United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest

Service

Willamette National Forest

McKenzie River Ranger District

57600 McKenzie Hwy.

McKenzie Bridge, Oregon 97413

Tel (541) 822-3381

FAX (541) 822-7254

Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper 

File Code: 2670 Date: June 7, 2016

Route To: Files

Subject: Biological Evaluation – Green Mountain Project

To: Terry Baker – District Ranger

James Rudisill – Team Leader

The purpose of this biological evaluation (BE) is to document the potential effects of the 

proposed action on listed species. The two species that will be evaluated are bull trout 

(Salvelinus confluentus) and Upper Willamette spring Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus 

tshawytscha). Both of these species are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species 

Act.

In addition, three special status species (a Forest Service designation) will be assessed. These 

species are caddisflies on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List.

Summary of Effects Determination:

LISTED SPECIES or HABITAT ESA 

STATUS

ESA / EFH 

DETERMINATION

Upper Willamette River Chinook Salmon – Evolutionarily 

Significant Unit (ESU) Threatened May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect

Upper Willamette River Chinook Salmon – Critical Habitat Designated May Affect, Will not 

Adversely Modify

Upper Willamette River Chinook Salmon – Essential Fish 

Habitat Designated Will Not Adversely Affect

Bull Trout – Distinct Population Segment (DPS) Threatened May Affect, Likely to 

Adversely Affect

Bull Trout – Critical Habitat Designated May Affect, Will not 

Adversely Modify

Caddisflies 

Regional 

Sensitive 

Species List

Beneficial Impact
Project Location: The Green Mountain Project is located in the South Fork McKenzie River 

watershed and all timber harvest units are upstream of Cougar Dam. 

Proposed Action: The purpose and need for the Green Mountain Project is to provide forest 

products, increase stream-side vegetative diversity, increase in-stream habitat complexity and 

productivity (i.e. increase forest structure, reduce tree density, and increase tree species 

diversity - particularly hardwoods), and shift the age-class and structural diversity of the forest 

in the project area and surrounding landscape by regenerating managed stands.

The proposed actions would respond to the purpose and need by treating (harvest and skips) 

approximately 4,420 acres of stands ranging in age from approximately 26-144 years old. 

Treatments would sustainably harvest 3,326 acres of timber in 134 units (see maps in appendix) 

which will net approximately 64 million board feet of wood. Approximately 447 acres, or 

approximately 10 percent of the proposed units, are stands over 80 years old and 3,327 acres, 

or approximately 90 percent of the proposed units, are under 80 years old. This alternative is 

consistent with management direction set forth in the Willamette National Forest Plan, as 

amended by the Northwest Forest Plan.

The Proposed Action (Alternative 2) would consist of the following:

Commercial Thinning Outside of Riparian Reserves

Commercially thin approximately 1,501 acres outside of Riparian Reserves. Post-harvest 

thinning densities would range from approximately 30 to 111 trees per acre, with the 

average stand containing about 79 trees per acre.

Within commercial thinning units, create about 310 acres of gaps or small openings outside of 

Riparian Reserves. Gaps would range from about one to three acres in size.

Within commercial thinning units, create about 289 acres of Dominant tree release (DTR) 

outside of Riparian Reserves. DTR treatments would leave a dominant tree, or a group of 

five to ten trees and remove trees within a 66 foot radius around the leave tree or trees. The 

DTR treatment would create small openings about 1⁄4 to 1

/3 acre openings.

Commercial Thinning Within Riparian Reserves

Commercially thin approximately 901 acres within Riparian Reserves. Post-harvest thinning 

densities would range from approximately 50 to 111 trees per acre, with the average stand 

containing approximately 84 trees per acre.

Create about 4 acres of gaps or small openings outside of the primary shade zone (i.e. 60 feet) 

within the Riparian Reserves of stands that were previously harvested. Five trees would be 

retained within the gaps which would be approximately 1⁄4 acre in size.

Non-Commercial Treatments Within Riparian Reserves

Create about 4 acres of gaps about 1⁄4 acre in size near stream channels in stands that were 

previously harvested. Trees in the gaps would be felled and left on site. This would occur in 

stands where we found little to no hardwoods in the stands. We conducted a “hardwood 

analysis” at a landscape level for Riparian Reserves in the South Fork McKenzie River 
watershed and walked nearly every stream in the project area. For hardwood analysis we 

used satellite imagery (WorldView 2) collected on July 19, 2013.

Regeneration Harvest

Regeneration harvest with reserves would occur on approximately 324 acres. This type of 

treatment is also called a Shelterwood with reserves. About 25 trees per acre of the existing 

trees would be retained. 

Create about five snag trees per acre from the reserved trees and create or retain at least 240 

linear feet per acre of down wood in decay classes 1 and 2.

Skips

Skips, or un-harvested portions of stands, would occur on approximately 324 acres outside of 

riparian reserves and on approximately 762 acres within riparian reserves. Skips would be 

located in both thinning and regeneration units and would occur in both riparian and upland 

portions of the stands.

Fuel Treatments

Reduce project-generated fuels by underburning approximately 795 acres. The remaining 

harvested acres would be evaluated for need of treatment. Treatments would include hand, 

or mechanical pile burning.

Planting

Plant approximately 421 acres, composed of the acres associated with regeneration and 

approximately 100 acres of gaps with a combination of Douglas-fir, white pine, Sugar pine, 

and western red cedar. Natural regeneration will be utilized for DTRs and on approximately 

210 acres of gaps.

Bull Trout

The distinct population segments of bull trout were listed as threatened in the Columbia River, 

Klamath River, and Jarbidge River basins (63 FR 31647, June 10, 1998 - Columbia/Klamath final 

rule; 63 FR 42757, August 11, 1998 - Jarbidge Emergency listing; 64 FR 17110, April 8, 1999 -

Jarbidge final rule).

Bull trout in the coterminous United States were listed as threatened on November 1, 1999 (64 

FR 58910). The coterminous listing added bull trout in the Coastal-Puget Sound populations 

(Olympic Peninsula and Puget Sound regions) and Saint Mary-Belly River populations (east of

the continental divide in Montana) to the previous listing actions indicated above.

Critical Habitat was designated for bull trout by the US Fish and Wildlife Service on October 18, 

2010 (75 FR 63898 64070). Critical Habitat for bull trout includes the McKenzie River, the South 

Fork McKenzie River up to its confluence with Roaring River and Roaring River itself where 

spawning habitat is found. 
There are three semi-isolated bull trout populations in the McKenzie River sub-basin: (1) the 

mainstem McKenzie River population, (2) the South Fork McKenzie River population, and (3) 

the Trail Bridge population. These populations are isolated from each other by Trail Bridge Dam 

on the McKenzie River and Cougar Dam on the South Fork McKenzie River. Neither dam has 

safe downstream passage and fish do get entrained and suffer mortality going through the 

turbines. Only Cougar Dam has upstream fish passage via trap and haul. The two populations 

above the dams have adapted to an adfluvial life history, whereas the mainstem population 

remains fluvial. In the South Fork McKenzie River the only stream system where bull trout have 

been documented spawning is Roaring River. Table 1 shows redd counts for all three 

populations. 

Table 1. Bull Trout Redd Counts in the McKenzie River Sub-Basin

Spring Chinook Salmon

Spring Chinook salmon utilize habitat in the McKenzie River, including the section within the 

Action Area. These salmon are part of the Upper Willamette River Evolutionarily Significant Unit 

(ESU), and have been designated as a Threatened species under the ESA by the National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS) (64 FR 14308). This listing decision was effective as of May 24, 1999. A 

subsequent decision by NMFS reaffirmed the Threatened status for wild stocks of spring 

S. Fork Population

Year Anderson 

Creek

Olallie 

Creek

McKenzie 

below Trail 

Bridge

McKenzie 

above Trail 

Bridge

Sweetwater 

Creek

Roaring River TOTAL

1991 8 8

1992 13 13

1993 15 1 16

1994 30 3 0 0 1 34

1995 73 10 7 0 2 92

1996 82 7 7 0 0 96

1997 85 9 3 0 0 97

1998 79 7 2 0 6 94

1999 77 6 0 0 13 96

2000 83 9 0 2 25 119

2001 72 6 1 2 34 115

2002 60 10 3 1 25 99

2003 56 17 0 9 4 27 113

2004 49 12 1 16 9 32 119

2005 47 12 2 10 9 35 115

2006 59 8 1 12 21 34 135

2007 58 15 4 15 22 54 168

2008 53 12 2 33 20 41 161

2009 65 13 0 50 21 76 225

2010 23 18 3 43 4 70 161

2011 33 15 5 39 7 61 160

2012 29 18 4 22 11 51 135

2013 34 18 0 28 17 46 143

Mainstem Population Trail Bridge Population
chinook salmon and added protection for the hatchery component of the spring chinook 

salmon population present in this portion of the ESU (70 FR 37160). This rule was effective on 

August 29, 2005. NMFS has released their final rule designating critical habitat for Upper 

Willamette River spring Chinook salmon (70 FR 52630), effective January 2, 2006. Critical 

habitat is designated in the South Fork McKenzie River and the lower reaches of some 

tributaries. The South Fork was not originally designated as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)(50 CFR 

600) due to the presence of Cougar Dam. Since 2010 adult passage has been in place with the 

construction of a collection facility below the dam so the Forest Service considers the South 

Fork above Cougar Reservoir as EFH.

Cougar Dam created a barrier to migration when it was constructed in 1963. This blocked 

migrating salmon from reaching the upper South Fork and also isolated the Roaring River 

population of bull trout. In 1993, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) began 

releasing hatchery Chinook salmon above Cougar Reservoir to provide marine derived nutrients 

to the system and to provide bull trout with a more robust prey base. The following table 

displays those releases.

Table 2. McKenzie Hatchery Spring Chinook Releases to South Fork McKenzie River above 

Cougar Reservoir

Year Males Females Jacks Total

1993 22 33 1 56

1994 0 0 0 0

1995 0 0 0 0

1996 51 68 3 122

1997 100 100 0 200

1998 165 153 9 327

1999 366 180 3 549

2000 801 695 10 1506

2001 1233 765 57 2055

2002 2775 2047 56 4878

2003 1758 1374 62 3194

2004 2143 1263 24 3430

2005 462 387 14 863

2006 765 243 10 1018

2007 438 297 8 743

2008 573 288 13 874

2009 651 629 107 1387

The Forest Service does not have redd counts for spring Chinook salmon in the South Fork 

McKenzie River. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife conducts the spring Chinook 

monitoring in the South Fork. However, Kurt Kremers (ODFW McKenzie River Hatchery 

Manager) indicated that in 2013 the hatchery would supplement those fish captured and 
transferred at the collection facility to get a minimum of 400 females and 200 males in the 

South Fork above Cougar Reservoir.

Aquatic Insects

Three aquatic insects found on the Regional Forester’s sensitive species list have been 

documented on the Willamette National Forest. These aquatic insects are all caddisflies and 

little is known about them. In fact, the common name for all of these caddisflies is “A Caddisfly.” 

A short summary of the distribution and known habitat associations are provided below. 

Rhyacophila chandleri: In Oregon, this species is documented on Willamette, Deschutes, 

and Umpqua National Forests. It is documented on the Willamette National Forest as a rare 

insect on the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest.

The entire Rhyacophila genus, whose name is derived from the Greek roots rhyaco (stream 

or torrent) and philia (fondness), is confined to running water. In the Cascade Mountains of 

Oregon, this species is associated with very cold, larger spring-fed streams (USDA Forest 

Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 2012a). Elevations of known populations 

range from around 1219 to 1700 m (4000 to 5600 ft.) in Oregon.

Rhyacophila leechi: In Oregon, Rhyacophila leechi is documented to occur on the 

Willamette National Forest and on BLM land in the Medford District. 

Rhyacophila leechi adults have been collected from springs and cold, spring-fed streams. 

This species appears to require colder water temperatures than the common and more 

widely distributed Rhyacophila. verrula, and is likely confined to smaller, headwater streams 

and springs (USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 2011). Oregon sites 

range in elevation from 440 to 980 m (1444 to 3210 ft.) (USDA Forest Service and USDI 

Bureau of Land Management 2011).

Namamyia plutonis: On National Forest System and BLM lands, documented occurrences 

are from the Rogue River-Siskiyou, Siuslaw, and Willamette National Forests (USDA Forest 

Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 2010). The majority of the documented 

occurrences are between 30 and 50 years old.

Namamyia plutonis tend to be found associated with small streams in densely forested old 

growth or mature forest watersheds (USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land 

Management 2010).
Project Design Features to Minimize Impacts to Listed Fish and Habitat: 

Objective Design Feature Location

Roads

32 Protect against sediment

Best Management Practices (BMPs), 

including placement of sediment 

barriers, provision of flow bypass, 

and other applicable measures, 

would be included as necessary to 

control off-site movement of 

sediment. Entire project area

33 Protect against sediment

For any perennial stream crossing 

culvert replacement, a specific 

dewatering plan shall be included 

with the contract design provisions. Entire project area

34 Protect against sediment

All road reopening, reconstruction 

and temporary road building would 

occur when soils are relatively dry to 

avoid potential surface erosion of 

exposed soil. Entire project area

35 Protect against sediment

All temporary roads shall be made 

hydrologically stable if not being 

used during extended periods of wet 

weather. Entire project area

36 Protect road infrastructure

Road maintenance along haul routes, 

including placement of additional 

surface rock, blading, brushing, ditch 

relief culvert cleaning or addition of 

ditch relief culverts should occur 

prior to project implementation. Entire project area

Silviculture

43

To meet stocking 

requirements as identified in 

the National Forest

Management Act (NFMA) 

planting will be utilized in 

addition to natural 

regeneration to ensure full 

stocking

Plant at 15’ x 15’ spacing, or about 

194 trees per acre. The species mix 

should contain Douglas-fir, western 

white pine, sugar pine, and western 

red cedar. Stratify the mix with 

Douglas-fir quantities higher in the 

lower elevations and western red 

cedar higher in the moister sites. 

Sugar pine and western red cedar will 

vary with sugar pine more prominent 

in warmer drier sites.

All harvest units where planting is to 

occur

44 Protect integrity of IRA

During presale, verify that no 

encroachment on the IRA exists. Units: 5320,5420,5800
Objective Design Feature Location

45 Maintain structural diversity

During presale, protect identified 

trees with raptor nests and those 

with unusual structure such as 

broken tops. All harvest units

46

Minimize damage during 

harvest.

Protect residual stand and reserve 

trees to the best extent possible from 

treatment damage. All harvest units

Hydrology - Fisheries - Soils

47

To reduce compaction and 

undesirable soil damage

Primary landings, temporary haul or 

principal skid roads utilized by the 

purchaser / logger should be 

subsoiled (to a depth of 18 to 24 

inches) at the completion of logging 

activities.

Units 70, 610, 1030, 1500, 1930, 

5120, 5130, 5140

48

To reduce compaction and 

undesirable soil damage Cable yarding up to 1900-425

Portions units downhill from Rd 

1900425 in units 5120, 5130, 5140

49

To reduce compaction and 

undesirable soil damage

Existing landings, temporary haul 

roads, old primary skid roads, and/or 

tractor fire lines would be utilized as 

much as possible prior to disturbing 

new areas. All harvest units

50

To minimize erosion and 

sedimentation

Construction or maintenance of 

roads would not be done when soils 

are saturated or run-off occurs. A 

stable fill would be constructed 

across all streams when crossed by 

new temporary roads. All harvest units

51

To minimize erosion and 

sedimentation

Native surfaced roads would be 

restricted from hauling when soils 

are saturated or run-off occurs. All harvest units
Objective Design Feature Location

52

To minimize potential impacts 

to fish.

Any project activity such as culvert 

replacement that must occur within 

fish-bearing streams would comply 

with Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife (ODFW) seasonal restrictions 

on in-stream work activities (July 1st 

– August 15th). If a waiver to these 

dates is required the district fisheries 

biologist will need to review the 

proposal and seek a waiver from 

ODFW, NMFS, and the USFWS if it is 

warranted. Best Management 

Practices (BMP’s), including 

placement of sediment barriers, 

provision of flow bypass, and other 

applicable measures, would be 

included in project design as 

necessary to control off-site 

movement of sediment. Entire project area

53 To prevent sedimentation

All haul roads would be maintained 

in stable condition. Wet weather 

haul would be monitored by the 

Timber Sale Administrator, the 

District Road Manager, Fisheries 

Biologist, and/or Hydrologist. When 

necessary, haul may be suspended 

during rainfall to prevent off-site 

movement of sediment into drainage 

courses, or when the road surface is 

either covered with a relatively 

continuous snow pack or frozen. 

Dust abatement of road surfaces 

would be used if roads become 

excessively dusty during the summer. All harvest units
Objective Design Feature Location

54

To reduce contamination to 

aquatic areas

If lignin sulfate is used for dust 

abatement, one application would 

occur during the dry season 

(July/August/September) at a dilution 

rate of 50% lignin sulfate and 50% 

water. Lignosulfonate would remain 

on the road surface and not go over 

road edge. During blading, small 

berms could be created or wattles 

used at stream crossings to assist 

with keeping palliatives on the road 

surface. A 1 foot no-application 

buffer on the edge of gravel would 

be used if road width allows. 

Lignosulfonate would not be applied 

when raining and when possible, a 3 

day forecast of clear weather would 

follow application. All harvest units

55

To reduce off-site movement 

of sediment into drainage 

courses

Ground-based equipment used for 

yarding, processing, fuel treatment, 

or other project activities would 

operate only when soils are relatively 

dry where water is not pooling. Over 

the snow operations may occur when 

there is a continuous snow pack at 

least 18 inches deep or when soils 

are sufficiently frozen to support 

equipment. Operations would be 

suspended before rainfall or 

precipitation results in off-site 

movement of sediment into drainage 

courses. All harvest units

56

Undesirable soil damage from 

skidding would be avoided 

through skid trail layout and 

use of alternative yarding 

systems

Ground-based equipment should be 

limited to slopes less than 30 

percent. Timber sale administrators 

may approve equipment use on 

slopes from 30-40% for short pitches 

based on site specific conditions. The 

upper limit for prebunching is on 45% 

slope. All equipment trails need to 

be prelocated and preapproved. Skid 

trails would be located outside 

drainages, seeps, springs and/or 

concave landforms, which could 

accumulate and transport overland 

flow and sediment. All harvest units
Objective Design Feature Location

57

To reduce compaction 

directly adjacent to stream 

channels.

Ground based equipment and skid 

roads should be at least 50 feet from 

the no-cut buffer for all streams (fishbearing to intermittent). These 

widths are required unless a change 

is approved by the district 

hydrologist or district fish biologist. All harvest units

58

Minimize impacts to stream 

channels.

Full suspension over the high water 

mark would be required when 

yarding over perennial stream 

channels. Where full suspension is 

not obtainable over intermittent 

streams, partial suspension would be 

required and yarding would be 

limited to when the stream is dry. 

Bump logs to protect the stream 

channel would be utilized as 

appropriate. All harvest units

59

Minimize impacts to stream 

channels.

Where cable yarding requires 

corridors through a riparian area, 

corridors would be laid out to 

minimize the number of trees cut. 

Trees located within no-harvest 

buffers that must be cut to facilitate 

yarding corridors would be felled 

towards the channel (if feasible) and 

left on site. All harvest units

60

To provide adequate drainage 

and avoid unnecessary soil 

disturbance

All skid trails and landings should be 

water-barred to provide adequate 

drainage. Water bar location should 

occur where local terrain facilitates 

effective drainage of the skid trail or 

landing while avoiding unnecessary 

soil disturbance. An example would 

be to construct water bars every 100 

feet on slopes less than 15 percent, 

and every 50 feet on slopes greater 

than 15 percent. Water bars should 

be keyed-in to the cut bank and have 

a clear outlet on the downhill side. In 

lieu of waterbars, where available in 

concentrations, slash should be 

scattered on corridors, skid trails and 

landings. All harvest units
Objective Design Feature Location

61 Reduce compaction

Primary skid trails and landings in 

harvest units with ground-based 

yarding should be sub soiled to a 

depth of 18-24 inches at the 

completion of project activities. 

Primary skid trails in gaps as well as 

all temporary landings should be subsoiled to a depth of 18-24 inches or 

to bedrock. All harvest units

62 To prevent sedimentation

All areas of exposed soil, such as 

landings, skid trails, decommissioned 

roads, and cut and fill slopes 

associated with road construction or 

maintenance would be seeded with 

sterile seed, native grasses, or weed 

free mulch unless agreed to 

otherwise. All harvest units

63 To prevent sedimentation

Scarification and waterbars may be 

limited or suspended on feller 

buncher/ processor/ forwarder roads 

when the skid road is sufficiently 

covered with slash to form an 

effective mat to minimize soil 

compaction and erosion. All harvest units

64

To reduce soil disturbance 

and the risk of erosion in 

riparian reserves

Handlines for underburning would 

not be constructed along no-cut 

riparian buffer areas. Fire would only 

be allowed to back into riparian 

areas. All harvest units

65 To reduce soil disturbance.

The west boundary of Unit 160 has 

an existing debris chute type failures 

as well as additional potentially 

unstable and unsuited rocky ground. 

This area would be deleted from the 

unit at layout and not affected by 

timber management. Soils/Geology 

personnel may assist in the layout of 

this unit. Unit 160
Objective Design Feature Location

66

To reestablish hydrologic and 

geologic processes

Temporary roads would be made 

hydrologically stable and removed 

after completion of project activities. 

Removal of temporary roads may 

include: blocking the entrance, 

removal of culverts, out-sloping the 

road surface, pulling back displaced 

material onto the road way, 

installation of water bars, revegetation of the road prism, and/or 

the sub soiling of compacted surfaces 

when necessary. All harvest units

67

To protect key riparian 

features and integrity

All existing down wood would be 

retained within Riparian Reserves to 

maintain aquatic objectives. All harvest units

68

To ensure sufficient water 

flow in streams

Water sources used by project 

operations would be reconstructed 

or maintained as necessary to 

protect stream bank stability, 

riparian vegetation, and water 

quality. Water used for fire 

treatments and dust abatement will 

be drafted from various water 

sources outside of Listed Fish 

Habitat. At all drafting locations, 

90% of stream flow would be 

maintained to reduce risk to aquatic 

species and water quality. Entire project area

69

To protect and enhance 

riparian features Riparian buffer see Appendix AAA. All harvest units

Project Area Existing Conditions

Recent forest research in the Coast Range and Western Cascades indicates that existing old 

growth stands developed with natural stand densities of 40 to 60 conifers per acre (Tappeiner 

et al, 1997; Poage & Tappeiner 2002). There are some plantations that have over 1,800 trees 

per acre. Post-harvest thinning densities in riparian reserves would range from a residual 

approximately 50 trees per acre to approximately 111 trees per acre with the average stand 

having approximately 84 trees per acre. All riparian reserves where thinning is proposed would 

have a no cut buffer and thinning would maintain 40 percent canopy cover in the rest of the 

reserve. 

Some riparian reserves in plantations have a good mix of hardwoods in the stand so no 

treatment was recommended in those areas. These stands appear to be on their way to 

achieving Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives without any need of silvicultural activities. 
As an example, the following units had non-fish bearing perennial streams in them and the 

riparian reserves stand had diverse vegetation so we recommended a 180 foot no cut area on 

each side of the creek: 220, 230, 240, 290, 300, 310, 330, and 350. These stands range in age 

from 30 to 42 years old and the stream systems drain into Cougar Reservoir.

Some riparian reserves in plantations did not have a good mix of hardwoods in the stand so 

silvicultural treatment is recommended in those areas. These stands are dense, dark 

plantations of almost pure Douglas-fir with either very few hardwoods in the riparian reserve or 

none at all and very little sunlight reaching the forest floor or the stream channels. These 

conditions were verified using satellite imagery and on the ground field investigations. In some 

cases thinning is recommended and in a few stands non-commercial “near stream gaps” are 

proposed. In these quarter acre gaps all trees would be felled and left on site. We would 

monitor these sites to ensure that hardwood trees colonized the site. We expect that within 6 

to 10 years there would be a stand of hardwood trees on the site. If required, we would plant 

hardwoods (i.e. vine maple, big leaf maple, and red alder). Units where near stream gaps are 

recommended are: 420, 430, 440, 500, 530, and 600. These stands range in age from 28 to 36 

years old and the stream systems drain into Cougar Reservoir.

On two streams we propose to fall and leave trees in the channel. Table 3 summarizes where 

we propose these treatments.

Table 3. Proposed Units with In-stream Fall-and-Leave Treatments.

Stream 

Name/Class

Unit Treatment Description

Pass Creek, Class 2

5080 Fall conifers into channel every 50-100 

feet alternating sides and avoid bank 

trees

5230

Elk Creek, Class 1

5420 Fall conifers into channel every 50-100 

feet alternating and avoiding bank 

trees. Every 200-400 feet, fall 5-10 

trees into the channel as a clump.

5440

5460

5470

Pass Creek is a tributary to Augusta Creek and is inhabited by coastal cutthroat trout. It is a 

relatively small stream and relatively steep (8 percent gradient and steeper). Elk Creek is a 

tributary to the South Fork McKenzie and is a larger system than Pass Creek. Its first two 

reaches are relatively flat (3 percent to 4 percent gradient) and the valley is wide (500 feet 

wide). There was very little large woody material in Elk Creek (see Table 4) and in the two 

reaches outside the wilderness there was evidence of salvage logging large trees that were in 

the creek. Surveyors observed numerous “root sprung” trees next to the creek but the tree had 

been cut from the rootwad and salvaged. Elk Creek is capable of providing habitat for cutthroat, 

rainbow, and Chinook salmon due to its cold stream temperatures but is lacking large woody 

material in the stream.
Table 4. Woody material counts for some streams in the Green Mountain Project Area.

Stream Reach Wood/Mile

Small/Medium/Large

Wood/Mile

Medium/Large Only

Ridge Creek (1993) 1 441 334

Loon Creek (1994) 1 237 59

Hardy Creek (1998) 1 78 17

2 116 28

3 71 16

Buoy Creek (2001) 1 18 1

2 19 2

Augusta Creek 

(2003)

1 79 23

2 76 23

3 105 35

4 156 85

Elk Creek (2001) 1 27 0

2 30 1

3* 124 3

4* 18 0

*These reaches are in the Three Sisters Wilderness

Small – are at least 12 inches in diameter at 25 feet from the large end.

Medium – are 24 inches to 36 inches in diameter at 50 feet from the large end.

Large – are greater than 36 inches in diameter at 50 feet from the large end.

Projects to add large wood material to the South Fork McKenzie River channel have been 

implemented since 1995. Since that time 841 trees or logs have been placed between Augusta 

Creek and Elk Creek, and in lower Roaring River. As of 2014, most of this wood has accumulated 

into large log jams and is providing excellent rearing habitat for fish in the South Fork.

Effects Analysis: A variety of treatments are prescribed for riparian reserves in plantations. 

These include: no treatment, thinning, gaps in the secondary shade zone, streamside adjacent 

gaps, and fall and leave in two fish bearing streams. The gaps that are adjacent to streams are 

non-commercial and all the trees would be felled and left on site.

There is uncertainty in the scientific literature regarding management actions in riparian 

reserves especially when it comes to coarse woody material. For example, if silviculutral 

treatments are needed to attain desired vegetation characteristic in order to achieve Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy (ACS) objectives what is the appropriate buffer width to protect aquatic 

organisms? Sweeney and Newbold (2014) conducted a scientific literature review that asked 

the question “how wide” a streamside forest should be to assure a natural setting for the 

stream, protect water quality, and enhance stream and river ecosystems and ecosystem 

services. In their review they were unable to find any publications addressing the issue of 

streamside forest width and the input of large woody debris to streams. They concluded that in 

lieu of direct studies bearing on this issue, they could infer at this time that a streamside forest 

can best provide a natural level of large woody debris to streams if its width is generally about 
30 meters (98 feet) or equal to the height at maturity of the dominant streamside trees 

(Sweeney and Newbold 2014). The ACS bases riparian reserve widths on “site potential tree 

heights” and in the South Fork McKenzie River that is 180 feet for a Douglas-fir. Standard and 

Guideline TM-1(c) in the Northwest Forest Plan (1994) provides direction on when silvicultural 

activities can take place in riparian reserves. Our task is to review all the riparian reserves in the 

project area and at the landscape level to determine if treatment is warranted. Based on our 

field investigations and a landscape level analysis of hardwoods in the South Fork McKenzie 

watershed we developed recommendations for each riparian reserve.

There are some studies that have looked at the effects of thinning and gaps on riparian and 

aquatic habitats. One study by Wilzbach and others (2005) looked at the production of resident 

fish (rainbow and cutthroat trout) by adding salmon carcasses and by removing all the red alder 

and other hardwoods on both sides of the stream along a 100 meter (328 feet) reach. One of 

their findings was that in light-limited settings where temperature gains associated with canopy 

opening are not problematic for aquatic resources, gains in salmonid production might be 

achieved by selective trimming of riparian hardwoods (Wilzbach et. al. 2005). This is not what is 

being proposed in the Green Mountain project (i.e. removing all hardwoods). In fact, our 

concern with some of the riparian reserves in the project area is that there are little to no 

hardwoods and at the landscape level only 3.2 percent of the acres in the riparian reserve land 

allocation are “deciduous, and deciduous shrub.” By creating small gaps (e.g. a 1⁄4 acre) along 

certain streams we expect that hardwood will colonize the site and if not we would plant 

hardwoods (e.g. red alder, vine maple, and big leaf maple) to improve the quality of 

allochthonous sources of energy for the aquatic community.

A recent study by Ruzicka and others (2014 in press) looked at the management of riparian 

buffers and upslope thinning with downslope impacts. In their conclusion they write that they 

found an edge effect below upland thinning treatments that extended up to 15 meters (49 feet) 

into untreated riparian buffers. There was no similar edge effect for trees downslope of gaps. 

They speculated that this difference could be due to the understory, shrub, and subdominant 

canopy layers responding more strongly to gap creation than thinning. They stated that their 

study demonstrates that upland management can be used to influence riparian forests at the 

upland edge but only to a limited spatial extent. Such management practices may be enough to 

support the functional goals of riparian buffers such as maintaining potential in-stream coarse 

woody debris, stream temperature moderation, and nutrient uptake. Finally they found that 

maintaining lower tree densities directly above riparian areas may be especially beneficial if 

other methods to increase tree growth and vigor such as thinning are not allowed directly in 

riparian management areas.

We are proposing thinning and gaps in riparian reserves to improve structural and vegetative 

diversity, not necessarily for improved tree growth in the no cut buffer as Ruzicka (2014 in 

press) found. It would, however, be a benefit to some of the stands in very dense plantations 

where we have prescribed no cut buffers (e.g. units adjacent to Augusta Creek – 5030, 5080, 

5090). The gaps they looked at in the study were circular and were 0.4 hectares (0.98 acres) in 

size and are bigger than what we propose. We expect that there would be a deciduous and 
deciduous shrub response in the gaps that would be a 1⁄4 acre in size. This would be beneficial to 

the stream community by improving the quality of allochthonous sources of energy. We do not 

expect stream temperatures to rise significantly because of the small size and limited number 

of the gaps, the steep gradient of the streams, the hyporheic activity caused by the complexity 

of cascade habitat, downstream stands where shade will aid in recovery, and the eventual 

establishment of a hardwood stand that would provide effective shade in 6 to 10 years. We 

would set up monitoring strategies to ensure compliance with Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality (ODEQ) water temperature standards.

An older study looked at the effects of clear cutting stream side forests which is not something 

we are proposing. Murphy and Hall (1981) looked at the varied effects of clear cut logging on 

predators and their habitat in small streams in the Blue River watershed and in the South Fork 

McKenzie River watershed (in Walker Creek). They found that effects associated with logging 

depended on stream size, gradient, and time after harvest. Clear cut sections where the stream 

was still exposed to sunlight (5- 17 years after logging) generally had greater biomass, density, 

and species richness of predators than old-growth (> 450-years-old) forested sections. Increases 

were greatest in small (first-order), high gradient (10- 16 percent,) streams, where clear-cut 

sites had both greater periphyton production and coarser streambed sediment than old-growth 

sites of similar size and gradient. Effects on predators were mixed in larger, lower gradient 

streams, where clear-cut sites showed accumulation of sediment and relatively small increases 

in periphyton production. Second-growth logged sections (12- 35 years after logging), reshaded by deciduous forest canopy, and had lower biomass of trout and fewer predator taxa 

than old-growth sites.

Murphy and Hall (1981) also noted a study in the Oregon Coast Range which found mixed 

effects of logging without streamside buffers on biomass of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus 

kisutch), but consistent reductions in cutthroat trout populations. Thus clear-cutting may be a 

direct stimulus to secondary production in some regions if other detrimental effects, such as 

temperature increase, reduction in pool quality, or sedimentation, are not severe. They also 

hypothesized that the differences in geomorphology and sediment load may explain differing 

impacts of logging on stream communities. Logging impacts on trout, for example, differ 

between the Western Cascades and Coast Range in Oregon, perhaps because streams in the 

Coast Range are often lower gradient and carry more sediment than those in the Western 

Cascades.

One of the habitat elements that affect stream communities in natural gaps we have observed 

in old growth is the structural presence of down wood. The gaps in old growth can be caused by 

a few large trees blowing down. This leads to a stream gap that has both hardwood and 

coniferous trees in the gap and large wood in the channel and on the forest floor. We propose 

to emulate these natural gaps in specific plantations by falling and leaving all the trees in the 

created gap. This will maintain structure in the gap, in the stream, and provide growing space 

for hardwoods.

The proposed action would have limited direct effects on fish. The direct effects would be 
limited to fish in Pass Creek, Loon Creek, Elk Creek, and the unnamed creek that flows through 

unit 5390. In each of these creeks we propose to fall and leave trees into the stream channel 

(see Table 3). This could adversely impact fish if we fall a tree and it hits a fish and kills it. We 

believe that mortality from trees falling is unlikely but it could happen. In Pass, Loon, and the 

unnamed creek, coastal cutthroat trout inhabit those streams so they would be the fish 

affected. In Elk Creek a wider range of fishes can be found including spring Chinook salmon and 

bull trout. In the short and long term the addition of these trees to the channel will have 

beneficial effects on fish habitat. Also, the small openings that are created should increase 

primary production at the site scale and eventually hardwood leaves would become more 

abundant in these streams providing higher quality nutritional material to the stream 

community.

There are no cut buffers of varying width (30 feet to 360 feet) prescribed for every stream in 

the project area. Thinning riparian reserves means that there will be an effect on the supply of 

coarse woody material and ACS objective 8 states that we maintain and restore supply amounts 

and distributions of coarse woody debris sufficient to sustain physical complexity and stability. 

The plantations where we propose thinning are dense. The number of trees per acre range 

from 176 to 1,822. Recent forest research in the Coast Range and Western Cascades indicates 

that existing old growth stands developed with natural stand densities of 40 to 60 conifers per 

acre (Tappeiner et al 1997; Poage & Tappeiner 2002). Having a no cut buffer adjacent to every 

stream would maintain a high level of trees per acre compared to what has been found in these 

studies. In the thinned areas there would still be more trees per acre left after thinning than 

found in the studies. The previously harvested stands proposed for treatment in the Green 

Mountain Project Area were harvested and replanted using direction that pre-dates even the 

Willamette Land and Resource Management Plan (1990) and prior to the Northwest Forest Plan 

(1994). As a result, the majority of these forest stands were set on a management-induced 

trajectory that has led to artificially dense, conifer-dominated stands, with tree densities above 

the range of natural variability expected in this area. When we conducted field investigations 

we based the no cut buffer on stream size, stream class, gradient, channel complexity, and how 

functional the existing coarse woody material was in the stream channel. We expect that the 

amount of woody material left behind in the no cut buffer and the remainder of the riparian 

reserve would be sufficient to sustain physical complexity and stability. Fish bearing streams 

have wider no cut buffers (i.e. from 90 to 180 to 360 feet) so thinning in these riparian reserves 

would have limited effects on fish and caddisflies.

At a watershed level, coarse woody debris levels will be maintained. There are 65,570 acres of 

riparian reserve in the project area. The proposed action would thin approximately 1.3 percent 

of the riparian reserve acres in the project area. The action alternatives would create up to 9

acres of gaps which is approximately 0.01 percent of riparian reserve acres in the project area.

Another way that fish could be affected directly is by road work. Table 5 shows culvert 

replacement sites on Forest Road 1900 that are within 150 feet of the South Fork McKenzie. 

Road 1900 parallels the South Fork McKenzie River and in one spot the road is directly next to 

the river.
Table 5. Culvert replacement needs on Forest Road 1900 within 150 feet of the South Fork 

McKenzie

New culvert diameter Stream Class Height of fill to be removed

36” Intermittent 7 ‘

18” Perennial 4’

18” Intermittent 7’

18” Intermittent 5’

18” Intermittent 5’

Since all but one of the streams is intermittent we do not expect that sediment from this work 

would have direct effects on fish in the South Fork. The perennial stream is very small and is all 

but a trickle during the summer and there is only 4 feet of fill that would be removed and 

replaced. Indirectly, there could be short term (immediately after the first rain of the season) 

turbidity effect but larger juvenile and adult salmon and trout appear to be little affected by 

ephemerally high concentrations of suspended sediments that occur during most storms and 

episodes of snow melt (Bjornn and Reiser 1991).

A bridge will need to be replaced over Hardy Creek on the 1980204 road. This bridge site is 350 

feet away from the South Fork McKenzie, and lower Hardy Creek is designated as critical 

habitat for Upper Willamette spring Chinook salmon. A piece of equipment will have to cross 

the creek at least once for this work to happen. No instream work would need to occur and 

excavation would take place in the existing road prism. If the work is done during the instream 

work period (July 1 to August 15) there would be no adult Chinook salmon in the stream 

systems during this period. There could be juvenile Chinook salmon in the South Fork or lower 

Hardy Creek during the summer period as well as cutthroat and rainbow trout. As discussed 

above, larger juvenile salmon and trout can handle short term turbidity effects and since 

excavation would take place in the existing road prism we do not expect turbidity to be an 

issue. If fish are in the path of an excavator while it crosses Hardy Creek, they would be 

harassed by the equipment but should be able to swim out of the way. Harassing fish listed on 

the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is considered “take” and is prohibited without authorization. 

There are two activities proposed on Elk Creek that could harass listed fish. First, a temporary 

bridge would need to be placed over Elk Creek on the 1964480 road. An old hazardous bridge 

was removed from this site in the recent past. Most work would be done on the approaches 

but there might be the need to have a piece of equipment in the channel. Second, falling and 

leaving trees into the channel would have the potential to have adverse effects in the shortterm (days) and beneficial effects in the long-term (decades). These activities would be required 

to take place during the instream work period (July 1 to August 15) to minimize impacts on fish 

but the potential for “take” under the ESA still exists so formal consultation will be required. 

Sampling for aquatic organisms (macroinvertebrates) has taken place in the South Fork 

McKenzie River watershed. In 2005 and 2006 samples were taken above Cougar Dam and 

below the dam. Members of the genus Rhyacophila were collected in both places but neither of 
the species found on the sensitive species list (SSL) was documented in those efforts. In 2004, 

samples were taken in the East Fork of the South Fork McKenzie River and in Walker Creek. As 

with the other samples Rhyacophila were collected but not the species on the SSL. No members 

of the genus Namamyia were found in any of these samples.

Despite not finding the species on the SSL the South Fork McKenzie River and Roaring River 

provide the type of habitat that Rhyacophila requires for survival (i.e. large spring-fed rivers) so 

we treat that habitat as potentially occupied. Namamyia plutonis tend to be found associated 

with small streams in densely forested old growth or mature forest watersheds (USDA Forest 

Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 2010). We did not sample this type of habitat in 

the South Fork but it does exist.

Effects Determination:

Bull Trout and Designated Critical Habitat

Given that there is the potential for “take” associated with the fall and leave treatments in Elk 

Creek this activity “may affect, and is likely to adversely affect, bull trout.” There are no 

activities proposed in or adjacent to designated critical habitat and project design features 

would protect critical habitat. Therefore, the proposed action “will not adversely modify critical 

habitat.”

Upper Willamette Spring Chinook Salmon

Given that there is the potential for “take” associated with the fall and leave treatments in Elk 

Creek, and with the bridge replacement in Hardy Creek these activities “may affect, and are 

likely to adversely affect, Upper Willamette spring Chinook salmon.” There are activities 

proposed in and adjacent to designated critical habitat. 

The section of Hardy Creek where bridge replacement is proposed is designated critical habitat. 

Since the bridge is unsafe to cross, a piece of equipment (e.g. an excavator) would have to 

create access to the creek (i.e. cut down some small trees ~10 inches in diameter) and cross it 

to reach the other side. We expect that this will only have to be done once and the trees cut 

will be left in the creek or within the riparian reserve. This will affect critical habitat but given 

the limited scope, duration, and magnitude of the activity we “do not expect it to adversely 

affect” designated critical habitat.

Elk Creek flows through unit 5420 and this segment of the creek is designated critical habitat. 

The stand has an average age of 41 years and we have prescribed a 90 foot no cut buffer along 

Elk Creek and thinning in the rest of the riparian reserve to increase vegetative diversity. In 

addition, we have prescribed “fall and leave” treatments in this segment of Elk Creek to 

increase woody material in the channel in order to improve habitat complexity. We would avoid 

bank trees during this activity. The 90 foot no cut buffer would protect critical habitat as would 
avoiding bank trees during fall and leave treatments. Fall and leave treatments are intended to 

improve habitat conditions as there is currently very little large wood in the channel. 

Units 5030, 5080, and 5090 are along Augusta Creek which is designated critical habitat. All of 

these units would have a 90 foot buffer along the creek and thinning in the rest of the reserve. 

In addition, the project design features will protect the critical habitat from timber harvest 

activities. Therefore, designated critical habitat “will not be adversely affected.”

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act:

Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act is designated in all areas except above impassible dams (Cougar Dam in the 

South Fork McKenzie River; and Blue River Dam), and natural migration barriers. The 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act reauthorization in 1996 

established a new requirement for “Essential Fish Habitat” (EFH) that requires federal agencies 

to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on activities that may adversely 

affect EFH. Essential Fish Habitat for the Pacific coast salmon fishery means those waters and 

substrate necessary for salmon production needed to support a long-term sustainable salmon 

fishery and salmon contributions to a healthy ecosystem. The species designated in the 

McKenzie River is spring Chinook salmon.

The Green Mountain Project “would not adversely affect EFH” for the same reasons designated

critical habitat would not be adversely modified.

Aquatic Insects on the Regional Sensitive Species List

We would create 1⁄4 acre gaps along some small streams in the project area that have zero to 

very few hardwoods. Trees would be felled and left on site. We expect that there would be a 

deciduous and deciduous shrub response in the gaps. This would be beneficial to the stream 

community by improving the quality of allochthonous sources of energy. We do not expect 

stream temperatures to rise significantly because of the small size and limited number of the 

gaps, the steep gradient of the streams, the hyporheic activity caused by the complexity of 

cascade habitat, downstream stands where shade will aid in recovery, and the eventual 

establishment of a hardwood stand that would provide effective shade in 6 to 10 years.

This change in allocthonous material would have a “beneficial impact” on the habitat for the 

caddisflies on the regional sensitive species list. This impact would be very small given that we 

have not found the caddisflies in question in our sampling and the streams are not their typical 

habitat (i.e. large spring fed rivers).

/s/Ramon Rivera

RAMON RIVERA 

District Fisheries Biologist
References

Bjorrn, T.C. and D.W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. American 

Fisheries Society Special Publication 19: 83-138.

Murphy, M.L. and J.D. Hall. 1981. Varied effects of clear-cut logging on predators and their 

habitat in small streams of the Cascade Range, Oregon. Canadian Journal of Fisheries 

and Aquatic Sciences. 38:137-145.

Poage, N.J. and J.C. Tappeiner. 2002. Long-term patterns of diameter and basal area growth of 

old-growth Douglas-fir trees in Western Oregon. Canadian Journal of Forest Resouces 

32: 1232-1243.

Ruzicka, K.J., K.J. Puettmann, and D.H. Olson. 2014 in press. Management of riparian buffers: 

upslope thinning with downslope impacts. Forest Science in press.

Sweeney, B.W. and J.D. Nubold. 2014. Streamside forest buffer width needed to protect stream 

water quality, habitat, and organisms: a literature review. Journal of American Water 

Resources Association 50: 560-584.

Tappeiner, J.C., D. Huffman, T. Marshal, A. Spies, and J.D. Bailey. 1997. Density, ages, and growth 

rates in old-growth and young-growth forests in coastal Oregon. Canadian Journal of 

Forest Research. v. 27, p. 638-648.

Wilzbach, M.A, B.C. Harvey, J.L. White, and R.J. Nakamoto. 2005. Effects of riparian canopy 

opening and salmon carcass addition on the abundance and growth of resident 

salmonids. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 62: 58-67.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1994a. Record of decision for 

amendments to Forest Service and BLM Planning Documents within the Range of the 

Northern Spotted Owl and Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for 

Late-Successional And Old-Growth Forest Related Species within the Range of the 

Northern Spotted Owl. Region 6, Portland, Oregon. 

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Land and Resource Management Plan, Willamette National Forest.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2010. Species Fact Sheet: 

Namamyia plutonis. Region 6, Portland, Oregon.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2011. Species Fact Sheet: 

Rhyacophila leechi. Region 6, Portland, Oregon.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2012. Species Fact Sheet: 

Rhyacophila chandleri. Region 6, Portland, Oregon.
Appendix A. Project Area Maps