Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

13

Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need 

1.1 Introduction

The Detroit Ranger District is proposing to improve stand growth, diversity and structure; move stand 

structure from an overabundance of mid-seral stands to increase both early and late seral stand structure 

within the watershed; reduce hazardous fuels; restore sugar pine and encourage sugar pine regeneration; 

treat powerline visuals; restore riparian and meadow habitats; and restore hydrologic processes in the 

Short Lake area. This project would also provide a sustainable yield of timber for commercial products to 

local and regional economies. Treatments would occur on about 4,060 acres on the Willamette National 

Forest. 

The Hwy 46 project area is approximately 31,295 acres, located in the Breitenbush Watershed. Forest 

Road 46 (Hwy 46), the Breitenbush River and a powerline bisect the project area. The Hwy 46 project 

area is located approximately 6 miles northeast of the town of Detroit, Oregon, in Marion County. The 

legal description of the area is T 9 S, R 6 E, sections 1, 11 – 15, 21 – 28, 35 and 36, T 9 S, R 7 E, sections 

3 – 36, T 9 S, R 8 E, sections 7, 18, 19, 30 and 31, T 10 S, R7 E, sections 1 – 6 and 8 – 12, T 10 S, R 8 E, 

section 6.

Within the project area trees are competing for sunlight, water and nutrients causing reduced tree growth 

and vigor. There is an oversupply of mid-seral stands, moving the seral distribution away from historic 

levels and limiting stand structure and species diversity across the landscape. This is the northern most 

extent of sugar pine, and past management and the exclusion of fire on the landscape has threatened this 

population of sugar pine. The Breitenbush Resort and Conference Center is located within the project 

area, and the watershed is popular with recreationists. 

31,136 acres in the project area are managed by the Willamette National Forest with the remaining 159 

acres belonging to private land holders. The project area is composed mostly of a Douglas-fir and western 

hemlock overstory, with an understory shrub component of vine maple, salal, dwarf Oregon grape, sword 

fern and Pacific rhododendron. Historically, large scale disturbances have been from infrequent, high 

intensity fires. Approximately 40% of the stands within the project area were initiated between 1600 and 

1800. Another round of fires burned portions of the landscape around the turn of the twentieth century, 

particularly in the northern part of the project area, with approximately 21% of the area in this age class. 

Although commercial logging started in the watershed shortly after that, it did not ramp up until the 1960s 

with even-aged management. Since the mid-1990s, there has been virtually no stand replacing 

disturbance. During the summer of 2017 three large fires burned within the project area. These fires were 

typical of the western cascades mixed severity fire regime and had a range of effects on the landscape, 

burning at total of 2,921 acres within the project area.

The project area is popular for recreation activities including: camping, hiking, hunting, fishing, 

bicycling, picnicking, target shooting, berry picking, viewing scenery, and driving for pleasure. Portions 

of the West Cascades National Scenic Byway and Cascading Rivers Scenic Bikeway are within the 

project area. The forested slopes along the Breitenbush River form an important scenic backdrop for the 

byway and river corridor. Several campgrounds along Forest Road 46 provide access opportunities to 

explore the area, enjoy a picnic or go for a short hike on a developed trail. Trailheads along the eastern 

project boundary provide entry to the Mt. Jefferson Wilderness. There are four special use permits for 

utilities within the project area as well as 71 recreation residences (summer homes).
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

14

Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

15

Figure 2 Hwy 46 Project Area

Figure 3 6th Field Watersheds within the Project Area
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

16

1.2 Purpose and Need for Action

The purpose of this project is to (1) improve stand growth, diversity and structure and move stand 

structure from an overabundance of mid-seral stands to increase early and late seral stand structure in the 

watershed, and to diversify wildlife habitat in the watershed; (2) strategically reduce hazardous fuels; (3) 

restore sugar pine stands to encourage sugar pine regeneration; (4) treat powerline visuals; (5) restore 

riparian habitats, meadows, and hydrologic processes in the project area; and (6) provide forest products 

to the local economy.

Improve Stand Growth, Diversity and Structure and Move Stand Structure 

from an Overabundance of Mid-seral Stands

The proposed project is needed to improve stand conditions, diversity, density, and structure in the project 

area, providing benefits to vegetation, wildlife, and overall health of the forest.

Increase Stand Health and Vigor

Why Consider Taking Action: All of the stands in which overstory management is proposed have a high 

continuous overstory canopy cover, most averaging 80% or more. The trees are competing for sunlight, 

water, and nutrients causing reduced tree growth and vigor as well as limiting understory vegetation. The 

understory is mostly limited to shrubs with few small trees scattered throughout resulting in single-storied 

stands in the plantations. The fire regenerated stands are similar to the plantations in that there is high 

competition between the overstory trees and suppression in the regeneration.

The proposed project would help improve stand conditions, diversity, density and structure with thinning, 

gaps, and dominant tree release. Thinning the overstocked stands would make more growing space and 

resources available to the remaining trees, resulting in decreased tree stress and development towards 

larger diameter stands. Stand vigor would also be increased as released trees develop into larger trees 

sooner, accelerating the development of some late successional characteristics. Tree species, age, and 

structural diversity would be maintained or enhanced. 

The Stand Density Index (SDI), which is a qualitative measure of tree competition within a stand, ranges 

from 143 to 522 and averages 322 for all stands being considered for treatment in the Hwy 46 project 

area. In Douglas-fir, the maximum SDI (SDImax) is 595 (Reineke 1933). As a stand reaches an SDI of 

about 149, or approximately 25% of SDImax, trees within the stand start to compete with each other. As 

SDI increases to around 357, or 60% SDImax, trees reach a point at which they start dying due to 

competition, or self-thinning (Long, 1985).

Existing Condition: Plantations are generally characterized by dense monocultures of Douglas-fir. 

Competition is high with mortality occurring in many of the stands. Crown ratios are small, leading to 

reduced diameter growth. Although fairly well established on some of the northerly slopes, regeneration is 

suppressed by the overstory and growing slowly. Fire regenerated stands are older than the plantations in 

this project, and tend to have larger trees. Species composition in the overstory varies for pure Douglas-fir 

to mixed Douglas-fir with noble fir, western white pine, western hemlock, western redcedar, pacific silver 

fir, and sugar pine. Understory regeneration is variable and is predominantly western hemlock with 

western redcedar, grand fir, pacific yew, and mountain hemlock at the higher elevations. These stands are 

similar to the plantations in that there is high competition between the overstory trees and suppression in 

the regeneration.

Desired Condition: The desired future condition is to have healthy, vigorous stands which are diverse in 

species as well as in vertical and horizontal structure. 
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

17

Increase the Amount of Early Seral Habitat

Why Consider Taking Action: Age class diversity in forest stands is important as some species of animals 

and plants depend on younger stages of forests for their feeding, nesting, and breeding requirements. 

Early seral habitat (defined as less than 20 years old) is of key importance to an estimated 156 species of 

wildlife in the central Oregon Cascades (O’Neil et al 2001). 

With the cessation of clear-cut logging twenty years ago and continued fire suppression, early seral 

habitat has been substantially reduced within the project area. Prior to the fires of 2017, the powerline 

corridor contained most of the early seral habitat in the project area, encompassing less than 1% of the 

acreage in the project area. It is estimated that 521 acres (1.6%) of early seral habitat was created in the 

project area as a result of the 2017 fires. Historically, the Breitenbush watershed maintained about 9% 

early seral due to wildfire (USDA 1996, 2014). Patches of early seral habitat contribute to landscape 

heterogeneity and provide habitat for large herbivores, song birds, cavity nesters, and pollinators.

There is a need to enhance, create, and maintain diverse quality and structurally rich early seral habitat to 

support wildlife species that have been documented to depend on early seral habitat, such as elk, blacktailed deer, rufous hummingbirds, olive-sided flycatchers, and a large number of butterfly and moth 

species. 

Existing Condition: Less than 4% of the project area is early seral habitat (defined as less than 20 years 

old).

Desired Condition: Historically the Breitenbush Watershed maintained about 9% early seral due to 

wildfire (USDA 1996, 2014). The desired condition would be to increase quality early seral habitat in the 

project area closer to historic levels.

Increase the Amount of Late Seral Habitat

Why Consider Taking Action: Age class diversity in forest stands is important as some species of animals 

and plants depend on older stages of forest development for their feeding, nesting, breeding and cover 

requirements such as flying squirrels, spotted owls, and many lichens and mosses. 

Historically, the Breitenbush watershed maintained about 60% of closed canopy late seral stands. 

Currently, the watershed has about 48% closed canopy late seral stands. There is currently a need to 

enhance, create, and maintain stands of trees in the Breitenbush watershed with late seral characteristics. 

Late-Successional Reserves (LSR) are to be managed to protect and enhance conditions of latesuccessional and old-growth forest ecosystems. Silviculture treatments are to benefit the creation and 

maintenance of late-successional forest conditions and are subject to review by the Regional Ecosystem 

Office (REO). In the Hwy 46 Project, there are 38 units that are either completely within or have a portion 

within the LSR, totaling 1,018 acres. Of this, 35 units encompassing 808 acres are prescribed for 

commercial thinning. These stands are previously managed, densely stocked plantations, less than 80 

years old. 

Existing Condition: Approximately 48% of the project area is in closed canopy late seral stands. 

Desired Condition: Historically, approximately 60% of the project area was in closed canopy late seral 

stands. The desired condition would be to move the late seral habitat closer to historical levels.

Increase the Potential for Riparian Reserves to Function as Late Successional Habitat

Why Consider Taking Action: Treatment of stands in Riparian Reserves would accelerate the ability of 

Riparian Reserves to provide adequate stream shade, root strength and bank stability, sediment filtration 

and nutrient cycling, large wood supply to waterbodies and floodplains, organic matter input, and habitat 
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

18

for riparian-dependent wildlife.

Existing Condition: Portions of Riparian Reserves within project area units consist of dense, overstocked, 

conifer-dominant stands with very little structural and species diversity and understory development. This 

lack of complexity and diversity is outside the natural range of variability and may be limiting nutrient 

cycling, deciduous organic matter input to waterbodies, and habitat for riparian-dependent wildlife.

Desired Condition: Maintain conditions in currently functioning portions of Riparian Reserves. In 

overstocked, conifer-dominant portions lacking structural and species diversity, attain Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy Objectives (Appendix E). 

Strategically Reduce Hazardous Fuels

Why Consider Taking Action: The project area surrounds both the Breitenbush Hot Springs Resort and the 

Breitenbush and Devils Creek summer home tracts. These areas have been identified as communities at 

risk in the Marion County Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Much of the area that surrounds the 

structures within these communities is dense older forest with heavy fuel loadings and narrow road access 

that could inhibit fire suppression activities in the event of a wildfire.

Existing Condition Fire suppression over the past century has resulted in increased fuel loading 

throughout forest ecosystems. In 2014 51 acres of mastication work was completed within the

Breitenbush Hot Springs, and between 2006 and 2012 50 acres of fuels reduction was completed by the 

US Forest Service within the summer home tracts. While this work has improved defensible space 

conditions and access for fire suppression resources there is still a substantial risk from wildfire within 

these communities.

During 2017, fire suppression work was done within the Breitenbush and Devils Creek summer home 

tracks to improve defensible space, however due to the amount of fuel loading and narrow access and 

egress the structures were classified as “prep and leave” and determined to be non-defensible. Additional 

fuels reduction work may make these structures easier and safer to defend in the event of another wildfire 

threatening this community.

Desired Condition: Reduced horizontal and vertical continuity of fuels in and around the Breitenbush 

Wildland-Urban Interface to decrease potential impacts and risks to people, structures, and resources in 

the event of a wildfire. 

Restore Sugar Pine

Why Consider Taking Action: The primary range of sugar pine extends from northern Mexico, through the 

Sierra Nevada, Northern California, and Southern Oregon. The very northern extent of its range is in the 

Hwy 46 project area. Sugar pines are moderately shade tolerant, particularly when they are young, 

needing some protection from the sun as they establish. As they get older their tolerance for competition 

decreases, and other species can out-compete them if lower intensity disturbances, primarily wildfire, do 

not thin stand densities.

Existing Condition: Fire suppression over the last 100 years, extensive logging, and the introduction of 

white pine blister rust at the turn of the 20th century have reduced the population across its range (Waring 

and Angell, 2011). Most of the sugar pine found in the project area are lone big trees surrounded by dense 

Douglas-fir stands. One area of naturally regenerating sugar pine was found during project 

reconnaissance. The presence of these trees means that sugar pine has been part of this landscape for a 

long time and now appears to be losing its place in the ecosystem due to lack of disturbance allowing it to 

regenerate.
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

19

Desired Condition: Sugar pine will be restored closer to historic levels on the landscape with continued 

regeneration.

Treat Powerline Visuals

Why Consider Taking Action: The Hwy 46 project area encompasses the Breitenbush viewshed corridor. 

This viewshed is an important scenic asset as it surrounds the Breitenbush Hot Springs Retreat and 

Conference Center and includes travel corridors that are considered sensitive to scenic quality. A 

powerline corridor bisects the watershed and the straight lines of the powerline corridor do not appear 

natural on the landscape.

Existing Condition: The project area is a high priority viewshed, with the powerline corridor bisecting 

the project area. The straight lines of the corridor are not natural looking.

Desired Condition: The existing straight line along the powerline corridor will be softened and a more 

natural appearing landscape will be created.

Restore Riparian Habitats, Meadows and Hydrologic Processes

Why Consider Taking Action: The previously managed stands in the Hwy 46 Project Area were harvested 

and replanted using direction that pre-dates 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, suppressing shrub and forb diversity 

in the understory. Analysis found that 4.6% of the Riparian Reserves in the Hwy 46 project area had a 

deciduous and deciduous/shrub component. Deciduous leaves have a higher nutritional quality than 

coniferous needles with regard to contributions to the aquatic food web. 

With the exclusion of fire, meadow habitat within the project area has been declining. A high elevation 

meadow has been encroached upon by conifers, resulting in a decline in plant diversity, pollinator habitat, 

and wildlife forage.

The current alignment of FS road 46-059 has disrupted the hydrology of the Short Lake Area. This road 

accesses Short Lake, a popular destination for dispersed recreation camping, as well as fishing, birding, 

boating and wildlife viewing. Rerouting the road would reduce sediment delivery to streams in the project 

area, improve water quality, and reduce road maintenance.

Existing Condition: The project area is deficient in hardwoods along streams. Past silvicultural practices 

harvested timber to the edge of many streams and planted Douglas-fir along the streamside. Foliage from 

hardwoods provide nutrients for macro-invertebrates which provide food for fish downstream. 

A high elevation meadow has been encroached upon by conifers since the last severe fire around the turn 

of the twentieth century. Historic aerial photos and field surveys indicate that this meadow once contained 

much more moisture and meadow vegetation, which is now being shaded out.

The current alignment of FS road 46-059 has disrupted the natural hydrology in the Short Lake area, 

allowing road generated sediment to enter the streams.

Desired Condition: Increase the shrub and deciduous component adjacent to streams. Restore the high 

elevation meadow to original standards by increasing hydrology, increasing solar exposure and enhancing 

the ability for native species to re-establish. Reduce the amount of road generated sediment entering 
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

20

streams in the area adjacent to FS road 46-059 (the Short Lake Road) by realigning the road to a more 

stable terrain.

Provide Forest Products to the Local Economy

Why Consider Taking Action: The proposed project is needed to ensure the Willamette National Forest 

continues to supply a reliable supply of timber products as directed by the laws and guidance below and 

in doing so contributes to the stability of local, regional, and national economies and contributes to the 

annual Probable Sale Quantity (PSQ) target for the Forest.

Several laws direct and allow the Forest Service to provide the sustainable harvest of trees from the 

Nation’s forests including Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 and the National Forest 

Management Act of 1976. One of the strategic goals of the Forest Service is to provide and sustain 

benefits to the people of the United States and the world as a whole. To accomplish this goal, one of the 

objectives is to provide a reliable supply of forest products over time consistent with achieving the desired 

conditions on National Forest System (NFS) lands and to maintain or create processing capacity and 

infrastructure in local communities. (USDA Strategic Plan FY 2014-2018 ). Additionally, the Willamette 

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

goals to produce an optimum and sustainable yield of timber that helps maintain the stability of local and 

regional economies, and contribute valuable resources to the national economy on a predictable and longterm basis.

Probable Sale Quantity (PSQ) is an estimate of probable harvest levels that could be maintained on a 

forest annually (Northwest Forest Plan 1994). PSQs represent neither minimum levels that must be met 

nor maximum levels that cannot be exceeded. Rather, PSQs represent the best assessment of the average 

annual amount of timber harvest that could occur on a forest without decline, over the long term, if the 

schedule of harvests and regeneration are followed (Northwest Forest Plan 1994). PSQ can vary and 

change over time depending on acres available for harvest, expected acre yields and Forest direction.

Existing Condition: The current PSQ annual target for the Willamette National Forest is 111 million board 

feet (MMBF) as amended by the Approval of PSQ Estimates for Northwest Forest Plan Forests (1998).

Desired Condition: Through implementation of the proposed action, the Detroit Ranger District would 

contribute approximately 40 MMBF to the Willamette National Forest PSQ target and to the local 

economy.

1.3 Proposed Action

Proposed Action

The proposed action would treat approximately 4,060 acres in the project area. Harvest treatments 

proposed include thinning, dominant tree release, gap creation, early seral creation, shelterwood harvest, 

meadow restoration and skips. Non-commercial treatments include understory enhancements, riparian 

treatments, and hazardous fuels treatments. A detailed description of proposed treatments and project 

activities is located in Appendix A.

As stated in Section 1.2, the purpose and need for action includes: 

1. improve stand growth, diversity and structure, and move stand structure from an overabundance 

of mid-seral stands to increase early and late seral stand structure in the watershed, and to 

diversify wildlife habitat in the watershed;
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

21

2. strategically reduce hazardous fuels;

3. restore sugar pine stands to encourage sugar pine regeneration;

4. treat powerline visuals;

5. restore riparian habitats, meadows, and hydrologic processes in the project area; and 

6. provide forest products to the local economy 

Table 3 illustrates the preferred action proposed treatments, connected actions, and the purpose and need

they address. 

Table 3 Preferred Action Treatments and Connected Actions

Proposed Activity Unit of 

Measure

Preferred

Action Purpose – Need Addressed

Timber Harvest Treatments

Thinning outside Riparian Reserves Acres 1785.45 1,3,4,5,6

Thinning in Riparian Reserves Acres 703 1,3,4,5,6

Quality Early Seral Habitat Creation Acres 43 1,6

Sugar Pine Shelterwood Acres 92 1,2,3,6

Gaps Acres 47.8 1,3,4,6 

Dominant Tree Release Acres 72.75 1,3,5,6 

Skips Acres 910 1,5

Meadow Restoration Acres 8 1,5,6

Total Acres 3662 -

Estimated Volume MMBF ~40

Non-Commercial Treatments

Understory Habitat Enhancements Acres 155 1,2,5

Streamside Treatments (fall and leave) Acres 20 1,5

Hazardous Fuels Treatment (WUI) Acres 223 2

Total Non-Commercial Treatment Acres 398

Post-Harvest Fuels Treatments1 in Timber Harvest Units

Pile and Burn (mechanical and/or hand 

treatments )2 Acres 886 2

Post-Harvest Underburn3 Acres 1102 2

Connected Actions

Harvest System
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

22

Proposed Activity Unit of 

Measure

Preferred

Action Purpose – Need Addressed

Helicopter Acres 317 6

Skyline Acres 1510 6

Ground Acres 926 6

Transportation

Temporary Road Reconstruction Miles 4.01 6

Temporary Road Construction Miles 5.11 6

Road Maintenance/Haul Route Miles 108 6

Road Realignment Miles 1 5, 6

Road Storage Miles 4.07 5

Road Decommissioning Miles 8.88 5

Rock Pit Management Each 10 6

Post-Harvest Planting

Early Seral Planting Acres 43 1

Shelterwood Planting Acres 92 1, 3

Gap Planting Acres 47.8 1, 3

Dominant Tree Release Planting Acres Up to 72.75 1, 3

Key Issues

Fire regenerated stands harvested Acres 767 1, 3, 5, 6

Other 

Subsoiling: Subsoiling would occur in harvest units where needed to keep compaction below Forest Standards and 

Guidelines for high compaction levels Subsoiling would also occur on skid roads located in regeneration 

harvest units and gaps. 

Temporary Road Decommissioning: All temporary roads used in project activities would be decommissioned 

upon completion of activities or connected activities. 

Scarifying Temporary Roads: Soils may be scarified to aid in vegetation establishment. 

Down Wood and Snag: At least 240 lineal feet per acre of decay class I and II material greater than 20” diameter 

and 20 feet in length would be retained within the regeneration harvest units. Where the preferred size of 

material is not available, 240 lineal feet per acre of the next largest trees proposed to be harvested would be 

left. On average 4 snags (or live trees for snag creation) per acre would also be left in the regeneration harvest 

units. 

1

: Post-harvest fuels treatments methods may change depending on feasibility and funding. Post-harvest fuels treatments would 

occur in timber harvest units; therefore the acreage of post-harvest fuels treatments are not included in the total acres of treated 

units.
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

23

2

: Mechanical treatment may include: grapple piling in slash concentrations, yarding tops attached, mastication, or any other 

mechanical device). 

3

: These acres are possible underburn acres due to dbh and location, not all acreage may be underburned. Acreage not 

underburned may have other post-harvest fuels treatments assigned before implementation. 

1.4 Forest Plan and Management Direction

This final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is tiered to the following EISs and plans, which are 

incorporated by reference:

The Willamette National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement, 

as amended (USDA Forest Service 1990; referred to as the “Forest Plan”)

The Northwest Forest Plan and Record of Decision and Standards and Guidelines for Management of 

Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth Related Species with the Range of the Northern

Spotted Owl (USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 1994a; referred to as the 

“Northwest Forest Plan”)

The Forest Plan as amended by the 2001 Record of Decision and Standards and Guidelines for 

Amendments to the Survey and Manage, Protection Buffer, and other Mitigation Measures Standards 

and Guidelines (USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 2001)

The Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision for Preventing and Managing Invasive 

Plants (USDA Forest Service 2005)

The Willamette National Forest Road Investment Strategy, Travel Analysis Report (TAR) (USDA Forest 

Service 2015)

The Forest Plan “guides all natural resource management activities and establishes management standards 

and guidelines for the Willamette National Forest. It describes resource management practices, levels of 

resource production and management, and the availability and suitability of lands for resources 

management” (Forest Plan, I-1). The Forest Plan provides management direction through the designation 

of specific management areas and standards and guidelines specific to these designations. 

The Forest Plan was amended by the Northwest Forest Plan (1994), which established additional 

management areas, standards, and guidelines associated with Matrix, Riparian Reserves, Adaptive 

Management Areas, and Late-Successional Reserves. When there is overlap of management areas, the 

more restrictive standards and guidelines apply (Northwest Forest Plan 1994a p. A-6). Figure 4 and 5 

illustrate the Forest Plan and Northwest Forest Plan management areas. Table 4 displays Forest Plan 

management areas, Northwest Forest Plan land management areas and proposed action unit acres for the 

proposed action.
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

24

Figure 4 Willamette Forest Plan Management Areas in the Hwy 46 Project Area
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

25

Figure 5 Northwest Forest Plan Management Areas in the Hwy 46 Project Area
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

26

Table 4 Land Management Areas in Project Area and Proposed Treatment Acres (Alternative 2)

Forest Plan

Management Areas (MA)

Northwest Forest Plan

Management Areas (MA)

Acres in 

Project 

Area

Proposed Action Acres

Timber 

Harvest

Non 

Commercial Total

Special Interest Areas (5A) 182 0 0 0 

Old Growth Groves (7) Late Successional Reserve 

(16A) 422 0 0 0

Wildlife Habitat – Pileated 

Woodpecker (9B) <1 0 0 0

Wildlife Habitat – Marten (9C) 168 0 0 0

Dispersed Recreation –

Lakeside Setting (10F) 130 101 0 10

Scenic Modification 

Middleground (11A) Matrix (14) 5353 1150 8 1158

Scenic Modification 

Middleground (11A)

Late Successional Reserve 

(16A)) 215 22 0 22

Scenic Modification 

Middleground (11A)

100-acre Late Successional 

Reserve (16B) 193 0 0 0

Scenic Partial Retention 

Middleground (11C) Matrix (14) 2385 299 0 299

Scenic Partial Retention 

Middleground (11C) Late Successional Reserve (16A) 2790 192 5 197

Scenic Partial Retention 

Middleground (11C)

100-acre Late Successional 

Reserve (16B) 137 0 0 0

Scenic Retention Middleground 

(11D) Late Successional Reserve (16A) 97 0 0 0

Scenic Retention Foreground 

(11F) Matrix (14) 1259 188 52 240

Scenic Retention Foreground 

(11F) Late Successional Reserve (16A) 1872 126 448 174

Developed Recreation – FS Site 

(12A) 45 0 3 3

Developed Recreation – Special 

Use Permits (12B) 7 0 5 5

Developed Recreation – Special 

Use Permits (12B) Late Successional Reserve (16A) 105 0 93 93

Special Use Permit Areas (13A) 335 59 0 59

Special Use Permit Areas (13A) Late Successional Reserve (16A) 65 27 0 27

Administrative Use Site (13B) Late Successional Reserve (16A) 6 0 0 0

General Forest (14A) Matrix (14) 6323 1070 140 1210

General Forest (14A) Late Successional Reserve (16A) 8965 519 44 563
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

27

Forest Plan

Management Areas (MA)

Northwest Forest Plan

Management Areas (MA)

Acres in 

Project 

Area

Proposed Action Acres

Timber 

Harvest

Non 

Commercial Total

General Forest (14A) 100-acre Late Successional 

Reserve (16B) 82 0 0 0

Eligible Wild and Scenic Rivers

(6B/6C) 5288 372 132 504

Riparian Areas (15) Riparian Reserves (15) 13502 761 53 814

Critical Habitat 24552 2692 305 2997

Private Land 

(not a management allocation) 159 0 0 0

Total Land Allocations1 31295 3662 398 4,060

1

: Does not include Eligible Wild and Scenic Rivers, Riparian Reserves or Critical Habitat which overlay other allocations.

The following management direction is relevant to management allocations with proposed treatments in 

the project area:

Forest Plan

Scenic – Modification Middleground (11A) areas have an objective to create and maintain desired visual 

characteristics of the forest landscape through time and space. Visually sensitive landscapes would be 

managed for a modest level of scenic quality. This area may also be managed for other resource goals 

including maintenance of wildlife habitats, recreation opportunities, watershed protection, and timber 

production.

Scenic-Partial Retention Middleground (11C) areas have the objective to create and maintain desired 

visual characteristics of the forest landscape through time and space. Visually sensitive landscapes would 

be managed for a moderate level of scenic quality. This area would also be managed for other resource 

goals including timber production, recreation opportunities, watershed protection, and maintenance of 

wildlife habitats.

Scenic-Partial Retention Foreground (11D) areas have an objective to create and maintain desired visual 

characteristics of the forest landscape through time and space. Visually sensitive landscapes would be 

managed for a moderate level of scenic quality. This area may also be managed for other resource goals 

including maintenance of wildlife habitats, recreation opportunities, watershed protection, and timber 

production.

Scenic-Retention Foreground (11F) areas have the objective to create and maintain desired visual 

characteristics of the forest landscape through time and space. Visually sensitive landscapes would be 

managed for a high visual quality. This area may also be managed for other resource goals including 

maintenance of wildlife habitats, recreation opportunities, watershed protection, and timber production.
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

28

Developed Recreation Sites (12A) areas have an objective to provide a safe, healthful, aesthetic, nonurban 

atmosphere for the pursuit of natural resource based recreation, and to provide facilities and 

improvements, consistent with resource protection needs and anticipated user demand.

Developed Recreation Special Use Permits (12B) areas have an objective to provide a safe, healthful, 

aesthetic, nonurban atmosphere for the pursuit of natural resource based recreation, and to provide 

facilities and improvements, consistent with resource protection needs and anticipated user demand.

Special Use Permits (13A) areas have an objective to provide safe and efficient sites for permitted 

facilities and improvements to promote public welfare in an environmentally sound manner.

General Forest (14 A) consists of areas outside of other Land Management Allocation categories where 

most of the timber treatments occur to produce an optimum and sustainable yield of timber production 

that is compatible with multiple use objectives.

Eligible Wild and Scenic Rivers (6B/6C) areas have an objective to maintain or enhance the largely 

undeveloped character of the shoreline while maintaining and improving the quality of water entering the 

river. These areas are managed to provide opportunities for a wide range of river oriented recreation 

activities and to maintain or enhance scenic quality. Management will comply with standards for 

Recreation or Scenic rivers as specified in FSH 1909.12. 

Northwest Forest Plan

General Forest-Matrix Lands (14A) consists of areas outside of other Northwest Forest Plan land 

allocation categories where intensive timber management takes place and most of the timber treatments 

occur to produce an optimum and sustainable yield of timber production that is compatible with multiple 

use objectives.

Riparian Reserves (MA 15) are areas where the conservation of aquatic and riparian-dependent, terrestrial 

resources receives primary emphasis. In these areas all streams, wetlands, ponds, lakes, and unstable or 

potentially unstable areas are included and managed for the purpose of protecting the health of the aquatic 

system and its dependent species. 

Late Successional Reserves (MA 16A) are managed to protect and enhance conditions of late-successional 

and old-growth forest ecosystems. The purpose of silvicultural treatments is to benefit the creation and 

maintenance of late-successional forest conditions.

1.6 Tribal Consultation 

Tribal consultation for the Hwy 46 project began in 2011 during the early planning stages of the project 

and included field visits with tribal representatives. On July 15, 2011 the Grand Ronde and Warm Springs 

Tribes participated in a field visit to the project area. Representatives from both tribes have also 

participated in collaborative meetings. The Siletz Tribes consulted independently with field visits and 

meetings. The Detroit Ranger District consulted with the Klamath Tribes, the Confederated Tribes of 

Grand Ronde, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians and the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs. A 

consultation package and invitation to comment was sent to the Tribes listed above on January 28, 2016. 

No comments were received. 

1.7 Public Involvement Efforts

Public involvement efforts during the development of the FEIS included collaborative meetings, scoping 

letters, field trips, meetings with interested parties and landowners, and publication of the project in the 
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

29

Willamette National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions and Willamette National Forest website. Below 

is a timeline illustrating public involvement efforts for the Hwy 46 project:

• July 15, 2011: Tribal input field trip into the Hwy 46 planning area.

• July 29, 2011: Breitenbush Community input field trip into the Hwy 46 planning area.

• August 3, 2011: Timber industry input field trip into the Hwy 46 planning area.

• August 15, 2011: Environmental Advocate input field trip into the Hwy 46 planning 

area.

• November 17, 2011: Breitenbush Collaborative begins meeting

• July 1, 2015: Project published in the Willamette National Forest Schedule of Proposed 

Actions

• March 9, 2016: Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS published in the Federal 

Register

• March 9, 2016: Scoping letter and background information mailed to members of the 

public, organizations, and state/federal agencies that have expressed interest in receiving 

information on District projects

• May 25, 2016: Public field trip to view and discuss Hwy 46 project at Detroit, Oregon

• October 20, 2017: Notice of Availability (NOA) and initiation of 45-day comment period 

for Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) published in the Federal Register

• October 20, 2017: Notice of Availability (NOA) and initiation of 45-day comment period 

for DEIS published in the Statesman Journal

Members of the public, organizations, and state and federal agencies were invited to provide comments 

and concerns about the Hwy 46 project during the public scoping comment period from March 10th 

through April 25, 2016. Scoping comments received varied from those that wanted more clarification on 

proposed activities to specific suggestions for project implementation. Scoping comments were used to 

help develop planning issues, alternatives, and effects analysis for the DEIS.

Members of the publics, organization, and state and federal agencies were invited to provide comment on 

the DEIS during the 45-day comment period from October 20th through December 4th, 2017. Twenty two 

letters were received from members of the public, federal officials, public interest organizations, and 

private businesses. Comments received varied from general statements of support or opposition to 

requests for additional analysis. Comments on the DEIS and the corresponding responses are located in 

Appendix I (FEIS). A complete record of all letters, including names and addresses of individuals, 

agencies, and organizations that submitted a letter during the 45-day comment period, is available online 

in the Hwy 46 EIS Public Reading Room at https://cara.ecosystemmanagement.org/Public//ReadingRoom?Project=47109

All correspondence and comments are available in the Project Record at the Detroit Ranger District 

office. 
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

30

1.8 Consultation with other Agencies

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS)

Upper Willamette River Chinook Salmon

This analysis found that the Hwy 46 Project “may affect, not likely to adversely affect” Upper Willamette 

spring Chinook salmon. This is due to the potential for “take” as defined in the ESA. Take is prohibited 

by the ESA unless it is authorized by the “fisheries” agencies (National Marine Fisheries Service for 

salmon). In order for the Forest Service to obtain authorization we must conduct consultation with the fish 

agencies under Section 7 of the ESA. Consultation is anticipated to be completed by May 2018. 

Northern Spotted Owl

The Biological Assessment for Willamette Planning Province of Oregon for FY 2018 LAA Projects 

within the Willamette National Forest with a Potential to Modify Habitat and/or Disrupt Northern Spotted 

Owls of LAA Projects with the Potential to Modify the Habitat and/or Disrupt Northern Spotted Owls –

Willamette Planning Province – FY 2016/17 was used to determine effects. A biological assessment was 

submitted August 1, 2017 and a biological opinion was signed August 31, 2017 which includes the Hwy 

46 project. This project would need to be completed prior to a final decision notice being signed for this 

project. The determination expected to be made in the Biological Assessment for the Hwy 46 project, 

which would be completed and concurrence received from the USFWS prior to the final decision notice is 

signed, is this project may affect and is not likely to adversely affect spotted owls by disturbance.

Oregon State Historic Preservation Office

The 1995 Programmatic Agreement (PA) among the USDA Forest Service PNW, the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, and the Oregon State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) Regarding Cultural 

Resource Management in the State of Oregon by the USDA Forest Service, (amended in 2004), provides 

a process by which the Forest Heritage Specialist may certify that the Forest has complied with Section 

106 of NHPA for the project. In accordance with this PA, an appropriate inventory was conducted during 

the summers of 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016. All known cultural sites in the Area of Potential Effect 

(project area) were protected by avoidance, resulting in a determination of “No Historic Properties 

Affected” on December 28, 2016. Documentation was provided by SHPO and copies have been retained 

in the Forest and District Heritage files.

1.9 Issues Derived from Public Comments

A standardized content analysis process was conducted to analyze the letters received during the public 

scoping comment period. Content analysis was designed to extract comments from each letter received, 

evaluate similar comments from different letters, and identify topics or issues of concern. During content 

analysis, the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), with involvement and approval from the Responsible Official, 

identified issues and separated them into three categories: “key” issues, “other” issues, and “out of scope”

issues.

Key Issues

Key issues represent an unresolved conflict associated with potential environmental effects of the 

proposed action that cannot be resolved simply with mitigation or design features. Key issues are used to 

formulate alternatives and focus the analysis of environmental effects. 
Hwy 46 Project FEIS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

31

During the public scoping process, two key issues were identified from comments and questions: 

Key Issue #1: Log truck traffic on the roads into and around the Breitenbush community poses a 

public safety concern. Issue includes public safety (Breitenbush community, bikeway, scenic 

byway, motorcyclists, etc.), and associated dust and noise associated with logging.

Key Issue #2: Harvest treatments should not occur in fire regenerated stands 

In response to Key Issue #1, concern for public safety issues associated with log truck traffic near the 

Breitenbush community, the haul route has been redesigned to require hauling as much as possible over 

FS road 2231 to Highway 22. Units located in the southern part of the planning area that are accessed by 

FS road 2231 will be hauled southeast over Boulder Ridge and down to Highway 22 just west of Idanha. 

This haul route is for both Alternative 2 and Alternative 3.

In response to Key Issue #2, Alternative 3 was developed, which eliminates harvest in fire regenerated

stands. Hazardous fuel and understory treatments would still occur in fire-regenerated stands.

Though two issues are listed above, only one measure of change will be used to compare the alternatives: 

Key Issue Measurement: Acres of fire-regenerated stands harvested

Other Issues and Out of Scope Issues

Other issues are minor issues that do not result in development of alternatives or focus the analysis of 

environmental effects. In most cases, the IDT is able to address these issues by refining the design of a 

project (i.e. dropping a unit from the project) or applying a design feature (i.e. requiring buffers around 

streams). 

Out of Scope issues are those identified as being “out of scope” of this environmental analysis. These 

issues include those that are not or cannot be addressed or solved in this project-level analysis; issues

already decided by law, regulation, or other higher level decisions; issues irrelevant to the decision being 

made; and/or issues that are conjectural or not supported by scientific evidence.

1.10 Decision Framework

The responsible official for this proposal is the District Ranger of the Detroit Ranger District on the 

Willamette National Forest. The District Ranger will review the proposed action, alternatives, and the 

environmental consequences in order to make the following decisions:

• Whether to implement the proposed action or another alternative;

• What specific design features are needed;

• What specific project monitoring requirements are needed to ensure design features are 

implemented and effective; and 

• What if any modifications would be made to the proposed action.

The decision will be based on: 

• How well the selected alternative achieves the project purpose and need; and

• How well the selected alternative responds to analysis issues.