the greatest amount of untreated 

forest fuels. The remaining action alternatives are expected to have similar recovery over 

time. Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, holds the greatest risk for long-term fluvial 

erosion. 

Salvage operations are not expected to increase fluvial erosion. Only Alternative 4 

proposes entry into riparian reserves. There would be a total of 32 acres of harvest within 

the reserves in this alternative and would occur outside of 1 site potential tree height of 

any stream channel. Harvest is not expected to generate an increase in fluvial erosion 

because the susceptibility of a watershed to increased peak flows increases with the 

reduction of canopy cover. Effective canopy cover and ground cover were removed by the 

fire. Effective canopy cover would not be further reduced through the removal of dead 

trees. Large woody material placed in stream channels as a response to the fire will help 

to moderate the erosive power of elevated peak flows. Post salvage planting would hasten 

recovery and moderate peak flows over time. 

Occurrences of mass wasting may increase over time as the roots of fire killed trees begin 

to decay and lose their ability to hold soils in place. The period of time when the risk for 

mass wasting is greatest is approximately 3 to 20 years after the burn. During this period 

of minimum root strength, soil reinforcement could be 20% to 40% of its undisturbed 

value. Post fire landslides that might mobilize into debris flows can only be expected if 

the winter weather is extreme enough to cause them. A spike in the number of landslides 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

283

would occur only if a substantial rain on snow winter storm follows a wet fall such as 

those that occurred during the winters of 1964 and 1997. If no such storm occurs during 

the period of diminished root strength, then no substantial increase in sedimentation 

associated with shallow-rapid landslides can be expected as a result of the Apple Fire. 

Increased occurrences of mass wasting as a result of timber salvage operations are 

likewise not expected to occur. Tree boles do not add to soil reinforcement. Areas of high 

soil instability within the planning area have been removed from harvest consideration. 

Although this would not affect the rate of slides that might occur in those areas, it would 

allow the trees, should a slide occur, to become entrained in the slide and potentially 

provide wood to the stream as well as retain dislodged soils. Replanting trees in salvaged 

units will hasten the recovery of the sub-watershed. Alternative 4 represents the greatest 

risk, as it would remove some timber from areas with sensitive soils. 

Fuels reduction would occur under all action alternatives (Table 6 in Chapter 2). Reducing 

forest fuels is an important aspect in the long-term health of the forest and the 

watershed. Past management has left much of the forest with higher than normal fuel 

loads. The fuels reduction associated with the Baked Apple Salvage sale have been 

designed to bring fuel loads back towards the natural range of variability. Without fuels 

treatments it is predicted future fires would burn hotter, be larger in size, and more 

frequent. Stream shade, peak flows, sediment regimes, and large wood could all be 

negatively impacted by future fires. The entire aquatic ecosystem in the sub-watershed 

could potentially endure setback after setback if fuels are not addressed. 

Fuels treatments would not be expected to adversely impact the aquatic environment or 

current sensitive fish species habitat because only 202 acres of riparian reserves along 

class I and II channels would be treated. Treatment would consist of handpiling and fall 

burning under closely monitored moisture conditions. In addition there would be no 

treatment within the primary flood plain or within 75 feet of the stream channel, 

whichever is greater. 

Oregon Coast coho salmon inhabit the lower 1 mile of the sub-watershed. It is believed 

that current coho habitat reflects historic coho distribution in the sub-watershed. The 

burn area extends through current coho habitat but was most intense up stream of it. 

Habitat conditions within the Panther Creek sub-watershed have been impacted by past 

land management activities. The Apple Fire of 2002 reset the environmental baseline 

across much of the sub-watershed. Post-fire BAER projects have reduced some of the risk 

the sub-watershed may face in the future due to the fire. Road drainage improvements, 

removing overly steep fills, improving stream crossings, some riparian and up land tree 

planting, and large wood placements have all added to the stability of the sub-watershed. 

The implementation of the Baked Apple Salvage sale is not expected to further degrade 

the aquatic habitats in the sub-watershed. It is not expected to add to the cumulative 

effects already present in the Panther Creek 6th field sub-watershed and is not expected 

to show added cumulative effects in the larger North Umpqua 5th field watershed. 

Determination of Effects 

The biological evaluation is a 5-step process. Each Sensitive species potentially occurring 

within the project area was evaluated based on these steps. Evaluation of impacts on a 

given species may be complete at the end of step #1 or may extend through step #5 

(Table 60). If the species’ habitat is not present then no further review is necessary. Step 

5, biological investigation, is not displayed. If data is insufficient to assess the 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

284

significance, a biological investigation would have been done, but such an investigation 

was not deemed necessary. The effects determinations displayed in the table below 

represent the alternatives presented in the EIS. 

Table 60. Effects Determination for Sensitive Aquatic Species. 

Step #1 

Prefield 

Review 

Step #2 

Field 

Recon 

Step #3 

Effects 

Determination

Step #4 Conclusion of Effects 

Review 

Process 

Habitat 

Present 

Species 

Present 

Effects Determination 

by Alternative 

Invertebrates 1 2 3 4 5 6 

Mt. Hood 

primitive 

caddisfly 

yes unk yes NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Cascades 

apatanian 

caddisfly 

yes unk yes NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Tombstone 

Prairie caddisfly 

yes unk yes NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Alsea micro 

caddisfly 

yes yes yes NI NI NI NI NI NI 

Fish 

Oregon Coast 

coho salmon 

yes yes yes MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

Oregon Coast 

steelhead trout 

yes yes yes MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

Umpqua chub no no no MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

Oregon Coast 

cutthroat trout 

yes yes yes MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

*Oregon Coast 

chinook salmon 

yes yes yes MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH MIIH 

EFH yes yes yes WNAA WNAA WNAA WNAA WNAA WNAA 

*OC chinook have not been documented in the Panther Creek sub-watershed but occur in the North Umpqua 

River. 

Key to determinations:

 Sensitive species determinations follow the nomenclature established in the Forest Service Handbook: 

NI= no Impact; 

MIIH= May Impact Individuals or Habitat but will not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal 

Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species; 

WIFV= Will Impact Individuals or Habitat with a Consequence that the Action May Contribute to a 

Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species. 

Essential Fish Habitat determinations follow the nomenclature established by NOAA Fisheries: 

WNAA=Would Not Adversely Affect 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

285

Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Under the Magnuson-Steven Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (MSA) 

The MSA requires Federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of Commerce regarding 

any action or proposed action authorized, funded, or undertaken by the agency that may 

adversely affect essential fish habitat (EFH) identified under this law. The MSA defines 

adverse effects as any impact, which reduces the quality and/or quantity of essential fish 

habitat. Adverse effects include direct, indirect, site specific or habitat wide impacts, 

including individual, cumulative or synergistic consequences of actions. This law deals 

with commercial fisheries. Coho salmon are considered for this project. 

The Baked Apple project (as mitigated) is expected to have a very low likelihood of 

causing an effect upon EFH, the species considered, and their major freshwater prey 

species. Major prey species are considered to be a variety of aquatic macroinvertebrates, 

including but not limited to the aquatic and winged adult phase of the following insect 

groups: stoneflies, mayflies, caddisflies, and midges. No substantial direct, cumulative, 

or synergistic effects to EFH are anticipated under the project. Coho salmon are found in 

the vicinity of the project planning area; however the chances of any effect being realized 

are limited in extent and duration and have been determined as ‘Would Not Adversely 

Affect’ EFH. 

Although the sensitive species determination calls for Oregon Coast coho salmon, 

steelhead and cutthroat are the same for each action alternative, the potential risk within 

the range of the MIIH call associated with each alternative varies (Table 61). 

Table 61. Ranking the Risk Associated With Each Alternative within the Range of the 

Effects Determination. 

Alternative Risk 

Ranking 

(greatest=1 

lowest=6) 

Rationale 

*pros/cons 

1 (No Action) 1 Would not further disturb the landscape /

Watershed left to recover on its own, fuels not 

addressed, fire risk remains elevated and 

increases through time, minimal planting would 

prolong recovery, short-term effective ground 

cover not addressed with added logging slash, FS 

road 4714 reconstruction sites not addressed. 

5 (Retention of 

Snags, Large Wood, 

Ecosystem 

Recovery, and Low 

Road Density Areas) 

2 Would minimize disturbance to the burned 

landscape / Fuel levels remain high, fire risk 

remains elevated and increases through time, 

Minimal planting prolongs recovery, no riparian 

acres planted. 

4 (Economics, Fire 

Risk, and Future 

Fuel Loads) 

3 Enters outer portion of riparian zone to lessen 

risk of future reburns, greatest amount of fuel 

reduction overall / Greatest amount of haul over 

forest roads, generating the greatest risk of 

accident and spill. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

286

Alternative Risk 

Ranking 

(greatest=1 

lowest=6) 

Rationale 

*pros/cons 

6 (Restoring and 

Maintaining 

Landscape Patterns) 

4 Reduces fuels across 917 acres, protects unstable 

soils. 

2 (Proposed Action) 5 Replants greatest amount of harvested area, 

includes greatest amount of helicopter harvest 

systems, addresses forest fuels, protects unstable 

soils. 

3 (Sediment and Site 

Productivity) 

6 Removes high and moderately unstable ground 

from harvest consideration, greater than 50% 

helicopter harvest systems used, addresses forest 

fuels. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

287

SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

ECONOMICS – TRACKED AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

Affected Environment 

During scoping, it was determined that the proposed use of helicopter logging may result 

in low or no returns to the treasury or may not be economically feasible. In addition, 

helicopter logging may not attract a bidder to the timber sale. Net present value and 

benefit/cost ratio are the indicators used to compare the direct effects of the 

alternatives, as these are the standard criteria used to measure economic efficiency. 

Economic effects to the local economy are estimated using an economic input/output 

model developed with IMPLAN Professional 2.0 (IMPLAN). All data used in the model 

preparation is 2000 information58, the latest available. 

Assumptions 

Douglas County, Oregon is the analysis area used for the model and other assumptions and 

outputs. Most timber sales from the North Umpqua District are purchased and operated 

by individuals and companies based in this county. Douglas County has a full array of 

logging contractors and milling facilities. Final demand is assumed to be wood products 

ready for shipment at the mill yards. 

Timber values were derived using the most recent historical average logging costs and 

delivered log prices compiled by the Oregon Department of Forestry. Log prices are 

reduced by the value of the chip and fiber components due to char. Charred logs are not 

suitable for most chip products. Helicopter logging costs were developed using Helipace, 

a joint Forest Service/helicopter industry model. Most costs and values are measured per 

thousand board feet (MBF). 

Fire-killed timber undergoes physical deterioration and decay quickly, although studies to 

quantify the causes and rates of volume loss are few. The two primary defects that result 

in scale deductions are weather checks and sap rot. The vegetation section in this 

chapter describes the wood deterioration expected to occur. Those assumptions are used 

here. 

Douglas County’s Economic Situation 

Total employment in Douglas County is hard to quantify. The Oregon Labor Market 

Information System (OLMIS) lists employment in 2000 at 37,751 while the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s 2000 Census lists 41,746. Both of these estimates are significantly less than the 

IMPLAN 2000 employment number of 54,047. The IMPLAN data includes all workers, full 

and part-time, and self-employed people. As a result of these differences, percentages 

and relative differences are used for analysis where possible instead of absolute numbers. 

Douglas County has attempted to diversify its economy in recent years as the timber 

industry situation has declined. However, the county continues to be heavily dependent 

on forestry and the wood products industry for primary employment. The wood products 

sector provides 16.6% of the area’s employment, and 29.7% of the overall industrial 

output, according to the IMPLAN data. Table 62 shows some of the major sectors of the 

 

58 Data sources and IMPLAN database construction methods are discussed in detail in the Data Guide, 2nd

Edition, June, 2000, on file at the Diamond Lake Ranger District office. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

288

local economy, and how each one contributes to the economic picture, based on 2000 

IMPLAN data. 

Table 62. Douglas County Economic Sectors 

Industry Total Industry 

Output * 

Employment 

# Jobs 

Average Employee 

Compensation ** 

Forestry/Wood Products 1295.605 8,954 $34,683 

Wholesale & Retail Stores 371.728 9,257 $16,174 

Construction/Maintenance 336.152 2,999 $25,655 

Real Estate 365.169 1,412 $ 6,786 

Fed, State, Local Government 

(non-education) 280.624 4,744 $42,635 

Personal & Business Services 158.689 3,537 $13,687 

Banking 116.117 730 $34,264 

Recreation & Entertainment 75.208 2,399 $10,641 

Communications 33.582 199 $33,211 

Utilities 62.011 195 $53,492 

Electronic & Electronic 

Manufacturing 8.390 34 $54,343 

Trans. Manufacturing 44.026 338 $32,360 

Farming/Ranching 38.233 1,864 $ 8,269 

Hotels & Lodging 18.860 496 $11,934 

Engineer & Architect Services 12.521 168 $17,298 

Legal 11.794 175 $24,699 

Mining 6.930 45 $ 9,161 

Nonprofit, Business, Labor 

Organizations 14.209 612 $16,209 

Totals 3249.848 38,158 $25,091 

* Million Dollars 

** Includes total payroll costs and benefits. 

The trends in employment show a shift from logging and wood products manufacturing 

toward retail sales and service sectors (Stevenson 2001). The average wage paid in these 

sectors, however, is much less than the timber and wood products average wage (see 

Table 62). Average earnings per job, in real dollars, have dropped from $31,080 in 1970 

to $25,724 in 2000 in Douglas County (Sonoran 2003). 

Total mill capacity in Douglas County stands at 760 million board feet (mmbf) per year 

according to Robert Ragon, Douglas Timber Operators Executive Director. Recently, local 

mills have increased log imports from Canada and travel further for raw log supply. In 

addition, two mills have closed within the last 3 years with a capacity of 283,000 cubic 

meters, or about 18.3 mmbf (Spelter 2002). Reduction in timber available from Federal 

land is given as one factor for these actions. 

Of more recent concern is general unemployment in the county, which is estimated at 

9.2% for July 2003, the highest rate in Oregon. Large layoffs from two local mills occurred 

in the spring of 2003, with another round of layoffs expected in October 2003. These 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

289

layoffs are related to the general slump in wood products and specifically to the reduction 

in the plywood market due to imports of Canadian and southern U.S. products (oriented 

strand board). 

Environmental Effects - Economic Analysis Discussion 

Net Present Value & Benefit/Cost Analysis (Efficiency Analysis) 

Forest Service planning costs are not included in the benefit/cost (B/C) analysis since they 

are considered sunk costs (OMB A-94). Table 63 displays the planning costs that are fixed 

for all alternatives. 

Table 63. Forest Service Planning Costs 

 Cost Center Non-Discounted Cost 

ID Team $352,000

Fields Surveys (all types) $95,000

Document Production $10,000

Forest Overhead (34%) $155,000

Total $612,000

The results of the direct benefit/cost analysis by alternative are displayed in Table 64. 

The standard criterion for deciding whether a government program can be justified on 

economic principles is net present value (NPV), or the discounted59 monetized60 value of 

expected net benefits (OMB A-94). The result of the analysis shows that NPV is correlated 

positively and proportionally with the amount of timber volume harvested. Alternative 4 

has the highest NPV and Alternative 5 has the lowest, actually a negative NPV. This 

indicates Alternative 5 is not economically sound, even with several Knutson-Vandenberg 

(KV) sale area improvement projects dropped. If no additional KV work other than 

required reforestation and mitigation were included, the NPV for Alternative 5 would be 

$448,877, the lowest alternative. Alternative 5 was not eliminated from detailed study 

since the KV expenditures are discretionary and a positive NPV may be realized. 

Stumpage is the value of the timber “on the stump.” It is the timber sale contract 

minimum value and is determined by subtracting logging, road work, and slash disposal 

costs from the delivered log price. Timber sale purchasers may bid more than the 

minimum in a competitive auction. The actual monetary return to the U.S. Treasury is 

determined by subtracting all post sale costs from the stumpage. Figure 68 displays Net 

Present Value and the return to the U.S. Treasury by alternative. 

 

59 Discounting is the process of calculating the present value of a future amount of money. 60 Monetized means expressing in terms of money.
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

290

Table 64. Economic Efficiency Analysis 

ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6 

Timber Volume (MBF) 44,938 31,364 49, 883 5,037 41,488 

Acres by Harvest Method 

Helicopter 601 455 413 0 305 

Skyline 443 395 644 241 562 

Loader 30 30 200 194 50 

Total Acres 1,075 880 1,257 435 917 

Volume (MBF)/Acre 41.8 35.6 39.6 11.6 45.2 

Total Present Benefits 

Gross Benefit $21,548,198 $15,042,350 23,891,199 $2,297,255 $20,228,537 

Value/MBF $480 $480 $479 $456 $482 

Value/Acre $20,045 $17,094 $18,871 $5,281 $21,704 

Total Present Costs 

FS Prep & Admin $952,472 $670,509 $902,822 $111,933 $881,702 

Logging $9,712,035 $7,050,668 $9,468,508 $1,212,166 $8,026,207 

Slash Disposal $690,513 $550,118 $687,045 $270,444 $535,514 

Road Work $179,949 $140,278 $176,370 $63,399 $122,597 

KV Reforestation $808,075 $657,041 $1,011,160 $187,726 $744,931 

KV Sale Area 

Improvements $1,647,820 $1,419,940 $1,448,920 $517,449 $713,441 

Total Cost $13,864,287 $10,382,190 $13,694,825 $2,365,827 $11,204,410 

Cost/MBF $309 $331 $274 $470 $263 

Cost/Acre $12,897 $11,798 $10,817 $5,439 $11,829 

Net Present Value $7,683,912 $4,660,161 $10,196,374 -$68,573 $9,204,127 

NPV/MBF $171 $149 $204 -$14 $219 

NPV/Acre $7,148 $5,296 $8,054 -$158 $9,876 

Stumpage $10,965,701 $7,301,287 $13,559,276 $751,245 $11,554,219 

Return to the Treasury $8,636,383 $5,333,379 $11,099,195 $46,069 $10,085,847 

B/C Ratio 1.55 1.45 1.74 0.97 1.83 

Alternative 4 has the highest net present value and return to the U.S. Treasury. In terms 

of per-unit NPV, alternative 6 is more efficient, primarily due to higher volume per acre 

cut and lower KV-funded sale area improvements. 

An economic risk for all alternatives is posed by the deterioration of timber through time 

as described previously. A worst-case analysis, assuming a delay of one year in 

operations, would result in a reduction in total volume of about 43%, with a corresponding 

reduction in volume per acre, one of the main factors in logging costs. These conditions 

would produce some deficit sales that would cost a prospective purchaser more than the 

timber is worth. NPV would be reduced from 48% to 60%. Alternative 5 would clearly be 

uneconomical to log, with an estimated logging cost per acre of about $396. The 

indicated stumpage at this level would mean a loss of about $153,000 to the purchaser. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

291

Net Present Value & Return to Treasury

$(2,000,000)

$-

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

23456

Alternative

NPV

Return to Treas.

 Figure 68. NPV & Return to Treasury 

Another source of uncertainty is the delivered log price at the time of sale auction. This 

directly affects the stumpage, the amount of funds available for KV sale area 

improvement, and the return to the U.S. Treasury. Values fluctuate throughout a typical 

year depending on supply, weather, housing starts, and many other market conditions. 

The 4th quarter is typically the lowest in the year due to plentiful supply, good logging 

weather, and the typical end of the housing start cycle. Table 64 and Figure 68 reflect 

values derived from 2002 4th quarter prices, derived from local sources. 

An analysis of representative local delivered log prices over the last 3 years shows a 

general decline of about 1.4% per year. In 2002, however, the prices stabilized and have 

moved higher the last 4 quarters. If a 1.4% decline from 4th quarter 2002 prices is 

assumed to establish a low bound for comparison, the NPV for each alternative would be 

as shown in Table 65. 

Table 65. Effect of Log Price Decline on NPV 

ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6 

NPV @ 4th Qtr 2002 $7,683,912 $4,660,161 $11,570,831 -$68,573 $8,903,469

NPV @ 1.4% Decline $7,382,240 $4,449,488 $11,190,086 -$100,747 $8,613,445

Difference -$301,672 -$210,673 -$380,745 -$32,174 -$290,024

Percent Difference -3.93% -4.52% -3.29% -46.92% -3.26%

The effect of this log price decline is relatively minor, compared to the potential loss of 

value from delayed logging. To remain economically viable, Alternative 5 would do less 

KV sale area improvement work. Overall, benefit/cost ratio is generally positively 

correlated with total volume harvested and volume per acre harvested. In this analysis, 

logging cost per thousand board feet (MBF) is the main variable directly correlated with 

B/C. Logging costs are influenced primarily by the volume per acre and the logging 

system. Figure 69 shows this relationship by alternative. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

292

B/C vs. Logging Cost/MBF

0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

250.00

300.00

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

B/C

Logging Cost / MBF

Alt 5

Alt 3Alt 2 Alt 4

Alt 6

 Figure 69. Logging Cost vs. B/C 

In summary, Alternative 4 provides the highest Net Present Value and return to the U.S. 

Treasury of all the alternatives, in all of the potential scenarios of volume and value loss. 

Conversely, Alternative 5 has a negative NPV and the smallest return to the U.S. Treasury 

of all the alternatives. The sensitivity analyses for loss of volume, decline in value, and 

change in discount rate do not change the relative differences significantly. 

Economic Impact Analysis 

Direct and Indirect Effects: 

The economic impact analysis using IMPLAN looks at changes in employment and income 

due to changes in the economic activity of the area from each alternative. In past periods 

of non-declining, even-flow of timber from federal land, an individual timber sale may not 

have significantly changed the overall economic activity of the county, since the total 

amount of volume would be sold each year. The conditions today and into the 

foreseeable future are not the same. The Umpqua has not sold a consistent level of 

volume, or levels approaching the potential sale quantity (PSQ) in the Forest Plan since 

1990. Therefore, new timber sales can be treated as an actual increase in the raw 

material available for local industry, allowing an increase in production up to the full level 

of mill capacity. 

The effect on log supply and prices of selling all of the SW Oregon fire salvage sales 

(Biscuit Salvage, Ash Salvage, Acker Salvaged and Baked Apple Salvage) within one or two 

years cannot be easily predicted. Log prices and supply are dependent on complex 

market conditions extending well beyond the local area and are a function of end-product 

demand as well. An increase in local supply, however, would generally equate to a 

decrease in imported logs (from outside of the local area) and a reduction in overall raw 

material price. This still would indicate a positive economic impact to the local area. 

Table 66 displays the results of the economic impact analysis by alternative. In general, 

the increase in timber volume to the local economy would result in increased local 

employment in the logging and wood products manufacturing sectors, increases in forestry 

services (slash treatment, planting, etc.), and indirect and induced increases in many 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

293

other sectors. The business taxes paid to Federal, State, and local governments would 

also increase. 

Other direct, indirect, and induced benefits derive from road reconstruction and 

maintenance and KV funded mitigation and enhancement work. These work activities are 

treated as costs in the benefit/cost analysis since they reduce the revenue to the 

Treasury, but they have economic benefits to the local community since most are 

contracted services. These benefits are included in the economic impact analysis and in 

the numbers reported in Table 66. Spreadsheets developed from IMPLAN outputs show 

the complete analysis by sector and subsector and are available at the district office. 

The numbers in Table 66 are not intended to be absolute. The analysis is used to compare 

the relative differences of the alternatives. The value of each activity included in the 

impact analysis was estimated from the cost and benefit analysis spreadsheets. An 

estimate was made of the percent of each activity’s value that would be spent locally. 

The value to the wood products manufacturing sector was estimated to be 40% of the 

delivered log price, reflecting the difference between end product value and log cost to 

the mill. This difference can be widely variable based on mill efficiency and the choice of 

end products, but it approximates the value given for all of Oregon in 1998 (Gebert et. al. 

2002). The percentage of value assigned to sawlog and veneer production is 75% and 25%, 

respectively, based on the 1998 data. 

Table 66. Economic Impact Analysis 

ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6 

% of Area Mill 

Capacity 

5.9% 4.1% 7.5% 0.7% 5.7% 

Change in Total 

Industry Output 

+$22,101,200 +$20,056,100 +$28,195,500 +$3,523,100 +$21,352,800 

Change in 

Employment 

+217 +195 +274 +40 +206 

Change in 

Employee Income 

+$5,839,400 +$5,243,000 +$7,452,600 +$897,000 +$5,650,700 

Change in 

Proprietor 

Income* 

+$1,199,000 +$1,034,100 +$1,475,000 +$287,000 +$1,091,300 

Change in Other 

Property Income** 

+$3,090,200 +$3,015,300 +$3,970,100 +$519,800 +$3,008,700 

Change in Indirect 

Business Taxes*** 

+$543,900 +$482,000 +$689,700 +$91,500 +$520,700 

Change in Value 

Added 

+$10,672,500 +$9,774,400 +$13,587,400 +$1,795,300 +$10,271,500 

* Proprietor income consists of payments received by self-employed individuals, such as private 

business owners. 

** Property income consists of payments for rent, royalties, dividends and corporate profits. 

*** Indirect business taxes consist of excise and property taxes, fees, licenses and sales taxes paid 

by businesses. 

The No-Action Alternative is not shown in the table since it does not change the conditions 

or level of economic activity in the county. This alternative would, however, contribute 

to the decline in the local timber industry, since it would not change the federal timber 

available over time, or the available associated contracts. Some reforestation is 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

294

predicted to occur under the No Action Alternative, but the impact of those contracts to 

the overall economy would be negligible. 

The values displayed in Table 66 are correlated with NPV and the total amount of volume 

harvested. Alternative 4 would provide the most positive impact to the local economy, 

and Alternative 5 would provide the least positive impact of the action alternatives. 

Jobs Created

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

23456

Alternative

 Figure 70. Jobs Created by Alternative 

Figure 70 highlights the number of local jobs created or sustained by each alternative. 

These are total jobs, including direct jobs in logging, milling, and forestry services, 

indirectly created jobs through timber industry spending in the county, and induced jobs 

created through the cycling of dollars throughout the economy. The average for all 

alternatives shows direct job creation is about 54% of the total, indirect jobs are about 

19%, and induced jobs are about 27%. 

A question was raised during scoping about the potential for skill shortages in the local 

area if timber harvest levels are increased. This question can best be answered by 

comparing the potential job creation in specific industrial sectors with the existing 

workforce. Table 67 displays the primary sectors where jobs would be created, the 

current workforce (in 2000) in those sectors, the number of jobs created by each 

alternative, and the percentage that represents of the current employment level. 

Table 67. Primary Sectors for Job Creation 

Jobs 

Sector Name Current 

Jobs ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6

26 Ag, Forestry, 

Fish Services 623 42 6.7% 

35 

5.6% 

50 

8.0% 

14 

2.2% 

36 

5.8% 

133 Logging 

Contractors 1,211 40 3.3% 

50 

4.1% 

53 

4.3% 

7 

0.6% 

40 

3.3% 

134 & 

139 

Sawmills & 

Veneer Mills 4,768 47 

1.0% 

33 

0.7% 

59 

1.2% 

5 

0.1% 

45 

1.0% 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

295

Given that current unemployment is 9.2% of the available workforce, and assuming that 

unemployment by sector is proportional with the current workforce, it appears that the 

skills are present in the local area to fill jobs created by the proposed alternatives. 

Unemployment in the wood products sector in Douglas County may actually be higher than 

the average by sector, indicating that needed skills are available. 

Cumulative Effects: 

During the DEIS comment period members of the public asked about the potential effects 

of the cumulative increase in the local supply of logs if all of the fire salvage were to be 

put on the market at the same time. These fire salvage sales include, but aren’t limited 

to: Baked Apple, Ash, Acker, Biscuit, Timbered Rock, Kelsay, and Molasses. The total 

volume in these salvage sales may be as much as 600 mmbf, an amount equal to about 

80% of the total mill capacity of Douglas County. 

The primary effect of a sharp increase in local supply would be a decrease in imports from 

Washington, other states, and Canada, resulting in a decline in delivered log prices to 

Douglas County mills. As stated in the previous section, the effect on log supply of selling 

all of these sales cannot be easily predicted. This is due to a number of uncertainties. 

1. Existing contracts for logs that must be honored, some time-constrained. 

2. Lawsuits and appeals of pending decisions on fire salvage sales. There is a high 

probability that some of the potential salvage volume will not be offered. 

3. Reduction in volume and value due to wood deterioration. 

4. Availability of logging contractors, especially helicopter loggers. 

5. The overall log market, tied to national and global economies. 

Since most of these factors are beyond our ability to predict accurately, log price decline 

must be described in terms of risk and probability. This analysis predicts the average log 

price where an individual timber sale would be deficit, and where the Net Present Value 

(NPV) of each alternative would be zero. The amount of money available for KV projects 

is estimated at each of these log prices. 

ASSUMPTIONS 

Two log prices are targeted in this analysis: 

1. Average log price where each sale would become deficit. 

2. Average log price where NPV for the alternative as a whole is zero. 

Each sale in each alternative is analyzed in a residual value appraisal to determine these 

figures. KV requirements are reduced to required reforestation and mitigation costs. The 

only other required mitigation listed in the DEIS and in the FEIS is snag falling for down 

moody material needs. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

296

Table 68. Average Log Prices 

ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 ALT 5 ALT 6 

DEIS Predicted Log 

Price 

$492.46 $492.55 $491.55 $468.39 $494.93

Log Price - All Sales 

Non-deficit 

$262.50 $277.44 $235.62 $358.12 $232.79

% Decline from DEIS 46.7 43.7 52.1 23.5 53.0

Log Price where NPV=0 $316.86 $339.97 $281.77 $482.38 $252.98

% Decline from DEIS 35.7 31.0 42.7 (Incr.) 2.0 48.9

Reforestation & 

Mitigation KV required 

$886,215 $720,615 $1,106,400 $206,085 $816,885

The second step in the analysis is to evaluate the probability that log prices will decline to 

these levels based on market forces. Historical prices were analyzed from the State of 

Oregon log price web site. Figure 71 displays the average delivered log price by year 

since 1977 (1st quarter prices) using the species mix percentage in Alternative 4. These 

prices have not been adjusted for inflation. The solid line shows a theoretical price trend 

with an assumed inflation rate of 4%. The real price trend has been down over the last 10 

years from the highest level in 1993. That year marked the severe downturn in federal 

timber offered for sale due to the spotted owl lawsuit. 

Delivered Log Prices

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

19771979198119831985198719891991199319951997199920012003

Year

Average Price

Avg

Inflation

Figure 71. Average Delivered Log Price 

Alternative 5 is the only alternative that is close to being in jeopardy from lower log 

prices. It currently has a negative net present value, and would fall further in negative 

territory with any price decline. 

The probability of log prices falling to the levels of the mid-1980’s is low, based on 

expected overall market levels. Therefore, the probability of deficit sales and negative 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

297

net present value due to log price decline from market forces is low. Alternative 6 has 

the least chance of suffering deficit conditions due to log supply driven price declines. 

RECREATION 

Affected Environment 

Numerous recreation sites occur in or around the planning area, including two developed 

and four dispersed camping sites. The two developed sites within the planning area 

include the Panther Creek Trailhead and Fairy Shelter. Panther Creek Trailhead is the 

access point to the 3.7 miles Calf segment of the North Umpqua Trail, which also resides 

in the planning area. This segment is currently closed due to fire damage and safety 

concerns. The Panther Creek Trailhead also provides access to the 5.0 mile Panther 

segment of the North Umpqua Trail to the west (hikers, mountain bikers, and equestrian 

riders use the North Umpqua Trail.) The historic Fairy Shelter, located in the headwaters 

of Bachelor Creek, is a three-sided pole structure with a cedar shake roof. 

The North Umpqua Wild and Scenic River lies to the north of the area being proposed for 

harvest. The Congressionally withdrawn area is variable and includes those lands found 

within 1⁄4 mile from either side of the North Umpqua River. The fire burned along the 

river, producing a patchwork of dead and dying conifers with most of the understory 

removed. All proposed harvest units are outside the area withdrawn for the Wild and 

Scenic River. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects: 

None of the action alternatives propose harvesting adjacent to the four dispersed camping 

sites or the two developed sites; therefore, there would be no direct effect to the actual 

camping sites. There is the potential of an indirect effect of implementing the action 

alternatives in the form of disturbance to campers, if they were using the dispersed or 

developed sites while logging or logging related activities were occurring, which may last 

up to 5 years. Alternative 5 would cause less disturbance, as it harvests the least amount 

of volume, followed by Alternatives 3, 6, 2, and 4. The no action alternative would 

create minimal disturbance, which would be associated with on-going maintenance 

activities and reforestation efforts that are planned to occur. Following the logging and 

post-logging operations, ongoing maintenance activities would occur and recreation use 

would likely return to pre-fire levels. No cumulative effects to recreationists are 

expected to occur from these actions. 

HUNTING 

Affected Environment 

Hunting takes place throughout the planning area during the fall and winter seasons. 

Hunters pursue black tailed deer, black bear, cougar, Roosevelt elk, and upland game 

birds during the time seasons are open for hunting. The fire created large openings that 

will revegetate over time. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

298

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects: 

The areas that burned at the highest intensity during the 2002 Apple Fire would see an 

increase in forage as areas begin to revegetate under all of the alternatives. Direct 

effects of the proposed activities would accelerate reforestation efforts; trees not 

protected by plastic tubes would be available forage for big game and upland bird species. 

Removal of the dead trees would result in a decrease in hiding cover. Burning activities 

would likely set back vegetative regrowth. Overall, hunting success for big game and 

upland birds may increase in the short term, but would decrease as the reforested areas 

mature. 

Increased forage for bears would also occur as species with berries revegetate. Abundant 

snags would provide denning opportunities, especially near forest edges where they can 

seek cover. Overall, hunting success for bear may also increase in the short term. Cougar 

populations may rise as big game populations increase, which may also lead to an increase 

in hunting success. 

VEHICULAR ACCESS 

Affected Environment 

Highway 138 is a nationally designated scenic byway and a major travel route for 

recreationists visiting Diamond Lake and Crater Lake National Park. Recreationists 

traveling within the planning area view landscapes of dead and dying conifers within a 

coniferous forest. The alternatives retain varying amounts of trees, and range between 

retaining 4 trees per acre to retaining 50% of the standing trees. Within the planning 

area, 80% to 93% of the area that burned would remain unharvested under the action 

alternatives. 

Once the area starts to reforest and the blackened scenery once again turns to a shade of 

green, forest users within the area can enjoy viewing young forests growing, where firescarred vegetation once dominated the viewshed. 

Recreationists traveling in the planning area have the opportunity to utilize a travel loop 

which is approximately 25 miles in length and takes around two to three hours to drive. 

The travel loop consists of roads 4720 to 4720-005 to 4720-760 and back to road 4720. 

Multiple short dead end roads along the route provide additional roads to explore. At 

present, the route is dominated by the view of burned landscapes. With time the route 

will again provide views of young and old forests with pockets of aging snags. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects: 

All alternatives maintain the existing travel routes used by the recreationists, so 

harvesting along the routes would only restrict seasonal recreational use of the dispersed 

camping sites and recreational driving for a short duration while logging is occurring. 

Short term impacts to access under Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 would occur when the 

4714 road is repaired. The no action alternative would have no affect on vehicular 

access; road maintenance activities and hazard tree felling would continue as part of 

ongoing maintenance. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

299

VISUALS 

Affected Environment 

The planning area was inventoried for visual quality during the development of the 1990 

Umpqua NF land and Resource Management Plan. Please see the visual quality report 

(incorporated by reference), which is located in the Project Record, for a complete 

description and definition of the visual quality objectives for the Forest. The inventory 

identified the following Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines (IV-19 to IV-26) for visual 

quality objectives: 

• The section of the North Umpqua Wild and Scenic River and Highway 138 within 

the planning area has a visual quality objective of foreground retention with a 

sensitivity level one; these areas are to remaining naturally appearing. 

• Other areas outside the Wild and Scenic River boundary that are seen from 

Highway 138 are mapped as middle ground retention sensitivity level one. 

• Areas within the planning area along Forest Service RD 4714 are background 

modification sensitivity level two. 

• All other areas in the planning area are background maximum modification 

sensitivity level three. 

The 2002 Apple Fire burned down to the North Umpqua River and can be seen from along 

Highway 138. The area is rapidly resprouting and green shrubs can be readily seen from 

the highway. In the middle ground and background views, burned snags are readily 

apparent. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects: 

All proposed harvest units are in the inventoried modification or maximum modification 

visual quality objective (VQO), except for a portion of Unit 44, which is harvested under 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6. Unit 44 can be seen from State Highway 138 and would 

require mitigation of the harvest prescription to meet the required middle ground 

retention VQO. The seen portion of Unit 44 can be viewed from a vehicle traveling east 

on State Highway 138 for approximately 7 seconds at a speed of approximately 50 MPH. 

The view is focal (very visible) and is within 1.5 miles of the highway. By retaining 70% of 

the trees in all alternatives, management activities would not be evident and there would 

be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to the VQO of Unit 44. In the proposed 

salvage units that have a modification and maximum modification designation, human 

activities may dominate the characteristic of the landscape, but should appear as a 

natural occurrence when viewed as background. 

Proposed harvest Unit 62D, which is harvested under all action alternatives, and the 

helicopter landing located upslope and to the east on Road 4720, which is associated with 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6, would require close adherence to the mapped retention area 

located just upslope from the unit boundary. The area seen from Highway 138 would be 

harvested only as mitigation to protect workers at the landing located in the existing rock 

pit. No harvest would occur below Rd 4720 in Unit 62D that can be viewed from Highway 

138. Harvest would be permitted for those trees which are located down slope of the 

ridge that lies to the northwest and blocks the view from Highway 138. A recreation staff 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

300

person would need to assist in the marking of the unit boundary to verify visual quality 

objectives are met after layout and harvest of Unit 62D. 

The silvicultural prescriptions meet the visual quality standards as 4 to 12 trees per acre 

or more are left after harvest is complete in all action alternatives. This area also meets 

salvage Visual Quality Objectives that are allowed in any distance zone. The no action 

alternative would have no effect on visual quality objectives in the area. All alternatives, 

as mitigated, are consistent with Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

LOW ROAD DENSITY AREAS – TRACKED AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE 

Oregon Natural Resources Council (ONRC), Umpqua Watersheds, the Wilderness Society, 

the Oregon Chapter Sierra Club, and Cascadia Wildlands Project submitted comments 

during scoping regarding the effect of the proposed project on uninventoried roadless61

areas. According to ONRC, portions or all of two uninventoried roadless areas exist within 

the project area; the 1,300 acre Limpy Creek and 1,680 acre Horseshoe Bend 

uninventoried roadless area. ONRC provided the GIS files of each area; all analysis is 

based on their maps, which have not been field verified. The Middle North Umpqua 

Watershed Analysis (USDA 2001) identified the Limpy Creek headwaters as a low road 

density area. These groups indicate that these areas provide habitat for a variety of 

species and offer solitude for human communities. The indicators selected to measure 

the impacts of the alternatives on this issue are acres salvaged and miles of temporary 

road constructed/reconstructed within the low road density areas; these indicators help 

measure the impact on the character of these areas. 

Protection of inventoried roadless areas falls under the Forest Service Roadless Rule, 

effective March 13, 2001. However, continued legal challenges and a currently proposed 

settlement have delayed full implementation of that rule. Regardless, protection is 

limited to those areas that are considered as inventoried roadless areas; no inventoried 

roadless areas exist in the planning area. The Calf-Copeland inventoried roadless area lies 

to the southeast of the Baked Apple planning area; the Cougar Bluffs inventoried roadless 

area lies to the west; and the Limpy Rock inventoried roadless area lies to the North, just 

across the North Umpqua Wild and Scenic River. There would be no effects to inventoried 

roadless areas under any alternative. 

The low road density areas mapped by ONRC are translated to unroaded areas, as defined 

by the 2000 Roadless Area Conservation FEIS. As defined in that FEIS, unroaded areas do 

not overlap with inventoried roadless areas. Unroaded areas can be any area, without the 

presence of classified roads, of a size or configuration sufficient to protect the inherent 

characteristics associated with its roadless condition. Classified roads are those 

permanent roads intended for long-term use that are tracked as part of the Forest’s 

transportation system. The temporary roads proposed under the various Baked Apple 

salvage alternatives are not classified road; they are not intended for long-term vehicle 

transportation and they will not remain open or drivable after the timber sale is 

completed. 

 

61 Uninventoried roadless areas are areas of land that were not identified during the development of the 

Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and are not displayed in Appendix C of the 

LRMP. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

301

Limpy Creek 

Affected Environment 

The Limpy Creek area is a steep, dissected canyon with limited access for humans. A 

series of waterfalls block upstream passage for fish and make foot travel difficult for 

people as well. No developed trails are located within the headwaters of Limpy Creek. 

The file provide by ONRC encompasses the headwaters of Limpy Creek, and becomes 

irregularly shaped as it moves into Bachelor and Fairy Creeks. In some locations, roads 

surround the area or are located less than one-third of a mile apart. Throughout the area, 

evidence of human management is highly visible. Field reconnaissance showed that while 

standing in proposed harvest units 79A (mid slope), 68, 48B and 48A, one could hear 

traffic either on Highway 138 or on the adjacent forest roads. Even with all of the dead 

trees standing, the lack of ground vegetation and needles on the trees allow for high 

visibility throughout the stand and across the landscape. The exception to this is at the 

bottom of Limpy Creek. Field reconnaissance into the creek bottom from unit 79A 

documented a sense of solitude, with few human sounds evident. This area is fairly 

secluded, was moderately to intensely burned by the fire, and is very difficult to access 

on foot. 

Environmental Effects 

The no action alternative and Alternative 5 retain all trees and construct no temporary 

roads; there would be no direct impacts to this low road density area as a result of these 

alternatives. However, indirect impacts would occur to the scenic quality of the area. 

Only existing plantations would be regenerated under Alternative 1, while only 220 acres 

would be regenerated under Alternative 5. Shrub fields would dominate the burned 

landscape in areas that are not reforested. Another high intensity fire would likely occur 

as fuels accumulate. Another fire would consume snags that were left and would again 

return the area to an early-successional forest. Cumulatively, across the landscape, the 

scenic quality of the area would be impacted for decades. 

The action alternatives proposed to harvest and construct temporary roads within this 

area to various degrees as displayed in Table 6 in Chapter 2. Alternative 4 would harvest 

the most acres; this alternative would have the most potential to directly affect the 

environment, both in terms of habitat (discussed in the Wildlife section of this chapter) 

and solitude of this low road density area. Human activities would be apparent following 

harvest, as stumps and logging corridors would be visible in the short-term, but would be 

undetectable as the area was reforested. Retention of snags and aggressive reforestation 

of the harvest units would help return the area to a forested condition, improving the 

scenic quality of the area. Once the proposed activities were concluded, the area nearest 

the creek bottom would continue to provide solitude, as riparian reserves would help 

buffer the effects of the salvage activities. Areas mid slope or nearest the roads would be 

visibly altered. In terms of greatest to least impacts of the human environment from 

salvage activities, Alternative 4 is followed by Alternative 2, 6, then 3. However, the 

beneficial effects of reforesting the area to restore the scenic quality help mitigate the 

effects of the salvage. Overall, there would be a low to very low potential of impacting 

the character of the area with the proposed activities. 

Alternatives 4 and 6 each proposed construction of 0.94 miles of temporary road, while 

Alternatives 2 and 3 proposed construction of 0.66 miles of temporary road within this 

area. Most of the proposed temporary road construction/reconstruction occurs on unit 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

302

75, where evidence of the old spur roads is highly visible. There would be a short-term 

direct effect of construction or reconstruction of these roads; however, the temporary 

roads would be restored and reforested following harvest, minimizing the direct effect of 

road activities in the long-term. No other indirect, or cumulative impacts are predicted 

to occur. 

Horseshoe Bend 

Affected Environment 

The Horseshoe Bend area is located primarily to the east of the planning area; a road 

separates it from the Calf-Copeland inventoried roadless. ONRC maps the area as 

occurring south of the Horseshoe Bend Campground, west along the North Umpqua Wild 

and Scenic River corridor, and south up Panther Creek to the confluence of Limpy Creek. 

No developed trails are located within this area of Calf Creek. In the area near Panther 

and Limpy Creek, roads surround the area or are located less than 1⁄2 mile apart. Evidence 

of human management is highly visible in this area. Along the North Umpqua Wild and 

Scenic River, the sounds of the highway and the view of the powerline are obvious. Field 

reconnaissance in units 59A and near the confluence of Panther and Limpy Creek resulted 

in detection of traffic noises that came from Highway 138. The dead trees do not block 

the view of the surrounding roads and past management activities. Within the Calf Creek 

area, however, solitude is more easily found, although access to this area is also difficult. 

Several harvest units totaling about 70 acres from the 1987 Apple Fire Salvage are located 

in the middle of the area mapped by ONRC. These areas were helicopter logged and are 

more open; stumps are visible. 

Environmental Effects 

The no action alternative and Alternative 5 retain all trees and construct no temporary 

roads; the indirect and cumulative impacts of these alternatives would be the same as 

described for Limpy Creek. 

The action alternatives would harvest and construct temporary roads within this area in 

minor amounts as displayed in Table 6 in Chapter 2. No harvest would occur in the Calf 

Creek area or within the Wild and Scenic River Corridor; the potential harvest units that 

would affect this area are located along the 4720 road. Alternative 4 would harvest the 

most acres (55); this alternative would have the most potential to directly affect the 

environment, as discussed for Limpy Creek. The effects would be the same as those 

described for Limpy Creek, but to a much lesser degree, as fewer acres would be 

harvested. Alternatives 2, 3, and 6 would each harvest 43 acres and would have similar 

direct effects as Alternative 4. The impact to the character of this area would be 

negligible. Cumulatively, when combining the effects of this and the salvage in Limpy 

Creek, the impact to the character of the area would remain low. 

Alternative 4 proposes construction of 0.15 miles of temporary road, while Alternatives 2 

and 3 proposed construction of 0.02 and 0.02 miles respectively; Alternative 6 no longer 

proposed road construction into the mapped low road density area. The temporary road 

construction associated with Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would occur on unit 59A, along a flat 

ridge at the top of the harvest unit. This temporary road would be restored and 

reforested following harvest, minimizing the direct effect of spur road activities. No 

other indirect or cumulative impacts are predicted to occur. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

303

OPTIONS FOR WILDERNESS, INVENTORIED ROADLESS, OR ROADLESS DESIGNATION 

During the 45-day comment period, the John Muir Project requested an analysis of the 

impacts of the proposed logging on uninventoried roadless areas (unroaded areas) with 

respect to wilderness designation eligibility. That group expressed the belief that the 

areas would no longer be eligible for such designation once the proposed logging occurs. 

The Wilderness Act of 1964 defined wilderness as an area of undeveloped federal land 

retaining it primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements of human 

habitation and that a) generally appear to have been affected primarily by the forces of 

nature with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticed; b) has outstanding 

opportunities for solitude or a primitive or unconfined type of recreation; c) has at least 

5,000 acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make it practicable its preservation and 

use in an unimpaired condition; and d) may also contain ecological, geological, or other 

features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historic value. 

Neither the Limpy or the Horseshoe low density road areas readily lend themselves to the 

future option of wilderness designation given their small size (1,300 and 1,680 acres, 

respectively), their narrow configurations, the presence of substantial amounts of visible 

human management in most of their areas, and sound intrusions from Highway 138. In 

addition, those same characteristics also detract from future designation as Roadless or 

Inventoried Roadless Areas. The surrounding classified roads are permanent roads in the 

matrix land allocation where timber harvest and silvicultural activities will continue to 

dominate. 

Alternatives 1 and 5 would not foreclose the future option of either Limpy or Horseshoe 

being designated as wilderness, roadless, or inventoried roadless, however low that option 

may be. Neither Alternatives 1 nor 5 take any action within the two areas. None of the 

action alternative construct any permanent road in the Limpy or Horseshoe low density 

road areas. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 would lessen the likelihood of wilderness, roadless, 

or inventoried roadless eligibility in the short-term given the visual dominance of stumps 

over the next 20 years. Yet, over the long-term, as vegetative succession proceeds, the 

open post-fire character will gradually change to an even-aged forest stand, masking the 

visual dominance of the salvage activities. However, the impact to future eligibility as 

wilderness, roadless, or inventoried roadless is considered extremely low under 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 because the criteria for meeting wilderness, roadless, or 

inventoried roadless areas, regardless of the effects of the alternatives, are lacking. 

AIR QUALITY 

Affected Environment

Air quality can be severely impacted by the presence of particulate matter and other 

pollutants during large wildfire events. Impacts from the Apple Fire were seen at Crater 

Lake National Park 20-25 miles to the southeast, Diamond Peak/Mt. Thielsen 30-35 miles 

to the northeast, Roseburg 30-35 miles to the west and Oakridge 30-35 miles to the 

northeast. The 2002 Apple Fire, along with the Tiller Fires, created inversions and smoky 

conditions that prohibited visitors to Crater Lake from viewing lake vistas. Impacts to 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

304

residents, visitors, and fire personnel in Douglas County also occurred, as some residents 

and firefighters suffered from respiratory illnesses as a result of the inversions. Prevailing 

winds in the area tend to be up canyon (blowing to the east) during the day and down 

canyon at night (blowing to the west). 

Activities that can affect air quality in the project area include burning on National Forest 

lands for hazard reduction and future wildfire occurrence and prescribed burning. The 

following nearby airsheds would be at risk of being impacted by the proposed fuels 

reduction activities: 

Class I Airshed 

• Crater Lake National Park 20-25 miles to the southeast 

• Diamond Peak 30-35 miles to the northeast 

• Mt. Thielsen 30-35 miles to the east 

Designated Areas 

• Roseburg 30-35 miles to the west 

Special Protection Zone 

• Oakridge 30-35 miles to the northeast 

Air Quality and Emissions 

As of July 1997, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revised the particulate 

matter62 standards for emissions given off during burning activities. EPA now requires PM2.5 (particulate matter 2.5 micrometers63) standards to be met. PM-2.5, or fine particles, 

are found in emissions given off during fuel combustion (from vehicles), and from burning 

of wood. PM-10, or coarse particles, are emitted from vehicles traveling on dirt roads, 

windblown dust, and from incomplete combustion of fuels. While PM-10 will still be 

monitored and regulated, PM-2.5 and smaller will also be included. This change was 

brought about after scientific study found a link between PM-2.5 and public health 

problems, which include respiratory illnesses such as asthma. The constraints this may 

place on forest burning are unknown. Carbon monoxide64 (CO) is also identified an 

emission that can cause adverse health effects. The Forest Service will achieve strict 

compliance to all aspects of the Clean Air Act by working in conjunction with the Oregon 

Department of Forestry to follow the Oregon Smoke Management Plan. A ‘permit’ will be 

acquired by providing a unit description and planning all burning with the Oregon 

Department of Forestry. Any planned variances from the daily burning instructions will be 

discussed and approved by the Smoke Management Duty Forecaster. 

Prescribed burning can affect air quality in ways similar to wildfires; however, prescribed 

burning offers many advantages over wildfire. The effects of prescribed fire can be 

manipulated to reduce adverse effects to air quality. Smoke mitigation techniques 

include consideration of atmospheric conditions, season of burn, fuel and duff moisture, 

diurnal wind shifts, appropriate ignition techniques and rapid mop-up. This can lead to a 

decrease in possible effects from emissions. Table 69 displays the emissions that are 

produced when forest fuels are burned. 

 

62 Particulate matter is the general term used for particles found in the air, including dust, dirt, soot, smoke 

and liquid droplets. Fine particles are considered to be 2.5 micrometers in diameter or less (PM-2.5); 

anything larger is considered a coarse particle, such as PM-10. 63 A micrometer is equivalent to one-thousandth of a millimeter. 64 Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas that is formed when carbon in fuels is not burned 

completely. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

305

Table 69. Pounds of Emissions Produced Per Ton of Fuel Consumed 

In order to manage emissions from fuels reduction activities, fire managers evaluate the 

treatment methods based on level of risk, ability to meet objectives, and potential for 

impacts. Table 70 describes the smoke management options and impacts for management 

consideration. 

Table 70. Smoke Management Options. 

Treatment Timing Benefits Impacts 

No treatment N/A No emissions from fuels. Highest potential for large 

amount of emissions during 

potential wildfire. 

Broadcast or 

underburn 

Spring or Fall, 

usually prior to 

the passage of a 

moisture-bearing 

frontal system. 

Fire managers have a great 

deal of control over total 

particulate matter produced 

by burning when large fuels 

are still too moist to burn. 

Potential for wildfire in the 

future is reduced, decreasing 

potential for higher 

emissions that may occur in a 

future wildfire. 

Ease of future fire 

suppression is increased. 

Produces highest amount of 

particulate matter of all 

treatment options. 

Pile and burn Fall or winter, 

when raining or 

snowing 

Produces less pounds of 

particulate matter per tons 

of fuel burned. 

Potential for wildfire is 

reduced, although less than 

underburning. 

Ease of future fire 

suppression is increased. 

Produces moderate amount 

of particulate matter. 

Can cause severe, localized 

impacts to soil resource. 

Prescribed spring underburning would generally be accomplished from March to June. 

This is when the large fuel and duff moistures are high, thus reducing total particulate 

matter that would be produced. Mixing (the height at which smoke will lose its buoyancy 

and stop rising) is generally very good this time of year and inversions are usually rare. 

Burning would be done only during atmospheric conditions that allow good smoke 

dispersal. 

Fuel Type 

TSP

(Total suspended Particulate Matter) PM10 PM2.5 CO 

Broadcast or 

Underburned Douglasfir/hemlock 29.6 23.1 21.8 312 

Piled Fuels 28.4 19.0 17.1 169 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

306

Prescribed fall underburning would generally be accomplished during late September to 

late October. Coordination with the weather service would be needed to provide fire 

managers with most optimum days for burning within the prescription parameters and to 

utilize fall rains for mop-up and reduce fuels consumption overall. 

Prescribed pile burning would generally be accomplished from October to December 

period. Mixing65 is extremely good this time of year and inversions are usually rare. 

Burning would generally be accomplished during or after frontal systems that provide very 

favorable smoke dispersal. Pile burning produces fewer pounds of particulate, per ton of 

slash burned, than broadcast or underburning. 

Burning would not be done during the restricted period in the Oregon Visibility Protection 

Plan, currently July 1 to September 15 without waivers from Salem Smoke Management 

Forecaster. 

Environmental Effects 

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Under this alternative, PM-10, PM-2.5, and CO emissions would not be produced directly 

from burning of activity generated fuels. The potential for substantial indirect 

degradation of air quality from wildfire in the future, as surface fuel deposition occurs, 

would not be reduced. The No Action Alternative does not provide any opportunity to 

cumulatively reduce existing forest fuels and the hazard they pose in wildland fires. 

During the flaming phase of a large wildfire, air quality degradation could exceed Federal 

and State standards as far as 50 miles down wind. Forest fuels would continue to increase 

with biomass production out-producing the decomposition rates in this climate. Longterm chronic effects of wildfires include higher PM-10 and PM-2.5 emissions, mostly due to 

large areas of exposed soil and ash in the aftermath of a high intensity wildfire. 

The project area would be subject to long-term deposition of surface fuels from snags due 

to the high tree mortality experienced from the Apple Fire. These snags would contribute 

to the fuel available for a potential wildland fire, again increasing the potential for higher 

emissions. 

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects of all Action Alternatives 

Predicted emissions from prescribed burning in the proposed area have been estimated 

using emission factors from Fastracs, a smoke management and reporting computer 

program. 

Temporary and short-term visibility impacts can be expected in the immediate project 

area during actual ignition and would be affected by wind speed and direction. Drainage 

inversions would affect nighttime dispersal of smoke, with possible smoke effects 

occurring 5 to 10 miles down wind. Smoke from burning forest fuels can impact human 

health as described earlier, particularly for the ground crews at the site. The localized 

effects of burning in the project area would be short-term degradation of air quality from 

prescribed burning, primarily during the actual burning stage and during night time canyon 

inversions. The prescribed burning associated with all action alternatives would be 

conducted in accordance with Oregon Smoke Management Plan. 

 

65 Mixing is the height or level in the atmosphere at which the rising smoke will lose its buoyancy and stop 

rising. The higher the mixing height is, the better the smoke will disperse. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

307

Smoke from prescribed burning may be visible from dispersed recreation sites. The 

impacts to recreationists would be limited to the day of the burn. Burning piles in the fall 

would have minimal impacts to the developed or dispersed recreation users; this is due to 

the minimal use of recreation sites during this time of year and to the favorable dispersal 

of smoke. Hunters in the area may be affected for a short period of time (the day of the 

burn), but would not experience adverse cumulative impacts. 

If a wildfire event does occur after implementation of the Action Alternatives, it is 

expected that concentrations of all smoke related emissions would be less than in the No 

Action Alternative due to the reduced levels of fuel available. All prescribed burning 

activities are coordinated with the state air quality agencies to ensure that atmospheric 

stability and mixing heights are advantageous for dispersion of emissions. Therefore, 

although prescribed burning contributes to cumulative effects, the effects would not 

exceed state and local air quality standards (Table 71). There may be cumulative effects 

if adjacent landowners federal, state and private were burning at the same time. 

Adherence to the Oregon State Smoke Management Plan would alleviate these impacts. 

Methodology and assumptions for predicting emissions are the same as for all action 

alternatives. 

Table 71. Acres of treatment and predicted emissions for each alternative. 

TREATMENT 1 2 3 4* 5 6 

Total Acres 0 1075 880 1459 435 917 

Underburn Acres 0 858 519 887 0 631 

Hand Pile Totals Acres 0 138 297 517 413 261 

Grapple Pile Totals Acres 0 26 26 35 22 25 

Number of Landing Piles 0 153 141 174 94 169 

Yard Top/Limbs Acres 0 8 8 0 0 0 

Fall Burn Acres 0 138 297 517 413 261 

Spring Burn Acres 0 858 519 887 0 631 

Total Fuels Treatment Acres 0 1022 842 1459 435 864 

No Treatment Acres 0 45 30 20 0 0 

Total Tons of PM 2.5 0 432 336 615 82 376 

Total Tons of PM 10 0 462 362 341 91 405 

Total Tons of CO 0 5861 4262 7899 806 4881 

Tons of Suspended Particulate 

Matter (not additive) 0 610 493 897 135 546 

* Includes acreage from hand pile burning in riparian reserves. 

No other direct, indirect, or cumulative effects are predicted to occur to air quality as a 

result of this project. 

UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS 

Implementation of an action alternative may result in potential adverse environmental 

effects that may not be mitigated or avoided. Field reconnaissance and interdisciplinary 

analysis helped eliminate or mitigate many potential impacts. All Forest Plan Standards 

and Guidelines, Best Management Practices, project design features, and other mitigation 

measures and management requirements (found in Chapter 2) also lessen potential 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

308

effects. The specific effects associated with project activities were discussed throughout 

this chapter. 

The potential still exists for adverse impacts, even with mitigation and application of 

standards and guidelines and BMPs. As disclosed, limited disturbance to some wildlife 

species may occur; recreationists may be have limited access during harvest operations, 

and there is potential for some localized effects to soils. These impacts vary by how long 

they last (duration) and how severe they are (intensity). Most of these effects are 

predicted to be short-term in nature (during harvest operations). No Standards and 

Guidelines would be violated with this project; all effects would be within acceptable 

parameters. In addition, some monitoring is prescribed to ensure that effects are within 

the limits prescribed and that mitigation measures and BMP’s are successful. 

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 

Irreversible commitments of resources are those that cannot be regained, such as the 

removal of oil or mined ore. Irretrievable commitments are those that are lost for a 

period of time; such as the temporary loss of timber productivity in forested areas that 

are kept clear for use as a power line rights-of-way or road. Irreversible or irretrievable 

effects, where applicable, were described in the environmental effects by resource. 

Implementing the No Action Alternative would result in an irretrievable loss of the 

economic value of the timber. The burned timber, as discussed previously, is predicted to 

rapidly decay; if it is not harvested, the commercial value of that timber would be lost. 

The implementation of Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 would result in the irretrievable effect 

of foreclosing the possible option of designating the Horseshoe Bend and Limpy Creek low 

road density areas as wilderness areas, inventoried roadless areas, or roadless areas. The 

need to assess the effects on uninventoried roadless areas was established in a 2003 court 

ruling (Sierra Club v. Austin, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 24294). The assessment of the effects 

of this project on the Horseshoe Bend and Limpy Creek low road density areas, located 

above in this chapter, concluded that neither low density road area readily lend 

themselves to wilderness or roadless designation given their small size, their narrow 

configurations, and the presence of substantial amounts of visible and audible human 

activity. Although no classified, open roads (no permanent roads) would be built, 

Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 would still lessen the likelihood of wilderness or roadless 

eligibility given the visual dominance of stumps over the next 20 years. However, because 

these alternatives would generate funding to reforest the area, the visual dominance of 

the salvage activities would subside over the course of at least two decades; Alternative 5 

would remain visually dominated by a blackened landscape for a much longer time, as 

described in the vegetative succession portion of this document. 

SHORT TERM 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). It is the intent of this project to continue to manage resources so that they are 

available for future generations. The salvage of trees associated with this project is 

considered a short-term use of a renewable resource. As the harvested area would be 

reforested, the use of the resource is considered as renewable; no impairment to the 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

309

productivity of the land to continue growing trees is projected to occur as a result of 

implementing this project. 

The soils section of this document describes actions that would be taken in order to help 

maintain long term site productivity. Mitigation and project design features that would 

help retain effective ground cover and restore mycorrhizal functions would help maintain 

the long-term productivity of the project. 

SPECIFICALLY REQUIRED DISCLOSURES

PUBLIC AND WORKER SAFETY 

Affected Environment 

Safety, as it relates to lands managed by the Umpqua National Forest, is monitored by two 

different agencies for two separate groups of people. Federal Occupational Safety and 

Health Administration (Federal OSHA), applies to the general public as they visit and 

recreate on federal lands. Identifying and felling danger trees along recreational travel 

routes would fall under Federal OSHA. During harvest operations, some temporary road 

closures may occur to protect the public traveling through the area; these closures would 

be able to fully protect the public. No direct, indirect, or cumulative effects related to 

the safety of the public would occur. 

Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OR-OSHA) pertains to those 

individuals involved in forest activities, such as the activities associated with this project. 

The Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Code “Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 

437 Division 6” is the guiding document relating to safety for those individuals involved in 

forest activities. The purpose of the rules contained in this division is to prescribe 

minimum safety and health requirements for those employed in forest activities work 

(437-006-0007). The rules in Division 6 apply to all government agencies and private 

employers who engage in forest activities (437-006-0003(1)). 

Environmental Effects 

Direct Effects: 

Alternative 1: Although no acres are proposed for timber harvesting under this 

alternative, all trees which are subsequently determined to be a Danger Tree66 along 

system roads open for travel or within those areas planned for subsequent reforestation 

activities or other types of forest activities within the analysis area would be felled as 

part of on-going road maintenance activities. Therefore, no direct effects to public safety 

are likely to occur. 

Alternative 2: For this alternative, any of the trees planned for retention in any proposed 

harvest unit, next to a landing, or that occurs along commercial use roads which are 

subsequently determined to be a danger tree, would be felled to provide a safe work 

area. The retention of approximately 6-12 dead trees per acre and all green trees within 

units proposed for timber harvesting utilizing loader, skyline or helicopter logging systems 

is not anticipated to be a safety related concern since employees involved in forest 

 

66 Danger Tree 437-006-0005 (13): A standing live or dead tree, including snags, with evidence of 

deterioration or physical damage to the root system, trunk, or stem. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

310

activities would be able to be “in the clear67” at all times. Those units which retain 12 

dead trees per acre would expose employees involved in forest activities to more safety 

related concerns since the “in the clear” safe work area is less than in those units which 

retain 6 dead trees per acre. 

Alternative 3: This alternative would have similar effects as described for danger trees 

and the retention of 4-16 dead trees per acres as Alternative 2. Those units which retain 

15-16 dead trees per acre would expose employees involved in forest activities to more 

safety related concerns since the “in the clear” safe work area is smaller than in those 

units which retain 4-6 dead trees per acre. 

Alternative 4: Under this alternative, a small percentage of the acres proposed for 

treatment would remove small diameter timber (12–18 inches DBH) from portions of the 

riparian areas along some of the streams within the analysis area. This area would have 

more safety related concerns during felling and bucking, as larger diameter trees would 

be retained. These retention trees would be sources of broken tops or limbs that may fall 

on workers who are conducting fuels reduction activities in the Riparian Reserves. 

Lookouts may need to be used to ensure safety objectives are met. All other effects to 

safety would be the same as those described for Alternative 2. 

Alternative 5: Within the units proposed for timber harvesting under this alternative, all 

green trees, all dead trees over 30 inches DBH, and 50% of the remaining dead trees in all 

diameter classes under 30 inches would be retained. As with the other action 

alternatives, all danger trees would be felled. Based on the Division 6 Policy relating to 

“In the clear” at all times for those employees involved in forest activities, it was 

determined that the use of a helicopter logging system was infeasible with this level and 

density of retention due to the effects of the helicopter’s rotor wash, which makes 

retained trees sway and potentially fall over, posing a high hazard to workers on the 

ground. However, since no helicopter logging is proposed, there would be no effects to 

safety from the use of helicopters. Skyline and loader logging systems would be utilized in 

this alternative. Because high levels of trees would be retained, this alternative would 

put forest workers at the greatest risk of injury compared to the other action alternatives. 

However, because of the ability to fell danger trees and the use of wide corridors for 

yarding, these logging systems would allow for employees to be “in the clear,” which 

mitigates any effects to safety. 

Alternative 6: The effects of this alternative would be primarily the same as those 

described for Alternative 3. Several harvest units would retain all green trees, all dead 

trees over 30 inches DBH, and 50% of the dead trees in all diameter classes under 30” 

DBH. This prescription is the same as the prescription described for Alternative 5. These 

areas would utilize skyline logging systems, which would allow employees to be “in the 

clear;” therefore, no effects to safety are anticipated. These areas would utilize skyline 

logging systems, which would allow employees to be “in the clear;” therefore, no effects 

to safety are anticipated. 

Indirect effects to safety to forest workers who plant trees, conduct inventories, etc. 

would occur in the areas where trees are retained. As time passes and the retained snags 

 

67 In The Clear 437-006-0005 (35): A position within the work area where the probability of hazardous contact 

with falling trees, moving logs, root wads, chunks, material, rigging and equipment is minimized by distance 

from the hazards and/or use of physical barriers, such as stumps, trees, terrain or other objects providing 

protection. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

311

age, the probability increases that the snags will become more instable and may fall. 

Mitigation can reduce this risk, by requiring lookouts or by working when winds are light. 

No other cumulative effects to safety are anticipated to occur with this project. 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

The project area has been surveyed for cultural resources. All heritage resources have 

been protected by eliminating the area from harvest or by buffering the areas that may 

occur near proposed activities. 

The Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde, Confederated Tribes of the Siletz, and the 

Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians were contacted by Debra Barner, Heritage 

Program Manager for the Forest during the Apple and Tiller fires of 2002. The cultural 

resource specialists for the various Tribes were contacted by phone regarding the burned 

area and potential damage to archaeological sites. Through telephone conversations by 

Debra Barner and the Tribal cultural preservation specialists for each tribe a tour was 

arranged. After a date was selected, formal invitations were sent to the Tribes. The 

week prior to the field trip, Ms. Connie Shultz, Preservation Specialist for the 

Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde called to inform Ms. Barner that she would be 

unable to attend. Mr. Tooter Ansures, Cultural Committee Chairperson and Mr. Thomas 

Rondeau, Cultural Committee member for the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe of 

Indians were able to attend the field trip on October 15, 2002 to inspect the burned area. 

The cultural committee members said that they support salvage of the burned area with 

minimal new road construction. Robert Kentta, Cultural Specialist from the Confederated 

Tribes of the Siletz was also unable to attend. 

The Umpqua National Forest has sent a cover letter with the quarterly copies of the SOPA 

to each of the Tribes. Each quarter, the cover letter highlights new projects and projects 

that may be of interest to the Tribes; in particular, all fire salvages were highlighted to 

give the tribes more information. 

Under the treaties with the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde, Confederated Tribes 

of the Siletz, and Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, no trust resources or 

reserved treaty rights are given for the lands managed by the Umpqua National Forest. 

On January 14, 2004, Debra Barner called Mr. Robert Kentta and Ms. Connie Shultz and 

left a voice mail requesting to “know whether they had received enough information on 

our Baked Apple EIS and our timber program in general”. If they needed information, Ms. 

Barner requested that they please return her telephone call. Mr. Kentta and Ms. Shultz 

did not return her phone call. Ms. Barner also telephoned Mr. Tooter Ansures and asked if 

he felt he had been given enough information on the Forest’s timber salvage effort for 

Baked Apple timber salvage. Mr. Ansures responded that “he did feel he was given 

enough information and supported the salvage logging as long as we were protecting 

archaeological sites”. 

On January 16, 2004, Debra Barner spoke with Mrs. Sue Shaffer, Tribal Chairman for the 

Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians during a meeting on another topic. Mrs. 

Shaffer said that “yes, they were given enough information” about the fire salvage. 

On January 21, 2004, Ms. Barner also spoke with Mr. Tom Rondeau concerning whether he 

had enough information on the Baked Apple EIS and the Forest timber program. Mr. 

Rondeau indicated he had enough information and supported the salvage logging. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

312

Based on interactions with the tribes and inventories of the on-the-ground locations of 

cultural resources, no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects would occur with 

implementation of any of the alternatives. 

UNIQUE HABITATS 

The 2002 Apple Fire burned through dry meadows and unique habitats in the planning 

area. All unique habitats have been buffered from proposed management activities. No 

direct, indirect, or cumulative effects from the proposed activities are expected to occur. 

WETLANDS AND FLOODPLAINS 

The timber sale planning area encompasses the potential floodplain of 17 miles of 

perennial streams. Floodplains are within the riparian areas of Class I, II, and III streams, 

and vary from only a few feet, to the entire riparian area in width. No salvage activities 

are planned in riparian areas, except for Alternative 4. Road 4714 would be reconstructed 

at two sites within the riparian area of these sites for all action alternatives. The 

reconstructed sites would be designed to withstand a 100-year flood event. The 

environmental effects of road reconstruction within the floodplain consistent with the 

Standards and Guidelines for the Umpqua National Forest LRMP have been evaluated and 

declared in the LRMP Final EIS (March 1990). Since the activities in this project follow 

those Standards and Guidelines, this activity will not be declared separately for this sale. 

No effects of any kind would occur to wetlands and floodplains with Alternatives 2, 3, 5, 

and 6, as all waterbodies are protected by no harvest buffers. The partial harvest and 

fuels treatments associated with Alternative 4 would not significantly affect the Riparian 

Reserves within the project area; therefore, no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to 

wetlands or floodplains are expected to occur. 

PRIME FARMLANDS, RANGELANDS, FORESTLANDS OR PARKLANDS 

No prime farmlands, rangelands, forestlands or parklands exist within the area; therefore; 

no direct, indirect or cumulative effects would occur. 

POTENTIAL OR UNUSUAL EXPENDITURES OF ENERGY 

The action alternatives would require expenditures of fuel for workers to access the 

project, use power equipment and utilize the logging systems. In addition, jet fuel use 

for helicopter operations would also occur; however, the project would not result in any 

unusual expenditure of fuel. The no action alternative would require no expenditure of 

fuel. No other direct, indirect, or cumulative effects are expected to occur with any of 

the alternatives. 

CONFLICTS WITH PLANS OR POLICIES OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS 

Implementation of any of the alternatives would not conflict with the plans or policies of 

other jurisdictions, including the Tribes. This project would not conflict with any other 

policies, regulations, or laws, including the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and 

the National Historic Preservation Act. Effects to air quality and compliance with the 

Clean Air Act are described in this chapter. 

CONSUMERS, CIVIL RIGHTS, MINORITY GROUPS, AND WOMEN 

Contracting procedures would ensure that projects made available to contractors through 

this project would be advertised and awarded in a manner that gives proper consideration 

to minority and women-owned business groups. Because of this consideration, there 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

313

would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to consumers, civil rights, minority 

groups with implementation of any of the alternatives. 

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 

On February 11, 1994, President Clinton signed Executive Order 12898. This order directs 

Federal agencies to address environmental justice by identifying and disclosing the effects 

of the proposed activities on minority and low-income populations. The effects of the 

proposed alternatives on the economic conditions of the State and county are disclosed in 

the Economics section of this document. 

According to statistical data for Douglas County, 6.1% of the population is made up of 

minorities. As displayed in the Economics section of this document, unemployment and 

poverty in the county is higher than the State average. Since the project occurs in the 

middle of the Forest, there are no definable population centers that would be directly 

affected by the project. The Dry Creek community, which lies about 4 air miles to the 

east, has a small store that could see an increase in business during logging operations. 

The rest of the community may potentially be affected by an increase in log truck traffic. 

The communities of Idleyld Park and Glide, which lie about 25 miles to the west, may also 

see an increase in business and an increase in traffic. However, none of these increases 

would be comparable to the logging seen in the area in the late 1980’s. No adverse 

effects would occur. 

The salvage area is not a high recreation destination area, as described in the recreation 

section. However, where there is concentrated and dispersed recreation (Apple Creek 

Campground and Fairy Shelter, plus a few dispersed sites), the effects to those recreating 

in the area would be greatest. Very few minority groups or low-income groups are found 

in this area. Because of this, very few individuals of minority populations would likely be 

affected by this project. Low-income populations who may spend time camping at Apple 

Creek may also be impacted by during implementation when logging occurs. These groups 

may choose to recreate elsewhere, and would likely not be negatively impacted. 

However, these effects would end when logging is completed. Overall, none of the 

alternatives imposes any other additional hardships on minority or low-income 

communities; therefore, there would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to 

environmental justice with any alternative. 
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment and Environmental Effects 

314

This page intentionally left blank. 
Chapter 4 – List of Preparers

315

CHAPTER 4 

LIST OF PREPARERS 

INTRODUCTION

This chapter lists the Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team members that prepared or help 

prepare the DEIS/FEIS. 

BAKED APPLE INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM 

This following people were members of the Baked Apple Interdisciplinary Team (IDT): 

Rick Abbott Diamond Lake Ranger District, Certified Silviculturist. 

B.S. Forest Management, Penn State University, 1978. Forest 

Engineering Institute, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 

1990. Five seasons USFS Presale, Fire, and Silvicultural experience. 

One year USFS presale experience. Three years Bureau of Indian 

Affairs timber sale administration experience. Ten years USFS 

timber sale planning experience. Four years USFS Silvicultural staff 

experience . Natural Resources Institute, Oregon State University, 

University of Washington, Washington State University, 1999-2000, 

Certified USFS Silviculturist, 2002. 

Debbie Anderson Umpqua National Forest, Supervisor’s Office, IDT Leader. 

M.S. Forest Resources, Oregon State University, 1994; B.S. Forest 

Resources, 1991; A.S. Forest Technology, Mt. Hood Community 

College, 1987. Over sixteen years of Forest Service experience in 

fire, silviculture, and planning. Currently serving as Forest NEPA 

coordinator and team leader of the Forest Planning Team. 

Jim Archuleta Diamond Lake Ranger District, Soil Scientist. 

A.S. Natural Resources, Haskell Indian Nations University, 1997. B.S. 

Crop and Soil, Oregon State University, 1997. One year Natural 

Resources Conservation Service experience in soil and water 

conservation practices and structures. Eight years Forest Service 

experience in soils, restoration and Civil Rights - Special Emphasis 

Program Manager. 

Joy Archuleta North Umpqua Ranger District, District Hydrologist. 

A.S., Saint Thomas Aquinas University, Fishkill, NY, 1993. B.S. 

Biology, Systemics and Ecology Track, University of Kansas, 

Lawrence, Kansas, 1995. M.S. Environmental Soil Science, Oregon 

State University, Corvallis, Oregon 1998. Hydrologist Trainee, 

Umpqua National Forest, Roseburg, Oregon, 1997-1999. Currently 

serving as District Hydrologist, North Umpqua Ranger District. 
Chapter 4 – List of Preparers

316

Steve Bacigalupo North Umpqua Ranger District, Fire and Fuels. 

Associates of Science Degree in Forestry, Umpqua Community 

College, 1981. Experience: Twenty-three years experience with the 

Forest Service in Fire Management. Currently serving as Assistant 

Fire Management Officer at North Umpqua Ranger District. 

Miles Barkhurst North Umpqua Ranger District, Civil Engineer. 

BSME, Environmental Geosciences minor, Oregon State University 

College of Engineering, 1997. Twenty-four years Forest Service 

experience in road reconnaissance, survey, design, construction and 

reconstruction, Eleven years Forest Service experience in 

transportation planning and watershed restoration. 

Larry D. Broeker Supervisors Office Umpqua National Forest, Geologist. 

BA Geology from University of Montana, 1972. 3 years experience 

with private enterprise in mining and engineering geology. Twentyfour years experience with U.S. Forest Service in mining, 

engineering, and resource geology. Currently serving as Forest 

Geologist. 

Stuart L. Carlson Diamond Lake Ranger District, Logging Systems/Safety. 

AAS Degree Forest Technology New York State Ranger School 1975. 

Timber Cruiser 1975-1978, International Paper Company. Contract 

Logger, 1978, Self Employed. Forest Service Sale Administrator 

1978-1995, and 1998-Present on the Olympic, Mt Hood, Malheur, and 

Umpqua National Forests. Water Rights Specialist, Targhee National 

Forest, 1995-1998. Safety Coordinator, Umpqua National Forest, 

2000 – Present. Certified Sale Administrator, 1988-Present. District 

Planner, Diamond Lake Ranger District, 2003 – Present. 

Raymond J. Davis Umpqua National Forest, Supervisors Office, Wildlife Biologist. 

B.S. Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, New Mexico State Univ., 1991. 

Eleven years experience in wildlife, planning and fire. Served as 

District Wildlife Biologist on 2 different forests (Siuslaw and 

Umpqua). Currently serving as the Wildlife Biologist for the Forest 

Planning Team. 

Clint Emerson Diamond Lake and North Umpqua Ranger Districts, District Botanist. 

B.S. Botany/Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, 1997. Six 

years experience working as a Botanist for the Umpqua NF (1997-

2004). 

Barbara Fontaine Umpqua National Forest, Supervisor’s Office, Aquatic Team 

Facilitator and Editor. M.S. Fisheries Biology, 1988, Oregon State 

University. B.S. Wildlife Management, Humboldt State University, 

1979. Twenty-three years of Forest Service experience in timber 

sale planning, fish and wildlife inventories, habitat restoration, and 

monitoring. Currently serving as the Fisheries Biologist for the Forest 

Planning Team. 
Chapter 4 – List of Preparers

317

Jerry Harryman North Umpqua Ranger District, Recreation. 

B.S. Range Management, Oregon State University, 1974. Four years 

of Range Conservationist assignments with Bureau of Land 

Management. Three years as Range Specialist with USFS. Twentyfour years of staff experience with responsibilities in range, 

recreation, special uses, trails, minerals, timber sales, and land 

programs. 

Ron McMullin North Umpqua Ranger District. Fisheries Biologist. 

B.S. Limnology/Aquatic Biology, University of Wisconsin - Stevens 

Point, 1992. Twelve years of Forest Service experience in aquatic 

resources and fisheries biology. Currently serving as District 

Fisheries Biologist and Planning Staff, North Umpqua Ranger District. 

Gene Mitchell North Umpqua Ranger District, Cultural Resources and Logging 

Systems. A.S. Forest Management, Umpqua Community College, 

1971. Thirty-two years of Forest Service experience in timber, 

silviculture, cultural resources and fire. Currently serving as presale 

Supervisory Forestry Technician for the Forest Implementation 

Team. 

 

Steve Nelson Diamond Lake Ranger District, Economic Analyst. 

BS (Forestry, minor in Business Management), Humboldt State 

University, 1980. Forest Engineering Institute, Oregon State 

University, 1985. Twenty-two years Forest Service experience in 

NEPA, Timber, Engineering, and Transportation Planning. Currently 

serving as Forest Road Maintenance Supervisor, Diamond Lake 

Ranger District. 

Kathy Postles North Umpqua Ranger District, EIS Editing Assistant. 

Over eighteen years experience in fire, fuels, silviculture and 

wildlife. Currently survey as District Dispatcher. 

OTHER CONTRIBUTORS AND REVIEWERS 

The following people also contributed to the preparation of this document or reviewed 

the document prior to its distribution: 

Wayne Brady 

Stephen Buskie 

Carol Cushing 

Richard Helliwell 

Megan Impson 

James Kaineg 

Yewah Lau 

Dave Lockwood 

Rachel L. Miller 

Don Morrison 

Dana York 
Chapter 4 – List of Preparers

318

This page intentionally left blank. 
 Chapter 5 – Response to comments 

319

CHAPTER 5 

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS, PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND 

RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 

INTRODUCTION

This chapter documents the public involvement process that occurred during the Baked 

Apple Fire Salvage Project. Lists of individuals, organizations, agencies, and tribes who 

participated are also documented. The 45-day public comment process is also described, 

along with the substantive comments received on the DEIS and the Forest Service’s 

response to those comments. 

BAKED APPLE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS 

Scoping (a process used to surface issues) for the Baked Apple Fire Salvage began with 

several public forums and meetings after the fire was contained. A town hall meeting to 

share what the District had learned about the fire was held in Glide, Oregon on December 

10th, 2002; approximately 22 people attended that meeting. A second town hall meeting 

was held on March 4th, 2003 in Roseburg, Oregon; twenty-nine people attended that 

meeting to preview a possible course of action. An additional town hall meeting was held 

on May 5th, 2003, also in Roseburg; twelve people attended that meeting and were able to 

interact with the team to discuss the proposed alternatives. Interdisciplinary team 

meetings to review alternatives and integrate information specialists had learned were 

open to the public on May 6th, 2003; five people attended that meeting. A final IDT 

meeting was held on June 12th, 2003, so that the public could interact with the team and 

discuss what specialists had found about the effects of the proposed activities on their 

resource; nine people attended that meeting. Seven field trips occurred where the 

interested and affected persons viewed the fire salvage area, learned about resource 

concerns, and provided their ideas of how to proceed. 

Based on the potential effects of the proposed action, the District Ranger determined that 

an environmental impact statement was the appropriate format for disclosing potential 

impacts. The Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the 

Baked Apple Fire Salvage Project was published in the March 17, 2003 Federal Register (68 

FR 12662). Scoping continued and the project was first listed in the April 2003 Umpqua 

National Forest Quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA). 

The regulatory agencies (US Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries) charged with 

overseeing the Endangered Species Act, were consulted extensively throughout the 

planning process. Formal consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service has been 

finalized. Members of the interdisciplinary teams from the Ash and Acker Fire Salvages at 

Tiller, the Biscuit Fire Salvage on the Siskiyou National Forest, and regional office experts 

were also consulted. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

320

IDT members conducted extensive literature reviews in preparing their analysis. Taxa 

experts from the Region were consulted; the Beschta report and McIver and Starr reports 

were thoroughly studied and resulted in formulation of issues, alternatives or analysis. 

Seventy-five comment letters were received during scoping. The Tribes (Cow Creek Band 

of Umpqua Indians, Confederated Tribe of the Grand Ronde Indians, and the Confederated 

Tribe of the Siletz Indians) were consulted; the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians 

indicated full support for the project. No other tribal interests responded to the 

proposal. 

Concerns from the public ranged from not salvaging fast enough, opposition to salvage, 

and a request to conduct restoration activities only. Numerous letters indicated support 

for managing the area using the “Beschta” approach. A detailed summary of the scoping 

comments received is located in the Project Record and is available on request. 

TRIBES THAT WERE CONSULTED FOR THE DEIS/FEIS 

Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians 

Confederated Tribe of Grand Ronde of Indians 

Confederated Tribe of Siletz Indians 

LIST OF PERSONS AND AGENCIES WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE PLANNING 

PROCESS EITHER AT OPEN HOUSES, PUBLIC FORUMS, MEETINGS, FIELD 

TRIPS OR WHO WROTE LETTERS OF INPUT FOR THE DEIS/FEIS 

Art Adams, Nordic Plywood 

Mike Anderson 

Susan Applegate 

Alan Baumann 

Paul Beck 

Bill Blodgett, Oregon Ridge and River Excursions 

Dave Burr 

Stephen Canning 

Rachel Connelly 

Ed and Mary Cooley 

Jenny Council 

Paul Craig 

Bruce Cronk 

Paul Czemerys 

Michael Davis 

Richard Dean 

Michelle & Jack DeAngeles 

Ann Dorsey 

Elsa Ruth Douglass 

Francis Eatherington, Umpqua Watersheds 

Bill Fisher, State Senator 

Jadene Fourman 

David & Lynn Frazer 
 Chapter 5 – Response to comments 

321

Beatrice Fredrickson 

Dave Germond 

Jake Gibbs, Society of American Foresters 

Javier Goirigolzarri, Resource Management Services 

Allen and Kathryn Goodwin 

Harold Grout 

Chad Hanson 

Rick Harbick 

Robin Hartman, Umpqua Basin Watershed Council 

Ken Hendrick 

John Hjort 

Bob Hoehne 

Ken Jensen 

Gerald Keck, DR Johnson Lumber 

Megan Kemple 

Richard & Nancy Kreger 

Josh Laughlin, Cascadia Wildlands Project 

Jim Leoni 

Penny Lind, Umpqua Watersheds 

Mike W. Letourneau, US Environmental Protection Agency 

Tammy Maurer, Elk Haven RV Resort 

Russ McCourdy 

Dave Melo 

Max Merlich 

Dave Metz 

David Mildrexler 

Cora Lynn Miller 

Toby Mills 

Gerry Mires 

Liz Mitchell 

Dave Moneh 

Bill Moore, Seneca Jones Timber Co. 

Dennis Morgan 

Anna Morrison 

Nick and Mary Murphy 

Dianne Muscarell 

Richard North 

Dick & Connie Norte 

Don Ollivant 

Diana Pare 

David Parker 

Everett & Gail Peterson 

Terri Peterson 

Mike Piehl 

Jeff Plikat 

Wally Plikat 

Robert & Jean Pollock 

Jack Price 

Robert E. Ragon, Douglas Timber Operators 

Edward B. Schattenkerk 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

322

Chuck Schnautz 

Mary Lou Schock 

Richard Schramm 

Gary Schroeder, C&D Lumber 

Lenny Schussel 

Wayne A. Shammel, Umpqua Band of Cow Creek Tribe of Indians 

Kathy Shayler 

Jack Shoemaker 

Leeanne Siart 

Phil Simon 

Karen Sjurgen 

John Sowell 

Charles Spooner 

Bruce Standley, Bruce Standley Construction 

Patrick Starnes, Umpqua Watersheds 

William Stiles 

Bruce Stewart, Bohemia Mine Owners Association 

Meera Subramanian 

Nancy Tague 

Jim Talburt 

Erin Tobin 

P. & B. Trusty 

Craig A. Tuss, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Roseburg Field Office 

Paul Utz 

Dan Van Slyke, Douglas County Commissioner 

Stanley Vejtasa, Umpqua Valley Audubon Society 

Diana Wales 

Frank R. Walter 

Alexander F. Wilcox 

Dale M. Williams 

Don Wilson 

Fara Wilson 

Bridget Wolf 

Ron Yockim 

DISTRIBUTION OF THE DRAFT AND FINAL EIS 

FEDERAL AGENCIES TO WHOM COPIES OF THE DEIS/FEIS WERE SENT 

Western Office of Review, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

Deputy Director, TDP, EAD, USDA Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service 

National Resource Conservation Service, Environmental Coordinator of Ecological Sciences 

Division 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Policy and Planning Division, Office of Civil Rights 

USDA, National Agricultural Library, Head, Acquisitions and Serials Branch 

National Marine Fisheries Service, Habitat Conservationists Division, Northwest Region 

U.S. Army Engineers Division, North Pacific, CENPD 
 Chapter 5 – Response to comments 

323

Director, Office of Environmental Compliance, U.S. Department of Energy 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Review 

EIS Coordinator, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 

Northwest Mountain Region, Regional Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration 

Federal Highway Administration, Western Resource Center 

U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, HUD CPD Division Director 

Director, Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance, U. S. Department of the Interior 

Northwest Power Planning Council 

Bureau of Land Management 

USDA-Forest Service R6, Environmental Coordination 

STATE AGENCIES TO WHOM COPIES OF THE DEIS/FEIS WERE SENT 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Division 

Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, Resource Management and Planning 

Paul Cleary, Water Resources Department 

John Lilly, Division of State Lands 

Dr. Vicki McConnell, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries 

Department of Environmental Quality, Salem Office 

Department of Land Conservation and Development 

Marty Brantley, Economic and Community Development 

Tom Potiowsky, State Economist 

Oregon Department of Forestry, Resources Library 

Jim Brown, Governor's Natural Resource Policy Director 

INDIVIDUALS TO WHOM COPIES OF THE DEIS/FEIS WERE SENT 

 

Susan Applegate 

Paul Beck 

Bryan Bird 

Mark Boyer 

Stephen Canning 

Ed Cooley 

Bruce Cronk 

Jack De Angeles 

Bob Devlin 

Ann Dorsey 

Rachel Dunmore 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

324

Francis Eatherington, Umpqua Watersheds 

Tyler Eaton 

Dave Germond 

Jake Gibbs, Society of American Foresters 

Javier Goirigolzarri, Resource Management Services 

Chad Hanson, John Muir Project 

Rick Harbick 

Robin Hartman, Umpqua Basin Watershed Council 

Eric Hellenthal 

Doug Heiken, ONRC 

Ken Hendrick 

John Hjort 

Bob Hoehne 

Dave Horax 

James Johnston, Cascadia Wildlands Project 

Gerald Keck 

Megan Kemple 

Richard & Nancy Kreger 

Josh Laughlin, Cascadia Wildlands Project 

Penny Lind, Umpqua Watersheds 

Lone Rock Timber Company 

Ivan Maluski 

Russ McCourdy 

Wendy McGowan 

Christie Meacham 

Dave Melo 

Max Merlich, Columbia Helicopters 

David Mildrexler 

David R. Monett 

Bill Moore, Seneca Jones Timber Co. 

Dennis Morgan 

Mike Mullen 

Geoff Niles 

Steve Niles 

Don Ollivant 

David Parker 

Dr. David Perry 

Jack Price 

Bob Ragon, Douglas Timber Operators 

Lenny Schussel 

Wayne A. Shammel, Umpqua Band of Cow Creek Tribe of Indians 

Jack Shoemaker 

Karen Sjorgren 

Charles Spooner 

Andy Stahl, Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics 

Bruce Standley, Bruce Standley Construction 

Patrick Starnes, Umpqua Watersheds 

William Stiles 

Meera Subramanian 

Craig A. Tuss, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Roseburg Field Office 
 Chapter 5 – Response to comments 

325

Paul Utz 

Dan Van Slyke, Douglas County Commissioner 

Stanley Vejtasa, Umpqua Valley Audubon Society 

Joseph Vaile, Klamath/Siskiyou Wildlands Center 

Diana Wales 

Frank R. Walter 

Anita Ward 

Gerald and Robin Wisdom 

Bridget Wolf 

Ron Yockim 

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 

The 45-day Public Comment period for the Baked Apple Fire Salvage Draft Environmental 

Impact Statement (DEIS) opened on October 31, 2003 and closed on December 15, 2003. 

The public was asked to give comment on Alternative 4 of the EIS. Thirty-eight timely 

comment letters were received. 

In January of 2004, two interdisciplinary team meetings that were open to the public were 

held to discuss the comments received on the DEIS. On January 6th, seven people 

attended the meeting, while on January 13th, ten people attended. At both meetings, 

those who attended had the chance to interact with resource specialists regarding the 

comments that were submitted. 

Comments were received from the following persons: 

1. Rachel Dunmore 

2. Megan Kemple 

3. Mike Mullen 

4. Karen Jeanne Sjorgren 

5. Robert Devlin 

6. Donald Ollivant 

7. David R. Monett 

8. Christie Meacham 

9. Ed Cooley 

10. Max Merlich, Columbia Helicopters 

11. Stanley Vejtasa, Umpqua Valley Audubon Society 

12. Joseph Vaile, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center 

13. Wendy McGowan 

14. Geoff Niles 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

326

15. Jack DeAngeles 

16. Christie Meacham 

17. Chad Hanson, John Muir Project 

18. Andy Stahl, Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics 

19. Mark Boyer 

20. Anita Ward 

21. Gerald and Robin Wisdom 

22. Erik Hellenthal 

23. Gerald Keck, Georgia Pacific Corporation 

24. Robert Ragon, Douglas Timber Operators 

25. David Mildrexler 

26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 

27. Francis Eatherington, Umpqua Watersheds, Inc. 

28. Javier Goirigolzarri, Resource Management Services 

29. Jake Gibbs, Umpqua Chapter Society of American Foresters 

30. Doug Heiken, Oregon Natural Resources Council 

31. Ronald Yockim, Douglas County Board of County Commissioners 

32. James Johnston, Cascadia Wildlands Project 

33. Steve Niles 

34. Tyler Eaton 

35. Dr. David Perry, retired scientist/professor, Oregon State University 

36. Preston Sleeger, United States Department of the Interior, Office of the 

Secretary, Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance 

37. Patrick Starnes, Umpqua Watersheds, Inc. 

38. Dave Horax, Columbia Helicopters 

All substantive comments submitted must be considered and addressed. A substantive 

comment is defined (CFR §215.2) as: 

"Comments that are within the scope of the proposed action, are specific to the 

proposed action, have a direct relationship to the proposed action and include 

supporting reasons for the Responsible Official to consider." 

Examples of substantive comments are those which: 

• provide new information pertaining to the preferred alternative or an alternative 

in the analysis; 

• identify a new issue or expand upon an existing issue; 
 Chapter 5 – Response to comments 

327

• identify a different (alternative) way to meet the purpose and need of the project; 

• provide an opinion regarding one or more alternatives, including the basis or 

rationale for that opinion; 

• point out a specific flaw in the analysis, or; 

• identify a different source of credible research, which if used in the analysis could 

result in different effects. 

It should be noted that all comments received are valuable. Alternative preferences, 

values and feelings also contribute to increased understanding and were carefully read 

and considered. The following narrative contains the comments, grouped by subject 

matter and paraphrased where appropriate, followed by the Forest Service’s response. 

 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

328

Table 72. Comments received on the DEIS, by subject of concern, and the Forest Service’s Response. 

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

32 Aquatic 

Ecosystem 

The NWFP explicitly prohibits the FS from relying on short-term mitigation fixes like placement of in-stream material for preserving long-term recruitment. NWFP S&G WR-3 instructs the FS: “Do not use mitigation or planned restoration as a substitute for preventing habitat degradation (S&Gs p C-37). Failure to address this issue and provide for recruitment of future wood violates the ACS objective # 3. 

Placement of large woody matthe effects of the fire and the apeak flows and channel erosioactivities (DEIS pg. 213). No tfrom within one site potential tof any stream channel (DEIS pBaked Apple alternatives are eflows (DEIS pg. 200). None of alternatives would appreciably large wood material (DEIS pg. 

27, 30 Aquatic 

Ecosystem 

This project is not consistent with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy of the Northwest Forest Plan. Logging on unsuitable soils adjoining Riparian Reserves is not consistent with ACS objectives 1, 3, 5, 8, and 9. Commercial logging for economic purposes in Riparian Reserves is inconsistent with ACS objectives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9. Salvage logging leaving as few as six trees per acre is not consistent with ACS objectives 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. Hazard tree logging of green trees will increase the canopy openings within the watershed even more, increasing peak flows, which is inconsistent with ACS objective #6. The project is located in the transient snow zone and will not remove much green canopy but salvage logging it will still adversely affect peak flows. Abundant snags and logs help trap snow on the hill slope with the effect of encouraging infiltration and slowing water run-off during big storm events (p 218 citing Lancaster et al. 2001). Salvage will degrade this function and effectively increase water peak flows. The EIS analysis of peak flow does not consider this. 

In response to public commenRanger has decided to remove from consideration from salvagand 6. The NWFP Appendices pg. B-to salvage timber from the ripacatastrophic events such as firwind, or insect damage result conditions, allow salvage and required to attain ACS objectivsalvaging timber from 32 acres potential tree height area and treatments within one site potereduce fuels and future fire risBy reducing the fuels and the areas, riparian indicators woulshort term and advanced in the -266). Under Alternative 6, the alternative, no riparian reserveAll action alternatives would lewithin harvest units to meet or Forest Plan Standard and Gui115) and the NWFP (NWFP AApplication of the standards anNorthwest Forest Plan, includi
 

329

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Aquatic Conservation Strategypotential adverse effects that mprojects. Achieving the objectbe determined over larger scawatershed) and over long time longer). The scale of this projeone 7th field watershed) is not 

duration to preclude or achieve objectives. Green hazard tree removal maroutes, landing areas, helicoptwithin units where they are idehuman safety (DEIS pg. 5). Thhazard trees is expected to be in nature. Green hazard trees designated unit will be availabgreen hazard trees outside of felled and left in place unless tadjacent roadway, in which cagreen hazard trees that are felreserves will be left in place. Salvage logging will have no esubwatershed (DEIS pg. 199, Hydrology Rpt.). Snow is not incanopy and therefore collects forest floor. Because the area zone when rains fall on the laras a result of the fire can be exthose that would be experiencliving canopy. Effective ground cover (EGC), following site preparation (e.g. burning, lop and scatter) is experosion when compared to no Soils Rpt. Figure 6). EGC will flow and help increase infiltrati
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

330

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

soil. The large wood that is rereference to potential landslidehow large wood can affect the events. All areas that were identified awere removed from harvest co150, 151 Table 34). Wood from were to occur and deliver to a help to reduce the velocity of tarea streams may experience flows as well as potentially slowood in streams can slow stredissipate the erosive power of expected as a result of the fire trees. 

27, 30 Aquatic 

Ecosystem 

The watershed analysis page 56-57 indicates that wildfire is one of the “primary recruitment mechanisms” for delivering large wood to streams and developing complex stream structure that dissipate energy, store and route gravel, create diversity of aquatic habitat types, etc. The watershed analysis also indicates that streams need 50-110 pieces of large wood per mile. The DEIS indicates that large wood is currently deficit in this watershed (especially Limpy and Bachelor Creeks) and that the lower reaches of Panther and Limpy Creeks (where threatened coho live) are simplified and scoured to bedrock due 

in part to lack of large wood. Salvage logging on steep slopes above streams will clearly deprive streams of much needed large wood. The watershed analysis indicates that harvest and roads are inversely related to large wood abundance. The Forest Service cannot reconcile this massive salvage project with ACSO #8. 

Unstable areas would not be salternative and only 32 acres oriparian reserve would be salvonly. This would allow for large the riparian from steep unstaboccur and from fire-killed riparwere developed in light of the watershed analysis and designmaintaining the objectives of thstrategy over the long-term. In addition, Large Woody Matelower mainstem of Limpy Creeand the tributary channels of PBachelor Creeks as part of the One hundred and twenty-five lapproximately 3.5 miles of lowCreeks. In addition approximachannels had large wood addeare achieved only over a perioThe ACS objectives do not proconstraining the short-term or individual projects. 
 

331

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

6 Economics Value from salvaging can be recovered for the U.S. Treasury, 

and more importantly, KV funding for rehabilitation of burned areas. Salvage logging will also create jobs that will benefit Douglas County and Oregon. 

The economic value of salvagsignificant issue and discussed (pg. 267-275). 

7, 38 Economics Get this project implemented and put people back to work. Time 

is of the essence. This will incur a huge loss of volume in the smaller diameter wood sought by local mills today, and the tops of the larger trees which will be unmarketable. The longer this wood sits the less likely you are to have interested bidders. The mills have figured out other sources for their supply and have long term procurement sources already under contract. They are not willing to take any chances on this degraded wood, or put up with the onerous operating 

restrictions, road work, slash requirements and other attendant costs of working on USFS ground anymore. There is also likely going to be preservationist protests. All this diminishes your bidder pool and a willingness to pay much for the wood. 

Recovering economic value is this project (DEIS, pg. 5). The DEIS recognizes that the and fire-killed timber decay rap

10, 23, 38 Economics 

Fire/Fuels 

Remove dead timber from every acre possible. Good volume is being lost by staying out of riparian areas and LSRs. Too many wildlife trees are being left. Riparian areas should be selectively 

logged to remove fuels and rehabilitate the areas. I encourage you to salvage log every acre you can in the matrix and any additional area in LSR. None of this wood should be wasted any more than it already has by sitting for over a year. 

Alternative 4 was designed to as possible within existing lawregulations. In addition, an altthat removed dead trees in all page 15). This alternative was study because it was not consobjectives of the riparian reserpage 15). The responsible official directeareas within the Matrix land alInitiation Letter, March 7, 2003allocation is considered to be bproject. 

11 Economics The economic gains from logging in controversial areas such as 

poor soils, erosion susceptible areas, and riparian areas, that Alternative 4 proposes, could be lost by delays in implementation because of the controversy these areas bring to the action. 

Thank you for your comment. Alternative 6 in the FEIS and hin unsuitable soils units in ordeand reduce the impact on the a
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

332

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

11, 27, 37 Economics In the economic analysis, the Forest Service should calculate 

the value to the forest that the fire achieved in improving forest health. The Economic Report also fails to show the benefits of the underburns of the Apple fire in the project area. It costs the Forest Service thousands of dollars to do prescribed burns on areas of the forest that have experienced negative results of fire suppression. The watershed analysis for the project area details how badly these prescribed burns are needed. The Apple fire accomplished over 9,000 acres of needed prescribed underburning where the overstory was minimally affected. 

During scoping, our organization asked many time for this economic analysis, but the DEIS only focused on the economic benefit of extracting burned trees for the benefit of the timber industry. When we complained, we were told that the economic benefit of the underburns could be as much a $7,500,000 within the Apple fire, and almost $3,000,000 within the Baked Apple planning area. These economic benefits of the fire should have been disclosed at the same time as the economic benefits of extracting burned trees. 

These costs are considered “sand are not included in the ecanalysis. The costs and beneare not attributable to this prodiffer by alternative. Howeverof the underburn will be documThe DEIS did respond to the sthey were understood by the recognizes the value of the unburned; economics were not cletter from Umpqua Watershedid not explicitly request a full underburn. 

27 Economics The DEIS failed to disclose the Forest Service used watershed 

restoration money from the Resource Advisory Committees Title II funds to cruise and mark this timber sale. The amount could be in excess of $111,656.00. We asked the Forest Service to correct this oversight but were told that it could only be included in the FEIS. Unfortunately, this does not allow either Umpqua Watersheds or other members of the public the opportunity to comment in detail on this part of the Economic Analysis. With this infusion of restoration money into the project, the economic returns of more environmentally friendly logging methods (such as in alternative 5) and unit choices are more viable. This should have been revealed in the DEIS. Cruising and marking for Alternative 4 especially is not consistent with the Secure Rural Schools Act because Alternative 4 prioritizes economic return purposes and deemphasizes the protection and restoration of unsuitable soils and other resource values. Instead, the Title II funds should be 

The cost of sale preparation weconomic efficiency analysis apage 270 of the DEIS. The RAbeen used under all alternativeEconomic Analysis; this moneof the cost for preparing Alternchange the economic returns osource of the money is not geritself. The question of proper use of elevated to the Chief’s level. ACouncil for the Washington Ofmoney to cruise and mark timbintent of the Act. Therefore, ththe RAC for use in other proje
 

333

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

used to either maintain infrastructure or enhance forest ecosystems. 

27 Economics The Economic report doesn’t account for the high volume of 

burnt timber from the Biscuit salvage logging, the Timber Rock fire sales, and smaller salvage sales from the Diamond Lake district and Roseburg BLM. This flood of raw logs will bring the supply side up and the demand side down, potentially reducing returns to the national treasury. The DEIS must include all these economic factors. 

The effect of this increased suthe DEIS on page 272. Thougdue to high uncertainty, the prreduction of delivered log pricevariations in log prices were inanalysis and discussed in Cha271). As a technical note, an not cause a decrease in demathis uncertainty, an analysis wsupplement to the Economic Adescribe the log price level for NPV goes to zero. 

27 Economics The Economic Report also fails to include the cost of fire 

suppression for the Apple fire. Mike Hupp told us it cost approximately $18,000,000. 

These costs are considered “s

and are not included in the ecoanalysis. The costs and benefare not attributable to this propdiffer by alternative. The cost of suppression for the approximately $16,500,000. 

27 Economics The use of KV is bias toward timber sales and away from 

recreation and other uses of the project area. KV funding never included fixing up the North Umpqua trail in the wild and scenic section of the project area. 

The North Umpqua Trail is locboundary. Since there are no trail, KV could not be legally usResource Advisory Committee Title II monies under the Secufinance the reconstruction of thfire. A separate NEPA effort is 

reconstruction. 

27 Economics At our meeting with the Forest Service on December 1, we 

asked why the smaller trees would be left, while the larger trees sold, since smaller trees are a greater fire hazard than larger trees. Ray Davis agreed there was economic impetus for this silviculture prescription. The DEIS should have made it clear that the “economic” purpose and need was being directly applied to the Riparian Reserves at the request of the timber industry in the 

Ray Davis did not agree that threason for the silviculture presreserves. Ray simply re-posed group that was at the meeting The primary drive behind the rprescription was in response tscoping (DEIS page 11) that re
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

334

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Forest Service’s preferred alternative. do more to reduce fuels along 

31 Economics The stumpage values in the Economic Efficiency analysis is not 

clear on whether stumpage costs were derived using the dollar values developed on recent regeneration harvests of mature timber or from sales involving thinning of less valuable trees. A review of logging costs on thinnings reveals a cost of $250 to $300, however, when the mature timber is harvested in regeneration prescription, the logging cost is less than $200. It would be helpful if the economic efficiency model identified what type of sale it utilized in developing the $275 to $407/acre cost. 

Stumpage values were derived approach to appraisal. Delivestarting point and were derived Department of Forestry publishand Southwest Oregon. (http://www.odf.state.or.us/divi

asset_management/logprices/quoted by diameter range and were derived from the Helipacappraisal methods for skyline diameter and species mix of efrom stand exam data and walAverage logging costs range fto $241/mbf (Alt 5). The comm$275 to $407/acre are total coForest Service prep and admindisposal, road work, reforestat

30 Economics Capturing commercial log value is a questionable purpose for 

this project. Conducting destructive salvage operations in order to capture commercial log value is inappropriate. This plan, like so many others in the Interior Columbia Basin, calls for the liquidation of most of the remaining old forest. Just because this burned area is in a “timber production zone” in an outdated forest plan is not a reason to salvage this area. The Forest Plan is so outdated that it is effectively invalid. 

The need to recover the econowood before it decays is an apbased on the land allocation dNational Forest Land and Res(Management Area 10, timber Northwest Forest Plan (Matrix within the Interior Columbia Ba

was amended by the 1994 ReAmendments to Forest Service Management Planning Documthe Northern Spotted Owl (NorPlan revision of the Umpqua NResource Management Plan w

30 Economics Many mitigation and monitoring efforts included in this proposal 

may not get funded due to inadequate K-V funds. Please disclose this uncertainty and the consequences. For instance, water quality monitoring is dependent upon staffing and funding. 

Effectiveness ratings, which raimplement a particular practice BMP action for the FEIS (the D

overall BMP). These ratings wFEIS – all practices received a 
 

335

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

For water quality monitoring, thPanther Creek is considered cmonitoring. Funding for this sifor the forest. 

5 Endangered 

Species 

Please clarify the rationale behind the “likely to adversely affect” determination for the action alternatives with respect to the spotted owl. 

The “may affect, and likely advdetermination for the spotted orespect to noise disturbance uWildlife Service standard opereffects determinations (DEIS, effect” to critical habitat due to outside designated critical hab

27, 30 Endangered 

Species 

The salvage will adversely affect the Oregon Coastal coho salmon that spawn within the project area, violating the Endangered Species Act. 

The determination of effects foSalvage Sale Project has been Impact Individuals, but Will NoToward Federal Listing for cohin the Panther Creek subwaterThis determination is substantBiological Evaluation (FEIS Ap

27 Endangered 

Species 

Four spotted owl activity centers, including 3 pairs, will be disturbed by most action alternatives. An assumption in the DEIS is that the burned old-growth can be sold because it is of no-use to the Northern Spotted Owl. This is untrue. The “Lakes fire” burned more than 80% of the Fenton Lake Mexican spotted owl Protected Activity Center (PAC) on the Jemez Ranger District of the Santa Fe National Forest in August 2002. But the Mexican spotted owl territory that was “completely destroyed” by fire is still occupied. The owl pair produced two fledglings in the summer of 2003. Impacts to the Northern Spotted Owl from the Baked Apple salvage logging should be fully considered. The Forest Service has not disclosed any evidence that Northern Spotted Owls will abandon burned territory. 

No assumption is made in the no use to the northern spotted 124 discuss how salvage of deaffect the spotted owl through habitat within and adjacent to habitats. The EIS also does nowls will abandon their territorone pair (#710) may shift its tewest due to impacts from the wnorthern spotted owl, the Mexicommonly nests in rock cavitiethe case for the Fenton Lake ocommenter. Based on converbiologist Jo Wargo, this owl pacavity that is protected by 1-2 to have survived the fire. The (once fledged) moved to a less (containing more green trees tthe nest site. The DEIS fully cand cumulative impacts to the pages 121-125. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

336

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

32 Endangered 

Species 

The Forest Service is assuming that all habitat for owls in the burn area has been eliminated. Even heavily burned areas provide forage and roosting habitat for spotted owls. The recommendations of the April 1992 “Spotted Owl Recovery Plan – Draft” are not being met under the proposed action, and jeopardize local populations of owls. 

The DEIS defines owl habitat aforaging habitat (NRF)” and disIt describes the fire’s impact to the same page and refers the Effects Evaluation Project (USincorporated by the DEIS on pService does not assume that burn area has been eliminatedfire decreased amounts of theslower levels remain within the The DEIS discusses how salvaeffects to the owl (pgs. 123-12prey species habitat (foraging discussion is provided in the fiinformation for Franklin et al. 2impacts to habitat fitness. Late(LSR) land allocations and mathe Northwest Forest Plan werthe Forest Service and BLM corecovery of the northern spotteproposed salvage totally avoidand meets or exceeds all manthe ROD standards and guidecomplies completely with the SPlan. 

26 Endangered 

Species 

While the action alternatives impact a small portion of the remaining NRF habitat in the planning area, analyses cited in the EIS state that pair occupancy in the area has declined since 

1989 and continued loss of pairs may accelerate the rate of population decline. While the EIS proposes buffers around the NRF to reduce direct and indirect impacts from timber harvesting and associated activities, it still concludes that the proposed actions “may affect, and likely adversely affect” the Northern spotted owl. We recommend that the EIS include additional measures to limit or eliminate impacts to the Northern spotted owl, such as limiting timber harvest activities to those periods of time when owls are 

The reference to pair occupanon page 122 of the DEIS is for Demographic Study Area (DSAgeneral trend across the range owl. Page 121-122 of the DEIcondition for all of the DSA’s thincluding the Tyee DSA (that is which shows that the populatioNo buffers are proposed arounSpotted Owl Cores (100 acre rduring initial project design. A122 of the DEIS, Alternative 4 of the remaining NRF habitat w
 

337

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

not known to be nesting and eliminating all activities within and adjacent to NRF habitat. 

Alternative 6, the FEIS preferr0.6% of the remaining NRF haThe likely to adversely affect dbased on the standards set by Service that presumes owl disRestricting salvage activities to make it infeasible to complete 

30 Endangered 

Species 

Pools are important for fish, but this habitat element is “at risk.” According to the NOAA checklist. Increased erosion and sedimentation from logging and road use will fill pools fuller and faster and they will remain full longer before being cleaned out by future storms. This is not addressed in the EIS. 

Following a fire event of this merosion and sedimentation can This natural erosion can be exdramatically 3 to 4 years followRetention of harvest slash (85vegetation is expected to keep to a minimum (DEIS pg. 150). sediment is not expected to be would occur when road conditfavorable and not conducive to erosion (DEIS pg. 239). Pool driven systems that are typicasubwatershed is driven by largsediment deposition, scour, andescribed throughout the analyApple Salvage Project is expeindicators is insignificant and mcaused by the fire itself. In addplacement and BAER road rehsediment storage and reduced production. 

32 Endangered 

Species/ 

other species 

The DEIS assumes that there will be no impact to torrent salamanders and Pacific Shrews because there will be no logging in riparian reserves (DEIS p. 30), but the preferred alternative would log in riparian reserves. 

The DEIS clearly states that thindividuals or habitat but are ntrend toward federal listing or lspecies” (pgs. 130 and 136, reimpacts are also summarized The DEIS states that “applicatbuffers would prevent or minimeffects”, but does not assume impacts to the species. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

338

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Alternative 6, the FEIS preferrpropose salvage within the rip

17 Endangered 

Species/ 

other species 

The black-backed woodpeckers, which are dependent on postfire stand-replacement forests with larger trees In nesting habitat, is declining and is “vulnerable to local and regional extinction” due to post-fire salvage logging (Dixon & Saab 2000). We, however, cannot find any analysis of the adverse impacts to this imperiled MIS species in the DEIS. This is in violation of NEPA. In addition, the DEIS fails to provide evidence that either population data or comprehensive habitat data have been gathered for this species, as required by 36 CFR 219.9. In absence of such evidence, we must assume that such evidence and data does not exist. 

This species is not commonly Cascade forests in Oregon. It species in the LRMP. Howevespecies during field reconnaissinclusion in the analysis. This page 112 of the DEIS and listedisplays how standards and guare being met or exceeded. 

17 Endangered 

Species/ 

 other species 

On pg. 142 of the DEIS, the Forest Service misrepresents the science on the olive-sided flycatcher very badly. The agency states that this species has been shown to “respond positively” to clearcutting, citing Altman & Sallabanks (2000). What the study actually says is that clearcutting in GREEN forest (not severely burned forest) attracts olive-sided flycatchers initially because it superficially resembles some of the openness of burned forest, but that olive-sided flycatchers appear not to be able to maintain viable populations there (i.e., it’s an ecological trap). The study recommends against post-fire salvage logging, particularly in the severely burned stands that this declining species prefers. The agency also misrepresents this study by claiming that it recommends removing all snags as not to create “ecological traps.” Nothing in the study says this. The comment about ecological traps is limited to logging in green forest, and the study recommends retention, not removal, of severely burned stands. The Forest Service must correct the inaccuracy in the FEIS and acknowledge the harm that the project will cause to the olive-sided flycatchers. 

The quote is not complete. Pastates, “...respond positively to 

long as some singing and percretained”. The DEIS clearly st

presence in early-successionadependent on the availability othat the species may be depenreplacing forest fires. Altman not recommend against post-fstate on page 20 of their manarecommendations, “Preliminarimportance of post-fire habitat a need to avoid or minimize sa

forest burns.” Nowhere in the suggest that removal of all snaDEIS clearly discloses how muremain unaltered and available 142-143) and discloses results for this species within the planpositive trend in abundance. 

28 Fire/Fuels The limited treatment area in the large impacted watershed will 

do little to significantly reduce the treat of repeated future catastrophic fires. 

Direction was given to focus oportion of the fire (DEIS projecLetter, March 7, 2003). Other avoid survey and manage requmade within the planning area 
 

339

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

future fires. After treatment, a area would allow effective fire tactics to be deployed, giving fchance to contain a fire before untreated area within the wate

30 Fire/Fuels The DEIS page 3 shows that plantations are at far higher risk of 

stand replacing fire. Page 171 indicates that old growth Douglas fir had the best survival rates. The FS should not be creating more of the dangerous plantation stands but should grow patchy type stands that are less likely to carry fire. Plant wider than 10 feet and clump trees. Leave some areas unplanted. Retain large numbers of large snags and down logs as mechanisms for creating patchiness and complexity. Large wood stores water and can resist burning under some circumstances. 

Planting prescriptions vary from (DEIS Appendix D – SilviculturPredicted seedling mortality of patchiness. The desired stocktrees per acre at age 15-25 yepre-commercial thinning. No pareas where natural regeneratthe desired stocking conditionselected for leave will be the laavailable and will be left in botaggregated pattern. Retention trees per acre, depending on tparticular, Alternative 6 retains acre on most salvage units; on type prescription is applied, beacre are retained. 

6 Fire/Fuels Overriding factor to be considered in salvaging timber is the 

reduction of fuel levels that could contribute to future fires that could be not only larger, but much hotter. Many of the environmental factors of common concern will, in the long-term, be protected by the removal of trees, which will create fuel breaks. 

The Fire and Fuels section in Caddresses the relationship betpredicted characteristics of futThe aquatic section of the DEI226 and 249 disclose impacts residual fuels. 

6 Fire/Fuels The Dead and Down Woody Inventory of the Benchmark Sale 

Area in the Tiller Ranger District should be incorporated into your EIS as an indicator of future fuel loading problems associated with Alternative #5. 

This data will be incorporated 

6 Fire/Fuels Is there a better way to emphasize the fire frequency of the 

planning area? Fire frequency is a very important factor and should be a foremost issue. 

Fire frequency and fire history 65 and 66 of the DEIS. Additiofrequency of the area will be a

6 Fire/Fuels The fourth sentence of the second paragraph on page 70 notes 

that the snag fall rates calculated do not take into account different species. Douglas-fir has a slower decay rate than many of the tree species, which may prolong the fuel loading 

The data collected for the devedidn’t look a specific species. including all species was colle
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

340

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

time span. 

7 Fire/Fuels Late Successional Reserves (LSR) should be logged. There is 

a need to reduce fuel loading. 

The responsible official directeareas within the Matrix land alInitiation Letter, March 7, 2003allocation is considered to be bproject. 

11 Fire/Fuels Figure 29 in the DEIS shows that the preferred alternative 

(Alternative 4) does not reduce future fire spread as much as Alternatives 2 and 6. Since reduction of future fire risk is a key 

goal of the salvage logging, Alternative 4 is less successful than 2 or 6 and about the same as Alternative 3 in achieving this goal. 

Figure 29 correctly displays thcommenter is correct in their inFuture fire risk is one of the twwith economic recovery also cthe FEIS’s preferred alternativrisk and still recover the econotimber. 

27, 32 Fire/Fuels The documentation in the DEIS shows that there is no greater 

reduction in re-burn potential by logging alternative 4, the most extractive alternative that commercially logs unsuitable soils and riparian reserves. Table 26 on page 98 shows that future wildlife size is smaller for post-salvage using alternative 2 (622 acres) than alternative 4 (669 acres). If the purpose for alternative 4 is to reduce the possible re-burn of dead wood, it does worst than alternative 2, so this is no reason to choose alternative 4. Figure 29 also shows alternative 2 better at preventing future fires than the preferred alternative 4. Reburn models are flawed and unconvincing. The model does not indicate that the reburn will happen, it merely speculates how a fire would burn if a fire burned through the area again. Model only assumes one roadside ignition point. The difference between Alternative 4 and 5 is only 231 acres and is not worth the severe and undisclosed environmental impacts that salvage logging would have on more than a thousand acres. 

The models are displaying potcomparison. Although it is true larger acreage of a future fire iAlternative 4 treats 555 more aThe larger acreage is due the units in proximity to other units planning area. The FARSITE tested (footnote P.81). The usused to show a comparison of to happen. It is correct that a Although fire history shows the one fire per year and a 32% chacres within the watershed a fin size. (p.65) The roadside ignlightning because it was more lightning ignition point. 

27, 32 Fire/Fuels The re-burn assumptions for alternatives 2 and 6 are 

exaggerated and unfounded. In various places, the Forest Service says: “We found no studies documenting a reduction in fire intensity in a stand that had previously burned and then been logged. [We] are aware of no evidence supporting the 

The removal of large fuels will severity. Large woody fuels hspread and intensity of the initcurrent fire behavior models; hcontribute to development of la
 

341

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

contention that leaving large dead wood material significantly increases the probability of reburn.”68 “The removal of large, 

merchantable trees from forests does not reduce fire risk and may, in fact, increase such risk.”69 The Forest Service has not 

disclosed this opposing scientific evidence to the public in violation of NEPA. Future reburn is in fact a good reason to leave “extra” snags and coarse woody debris, you want to leave enough material so that some is left after a potential reburn (i.e., a margin of error). The large material will have the greatest chance of surviving fire. If the Forest Service is going to assume the worse case scenario they should describe how many large logs snags and logs survived the reburn and whether those surviving trees are enough to meet forest plan requirements for snags and down logs. The Forest Service assumptions about reburn are flawed. There is absolutely no scientific evidence to suggest that a burned area like the Baked Apple fire will necessarily burn again or in the near future, that reburning will be severe or have serious environmental consequences, or perhaps most importantly, that salvage logging can prevent reburn or diminish its severity. 

severity. Fire persistence, resiburnout time (which affects soinfluenced by loading, size, anwoody fuel. (From: Coarse WBenefits and Fire Hazard in thUSDA Forest Service Gen Tec2003, James K. Brown, ElizabKramer). Planned snag retention meets Southwestern Oregon Provincinformation can be found startDEIS. While it is true a fire may nevearea, the fire history of the watthere is on average one fire pearea. A fire that initiates outsidreaches the treated fuels of thdiminished fire behavior and fasafe operations of firefighters. increase short-term fuel loads increased fine activity fuels, buand long-term fire risk through structure” (Brown 1980). 

27 Fire/Fuels In all alternatives, some of the logging slash will be treated with 

burning. The DEIS never analyzed the impacts of this second burn, so soon after the first burn, on affected soils. And not all logging slash will be burned. This will contribute as much, if not more, to spreading a wildfire than leaving the large trees standing. 

Where prescribed within the Dwill be treated to levels stated Reduction Guidelines. Prompresult in immediate reduction o

most potential to spread a wild

27, 32 Fire/Fuels There was no evidence large (but shorter) snags will fall down in 

a “jackstraw” pattern, promoting a hotter fire if it were to reburn. There was a great deal of discussion at the public meetings of how the 2002 Apple fire affected the 1987 Apple Creek fire area, 

Snag falldown will happen in a uniformly. Table 8 on p.62 shopractices in regards to Baked A115 of the DEIS shows snag p

68 Wildfire and Salvage Logging (Beschta, et al., Oregon State University, 1995). See also McIver, J. D., and L. Starr, tech eds, 2000. Environmental Effects of 

and Annotated Bibliography. U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR. Available online at <http://www.fs.fed.us/

69 Dept. of Agriculture and Interior, Report to the President (September 2000). 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

342

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

but none of that made it into the Baked Apple DEIS. This was a large omission of facts and analysis. If included, it could have discounted the purpose for salvage logging to reduce hazardous fuels. The Forest Service should have disclosed information on the 1987 Apple Creek fire. Old trees that received an underburn in 1987 survived the 2002 fire also. Many dead trees from the 1987 fire have not fallen over, but simply melted from the top down, now standing as shorter snags. Salvage logging simply does not prevent future fires. The DEIS freely admits that the Apple Fire of 2002 is itself a reburn of the 1987 Apple Fire, which was salvage logged. “All of the clearcuts from the 1987 Apple fire within the planning area were reburned in 2002” (DEIS p. 211). 

1987 Apple Fire in relation to ealternative. The 1987 Apple Fire was discudocument (DEIS Chapter 3 pa200, 211, 227, 280). The condremained after both the 1987 aconsidered in the wildlife analyAfter harvest and fuels treatmeconditions, uncontrolled wildfirtreated areas. The effects of a these areas will be diminished

17 Fire/Fuels The DEIS does not promise that slash clean-up will occur as 

part of the same projects. Regarding slash clean-up, 1) Have funds already been secured for post-logging slash clean-up? If so, please provide us with documentation of this. 2) How much will slash clean-up cost? Will it cost more than the revenue generated by the salvage sale? 3) How many tons per acre of slash debris will be on the ground BEFORE slash clean-up? 4) If slash is not cleaned up, either due to lack of funds or other reasons, what would be the adverse environmental impacts? In the absence of direct proof that funds have been allocated and earmarked for slash clean-up in this specific project, we have to assume that you have no actual intention of cleaning up slash after merchantable trees are removed. 

The Umpqua LRMP states “Prmanagement tool that may be management and vegetation odesired fuel profiles in all ecosDEIS states “Treat activity-credesignated for no treatment, to 84. The estimated cost of the page 270 of the DEIS. Funds revenue generated by the timbtreatments. The economic anaalternatives (except 5) have a After harvest but prior to fuels would represent a fuel model 1Fire/Fuels section of the appen

17 Fire/Fuels The DEIS implies that the removal of large trees is necessary to 

prevent future severe fire. Please cite at least one scientific study that provides evidence supporting this view. We are only aware of studies which clearly state that removal of large trees is unnecessary and will not reduce future fire severity. The Forest Service must support its assertions with science or acknowledge that they are not scientifically accurate and that the DEIS does not have scientific integrity on this point. 

The DEIS explains the hazard fuels over time due to snag falfuels will influence future fire swoody fuels have little influencof the initiating surface fire in cmodels; however, they can co

large fires and high fire severitresistance-to-control, and burnsoil heating) are significantly inand decay state of large woodDebris: Managing Benefits an
 

343

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Recovering Forest USDA ForeRep. RMRS-GTR-105. 2003, JElizabeth D. Reinhardt, and Ky

19 Fire/Fuels Leaving a large buffer on the scorched portion of Limpy Creek 

will leave a heavy fuel load. The fuel load and the steep slopes, aspect, and narrow canyon will add to the severity of the next fire. The heavy fuel load is the only condition we can control, so harvesting trees is required to reduce the severity of the next fire and speed up the recovery along Limpy Creek. 

The Responsible Official directeam (IDT) to retain full RipariaProject Initiation Letter (3/07/2during scoping requested salvIn order to design a feasible althat limited salvage in Riparian and still achieve an effects detallow for timely completion of tIn addition, an alternative was throughout riparian areas, but detailed study (DEIS page 15)

31 Fire/Fuels If the volume of the standing dead and dying material is not 

reduced there will be unacceptable fuel loads in the area for decades. With the heavy fuel loads created by both the dead and dying material as well as the regrowth of brush, the repeat fires will burn hot and create extensive long-term resource damage. While the DEIS discusses fire classes, we suggest that the DEIS address the consequences of brush growth and dead material on not only the areas proposed for harvest, but also the leave areas and surrounding forest. It is the Board of Commissioner’s position that the majority of the fuel loadings must be removed during these entries to reduce the danger of repeat fires and threats to both the Baked Apple lands as well as to the adjacent lands. 

The regrowth of brush dependwill contribute to increasing spand within the planning area. the future is highly variable bafactors and is difficult to predicdiscussed on page 77 of the D

31 Fire/Fuels The DEIS should clearly discuss the risk and consequences to 

the environment from repeat burns if large fuel loads are left in the area. Examples of such repeat burns include the Biscuit 

Fire/Silver Fire and Apple Fire. In both cases, the post fire fuel 

loads were not reduced to acceptable levels after the fire. The history of repeat burns has demonstrated that these subsequent fires burn hotter and create resource damage that is of far greater long-term consequences than the original fire. 

The fire/fuels section clearly dof retaining high fuel loads (DEaddition, a comparison of the aand fuels parameters is found 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

344

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

30 Fire/Fuels The Baked Apple DEIS repeatedly discredits leaving abundant 

snags and down wood based on a hypothetical worst case scenario of future intense fire during extreme fire weather conditions. The EIS does not explain the likelihood of the this fire, or the fact that less intense fire (wild or prescribed) could occur during less intense weather and fuel condition and dramatically alter the consequences described in the DEIS. 

All snag and down wood retenrequirements of the Umpqua LForest Plan ROD. As for the rweather conditions used in the as the day of the Apple Fire igbaseline reality (above 90th pe

the year). The fire history sectpercentage of a fire starting on planning area and the average planning area. If a future fire wintense weather conditions, dimand effects would be expected

30 Fire/Fuels The FARSITE and BEHAVE models were run as a worst case 

scenario by assuming there is a fire ignition in year 25 during extreme fire weather. By assuming this fire WILL happen (instead of MIGHT happen) the Forest Service makes sure that alternatives that retain large number trees will look bad in terms of future habitat and soil erosion. The Forest Service must disclose — a. The model assumptions that underlie this worst case scenario (i.e. model parameters, assumed structure and arrangement of vegetation ingrowth of salvaged and unsalvaged area, fire suppression response, wind, explain how the models work “suppose v. 1.16” and FVS West Cascades variant 6.21, etc.) b. The fact that this fire is speculative might not happen, c. That a prescribed fire or wildfire might happen during less intense fire weather and under more moist fuel conditions and dramatically change the assumed outcomes in favor of retaining large fuels. d. The Forest Service must also disclose fire effects in other time periods. There is nothing magic about year 25. The preferred alternative will have more negative fuel/fire consequences in some time periods. e. The fact that there remains significant uncertainty over these model predictions and in fact there is a remarkable similarity in the outcomes among alternatives (Figure 29, page 83), (they are all bad) that combined with uncertainty makes the differences among alternatives almost meaningless. 

The fire is a prediction and shoPrescribed fires would occur uconditions. Included in the fuedisplaying loadings at 5, 10, 15 predictions of fuel loadings aftetreated with prescribed fire. Tprediction based on models anstated earlier, wildfires that buweather and fuel conditions woand not have the dramatic fire 

2002 Apple Fire on the day it sBased on fire history, a fire is lin the planning area; thereforefire will occur is correct; the DEthis future fire WILL happen uncircumstances. Instead, the Dsame weather conditions that Apple Fire in order to correctly fire can spread throughout the Fuel loadings are calculated amodel becomes less accurate accuracy, 25 years was chosewhat FARSITE predicts might year 25 and is not assuming a the planning area averages on
 

345

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

f. The Forest Service is making two inappropriate assumptions: 

 i. That future fire during the most extreme weather conditions WILL certainly happen; and 

 ii. That less intense fire during less severe conditions of fuel moisture and weather WILL NOT happen first. Such as fire would change fuel profiles and consequences of future fires. 

Model outcomes are strictly fodata on the models used are areport, Appendix D. 

30 Fire/Fuels The EIS purpose and need to reduce fuels is contradicted by 

several facts that are lost in the EIS: a. Page 85 says that shrub growth somewhat reduces fire indices due to fuel moisture content, and page 89 says that shrub growth will be reduced under alternative 4. b. Page 98 indicates that the preferred alternative leaves more tons/acre of fine fuels than alternative 5. c. The Forest Service must disclose that fire effects in unsalvaged areas are mitigated by some of the same factors that mitigate fire risk in salvage areas (p 83): “spacing” (unsalvaged fuel will be patchy and fall over time, not all at once), “shading from overstory” (there will be much more such shade in unsalvaged areas), “decay of fine fuels” (though there will be some pulses, tops and branches will fall over time and decay over time). All these things will “limit fire potential” in unsalvaged areas even more than salvage areas, but the EIS 

makes it sound like this only applies to logged areas. Correct this misinformation and redo the fuel/fire analysis accordingly. d. The EIS fire/fuels analysis does not add up. Please carefully consider all these factors and redo the analysis. e. Units that do not meet 85% effective ground cover will not 

have activity fuels treated. The soil benefits of this are accounted for, but the fire/fuel consequences are not disclosed. 

Page 89 states that shrub growwhat is expected to occur undreforestation. It goes on to stashrub growth and reforestation was described under AlternativAlternative 5 harvests less volless activity generated fuels in fall down of snags soon accumbecomes a fuel model 12 betwUnsalvaged areas will generatthose described on pages 77-8recognize that not all unsalvagcontribute the same amounts oburn the same way in the evenAdditional discussion of the poin Appendix D, Fire/Fuels RepUnits with less than 85% effechave low fuel loadings and brofuels, lessening the hazard buthe hazardous fuels reduction location and proximity to other activity fuels would not be treareview could determine differeunits. Page 83 of the DEIS discloses cover would be retained as preanalysis used this information 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

346

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

units may not receive slash trecorrectly uses this information risk. 

30 Fire/Fuels The DEIS (page 70) says that both the FMA and BTU fuel 

models failed to consider the fuel and heat consequences of shrub and tree ingrowth, but such ingrowth is certainly expected and should have been considered because with ingrowth the differences between the alternatives might not be significant and the public and the decision-maker should know this. 

The models don’t factor in shruvery unpredictable, as describDEIS. However, the IDT did ingrowth, which is disclosed on and 94. 

30, 32 Fire/Fuels The Forest Service says that purpose and need is partly to 

reduce fuels, and the EIS claims that this project will reduce future fire hazard, but the EIS fails to disclose that logging will actually increase fuels over some time frames. If fuel loads are the issue, the Forest Service should be focusing on small material under 12 inches in diameter and they should be leaving the large diameter material that stores water and is relatively resistant to burning (in addition to providing many other important ecosystem values (Rose et all 2001)). To fully inform the public and the decision maker, the EIS must display a graph showing the fuel loads by size and by time period for each harvest unit. Salvage logging does not prevent reburn. The FS ignores the fact that replanted stands provide an ideal environment for 

future, high-intensity fire. In addition salvage logging operations with accumulations of large volumes of fine slash will also create conditions for a reburn. It is unlikely that fuels in an unsalvaged area would reach the same concentration as in the post-salvage scenario because decomposition breaks down much of the new material because it accumulates at a slower rate. If the forest to 

be salvaged will be replanted, then salvage will create new fuel loading. If it’s not successfully replanted to agency standards, then the Forest Service will be violating requirements to ensure 

reforestation. 

The DEIS does disclose that pwould increase short term fuel DEIS states “Fire behavior wothe condition of adjacent stand

surface fuels and snags. Currpublished studies that have exsalvage logging alters the size the resulting future fire hazardafter harvesting green trees sulogging may increase short terrisk, due to increased fine activincrease is followed by a reducterm fire risk through removal (Brown 1980). After a fire, the in adjacent stands, potentially future fires.” Fuel loadings are displayed ovrepresentative stands. There in the Fire/Fuels Report, locateThe DEIS does not state that sprevent a reburn. The fire/fuethat “In general, the amount of probability of reburn or wildlanmeteorological and physical prlightning, and human behavior caused fires, determine when occurs. The real question is n
 

347

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

greater probability for reburn, bwould they be of greater intensto natural resources” (Everett experience has shown that incresult in increased fire intensity 82). Page 85, 85, 88, 89, 92, and 9proposed reforestation levels wbehavior. 

30 Fire/Fuels The EIS also discloses that the number of pieces >9” dbh is 

more important than the tons per acre when considering “resistance to control” so the Forest Service should consider removing the much more abundant smaller size classes and retain the larger, less numerous, but more biologically valuable large snags and wood. This is a reasonable alternative that should have been considered. 

Smaller diameter fuels will also merchantable, and will likely bsalvage operations. These smconsumed during fuels treatme87, 89, 90, and 93 all describe tonnage for each alternative, wdiameter materials will be redutreatments. An alternative thareduction and restoration only of the DEIS. 

30 Fire/Fuels The Forest Service seems to expect perfect control of slash 

fires. Just enough to reduce hazardous fuels but not too much to reduce soil cover. Please disclose the uncertainty associated with both ends of this spectrum and the consequences of this uncertainty and how it compares to alternatives 3, 5, and no action. 

All prescribed fire preformed brequired to have a prescription considering all these factors aimplementation of any prescrib(DEIS page 51). Should a premuch, mitigation in the form of Should a prescribed fire burn tpiling and burning may be requparameters to within the presc

30 Fire/Fuels The NEPA document fails to disclose that NOT salvaging (e.g. 

natural recovery) may have some countervailing benefits in terms of fire risk and reburn potential, including: (a) large logs store water, (b) standing snags provide some shade, (c) regrowth tends to be more patchy and less dense and continuous, (d) fuels in the form of branches and dead trees fall to the ground slowly over time and have a chance to decay as they added, (e) falling snags over time tend to break up the continuity of fuels in the form of brush and reprod. 

The DEIS does recognize the coarse wood have on the natupage 52, 102-119, 147-161, 18
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

348

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

5 Fire/Fuels Where is the decision/standard to not salvage areas too rocky 

for reforestation coming from? This may cause future problems due to high predicted fuel loading. 

The proposed action did not coinitial reconnaissance focused unsuitable soils. However, in Alternatives 4 and 6 proposed unsuitable soils, primarily to repg. 151). However, further invorder to remain consistent with and Guidelines regarding salvsoil areas, these areas would salvaged without amending thpotentially create a lengthy deOfficial decided against salvagFuture fuel loads were considesection of the DEIS. 

5 Fire/Fuels There should be some mention of barriers caused by predicted 

fuel loadings. 

The Forest Service is not sure comment is referring to. In terpersons who plant the trees wmove around some areas as ftime. In terms of wildlife movewould be able to negotiate indlarge clusters may require the the area. For smaller mammamay make travel corridors safeprovides. However, most wildtravel routes outside or around loads. 

32 Fire/Fuels There is no substantive data that supports the role of reburn 

advanced by the UNF in reviews of the Beschta report, such as Everett’s (1995) Review of the Beschta Report, or in other studies such as McIver and Starr (2000). 

As stated previously the DEIS salvage logging will prevent a section explicitly states that “thwhether there is a greater probwhen reburns occur would theand more destructive to natura1995). Professional experiencincreased fuel loads can result and severity (DEIS page 82). 

32 Fire/Fuels The unlogged dead and dying trees from the Apple fire will soon 

become large downed material that provides important shade structures that obstruct solar radiation and reduce the speed and variability of surface winds, which inhibits extreme or erratic fire 

All alternatives remain consisteStandards and Guidelines regand tree retention. Providing fiintensity as only one of its obje
 

349

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

behavior. The ability of large downed logs to store water and provide shade from the sun and wind can function to lower fire intensity and the rate of spread in the planning area. The Forest Service does not consider or disclose these possibilities. 

percentile conditions fuels havmoisture and contribute to higheffects of shade and water retethe aquatics section of the DE

5 Fire/Fuels The No Action alternative should talk about potential negative 

impacts of choosing that alternative, such as fuel loading, reforestation problems, other foregone restoration activities, and NW Forest Plan direction for matrix lands. 

Discussions relating to the envchoosing the No Action Alternathroughout Chapter 3 – AffecteEnvironmental Effects of the Dthe fuels section, pages 75-83

5 Fire/Fuels 

Riparian 

Reserves 

There should be some discussion of potential problems in the future caused by excessive fuel loading in riparian areas. 

Discussion on fuel loads in Ripfound in Fire and Fuels section DEIS, beginning on page 89. 

32 Fire/Fuels 

Roads 

Roads are the real fire problem. The only way to reduce the chance of fire is to reduce access via roads. The project contemplated by the DEIS will increase logging (itself a vector for fire ignitions), and maintain roads that otherwise may not have supported vehicular traffic, increasing the chance or fire. 

The DEIS recognizes that both physical processes that generbehavior that leads to human-when and where fire ignition owas completed for the project Umpqua Ranger District. Decpotential to decrease human-cResponsible Official determinethat would occur with this projewas proposed in order to focus primary need of salvaging deaeconomic value was lost. 

5 Fire/Fuels 

Reforestation 

The Forest Service needs to be clear that most of the activities for reforestation and fuel treatment will depend on salvage sales. 

Reforestation will be funded thVandenberg (KV) funds and slbrush disposal (BD) funds. Thgenerated by salvage sale for evaluated in the Economics seDEIS (pg. 270-271). Over the reforestation of some burned pacres total) has been occurring funds. 

24, 28, 29 Fire/Fuels 

Safety 

While snags are valuable for cavity nesters, retaining 6-12 trees per acre presents tremendous fire and safety hazards. Abundant material for foraging or nesting can be found within a very short distance from the harvest sites in riparian areas, in less intensely burned areas, and in nearby fires. 

Planned snag retention meets Southwestern Oregon ProvincEffects to Cavity nesting wildlifon page 111 of the DEIS. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

350

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Safety is addressed on DEIS pof 6-12 TPA was not anticipate

7, 8 Forest Health/ 

Insects and 

Disease 

Move into green timber areas that were underburned to get ahead of the bug infestations. Must go beyond dead to get it. 

While this project does not confire stressed or fire injured grefew that need to be felled to faprovide for worker safety), the Diamond Lake Ranger DistrictSouthwest Oregon Forest InseCenter will continue to monitor insect activity within the Apple 168-169). Future removal of tinsect infestations is not preclu

28 Forest Health/ 

Insects and 

Disease 

Pg. 2 of the Insect section of the DEIS noted under the Current Conditions that “there is little evidence of insect activity.” However, as early as April 2003, I found most of the smaller killed trees had beetle or boring insect activity. With the huge available food source, I predict that these populations will explode over the next several years. 

Permanent insect mortality plothe Baked Apple planning area summary of the most current ithe mortality plots has been ad

30, 32 Forest Health/ 

Insects and 

Disease 

The DEIS needs to disclose and consider the benefits (and beneficial effects) of a healthy population of insects or a possible 

healthy surge in insect populations post-fire. Insects not only provide food for many species of terrestrial, aquatic, and avian species but they also help regulate forest density. 

The beneficial effects of insectChapter 3 of the FEIS, under tDr. Don Goheen, insect specia

30 Green Tree 

Harvest 

We strongly support the decision to retain all trees with any green needles. But we feel that many live trees will still be cut for safety or operational reasons and many will be damaged by logging. 

Green trees would be protecteplacement of skyline corridorsfor safety will be minimized to these trees are a recognized sbenefits. It is anticipated that existing green trees would be 

32 Green Tree 

Harvest 

The DEIS ignores the green tree logging under the preferred alternative that will increase risk of landslides in an already heavily compromised landscape. 

As disclosed on page 5 of the trees would be removed. Only those that occurred in logging 

trees that could not be avoided construction would be remove202-212, the risk of landslides Alternative 6, the FEIS preferr

27, 30, 32 Green Tree How many green trees will be logged in the Hazard tree units of 

Alternative 4? The DEIS lacks disclosure of the impacts of 

During the fire suppression acArea Emergency Rehabilitatio
 

351

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Harvest green tree removal in these hazard tree units. Many green trees 

are located in hazard tree units 78B, 58A, 42, and 43. The FS admits that at least some green, unburned latesuccessional trees will be logged. Even the removal of fire-killed late-successional trees denies a future landscape the benefit of legacy late-successional structures, diminishes the structural complexity of recovering stands, and retards the development of 

future structural complexity and late-successional characteristics. We strongly support the decision to retain all trees with any green need. But we feel that many live trees will still be cut for safety or operational reasons and many will be damaged by logging. Remaining live trees are very important as current habitat (cover, shade, microclimate, nest/roost/foraging structures, etc.), as seed sources for natural recovery of locally adapted vegetation, as refugia for beneficial soil organisms, and as future sources of snags to fill the temporal gap between the batch of snags created by this fire and those to be produced in the distant future by the next stand of trees. 

determined to be a hazard at tleft in place. It is unknown at tadditional hazard trees exist wtrees. Until a site specific evato and during logging operatiocertainty exactly how many grefelled. Danger tree or snags within rebe evaluated to determine if it personnel, Oregon OSHA rule danger trees that can fall or slibe felled, Oregon OSHA rule 4The majority of green trees wilthe Baked Apple planning area The effects of harvesting greepages 106-108 of the DEIS. “alternatives impact a very sma2.5%) of the remaining late-suwithin the planning area. 

27 Green Tree 

Harvest 

The DEIS should have explained why the Forest Service is logging in units with 60% green crown closure. This is close to natural crown closure for an old-growth forest. This doesn’t meet the purpose and need of reducing unnatural high fuel loads. 

Partial harvest within these staneed to recover dead merchanvalue is lost to decay and deteland allocation. 

27 Green Tree 

Harvest 

Why are units that are primarily located in underburn areas with many green trees being logged if they are just unburned such as 18, 58C, 59A, 44 and 25A? Unit 79A has a lot of green trees in the top of the unit, and in places, healthy, pre-fire, regeneration. Yet the prescription for here is just like the dead units, to leave six trees per acre and then replant. Likewise, Unit 75 also has live trees at the top of the unit that could be impacted by the logging. There were a number of large sugar pines still alive. At least one very large (about 4’ across), live, sugar pine that is only 30’ away from the road flagged for the new road into unit 75. The Forest Service should consider 

Units 58C, 59A, and 44 burned have widely scattered green trand 25A burned at low to modbased on the need to recover timber before its value is lost to within the matrix land allocatio79A and 75 burned at high intereforestation is necessary to alevels. Existing scattered greeintensity burned areas are impas disclosed on page 173-174 The proposed temporary spur flagged for reconnaissance pu
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

352

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

routing the road round this, and other live trees. There is a large (about 3’ across), live Douglas fir tree right in the middle of the orange flagging for the new road. The seed source from these trees is valuable after the fire. It is a detriment to the future forest to remove beautiful live trees and then replant with nursery stock, all without mentioning any of the impacts in the DEIS A temporary road will be built into the east part unit 79A for alternative 4 and 6, but not for other alternatives. Yet, alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 6 will skyline yard the eastern part of 79A. Why do alternatives 4 and 6 need to build a new road when alternatives 2 and 3 will do the same prescription with no new road? Areas along the new proposed road into 59A will be “loader logged”. This tractor logging, along with the “temporary” new road, will have permanent effects the DEIS did not analyze. 

assist the planning team in detthe proposed spur so that they basis, describe the potential eftemporary spur. New road locgreen trees, where possible. Upon further review, the tempopart of unit 79 is not necessary The FEIS reflects this change. The DEIS describes the impacunit 59A and the six other unitlogging on pages 224 and 225temporary road construction a225, 232 and 233 of the DEIS. of the impacts of loader logginand reconstruction on pages 1

27 Green Tree 

Harvest 

The DEIS should have disclosed how alive and green many of the units are. The DEIS should have considered the different impacts that salvage logging would have in green stands, as opposed to dead stands. 

The effects of harvesting in greon pages 106-108 of the DEISaction alternatives impact a veto 2.5%) of the remaining late-habitat within the planning areTable 1 in the Silvicultural Pregeneral biological and physicaboth pre-fire and post fire. If thstructural stage is the same as stage, the unit is still dominatepost fire Oliver stage is describinitiation), the unit is dominate

27 Green Tree 

Harvest 

The proposed new road into 79A and 59A will have to cut many healthy, green trees. How many more green trees will need to be removed for yarding corridors? 

The potential location for the te79A will cut very few, if any, grlocation of the temporary road replaced, high intensity burn aThe exact number of green trefelled during yarding operationbecause yarding corridors are the salvage operation, as appr
 

353

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

administrator. 

30 Green Tree 

Harvest 

Protect all live trees. While it is true that some trees injured by 

fire will soon die, the agency fails to acknowledge or disclose the degree of confidence in their estimates (of trees predicted to die). An EIS is necessary to consider the effects of harvesting numerous trees that may soon die. 

As described on page 5 of the proposal will remove only dead Figure 3. The only live trees thbe those felled for safety, in lotemporary roads. No ‘predictemarked for salvage. If a propoharvest more trees that eventu

process would be initiated and the documentation (CE, EA, odetermined at that time. Howenot considered to be reasonab

5 Green Tree 

Harvest 

Why will there be no green tree harvest outside circumstances 

mentioned? 

The project area is focused on where salvage of dead trees wpurpose and need for recoverireduction, and progress towara healthy, productive forest (D

25 Humancaused Fires Logging companies should not be given some sort of reward for fires. Agent Russell agreed that it w

determine whether or not the snot. Therefore, it remains spenot the fire was started for moearned by a firefighter or mone

31 Humancaused fire On pg. 13 of the DEIS, the Forest Service discusses the issue of whether salvage would reward whoever started the fire. Missing 

from this discussion is the recognition that no matter how the fire 

was started, there is still a need to restore this area as quickly as possible. 

Thank you for your comment. preferred alternative for the FEtrees and reforest the area in a 

6 Humancaused fires The third sentence of the last paragraph of Chapter 1 implies that the fire was arson. The fire could have been caused, 

however, by accidental means. 

The wording in this paragraph by members of the public. Thithe DEIS clearly portrays the iscoping and therefore will remOngoing investigations of the cThe special investigator assigndetermined that the cause of tarson”. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

354

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

27, 32, 37 Humancaused fires The Forest Service could be destroying valuable evidence by logging before the (arson) investigation is complete. The 

logging reward for this human caused fire should have been considered in this DEIS. The Baked Apple salvage sale could have been the intent of the fire. The DEIS should have considered incentives for starting fires within the scope of the analysis. Numerous citizens have expressed concern that this salvage logging project will reward past arson and encourage future arson. The Forest Service only states that since the Forest Service investigation into the cause of the fire is “on-going” that this concern is conjectural and not based on any scientific evidence (DEIS, p. 13). The Forest Service may not be concerned with this issue, but we are. There have been thousands of acres of the Umpqua National Forest burned by arsonists in the last five years. Only one of the arsonists has been arrested, and freely admitted to setting fires to realize financial benefits. The DEIS should consider how creating economic incentives for fire could cause future fire. 

The Forest Service considered scoping as a non-significant isevidence that the fire was starfinancial interest in any resultatimber (DEIS page 13). The area where the fire ignited salvage; any evidence that manot be affected by this project. Russell (Criminal Investigator Law Enforcement Regional Invconcurred that there would be this proposal (personal commu2004). According to Special Ainvestigation of the site where to have started has concludedcollected from the scene (persJanuary 15, 2004). Special Agent Russell also con“suspected arson”. This is the made if all of the common cauruled out. According to Speciathere is something at the scenevidence) that proves the fire wmust be “suspected arson” (peJanuary 15, 2004). The financial benefits gained bfires in the past, as indicated bduring firefighting, not salvagealso concurred that it is not pomotivation of the person who sFire (personal communication, 

27 Logging/ 

salvage 

The DEIS never explained why all helicopter yarding units were removed from alternative 5 making the alternative so small it is unchoosable. Alternative 3 uses helicopters while leaving 15 trees per acre. This is close to what is left in alternative 5. The Forest Service should have considered an alternative that 

This is explained on page 287 Alternative 5. Leave tree quantities range froin Alternative 5. These far exc
 

355

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

includes the Beschta recommendations as well as helicopter yarding. 

26 Logging/ 

salvage 

The EIS evaluates the impacts from the natural erosion processes as well as timber harvest road impacts. However, it does not evaluate the direct impacts from timber harvest activities. 

The DEIS thoroughly documenproposed timber harvest activiprocesses. Direct effects from aquatic system from mass waspages 208-212 of the DEIS. Inharvest on fluvial erosion are d218-219. Finally, the direct effsurface erosion are document222-228. 

1, 2 Logging/ 

salvage 

Log plantations or previously logged areas, rather than old growth. 

Some salvage units occur in pareas. In addition, Alternative salvage burned old growth. 

3 Logging/ 

salvage 

Do not salvage log burned areas. Clearcut logging does not constitute rehabilitation. 

Alternative 1, no action, does nThe purpose and need stated dead merchantable timber, refhazardous fuels. Rehabilitatio

4 Logging/ 

salvage 

Commenter stated a preference for Alternative 5, the Beschta 

alternative, because no Riparian Reserves are logged, and slash is hand-piled and burned. Additionally, Alternative 5 addresses retention of functional late successional/old growth 

stands, retention of large snags, and protection of uninventoried roadless areas. 

Thank you for your comment. preferred alternative in the FEthe retention levels found in Alsalvage in riparian reserves, athe landscape. 

 5 Logging/ 

salvage 

There should be documentation of total estimate of burned timber in project area. 

A table has been added to Chaddressing this. Within the 17are proposed for salvage (5% Within the planning area, 9,80project proposes salvage on aburned in the planning area. 

5 Logging/ 

salvage 

Total unsalvaged acres should also be included in the significant issue addressing potential salvage impacts to late successional/old growth stands. 

The issue responds to the proproposes salvage in Matrix onwas determined to be outside by the responsible official. Thdescribed in the DEIS. Howevadditional information on the eadded to Chapter 1. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

356

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

6 Logging/ 

salvage 

A comparison of the number of dead/dying trees left standing in relation to the number cut would serve as an indicator of wildlife habitat, etc., remaining after any salvaging occurs. 

A discussion of the parameterdevelopment of the proposed FEIS where the proposed actioAdditionally, a comparison of amerchantable fire-killed timber fires in the North Umpqua watand compared to the acres proproposed action. 

7 Logging/ 

salvage 

Use tractor logging first, skyline yarders next, and helicopters as a last resort. Build temporary roads where you need to log; they may be left for future fire suppression efforts. 

Alternative 4 put more emphasskyline logging systems compaalternatives (DEIS, pg. 30). Aalternative in the FEIS, also ussystems where possible, followthen helicopters. All temporary roads will be rehthe DEIS, page 55. 

9, 12, 14 Logging/ 

salvage 

Alternatives 2, 4, and 6 are completely unacceptable salvage proposals because they leave too few trees behind to help replenish the fragile, burned soils. Furthermore, Alternatives 4 

and 6 log on unsuitable soils and riparian reserves. 

Salvage on unsuitable soils haAlternatives 4 and 6 in the FEI

9, 12, 15, 

20, 30 

Logging/ 

salvage 

Alternative 5 is the best alternative. It is economically viable because the Forest Service used watershed restoration money 

(from the Resource Advisory Committees) to cruise and mark this timber sale. That restoration money should help restore these burned forests by leaving 50% of the dead wood in the salvage units. Alternative 3 is the next best choice. 

The money originally secured has been returned to the RACCouncil has determined that utimber purposes would not menor would the Forest be able to funds (KV and/or BD money) r

10 Logging/ 

salvage 

The Forest Service should conduct the sales using mbf rather than ccf. With the defect at 40%+ this year, the sales will not 

attract bidders based on ccf. I would also strongly urge you to sell these on a scaled basis Scribner log scale as it reflects true value to a purchaser. Cubic will simply not attract bidders on salvage volume. Time is critical; these sales should have been well on the way by now. You need to offer something of value at a competitive price for bidders to show up. 

The Forest received permissioutilizing MBF Scribner 20 foot measurement (Eastside Scribnmeasurement. 
 

357

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

10, 24, 29, 

33, 38 

Logging/ 

salvage 

There will be a serious demand for logging helicopters next year for salvage and firefighting. Firefighting pays much better than logging, so there is an exodus during the summer from logging. Consider allowing salvage of Baked Apple to be done in the winter and before the Biscuit Fire salvage. The salvage sale may not get any bids if potential timber purchasers cannot be assured of the availability of logging aircraft. Our company is certainly interested in the areas that require helicopter logging. I would encourage you to get all you can by conventional means to lower the logging cost and make these more attractive to bidders. Remember that if these don't come out until summer you are right back into fire season and its restrictions and competition for helicopter services. Much of this ground is low elevation and lends itself to winter 2003/04 helicopter operations when the machines are available. With a projected volume of 25,000M requiring helicopter logging you have a large need to fill if it's next summer. Operating season is too short to do all the salvage. Availability of helicopters will be limited at that time because of wildfire suppression activities. Use winter operating season for at least a portion of the project area to help with feasibility. 

The timber sale contract would “Normal Operation Period defiOctober 31. To extend the operating seasolengthy consultation process wagencies, further decreasing ththis project. 

13, 14 Logging/ 

salvage 

Alternative 5, in leaving 50% and logging 50%, seems to be the best way to “make use” of materials as a result of the fire while simultaneously restoring the area in the best way possible. 

Thank you for your comment. has chose Alternative 6, as the the FEIS. 

16 Logging/ 

salvage 

Please proceed with the salvage. It is good for the environment/economy. 

Thank you for your comment. 

17 Logging/ 

salvage 

The Forest Service should retain the prescription in the FEIS and ROD to remove only “dead trees.” Removal of trees with any green foliage would eliminate healthy green, old growth trees from the landscape and would have serious adverse impacts on proposed TES species such as the Northern Spotted Owl and Pacific fisher. 

Thank you for your comment. salvaged. Live trees may be fdescribed on page 5 of the DE

17 Logging/ 

salvage 

Choose Alternative 5, with the modification to preclude the removal of snags over 15 inches in diameter. Such removal should occur through a service contract (using a portion of the 

Thank you for your comment. considered that focused on resreduction (DEIS page 15). 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

358

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

funds that would otherwise be used for slash clean-up), and all slash should be treated immediately. 

20 Logging/ 

salvage 

As the Conservation member of the Rogue/ Umpqua Resource Advisory Committee, my constituency’s interests are to support the most scientific and best management practices for the health restoration of the forests, wildlife, and soils while maintaining viable economic incentives for those protective goals. Therefore, the most suitable alternative is Alternative 5. This is critical because burned trees are needed, as noted in the DEIS, “for organic material to supply nutrients and moisture for soil productivity. Retention of wood aids in the revegetation of the poor sites by providing shade and possible seed germination sites.” Since the burn was so severe in places and soils so rocky, extra care needs to be taken not to further compact or compromise these soils. In addition, no new roads should be constructed nor salvage trees logged on unsuitable soils and in Riparian Reserves. The Forest Service’s preferred alternative, Alternative 4, seems to be too “economics” oriented serving immediate, short-term interests. Alternative 4 would eventually cause more harm than good. Alternative 6, with logging in Riparian Reserves and on unsuitable soils is unjustified as prevention against the spread of future fires. You would be destroying the very things you hope to protect. 

Thank you for your comment. as the preferred alternative for does not salvage within ripariasalvage on unsuitable soils unAlternative 6. 

21 Logging/ 

salvage 

To avoid the appearance that policy and decisions are being made by the timber corporations, choose Alternative 5, which best serves clean water and the long range health and productivity of our forest, soils, fish, and wildlife. 

Thank you for your comment. alternatives are described in Cresponsible official has chosen preferred alternative for the FE

23 Logging/ 

salvage 

Look at the entire burned area from a restoration emphasis, not arbitrarily constrained by LSR or stream buffer designations. These designations were designed for green forests, not burned forests. There exists at least an additional 2,600 acres of standing burned timber in the Apple Fire that should be salvaged and the land replanted. This will benefit the watershed, forest, and surrounding communities. 

The responsible official determeffort would occur in Matrix lansalvage effort. Chapter 1 of thinformation as to how the propdeveloped. 

24 Logging/ 

salvage 

Our review of the DEIS and the alternatives evaluated leads us to be critical of the limited extent of proposed restoration activities. While it is difficult to find in the EIS, we believe that nearly 4,000 acres were consumed in a stand replacement fire 

in this drainage, yet the most aggressive alternative evaluated 

The responsible official determeffort would occur in Matrix lansalvage effort. Chapter 1 will ihow the proposed action was displays acres burned both by 
 

359

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

was #4, which proposes reducing fuel loads on approximately 1,400 acres of dead timber. Taken out of consideration for treatment were the bulk of the riparian areas so designated under the original charter of the Northwest Forest Plan. 

other fires in the 5th field water

are addressed below. 

25 Logging/ 

salvage 

Please drop the preferred alternative (Alternative 4) because it does not take into consideration the importance of this area as wildlife habitat, the risk to the fragile soil layers, and the devastation roads will bring into this post-fire area. Alternative 4 appears contrary to protecting the fragile post-fire forest ecosystem and to maintain the natural functioning processes that will naturally recover this forest. 

Thank you for your comment. has chosen Alternative 6 as th

the FEIS. 

25 Logging/ 

salvage 

Leave all trees over 20 inches across and at least 50% of standing dead trees. These trees are very important for wildlife and providing shade and soil stability. The large trees provide complexity in the recovering forest stand. Tree farms are not acceptable replacements for the magic complexity and interconnectedness that nature recovers with. Use the most sound science, like the Beschta Report. Refrain from building any new roads or landings. 

Alternative 5 was designed to described in the Beschta repothe importance of large snags permanent roads would be con

25 Logging/ 

salvage 

Do not salvage log in Late Successional or Riparian Reserves. The management plan for LSR’s should be non-commercial restoration; leave them alone when no restoration is needed. Commercial logging will degrade the LSR and Riparian Reserve and prevent the Forest Service from fulfilling its duty to protect the native species. Going in after fires will significantly alter the trajectory and functioning of the post-fire ecosystem. The Northwest Forest Plan says the Reserves represent forests “in their natural conditions with natural processes, such as fire, allowed to function to the extent possible.” It requires that any “salvage operations not diminish [wildlife] habitat suitability now or in the future.” 

None of the action alternatives the Late Successional Reservsalvage on 32 acres of Ripariato issues generated during sconot propose salvage in Riparia

28 Logging/ 

salvage 

The salvage and restoration proposal falls short of the intended management for Matrix lands as prescribed by the ROD. It is disappointing to not see an alternative which considered full restoration of the Matrix lands while addressing the appropriate environmental issues like primary riparian buffers, snag retention, suitable soils, along with access, future fire risk, noxious weeds, etc. 

The Forest Service believes thalternative for the FEIS, Alternecological needs with the need burned timber before it decays
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

360

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

31 Logging/ 

salvage 

Due to the uncertainty in the amount of dying material, the marking crews should lay out the timber sales in a manner that considers the potentially dying material in their snag calculations and group the snags rather than dispersing them across the landscape. The FEIS should clearly state that material that is green when marked but dies during the contract period may also be removed. Given that as much as 25% of the surrounding land may die as a result of insects and other stress, the desired fuel reduction and economic recovery will not be met if the dying material is left onsite. The Board recommends that footnote 3 and similar references to dead trees as being those with no visible green needles at the time of marking be removed and a marking guideline such as that used in the Easy Fire DEIS be used. 

In the purpose of and need for page 5 of the DEIS, this salvagonly dead trees. The only live would be for safety, in logging temporary roads. No ‘predictemarked for salvage. Dr. Don Goheen is currently costudy collecting data from the fires of 2002. A rating system tfire damaged conifers in Southresult of this study. 

34 Logging/ 

salvage 

The west is full of tree farms. Let the old forest stay standing for prosperity. They have enough places to log, and the old growth would be made mostly into paper. 

The no action alternative respo

26 Logging/ 

salvage 

The EIS states that surface erosion will be mitigated in the harvest units by retaining and scattering harvest slash across clearcut and burned slopes to function as effective ground cover. However, the EIS does not propose any mitigation for the direct impacts from harvest activities such as skidding. The EIS needs to provide mitigation measures for the direct impacts from harvest activities along with information that demonstrates that the proposed mitigation measures are effective in reducing soil compaction, vegetation displacement, and the baring of soils, increases infiltration and thus reduces erosion. 

Site-specific prescriptions for dtemporary roads have been dein the FEIS Best Management Practices arequirements for logging practprescribed (DEIS pages 48-57practices, used for many years

of lessening erosion and pollutmanagement actions. 

17 Low road 

density areas 

The adverse impacts of the proposed logging on uninventoried roadless areas with respect to wilderness designation eligibility should be analyzed. We believe that the area will no longer be eligible for such designation once the proposed logging occurs. 

A discussion on uninventoried potential eligibility for wilderneFEIS. 

30, 32 Low road 

density areas 

Salvage logging in un-roaded areas is inappropriate. Further disclosure, analysis, and protection needs to be addressed that consider unimpeded operation of natural ecological processes, water quality, healthy soils; fish; and wildlife refugia, centers for dispersal, recolonization, and restoration of adjacent disturbed 

Low road density areas were tissue (DEIS p. 11, 12, .278-28do not enter any low road densdensity area in question is not area; no inventoried roadless a
 

361

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

sites, reference sites for research, non-motorized low-impact recreation, carbon sequestration, refugia that are relatively less at risk from noxious weeds and other invasive non-native species, and many other significant values. The preferred alternative logs in the 1,300-acre Limpy Creek roadless area. 

area. There would be no effecareas under any alternative. 

5 Low road 

density areas 

Is the area mentioned by Umpqua Watersheds an inventoried roadless area or uninventoried roadless area? 

The areas brought forth by Umfour other environmental grouproadless areas are described bUmpqua Watershed Analysis aAreas (pg. 103). A description found on pages 278-280 in the not affect inventoried roadless 

27 NEPA The Forest Service failed to properly consider a no-action 

alternative since hazard trees will be removed even under no action. 

The No Action alternative proptrees. Under the no action altemight be felled and left in placthey would not be sold in a timalternative was selected and thidentified a need to remove hasale, then a separate NEPA pr

30 NEPA The DEIS lacks any analysis or disclosure of the adequacy of 

BMPs in a post-fire setting. 

Disclosure of the adequacy of disclosed in the EIS. 

30 NEPA The Forest Service cites Starr 2000 but it’s not in the references. McIver and Starr, 2000 are list

section on page Reference-7. 

29 NEPA While it may be beyond the ability of the Forest Service to 

placate all consulting agencies regarding the short-term impacts if the project was expedited, it should be stated that the longterm effects of NOT acting expeditiously are not desirable and will not achieve long-term desired results. 

The effects of no action are deChapter 3. 

31 NEPA As reported in the “Biscuit Fires: Management Options for Forest 

Regeneration, Fire and Insect Risk Reduction and Timber Salvage” as well as Forest Fire Salvage Review (John Lowe, 2000), if the Forest Service does not respond aggressively to restore these lands, we will face a cycle of shrubs and fires for decades to come and delay in achieving the desired future condition which will affect us for generations. The failure to act in a timely manner is a decision that will have profound effects 

Pages 173-176 of the DEIS dodelayed regeneration on foressuccession, and includes citaton the Biscuit Fire Salvage. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

362

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

on the local community relative to recreational use, economic value, and wildlife values. 

31 NEPA The Forest Service is at a critical junction in making the decision 

whether to act or not to act. In either case, the decision has environmental consequences. We recommend that the Forest Service clearly identify the consequences of both no action and a delay in action. By treating only 1,432 acres the Forest Service is electing to delay the achievement of the desired future condition on the remaining lands (see Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, IV-5 to 10). 

The effects of no action are deChapter 3. The preferred alterAlternative 6, represents a balprotection and the need to rembefore the economic value is lo

31 NEPA The Forest Service should examine the NEPA timeline and 

identify steps that can be taken to reduce delay. 

Thank you for your comment. has an interest in expediting thtowards that goal. 

35 NEPA You’ve done a really nice job of pulling together information and 

developing alternatives. Your approach to salvaging a small proportion of the burned area and staying out of LSR’s is just excellent. The commenter states that alternative 5 is his 

preferred alternative and maybe also the “no action” alternative. 

Thank you for your comment 

30 NEPA The Forest Service should post all specialists reports in the 

project file on the internet. The 1990 Umpqua LRMP should also be on the internet. 

All DEIS related documents, inspecialist reports have been pNational Forest website since The Umpqua LRMP is now avposting of the LRMP on the Foaccomplished as staffing allow

30 NEPA The Forest Service should be sure to disclose any 

inconsistencies between the analysis and recommendations in the specialists reports and the DEIS. The FS has a duty to disclose and respond credible dissenting opinions. 

The specialist reports have bereference and are included in tappendices, available in paperForest’s website. The IDT had effects of the proposed salvag

32 NEPA 

Fire/Fuels 

The Forest Service’s discussion of fire and fuels is illegal. It is illegal for the Forest Service to make bad decisions, such as the decision to aggressively salvage logged burned areas, but it is illegal to provide the public and the decision maker with bad information or fail to disclose important information. NEPA 

requires that agency decisions be based on the highest quality data and analysis to provide the public participation and 

Discussions relating to the enveach alternative can be found Affected Environment and EnvDEIS. Reburn risk and potentand human behavior and vary fire, if there was a reburn, are 
 

363

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

informed decision making (40 CFR 1500.1). The Forest Service has refused to disclose accurate information about the potential for reburn, the benefits of reburn, the reburn risks associated with salvage, or the potential for salvage to reduce the risk of reburn. 

32 NEPA The DEIS makes the unsupported contention that the salvage 

project does not risk mass wasting or other erosion of soil movement events (DEIS p 208). The FS should disclose, as NEPA requires, the scientific consensus, underscored in the 

Beschta report and elsewhere that salvage logging dissected terrain risks increase peak flows, loss of soil cohesion, landslides and other forms of mass sediment delivery to streams. 

Page 208 of the DEIS explicitly logging would not increase the risk for landslides, nor would thincrease the likelihood of causand above what the fire is expconsidered to be unstable and instability were field verified anconsideration of salvage (DEIS page 209 of the DEIS displays made up of small scattered locrisk or landslides. However, athese areas are potentially at rever fail. 

32 NEPA Nowhere in the DEIS does the FS state why the 

recommendations in the Beschta Report are not valid for the planning area. None of the reports are refuted or shown to be factually inappropriate for the proposed project. The FS has not met its “hard look” burden and properly analyzed the proposed action. The FS has an affirmative duty to disclose that there is significant scientific data that counsels activities proposed by the agencies (CFR 1502.24). When there are impacts that are highly uncertain or there is controversy surrounding the impacts of the proposal, an EIS is required in order to fully assess those impacts (Id 1508.27). In this case, the EIS inadequately addresses this controversy. 

Alternative 5 retains high levelwood while avoiding salvage in (DEIS, p. 38). The silviculturaon the recommendations mad(1995). Direct, indirect and cuanalyzed for all alternatives in document. Because of the imReport in recent court decisionraised in the Beschta Report athe Baked Apple Fire Salvage the DEIS in Appendix C: Issueal 1995. 

32 NEPA Merely listing mitigation measures, without any discussion as to 

the efficacy is illegal under NEPA. There is absolutely no discussion in the Baked Apple DEIS (or any other document) of mitigation measures implementation, use, and efficacy or anything at all beyond their existence. This is significant because many of the environmental impacts discussed in the DEIS are dismissed because planned mitigation measures or best management practices will eliminate the need to address the impact. The public and the decision maker should be aware 

Mitigation measures and Best (BMP) are listed and described Appendix B, which describes tBMP. Where mitigation is prescribed effects are also disclosed (Chainclude: 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

364

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

that many of the mitigation measures that the Forest Service employs, are in fact, not particularly effective. 

• All temporary roads (legacy 

rehabilitated. The specific minclude subsoiling the road, available harvest slash on throads (DEIS, 157). 

• Indirect impacts to the great 

changes in prey species are dead wood within the planninatural range of variation thMitigations include no-salvatrees within units (DEIS, 139

32 NEPA NEPA requires a site-specific monitoring and mitigation plan that 

is missing from the Baked Apple DEIS. 

Mitigation measures, monitorinPractices are described by altespecifically, where applicable, Appendix B of the DEIS includManagement Practices (BMP) site-specific. In order to identiclearly, a different symbol (a) pages 48-57. 

32 NEPA The Baked Apple DEIS fails to adequately address the 

cumulative impacts of fuels and fire management, water quality, and other issues with regards to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions. The effects of the North Umpqua Complex, Tiller, Calf 2 or Limpy fires, all of which burned nearby nor does it discuss the salvage operation that are likely for these fires. The 1987 Apple fire is not mentioned nor is the aggregated impacts of nearby timber sales, including the Felix, Meow timber sales and the Dry Creek hazardous fuel reduction project also in the watershed. The UNF seems to feel that only projects that are within the arbitrary boundaries of the planning area are relevant to the geographic scale at which to analyze cumulative impacts, the DEIS fails to analyze timber harvest that are very close to the planned Baked Apple salvage units and will have cumulative impacts. 

The DEIS addressed all past, foreseeable actions during cumTable 8 displays past activitiesApple Fire and salvage related that table, the text describes aduring 2002. Table 9 displays BAER activities that were condPage 64 of the DEIS displays activities, including the Felix/Mthe potential for salvage on the salvage or other post-fire projefor the North Umpqua Completherefore, no reasonably foresdescribed. Relevant information from thesand where applicable, incorpoeffects analysis. Cumulative edifferent scales depending on 
 

365

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

process analyzed. For exampincorporated the effects of theof the Apple Fire plus fire-killed broader sale in western Oregosalvaged when snag habitat foanalyzed. The soil scientist inthe 1987 Apple fire into the cufor site productivity, since that scale. 

30, 37 NEPA Please consider at least one non-commercial, restoration only 

alternative that invests in restoration and recovery of the fire area. The NEPA analysis fails to consider a minimal restoration and natural recovery alternative. A restorative alternative needs to be considered with the narrow goal of restoration; any commercial salvage would be incidental. 

Alternative 1, no action, includof burned plantations as funds continued road maintenance to as needed (DEIS page 16). Anatural recovery. In addition, in response to scoconsidered, but eliminated from would have implemented restocommercial timber sale (DEIS only alternative would not meeof this project. 

30 NEPA Also, consider an alternative modeled on the recommendations 

of the Beschta report. 

Alternative 5 was modeled afte(DEIS page 38). 

30, 37 NEPA The EIS should clearly indicate that the Beschta-like Alternative 

5 is ecologically superior to all other alternatives, and that Alternative 3 sacrifices some ecological values but still meets 

both economic and ecological goals. Commenter indicated that although they believed that Alternative 5 would not be preferred, they thought that there 

would be some middle ground chosen, since they had participated in good faith. 

The consequences, both positAlternative 5 are displayed thrare the consequences of AlterResponsible Official has choseAlternative 6, which is responscomments received on the DEsalvages less volume than Altemore than 3, 5, and 1, so it doground. 

37 NEPA What was the purpose of having open IDT meetings, working 

collaboratively on a blended alternative, then picking the timber 

industries preferred alternative (maximum harvest)? Commenter feels sold out and betrayed, and felt that time was wasted given the effort put in to collaboration, which was negated by the choice of the preferred alternative. Alternative 6 should have 

The Responsible Official identshe felt best met the purpose aDraft EIS. After reviewing cominteraction with the public, the instead chosen to implement A
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

366

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

been chosen, given it was a compromise and addressed all of the issues. 

30 NEPA (WA) Salvage is not a recommended reason to harvest timber 

according to the Mid North Umpqua Watershed Analysis. The watershed analysis is supposed to provide a context for decision-making but it is silent on the topic of salvage. The watershed analysis must be updated before this project is approved. It should address issues such as snag retention need to meet long-term snag habitat, large wood recruitment, the historic range of variability of early seral plant communities with abundant snags. 

Appendix A of the Baked Appldocuments all Watershed Anarecommendations that applied was reviewed after the 2002 Awhich recommendations were recommendations were no lonimplemented, and other areas the existing condition. Whereaspecifically address salvage, it 

salvage (page 119), which increstoring landscape patterns. The WA addresses snags (pagrecruitment (pages 56-62), and variability for plant communitieSnag retention (DEIS pages 1recruitment (DEIS pages 179-historic range of variability (DEdiscussed in the DEIS at the swatershed level. 

30 NEPA (WA) The watershed analysis recommends that the Riparian 

Reserves should not be harvested (WA page 121). The project is not following this recommendation. 

The recommendation in Table WA applies to green tree harvstates that the general silvicultupdated during project plannininformation. Given the changereserves, this project level planTable 21. 

30 NEPA (WA) The watershed analysis recommends scheduling work on higher 

productivity areas first (WA page 123). The project does not follow this recommendation. 

The recommendation on page mid-seral stands that are greepotentials and would realize ththinning over low site potential recommendation will be followThe recommendation does noburned and dead. Therefore, 
 

367

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

contradict that recommendatio

30 NEPA (WA) The watershed analysis recommends use of native seeds 

sources for revegetation projects, but the DEIS relies on planting after logging to get to 85% effective soil cover. The DEIS does not disclose if this will be with native plants and fails to disclose the consequences of using non-natives (altering succession, reduce coverage of natives, out compete planted trees, create future fire hazard), nor the likely ineffectiveness of trying to revegetate from seed in “steep-dry” sites in the late summer (after a May to October operating season). There will be very little germination and growth, before Fall rains wash the seeds (and the soil) away. 

All planting (erosion control anforest is obliged to follow the nsigned by the Forest Supervisdocument directs only native sunless waived by the Forest Sspecific basis. If a site has been deem to havseeding or planting of that acreconsultation with a botanist to effectiveness of seeding or pla

30, 32 NEPA (WA) The DEIS lacks any analysis or disclosure of the adequacy of 

BMPs in a post-fire setting. There is no good evidence that the application of BMPs in the Baked Apple Project area can reduce the impacts of logging and road construction at the watershed scale to an ecologically insignificant level, especially in light of the generally poor existing conditions in the planning area. Nor is there any evidence that they will alleviate cumulative effects at the 

landscape scale. 

Each BMP has been rated for implemented and effective. Thadded to Appendix B. 

30 NEPA (WA) The watershed analysis page 79 fails to describe post-fire 

landscapes as a specific habitat type. This is a serious omission that requires that the watershed analysis be rewritten before the decision is made. 

In fact, the watershed analysis habitat on page 32, and shows stand from the 1987 Apple Fire on page 31, shows a graphicafire habitat. The watershed anlandscape-level condition of th65, last paragraph. 

10, 22 NEPA, 

Economics 

The project is progressing too slowly. Deterioration of the timber threatens to affect the viability of the restoration. Keep the merchantability standards high enough to get the most wood moved in the shortest amount of time. 

The Forest Service is required planning procedures under the Policy Act (NEPA). The requirthe public, and require full disc

30 NEPA/ 

Water Quality 

The EIS indicates that the erosion control plan will be in the timber sale contract, but it should be in the EIS. The agency must provide convincing evidence that logging in this steep, 

highly erosive, post-fire landscape will not cause increase 

Pages 48-57 describe how the be mitigated. By placing an erspecific for the Timber Sale Copage 55 of the DEIS), the sale 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

368

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

erosion and sediment in violation of the Clean Water Act and the ACS. Compliance with substantive requirements must be disclosed in the EIS. 

have the authority to implemenin the DEIS. 

26 NEPA/ 

Environmental 

Justice 

The EIS does not provide any analysis of the communities that will be impacted by the proposed actions nor describes how it was determined that low-income or minority communities will not endure any additional hardships. The EIS should disclose what efforts were taken to meet environmental justice requirements. The EIS should describe the efforts and criteria utilized to identify low income and people of color (minority) communities that may be impacted by the proposed project. The EIS should provide demographic analyses that describes the racial and income profile of the communities that would be impacted by the proposed project and identify those communities that have significant populations of low income and people of color. In addition, the EIS needs to provide a comprehensive accounting of all impacts on these communities, including (but not limited to) cumulative and indirect impacts. The EIS also needs to determine if the impacts to low income and people of color communities will be disproportionately higher than those on nonlow income and non-people of color communities. For such a determination, the EIS must identify a reference community, provide a justification for utilizing this reference community, and include a discussion of the methodology for selecting the reference community. If impacted, the EIS should describe the efforts that were taken to assure that these communities have had opportunity to provide meaningful input into the decisions being made about the project. The EIS should describe what was done to inform the communities about the project and the potential impacts in will have on their communities, what input was received from the communities, and how that input was utilized in the decisions that were made regarding the project. 

According to statistical data foof the population is made up oin the Economics section of thunemployment and poverty in the State average. Since the pmiddle of the Forest, there are centers that would be directly aThe Dry Creek community, whto the east, has a small store tin business during logging opecommunity may potentially be log truck traffic. The communiGlide, which lie about 25 miles see an increase in business anHowever, none of these increacomparable to the logging see1980’s. No adverse effects woThe salvage area is not a high area, as described in the recrewhere there is concentrated an(Apple Creek Campground andispersed sites), the effects to area would be greatest. Very low-income groups are found ithis, very few individuals of milikely be affected by this projecpopulations who may spend timCreek may also be impacted dwhen logging occurs. These grecreate elsewhere, and would impacted. However, these efflogging is completed. Overall, imposes any other additional hlow-income communities; ther
 

369

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

direct, indirect, or cumulative ejustice with any alternative. 

26 NEPA/ tribal 

consultation 

The EIS states that the Forest Service consulted with the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, Confederated Tribe of Grand Ronde Indians, and the Confederated Tribe of Siletz Indians. However, the EIS does not provide any specifics regarding these consultations other than to state that the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians indicated full support for the project and no other tribal interests responded to the proposal. The EIS needs to document that treaty rights and privileges are addressed appropriately. As the proposed project may have impacts on Tribes, the EIS should be developed in consultation with all affected tribal governments, consistent with Executive Order (EO) 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments). EO 13175 states that the U.S. government will continue to work with Indian tribes on a government-to-government basis to address issues concerning Indian tribal self-government, trust resources, and Indian tribal treaty and other rights. Documentation of these consultations should be included in the EIS. In particular, the EIS should include a discussion of all correspondence the Forest Service has had with the potentially impacted Indian tribes including the issues and concerns raised by the tribes about the proposed project. The EIS should provide the reader with a clear understanding of how the tribes were involved in the decisions that were made to address these issues and concerns. 

The Confederated Tribes of thConfederated Tribes of the SilBand of Umpqua Tribe of IndiaDebra Barner, Heritage PrograForest during the Apple and Tcultural resource specialists focontacted by phone regarding potential damage to archaeolotelephone conversations by Decultural preservation specialistwas arranged. After a date wainvitations were sent to the Trithe field trip, Ms. Connie Shultfor the Confederated Tribes of to inform Debra that she would Tooter Ansures, Cultural ComMr. Thomas Rondeau, Culturathe Cow Creek Band of the Umwere able to attend the field triinspect the burned area. The members said that they suppoarea with minimal new road coKentta, Cultural Specialist from of the Siletz was also unable to The Umpqua National Forest hwith the quarterly copies of the Tribes. Each quarter, the coveprojects and projects that may Tribes; in particular, all fire salgive the tribes more informatioUnder the treaties with the CoGrand Ronde, Confederated TCow Creek Band of Umpqua Tresources or reserved treaty ri
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

370

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

lands managed by the UmpquOn January 14, 2004, Debra BKentta and Ms. Connie Shultz requesting to “know whether thinformation on our Baked Appprogram in general”. If they nerequested that they please retMr. Kentta and Ms. Shultz did Debra also telephoned Mr. Toohe felt he had been given enouForest’s timber salvage effort fsalvage. Mr. Ansures respondwas given enough information salvage logging as long as we archaeological sites”. On January 16, 2004, Debra BSue Shaffer, Tribal Chairman fof Umpqua Tribe of Indians dutopic. Mrs. Shaffer said that “yenough information.” On January 21, 2004, Debra aRondeau concerning whether information on the Baked Appltimber program. Mr. Rondeau information and supported the 

15 NEPA/other 

laws 

Why does the Forest Service ask for public comment on the Baked Apple Salvage Project when the District Ranger announced at the Senator Smith gathering that you were going to pursue Alternative #4? Is this only lip service to the public in order to satisfy due process? 

The Responsible Official chosDEIS because she felt it best mneed. In response to commeninvolvement, the Responsible Alternative 6 as the preferred a

18, 27 NEPA/other 

laws 

The Umpqua Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) has approved Title II monies under the Secure Rural Schools Act to finance presale activities. The expenditure of Title II monies on a project requires that any revenue generated by that project be deposited in the U.S. Treasury (Public Law106-393§402 (b). If you accept the RAC’s offer, you will be unable to utilize any 

The Office of General Council Forest with their opinion on the Act. According to OGC, the Fall money generated from the which would preclude collectiothis would severely hamper the 
 

371

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

revenues earned from the sale for reforestation, brush disposal, or other KV work. I recommend you address this in the FEIS. The National Forest Management Act requires that marking of timber “be conducted by persons employed by the secretary of Agriculture”. Further, such persons shall have no personal interest in the purchase or harvest of such products and shall not be directly or indirectly in the employment of the purchase thereof” 16 U.S.C. § 472 (g). I believe “employed by” is synonymous with “employee,” thus eliminating private contractors from marking timber. Thus the Title II funds would not be legally available for the purpose to which the RAC seeks to put them. The Secure Rural Schools Act requires that Title II funds, such as those used in the Baked Apple project, will: 

“improve the maintenance of existing infrastructure, implement stewardship objectives that enhance forest ecosystems, and restore and improve land health and water quality.” 

Cruising and marking for Alternative 4 especially is not consistent with the Secure Rural Schools Act because Alternative 4 prioritizes economic return purposes and deemphasizes the protection and restoration of unsuitable soils and other resource values. Instead, the Title II funds should be used to either maintain infrastructure or enhance forest ecosystems. 

reforest the area and implemethe Forest has returned the moallocation. 

27, 30 NEPA/other 

laws 

It is illegal to be commercially exploiting riparian reserves. It is also illegal for the DEIS to not outright admit the reserves are being used for economic purposes. Instead, the only reason the DEIS gives for reserves being logged is “To address fuels concerns... an issue raised during scoping.” 

The Record of Decision for the on pages C-31 and C-31, that prohibited in the Riparian Resecatastrophic events (if required and if watershed analysis detewood needs are meet and otheadversely affected. TM-1 specRiparian Reserve acres are nocalculations of the timber baseAlternative 4 proposed salvage 32 acres of riparian reserves t
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

372

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

while leaving enough snags anfuture coarse woody debris neAlternative 6, the preferred altedoes not include salvage in Ri

27 NEPA/other 

laws 

The Appleseed salvage sale was sold on July 30, 2003, and will be logged before March 2004. All of the Apple Seed units are immediately adjacent to Baked Apple units. Appleseed built .25 miles of new roads within the project area, and cut trees averaging 12 inches DBH on over 100 acres of older managed plantations and young wild stands. A half million board feet was sold. The DEIS mentions Appleseed under “Cumulative Effects” headings, but should have been more specific. For instance, the Baked Apple DEIS says, “The temporary roads built for the Apple Seed project would be decommissioned...”70 But some 

roads built for Appleseed are shown as new “temporary” road construction for Baked Apple. For example, the new road built for Apple Seed unit 23A is the same new road to be built for unit 25 of Baked Apple. 

None of the temporary roads bsalvage sale will be used in anthe Baked Apple Salvage. Thinitiates from the same point, b

27 NEPA/other 

laws 

The new road into unit 75 is already flagged orange. Alternative 5 would not build this new road. Does this mean the Forest Service has already made a decision not to choose alternative 5? Determining the location of new roads, before you make a decision to build the new roads, is illegal. 

The proposed temporary spur flagged for reconnaissance puassist other planners in determproposed spur so the site-specThere is nothing pre-decisionaroads, units, landings, etc. No flagging the potential location 

70 Baked Apple DEIS page 236. 
 

373

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

27 NEPA/other 

laws 

Under The Data Quality Act, Federal agencies must maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information. The 

guidelines define the term “objectivity” as follows: “‘Objectivity’ includes whether disseminated information is being presented in an accurate, clear, complete, and unbiased manner.” The guidelines conclude that “agencies should not disseminate substantive information that does not meet a basic level of quality. The Baked Apple DEIS demonstrates a bias towards selection of logging alternatives proposed. Therefore, these documents are not “unbiased,” as required by the DQA. For instance, the work has been started on the new road into unit 75, biasing selection of an alternative that includes the new road. The information in the Economic Analysis is missing key elements, such as the funding by the Secure Rural Schools act, or the economic benefits of the beneficial underburning of the Apple fire. Information was also incorrect on the use of the Northern Spotted Owl of burned old-growth. Another example is the claim that alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 5 will increase the risk of a future stand replacing fire while your graphs show otherwise (see reason 6 above). Other mis-information and missing information detailed in our comments above, such as the missing peer review for DecAID, rises to the level of “important” information that the DQA requires the Agency to hold to higher quality standards. Subsequently, the DEIS violate the guidelines 

implementing the DQA. 

The DEIS does not demonstraof logging alternatives. As stated above, only the loca75 was flagged; no work has bon the Title II monies was inclueconomic analysis; as stated emonies is irrelevant to the ecoThe beneficial effects of the un

throughout the fire were addreDEIS; additional information hFEIS. The information presented on and reflects the best available wildlife biologist, is currently a Spotted Owl review team and knowledgeable about spotted needs. As stated previously, the DEIS future reburn will occur, but insdoes occur, it will likely be of gpage 82). Use of DecAID was explained DEIS. 

30 NEPA/other 

laws 

The Forest Service has a NEPA obligation to disclose the risk of running out of K-V funds before they are done with the mitigation projects identified in the preferred alternative. If the mitigation and restoration is not completed, the NEPA analysis is no longer accurate and in fact it becomes misleading. 

The economic efficiency analyanalyses for risk associated wvolume to decay, and change alternatives except Alternative respect to NPV, including all alower bounds of sensitivity. Thof running out of KV for the preThe risk of running out of KV fo(very likely). The supplementareduction mentioned above, w
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

374

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

which each alternative NPV golevels, we will display the amobe available, if any. 

30 NEPA/other 

laws 

The agency has a conflict of interest. The NEPA document for this project needs to acknowledge that the Forest Service has an inherent conflict of interest when preparing commercial timber sales, and therefore, the action alternative selected is not based purely on legitimate forest health and ecological considerations along. Under NEPA the Forest Service needs to acknowledge that to choose the No Action Alternative or any non-commercial alternative could result in the loss of employment by agency timber planners and others involved in the preparing and deciding this timber sale. So, both the analysis and the decision could be significantly biased. Purpose and need must acknowledge that maintaining employment for agency timber sale planners is really what’s at stake here. See Earth Island Institute v. US Forest Service (9th

circ Dec 11, 2003). 

The National Environmental PAgencies the latitude to select that best implements their ForThe consequences of choosinthroughout Chapter 3. Choosinecessarily lead to downsizing Current and future budgetary cstaffing levels. The Umpqua Nexperienced significant downsyears, including the downsizinsales. 

34 NEPA/ other 

laws 

Commenter has lost interest in the process and in interacting with the Forest Service. Commenter stated that he felt sold out and betrayed given the decision to go forward with Alternative 4. Commenter was frustrated because he attended all of the public meetings and was present (ad advocated) for the development of the blended alternative (Alternative 6), only to find that the timber industry’s alternative was preferred. Why were meetings held and input solicited and a blend developed if industry was to win out? 

All public meetings and interacinclude all potential opinions aenvironmental analysis procesAlternative 4 in the DEIS helps does not preclude selection of FEIS. The responsible official has sethe preferred alternative in the comments, concerns and inpuaffected publics. 

34 NEPA/ 

Preferred 

Alternative 

How was the preferred alternative selected? Who selected it? Concern that the preferred alternative harvested the most volume and harvests in controversial areas. 

The responsible official selectealternative in the DEIS (Alternamet the purpose and need. Thfor the FEIS is Alternative 6. 

1,2,3 NEPA/ No 

Action 

Commenters urge the agency to choose the No Action Alternative. Do not log to prevent impacts to salmon, water quality, the fragile environment, etc. 

Thank you for your comment. addresses these concerns. 
 

375

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

30 Noxious 

Weeds 

Opening up the canopy and disturbing the soil through road building and logging as proposed in this project could spread non-native weeds far and wide. The invasive weed sites in the analysis area and along all log and gravel haul routes should be fully inventoried and documented as part of the NEPA process for this project. 

The DEIS pages 164-167 docucondition of noxious weeds witthe potential effects of the propLocations of noxious weeds wpersonnel during reconnaissansystems report). Mitigation de57 of the DEIS would reduce tweeds and would help control weeds. 

5 Reforestation The document should clarify that unsalvaged areas may not be 

reforested due to OSHA regulations. 

Riparian reserves that receivethat are located within sale arebe reforested except under AltApproximately 600 acres withibe planted under Alternatives has utilized Categorical Exclusplantations where large snags Areas that retain snags that wevaluated for safety concerns. safety in areas with retained sPublic and Worker Safety sectDEIS (pgs. 286-287). 

5 Reforestation Please clarify the statement under Element 2 of the Purpose and 

Need that “[s]lash treatment proposal is based on the need to reduce activity-generated and existing dead fuels in order to keep fuel loads within parameters prescribed by the Forest.” Does this apply to all the acres in the project area? How will this be funded? 

Slash treatment would occur in would be paid for with Brush Dwould be incorporated into the (DEIS, pg. 6, 18, 24, 30, 38, 5fuel loads such as burned planof any harvest units, but within boundaries, would be treated useparate contracts (not with thDEIS p. 53. 

29 Reforestation Concern for reforesting harsh sites within the burn is legitimate. 

Shallow, rocky soils combined with steep south slopes are challenging to reforest but is routinely accomplished throughout southwest Oregon. Incorporating modern forestry tools – namely timely planting with healthy nursery stock and the use of herbicides to control herbaceous and woody plants – increases the likelihood of success. While the legal challenges and agency processes are difficult to navigate, if the desired future condition is a healthy forest achieved in an acceptable 

Pages 13, 14, 17, and 18 of thand page 51 and 52 of the DEare prescribed to increase survplanted seedlings. Timely planimproved conifer stock and reldisclosed. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

376

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

timeframe, these tools must be utilized. 

31 Reforestation While the draft considers the replanting on the existing 

plantations, it effectively makes the decision that land outside the plantations and those outside the action alternative salvage proposals will be left untreated. Since the decision not to treat these lands is a decision with an impact on the human environment, the full environmental impacts of the decision not to treat the remaining acres (18,000 – (1,600 +1,432) = 14,968 acres) should also be discussed in the final EIS. 

Pages 52 and 53 of the DEIS dcollected to reforest lands outsare within the KV boundary. Fplanning area, not all of the redid so at high intensity. Within acres of late-successional stanintensity, while about 2500 acrAppropriated dollars are being areas as funding allows. Unlike the fire behavior that ocLSR burned more patchily (DEareas have large patches of inNatural seeding is much more areas, versus what was found 

31 Reforestation The quick removal of the dead and dying material is necessary 

to insure prompt and effective reforestation. As demonstrated by the FIR program, there is a severe reduction in conifer growth if the shrubs are not controlled. It is the recommendation of the Board that all acres that are not within close proximity to a 

natural seed source be included within the artificial seeding program. 

No large scale seeding prograthis project. As described abosalvage units will be reforested seedlings are secured. 

31 Reforestation As stated in the report on the Biscuit Fire by Sessions et al. 

(2003), delays in restocking the area will result in high mortality to seedlings and will necessitate manual release or the use of herbicides to promote growth and achieve desired stocking levels. The FEIS should discuss the need for herbicide use if planting is not done in a timely manner. 

The DEIS recognizes the potereforestation (pages 173-176) effect that would have on foresthe DEIS lists measures that wseedling survival. 

31 Reforestation The public would be well-served by a discussion in the FEIS as 

to the availability of live seed sources in the burn area and the area that these seed sources are likely to reseed. Further, a discussion of the likelihood of a seed crop in any one year would also be helpful in understanding the limited ability for natural regeneration over this large area. 

Natural seeding from green tre173-176 in the DEIS. 
 

377

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

32 Reforestation The UNF must guarantee that harvest units can be successfully 

reforested. The courts have ruled that: “The statutory and regulatory language clearly and plainly requires the FS to insure that timber practices will achieve adequate restocking within 5 years”. This mandate has not been met in the Baked Apple DEIS. 

Meeting the five-year regeneraNFMA regulation 36CFR219.2page 173 of the DEIS. Pages Prescription and page 51 and activities that are prescribed to growth of planted seedlings in regulation. 

32 Reforestation The DEIS asserts that natural regeneration will be less 

efficacious than post-logging regeneration, but the UNF provides no evidence to support this contention, other than the assertion that there are not many natural seed sources (DEIS, pg 174). Spotty natural regeneration would reduce fuel loading naturally. 

Pages 173-174 of the DEIS diand District monitoring of the Sthe fact that planting is necessdesired condition of a healthy, meet the five-year NFMA stoc

32 Reforestation Even the removal of fire-killed late-successional trees denies the 

future landscape the benefit of legacy late-successional structures, diminishes the structural complexity of recovering stands, and retards the development of future structural complexity and late-successional characteristics. If reforestation 

after stand replacing events serves to indirectly create future structurally complex older forest, then retaining legacy features makes this happen faster. Salvage logged units will be converted to tree farms. Even if they are not logged at 80-120 

years of age (as called for by current management goals), the lack of in-stand disturbance in the replanted forest means they will probably never attain late-successional characteristics. 

All alternatives leave some levsuccessional structures in the standing snags, and down woosmall scale disturbance within still occur. Small scale disturbfrom root disease, insects, comlegacy trees. 

27 Reforestation/

Silviculture 

The DEIS should also have disclosed how much of the natural regeneration in the green units will be disturbed by the salvage logging and the treatment of the logging slash. 

This information will be disclosVegetative Regrowth/Forest S

27 Reforestation/

Silviculture 

The “Partial Harvest” prescription in Alternative 3 was never fully explained. We searched the entire DEIS, the silviculture appendix, the logging systems appendix, and the glossary, and no place was there a definition of “Partial Harvest”. All other units have a designated snags/acre retained, except the Partial Harvest units, which have a NA (Not Applicable?) Why aren’t the number of snags per acre applicable in these units? Does the canopy closure of 40 -60% mean that Partial Harvest units will cut all dead trees, but most of the trees in the units are live? 

Partial harvest is defined as a leaves a majority of the existinstanding after harvest. Partial areas that received a low to mdominated by green trees. Thon page 8 states “No merchanwill be left in partial harvest unmoderate intensity underburn.snags will be left on these sitelocated in areas that received dominated by dead trees and f
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

378

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

prescription, described on pag

27, 30, 32 Reforestation/

Silviculture 

The Forest Service is wasting our money by a massive, nursery stock, replanting program. The post-fire, natural regeneration already on the ground is impressive. The DEIS never explained why expensive nursery stock, tubs, mulch and shade blocking, 

along with labor costs, is necessary. Some units that are green units, where the few dead trees will be plucked out, have a lot of pre-fire natural regeneration. The DEIS never said why these areas need nursery stock replanting. Is it because the logging slash treatments will kill the natural regeneration? Salvage logging on unsuitable soils is inappropriate in part because salvage logging will set back vegetation recovery that may already be tenuous. The LRMP IV-44 allows for salvage on these sites under certain circumstances and considerations which the FS has not done. Document that the likelihood of mass wasting will not increase. Logging will damage and kill some live trees and other vegetation that currently provide soil cohesion. Salvage will delay the recovery of the next generation of vegetation that must grow and replace the decayed roots the burned vegetation. LRMP IV-203 C5-V, drop the 159 ac of harvest on unsuitable soils. Replanting with nursery stock seriously depletes the genetic diversity at the site. Especially in Riparian Reserves, there is no reason to stuff in a bunch of nursery trees that could have come from all one parent, when the forest has already replanted itself with abundant regeneration from a diverse number of trees in the area. Plant at low density to extend the early seral community and avoid future stand management costs. 

Pages 172-176 of the DEIS exnecessary in areas that receivand have few green trees avaiThis was based on science litethe Spring Fire. Planting was harvest units dominated by greSilvicultural Prescription showplant”. Salvage on unsuitable soil unitAlternatives 4 and 6. The delay of vegetative recovesubsequent prescribed burning 173 of the DEIS. Other indirecunder the appropriate resource A recent study from Oregon Stseedling stocks used for artificclearcut, shelterwood, and grosignificantly greater levels of gaverage, that found in natural probably because the seeds ustocks come from many wild smore diversity than found in siet. al, 1998). Planting prescriptions vary from Predicted seedling mortality of patchiness. The desired stocktrees per acre at age 15-25 yeprecommercial thinning. 

30 Reforestation/

Silviculture 

The rate and magnitude of vegetation recovery is related to several important management requirements: hydrology, soils, fuels, erosion/sediment (p175), but the EIS gives far too little attention to the fact that salvage logging will set back vegetative 

The study referenced in the coeast side of the Cascades, whprocesses, precipitation, and tdifferent than on the west side 
 

379

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

recovery that has already started and thereby retard attainment of several important management objectives. In research on post-fire logging on the Winema NF, Sexton (1998) found that salvage logged sites produced only about 38% of the understory biomass of that on the unlogged site; and one year later produced only about 27% of the understory biomass of that on the unlogged site. In fact, Sexton’s (1998) study comparing salvaged and unsalvaged areas of a fire on the Winema NF one and two years after logging showed: Salvage Areas showed: Unsalvaged Areas showed: reduced vegetation biomass greater vegetation biomass reduced species diversity greater species diversity reduced species richness greater species richness reduced growth of seedlings greater growth of seedlings reduced survival of seedlings greater survival of seedlings 

Baked Apple is located. Vegepositively correlated with the aavailable. There is at least a tprecipitation going from the eathe Cascades. It would not be predict the effects of logging othe west side of the Cascadesacknowledges that vegetative for two to three years in areas slash treatment. 

5 Riparian 

Reserves 

Who will pay for the felling and fuels treatments in the riparian areas noted in Alternative 4? 

KV funds will be collected to fe(DEIS, pg. 51, 53). KV will alsslash in the riparian reserves fprescriptions. 

19, 29 Riparian 

Reserves 

Not all class four streams need to be protected. Class four streams that are fairly rocky and have very little soil movement do not need a buffer. The soil type will determine if the stream needs protection. There are also a few draws or class four streams that only run water when there are at least three inches or more of rainfall occurring in one day. Harvesting is required to reduce the buffer area’s risk of another devastating fire that will most definitely take place if the problem is not dealt with. 

The responsible official determlogging would occur in riparian the project (Project Initiation Leresponse to scoping, Alternativconcerns in riparian reserves band felling and burning smalleClass III and IV streams. 

19 Riparian 

Reserves 

Riparian buffers will inhibit the comeback of oaks growing in rocky meadows. Harvesting is strongly encouraged around rocky meadows to encourage the comeback of oak habitat. 

No salvage is prescribed in Rithe preferred alternative for the salvage will occur in unsuitable areas were dropped from consmeadows that burned will expespecies, including oak. 

7 Riparian 

Reserves 

Today’s logging equipment also allows for the removal of material in riparian areas. 

Salvage in Riparian Reserves 4 (DEIS, pg. 30-33). 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

380

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

9, 12, 13, 

14, 30 

Riparian 

Reserves 

Riparian Reserves should be managed only for aquatic and wildlife values, not economic incentives. The Forest Service 

admits to leaving behind the smaller trees and selling the larger trees for economic benefits. Riparian Reserves should be managed only for aquatic and wildlife values and not for economic incentives. The logging in Riparian Reserves would cut and leave on the ground trees 8 to 12 inches diameter, but cut and sell trees 12 to 18 inches in diameter. Leaving behind the smaller trees and selling the larger trees, the Forest Service admitted, is for economic benefits. Riparian areas are important, sensitive zones for the health of forests, watersheds, and wildlife. Goals of this sale can be achieved without the minimal contribution that the logs in the 

riparian areas would provide under Alternative 4. 

Alternative 4 includes salvaginReserves (DEIS, pg. 58). No salvage within riparian reserveThe removal of trees 12” to 18acres of riparian reserves was raised during scoping (DEIS ptrees would be removed and sfeasible to cut, pile, and burn tdiameter. The removal of theswas driven by fuels objectivesthan 780,000 board feet of timbiologist concluded that this limfrom the riparian reserves wouACS objectives. The wildlife bcurrent and future coarse woomet by the retention of all treediameter. This complies with tGuideline TM-1. No salvage in riparian reserveAlternative 6, the preferred alte

27, 32 Riparian 

Reserves 

In the riparian reserve harvest of Alternative 4 why are the smaller trees left, while the larger trees sold, since smaller trees are a greater fire hazard than larger trees? The DEIS gives no ecological justification for commercially selling trees of this size out of reserves. The outer half of the reserves especially serve as a corridor for old-growth dependent wildlife and selling 18 inch trees does not benefit that habitat. Because we raised this issue in our meeting, a written explanation for leaving the smallest and selling the largest of what is cut in reserves, was emailed by Steve Bacigalupo: “The objective would be the same as the harvest units in terms of fuels reduction. Reduction of future fuels accumulations caused by the falling of snags. By removing that material future 

In response to scoping, Alternpart to address the issue of mawithin riparian reserves that arunits. Only areas adjacent to included in Alternative 4 in ordthe fuels prescriptions and to mto use KV funds to meet resouThe fuels objective in the riparas the upland salvage units in reduction of future fuels accumfalling of snags. By removing up would be reduced, reducing caused by larger fuels being cduration fire. This treatment, i

71 Northwest Forest Plan. C-36. FM-4. 
 

381

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

build-up would be reduced, reducing intensity of future fire caused by larger fuels being consumed, by longer duration fire. This treatment in conjunction with the fuels treatment of the smaller material will diminish fire behavior.” This explanation fails to explain anything – especially why smaller fuels are being left, which are more vulnerable to ignition and spreading fire, than the larger fuels being yarded and sold. And, the “reburn” theory eluded to in this response is unfounded (see reason 6). And lastly, if there is any explanation at all to selling the largest of the trees cut in the Riparian Reserve, it should have been in the DEIS for everyone to see. It is illegal to commercially log Riparian Reserves for economic purposes. You can only log in Riparian Reserves “to control stocking, reestablish and manage stands, and acquire desired vegetation characteristics needed to attain Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.” The DEIS never explained how selling larger trees while retaining smaller trees met the ACS objectives. Salvage in reserves is only allowed when “watershed analysis determines that present and future coarse woody debris needs are met and other ACS objectives are not adversely affected.” The DEIS never pointed to any place in the Watershed Analysis that made these determinations for the size of trees being sold. The ACS determinations in the DEIS never documented how the prescribed burns of logging slash in the Riparian Reserves contribute to ACS objectives.71

According the NWFP standards and Guidelines, the FS can adjust RR in cases of catastrophic fire (S&Gs p C-32). The Forest Service does not demonstrate that reducing riparian reserve width is necessary to meet ACS objectives. Logging 32 acres in RR is not going to significantly modify fire behavior and protect the RR from fire. 

fuels treatment of the smaller mfuture fire behavior. The smalpiled, then burned in order to f(DEIS page 30). The eighteen limit would allow fuels to be rethe larger wood that is considewildlife and riparian objectivesSee response to comment aboof how the project meets ACS The project is not modifying ripproposing, in one alternative, tactivities within portions of the order to respond to an issue ra

27 Riparian 

Reserves 

The DEIS never tells us the current condition of the Riparian Reserves. How many trees larger than 18” would be left? In the reserves we looked at, we didn’t see many. It could be the Forest Service is selling, for the most part, the largest trees in the Riparian Reserves. The DEIS also never tells us how many acres will be logged commercially versus how many of acres in 

The current condition of the ripdiscussed throughout Chapter 

181, 184-186, 213-217, and 22condition of the reserves in tertreatments prescribed. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

382

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

the Reserves will receive fuel reduction without commercial extraction. 

The silviculture report, DEIS Abiological and physical conditioReserves (Table 1 pages 5-7)44 trees greater than 20 incheanalysis of stand exam data shapproximately 30 trees per acrreserves. Page 223 summarizes the acrreserves. This information is cdescription of Alternative 4 in t

27 Riparian 

Reserves 

The DEIS never told us why Fuels Treatment units were needed, why these units were chosen over other Riparian Reserves, and why it was only needed in Alternative 4. If it raises the fuel reduction capabilities of alternative 4 so that it is the only choosable alternative, it is unfair to exclude this measure from the other alternatives. The Forest Service should have analyzed an alternative that excludes commercial harvest in the Riparian Reserves, but includes the non-commercial fuels treatments. 

The riparian treatments were iconveyed during scoping and The fuels objective in the riparas the upland salvage units in reduction of future fuels accumfalling of snags. By removing up would be reduced, reducing caused by larger fuels being cduration fire. This treatment, ifuels treatment of the smaller mfuture fire behavior. The smalpiled, then burned in order to f(DEIS page 30). The eighteen limit would allow fuels to be rethe larger wood that is considewildlife and riparian objectivesAlternative 4 as a response to 

a sharp contrast between alteraspect of every issue in all altenot having a reasonable range Alternatives 2, 3, 5, and 6 do nsalvage within the riparian resinclude the use of fuel breaks, riparian reserves. 
 

383

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

30 Riparian 

Reserves 

The preferred alternative is unclear on the fate of trees >18 inches dbh in the Riparian Reserve logging. 

All trees greater than 18 incheretained within the riparian resThe only exception to this woudesignated as hazard trees, wleft in place. 

24 Riparian 

Reserves 

The Northwest Forest Plan directed that “interim” buffers around intermittent and ephemeral streams be reviewed and narrowed from the original designation upon completing a watershed analysis. That review has still not occurred, and as a result, substantial acreage of dead timber that has little or no impact on water quality has been arbitrarily taken off the table for consideration for restoration activities. The range of alternatives needs to be expanded to include salvage and restoration of the “interim” riparian areas on intermittent and ephemeral streams burned in stand replacement fire. Even though such an alternative may be impossible to implement because of the lengthy consultation process with NOAA, the public deserves the right to know the extent of these areas and why these areas are off limits. 

The Middle North Umpqua Wadid not determine a need to adwidth. In response to scoping, salvagwithin the outer portions of ripaconsidered in Alternative 4 (DEAn alternative to salvage withiconsidered, but eliminated from page 15). 

31 Riparian 

Reserves 

The Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Prescriptions for riparian areas specifically authorizes salvage harvest within the riparian areas of Class 1 and 2 streams when there is a catastrophic event (See Prescription C2-1, Forest Plan IV-169 to 171). The FEIS should clarify that salvage within the riparian areas is necessary to move these areas to the desired future condition and natural variability. The ROD should also clarify that the salvage in these areas is 

authorized by the LRMP, given that the post fire condition is not 

within the range of natural variability. 

Salvage is proposed within rip4 to move these areas toward reduce fuels in the future to a more controllable during fire evEffects and Behavior for Action 

proposed harvest and fuel treawill move current conditions tothe long term (DEIS, p. 96), a behavior is easier to control co10 and 12, the most common fto occur in the surrounding lanTable 14, p. 96, Figure 35 and 

30 Riparian 

Reserves 

The EIS has conflicting findings on aquatic impacts of logging. It says on page 212 that no alternative will prevent attainment of ACS objectives, but then on page 219 the EIS indicates that there will be cumulative effects on large wood and fluvial erosion. Since there is a deficit of large wood in streams (p 241, 248) and since large wood has a “profound effect” on stream morphology (p 213), any loss would retard or prevent ACS 

The statement on DEIS pg. 21Baked Apple alternatives are eattainment of ACS strategy obthe sediment regime associatenone would degrade the waterof management related landsliFisheries in the short term.” 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

384

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

attainment. 

Throughout Chapter 3, the FEaquatic impacts in terms of ma(long vs short term) in order to Aquatic Conservation StrategyUnder all alternatives, sites witshallow-rapid landslides have stability modeling with subseqVerified areas of unstable or pwere deleted from salvage loglarge wood to be recruited to tsteep unstable slopes should a Large Woody Material was admainstem of Limpy Creek, lowthe tributary channels of PanthBachelor Creeks as part of the One hundred and twenty-five lapproximately 3.5 miles of lowCreeks. In addition approximachannels had large wood adderemoved from within one site pft.) of any stream channel. No inches in diameter would be reof riparian treatment proposed to the DEIS Appendices, Fisheand pages 31, 207-208 in the 

30 Riparian 

Reserves 

The EIS analysis of ACSO #1 (p 102) is inaccurate. Salvage will in fact reduce the complexity of landscape features and reduce a rare habitat type (early seral with snags) below the historic range of variability. This has a direct connection to aquatic habitat because such areas likely contribute disproportionately to large woody debris accumulations in streams, especially in steep watersheds like those in this project area. 

The DEIS discloses that pre-fiwere composed of smaller-sizmore diverse and fragmented estimated natural conditions achanged as a result of the fire 36, caption). The DEIS states early-successional habitat that (salvaged or planted), covers aplanning area. This is still highnatural range of variability for t105). The DEIS also states th
 

385

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

over 50% of the existing fire-crplanning area would not be haareas not proposed for salvageremains well distributed across the Riparian Reserve network patches” (DEIS page 104). 

30 Riparian 

Reserves 

The EIS analysis of ACSO #2 (p 102) is inaccurate because it fails to address the connectivity between upslope and stream systems. Roads are a major interceptor of logs and other material destined for streams. This project not only proposes to use and maintain many roads that interfere with this connectivity, it also proposes to build more new roads that may serve to exacerbate this adverse consequence. 

Existing roads do intercept macrossings, where movement ostream can be restricted, and areas, where falling material lamight otherwise reach the strealternatives will exacerbate thethe existing condition, use and existing roads will not further rwoody material entering streamEssentially all the large diametintercepted by roads (especialreserves) during fire suppressconserved and placed into burburned area emergency rehabAll new roads constructed with temporary roads and are not loriparian areas. They will not inwould otherwise enter streams

30 Riparian 

Reserves 

The EIS analysis of ACSO #5 (p 201) fails to consider the effect of delayed vegetation recovery, increase logging related ground disturbance, and how these will affect the rate and timing of erosion and sedimentation. The EIS also says that roads and logging related sediment should be “expected” (p 201). 

Page 201 of the DEIS is an intsubject of “Erosion and SedimSignificant Issue”. The analysi– 329) addresses each type of origin and fully discloses the ADirect Effects, Indirect Effects, Conclusions. Vegetation within the riparian zundisturbed. Only one alternatriparian harvest. No vegetation within the first site potential treVegetative regrowth here coup
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

386

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

logging systems, BMP’s, maincover, and applying mitigation expected to significantly reducsediment to reach area streamsalvage logging is expected to disclosed on page 224 and 22disclosure is further developed None of the Baked Apple altersediment regime associated wprocess at the scale of the 5th time-frame of decades or longalternatives would cause shortthe surface erosion process durecovering post-fire vegetation burning, yet this impact is not elonger than a few years. The sincluding slash burning, is not appreciable change to the sedsurface erosion over the long-trecovery in the form of pioneegrasses, herbaceous plants, arecovers quickly to hold surfac

30, 32 Riparian 

Reserves 

The EIS (p 248) falsely claims to have no effect on LWM entering streams. The EIS (p253) admits that the preferred alternative has a risk of landslides occurring on salvaged sites so they won’t deliver the large logs needed by the streams. The ACS objectives will also be violated because some areas that will experience debris flows will be inaccurately identified as stable and will be logged. Those trees should be in the stream but instead will be taken to the mill. The EIS fails to address the uncertainty associated with predicting landslides and the consequences of that uncertainty (p208). The preferred alternative includes over 10 acres of unstable sites in harvest units. This will deprive some streams of large wood in violation of the ACS. 

The uncertainty associated witof landslide activity is discusseof the DEIS. The 10 acres under Alternative Alternative 6) are not definitiveor even potentially unstable. Tshown in Table 53 of the DEIS the aggregation of many very that may or may not actually bwork completed by the interdisall of the larger discernable swSHALSTAB mapping has a reaccuracy because of the 10 mdigital terrain model, not all sitwere determined to presently b
 

387

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

The EIS (226) claims that retaining upland trees will cause an unacceptable risk of intense future fires in riparian areas (from trees falling and moving from upland to riparian areas). If this is true, then failing to retain such trees will violate ACS objective #8 related to instream wood. The DEIS claims that logging under the preferred alternative will not lead to landslides as trees are dead. Later the DEIS states the correct assertion that Alternative 5 carries less risk of landslides because it leaves substantial amounts of dead trees. More support that the preferred alternative risks mass wasting can be found in the DEIS on page 24, where the UNF reveals that Alternative 5 would not log units 16, 27A, 27B, 38, 70, 71, 86, and 90, because these units (all of which are included in the preferred alternative) have the potential to cause landslides. 

instability for shallow rapid laneach alternative contains a diffsalvage sale units that have vasusceptibility to mass wasting risk of removing dead trees thadelivered in a landslide to a strfunction to slow the momentum (Lancaster et al. 2001). Salvage logging under any of tnot increase the chances of latrees to be salvages are dead provide root strength once the decay. The impact of salvage process is that if a landslide wthat was salvaged, the dead tavailable to function within the downslope to a stream if the sdistance. Sites at substantial landslides have been identified modeling (SHALSTAB digital tsubsequent field investigation. unstable or potentially unstablfrom salvage logging. The rea38, 70, 71, 86, and 90 were drwas to further lessen the comberosion and the chances of haheadwall area slide without the 209). These units were identiof that occurring, though field r

identifiable headwalls. 

32 Riparian 

Reserves 

DEIS fails to ensure that stream temperatures do not increase from salvage logging and violates ACS. RR moderate ambient air temperatures which can influence stream temperatures. 

Only Alternative 4 proposes saStream shade reduction along 

under this alternative would be stream temperature increases this scale (DEIS, pg. 184). Am
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

388

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

influences from removing dead primary shade zone would havresulting stream temperatures

32 Riparian 

Reserves 

Stream channels in the planning area are lacking in down woody debris (DEIS p 204), and the DEIS’s failure to address how logging future large woody debris and hauling it offsite does not impact future large woody debris recruitment violates the ACS. The preferred alternative would log in riparian reserves delineated by the NWFP. Logging would occur within 75 feet of Class I fish bearing streams, where normally there would have been a 360-ft buffer (DEIS, p. 30). The DEIS does not address how the logging activities will affect future large wood recruitment. 

No timber would be removed ffeet of any stream channel (DEthe Baked Apple alternatives wrecruitment of large wood matalternative selected in the FEISdoes not salvage in riparian re

26 Riparian 

Reserves 

The preferred alternative is the only proposed alternative that calls for timber harvesting in riparian reserves. The preferred alternative would allow for the removal of trees within the 360' buffer of class I and II streams and within the 180' buffer of class III and IV streams. The justification for logging in riparian reserves is to maximize economic efficiency and reduce fuel loads. The only mitigation measure proposed for logging impacts within the riparian reserves is the scattering of slash within the inner 50' of the stream buffer. However, a significant amount of the harvesting in the riparian reserves is to be performed via helicopter logging which has the least amount of impacts of the three proposed logging techniques. While provisions exist in the Forest Plan that allow for some salvage logging in riparian reserves, logging impacts could exasperate stream temperatures that are currently elevated in the Panther Creek sub-watershed, degrade water quality through the introduction of sediments and nutrients and delay the recovery of some habitat functions. It is recommended that harvesting with the riparian reserves be limited to helicopter logging. Utilizing helicopter logging will assure that logging impacts will have minimal impacts on the aquatic systems and their dependent species. 

The rationale for salvaging witis described previously. The preferred alternative for thdoes not salvage within the rip
 

389

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

32 Riparian 

Reserves 

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has found the riparian reserves in the area to be “not properly function (DEIS p. 245).” Further impacts to riparian reserves will lead to a jeopardy call for the listed fish species in the area. 

Page 245 of the DEIS states thwithin the Panther Creek sub-w“Functioning at Risk”. Only Alteharvest activity within the riparacres have been identified in ttreatment in response to fuel loNone of these acres occur withheight (180 ft.) of any stream cspecific risk of future fire riparibecome more resilient to futurquickly toward advancing riparobjectives. 

32 Riparian 

Reserves/ 

Wildlife 

Logging in Riparian Reserves will disrupt connectivity for terrestrial species. The DEIS must consider the impact to thermal ground cover, habitat connectivity, refugia for species with limited dispersal capabilities and opportunities for species 

such as the northern spotted owl. 

The second paragraph on pagdiscusses connectivity for terrethe project affects it. Page 12habitat for the spotted owl. Thremove any dispersal habitat f

30 Roads No roadbuilding please. Roads harm wildlife, spread tree 

diseases and bark beetles, promote insect infestations, cause 

invasion by harmful non-native plant and animal species, damage soil resources and tree growth, and adversely impact aquatic ecosystems. For the semi-permanent roads that will be tilled, BLM’s own 

scientist has little faith in the restorative value of this technique. 

The temporary roads will be sumatter returned to the surface The practice of providing orgalikely enhance both the short-tdurability of gains” accelerating hydrologic and ecological funcspecific prescriptions for all temincluded in the FEIS. Dale Stewart, BLM Soil Scientdocument, states the referencgiven piece of equipment and temporary roads, not the genesuch roads. 

26 Roads While none of the proposed action alternatives would build any 

new permanent roads, none of the alternatives would decommission any permanent roads and therefore road density would not change. The direct and indirect environmental impacts from roads is well documented with increased sedimentation to waterbodies being potentially the largest direct impact. While the EIS proposes 

A project level roads analysis wproject (July 2003) and is on fiRanger District. The Responsdecision to eliminate all road wnecessary to conduct safe timtrigger a “Likely Adversely Affefor coho salmon which was listthe planning of this salvage pr
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

390

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

actions that will reduce existing road impacts (e.g., reconstruction at milepost 4.41 and road 4714), maintaining greater than 3 miles per square mile road density in the project area will prevent it from becoming a properly functioning fisheries habitat. It is recommended that the EIS include provisions in the action alternatives that decommission roads to a level that meet NOAA-Fisheries criteria for properly functioning fisheries habitat. 

determination would have resuconsultation process, which win decay rates that would makuneconomical. The DEIS page 53 discloses thcollected to decommission and would require a separate NEPOffice of General Council (OGagency that this would not be fhas been removed from the FEThe “not properly functioning” densities is not further degrade

30 Safety Hazard tree removal must not be used as an excuse to get 

timber volume. Truly hazardous trees located in high use areas should be felled (often leaving a high stump for wildlife) but such trees should generally be left to provide for wildlife and soil needs. The NEPA analysis also fails to acknowledge that the public assumes certain risk when recreating on public lands, so not every hazardous tree on every dead end spur road needs to be felled and removed. See ORS §§ 105.672(3), 105.682(1) and 

Brewer v. ODFW, 2P.3d 418, 167 Or. App. 173. 

The purpose and need on pagfocuses on economics, which hazard trees would contribute million board feet of timber wo

salvage of these hazard trees addresses the most area of haNo high use recreation areas wexist. The public assumes some risk where the trees were killed by has placed signs in the area thfire killed trees. Only roads where there would be evaluated for hazard trees; would be felled. 

31, 38 Safety An important topic not addressed in the DEIS is the safety 

issues created by standing dead and dying material. It would be difficult under OSHA rules for the Forest Service to maintain recreational roads and trails in the area. We suggest that the Forest Service discuss the safety implications of the dead standing timber on both the Forest Service employees, as well as the forest users. 

Pages 286 and 287 describe ssalvage. Retention of standing dead tresalvage units, along system roproposed for salvage will contitime. Exposure to hazard tree
 

391

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

This standing dead timber also becomes a serious safety hazard the longer this project is stretched out, especially with the helicopter logging. Many of these dangerous snags may now need to be felled for safety of the hooking crew. This is a cost that should be allowed for in your appraisal. 

all alternatives; however, not aidentified. All people who enter the fire aexposed to hazard trees and abeen installed at key locations hazards. 

31 Safety The DEIS in pages 286-87 discusses the need to fell danger 

trees along system roads. It should also discuss the impact of not felling danger trees along trails and other recreation sites. Given the need to keep the road and trail systems open, we suggest that road and trails be cleared of hazard trees through the use of Categorical Exclusions. 

All danger trees along the hauand felled. Danger trees are rthroughout the District in recre

30 Safety Why are hazard trees being felled for this project? Weren’t they 

felled during firefighting? 

Trees that are determined to bphases of logging operations wOregon OSHA guidelines to pr(DEIS pages 286 and 287). Trees which were determined felled during firefighting. Howedecay over time, additional tredeemed to be a hazard will bedecay and as other types of wseasons and time periods. 

30 Safety The EIS indicates that leave trees cut for safety purposes “may” 

be replaced. This should be “shall.” 

Any marked leave trees which reasons within harvest units w

5 Science What regional direction is given regarding the incorporation of 

the Beschta report? 

No official direction exists that environmental analyses must Report. However, the Region Report be considered. On SeChief of the Forest Service Gramemo to all Regional Foresterimportance of both the BeschtService Research Branch’s revdiscussion of the timber salvagclarify the need to address BeHarv Forsgren re-iterated the i
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

392

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

discussion of the Beschta repoNEPA documents (Memo dateaddition to these memos, receelevated the importance of thoBeschta Report (League of WiBlue Mountains Biodiversity PWildlands Project, v. USFS (CNo. 02-728-JE; Sierra Club v. Salvage) No. 01-3901-MMC; LDefenders v. Forsgren (Hash R1819-HA). 

35 Science The commenter states that the 50% retention value in Beschta 

et al. was expert opinion. From an ecological standpoint, it seemed like a reasonable first approximation. The proviso that it be distributed across all size classes was provided by Wayne Minshall. 

Alternative 5 was developed to 

30 Science 

(wildlife) 

The logging will adversely affect designated big game cover MA 11 in violation of the LRMP. a. The EIS fails to show where the Big Game MA 11 is in relation to the harvest units. b. The Forest Service fails to recognize and protect the value of large snags as big game cover. c. The Forest Service fails to recognize the unsalvaged post-fire areas will provide far superior mosaic of cover and forage than salvaged areas. d. The EIS (p 136) recognizes that human disturbance can cause big game to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. This risk should not be taken in designated MA 11. e. Page 136 of the DEIS indicates that >20% of the big winter range should be in optimal cover, but the EIS does not say how much currently is optimal cover. (The EIS says 40% for the planning area, but does not disclose the amount of cover within the winter range portion of the planning area). Since the fire severely reduced cover, what little cover remains in the form of large tree boles should be retained, not removed making a bad situation even worse for big game. f. The EIS admits that dead trees do provide cover value for big game (citing Fire Effects Information System) but the Forest 

The DEIS states that the salvawinter range, but that the impa(pg. 137).No maps of winter raDEIS. However, the spatial arrange management area locataffected environment section odocument, which is incorporatshows a map of winter range qthe 2002 wildfires (Fig. 41, pagThe DEIS clearly states that dcover on page 136 and 137. Astanding dead trees would resbig game by reducing their [treimpacting their effectiveness ahiding cover is protected in Ripother non-harvested areas witThere is no science we are awunsalvaged post-fire areas are cover and forage than salvagearrangement of cover areas animportant aspect to the suitabi
 

393

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Service does not explain why they can just destroy so much of what little cover remains in this winter range. See FEIS Elk narrative: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/wildlife/mammal/ceel/fire_effects_and_use.html

g. The LRMP requires that opening should be limited to 20 acres to enhance patters of cover/forage, but there are many harvest units that are directly adjacent to each other and will make many opening much larger than 20 acres. h. The forest plan requires that the Forest Service use a habitat effectiveness index when planning timber sales. This was not done. 

use. The DEIS does state tharemain well-distributed throughThe DEIS (pg. 136) does recodisturbance may have a direct However, this effect is temporaabandonment is not common...return once harvest operations standards and guidelines for Mhuman disturbance within this S&G’s require seasonal restricApril 30) if unacceptable impacare expected to occur. The DEimpact significant. The 40% value in the DEIS refcover within the winter range aoccurs within the planning areincreases significantly when co11 land allocation on the foresThe Forest Service is not “desremains in winter range. As stdiscussion, 40% of the winter allocation (MA-11) that occurs will have cover habitat. The LRMP does not require th20 acres. What the LRMP sayaverage 20 acres or less” (pg. salvage are allowed. The DEIaverage salvage unit size (inclapproximately 11.5 acres unde(pg. 136). It also states that rimaximize edge of dead tree hasome cover. There is no Forest Plan requireffectiveness index when plan
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

394

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

30 Science 

(wildlife) 

Red tree voles must be surveyed. The recent fires in SW Oregon should lead the Forest Service to re-evaluate the decision not to conduct surveys and accept the inadvertent loss of red tree vole nests and are not surveyed. Known red tree vole nests occur near units 79a, 79B, and 78B and must be protected. 

As stated in the DEIS (pg. 138listed as a Category “D” survey Surveys are not required for thrange-wide annual species revremoved the red tree vole from species list for the Umpqua Na12/19/03). The DEIS disclosebe harvested in any alternative tree vole site in that location (D2004, the Record of Decision wsurvey and manage mitigation guidelines from the Northwest tree vole did not meet the criteForest Services “sensitive speUmpqua National Forest. Regdrop Unit 79B made during the project will be retained. 

30 Science The decision on this project must be deferred until the Forest 

Service produces credible monitoring results to show that their management is not harming Management Indicator Species: pileated woodpecker, marten, elk, and “cavity nesters.” It is clear that salvage will significantly harm all these species. Why can’t the Forest Service follow requirements to monitor these species and determine whether management is impairing these species? Why do we have to act in ignorance of the consequences of our actions? 

The process of monitoring of in“Management Indicator SpecieNorthwest Forest Plan, which management agencies from simanagement to ecosystem mastandards and guidelines for pamounts of coarse woody deb

allocation (ROD C-40-42), 100owl activity centers (ROC C-10for intermittent streams (ROD Species Analysis Team to detehabitat conditions would be suwell-distributed populations of most of their range (FEIS, Appproject is consistent with these guidelines. 

30 Science 

(wildlife) 

The Forest Service failed to consider new information on pileated woodpeckers that live on the westside of the cascades. They need more and larger roosting trees than nesting trees and these needs are not recognized in current management requirements. Determining pileated woodpecker population potential based on nesting sites is inadequate. The EIS must 

The DEIS used information fropotential effects of the project adequate retention levels of despecies, such as the pileated w(and the DEIS) incorporates threferred to from the following s
 

395

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

address this new scientific information. See Science Findings 

Issue 57 (October 2003) Coming home to roost: the pileated woodpecker as ecosystem engineer, by Keith Aubry, and Catherine Raley, http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/sciencef/scifi57.pdf. 

K.B., and C.M. Raley. 2002. Strees by pileated woodpeckers Washington. J. Wildl. Managelisted in the literature list for De

31 Snag/down 

wood 

On pg. 111 of the DEIS, the Forest Service notes the January 19, 2001 Memorandum of Understanding refinement of the coarse wood requirements. However, nowhere in the discussion does it discuss whether these local models were applied to the various alternatives. 

The last paragraph on page 11how local models were used to wood to retain to achieve adeqPages 117-118 provide further local model data is used for va

30 Snags/down 

wood 

Soils 

The fire already removed a significant fraction of on-site nutrients. Salvage logging will only compound the loss. Removing so many large nutrient reservoirs in the form of tree boles will steal from the future forest. The EIS analysis of nutrients is flawed because it fails to recognize that the large quantities of nutrients that are tied up in the boles of trees are not needed now, because there is very little live vegetation ready to take those nutrients, but as the forest grows and develops these nutrients will be needed over time as the dead tree boles are colonized by fungi and slowing release their nutrients to the developing forest. 

The DEIS does take into accothe boles proposed for removadiscloses the trade-off of long-order to lessen fuel loads and In addition, the numbers of trethe ecological requirements as Association Group. Future coexpected to occur; inoculation Mycorrhizae will add additiona

30 Snags/down 

wood 

The plan also requires “renewable supply of large down logs well-distributed across the landscape” (p C-40). Since the burned stands are not recruiting many more large trees for a long time, the Forest Service must retain most or all of the existing large snags to provide this renewable supply of down logs. 

Pages 111 and 117-118 of the decay and fall down rates wermuch to leave to meet the stanpage C-40 of the Northwest Fo100 years. The remainder of twoody debris discuss further, will remain on the landscape. 

5 Snags/down 

wood 

For Alternative 3, where is the standard for retaining trees greater than 30 inches coming from? How much of the fire area has over 15 trees over 30 inches? 

30 inches leave trees is not a fthirty-inch tree diameter criterioequations used (Mellon and Agdetermine future down wood nLate seral habitat occupied ovplanning area affected by the 2two stands were sampled; elev15 trees per acre over 30” diamtree retention is to retain the la
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

396

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Regardless of what is existing would be retained (DEIS page 

5 Snags/down 

wood 

For Alternative 4, what sizes of trees will be included for retention of 12 trees/ acre. Is this in addition to the 2 trees/acre that will be felled? 

The largest diameter trees avameet the 12 tree/acre retention 2 trees/ acre felled for site pro

28, 29 Snags/down 

wood 

While the analysis focused on snag populations within the planning area, Fig. 41 on page 109 of the DEIS portrays a more accurate view of snag populations. Alternative 4 exceeds Forest 

Plan snag requirements by roughly 400%. The snag retention planned is excessive and will jeopardize the future survivability of any efforts to reestablish a thriving conifer forest. 

The snag retention requiremenwildlife species and coarse woSilviculturist retained additionashade for seedlings. Reforesthampered by snag retention le

24 Snags/down 

wood 

Finally as mentioned before we remain concerned about retaining 6-12 snags per acre in the treatment area. When one looks around at all the dead trees in the riparian areas, all of the dead trees in the less intensively burned area, all the dead trees in the Spring Fire and all of the dead trees in the Tiller Complex, most of which is not proposed for salvage, it is unfathomable to think that cavity nesters can’t find more than abundant material for foraging or nesting on the Umpqua National Forest within a very short distance from the harvest sites. While snags are valuable for cavity nesters they are also tremendous fire and safety hazards. Somehow these negative attributes must be given serious consideration. 

As stated above, the snag retebased on needs of wildlife spedebris, and shade for seedling The effect of snag retention is DEIS. In terms of fire hazard, throughout pages 70-99. In tesnags are addressed on page

30 Snags/down 

wood 

This EIS discloses numerous conflicting interests involving removing versus retaining trees. Removing logs reduces fire/fuel 

hazards, but also reduces wildlife habitat in the short and longterm, reduces survival and growth of planted trees, reduces biomass and diversity of recovering vegetation, delays vegetation recovery, decreases soil moisture, removes sediment traps, deprives streams of LWD, and all the other ecological 

functions described in Rose et al 2001. While retaining large logs cause some potential fire/fuel hazard, but serves all the functions described above. Please make sure that the ROD clearly documents and explains all the tradeoffs and the explicit rationale for the final decision. 

The DEIS does disclose both timpacts of removing dead treethroughout Chapter 3. 
 

397

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

5 Snags/down 

wood 

Does the standard of leaving 2 felled trees/acre apply to all areas? Are there areas that already have adequate amounts of down wood? 

The felling of two snags/acre wthe salvage harvest units (DEI45, and 53). The snags to be the leave trees after the sale is felling would be funded by KV

30, 35 Snags/down 

wood 

The current snag retention requirements of the Umpqua LRMP and even the Northwest Forest Plan are not up-to-date. The EIS uses DecAID to analyze down wood requirements but not for snag-dependant species. Since DecAID is the best available science, the Forest Service must use it. NOTE on DecAID: Be sure to use this tool appropriately. The commenter states that the use of DecAid and its results are good for cavity nesters and birds. Numbers for snag retention are “even better now with DecAid”. 

DecAID was used for this projeDecAID does include informatretention and snag-dependent used in an appropriate manne

30 Snags/down 

wood 

The EIS analysis of ACSO #9 (p 102) is inaccurate because it fails to adequately provide for coho, steelhead, cutthroat, marten, bats, cavity nesting birds, and: a. It fails to retain enough snags and down wood to support abundant prey species for spotted owls. b. The DEIS fails to consider snag fall rates and the severely limited snag recruitment rates. After a portion of the few snags 

that are retained fall down the salvaged areas will fall far short of species requirements. c. The EIS admits that private lands are not doing enough to 

maintain viable populations (p 109) so federal lands must do more (much more). 

No trees of any size will be cut immediate flood plain or 75 feeof fish bearing streams. No trethe riparian from within one sitstream channel (DEIS pg. 31). recognizable unstable areas thtrees to riparian areas have beaction alternatives. Thereforeappreciable effect to LWM recchannels. The determination oall alternatives has been deterindividuals, but not likely to caFederal listing. Prior to the Fewhich resulted in the temporarauthority of NOAA Fisheries recoho, the fisheries Level 1 conconcurred with the Not Likely tdetermination for coho salmon A – The DEIS discusses the inspotted owl from impacts to pr124). This impact is not considanalyses that show how snag be maintained at or above req
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

398

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Forest Plan standards and guiadvice (pages 110-119). B – The DEIS discusses how srates were incorporated into thanalysis on page 117. Cumula(snags and logs) were modeleC – The preferred alternative 6) salvages about 15% of the outside of riparian reserves anentire fire area, Alternative 6 sfire area, leaving snags and coacross the landscape. 

30 Snags/down 

wood 

The DEIS fails to consider snag fall rates and the severely limited snag recruitment rates. After a portion of the few snags that are retained fall down the salvaged areas will be in clear violation of forest plan snag requirements. 

DEIS Pages 111 and 117-118 

and fall down rates were used to leave to meet Northwest Fopage C-40 over the next 100 yBy following the landscape plarecommendations in the water2001), and the Forest Plan Stathe action alternatives would aplanning area to move towards landscape patterns and stand approximate the natural disturattained, the planning area woappropriate amounts of habitadistributed populations of ripar

30 Snags/down 

wood 

The EIS refers to the SW Oregon PIEC 1-19-01 MOU on Coarse Wood but fails to recognize that this document is for green stands and assumes relatively continuous recruitment of coarse wood from within and adjacent stands, i.e., it does not apply to post-fire situations where recruitment is severely limited. 

The MOU applies to coarse woregeneration harvests within th

specify whether the harvest is DEIS pages 111 and 117-118 and fall down rates were used to leave to meet Northwest FoROD p. C-40 over the next 10
 

399

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

30 Snags/down 

wood 

The down wood retention is also inadequate and the DEIS failed to account for very limited recruitment of down woody debris, decay, and the fact that much of the down wood that is retained will burn up in slash fires. This means that future down woody debris levels under the preferred alternative will likely violate LRMP requirements. 

Pages 111 and 117-118 discufall down rates were used to dleave to meet ROD C-40 over 

30 Snags/down 

wood 

Alternative 3 meets a DFC of 2 snags per acre and 504 feet of down woody debris in 100 years. Where does this come from? 

Is this from the forest plan? If so, most of the other alternatives will violate the forest plan by retaining far too few snags to meet the long-term DFC. 

These numbers come from the group forest plot inventory datconsiders decay and fall down Pages 111 and 117-118 discufall down rates were used to dleave to meet ROD C-40 over 

32 Snags/down 

wood 

The FS has failed to meet its legal obligation to maintain viable populations of cavity excavators, including pileated and northern three-toed woodpeckers. There are no surveys for these species, there is insufficient suitable habitat within the planning area (and what habitat does exist will be drastically reduced if logging takes place), and the habitat model selected by the Forest Service is unsuitable for the proposed project. 

The Forest Service is meeting maintain viable populations of or exceeding the standards anNorthwest Forest Plan. Inclusguidelines for providing specifiwoody debris in the Matrix land 42) allowed a Species Analysiregional habitat conditions woustable, well-distributed populatthroughout most of their range The northern three-toed woodthis forest. 

30 Snags/down 

wood 

Protect all large snags. If the agency chooses to conduct a salvage operation in this fire area, they must use a diameter cap and protect these scarce and valuable structures. The agency’s snag retention guidelines are based on wildlife needs, but fail to consider or analyze the need of large snags and large down logs for shade, water storage, disturbance (via falling and sliding), nutrient storage, channel forming, sediment trapping, soil conservation, underground processes, etc. The NEPA analysis failed to disclose and analyze these significant issues. 

Under all alternatives, the largretained as prescribed. Alternover 30 inches in diameter to a(DEIS page 24). The role of sthoroughly described by resouof the DEIS. 

30 Snags/down 

wood 

Provide for well distributed snags. Snag retention should be both clumped and well-distributed, not all clumped. 

The retention of snags is prescbasis, in order to distribute theThe silviculture prescription, Ddescribes that snags will be leas dispersed trees. 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

400

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

32 Soils After asserting that the preferred alternative will not increase the 

risk of landslides, the DEIS states that ten acres that are proposed to be logged as part of preferred alternative are at risk of instability (DEIS, p. 209). Logging on unstable slopes risks 

sediment delivery to streams and violates the ACS. 

Pages 208-209 of the DEIS ththe removal of the dead trees risk for instability would not inccausing mass wasting. Dead root strength. Alternative 6, th

the FEIS, salvages on very smpotentially unstable land totalinon a digital terrain model. Howreconnaissance revealed no vinstability associated with thesstability problem areas are not potential impacts of landlslideto salvage of dead wood that delivered to streams or ripariaThe impacts of such a possible slight as well and would not aprecruitment or delivery process 5th, 6th, or 7th field watersheds. 

scale of such a potential impacdead trees will be left along all potential for new wood recruitmarea’s streams is essentially u

5 Soils Acres potentially left with <85% ground cover is untrue for the 

No Action alternative because future fires were not considered. 

The number displayed on Tabpredicted acres that would havground cover immediately afteFuture fires were considered foanalyzed for the No Action Altethe DEIS (pg. 81-83). Future fiyears in the future, not for the implement this project. Should assumed that the area affecteless than 85% effective ground following the fire. 

9, 12, 14 Soils Unsuitable soils should not be logged even if the trees have 

burned. The economic incentive for logging harsh soils was removed in 1990 when the Forest Plan forbade logging there. It is unconscionable to allow salvage logging now when it would deter trees from ever growing back. Economic incentives are 

not worth permanent deforestation. 

Alternatives 4 and 6 include sasoils (DEIS, pg. 58) in the DEI5, as well as the No Action Altetrees on unsuitable soils. In thunsuitable soils units will not opreviously. 
 

401

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

13 Soils Salvage logging on 160 acres that contain unsuitable soils under 

Alternative 4 appears to be a poor idea if the restoration of these areas is a priority. After observing the planting of thousands of acres of the Umpqua National Forest, many of those involved replanting areas that were previously planted and failed. The organic matter created by leaving the affected trees in unsuitable soil areas will provide a much more needed benefit in the long run that the short term benefit solution that logging this 160 acres would provide. 

Salvage on unsuitable soils unfrom Alternatives 4 and 6 in th

27 Soils Several places in the DEIS and appendices, the Forest Service 

says that the unsuitable soils units will retain 12 trees per acre to mitigate for the impacts of logging.72 But that’s not what the 

Alternative 4 table 3 shows. It shows most TRR and TRG units to retain only 6 TPA. The only exceptions are the units that can be seen from Highway 138. This inconsistency in the EIS documentation must be corrected. The public still does not know 

how many trees per acre will be left in units with unsuitable soils. 

These are errors in the DEIS, pages 36 and 37, plus other lounsuitable soils units have beeconsideration, this has been co

27 Soils The DEIS is unclear if logging on unsuitable soils will also 

include areas that would sustain “Irreversible Soil Damage.” Figure 55, page 152 in the DEIS, shows areas of unsuitable soils where “Irreversible Soil Damage” could occur, including parts of unit 48A-TRR proposed for logging under alternative 4. But in Table 34 (page 151 of the DEIS), it says that 0 acres of 

unsuitable soils with “irreversible soil damage” will be logged. Either table 34 is wrong, or Figure 55 is wrong. Which is it? 

Logging will not occur on lands “Irreversible Soil Damage” and 55 map (DEIS, p. 152). Table read “none” for green and salvboth Irreversible Soil Damage 

lands (with respect to TRG and In the FEIS, all action alternatiremove portions of proposed u

Irreversible Soil Damage lands alternatives will drop all unsuit4720-005 and 48 will be correc

. Soils The DEIS fails to disclose all the “unsuitable soils” areas that will 

be logged. The Umpqua National Forest LRMP map of “Unsuitable (Commercial Forest) Land” shows areas that are “unable to regenerate in 5 years” in orange. This map marks as orange over what are unit 48B, 59C, and 59B. The Baked Apple DEIS never explained why DEIS units are mapped different from the LRMP map of unsuitable lands. Unit 42_TRR (between spurs 400 and 390) is mapped in the 

Figure 55 (DEIS, p. 152) disclo“unsuitable soils” areas consisfor classifying unsuited lands (8 to B-13). The discrepancy be(LRMP unsuited lands map un48B, 59C and 59C represent dunsuited land mapping done fomapping done by District Resoassistance of a Soil Scientist (

72 For instance, see DEIS page 30, or see Hydrologist Report dated 9/25/03 in the appendices. Page 3. “Areas that were considered difficult to reforest... would 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

402

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

DEIS as unsuitable soils that will endure ground based logging. Tractor logging on unsuitable soils adds insult to injury.The LRMP, page IV-44, says that the Forest Service needs to follow clear steps to change the LRMP unsuitable lands map. This includes documentation of boundary adjustments “in the project records”. We could find no documentation in the Baked Apple DEIS project records for this change from the LRMP. 

reconnaissance and other field the Forest Unsuited Lands maAll action alternatives will be m42_TRR, in addition to any othFigure 55 (DEIS, p. 152) disclo“unsuitable soils” areas that wLRMP unsuitable lands map dvicinity. The DEIS (Unsuitable 3) discloses the intent to use FForest database of unsuitable unsuitable soils salvage units consideration. 

27, 30 Soils Unsuitable soils have been removed from timber base and 

cannot be logged, except in some instances for salvage. We question whether the LRMP allows the salvage loophole Baked Apple is using. The Baked Apple DEIS says that “given the situation of wildland fire in the project area, an exception to enter unsuitable lands is allowed for “removal of timber killed by catastrophic events.” But the Apple Fire was not a “catastrophic 

event”. Don Morrison said at several public meetings that the 

Umpqua 2002 fires are well within the realm of a “natural”, not catastrophic event. Additionally, the LRMP salvage exception for logging on unsuitable soils says that the Forest Service must consider “economic, social and environmental consequences, with emphasis placed on coordination to meet other resource needs.” These consequences were not adequately considered in the DEIS, and the emphasis was not placed on coordination 

to meet other resource needs. The DEIS spent virtually no time on the environmental impacts of logging on unsuitable soils. The only conclusion the DEIS reached was that permanent 

deforestation would be good for wildlife species who like early seral habitat, as if there wasn’t enough of that around. Salvage logging on unsuitable soils is inappropriate in part because salvage logging will set back vegetation recovery that may already be tenuous. The LRMP IV-44 allows for salvage on these sites under certain circumstances and considerations 

which the FS has not done. 

The Apple Fire was a catastrothe LRMP, which states: Exceptions for maximum openare permitted for catastrophic windstorms or insect and diIV-43). Salvage in riparian areas is resoccurrences (>50% of existinrepeated in other managemenstands adjacent to perennial astreams (C2-I, -IV, -VII, -VIII aThe LRMP defines "catastrophspace scales. In the context of landscapes, the 2002 fire may catastrophic (within the realm Middle North Umpqua watershintensity stand replacement firacres in size) over a short time beginning in the late 1800's (DUmpqua Watershed Analysis-The DEIS does not conclude t
 

403

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

The FS has not fully described the environmental consequences including long term productivity, increased erosion and sedimentation, delayed big game cover, delayed recruitment of large wood to the terrestrial and aquatic systems, long term soil productivity, water quality, big game cover (LRMP IV-132) and snag and down wood function. 

deforestation would be good foearly seral habitat”. Instead, pstates that there could potentiaoccupation of shrub or grass shaving a beneficial effect on soProposed salvage will increase 

needed for initial vegetation reDEIS page 224), particularly wtreatments are implemented, a and lower fire risk in the futureand its associated reforestatiosuccession in the long-run. Thpaid for by KV trust funds, collsale proceeds, will help acceledelay it. The roots of trees staroots of initial pioneering vegegrass, and shrubs. The few livby the logging would have no since landslides only increase a stand die. The contribution oindividual scattered trees that inconsequential. Salvage on unsuitable soils ununder Alternatives 4 and 6, as 

27, 30 Soils The Umpqua National Forest has no ecological reason to log on 

unsuitable soils. The WEEP report says: “management practices that remove organic matter from low-resilience sites after a wildfire, or prevent the input of nitrogen into the soil, may aggravate the severity of fire effects on the long term soil productivity.” Even the DEIS admits that salvage logging here 

could cause permanent deforestation (DEIS page 152). Salvage logging on unsuitable soils is inappropriate in part because salvage logging will set back vegetation recovery that 

may already be tenuous. The LRMP IV-44 allows for salvage on these sites under certain circumstances and considerations 

which the FS has not done. 

Proposed salvage logging ope

significantly increase the risk oabove what the fire is expecteA slope stability model, SHALSassess risk of mass wasting in salvage units and to identify thto assess mass wasting risk oof this model were also used talternative of proposed salvag53). Proposed Salvage will increas

needed for vegetation recover
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

404

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

The FS has not fully described the environmental consequences including long term productivity, increased erosion and sedimentation, delayed big game cover, delayed recruitment of large wood to the terrestrial and aquatic systems, long term soil productivity, water quality, big game cover (LRMP IV-132) and snag and down wood function. Document that the likelihood of mass wasting will not increase. Logging will damage and kill some live trees and other vegetation that currently provide soil cohesion. Salvage will delay the recovery of the next generation of vegetation that must grow and replace the decayed roots the burned vegetation. LRMP IV-203 C5-V, drop the 159 acres of harvest on unsuitable soils. 

harvest fuel treatments are imfuel reduction and lower fire risof the DEIS states that salvage “could potentially lead to long-or grass species”, not permaneMore analysis and disclosure wrelated to site productivity impThe DEIS describes the enviroin terms of Erosion Risk (DEIS(DEIS, pp. 219-238), Fluvial EMaterial in streams (DEIS, pp. consequences to Soil Productterrestrial Coarse Woody DebrBig Game Cover, DEIS, pp. 13(DEIS, Aquatic Environmental 

See previous discussion of maAlternatives 4 and 6 have beethe salvage on unsuitable soils 

27 Soils More specific “unsuitable soil” unit concerns: 

Unit 42_TRR (between spurs 400 and 390) is mapped in the DEIS as unsuitable soils that will endure ground based logging. Tractor logging on unsuitable soils adds insult to injury. And unit 42_TRR is mostly green trees. There is little evidence the fire even burned here. The DEIS alternative 4 designates this unit as leaving only 6 trees per acre instead of partial harvest (or at least 12 TPA). This unit must be dropped from the proposal. Since this unit is not in the timber base and it can only be logged if there is a catastrophic event. There is no such event, especially in this green unit. Tractor logging here will ruin this place. Unit 78F_TRR is very rocky and appeared unstable. We have 

special concerns over this unsuitable-soil-unit because it borders riparian reserves for its entire east and south boundaries. Unit 78B_TRR is also a concern because of its proximity to riparian reserves and the fact it will be skyline harvested, dragging one 

All unsuitable soils units have Alternatives 4 and in the FEIS
 

405

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

end of the logs up the steep slopes. 

30 Soils The EIS (p 155) claims that soil cover will be “maintained and 

enhanced” by logging. The EIS (p 156) also claims that the heavy logging alternatives will have “direct beneficial effect of reducing the risk of surface erosion.” This analysis is seriously flawed and fails to account for several important facts: a. Pages 219 and 221 states clearly that surface erosion “drops off dramatically” as ground vegetation re-establishes. b. The EIS also admits that logging will set back vegetative recovery (EIS page 173) (Sexton 1998). Both live leaf cover and live roots are important to soil conservation but will be significantly decreased due to logging disturbance. c. Logging will disturb existing cover in the form of needles and small branches that are already littering the forest floor. d. Logging will gouge the soil and break small roots that may be dead but are still holding the soil. e. The Forest Service has not included burned soil areas in its accounting of detrimental soil conditions as required by the LRMP. The Apple fire burned many acres at high severity and slash burning will burn many more acres. These burned acres must be added to roads, skid trials, yarding corridors to make final determinations of compliance with DSCs. Each harvest units must be field verified and disclosed in the EIS. P 154. f. Slash piling and burning will cause serious soil impacts and lead to erosion. g. The EIS says that erosion “can occur” in yarding corridors, but fails to admit that any such thing will happen in this steep, severely burned landscape. How can this be? h. Page 263 indicates that tree boles help retain dislodged soil. Too many tree boles are removed through salvage logging to fulfill this critical function. 

The analysis does consider socontribution of logging slash. A: While ground vegetation doground cover in the form of logslow surface erosion. B: The EIS states vegetative rfor two to three years following material is important to the soigreen organic mater will add to will be replaced with slash durvegetative recovery. C: This is recognized in the DEbe more material added in a sbecause of the creation of actiAdditionally, some of the distumixed in at the surface to speeanother portion lost to fuels tre

the DEIS (page 153). D: Logging is expected to gouskyline corridors; breakage of this reason the DEIS mitigates contract provisions requiring thgouges where applicable and ground cover. These measurematter in contact with the soil afungi and other potentially benE: Burned soils areas were takcalculating detrimental soil condetrimental soils analysis was using more site specific informF: While machine slash piling localized soil impacts, this has for hand-piling operations. Mooccurrence and depending upoits duration of heating, these e
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

406

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

G: The DEIS states that erosiocorridors (page 225). Page 15Apple Fire elevated erosion raburn. H: All tree boles will be retaineand at least 4 trees per acre wmeet Forest plan standards an

30 Soils The Forest Service must also minimize soil and litter disturbance 

caused by logging and yarding (p C-44). Best Management Practices are not enough. This is critically important in a salvage situation where the soils are already directly impacted by fire. Ground-based logging must be prohibited because the fire consumed litter, volatilized soil organics, killed beneficial soil organisms, roots of surviving trees can be more easily damaged by ground-based logging, and loss of soil cover means erosion is more likely. Dragging logs during skyline yarding must also be prohibited. The DEIS eliminated analysis of an alternative that would follow Beschta recommendations by using helicopter only, but this alternative is required by the Northwest Forest Plan soil standards. 

The use of helicopters to grapprescription was thoroughly anbe economically infeasible, anThe grapple helicopter logging developed rather than regular, helicopter logging, which woulset chokers under the rotor waequating to a high level of risk Beschta Report does not recoas the sole method of harvest. All soils standards and guidelindevelopment of alternatives. 

30 Soils Units 16, 27A, 27B, 38, 70, 71, 86, and 90 have high erosion 

and landslide risk and must be deferred in order to meet the ACS. 

These units mentioned likely waccelerated erosion during acteffective ground cover left aftepreparation will help mitigate t

30 Soils 

Fire/Fuels 

Why did the Forest Service model vegetation regrowth as part of the soil cover analysis (p 153) but not as part of the fire and fuels analysis (p 70)? a. The Forest Service implied it was too widely variable for the fuel analysis but why is it OK for the soil cover analysis. b. How is the “widely variable” aspect of vegetation regrowth accounted for in the soil cover analysis? 

The FARSITE model does not widely variable factor of shrub does not include projected shrthese conditions could vary wiand depend on whether action or manipulate shrubs. Shrub gsame under all alternatives. Sh5 years would tend to slightly dindices (flame length, rate of sintensity) due to considerably similar size dead fuels. This dato increase as shrub growth in20 to 40 years until shrub decafuel moistures in the live portio
 

407

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

some equilibrium. After that posubsides as the shrubs becomof the overall fuel bed” (page 1The WEPP model used for suraccounts for the amount of effform of live vegetation, surface logging created slash and otheas rock that all shield soil surfa

30 Soils The WEPP model used by the Forest Service may not be 

calibrated to accurately describe erosion from logging steep slopes after fire. 

The WEPP model is designed sediment yield from wildfire on WEPP model was able to predwet, steep Cascade scenario (P.R. 2001. Comparing Erosion Operations to Wildfire. In: PeteKrogstad, editors, Proceedings Mountain Logging and 11th PaSymposium: 2001 - A Forest ESeattle, WA: College of Forest Washington and International Research Organizations. 78-8International Mountain Logging Northwest Skyline Symposium 2001, Seattle, WA.) 

30 Soils The EIS (p 223) appears to rely on the buffers ability of riparian 

areas that burned and lost their ground cover and with it much of their ability to trap and filter sediment. 

Riparian buffers that were burnhaving reduced cover yet little treatment (all the other alternariparian reserves. Their vegetauninterrupted by salvage loggiburning allowing succession o(moss, grass, forbs) to procee

30 Soils The EIS analysis of short term use and long term productivity 

must disclose the fact that salvage logging will remove nutrients 

and other soil-supporting values of values of large logs. Alternative 2, 4 and 6 are completely unacceptable salvage 

proposals because they leave too few trees behind to help replenish the fragile, burned soils. Alternative 4 and 6 even logs on unsuitable soils and in riparian reserves. 

The Baked Apple DEIS disclosalternatives, there would be re(DEIS p. 159). More was addeChapter 3 of the FEIS. The DEIS also used LWD monWildlife Section) to determine present in unburned environmamount of logs to leave for eac
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

408

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

 needs of the soil resource. 

Logging on unsuitable soils unboth Alternatives 4 and 6 as d

30 Soils Unsuitable soils should not be logged even if the trees have 

burned. The economic incentive for logging harsh soils was removed in 1990 when the Forest Plan forbid logging here. It is unconscionable to allow salvage logging now when it would deter trees from ever growing back. Economic incentives are not worth permanent deforestation. 

Unsuitable soils units were elimunder both Alternatives 4 and 

30 Soils Protect forests as carbon. Land will not be converted from 

use in this proposal; thereby thstorage will not affect the amo(Bouwman and Leemans 1995Soils in the Global Carbon CycForms and Functions in ForesEditors. Copyright, Soil SciencThe assumption by these authwould fail to protect soil as carmanagement activities. 

1, 2, 3 Soils/Water 

quality 

Salvage logging will create erosion and result in sediment loading impacts to salmon, cutthroat trout, and steelhead populations. 

Water quality best managemeleaving slash to maintain effecuse of other erosion control mimplemented in harvest units tsurface erosion (DEIS, pg. 48-mitigated, is expected to have causing an effect on essential considered, and their major fre(DEIS, pg. 265). Impacts to this projected to be limited in extgiven a “May Affect but Not Likdetermination when the speciethreatened (DEIS, pg. 265). Nconsultation team concurred wto the shift of coho to sensitive occurred between the Draft an
 

409

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

35 Soils/Water 

Quality 

The total area impacted raises an important issue. If the salvage results in sedimentation or soil compaction, then the more area impacted the bigger the problem. If the salvage can avoid those kinds of impacts (also the spread of weeds), then salvaging larger areas with less [trees] removed per acre is better than a smaller area with more [trees] removed. 

The alternatives are all designsoils. Mitigation measures are reduce the potential for noxiouAlternative 6, the preferred alteretains between 4-15 trees peunits, and retains from 25-175 that receive a Beschta-type pr

27, 30 Soils/Wildlife Leaving mostly 6 trees per acre in Alternatives 2 and 4, and only 

4 trees per acre in places with Alternative 6 is not leaving an adequate number of standing trees for wildlife, or dead trees for soil nutrients, especially in the upper parts of the slopes. Trees left further down the slopes, such as in Riparian Reserves, cannot contribute to soil nutrients uphill. The DEIS erroneously averages the effects of the dead retention trees over all harvest acres. This analysis neglects to look at the effect to the ridgetops, with will be more heavily salvaged than riparian areas. A new DEIS must correct this error. 

All alternatives retain coarse wthat meet or exceed forest pla159 of the DEIS documents thFire on nutrients, and the subsand slash treatment on soil nuanalysis and effects disclosure added to the FEIS. 

32 Visuals Logging Unit 44 is located in a middle ground retention LRMP 

land allocation. Logging this unit and possibly other units, likely violates Umpqua Land and Resource Management Plans standards and guidelines for managing visual resources. 

Unit 44 is mapped as visual quretention sensitivity level one. trees in all alternatives the reqbe met. Management activitieand there would be no direct, ieffects to the VQO (DEIS p. 27

30 Water Quality The EIS indicates that logging related sediment increases will be 

minimized but this is not enough to meet the ACS. We need an honest assessment of ACS consistency, not unsupported conclusions. 

None of the Baked Apple altersediment regime associated wprocess at the scale of the 5th time-frame of decades or longalternatives would cause shortthe surface erosion process durecovering post-fire vegetation burning, yet this impact is not elonger than a few years. The sincluding slash burning, is not appreciable change to the sedsurface erosion over the long-trecovery in the form of pioneegrasses, herbaceous vegetatiohardwoods) recovers quickly tplace. In addition, there will b
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

410

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Ground Cover after salvage anmitigate surface erosion. 

30 Water Quality The watershed analysis page 46 cites Stillwater 2000 to show 

that timber harvest and roads have increased sediment in the watershed by 3 times. This project is just more logging and more roads, and in a watershed that is steep and has extremely erosive soils. The Forest Service cannot reconcile this increased in erosion and sedimentation with the Clean Water Act and the Aquatic Conservation Strategy. 

The erosion hazard was reanashowing more erosion hazard DEIS. The DEIS discloses thaprocesses that result in sedimemass wasting, and fluvial erosrelated sedimentation from the and sedimentation related to loon roads, can be expected (DErelated erosion (from existing rroad maintenance associated would be controlled or mitigaterequirements of the Clean Waconsistent with the Standard aUmpqua Forest Plan including Forest Plan. Though short-terand sedimentation are expectewatershed of Panther Creek, lomore than a decade will not be the Middle North Umpqua 5th f

Alternative 6 which was selectOfficial was designed to contriand restoration of landscape pwatershed analysis, and it meeguidelines in the Forest Plan, aNorthwest Forest Plan. Mass wasting risk was evaluatmodel (DEIS p. 206). All unsta‘at maximum risk’ of instability verified during the intensive fieremoved from all alternatives. effective ground cover generatharvest and site preparation werosion. While management rexpose some areas of soil to s
 

411

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

rainfall, surface erosion and asare anticipated to be short-term fall of 2004 when logging could will have recovered substantiaalong with hardwood sprouting cover to help arrest the gravity movement of surface erosion b

30 Water Quality The EIS (pp 259, 260) includes two inaccurate checklists of 

aquatic indicators. Based on these comments the preferred alternative deserves degrade marks for: sediment and turbidity, 

large woody material, pool character, stream bank condition (related to peak flows), changes in base/peak flows, disturbance history, and landslide rates (or more accurately, landslide “quality” and LWD recruitment to streams). The site scale must also be considered. Fish (and their eggs) live and die at very specific sites. 

These tables and the base line are generated from numerous in nature. The scale at which tthe 5th and 6th field watershed 

more likely to readily change dthe environmental baseline wo

field scale. The baseline for eadetermined using data sets, indocuments, and professional jtable legend. These baseline ralso interdisciplinary in nature. these tables is consistent with cooperation with NOAA Fisher

30 Water Quality The project is located in the transient snow zone and will not 

remove much green canopy, but salvage logging will still adversely affect peak flows. Abundant snags and logs help trap snow on the hill slope with the effect of encouraging infiltration and slowing water run-off during big storm events (p 218 citing Lancaster et al. 2001). Salvage will degrade this function and effectively increase water peak flows. The EIS analysis of peak flow does not consider this. 

Accumulations of snow are exreduction of live canopy becauhydrologist for the project has support that down wood increaalthough it does seem intuitive some of these areas due to shaccumulation of snow when excreates rain-on-snow events thincrease peak flow events. Thpotentially exacerbate the siturisk of peak flows. In addition, extremely rare on these soils. saturated soil conditions not ovDown wood and dead snags onothing to reduce subsurface s

30 Water Quality When conducting activities that could impact 303(d) listed 

streams, the land management agencies have agreed to validate impairment of listed streams, demonstrate that measures are in place to prevent further degradation, and 

The only listing within the plantemperature. Detailed analysidemonstrates that stream temaffected by the proposed salva
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

412

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

develop water quality restoration plans before TMDL are developed. The agency has not fulfilled its obligations under this interagency agreement. 

The protocol developed by DEfor flexibility in approach. Currthe intent of the protocol, primthe Forest Service has with DEthe Forest validates data by pacall for data; 2) the Forest has restoration measures in place 3) the elements of a WQRP aand in existing watershed ana

30 Water Quality The EPA erred in exempting timber harvesting from the 

requirement of obtaining a stormwater runoff permit under the Clean Water Act. The agency should obtain a NPDES permit. The EPA put the Forest Service and BLM on notice of this new permit during an IAC meeting November 5th, 2003. 

The Forest Service is not in vioAct by not obtaining a NPDES Blanchard (Oregon DEQ); “Thpermits for these types of fores

30 Water Quality/ 

Other 

The NEPA analysis must address the cumulative effects of logging and grazing on water quality and discuss the fact that further grazing will retard the attainment of riparian and aquatic management objectives in violation of the applicable land management plan as amended. Give it a long rest from grazing. The fire area must be rested from grazing. The NEPA analysis fails to disclose the significant adverse effects of livestock grazing in a post-fire landscape. 

No grazing is proposed in the has occurred in the area for deDEIS discloses that no rangelaarea. 

32 Wildlife For most wildlife species, including the Pacific fisher, Pacific 

fringed bat, the DEIS simply asserts that the impacts from the proposed actions will be less than the fire. In the Blue 

Mountains Biodiversity Project v Blackwood, a similar statement 

was rejected by the courts, “The proper evaluation should identify the impact of the increased sediment from the logging and roadbuilding on the fisheries habitat in light of the documented increases that already have resulted from the fire.” 

For the Pacific fisher, the DEIS potential denning habitat woulfrom salvaging dead trees withsuccessional habitats.” (pg. 13“Indirect effects would occur don prey habitat, or large dead fire is discussed under the cumFor the Pacific fringed myotis, that timber harvesting is expecroosting habitat through the feand snags (pg. 133). It further effects would likely occur from (insect populations) resulting f

prescribed burning related chaeffect of the fire is discussed u
 

413

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

effects section. Cumulative efpast, present and reasonably f

32 Wildlife The DEIS claims that the Baked Apple Project will meet ACS 

objective #1 by not increasing or decreasing the amount of early or late-successional habitat outside of its natural range variability (DEIS p 102) but five pages later the DEIS admits that it will decrease late-successional habitat by another 137 acres (DEIS p 107) 

The DEIS does not state that tlate-successional habitat. It stwould “simplify stand structure(remove) it. The project does late-successional habitat until shown in Figure 42 on page 1

32 Wildlife Un-salvaged burned areas are rare in western Oregon and given 

the new emphasis on maintaining viability of neo-tropicals and other species associated with fire areas, as many snags as possible should be retained. This project will negatively impact species like neotropical migrants, and the Baked Apple Project will contribute towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability. This was not disclosed or analyzed in the DEIS. 

The direct, indirect and cumulaneotropical birds are disclosed Page 103 of the DEIS discusssalvaged burned areas within 

watershed, and how the fire inback into its estimated natural document (pg. 45-46) also dis

30 Wildlife The EIS shows the Forest Service bias by considering snag fall 

only when it benefits them. Snag fall was considered a fuel problem that must be addressed by logging, and slash was considered a benefit in terms of soil coverage, but the Forest Service failed to consider the fact that most of the few snags retained after logging will fall and deprive wildlife of much needed snag habitat for many decades before the stands grow and begin recruiting new snags. 

Pages 111 and 117-118 discufall down rates were used to dleave to meet ROD C-40 over 

30 Wildlife The EIS (p 104) says that bluebirds will migrate to other areas, 

but in fact won’t many young bluebirds born here disperse to the death and/or starve to death. Let’s not put a happy face on it. The DEIS (p 143) analysis for western bluebirds just says similar to olive –sided flycatcher. That is too vague and conclusory. These species have different needs that will be affected by the logging in different ways. 

The analysis for western bluebaffected environment and statu

planning area (pg. 143). The ddirect, indirect and cumulative and its habitat (snags in early-in fact quite similar to those fospecies utilize the dead tree ststage. Repetition of the impacbe unnecessary and avoided bthe DEIS. Note that populatioexpected in increase (based omonitoring results) in the plannalternatives (page 143). 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

414

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

5 Wildlife How much impact will burning logging-created slash during the 

spring affect landbirds, as significant issue #8 suggests? There should not be as much impact to landbirds in burned areas, compared to green areas. 

More discussion was added to the impacts of fire to breeding distinguish between effects of vs. green areas. However, all will occur within previously burwildfire), and the majority occusuccessional (stand replaced) 

27, 30, 32 Wildlife The DEIS mentions several times that the Beschta 50% 

recommendations are undocumented. But the DEIS never gives us greater documentation for the DecAID 2.3% recommendation. There is a great deal of difference between 50% and 2.3%. Since Beschta is well known, the DEIS should have justified the use of the “DecAID tool” instead. 

The DEIS provides a citation fReferences -7, under Marcot eprovide a URL for a website addocuments DecAID. This URL final EIS. The DEIS states that the 2.3% based on minimum recommenstand-level amounts of dead wearly-successional conifer stanCascades of Oregon (pg. 116)based on forest inventory plot comparable to the 50% retentidead trees given by Beschta ebased on expert opinions. Oncover and the other applies to trees. 

27, 30, 32 Wildlife Utilization of DecAID is inappropriate for the Baked Apple project 

for several reasons. The program is simply a literature review of existing science regarding snag habitat, there is a lack of information on post-fire ecosystems used by cavity nesters, the output is based on the extrapolation of minimal data and it is being applied at the wrong scale. The FS has not disclosed key shortcomings of DecAID. The numbers generated by DecAID are well below what relevant science recommends for cavity excavators. The model does not address several MIS and cavity excavators found in the planning area. In addition, the FS has averaged snag retention levels and the 30% to 50% tolerance is insufficient to meet the requirements of the NWFP. 

According to the developers of developed with the intent to be planners, timber consultants, aacross all land ownerships in WDecAID is more than just a litescience regarding snag habitait. As the developers of DecA

1. A thorough re

literature and wildlife use of primarily in Or

2. A statistical sy

levels of use b
 

415

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

species of dec

3. A summary of 

decayed wood species in Ore(number of spor down wood 

4. Statistical sum

inventory data wood in unharlandscapes acWashington 

5. A helpful tool 

decisions 

The authors of DecAID do not inappropriate for use in post-fisimply state that caution shoulforest inventory summaries, befor post-fire inventory plots is sthe reasons why a post-fire invdead wood was conducted for pgs. 112 and 116). The resultsurvey were used in conjunctioa site-specific analysis. A site-specific inventory is useThe Forest Service is aware ocautions to be used with DecAwith post-fire data. Again, this planning area survey was conplanning of the salvage. Although the developers of Deat multiple spatial scales, the Dscale that DecAID is recomme116). The planning area fits th
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

416

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

27, 30 Wildlife The Forest Service never analyzed the impacts to wildlife from 

logging within roadless areas over 1,000 acres, two of which are in most of the proposed alternatives, Limpy Creek and Horseshoe Bend. Scientists have determined that roadless areas over 1,000 acres are important to species dependent on old-growth forests. This remains true even for burned forests. This lack of analysis in the DEIS must be corrected. Salvage logging in un-roaded areas is inappropriate. Salvage logging will irrevocably harm the values of this area for high quality fish habitat, complex wildlife habitat, water quality, recreation, weed suppression, less risk of human caused fire, reference landscape, ect. Further disclosure, analysis, and protection needs to be addressed that consider unimpeded operation of natural ecological processes, water quality, healthy soils; fish; and wildlife refugia, centers for dispersal, recolonization, and restoration of adjacent disturbed sites, reference sites for research, non-motorized low-impact recreation, carbon sequestration, refugia that are relatively less 

at risk from noxious weeds and other invasive non-native species, and many other significant values. See Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation FEIS, November 2000. 

The wildlife analysis took into aproposed salvage units and tethe spatial arrangement of unitadjacent to the two low road dAs described in the DEIS on pof the proposed activities on thtook into account the impacts solitude. Page 115 of the DEIimpacts to snags within the plashows how the two low road dbe affected. 

27, 32 Wildlife The DEIS says that “Timber harvesting is expected to directly 

impact roosting habitat for the Pacific Fringed Bat through the felling of large dead trees and snags. The DEIS does not give any survey or bat population results, and thus does not have enough information to conclude that “the action alternatives may impact individuals or habitat but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. 

Based on the prefield review oreconnaissance of potential haproposed salvage units, the Dprobable that this species occusalvage units (Table 29, page on page 134, the conclusion thspecies is not likely to contribulisting or loss of viability was bshowed that dead tree (roost) a result of the fire) and will remnatural range (for all action alteplanning area (Figure 48, pg. 1the cave discovered during fiereceive a 250 foot no-harvest Northwest Forest Plan standar
 

417

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

27, 30 Wildlife The proposed alternative will have the highest impact on 

landbirds due to the highest number of acres of logging slash broadcast burned in the spring, and the largest number of acres of loader logging. The DEIS failed to consider the cumulative effects to all the landbirds (not just individual species) of spring time logging slash burns. 

Direct, indirect and cumulative migratory birds are discussed 146). In addition, a breeding bthe planning area, was establisof the first year’s monitoring aravailable on the web, and discecological importance of wildfisnags is discussed in several DEIS (pgs. 102-105, 110-115)discussed in the Wildfire Effec(USDA 2003, pgs. 43-49), whiby reference (DEIS pg. 1 - Intr

30 Wildlife The DEIS statement of purpose and need (page 5) fails to 

recognize the habitat values of the Matrix. The DEIS says that the desired future condition of the matrix is to provide “commodities” (p 8) but that is not all. Matrix is not a sacrifice zone and should not be converted to simplified tree farms. The Northwest Forest Plan ROD (p B-6) says: Stands in the matrix can be managed for timber and other commodity production, and to perform an important role in maintaining biodiversity. Silvicultural treatments of forest stands in the matrix can provide for retention of old-growth ecosystem components such as large green trees, snags and down logs, and depending on site and forest type, can provide for a diversity of species. Retention of green trees following timber harvest in the matrix provides a legacy that bridges past and future forests. Retaining green trees serves several important functions including snag recruitment, promoting multistoried canopies, and providing shade and suitable habitat for many organisms in the matrix. “Coarse woody debris is essential for many species of vascular plants, fungi, liverworts, mosses, lichens, arthropods, salamanders, reptiles, and small mammals. Because of drier microclimates, logs in the matrix may be occupied by species different from those found on coarse woody debris in latesuccessional forests. However, those logs may provide transitional islands for the maintenance and eventual recovery of some late-successional organisms in the matrix.” 

The Apple fire burned across nearly, mid, and late seral foresUmpqua Watershed. This burn approximately 5,400 acres of hacres of mosaic burn, and 9,50Harvest will be confined to the within the Panther Creek subwacreage affected by salvage in 1,432 acres all within high inteGreen tree removal will be limthose needing to be removed fAll snag and down woody debor exceed LRMP standards analternatives as outlined in the 
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

418

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Clearly, the matrix is intended to develop and provide complex forest habitat. This complexity will be best achieved by retaining large trees and down logs that will provide a host of environmental services. The FEMAT report indicates that “because the matrix provides habitat and connectivity for many organisms, post-disturbance management must achieve a balance between economic and ecosystem objectives.” FEMAT IV-37. The NFP ROD also says that commercial salvage will be “less constrained” in the matrix, but it does not say that salvage will be unconstrained. See also Rose et al. 2001. 

30 Wildlife The Forest Service has misconstrued the concept of historic 

range of variability. The watershed analysis page 65 indicates that patches of dead trees are “highly deficit” in this watershed due to logging and salvage. The EIS also accurately described early seral stands that result from clearcuts and salvage as very different from early seral with abundant snags. The EIS indicates that the Apple Fire created an overabundance of early seral stands with snags, so justifies logging many of these stands. This characterization of “too much” early seral with snags cannot be reconciled with the fact that the Apple Fire itself was not outside the historic range of variation (which the DEIS repeatedly described as windy, steep, and prone to intense fire), so the fire cannot have created an overabundance of early seral conditions. The DEIS analysis of ACS objective 1 must be rewritten to conclude that the watershed is NOT outside historic range of variability for early seral with snags. 

The DEIS does not conclude toutside historic range for early DEIS states that early-successplanning area consists of two d1) devoid of dead trees (e.g. cdensities of dead trees (e.g., pDEIS states that the total acrehabitat is above its estimated n36)...”this deviation is mainly charvesting”. It further states, “successional habitat with high now within its estimated naturatotal acreage of early-successit is estimated to naturally occurange of early seral with snags Figure 48, page 118. 

30, 32 Wildlife The EIS (p 105) indicates that the preferred alternative will leave 

only 17% of the planning area in a burned and unsalvaged condition, the EIS also concludes without any support that this is still “higher than the estimated natural range of variability for this type of habitat” even though “large fires are common in this watershed” (p 108). This requires further analysis. a. Both Figure 36 on page 101 and Figure 48 on page 118 show that the existing condition is outside the historic range of variability. This is highly suspect because this area has 

The information on page 105 sand 28% of the early-successiplanning area would not be sa1,600 acres of burned plantatioare included in this calculationWhen examining the acres whproposed, of the 2,066 acres ohabitat with snags created by tproposes to salvage 65% of th
 

419

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

historically experienced lots of large fires. b. We need to know the real historic range of variability for early seral with snags based on an analysis like Wimberly et al. 2000 did for the coast range. See Michael C. Wimberly, Thomas A. Spies, Colin J. Long, and Cathy Whitlock, “Simulating historical variability in the amount of old forests in the Oregon coast range,” Conservation Biology, pages 167-180, Volume 14, no. 1, February 2000. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/journals/0010.pdf c. We need to know the consequences of all the alternatives on moving toward or maintaining this rare habitat type (early seral with snags). d. The bands for “natural range” on the top half of Figure 36 (p 101) should add up to 100%. e. The “historic reference” may have been based on a snapshot in time (1946). This is not scientifically credible. f. The Forest Service must consider not just this watershed area but must consider multiple scales and the regional dearth of early seral with snags. The NEPA document repeatedly invokes the concept of “historic range of variability” (HRV) to justify industrial intervention such as logging and roading. However, the HRV concept is meaningless unless a scale is specified (preferably both a temporal and spatial scale). The scale of determining the historic range of variability is critical. At small scales, the amount of old forest varied from zero to 100 percent depending on how recently the site was disturbed by intense fire, flood, volcanism, etc. HRV at this scale is meaningless and must never be used as an excuse to destroy old forests. But at very large scales, such as the Interior Columbia Basin, the condition of vegetation is a mosaic that reflects the effects of fires and other disturbances. At these large scales, the historic range of variability begins to approach the amounts of young and old forest expected based on the fire return interval for stand replacing fires. 

of the early-successional habitunsalvaged. Alternative 6, the the FEIS, salvages less. Figure 36 on page 101 shows for this type of habitat is betwearea in the planning area. Theearly-successional habitat that the project is higher than the ethis area. A – The reason why early-sucthe estimated natural range is 103. The 4-12% natural range large fires in the planning area watershed analysis (figure 9, pB – The Wimberly et al. modeanalysis of lake sediment from The scarcity of their sediment ability to estimate fire sizes, so relatively recent large coastal size. Lake core sampling is beconducting an analysis for salvjust like Wimberly et al., the temaps and aerial photographs tstand replacement patches (eawithin the planning area and thoccurs in. C – The DEIS fully discloses thcumulative impacts of each alttype on pages 110-119. D – The bands for natural ranghowever the bars representing This is due to the fact that thesspatial fluctuation of each habother. When late-successiona
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

420

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

In the Northwest Forest Plan area and the Interior Columbia Basin, the amount of old forest, large trees, and early seral with large snags are far below the historic range of variability. If we look only at the 5th field watershed scale we will miss this larger 

pattern of loss of old complex and young complex forest structure. Those few watersheds that are at or above HRV should be managed and conserved to compensate for the many watersheds that are below HRV. All HRV references in the NEPA document must be clarified to specify a geographic and temporal scale and note that whether the same parameter is within the HRV at the more meaningful regional scale. g. For an issue like complex early seral habitat that is so dependent upon large and infrequent events like wildfire, the scale of analysis must be correspondingly large. This is highlighted by the fact that only 1.8% of the Umpqua National Forest is early seral with snags (p143). Even if will maintain HRV with the 6th field planning area, the salvage will affect push 

the large scale plan area away from HRV. 

successional habitat is low. In situations where each conditiosame time. E – The historic reference is apoints in time – late 1800s and analysis, page 21). The 1946 used to represent a reference of mapping from 1946 aerial ppre-timber management perspReference periods such as this estimate “natural” conditions. F – The DEIS discusses this hspatial scales, from the site (sn112) to the planning area (pag118), the forest-scale (pages 1document (referenced on page the provincial scale of this habshows a map of the provincial figure 36, page 46 of WEEP). G – Again, the WEEP documeconditions and shows a positivtype in figure 35, page 45. 

30 Wildlife ACSO #1 is also violated by salvage in underburned latesuccessional old growth. Page 101 clearly shows that LSOG is 

underrepresented and underburned LSOG is even more rare, so the FS can’t salvage any underburned LSOG and still comply with ACSO #1. Page 107 says that this logging will have insignificant effects but this belies the HRV facts. 

The DEIS does show that LSOnatural range within the planniApple Fire. It does not discuss underburned LSOG. All of the area has experienced fire at soamount of underburned LSOG is disclosed on pages 47-49 of (incorporated as a reference oand Appendix D of the WEEP the web). 

30 Wildlife If conducted during the nesting season, the proposed harvest of 

timber will very likely kill nesting migratory birds in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act environmental statute, enacted to federal agency actions is stiPresidential Executive Order (
 

421

Letter 

Number 

Subject of 

Concern 

Comment Forest Service 

Be sure to protect the following bird species of conservation concern to the U.S.: Yellow-billed Loon; Black-footed Albatross; Northern Goshawk (resident laingi ssp. only); Peregrine Falcon (including resident pealei ssp. in Alaska); Black Oystercatcher; Whimbrel; Longbilled Curlew; Marbled Godwit (beringiae ssp. only); Black Turnstone; Surfbird; Red Knot; Rock Sandpiper; Short-billed Dowitcher; Caspian Tern; Arctic Tern; Aleutian Tern; Marbled Murrelet (except where listed as Threatened); Kittlitz's Murrelet; Yellow-billed Cuckoo; Flammulated Owl; Black Swift; Rufous Hummingbird; Lewis's Woodpecker; White-headed Woodpecker; Olive-sided Flycatcher; Horned Lark (strigata ssp. only); Vesper Sparrow (affinis ssp. only). 

2001) required the Forest Servmemorandum of understandinand Wildlife Service. This MO2001) is designed to strengtheconservation and avoid or minmigratory birds. The MOU directs the Forest Scomprehensive migratory bird the Partners in Flight Bird Conproposed project incorporates consistent with it (pages 140-1breeding bird survey route was the planning area in 2003 to comonitoring of local bird populawith section C-5 of the MOU. Effects to migratory birds were (pages 140-146). As documen20 landbirds that are listed in tWestside Coniferous Forests, potentially be affected by the polive-sided flycatcher, western crowned warbler, and rufous hto peregrine falcon were also d127-129). Cavity nesting specpages 110-115. None of the ocommenter either occur within within categories that require d

30 Wildlife (WA) The watershed analysis page 84 describes Vaux’s swifts as a 

snag-dependent species that needs special management attention, but the DEIS does not discuss this species. 

The landbird conservation plan swift as a focal species for largsuccessional/old-growth forest project mainly focuses on salvsuccessional (stand replaced) discussion focuses primarily ospecies. However, additional in the final EIS to relate the imhabitat to impacts on Vaux’s s
Chapter 5 – Response to comments

422

This page intentionally left blank. 
References Cited 

References - 1

References Cited 

Adams, Clarence. Personal Communication – March 23, 2004. 

Adams, W.T., J. Zuo, J.Y. Shimizu, and J. C. Tappeiner. 1998. Impact of Alternative 

Regeneration Methods on Genetic Diversity in Coastal Douglas-Fir. Forest Science, Vol. 

44, No.3, pages 390-396. 

Agee, James K. 1993. Fire Ecology of the Pacific Northwest. Washington, DC: Island Press. 

493 p. 

Altman, B. 2000. Olive-sided flycatcher nest success and habitat relationships in post-fire 

and harvested forests of western Oregon. Unpublished report. 32pp. 

Altman, B. and R. Sallabanks. 2000. Olive-sided Flycatcher. In A. Poole and F. Gill, (eds.) 

The Birds of North America, No. 502. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and 

The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. 

Amaranthus, M. P., D. Page-Dumroese, A. Harvey, E. Cazares, and L. Bednar, 1996. Soil 

compaction and organic matter affect conifer seedling nonmycorrhizal and 

ectomycorrhizal root tip abundance and diversity, USDA Forest Service, PNW-RP-494. 

Amaranthus, M., H.Jubas, and D. Arthur. 1989. Stream shading, summer streamflow and 

maximum water temperature following intense wildfire in headwater streams. 

Amman, Gene D., and Kevin C. Ryan. 1991. Insect Infestation of Fire-Injured Trees in the 

Greater Yellowstone Area. 

Anderson, Hal E. 1982. Aids to Determining Fuel Models for Estimating Fire Behavior. 

Gen.Tech. Rep. INT-122. 

Anthony, R.G., Forsman, E.D., Green, G.A., Witmer, G. and S.K. Nelson. 1987. Small 

mammal populations in riparian zones of different-aged coniferous forests. The Murrelet 

68, 94–102. 

Anthony R., S. Ackers, R. Claremont, J. LaVoie, D. Giessler, N. Seaman, J. Schilling and S. 

Turner-Hane. 2002a. The ecology of northern spotted owls (Strix occidentalis caurina) on 

the Willamette National Forest, Oregon: Habitat use and demography. Annual research 

report. 27p. 

Anthony R., S. Andrews, F. Wagner, W. King, T. O’Brien, T. Phillips, G. Rible and M. 

Shannon. 2002b. Demographic characteristics of spotted owls (Strix occidentalis caurina) 

in the Southern Oregon Cascades. Annual research report. 23p. 

Arnett, E. and J.P. Hayes. 2002. Influence of landscape characteristics on abundance and 

use of habitat by bat communities in the central Oregon Cascades. Cooperative Forest 

Ecosystem Research Program – CFER annual report. Corvallis, OR. p. 51-53. 
References Cited 

References - 2

Aubry, K.B., M.J. Crites and S.D. West. 1991. Regional patterns of small mammal 

abundance and community composition of Oregon and Washington. Pages 285-94 in L. F. 

Ruggiero, K. B. Aubry, A. B. Carey, and M. H. Huff, tech. coords. Wildlife and vegetation 

of unmanaged Douglas-fir forests. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-285. Portland, 

OR. 

Aubry, K.B. and C.M. Raley. 2002. Ecological characteristics of fishers in the southern 

Oregon Cascade Range. Final progress report: June 2002. USDA For. Serv., Pacific 

Northwest Research Station, Olympia, WA.

Aubry, K.B. and J.C. Lewis. 2003. Extirpation and reintroduction of fishers (Martes 

pennanti) in Oregon: implications for their conservation in the Pacific states. Biological 

Conservation, in press. 

Barker, Paul F. 1989. Timber salvage operations and watershed resource values. In: Berg, 

Neil H., tech. coord. Proceedings of the symposium on fire and watershed management; 

1988 October 26-28; Sacramento, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-109. Berkeley, CA: USDA 

Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 1-2. Available 

from: National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; PB89-228639. 

Bate, L.J., Garton, E.O. and M.J. Wisdom. 1999. Estimating snag and large tree densities 

and distributions on a landscape for wildlife management. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-425. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 76 p. 

Bouwman, Alex F., and Rik Leemans. 1995. The Role of Forest Soils in the Global Carbon 

Cycle. Carbon Forms and Functions in Forest Soils. Mcfee and Kelly Editors. Copyright, 

Soil Science Society of America. 

Bendell, J. F. 1974. Effects of fire on birds and mammals. Pages 73-138 in T.T. Kozlowski 

and C.E. Ahlgren, eds. Fire and ecosystems. Academic Press, New York. 

Bennett, K.A. 1982. Report to the Siuslaw National Forest. Effects of slash burning on 

surface soil erosion rates in the Oregon Coast Range. 

 

Beschta, Robert L. 1990. Effects of fire on water quantity and quality. In: Walstad, John 

D., S.R. Radosevich, D.V. Sandberg, eds. Natural and prescribed fire in Pacific Northwest 

Forest. Corvallis, Oregon State University Press: 219-232 . 

Beschta et. al. 1995. Wildfire and Salvage Logging: Recommendations for Ecologically 

Sound Post Fire Salvage Management and Other Post-Fire Treatments on Federal Lands in 

the West. 

Bjornn, T.C. and D. W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat Requirements of Salmonids in Streams: 

Influences of Forest and Range Management on Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats. 

American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19. Bethesda, MD, USA. 

Bouwman and Leemans 1995. The Role of Forest Soils in the Global Carbon Cycle. Carbon 

Forms and Functions in Forest Soils. Mcfee and Kelly Editors. Copyright, Soil Science 

Society of America. 
References Cited 

References - 3

Brown, G. W. 1969. Predicting temperatures of small streams. Water Resource. Res 5 

(1):68-75. 

Brown, James K. 1980. Influence of harvesting and residues on fuels and fire 

management. In: Proceedings, Environmental consequences of timber harvesting in Rocky 

Mountain coniferous forests; 1979 September 11-13; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT90. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 

417-432. 

Brown, J., Reinhardt, E., and Kramer, K. 2001. Coarse woody debris and succession in the 

recovering forest. USDA Forest Service. 

Carey, A.B. 1991. The Biology of arboreal rodents in Douglas-fir forests. USDA Forest 

Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-276. 46pp. 

Catton, T.J.. December 2001. Personal communication on fishers. 

Choromanska U. and T.H. De Luca. 2001. 

Cissel, J.H., F.J. Swanson, G.E. Grant, D.H. Olson, G.V. Stanley, S.L. Garman, L.R. 

Ashkenas, M.G. Hunter, J.A. Kertis, J.H. Mayo, M.D. McSwain, S.G. Swetland, K.A. 

Swindle and D.O. Wallin. 1998. A landscape plan based on historical fire regimes for a 

managed forest ecosystem: the Augusta Creek study. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-422. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 82pp. 

Cissel, John; ed. 2002. Blue River Landscape Study: Landscape Management and 

Watershed Restoration Strategy – Version 2. Unpublished report. Available on line at: 

http://www.fsl.orst.edu/ccem/brls/BRLPV2.pdf. 

Cole, E.K., M.D. Pope and R.G. Anthony. 1997. Effects of road management on movement 

and survival of Roosevelt elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 61(4):1115-1126. 

Cristy, R.E. and S.D. West. 1993. Biology of bats in Douglas-fir forests. USDA Forest 

Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-308. 27pp. 

Cross, S.P., H. Lauchstedt and C. Harmes. 1996. Characterizing forest roost sites of some 

bats of special concern occurring in Roseburg and Medford BLM Districts. Final Report – 

Department of Biology. Southern Oregon State College, Ashland, OR. 47pp. 

Dambacher, J. M. 1991. Distribution, abundance, and emigration of juvenile steelhead 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss), and analysis of stream habitat in the Steamboat Creek basin, 

Oregon Master’s thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis. 

Davis, Raymond J. 2003. Snag and down wood inventory of the Baked Apple Planning 

Area. On file at the North Umpqua Ranger District. 

Delaney, D.K., T.G. Grubb, P. Beier, L.L. Pater and M.H. Reiser. 1999. Effects of 

helicopter noise on nesting Mexican spotted owls. Journal of Wildlife Management. 63: 60–

76. 
References Cited 

References - 4

Denning, Cliff, 1994, Root Strength and Tree Surcharge (Section 4F): in, David E. Hall, 

Michael T. Long, and Michael D. Remboldt, eds., Slope Stability Reference Guide for 

National Forests in the United States: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Forest Service, Engineering 

Staff, Washington, DC, EM-7170-14, v. II, p. 543-548. 

Dietrich, William E., and David R. Montgomery.1998. SHALSTAB, A digital terrain model 

for mapping shallow landslide potential: Technical Report, National Council of the Paper 

Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Corvallis, Oregon, 26p.

Duncan, Nancy. February 2003. Personal communication. Survey and Manage Mollusk 

Taxa Lead. p108. 

Elliot, W. J., and D. E. Hall, 1997. Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) forest 

applications. General Technical Report INT-GTR-365. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

Elliot, W. J., Robicaud, P. R. and D. E. Hall, Cuhaciyan, C. O., Pierson F. B., Wohlgemuth, 

P. M. 2001. A Probabilistic Approach To Modeling Erosion For Spatially Varied Conditions, 

Presentation to American Society of Agriculture Engineers, Sacramento, California. 

Emerson, Clint. June 2003. Personal communication on Apple Fire revegetation.

Everett, Richard. 1995. Letter dated August 16 to John Lowe. Review of Beschta 

document. 8 p. On file with: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 

1133 N. Western Ave., Wenatchee, WA 98801. 

Evers, L. 2002. Addressing the issues raised in the 1995 Beschta Report on Post-fire 

Salvage Logging, Oregon State Office, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon. 

Farrell, T., M. Widmann and R. Davis. 1996. Report on the 1995-96 survey to determine 

the occurrence, distribution and habitat associations of wolverine, fisher and marten in 

the Umpqua National Forest. ODFW Report 95-2-04. 22pp. 

FEIS. 2003. Fire effects information system database. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory. Available online: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis. 

FEMAT. 1993. Forest Ecosystem Management: an ecological, economic and social 

assessment. Report of the Forest Ecosystem Management Team. 

Finney, Mark A. 1998. FARSITE; Fire Area Simulator – Model Development and Evaluation. 

RMRS–RP –4. Ogden, UT; USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 47pp. 

Fischer, W.C. 1980. Prescribed fire and bark beetle attack in ponderosa pin forest. Fire 

Management Notes. 4: 10-12. 

Flanagan, P. 1996. Survival of fire-injured conifers. Fire Management Notes 56: 13-16. 

Flanagan, S.A., M.J. Furniss, T.S. Ledwith, S. Thiesen, M. Love, K. Moore, J. Ory. 1998. 

Methods for inventory and environmental risk assessment of road drainage crossings. 

USDA, Forest Service. San Dimas Technology and Development Center, San Dimas, CA. 
References Cited 

References - 5

Fontaine, B. L. 1988. An evaluation of the effectiveness of instream structures for 

steelhead trout rearing habitat in the Steamboat Creek basin. Master’s thesis. Oregon 

State University, Corvallis. 

Forde, Jon D. 1983. The effect of fire on bird and small mammal communities in the 

grasslands of Wind Cave National Park. Masters Thesis. Michigan Technological University. 

Houghton, MI. 140pp. 

Forsman, E.D., E.C. Meslow and H.M. Wight. 1984. Distribution and biology of the spotted 

owl in Oregon. Wildlife Monographs 87. 64 pp. 

Forsman, E.D., J. A. Reid, S.A. Graham, J.S. Mowdy and A.L. Price. 2002. Demographic 

characteristics of northern spotted owls (Strix occidentalis) on the Tyee study area, 

Roseburg, Oregon: 1985-2002. Annual research report. 12p. 

Franklin A.B., K.P. Burnham, G.C. White, R.J. Anthony, E.D. Forsman, C. Schwarz, J.D. 

Nichols and J. Hines. 1999. Range-wide status and trends in northern spotted owl 

populations. Status report. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO and Oregon State 

University, Corvallis, OR. 71pp. 

Furniss, M .M. 1965. Susceptibility of fire-injured Douglas-fir to bark beetle in southern 

Idaho. Journal of Forestry 63: 8-11. 

Furniss, R. L., and V. M. Carolin. 1977. Western forest insects. USDA Forest Service. 

Miscellaneous Publications No. 1339. 654 p. 

Furniss, M.J., T.S. Ledwith, M. Love, B.C. McFadin, and S.A. Flanagan. 1998. Response 

of road-stream crossings to large flood events in Washington, Oregon, and 

Gebert, Krista M., & Charles E. Keegan III, Sue Willits, Al Chase. 2002. Utilization of 

Oregon’s Timber harvest and Associated Direct Economic Effects. Pacific Northwest 

Research Station General Technical Report ONW-GTR-52. 

Gomez, D.M. and R.G. Anthony. 1998. Small mammal abundance in riparian and upland 

areas of five seral stages in western Oregon. Northwest Sci. 72:293–302. 

Good, D.A. and D.B. Wake. 1992. Geographic variation and speciation in the torrent 

salamanders of the genus Rhyacotriton (Caudata: Rhyacotritonidae). Univ. California 

Publications in Zoology. 126:1-91 

Graham, S. A. 1925. The felled tree trunk as an ecological unit. Ecology 6(4): 397-411. 

Grifantini, Michael C.; Stuart, J.D.; Fox, L., III. 1991. Deer habitat changes following 

wildfire, salvage logging and reforestation, Klamath Mountains, California. In: 

Proceedings of the symposium on biodiversity; 1991 October 28-30; Santa Rosa, CA. [Place 

of publication unknown]: [publisher unknown]: 163-167. As cited in: Mclver, James D. and 

Lynn Starr. Tech eds. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire logging: literature review 

and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 72p. 
References Cited 

References - 6

Grinnell, J. and T.I. Storer. 1924. Animal life in the Yosemite. University of California 

Press, Berkeley, CA. 

Hadfield, J.S., and R.W. Magelssen. 2000. Wood changes in fire-killed eastern Washington 

tree species- year five progress report. USDA Forest Service Wenatchee Service Center. 

34p. 

Hagar, J.C., W.C. McComb, and C.C. Chambers. 1995. Effects of forest practices on 

wildlife, Chapter 9 in R.L. Beschta, J.R. Boyle, C.C. Chambers [and others]. Cumulative 

effects of forest practices in Oregon: literature and synthesis. Prepared for Oregon 

Department of Forestry. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 

Harrington, M.G. 1987. Ponderosa pine mortality from spring, summer, and fall crown 

scorching. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 2: 14-16. 

Heinemeyer, K.S. and J.L. Jones. 1994. Fisher biology and management in the western 

United States. USDA Forest Service and Interagency Forest Carnivore Working Group 

Report. 109pp 

Helvey, J.D., A.R. Tiedemann, and T.D. Anderson. 1985. Plant nutrient losses by soil 

erosion and mass movement after wildfire. Journal of Soil Water Conservation 40:168-173. 

Hermann, Richard K., and William W. Chilcote 1965. effect of seedbeds on germinations 

and survival of Douglas-fir. Oregon State University, School of Forestry, Forest Research 

Laboratory Research Paper 4. Corvallis. 28 pages. 

Huff, M., J. Henshaw and E. Laws. 1997. Great gray owl survey status and evaluation of 

guidelines for the Northwest forest plan. Available online at the following URL: 

http://www.or.blm.gov/surveyandmanage/SP/Great%20Gray%20Owl/icover.htm 

Hunter, M.G. 1998. Watershed-level patterns among stream amphibians in the Blue River 

watershed, West-Central Cascades of Oregon. Masters Thesis, Oregon State Univ., 

Corvallis, OR. 97pp. 

Hutto, R.L. 1995. Composition of bird communities following stand-replacement fires in 

northern Rocky Mountain (USA) conifer forests. Conservation Biology 9(5):1041-1058. 

Isaacs, Frank. September 2003. Personal communication on bald eagles. 

Jones, J. A., and G. E. Grant. 1996. Peak flow responses to clear-cutting and roads in 

small and large basins, Western Cascades, Oregon. American Geophysical Union. Water 

Resources Research, vol. 32 (4): 959-974. 

Jones, J. A. 2000. Hydrologic processes and peak flow discharge response to forest 

removal, regrowth and roads in ten small experimental basins, Western Cascades, Oregon. 

Water Resources Research. 

Jurgensen, M. F., A. E Harvey, R. T. Graham, D. S. Page-Dumroese, J. R. Tonn, M.J. 

Larsen, and T.B. Jain. 1997. Impacts of timber harvesting on soil organic matter, nitrogen, 

productivity and health of Inland Northwest forests. For. Sci. 43: 234-251. 
References Cited 

References - 7

Kimmey, J.W. 1955. Rate of deterioration of fire-killed timber in California. USDA 

Circular No. 962. Washington, D.C. 22 p. 

Kimmey, J.W., and R.L. Furniss. 1943. Deterioration of fire-killed Douglas-fir. USDA 

Technical Bulletin No. 851. Washington, D.C. 61 p. 

Kimmins, J. P. 1996. Forest Ecology, A Foundation for Sustainable Management. 2nd ed. 

Prentice-Hall. NJ. p61. 

Kline, LeRoy. 1996. 1995 “forest health” update. Unpublished paper presented to the 

Oregon Board of Forestry. 5 p. Available from: http://www.odf.state.or.us/FH/

BDFOR.HTM. 

Klock, G.O. 1975. Impacts of five post-fire salvage logging systems on soil and vegetation. 

J. of Soil and Water Conservation. 30(2): 78-81. 

Lancaster, S.T., S.K. Hayes and G.E. Grant. 2001. Modeling sediment and wood storage 

and dynamics in small mountainous watersheds. Geomorphic Process and Riverine Habitat 

Water Science and Application. Vol 4, pages 85-102. 

Landsberg, Johanna and A. R. Tiedemann. 2002. Fire Management. In: Dissmeyer G.E., ed. 

Drinking water from forest and grasslands. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-39 Ashville, North 

Carolina: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 124-138. 

Leonard, W.P., H.A. Brown, L.L.C. Jones, K.R. McAllister and R.M. Storm. 1993. 

Amphibians of Washington and Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, WA. 168pp. 

Lightcap, Scott. September 2003. Personal communication regarding the Diamond Lake 

Restoration Project. 

Lint J., R. Horn, F. Oliver, C. Larson, , K. Krause, M. O’Hara, M. Oleri, H. Wise, M. Irwin, 

K. Fukuda and P. Colvard. 2002. Demographic characteristics of northern spotted owls 

(Strix occidentalis caurina) in the Klamath Mountain Province of Oregon 1983-2002. 

Annual research report. 23p. 

Lint, Joe. 2003. Personal communication on northern spotted owls. 

Lowell, E.C., S.A. Willets, and R.L. Krahmer. 1992. Deterioration of fire-killed timber in 

the western United States. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station 

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-292. 27 p. 

Lowell, Eini C., & James M. Cahill. 1996 Deterioration of Fire Killed Timber in Southern 

Oregon and Northern California. West. J. Appl. For. 11(4):125-131. 

Lyon, L.J, M.H. Huff, R.G. Hooper, E.S. Telfer, D.S. Schreiner and J.K. Smith (eds.). 

2000. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on fauna. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR42-vol. 1. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 83pp. 

Marcot, Bruce G., Kim Mellen, Janet L. Ohmann, Karen L. Waddell, Elizabeth A. Willhite, 

Bruce B. Hostetler, Susan A. Livingston, Catherine Ogden, and Tina Dreisbach. 2002. The 

DecAID repository: background information for DecAID, the decayed wood advisor for 
References Cited 

References - 8

managing snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in forests of 

Washington and Oregon. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station and 

Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon. 

Marshall, D.B., M.G. Hunter and A.L. Contreras, Eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR 768 pp. 

Martin, D.A. and J.A. Moody. 2001. Comparison of Soil Infiltration Rates in Burned and 

Unburned Mountainous Watersheds. Hydrol. Process, 15. PP 2893-2903.

McCullough, B. 1991. Final report of a cavity nesting bird study on the Mount Hood 

National Forest. Unpublished report. 30pp. 

Mclver, James D. and Lynn Starr. Tech eds. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire 

logging: literature review and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 72p. 

McDade, M. H., F. J. Swanson, W. A. Mckee, J. F. Franklin, and J. Van Sickle. 1990. 

Source distances for coarse woody debris entering small streams in western Oregon and 

Washington. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 20: 326-330. 

McDonald, Lee H., Alan W. Smart, Robert C. Wissmar, 1991. Monitoring guidelines to 

evaluate effects of forestry activities on streams in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska: U. 

S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Division, and Center of Streamside Studies. 

EPA/910/-91-001, 166 p. 

McGarigal, K. 1993. Relationships between landscape structure and avian abundance 

patterns in the Oregon Coast Range. Ph.D. diss., Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 

McGarigal, K. and W.C. McComb. 1995. Relationships between landscape structure and 

breeding birds in the Oregon Coast Range. Ecol. Monogr. 65(3):235-260. 

Mellen, K. and A. Ager. 2002. A coarse wood dynamics model for the western Cascades. in

W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr., P.J. Shea, B.E. Valentine, C.P. Weatherspoon and T.E. Lisle 

(Ed.). Proceedings of the symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in 

western forests, 2-4 November 1999, Reno, Nevada. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Southwest Research Station General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181:503-516. 

 

Miller, J.M., and F.P. Keen. 1960. Biology and control of the western pine beetle: a 

summary of the first fifty years of research. USDA Forest Service Miscellaneous Publication 

No. 800. 381 p. 

Montgomery, David R., Wright, Robert H., and Booth, Thom. 1991. Debris flow hazard 

mitigation for colluviums field swales: Bulletin of the Assoc. of Engineering Geologists, 

V.XXVIII, No 3, p. 303-323. 

Monleon, V. J., K. Cromack Jr., and J.D. Lansberg. 1997. Short - and long term effects of 

prescribed underburning on nitrogen availability in ponderosa pine stands in central 

Oregon. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 27(3): 369-378. 
References Cited 

References - 9

Murphy, M. L., and K. V. Koski. 1989. Input and depletion of woody debris in Alaska 

streams and implications for streamside management. North American Journal of Fisheries 

Management 9: 427-436. 

Nussbaum, R. A., E. D. Brodie, Jr. and R. M. Storm. 1983. Amphibians and reptiles of the 

Pacific Northwest. Univ. Press of Idaho. 332pp. 

ODFW. 2003. Oregon’s elk management plan. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 

Portland, OR. 58pp. 

Ohmann J. L., W.C. McComb and A.A. Zumrawi. 1994. Snag abundance for primary cavitynesting birds on nonfederal forestlands in Oregon and Washington. Wildlife Society 

Bulletin 22(4):607-620. 

Oliver C. D. and B. C. Larsen. 1996. Forest Stand Dynamics. Wiley and Sons, Inc. New 

York. 

OLMIS. Oregon Labor Market Information System. (2000). Summary Covered Employment 

and Payroll Report, Douglas County, 2000. Oregon Employment Department. Available at 

WWW: http://www.olmis.org

OMB A-94. Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-94. (1992, October, revised 

1999). Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs. 

Washington, D. C: Author. 

Ormsbee, Pat. July 2002. Personal communication on bats. 

Page-Dumerose, Deborah; Jurgenen, M; Harvey, A. 2002. Fire and Fire Suppression 

Impacts on Forest Soil Carbon. Rocky Mountain Research Library, (Unpublished final 

Report #00-JV-11222062-550). 

Park, Chris 2003. Draft, sufficiency Analysis for Stream Temperature: evaluation of the 

adequacy of the Northwest Forest Plan Riparian Reserves to achieve and maintain stream 

temperature water quality standards. U. S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land 

Management. 

Partners In Flight (PIF). 2000. Landbird conservation plan: Westside coniferous forests. 

Partners in Flight. http://community.gorge.net/natres/pif/westside_page1.html. 

Perry, D.A., R. Molina, and M.P. Amaranthus. 1987. Mycorrhizae, mycorrhizospheres, and 

reforestation: current knowledge and research needs. Canadian Journal of Forest 

Research. 17(8):929-940. 

Peterson, D. L. and M. J. Arbaugh. 1986. Post fire survival in Douglas-fir and lodgepole 

pine: comparing the effects of crown and bole damage. Canadian Journal of Forest 

Research 16:1175-1179. 

Pilliod, D.S., R.B. Bury, E.J. Hyde, C.A. Pearl and P.S. Corn. 2003. Fire and amphibians in 

North America. Forest Ecology and Management. 178(1-2): 163-181. 
References Cited 

References - 10

Radtke, Sherman and Rudolph V. Edwards, Jr. 1976. Soil Resources Inventory. R-6, 

Umpqua National Forest, Roseburg, OR. 

Robichaud, P. R. and R.E. Brown. 1999. What Happened After the Smoke Cleared: Onsite 

Erosion Rates After a Wildfire in Eastern Oregon. Proceeding of the Annual Summer 

Specialty Conference (Track 2: Wildland Hydrology), 419-426. June 30-July 2, 1999, 

Bozeman, MT. Herndon, VA: American Water Resources Association. 

Rothermel, Richard C. 1983. How to Predict the Spread and Intensity of Forest and Range 

Fires, PMS 436-1, NFES 1573, June 1983. 

Ryan, K. C. 1990. Predicting prescribed fire effects on trees in the interior West. In; M. E. 

Alexander, G. F. Bisgrove technical advisors. The art and science of fire management. 

Proceedings of the First Interior West Fire Council Annual Meeting. Forestry Canada, 

Northern Forestry Center. P. 148-162. 

Ryan, K. C. and W. H. Frandsen. 1991. Basal injury from smoldering fires in mature Pinus 

Ponderosa Laws. International Journal of Wildland Fire 1: 107-118. 

Society of American Foresters. 1996. The role of “salvage” and “sanitation” harvesting in 

the restoration and maintenance of healthy forests [Position paper]. Available from: 

Society of American Foresters web page: www.safnet.org. 

Sauer, J. R., J.E. Hines and J. Fallon. 2003. The North American breeding bird survey, 

results and analysis 1966 - 2002. Version 2003.1, USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, 

Laurel, MD.

Scott, D.W., J. Szymoniak, and V. Rockwell. 1996. Entomological concerns regarding burn 

characteristics and fire effects on tree species during prescribed landscape burns: burn 

severity guidelines and mitigation measures to minimize fire injuries. USDA Forest Service, 

Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. BMZ 97-1. 48 p. 

Schwendeman, T. 1981. Dust Control Study, Gallatin National Forest. USDA Forest 

Service Region 1. 

Schultz, Dave. (1994, November) Deterioration of Salvage Trees. Forest Pest 

Management. 

Sessions, J., R. Buckman, M. Newton, and J. Hamann. 2003. The Biscuit Fire: 

Management Options for Forest Regeneration, Fire and Insect Risk Reduction, and Timber 

Salvage. College of Forestry, Oregon State University. 63 pp. 

Sexton, Timothy O. 1994. Ecological effects of post-wildfire salvage-logging on vegetation 

diversity, biomass, and growth and survival of Pinus ponderosa and Purshia tridentata. 

Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Department of Rangeland Resources. 28 p. 

Unpublished manuscript. On file with: Department of Rangeland Resources, Strand 

Agriculture Hall, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331. As cited in: Mclver, James 

D. and Lynn Starr. Tech eds. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire logging: literature 

review and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 72p. 
References Cited 

References - 11

Shakesby, Richard A.; Coelho, Celeste de O.A.; Ferreira, António D. and others. 1993. 

Wildfire impacts on soil erosion and hydrology in wet Mediterranean forest, Portugal. 

International Journal of Wildland Fire. 3(2): 95-110. As cited in: Mclver, James D. and 

Lynn Starr. Tech eds. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire logging: literature review 

and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 72p. 

Sidle, Roy, 1985, Factors influencing the stability of slopes; in Proceedings of a Workshop 

on Slope Stability, Problems and Solutions in Forest Management: U.S Dept. of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-180, p. 17-25 

Simon, Jerry, Stephen Christy, and Joseph Vessels. 1994. Clover-Mist fire recovery: a 

forest management response. Journal of Forestry. November: 41-44. 

Siskiyou National Forest, 1997. Unpublished report Soil Disturbances from Helicopter 

Yarding in the Upper Pistol Timber Sale. Southwestern Oregon. 

Sonoran, Institute. 2003. Population, Employment, Earnings and Personal Income Trends, 

Douglas County, OR. Sonoran Institute, Bozeman, Montana. 

Spetler, Henry. 2002. Sawmill Closures, Openings, and Net Capacity Changes in the 

Softwood Lumber Sector, 1996-2003. Res. Pap. FPL-RP-603. Madison, WI: USDA, Forest 

Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 

Spies, Thomas A.; Franklin, Jerry F. 1988. Old growth and forest dynamics in the Douglasfir region of western Oregon and Washington. Natural Areas Journal. 8(3): 190-201. 

[7248]. 

Stevenson, Dwayne & Mark Miller, Kathi Riddell. 2001. Employment Projections by 

Occupation 2000-2010, region 6 (Douglas County). Oregon Employment Department, 

Salem, OR. 

Swanston, Douglas N., and Frederick J. Swanson, 1976. Timber harvesting, mass erosion 

and steep land forest geomorphology in the Pacific Northwest: in Coates, Donald R., ed., 

Geomorphology and Engineering, Dowden, Hutchison & Ross, Inc. Stroudsburg, PA., p. 

199-221. 

Swezy, D. M. and J. K. Agree. 1990. Prescribed fire effects on fire fine roots and tree 

mortality in old-growth ponderosa pine. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 21:626-634. 

Thomas, J.W. 2002. Dead wood: Foresters bane to environmental boon. In W. F. 

Laudenslayer, Jr., P.J. Shea, B.E. Valentine, C.P. Weatherspoon and T.E. Lisle (Ed.). 

Proceedings of the symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western 

forests, 2-4 November 1999, Reno, Nevada. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest 

Research Station General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181. p. 3-9 

Thomas, T. L., and J. K. Agee., 1986. Prescribed fire effects on mixed conifer forest 

structure at Crater Lake, Oregon. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 16:1082-1087. 

Toweill D. and J. W. Thomas (eds.). 2002. North American elk: ecology and management. 

Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press. 1128pp. 
References Cited 

References - 12

USDA Forest Service. 1975. Region 6 dead tree (snag) management policy. USDA Forest 

Service Manual 2405.14, Portland, OR. 

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. 

Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. 

USDA Forest Service. 1994. American marten, fisher, lynx and wolverine in the western 

United States. USDA Forest Service, General Tech. Report RM-254, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 184pp. 

USDA Forest Service. 1997. Idaho Panhandle National Forest, Sand Point Ranger District. 

Water Quality Effects of Three Dust Abatement Compounds. 

USDA Forest Service. 1999. San Dimas Technology and Development Center. Dust Palliative 

Selection and Application Guide. 

USDA Forest Service. 1999. Umpqua National Forest peregrine falcon site management 

plan. Working draft. Umpqua National Forest, Roseburg, OR. 49pp 

USDA Forest Service. 2000. Landbird strategic plan. Washington, DC. 21pp. 

USDA, Forest Service. 2001. Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis. Umpqua National 

Forest. 

USDA Forest Service. 2001a. Watershed Analysis: North Umpqua River Wild and Scenic 

Corridor. North Umpqua Ranger District. 

USDA Forest Service. 2002. Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) report for the 2002 

Apple Fire. 

USDA Forest Service. 2003. Umpqua National Forest. Wildfire Effects Evaluation Project. 

USDA Forest Service. 2003a. Umpqua National Forest. Baked Apple Roads Analysis. North 

Umpqua Ranger District. 

USDA Forest Service, USDA Bureau of Land Management, and Oregon State Parks and 

Recreation Department. 1992. North Umpqua Wild and Scenic River. Environmental 

Assessment. 

USDA/USDI, 1994. Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl and 

it’s Amendments. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1994. Final supplemental 

environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and oldgrowth forest related species within the range of the northern spotted owl, Appendix J2 – 

Results of additional species analysis. Portland, Oregon. 475pp. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1995. Great gray owl survey 

protocol. Portland, OR. 26 pp. 
References Cited 

References - 13

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2000. Management 

recommendations for the Oregon red tree vole (Arborimus longicaudus). Version 2.0. 

Portland, Oregon. 25pp. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2001. Record of decision for 

amendments to the survey and manage, protection buffer and other mitigation measures 

standards and guidelines. Portland, Oregon. 106pp. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2003. Supplemental direction for 

identification of non-high priority sites for red tree vole within the "Pilot" Area. USDA 

Forest Service memorandum, BLM Instruction Memorandum OR-2003-062. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

1998. South cascades late successional reserve assessment. Umpqua National Forest, 

Roseburg, OR. 255pp. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1999. Field guide to survey and manage terrestrial 

mollusk species from the Northwest Forest Plan. USDI Bureau of Land Management, 

Portland, OR. 114pp. 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 1982. Recovery plan for peregrine falcon (Pacific 

population). Portland, Oregon. 87pp. 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. 12-Month finding for a petition to list the southern 

torrent salamander. Federal register 65(109):35951-35956. 

USGS - United States Geological Survey. 1996. Water quality and algal conditions in the 

North Umpqua River Basin, Oregon, 1992-95, and implications for resource management. 

Verts, B.J. and L.N. Carraway. 1998. Land mammals of Oregon. Univ. of California Press, 

Berkley, CA. 800pp. 

Vesely, D. 1997. Terrestrial amphibian abundance and species richness in headwater 

riparian buffer strips, Oregon Coast Range. Master's thesis. Oregon State University, 

Corvallis. 

Weatherby, J.C., R.A. Progar, and P.J. Mocettini. 2001. Evaluation of tree survival on the 

Payette National Forest 1995-1999. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region. FHP 

Report R4-01-01. 29 p. 

Weatherspoon, P. 1988. Evaluating damage to trees from the 1987 wildfires. In: Oregon 

State University Extension Service Forestry Intensified Research (FIR) Report: Special Fire 

Issue. 9:13-14. 

Wei, X., J.P. Kimmins, and G. Zhou. 2003. Disturbances and the sustainability of longterm site productivity in lodgepole pine forests in the central interior of British Columbia – 

an ecosystem modeling approach. Ecological Modeling, Volume 164, Issues 203. Pages 

239-256. 
References Cited 

References - 14

Weller, T.J. and C.J. Zabel. 2001. Characteristics of fringed myotis day roosts in northern 

California. J. Wildl. Manage. 65(3):489-497. 

Wemple, B. C., J.A. Jones, and G. E. Grant.1996 Channel network extension by logging 

roads in two basins, Western Cascades, Oregon. Water Resources Bulletin, American Water 

Resource Association. 32 (6): 1195-1207 

White, D.E., T. Atzet, P.A. Martinez and L.A. McCrimmon. 2002. Dead Wood and Fire 

Relationships in Southwestern Oregon Western Hemlock Forests. In W. F. Laudenslayer, 

Jr., P.J. Shea, B.E. Valentine, C.P. Weatherspoon and T.E. Lisle (Ed.). Proceedings of the 

symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western forests, 2-4 

November 1999, Reno, Nevada. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station 

General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181:479-487. 

Wilson, Larry 1999. Snagfall submodel for SNFP growth and yield model. Paper dated 

August 12th, 1999. 

Wright, Henry A. and Arthur W. Bailey. 1982. Fire Ecology: United States and Southern 

Canada. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 501 pages. 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 1

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

A 

Access - The mode by which activities are pursued and how well users can travel to or within 

the setting. 

Affected Environment - The biological, social, economic, and physical aspects of the 

environment that will or may be changed by proposed actions. 

Alternative - A combination of management prescriptions applied in specific amount and 

locations to achieve a desired management emphasis as expressed in goals and objectives. 

One of several policies, plans, or projects proposed for decision making. An alternative need 

not substitute for another in all respects. 

Anadromous fish - Those species of fish that mature in the sea and migrate into streams to 

spawn (e.g., salmon and steelhead trout). 

Analysis Area - A delineated area of land subject to analysis of (1) responses to proposed 

management practices in the production, enhancement, or maintenance of forest and other 

outputs and environmental quality objectives; and (2) economic and social impacts. 

Aquatic (and riparian) health - Aquatic and riparian habitats that support animal and plant 

communities that can adapt to environmental changes and follow natural evolutionary and 

biogeographic processes. Healthy aquatic and riparian systems are resilient and recover 

rapidly from natural and human disturbance. They are stable and sustainable, in that they 

maintain their organization and autonomy over time and are resilient to stress. In a healthy 

aquatic/riparian system there is a high degree of connectivity from headwaters to 

downstream reaches, from streams to floodplains, and from subsurface to surface. Floods can 

spread into floodplains, and fish and wildlife populations can move freely throughout the 

watershed. Healthy aquatic and riparian ecosystems also maintain long-term soil productivity. 

Available water - The amount of water in the soil that can be readily absorbed by plant 

roots. 

B 

Best Management Practice (BMP) - The set of practices derived from “General Water Quality 

Best Management Practices”, USDA 1988, and listed in the Forest Plan which, when applied 

during implementation of a project, ensures that water-related beneficial uses are protected 

and that State water quality standards are met in the appropriate management areas. BMPs 

are based on site-specific evaluation and represent the most effective and practicable means 

of accomplishing the water quality goals of the specific area involved in the project. 

Biological Diversity - (1) The distribution and abundance of plant and animal communities. 

(2) The variety of life forms and processes, including a complexity of species, communities, 

gene pools, and ecological functions. 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 2

Board Foot - A unit of measurement represented by a board one foot square and one inch 

thick. 

C 

Canopy - In a forest, the branches from the one or more uppermost layers of trees. 

Canopy closure - The amount of ground surface shaded by tree canopies as seen from above. 

Used to describe how open or dense a stand of trees is, often expressed in 10 percent 

increments. 

Catastrophic/Catastrophe – As defined by Webster’s, a great and sudden calamity/disaster. 

When used in context of the Umpqua LRMP, catastrophic events are defined as fires, 

windstorms, or insect and disease attacks. A catastrophic occurrence to a stand occurs when 

greater than 50% of an existing stand is affected. 

Closure - A road management term indicating the road cannot be used by motorized traffic. 

This limitation can be accomplished by regulation, barricade, or blockage devices. The road 

can be available for emergency use or permitted use such as firewood cutting during dry 

periods. 

Competition - An interaction that occurs when two or more individuals make demands of the 

same resources that are in short supply. 

Connectivity - The arrangement of habitats that allows organisms and ecological processes to 

move across the landscape; patches of similar habitats are either close together or linked by 

corridors of appropriate vegetation. The opposite of a fragmented condition. 

Corridor (landscape) - Landscape elements that connect similar patches of habitat through 

an area with different characteristics. 

Cover type - A vegetation classification depicting a genus, species, group of species, or life 

form of tree, shrub, grass, or sedge. In effect the present vegetation of an area. 

Crown - The part of a tree containing live foliage; treetops. 

Cultural Resource - The physical remains of human activity (artifacts, ruins, burial mounds, 

petroglyphs, etc.) and conceptual content or context (as a setting for legendary, historic, or 

prehistoric events, as a sacred area of native peoples, etc.) of an area of prehistoric or 

historic occupation. 

D 

Danger Tree – A standing live or dead tree, including snags, with evidence of deterioration or 

physical damage to the root system, trunk, or stem. 

Debris Flows – Are large debris slides that are charged with water and confined to steep 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 3

stream channels. Debris flows may travel several thousand feet before settling out in gentler 

terrain often at the junction of the steep tributary and a larger, lower gradient stream. 

DecAID - An internet-based computer program being developed as an advisory tool to help 

federal land managers evaluate effects of management activities on wildlife species that use 

dead wood habitats. The tool synthesizes published literature, research data, wildlife 

databases, and expert judgment and experience (Mellen et al. 2003). DecAID presents 

information on wildlife use based on snag density and snag diameter. This information is 

presented at three statistical levels: low (30% tolerance level), moderate (50% tolerance 

level), and high (80% tolerance level). A tolerance level can also be defined as an .assurance 

of use. Or the likelihood that individuals in a population of a selected species will use an area 

given a specified snag size and density. 

Decommissioned Road - A road permanently removed from the transportation system. The 

management objective of decommissioning is to restore the hydrologic function. 

Decommissioning includes, as needed: the removal of drainage structures such as culverts, recontouring cut and fill slopes, subsoiling, and revegetating the old road beds. 

Density (stand) - The number of trees growing in a given area, usually expressed in terms of 

trees per acre or basal area per acre. 

Desired Condition - (1) A portrayal of the land or resource conditions that are expected to 

result if goals and objectives are fully achieved. (2) A description of the landscape as it could 

reasonably be expected to appear at the end of the planning period if the plan goals, 

objectives, standards, and guidelines for that landscape are fully achieved. 

Detrimental Soil Conditions- Are those physical changes to soil caused by equipment or 

traffic that results in compaction, puddling or horizontal displacement of surface soils, or 

severe burning where the top soil layer has been changed in structure and color (Umpqua 

LRMP IV-68-69). 

Detrimental Soil Impacts - Soil erosion, displacement, compaction, puddling, or burning that 

exceeds certain thresholds. For instance, displacement is a detrimental soil impact only if 

more than 50% of the topsoil or humus-enriched A-horizon is removed from an area of 100 

square feet or more, which is at least 5 feet in width. A Forest Plan standard limits the 

amount of detrimental soil impacts to 20% of an activity area. 

Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) - The diameter of a tree measured 4 1⁄2 feet above the 

ground. 

Disturbance - Refers to events that alter the structure, composition, or function of terrestrial 

or aquatic habitats. Natural disturbances include, among others, drought, floods, wind, fires, 

wildlife grazing, and insects and diseases. Human-caused disturbances include, among others, 

actions such as timber harvest, livestock grazing, roads, and the introduction of exotic 

species. 

Downed Wood - A tree or part of a tree that is dead and lying on the ground. 

Duff - The partially decomposed organic material of the forest floor that lies beneath freshly 

fallen leaves, needles, twigs, stems, bark, and fruit. 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 4

E 

Ecosystem - A complete, interacting system of living organisms and the land and water that 

make up their environment; the home places of all living things, including humans. 

Effects - Environmental changes resulting from a proposed action. Included are direct 

effects, which are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place, and indirect 

effects, which are caused by the action and are later in time or further removed in distance, 

and cumulative effects, which includes the effects of the past, present, proposed, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions. 

Effective Ground Cover – (EGC) is considered to be all living or dead herbaceous or wood 

material and rock fragments greater than 3⁄4 inch in contact with the ground and considered 

to be stable and resistant to downslope movement. 

Endangered Species - Any species, plant, or animal that is in danger of extinction throughout 

all or a significant portion of its range. Endangered species are identified by the Secretary of 

the Interior in accordance with the 1973 Endangered Species Act. 

Environment - The combination of external physical, biological, social, and cultural 

conditions affecting the growth and development of organisms and the nature of an individual 

or community. 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - A document prepared by a Federal agency on the 

environmental effects of its proposals for major actions used as a tool for decision-making. It 

is a formal document that must follow the requirements of NEPA, the Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidelines, and directives of the agency responsible for the 

project proposal. 

Erosion - The wearing away of the land surface or stream channel by running water, wind, 

ice, gravity, or other geological activities; can be reduced by increasing ground cover or that 

concentrate running water. 

F 

Fire Intensity - A term used to describe the rate at which a fire produces thermal energy; 

influenced by the amount of fuel available, local weather conditions, and the topography of 

the burn site. Refers to how the fire affected the canopy. Low intensity fire = 40% of over 

story trees killed. Moderate intensity = 40-80 % of over story trees killed. High intensity = 80-

100% of over story trees killed. 

Fire Regime - The characteristics of fire in a given ecosystem, such as the frequency, 

predictability, intensity, and seasonality of fire. 

Fire Return Interval - The average time between fires in a given area. 

Fire Severity - The degree to which a site has been altered or the successional processes 

disrupted by fire. Fire severity, loosely, is a product of fire intensity and residence time. 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 5

Depending on the amount and condition of organic material in them, burned areas are 

described as belonging to one of three fire severity categories: low-severity, moderateseverity, or high-severity. Low severity = duff is largely intact, although it can be charred on 

the surface; woody debris is partially consumed or charred. Moderate severity = duff is 

deeply charred or consumed, but underlying mineral soil is not visibly altered, including fine 

roots near the surface. High severity = Duff is completely consumed or deeply burned. Soil 

surface texture is changed and fine roots near the surface are consumed or deeply burned. It 

is possible to have a high intensity fire with low severity. It is also possible to have a low 

intensity fire with high severity. Severity also considers the amount of time fire was present 

and how high the temperatures.

Fireline Intensity - The rate of heat release along a unit length of fireline. A high intensity 

fire would require additional and more complex resources (air tankers, bulldozers, etc.) to 

suppress than a low intensity fire. 

Floodplain - The portion of river valley or level lowland next to streams, which is covered 

with water when the river or stream overflows its banks at flood stage. 

Forage - Vegetation (both woody and non-woody) eaten by animals, especially grazing and 

browsing animals. 

Forbs - Any herbaceous plant other than true grasses, sedges, and rushes. 

Forest Health - The condition in which forest ecosystems sustain their complexity, diversity, 

resiliency, and productivity to provide for specified human needs and values. It is a useful 

way to communicate about the current condition of the forest, especially with regard to 

resiliency, a part of forest health that describes the ability of the ecosystem to respond to 

disturbances. Forest health and resiliency can be described, in part, by species composition, 

density, and structure. 

Forest Plan (Umpqua) - A document that guides natural resource management and 

establishes standards and guidelines for a national forest; required by the National Forest 

Management Act. 

Forest-Wide Standards - An indication of policy or conduct dealing with the basic 

management of the Forest. Forest-wide management standards apply to all areas of the 

Forest regardless of the other management prescriptions applied. 

Fragmentation (habitat) - The break-up of a large land area (such as a forest) into smaller 

patches isolated by areas converted to a different land type. The opposite of connectivity. 

Fuel (fire) - Dry, dead parts of trees, shrubs, and other vegetation that can burn readily. 

Fuel Hazard - An accumulation of vegetative fuel that has a high risk of ignition or difficulty 

of suppression. 

Fuel Ladder - Vegetative structures or conditions such as low-growing tree branches, shrubs, 

or smaller trees that allow fire to move vertically from a surface fire to a crown fire. 

Fuel load - The dry weight of combustible materials per unit area; usually expressed as tons 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 6

per acre. 

Fuel Treatment - The rearrangement or disposal of natural or activity fuels to reduce the fire 

hazard. 

G 

 

Ground fire - A fire that burns the organic material in the soil layer and the decayed material 

or peat below the ground surface. Synonymous with underburn. 

H 

 

Habitat - A place that provides seasonal or year-round food, water, shelter, and other 

environmental conditions for an organism, community, or population of plants or animals. 

Habitat Type - A group of plant communities having similar habitat relationships. 

Hard Snag - A snag composed primarily of sound wood, particularly sound sapwood, that is 

generally unmerchantable. 

Harvest - (1) Felling and removal of trees from the forest; (2) removal of game animals or fish 

from a population, typically by hunting or fishing. 

Headwaters - Beginning of a watershed; un-branched tributaries of a stream. 

Hiding Cover - Vegetation capable of hiding 90% of a standing adult deer or elk from human 

view at 200 feet. 

Historic or Natural Range of Variability - The natural fluctuation of ecological and physical 

processes and functions that would have occurred during a specified period of time. Refers to 

the range of conditions that are likely to have occurred prior to settlement of the project 

area by Euro-Americans (approximately the mid 1800s), which would have varied within 

certain limits over time. The range of variability is discussed in this document only as a 

reference point, to establish a baseline set of conditions for which sufficient scientific or 

historical information is available to enable comparison to current conditions. 

Hydrophobic Soil - Soil that does not readily absorb water. Hydrophobic soil is highly 

erodible. It is usually formed during severe fire on coarse textured soils. Hydrophobic soil 

usually returns to a non-hydrophobic condition after one or two winters. 

I 

 

In The Clear – A position within the work area where the probability of hazardous contact 

with falling trees, moving logs, root wads, chunks, material, rigging and equipment is 

minimized by distance from the hazards and/ or use of physical barriers, such as stumps, 

trees, terrain or other objects providing protection. 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 7

Indicator Species - A species that is presumed to be sensitive to habitat changes; population 

changes of indicator species are believed to best indicate the effects of land management 

activities. 

Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) - A group of individuals with different training assembled to 

solve a problem or perform a task. The team is assembled out of recognition that no on 

scientific discipline is sufficiently broad to adequately solve the problem. Through 

interaction, participants bring different points of view to bear on the problem. 

Intermittent Stream - A stream that flows only at certain times of the year when it receives 

water from other streams or from surface sources such as melting snow. 

Irretrievable - Applies primarily to the use of nonrenewable resources. For example, some or 

all of the timber production from an area is irretrievably lost during the time an area is used 

as a road. If the road is decommissioned, timber production can be resumed. The production 

lost is irretrievable, but the action is not irreversible. 

Irreversible - Applies primarily to the use of nonrenewable resources, such as minerals or 

cultural resources, or to those factors such as soil productivity that are renewable only over 

long time periods. Irreversible also includes loss of future options. 

Issue – An unresolved conflict over the use of available resources. Issues are points of 

debate, dispute, or disagreement over the effects of a proposed action. 

L 

Landing – Any designated place where logs are laid after being yarded, and are awaiting 

subsequent handling, loading and hauling. 

Landscape - All the natural features such as hills, forest, and water, which distinguish one 

part of the earth’s surface from another part; usually that portion of land which the eye can 

comprehend in a single view, including all its natural characteristics. 

Large Downed Wood - Logs on the forest floor with a large end diameter of at least 21 

inches. 

Large Woody Debris - Pieces of wood that are of a large enough size to affect stream channel 

morphology. 

Late-Successional Forest - Refers to mature forest characterized by a single or multiple 

canopy layers consisting of large or old trees. Other characteristics of old forests include: 

variability in tree size; increasing numbers of snags and coarse woody debris; increasing 

appearance of decadence, such as broken tops, sparse crowns, and decay in roots and stems; 

canopy gaps and understory patchiness; and old trees relative to the site and species. 

Litter - The uppermost layer of organic debris on the soil surface, which is essentially the 

freshly fallen or slightly decomposed vegetation material such as stems, leaves, twigs, and 

fruits. 

Low Soil Burn Severity- Low soil heating, or light ground char occurs where litter is scorched, 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 8

charred , or consumed, but the duff id left largely intact, although it can be charred on the 

surface. Woody debris accumulation are partially consumed or charred. Mineral soil is not 

changed. 

M 

Management Area - An area with similar management objectives and a common management 

prescription. 

Management Direction - A statement of goals and objectives, management prescriptions, and 

associated standards and guidelines for attaining them. 

Management Indicator Species - Species identified in the Forest Plan that are used to 

monitor the effects of planned management activities on viable populations of wildlife and 

fish, including those that are socially or economically important. 

Maximum Modification – A Visual Quality Objective where land management activities can 

dominate the natural landscape to greater extent than in the modification objective, except 

as viewed from background when visual characteristics must be those of natural occurrences 

within the surrounding area.

Mitigation - Avoiding or minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action 

and its implementation; rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the 

affected environment; reducing or eliminating the impact by preservation and maintenance 

operations during the life of the action. 

Modification – A Visual Quality Objective where land management activities may visually 

dominate the natural surrounding landscape but must borrow from naturally established form, 

line, color, and texture. 

N 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) – A national policy that encourages “productive 

and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment.” NEPA requires Federal agencies 

to: (a) use a systematic interdisciplinary approach in planning and decisionmaking; (b) 

consider the environmental impact of proposed actions; (c) identify adverse environmental 

effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented; (d) consider 

alternatives to the proposed action; (e) consider the relationship between local short0term 

uses of the human environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term 

productivity; and (f) identify any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources 

which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. Establishes a 

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 

O 

 

Old Growth - For all National Forests in the Pacific Northwest Region, an old growth stand is 

defined as any stand of trees 10 acres or greater generally containing the following 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 9

characteristics: 

a) Stands contain mature and over-mature trees in the overstory and are well into the 

mature growth stage (see Handbook of Terminology, Society of American Foresters). 

b) Standing dead trees and down material is present. 

c) Evidence of human activities may be present but may not significantly alter the 

other characteristics and would be a subordinate factor in a description of such a 

stand. 

Open Road - A road or segment that is open to use. 

Open Road Density - The miles of open road in a specific area of land. Commonly miles per 

square mile of land. 

Overstory - The uppermost canopy of the forest when there is more than one level of 

vegetation. 

P 

Partial Harvest – A silvicultural practice where part of the stand is removed and part of the 

stand is retained. Partial harvest is defined as a logging operation that leaves a majority of 

the existing live or dead trees standing after harvest. 

Partial Retention – A Visual Quality Objective where land management activities may be 

evident to the viewer but must remain visually subordinate to the surrounding landscape. 

Pedestal Formation – Stones and pebbles perched on the column of soil they shield from 

rainfall. 

pH – Stands for the “power of Hydrogen.” During photosynthesis, hydrogen ions are created. 

More plant life in the water equates to more hydrogen ions and higher pH levels. 

 

Prescribed Fire - Intentional use of fire under specified conditions to achieve specific 

management objectives. 

Prescribed Natural Fire - The use of unscheduled natural ignitions to meet management 

objectives. Lightning is the primary cause of natural ignition. 

Prescription - A management pathway to achieve a desired objective(s). 

Preservation - Allows only ecological changes. Management activities, except for very low 

visual impact recreation facilities, are prohibited. This objective applies to specially classified 

areas, including wilderness. 

Primary Production – Is the growth and production of biomass by plants. 

Productivity - (1) Soil productivity: the capacity of a soil to produce plant growth, due to the 

soil’s chemical, physical, and biological properties (such as depth, temperature, waterholding capacity and mineral, nutrient, and organic matter content). (2) Vegetative 

productivity: the rate of production of vegetation within a given period. (3) General: the 

innate capacity of an environment to support plant and animal life over time. 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 10

Proper Functioning Condition - Riparian wetland areas are functioning properly when 

adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy 

associated with high water flows, thereby reducing erosion and improving water quality; filter 

sediment, capture bedload, and aid floodplain development; improve flood-water retention 

and ground-water recharge; develop root masses and stabilize stream banks against cutting 

action; develop diverse ponding and channel characteristics to provide the habitat and the 

water depth, duration, and temperature necessary for fish production, waterfowl breeding, 

and other uses, and support greater biodiversity. 

Proposed Action - A proposal by a federal agency to authorize, recommend, or implement an 

action. 

R 

 

Record of Decision - A document separate from but associated with an Environmental Impact 

Statement that states the decision, identifies all alternatives, specifying which were 

environmentally preferable, and states whether all practicable means to avoid environmental 

harm from the alternative have been adopted, and if not, why not (40 CFR 1505.2). 

Reforestation - Treatments or activities that help to regenerate stands of trees after 

disturbances such as harvest or wildfire. Typically, reforestation activities include preparing 

soil, controlling competition, controlling pests, and planting seeds or seedlings. 

Regeneration - The process of establishing new plant seedlings, whether by natural means or 

artificial measures (planting). 

Rehabilitate - To repair and protect certain aspects of a system so that essential structures 

and functions are recovered, even though the overall system may not be exactly as it was 

before. 

Resilient, Resilience, Resiliency - (1) The ability of a system to respond to disturbances. 

Resiliency is one of the properties that enable the system to persist in many different states 

or successional stages. (2) In human communities, refers to the ability of a community to 

respond to externally induced changes such as larger economic or social forces. 

Restoration - Holistic actions taken to modify an ecosystem to achieve desired, healthy, and 

functioning conditions and processes. Generally refers to the process of enabling the system 

to resume acting or continue to act following disturbance as if the disturbances were absent. 

Restoration management activities can be either active (such as control of noxious weeds, 

thinning of over-dense stands of trees, or redistributing roads) or more passive (more 

restrictive, hands-off management direction that is primarily conservation oriented). 

Retention – A Visual Quality Objective where land management activities are not visually 

evident. Management activities are permitted, but the results of those activities on the 

natural landscape must not be evident to the average viewer.

Riparian Area - Area with distinctive soil and vegetation between a stream or other body of 

water and the adjacent upland; includes wetlands and those portions of floodplains and valley 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 11

bottoms that support riparian vegetation. 

Roads and Danger Trees – All danger trees that can be fall or slide onto roadways shall be 

felled a safe distance back from the roadway. Loose rocks, stumps, and other materials that 

obstruct the view at inspections or on sharp curves shall be cleared. 

Road Density - The measure of the degree to which the length of road miles occupies a given 

land area (usually expressed as mile/sq. mile). 

Roadless Area - A National Forest area that (1) is larger than 5,000 acres or, if smaller than 

5,000 acres, is contiguous to a designated wilderness or primitive area; (2) contains no roads; 

and (3) has been inventoried by the Forest Service for possible inclusion in the Wilderness 

Preservation System. 

Runoff - The total stream discharge of water, including both surface and subsurface flaw, 

usually expressed in acre-feet of water yield. 

S 

 

Salmonids- Belong to the family of fish that includes salmon and trout. Some species are 

ocean-going (anadromous) while others are not (resident). 

Salvage Harvest - The harvest of trees that are dead, dying, or deteriorating (e.g. because 

over-mature or materially damaged by fire, wind, insects, fungi, or other injurious agencies) 

before they lose their commercial value as sawtimber. 

Sawtimber - Trees suitable in size and quantity for producing logs that can be processed into 

lumber. 

Scoping - An early and important process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed 

and for identifying the significant issues related to the proposed action. Identifying the 

significant environmental issues deserving of study and de-emphasizing insignificant issues, 

narrowing the scope of the environmental impact statement accordingly (CEQ regulations, 40 

CFR 1501.7). 

Sediment - Solid materials, both mineral and organic, in suspension or transported by 

water, gravity, ice, or air; may be moved and deposited away from their original position and 

eventually will settle out. 

Sensitive Species - Those species which are recognized by the Regional Forester to need 

special management in order to prevent the need for their placement on Federal or State 

lists. 

Seral - Refers to the stages that plant communities go through during succession. 

Developmental stages have characteristic structure and plant species composition. Early seral 

refers to plants that are present soon after a disturbance or at the beginning of a new 

successional process (such as seedling or sapling growth stages in a forest); mid seral in a 

forest would refer to pole or medium sawtimber growth stages; late or old seral refers to 

plants present during a later stage of plant community succession (such as mature and old 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 12

forest stages). 

Seral Stage - The developmental phase of a forest stand or rangeland with characteristic 

structure and plant species composition. 

Shallow Soils - Highly and very highly erodible, unforested, shallow, rocky soils supporting 

low amounts of ground cover. 

Sheet Erosion – Removal of a relatively uniform thin layer of soil from the land surface by 

rainfall and largely unchanneled surface runoff (sheet flow). 

Silviculture - The practice of manipulating the establishment, composition, structure, 

growth, and rate of succession of forests to accomplish specific objectives. 

Site - A specific location of an activity or project, such as a campground, a lake, or a stand of 

trees to be harvested. 

Slash - The residue left on the ground after felling and other silvicultural operations and/or 

accumulating three as a result of storm, fire, girdling, or poisoning of trees. 

Slash Treatment – Includes underburning, grapple piling and burning the piles, hand piling 

and burning the piles, and yarding tops attached. 

Snag - A standing dead tree, usually larger than five feet tall and six inches in diameter at 

breast height. Snags are important as habitat for a variety of wildlife species and their prey. 

Soil - The earth material that has been so modified and acted upon by physical, chemical, and 

biological agents that it will support rooted plants. 

Soil Disturbance - Disturbance, such as displacement or compaction, which may or may not 

be intense enough to be detrimental soil impact. 

Soil- Low Burn Severity- Low soil heating, or light ground char occurs where litter is 

scorched, charred, or consumed, but the duff is left largely intact, although it can be charred 

on the surface. Woody debris accumulation are partially consumed or charred. Mineral soil is 

not changed. 

Soil-Moderate Burn Severity- Moderate soil heating, or moderate ground char, occurs where 

the litter on forest sites is consumed and the duff is deeply charred or consumed, but the 

underlying mineral soil surface is not visibly altered. Light colored ash is present. Woody 

debris is mostly consumed, except for logs, which are deeply charred.

Soil-High Burn Severity - High soil heating, or deep ground char, occurs, where the duff is 

completely consumed and the top of the mineral soils is visibly reddish or orange on severely 

burned sites. Color of the soil below 1 cm is darker or charred from organic material. The 

char layer can extend to a depth of 10 cm or more. Logs can be consumed or deeply charred, 

and deep ground char can occur under slash concentrations or burned logs. Soil textures in 

the surface layers are changed and soil becomes fused.

Stand - A group of trees in a specific area that is sufficiently alike in composition, age, 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 13

arrangement, and condition so as to be distinguishable from the forest in adjoining areas. 

Stand Density - Refers to the number of trees growing in a given area, usually expressed in 

trees per acre. 

Streams (Class I and II) – Are perennial streams that have sea-run (anadromous) and resident 

fish, respectively. 

Streams (Class III) - Are perennial streams that are not occupied by fish. 

Streams (Class IV) – Intermittently flowing streams that dry up in the summer. 

Stream channel - The deepest part of a stream or riverbed through which the main current of 

water flows. 

Structure - The size and arrangement, both vertically and horizontally, of vegetation. 

Subwatershed - A drainage area, equivalent to a 6th-field Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC). 

Hierarchically, subwatersheds (6th-field HUC) are contained within watershed (5th-field 

HUC), which in turn contained within a subbasin (4th-field HUC). The size of subwatersheds 

has recently been redefined as 10,000 to 40,000 acres. 

Surface Erosion - The detachment and transport of individual soil particles by wind, water, or 

gravity. 

T 

Temporary Road - Those roads needed only for the timber sale purchaser’s use. The Forest 

Service and the purchaser must agree to location and clearing widths. Temporary roads are 

used for a single, short-term use (e.g., to haul timber from landings to Forest development) 

and are decommissioned after use. 

Terrestrial - Pertaining to the land. 

Threatened and Endangered Species (T&E) - A species or subspecies of animal or plant 

whose prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy or likely to become 

so within the foreseeable future. Threatened species are identified by the Secretary of 

Interior in accordance with the 1973 Endangered Species Act. 

U 

Underburn - To burn by a surface fire that can consume ground vegetation and ladder fuels. 

Understory - The trees and other woody species that grow beneath the canopy of other 

plants. Usually refers to grasses, forbs, and low shrubs under a tree or shrub canopy. 

Upland - The portion of the landscape above the valley floor or stream. 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 14

V 

 

Viability - In general, viability means the ability of a population of a plant or animal species 

to persist for some specified time into the future. For planning purposes, a viable population 

is one that has the estimated numbers and distribution of reproductive individuals to ensure 

that its continued existence will be well distributed in the planning area. 

Visual Quality - The degree of apparent modification of the natural landscape. 

Visual Quality Objectives (VQOs) - A desired level of management based on physical and 

sociological characteristics of an area. Refers to the degree of acceptable alteration of the 

characteristic landscape. 

W 

Watershed - (1) The region draining into a river, river system, or body of water. (2) Fifthfield watersheds can range in size from 40,000 to 250,000 acres and are made up of multiple 

6th field watersheds. Sixth-field watersheds can range in size from 10,000 to 40,000 acres, 

with some as small as 3,000 acres. 

Wildfire - A human or naturally caused fire that does not meet land management objectives. 

Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) - The line, area, or zone where structures and other human 

development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels. 

Y 

 

Yarding - The hauling of felled timber to the landing or temporary storage site from where 

trucks (usually) transport it to the mill site. Yarding methods include cable yarding, ground 

skidding, and aerial methods such as helicopter yarding. 

Yarding with Tops Attached - Transporting the crown attached to the last log. The last log is 

trimmed and bucked at the landing. This is done to trees that are too large for whole tree 

yarding. 

 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 15

Key Acronyms 

BAER Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation/Response 

BMP Best Management Practices 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CWD Coarse Woody Debris 

DBH Diameter at Breast Height 

EGC Effective Ground Cover 

EIS (DEIS or FEIS) Environmental Impact Statement (Draft or Final) 

IDT Interdisciplinary Team 

KV Knutsen-Vandenberg 

LRMP Land and Resource Management Plan 

LSR Late Successional Reserve 

MIS Management Indicator Species 

MMBF Million Board Feet 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

NFMA National Forest Management Act of 1976 

NFS National Forest System 

PAG Plant Association Group 

PETS Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive species 

ROD Record of Decision 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office 

SOPA Schedule of Proposed Actions 

VQO Visual Quality Objectives 

WA Watershed Analysis 

WEEP Wildfire Effects Evaluation Project 
Glossary and Acronyms 

Glossary and Acronyms - 16

This page intentionally left blank. 
References Cited 

References - 1

References Cited 

Adams, Clarence. Personal Communication – March 23, 2004. 

Adams, W.T., J. Zuo, J.Y. Shimizu, and J. C. Tappeiner. 1998. Impact of Alternative 

Regeneration Methods on Genetic Diversity in Coastal Douglas-Fir. Forest Science, Vol. 

44, No.3, pages 390-396. 

Agee, James K. 1993. Fire Ecology of the Pacific Northwest. Washington, DC: Island Press. 

493 p. 

Altman, B. 2000. Olive-sided flycatcher nest success and habitat relationships in post-fire 

and harvested forests of western Oregon. Unpublished report. 32pp. 

Altman, B. and R. Sallabanks. 2000. Olive-sided Flycatcher. In A. Poole and F. Gill, (eds.) 

The Birds of North America, No. 502. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and 

The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. 

Amaranthus, M. P., D. Page-Dumroese, A. Harvey, E. Cazares, and L. Bednar, 1996. Soil 

compaction and organic matter affect conifer seedling nonmycorrhizal and 

ectomycorrhizal root tip abundance and diversity, USDA Forest Service, PNW-RP-494. 

Amaranthus, M., H.Jubas, and D. Arthur. 1989. Stream shading, summer streamflow and 

maximum water temperature following intense wildfire in headwater streams. 

Amman, Gene D., and Kevin C. Ryan. 1991. Insect Infestation of Fire-Injured Trees in the 

Greater Yellowstone Area. 

Anderson, Hal E. 1982. Aids to Determining Fuel Models for Estimating Fire Behavior. 

Gen.Tech. Rep. INT-122. 

Anthony, R.G., Forsman, E.D., Green, G.A., Witmer, G. and S.K. Nelson. 1987. Small 

mammal populations in riparian zones of different-aged coniferous forests. The Murrelet 

68, 94–102. 

Anthony R., S. Ackers, R. Claremont, J. LaVoie, D. Giessler, N. Seaman, J. Schilling and S. 

Turner-Hane. 2002a. The ecology of northern spotted owls (Strix occidentalis caurina) on 

the Willamette National Forest, Oregon: Habitat use and demography. Annual research 

report. 27p. 

Anthony R., S. Andrews, F. Wagner, W. King, T. O’Brien, T. Phillips, G. Rible and M. 

Shannon. 2002b. Demographic characteristics of spotted owls (Strix occidentalis caurina) 

in the Southern Oregon Cascades. Annual research report. 23p. 

Arnett, E. and J.P. Hayes. 2002. Influence of landscape characteristics on abundance and 

use of habitat by bat communities in the central Oregon Cascades. Cooperative Forest 

Ecosystem Research Program – CFER annual report. Corvallis, OR. p. 51-53. 
References Cited 

References - 2

Aubry, K.B., M.J. Crites and S.D. West. 1991. Regional patterns of small mammal 

abundance and community composition of Oregon and Washington. Pages 285-94 in L. F. 

Ruggiero, K. B. Aubry, A. B. Carey, and M. H. Huff, tech. coords. Wildlife and vegetation 

of unmanaged Douglas-fir forests. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-285. Portland, 

OR. 

Aubry, K.B. and C.M. Raley. 2002. Ecological characteristics of fishers in the southern 

Oregon Cascade Range. Final progress report: June 2002. USDA For. Serv., Pacific 

Northwest Research Station, Olympia, WA.

Aubry, K.B. and J.C. Lewis. 2003. Extirpation and reintroduction of fishers (Martes 

pennanti) in Oregon: implications for their conservation in the Pacific states. Biological 

Conservation, in press. 

Barker, Paul F. 1989. Timber salvage operations and watershed resource values. In: Berg, 

Neil H., tech. coord. Proceedings of the symposium on fire and watershed management; 

1988 October 26-28; Sacramento, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-109. Berkeley, CA: USDA 

Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 1-2. Available 

from: National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; PB89-228639. 

Bate, L.J., Garton, E.O. and M.J. Wisdom. 1999. Estimating snag and large tree densities 

and distributions on a landscape for wildlife management. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-425. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 76 p. 

Bouwman, Alex F., and Rik Leemans. 1995. The Role of Forest Soils in the Global Carbon 

Cycle. Carbon Forms and Functions in Forest Soils. Mcfee and Kelly Editors. Copyright, 

Soil Science Society of America. 

Bendell, J. F. 1974. Effects of fire on birds and mammals. Pages 73-138 in T.T. Kozlowski 

and C.E. Ahlgren, eds. Fire and ecosystems. Academic Press, New York. 

Bennett, K.A. 1982. Report to the Siuslaw National Forest. Effects of slash burning on 

surface soil erosion rates in the Oregon Coast Range. 

 

Beschta, Robert L. 1990. Effects of fire on water quantity and quality. In: Walstad, John 

D., S.R. Radosevich, D.V. Sandberg, eds. Natural and prescribed fire in Pacific Northwest 

Forest. Corvallis, Oregon State University Press: 219-232 . 

Beschta et. al. 1995. Wildfire and Salvage Logging: Recommendations for Ecologically 

Sound Post Fire Salvage Management and Other Post-Fire Treatments on Federal Lands in 

the West. 

Bjornn, T.C. and D. W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat Requirements of Salmonids in Streams: 

Influences of Forest and Range Management on Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats. 

American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19. Bethesda, MD, USA. 

Bouwman and Leemans 1995. The Role of Forest Soils in the Global Carbon Cycle. Carbon 

Forms and Functions in Forest Soils. Mcfee and Kelly Editors. Copyright, Soil Science 

Society of America. 
References Cited 

References - 3

Brown, G. W. 1969. Predicting temperatures of small streams. Water Resource. Res 5 

(1):68-75. 

Brown, James K. 1980. Influence of harvesting and residues on fuels and fire 

management. In: Proceedings, Environmental consequences of timber harvesting in Rocky 

Mountain coniferous forests; 1979 September 11-13; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT90. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 

417-432. 

Brown, J., Reinhardt, E., and Kramer, K. 2001. Coarse woody debris and succession in the 

recovering forest. USDA Forest Service. 

Carey, A.B. 1991. The Biology of arboreal rodents in Douglas-fir forests. USDA Forest 

Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-276. 46pp. 

Catton, T.J.. December 2001. Personal communication on fishers. 

Choromanska U. and T.H. De Luca. 2001. 

Cissel, J.H., F.J. Swanson, G.E. Grant, D.H. Olson, G.V. Stanley, S.L. Garman, L.R. 

Ashkenas, M.G. Hunter, J.A. Kertis, J.H. Mayo, M.D. McSwain, S.G. Swetland, K.A. 

Swindle and D.O. Wallin. 1998. A landscape plan based on historical fire regimes for a 

managed forest ecosystem: the Augusta Creek study. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-422. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 82pp. 

Cissel, John; ed. 2002. Blue River Landscape Study: Landscape Management and 

Watershed Restoration Strategy – Version 2. Unpublished report. Available on line at: 

http://www.fsl.orst.edu/ccem/brls/BRLPV2.pdf. 

Cole, E.K., M.D. Pope and R.G. Anthony. 1997. Effects of road management on movement 

and survival of Roosevelt elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 61(4):1115-1126. 

Cristy, R.E. and S.D. West. 1993. Biology of bats in Douglas-fir forests. USDA Forest 

Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-308. 27pp. 

Cross, S.P., H. Lauchstedt and C. Harmes. 1996. Characterizing forest roost sites of some 

bats of special concern occurring in Roseburg and Medford BLM Districts. Final Report – 

Department of Biology. Southern Oregon State College, Ashland, OR. 47pp. 

Dambacher, J. M. 1991. Distribution, abundance, and emigration of juvenile steelhead 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss), and analysis of stream habitat in the Steamboat Creek basin, 

Oregon Master’s thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis. 

Davis, Raymond J. 2003. Snag and down wood inventory of the Baked Apple Planning 

Area. On file at the North Umpqua Ranger District. 

Delaney, D.K., T.G. Grubb, P. Beier, L.L. Pater and M.H. Reiser. 1999. Effects of 

helicopter noise on nesting Mexican spotted owls. Journal of Wildlife Management. 63: 60–

76. 
References Cited 

References - 4

Denning, Cliff, 1994, Root Strength and Tree Surcharge (Section 4F): in, David E. Hall, 

Michael T. Long, and Michael D. Remboldt, eds., Slope Stability Reference Guide for 

National Forests in the United States: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Forest Service, Engineering 

Staff, Washington, DC, EM-7170-14, v. II, p. 543-548. 

Dietrich, William E., and David R. Montgomery.1998. SHALSTAB, A digital terrain model 

for mapping shallow landslide potential: Technical Report, National Council of the Paper 

Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Corvallis, Oregon, 26p.

Duncan, Nancy. February 2003. Personal communication. Survey and Manage Mollusk 

Taxa Lead. p108. 

Elliot, W. J., and D. E. Hall, 1997. Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) forest 

applications. General Technical Report INT-GTR-365. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

Elliot, W. J., Robicaud, P. R. and D. E. Hall, Cuhaciyan, C. O., Pierson F. B., Wohlgemuth, 

P. M. 2001. A Probabilistic Approach To Modeling Erosion For Spatially Varied Conditions, 

Presentation to American Society of Agriculture Engineers, Sacramento, California. 

Emerson, Clint. June 2003. Personal communication on Apple Fire revegetation.

Everett, Richard. 1995. Letter dated August 16 to John Lowe. Review of Beschta 

document. 8 p. On file with: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 

1133 N. Western Ave., Wenatchee, WA 98801. 

Evers, L. 2002. Addressing the issues raised in the 1995 Beschta Report on Post-fire 

Salvage Logging, Oregon State Office, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon. 

Farrell, T., M. Widmann and R. Davis. 1996. Report on the 1995-96 survey to determine 

the occurrence, distribution and habitat associations of wolverine, fisher and marten in 

the Umpqua National Forest. ODFW Report 95-2-04. 22pp. 

FEIS. 2003. Fire effects information system database. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory. Available online: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis. 

FEMAT. 1993. Forest Ecosystem Management: an ecological, economic and social 

assessment. Report of the Forest Ecosystem Management Team. 

Finney, Mark A. 1998. FARSITE; Fire Area Simulator – Model Development and Evaluation. 

RMRS–RP –4. Ogden, UT; USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 47pp. 

Fischer, W.C. 1980. Prescribed fire and bark beetle attack in ponderosa pin forest. Fire 

Management Notes. 4: 10-12. 

Flanagan, P. 1996. Survival of fire-injured conifers. Fire Management Notes 56: 13-16. 

Flanagan, S.A., M.J. Furniss, T.S. Ledwith, S. Thiesen, M. Love, K. Moore, J. Ory. 1998. 

Methods for inventory and environmental risk assessment of road drainage crossings. 

USDA, Forest Service. San Dimas Technology and Development Center, San Dimas, CA. 
References Cited 

References - 5

Fontaine, B. L. 1988. An evaluation of the effectiveness of instream structures for 

steelhead trout rearing habitat in the Steamboat Creek basin. Master’s thesis. Oregon 

State University, Corvallis. 

Forde, Jon D. 1983. The effect of fire on bird and small mammal communities in the 

grasslands of Wind Cave National Park. Masters Thesis. Michigan Technological University. 

Houghton, MI. 140pp. 

Forsman, E.D., E.C. Meslow and H.M. Wight. 1984. Distribution and biology of the spotted 

owl in Oregon. Wildlife Monographs 87. 64 pp. 

Forsman, E.D., J. A. Reid, S.A. Graham, J.S. Mowdy and A.L. Price. 2002. Demographic 

characteristics of northern spotted owls (Strix occidentalis) on the Tyee study area, 

Roseburg, Oregon: 1985-2002. Annual research report. 12p. 

Franklin A.B., K.P. Burnham, G.C. White, R.J. Anthony, E.D. Forsman, C. Schwarz, J.D. 

Nichols and J. Hines. 1999. Range-wide status and trends in northern spotted owl 

populations. Status report. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO and Oregon State 

University, Corvallis, OR. 71pp. 

Furniss, M .M. 1965. Susceptibility of fire-injured Douglas-fir to bark beetle in southern 

Idaho. Journal of Forestry 63: 8-11. 

Furniss, R. L., and V. M. Carolin. 1977. Western forest insects. USDA Forest Service. 

Miscellaneous Publications No. 1339. 654 p. 

Furniss, M.J., T.S. Ledwith, M. Love, B.C. McFadin, and S.A. Flanagan. 1998. Response 

of road-stream crossings to large flood events in Washington, Oregon, and 

Gebert, Krista M., & Charles E. Keegan III, Sue Willits, Al Chase. 2002. Utilization of 

Oregon’s Timber harvest and Associated Direct Economic Effects. Pacific Northwest 

Research Station General Technical Report ONW-GTR-52. 

Gomez, D.M. and R.G. Anthony. 1998. Small mammal abundance in riparian and upland 

areas of five seral stages in western Oregon. Northwest Sci. 72:293–302. 

Good, D.A. and D.B. Wake. 1992. Geographic variation and speciation in the torrent 

salamanders of the genus Rhyacotriton (Caudata: Rhyacotritonidae). Univ. California 

Publications in Zoology. 126:1-91 

Graham, S. A. 1925. The felled tree trunk as an ecological unit. Ecology 6(4): 397-411. 

Grifantini, Michael C.; Stuart, J.D.; Fox, L., III. 1991. Deer habitat changes following 

wildfire, salvage logging and reforestation, Klamath Mountains, California. In: 

Proceedings of the symposium on biodiversity; 1991 October 28-30; Santa Rosa, CA. [Place 

of publication unknown]: [publisher unknown]: 163-167. As cited in: Mclver, James D. and 

Lynn Starr. Tech eds. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire logging: literature review 

and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 72p. 
References Cited 

References - 6

Grinnell, J. and T.I. Storer. 1924. Animal life in the Yosemite. University of California 

Press, Berkeley, CA. 

Hadfield, J.S., and R.W. Magelssen. 2000. Wood changes in fire-killed eastern Washington 

tree species- year five progress report. USDA Forest Service Wenatchee Service Center. 

34p. 

Hagar, J.C., W.C. McComb, and C.C. Chambers. 1995. Effects of forest practices on 

wildlife, Chapter 9 in R.L. Beschta, J.R. Boyle, C.C. Chambers [and others]. Cumulative 

effects of forest practices in Oregon: literature and synthesis. Prepared for Oregon 

Department of Forestry. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 

Harrington, M.G. 1987. Ponderosa pine mortality from spring, summer, and fall crown 

scorching. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 2: 14-16. 

Heinemeyer, K.S. and J.L. Jones. 1994. Fisher biology and management in the western 

United States. USDA Forest Service and Interagency Forest Carnivore Working Group 

Report. 109pp 

Helvey, J.D., A.R. Tiedemann, and T.D. Anderson. 1985. Plant nutrient losses by soil 

erosion and mass movement after wildfire. Journal of Soil Water Conservation 40:168-173. 

Hermann, Richard K., and William W. Chilcote 1965. effect of seedbeds on germinations 

and survival of Douglas-fir. Oregon State University, School of Forestry, Forest Research 

Laboratory Research Paper 4. Corvallis. 28 pages. 

Huff, M., J. Henshaw and E. Laws. 1997. Great gray owl survey status and evaluation of 

guidelines for the Northwest forest plan. Available online at the following URL: 

http://www.or.blm.gov/surveyandmanage/SP/Great%20Gray%20Owl/icover.htm 

Hunter, M.G. 1998. Watershed-level patterns among stream amphibians in the Blue River 

watershed, West-Central Cascades of Oregon. Masters Thesis, Oregon State Univ., 

Corvallis, OR. 97pp. 

Hutto, R.L. 1995. Composition of bird communities following stand-replacement fires in 

northern Rocky Mountain (USA) conifer forests. Conservation Biology 9(5):1041-1058. 

Isaacs, Frank. September 2003. Personal communication on bald eagles. 

Jones, J. A., and G. E. Grant. 1996. Peak flow responses to clear-cutting and roads in 

small and large basins, Western Cascades, Oregon. American Geophysical Union. Water 

Resources Research, vol. 32 (4): 959-974. 

Jones, J. A. 2000. Hydrologic processes and peak flow discharge response to forest 

removal, regrowth and roads in ten small experimental basins, Western Cascades, Oregon. 

Water Resources Research. 

Jurgensen, M. F., A. E Harvey, R. T. Graham, D. S. Page-Dumroese, J. R. Tonn, M.J. 

Larsen, and T.B. Jain. 1997. Impacts of timber harvesting on soil organic matter, nitrogen, 

productivity and health of Inland Northwest forests. For. Sci. 43: 234-251. 
References Cited 

References - 7

Kimmey, J.W. 1955. Rate of deterioration of fire-killed timber in California. USDA 

Circular No. 962. Washington, D.C. 22 p. 

Kimmey, J.W., and R.L. Furniss. 1943. Deterioration of fire-killed Douglas-fir. USDA 

Technical Bulletin No. 851. Washington, D.C. 61 p. 

Kimmins, J. P. 1996. Forest Ecology, A Foundation for Sustainable Management. 2nd ed. 

Prentice-Hall. NJ. p61. 

Kline, LeRoy. 1996. 1995 “forest health” update. Unpublished paper presented to the 

Oregon Board of Forestry. 5 p. Available from: http://www.odf.state.or.us/FH/

BDFOR.HTM. 

Klock, G.O. 1975. Impacts of five post-fire salvage logging systems on soil and vegetation. 

J. of Soil and Water Conservation. 30(2): 78-81. 

Lancaster, S.T., S.K. Hayes and G.E. Grant. 2001. Modeling sediment and wood storage 

and dynamics in small mountainous watersheds. Geomorphic Process and Riverine Habitat 

Water Science and Application. Vol 4, pages 85-102. 

Landsberg, Johanna and A. R. Tiedemann. 2002. Fire Management. In: Dissmeyer G.E., ed. 

Drinking water from forest and grasslands. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-39 Ashville, North 

Carolina: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 124-138. 

Leonard, W.P., H.A. Brown, L.L.C. Jones, K.R. McAllister and R.M. Storm. 1993. 

Amphibians of Washington and Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, WA. 168pp. 

Lightcap, Scott. September 2003. Personal communication regarding the Diamond Lake 

Restoration Project. 

Lint J., R. Horn, F. Oliver, C. Larson, , K. Krause, M. O’Hara, M. Oleri, H. Wise, M. Irwin, 

K. Fukuda and P. Colvard. 2002. Demographic characteristics of northern spotted owls 

(Strix occidentalis caurina) in the Klamath Mountain Province of Oregon 1983-2002. 

Annual research report. 23p. 

Lint, Joe. 2003. Personal communication on northern spotted owls. 

Lowell, E.C., S.A. Willets, and R.L. Krahmer. 1992. Deterioration of fire-killed timber in 

the western United States. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station 

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-292. 27 p. 

Lowell, Eini C., & James M. Cahill. 1996 Deterioration of Fire Killed Timber in Southern 

Oregon and Northern California. West. J. Appl. For. 11(4):125-131. 

Lyon, L.J, M.H. Huff, R.G. Hooper, E.S. Telfer, D.S. Schreiner and J.K. Smith (eds.). 

2000. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on fauna. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR42-vol. 1. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 83pp. 

Marcot, Bruce G., Kim Mellen, Janet L. Ohmann, Karen L. Waddell, Elizabeth A. Willhite, 

Bruce B. Hostetler, Susan A. Livingston, Catherine Ogden, and Tina Dreisbach. 2002. The 

DecAID repository: background information for DecAID, the decayed wood advisor for 
References Cited 

References - 8

managing snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in forests of 

Washington and Oregon. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station and 

Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon. 

Marshall, D.B., M.G. Hunter and A.L. Contreras, Eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR 768 pp. 

Martin, D.A. and J.A. Moody. 2001. Comparison of Soil Infiltration Rates in Burned and 

Unburned Mountainous Watersheds. Hydrol. Process, 15. PP 2893-2903.

McCullough, B. 1991. Final report of a cavity nesting bird study on the Mount Hood 

National Forest. Unpublished report. 30pp. 

Mclver, James D. and Lynn Starr. Tech eds. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire 

logging: literature review and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 72p. 

McDade, M. H., F. J. Swanson, W. A. Mckee, J. F. Franklin, and J. Van Sickle. 1990. 

Source distances for coarse woody debris entering small streams in western Oregon and 

Washington. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 20: 326-330. 

McDonald, Lee H., Alan W. Smart, Robert C. Wissmar, 1991. Monitoring guidelines to 

evaluate effects of forestry activities on streams in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska: U. 

S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Division, and Center of Streamside Studies. 

EPA/910/-91-001, 166 p. 

McGarigal, K. 1993. Relationships between landscape structure and avian abundance 

patterns in the Oregon Coast Range. Ph.D. diss., Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 

McGarigal, K. and W.C. McComb. 1995. Relationships between landscape structure and 

breeding birds in the Oregon Coast Range. Ecol. Monogr. 65(3):235-260. 

Mellen, K. and A. Ager. 2002. A coarse wood dynamics model for the western Cascades. in

W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr., P.J. Shea, B.E. Valentine, C.P. Weatherspoon and T.E. Lisle 

(Ed.). Proceedings of the symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in 

western forests, 2-4 November 1999, Reno, Nevada. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Southwest Research Station General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181:503-516. 

 

Miller, J.M., and F.P. Keen. 1960. Biology and control of the western pine beetle: a 

summary of the first fifty years of research. USDA Forest Service Miscellaneous Publication 

No. 800. 381 p. 

Montgomery, David R., Wright, Robert H., and Booth, Thom. 1991. Debris flow hazard 

mitigation for colluviums field swales: Bulletin of the Assoc. of Engineering Geologists, 

V.XXVIII, No 3, p. 303-323. 

Monleon, V. J., K. Cromack Jr., and J.D. Lansberg. 1997. Short - and long term effects of 

prescribed underburning on nitrogen availability in ponderosa pine stands in central 

Oregon. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 27(3): 369-378. 
References Cited 

References - 9

Murphy, M. L., and K. V. Koski. 1989. Input and depletion of woody debris in Alaska 

streams and implications for streamside management. North American Journal of Fisheries 

Management 9: 427-436. 

Nussbaum, R. A., E. D. Brodie, Jr. and R. M. Storm. 1983. Amphibians and reptiles of the 

Pacific Northwest. Univ. Press of Idaho. 332pp. 

ODFW. 2003. Oregon’s elk management plan. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 

Portland, OR. 58pp. 

Ohmann J. L., W.C. McComb and A.A. Zumrawi. 1994. Snag abundance for primary cavitynesting birds on nonfederal forestlands in Oregon and Washington. Wildlife Society 

Bulletin 22(4):607-620. 

Oliver C. D. and B. C. Larsen. 1996. Forest Stand Dynamics. Wiley and Sons, Inc. New 

York. 

OLMIS. Oregon Labor Market Information System. (2000). Summary Covered Employment 

and Payroll Report, Douglas County, 2000. Oregon Employment Department. Available at 

WWW: http://www.olmis.org

OMB A-94. Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-94. (1992, October, revised 

1999). Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs. 

Washington, D. C: Author. 

Ormsbee, Pat. July 2002. Personal communication on bats. 

Page-Dumerose, Deborah; Jurgenen, M; Harvey, A. 2002. Fire and Fire Suppression 

Impacts on Forest Soil Carbon. Rocky Mountain Research Library, (Unpublished final 

Report #00-JV-11222062-550). 

Park, Chris 2003. Draft, sufficiency Analysis for Stream Temperature: evaluation of the 

adequacy of the Northwest Forest Plan Riparian Reserves to achieve and maintain stream 

temperature water quality standards. U. S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land 

Management. 

Partners In Flight (PIF). 2000. Landbird conservation plan: Westside coniferous forests. 

Partners in Flight. http://community.gorge.net/natres/pif/westside_page1.html. 

Perry, D.A., R. Molina, and M.P. Amaranthus. 1987. Mycorrhizae, mycorrhizospheres, and 

reforestation: current knowledge and research needs. Canadian Journal of Forest 

Research. 17(8):929-940. 

Peterson, D. L. and M. J. Arbaugh. 1986. Post fire survival in Douglas-fir and lodgepole 

pine: comparing the effects of crown and bole damage. Canadian Journal of Forest 

Research 16:1175-1179. 

Pilliod, D.S., R.B. Bury, E.J. Hyde, C.A. Pearl and P.S. Corn. 2003. Fire and amphibians in 

North America. Forest Ecology and Management. 178(1-2): 163-181. 
References Cited 

References - 10

Radtke, Sherman and Rudolph V. Edwards, Jr. 1976. Soil Resources Inventory. R-6, 

Umpqua National Forest, Roseburg, OR. 

Robichaud, P. R. and R.E. Brown. 1999. What Happened After the Smoke Cleared: Onsite 

Erosion Rates After a Wildfire in Eastern Oregon. Proceeding of the Annual Summer 

Specialty Conference (Track 2: Wildland Hydrology), 419-426. June 30-July 2, 1999, 

Bozeman, MT. Herndon, VA: American Water Resources Association. 

Rothermel, Richard C. 1983. How to Predict the Spread and Intensity of Forest and Range 

Fires, PMS 436-1, NFES 1573, June 1983. 

Ryan, K. C. 1990. Predicting prescribed fire effects on trees in the interior West. In; M. E. 

Alexander, G. F. Bisgrove technical advisors. The art and science of fire management. 

Proceedings of the First Interior West Fire Council Annual Meeting. Forestry Canada, 

Northern Forestry Center. P. 148-162. 

Ryan, K. C. and W. H. Frandsen. 1991. Basal injury from smoldering fires in mature Pinus 

Ponderosa Laws. International Journal of Wildland Fire 1: 107-118. 

Society of American Foresters. 1996. The role of “salvage” and “sanitation” harvesting in 

the restoration and maintenance of healthy forests [Position paper]. Available from: 

Society of American Foresters web page: www.safnet.org. 

Sauer, J. R., J.E. Hines and J. Fallon. 2003. The North American breeding bird survey, 

results and analysis 1966 - 2002. Version 2003.1, USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, 

Laurel, MD.

Scott, D.W., J. Szymoniak, and V. Rockwell. 1996. Entomological concerns regarding burn 

characteristics and fire effects on tree species during prescribed landscape burns: burn 

severity guidelines and mitigation measures to minimize fire injuries. USDA Forest Service, 

Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. BMZ 97-1. 48 p. 

Schwendeman, T. 1981. Dust Control Study, Gallatin National Forest. USDA Forest 

Service Region 1. 

Schultz, Dave. (1994, November) Deterioration of Salvage Trees. Forest Pest 

Management. 

Sessions, J., R. Buckman, M. Newton, and J. Hamann. 2003. The Biscuit Fire: 

Management Options for Forest Regeneration, Fire and Insect Risk Reduction, and Timber 

Salvage. College of Forestry, Oregon State University. 63 pp. 

Sexton, Timothy O. 1994. Ecological effects of post-wildfire salvage-logging on vegetation 

diversity, biomass, and growth and survival of Pinus ponderosa and Purshia tridentata. 

Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Department of Rangeland Resources. 28 p. 

Unpublished manuscript. On file with: Department of Rangeland Resources, Strand 

Agriculture Hall, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331. As cited in: Mclver, James 

D. and Lynn Starr. Tech eds. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire logging: literature 

review and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 72p. 
References Cited 

References - 11

Shakesby, Richard A.; Coelho, Celeste de O.A.; Ferreira, António D. and others. 1993. 

Wildfire impacts on soil erosion and hydrology in wet Mediterranean forest, Portugal. 

International Journal of Wildland Fire. 3(2): 95-110. As cited in: Mclver, James D. and 

Lynn Starr. Tech eds. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire logging: literature review 

and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 72p. 

Sidle, Roy, 1985, Factors influencing the stability of slopes; in Proceedings of a Workshop 

on Slope Stability, Problems and Solutions in Forest Management: U.S Dept. of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-180, p. 17-25 

Simon, Jerry, Stephen Christy, and Joseph Vessels. 1994. Clover-Mist fire recovery: a 

forest management response. Journal of Forestry. November: 41-44. 

Siskiyou National Forest, 1997. Unpublished report Soil Disturbances from Helicopter 

Yarding in the Upper Pistol Timber Sale. Southwestern Oregon. 

Sonoran, Institute. 2003. Population, Employment, Earnings and Personal Income Trends, 

Douglas County, OR. Sonoran Institute, Bozeman, Montana. 

Spetler, Henry. 2002. Sawmill Closures, Openings, and Net Capacity Changes in the 

Softwood Lumber Sector, 1996-2003. Res. Pap. FPL-RP-603. Madison, WI: USDA, Forest 

Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 

Spies, Thomas A.; Franklin, Jerry F. 1988. Old growth and forest dynamics in the Douglasfir region of western Oregon and Washington. Natural Areas Journal. 8(3): 190-201. 

[7248]. 

Stevenson, Dwayne & Mark Miller, Kathi Riddell. 2001. Employment Projections by 

Occupation 2000-2010, region 6 (Douglas County). Oregon Employment Department, 

Salem, OR. 

Swanston, Douglas N., and Frederick J. Swanson, 1976. Timber harvesting, mass erosion 

and steep land forest geomorphology in the Pacific Northwest: in Coates, Donald R., ed., 

Geomorphology and Engineering, Dowden, Hutchison & Ross, Inc. Stroudsburg, PA., p. 

199-221. 

Swezy, D. M. and J. K. Agree. 1990. Prescribed fire effects on fire fine roots and tree 

mortality in old-growth ponderosa pine. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 21:626-634. 

Thomas, J.W. 2002. Dead wood: Foresters bane to environmental boon. In W. F. 

Laudenslayer, Jr., P.J. Shea, B.E. Valentine, C.P. Weatherspoon and T.E. Lisle (Ed.). 

Proceedings of the symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western 

forests, 2-4 November 1999, Reno, Nevada. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest 

Research Station General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181. p. 3-9 

Thomas, T. L., and J. K. Agee., 1986. Prescribed fire effects on mixed conifer forest 

structure at Crater Lake, Oregon. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 16:1082-1087. 

Toweill D. and J. W. Thomas (eds.). 2002. North American elk: ecology and management. 

Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press. 1128pp. 
References Cited 

References - 12

USDA Forest Service. 1975. Region 6 dead tree (snag) management policy. USDA Forest 

Service Manual 2405.14, Portland, OR. 

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. 

Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. 

USDA Forest Service. 1994. American marten, fisher, lynx and wolverine in the western 

United States. USDA Forest Service, General Tech. Report RM-254, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 184pp. 

USDA Forest Service. 1997. Idaho Panhandle National Forest, Sand Point Ranger District. 

Water Quality Effects of Three Dust Abatement Compounds. 

USDA Forest Service. 1999. San Dimas Technology and Development Center. Dust Palliative 

Selection and Application Guide. 

USDA Forest Service. 1999. Umpqua National Forest peregrine falcon site management 

plan. Working draft. Umpqua National Forest, Roseburg, OR. 49pp 

USDA Forest Service. 2000. Landbird strategic plan. Washington, DC. 21pp. 

USDA, Forest Service. 2001. Middle North Umpqua Watershed Analysis. Umpqua National 

Forest. 

USDA Forest Service. 2001a. Watershed Analysis: North Umpqua River Wild and Scenic 

Corridor. North Umpqua Ranger District. 

USDA Forest Service. 2002. Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) report for the 2002 

Apple Fire. 

USDA Forest Service. 2003. Umpqua National Forest. Wildfire Effects Evaluation Project. 

USDA Forest Service. 2003a. Umpqua National Forest. Baked Apple Roads Analysis. North 

Umpqua Ranger District. 

USDA Forest Service, USDA Bureau of Land Management, and Oregon State Parks and 

Recreation Department. 1992. North Umpqua Wild and Scenic River. Environmental 

Assessment. 

USDA/USDI, 1994. Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl and 

it’s Amendments. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1994. Final supplemental 

environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and oldgrowth forest related species within the range of the northern spotted owl, Appendix J2 – 

Results of additional species analysis. Portland, Oregon. 475pp. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1995. Great gray owl survey 

protocol. Portland, OR. 26 pp. 
References Cited 

References - 13

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2000. Management 

recommendations for the Oregon red tree vole (Arborimus longicaudus). Version 2.0. 

Portland, Oregon. 25pp. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2001. Record of decision for 

amendments to the survey and manage, protection buffer and other mitigation measures 

standards and guidelines. Portland, Oregon. 106pp. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2003. Supplemental direction for 

identification of non-high priority sites for red tree vole within the "Pilot" Area. USDA 

Forest Service memorandum, BLM Instruction Memorandum OR-2003-062. 

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

1998. South cascades late successional reserve assessment. Umpqua National Forest, 

Roseburg, OR. 255pp. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1999. Field guide to survey and manage terrestrial 

mollusk species from the Northwest Forest Plan. USDI Bureau of Land Management, 

Portland, OR. 114pp. 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 1982. Recovery plan for peregrine falcon (Pacific 

population). Portland, Oregon. 87pp. 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. 12-Month finding for a petition to list the southern 

torrent salamander. Federal register 65(109):35951-35956. 

USGS - United States Geological Survey. 1996. Water quality and algal conditions in the 

North Umpqua River Basin, Oregon, 1992-95, and implications for resource management. 

Verts, B.J. and L.N. Carraway. 1998. Land mammals of Oregon. Univ. of California Press, 

Berkley, CA. 800pp. 

Vesely, D. 1997. Terrestrial amphibian abundance and species richness in headwater 

riparian buffer strips, Oregon Coast Range. Master's thesis. Oregon State University, 

Corvallis. 

Weatherby, J.C., R.A. Progar, and P.J. Mocettini. 2001. Evaluation of tree survival on the 

Payette National Forest 1995-1999. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region. FHP 

Report R4-01-01. 29 p. 

Weatherspoon, P. 1988. Evaluating damage to trees from the 1987 wildfires. In: Oregon 

State University Extension Service Forestry Intensified Research (FIR) Report: Special Fire 

Issue. 9:13-14. 

Wei, X., J.P. Kimmins, and G. Zhou. 2003. Disturbances and the sustainability of longterm site productivity in lodgepole pine forests in the central interior of British Columbia – 

an ecosystem modeling approach. Ecological Modeling, Volume 164, Issues 203. Pages 

239-256. 
References Cited 

References - 14

Weller, T.J. and C.J. Zabel. 2001. Characteristics of fringed myotis day roosts in northern 

California. J. Wildl. Manage. 65(3):489-497. 

Wemple, B. C., J.A. Jones, and G. E. Grant.1996 Channel network extension by logging 

roads in two basins, Western Cascades, Oregon. Water Resources Bulletin, American Water 

Resource Association. 32 (6): 1195-1207 

White, D.E., T. Atzet, P.A. Martinez and L.A. McCrimmon. 2002. Dead Wood and Fire 

Relationships in Southwestern Oregon Western Hemlock Forests. In W. F. Laudenslayer, 

Jr., P.J. Shea, B.E. Valentine, C.P. Weatherspoon and T.E. Lisle (Ed.). Proceedings of the 

symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western forests, 2-4 

November 1999, Reno, Nevada. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station 

General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181:479-487. 

Wilson, Larry 1999. Snagfall submodel for SNFP growth and yield model. Paper dated 

August 12th, 1999. 

Wright, Henry A. and Arthur W. Bailey. 1982. Fire Ecology: United States and Southern 

Canada. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 501 pages.