U.S. Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Land Management 

Vale Field Office 

100 Oregon Street 

Vale, Oregon 97918 

September 2002 

Southeastern Oregon 

Resource Management Plan 

and 

Record of Decision 
As the Nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and 

natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the 

environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. 

The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is in the best interest of all our people. 

The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in Island Territories under 

U.S. administration. 

BLM/OR/WA/GI-03/020+1792 
Vale District Office, September 2002
 

Table of Contents 

Table of Contents
 

Record of Decision .................................................................................................................... i
 

Introduction ....................................................................................................................... ii
 

Decision Summary ............................................................................................................ ii
 

Alternatives Considered .....................................................................................................v
 

Management Considerations, Environmental Preferability ...............................................v
 

Mitigation ......................................................................................................................... vi
 

Implementation ................................................................................................................ vi
 

Monitoring........................................................................................................................ vi
 

Public Involvement .......................................................................................................... vi
 

Table S-1 ........................................................................................................................ viii
 

Resource Management Plan ...................................................................................................... 1
 

Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................. 2
 

Planning Area .................................................................................................................... 2
 

Scoping Issues ................................................................................................................... 5
 

Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study ............................................................................. 7
 

Public Participation ........................................................................................................... 8
 

Planning Criteria ............................................................................................................... 9
 

Coordination and Consistency With Other Plans ........................................................... 13
 

Relationship to Other BLM Planning Documents .......................................................... 14
 

Policy ........................................................................................................................... 14
 

Wilderness Study Areas ............................................................................................ 14
 

Caves ......................................................................................................................... 15
 

Management Framework................................................................................................. 16
 

Ecosystem-Based Management ................................................................................ 16
 

Goals ........................................................................................................................... 24 
 

Desired Range of Future Conditions .............................................................................. 24
 

Management Decisions ................................................................................................... 27
 

Introduction............................................................................................................... 27
 

Objective, Rationale, Monitoring and Management Actions ................................... 28
 

Air Resources .................................................................................................... 28
 

Energy and Mineral Resources .......................................................................... 28
 

Fire ..................................................................................................................... 37
 

Rangeland Vegetation ........................................................................................ 38
 

Forest and Woodlands ....................................................................................... 41
 

Special Status Plant Species .............................................................................. 43
 

Water Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas .................................................. 44
 

Fish and Aquatic Habitat ................................................................................... 49
 

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ............................................................................ 50
 

Special Status Animal Species ........................................................................... 51
 

Wild Horses ....................................................................................................... 55
 

Rangeland/Grazing Use ..................................................................................... 56
 

Recreation .......................................................................................................... 60
 

Off-Highway Vehicles ....................................................................................... 65
 

Visual Resources ............................................................................................... 67
 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern ......................................................... 68
 

Wild and Scenic Rivers ................................................................................... 102
 

Land Adjacent to Wilderness Study Areas ...................................................... 104
 

Human Uses and Values .................................................................................. 106
 

Cultural Resources........................................................................................... 106
 

Land and Realty ............................................................................................... 108
 
 

Southeast Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Public Involvement and Implementation ............................................................................... 111
 

Adaptive Management ................................................................................................... 111
 

Implementation ..............................................................................................................113
 

Plan Evaluation ..............................................................................................................113
 

Acronyms and Glossary ........................................................................................................ G-1
 

Appendices 

Appendix D1 

Appendix D2 

Appendix D3 

Appendix D4 

Appendix D5 

Appendix D6 

Appendix E 

Appendix F
 

Appendix H
 

Appendix I
 

Appendix J
 

Appendix L
 

Appendix M
 

Appendix O
 

Appendix R
 

Appendix S
 

Appendix T
 

Appendix U
 

Appendix W
 

Appendix X
 

Tables 

Table 1
 

Table 2
 

Table 3
 

Table 4
 

Table 5
 

Table 6
 

Table 7
 

Table 8
 

Table 9
 

Table 10
 

Table 11
 

Table 12
 

Table 13
 

Table 14
 

Table 15
 

Riparian/ Wetland Areas .......................................................................... D-1
 

Riparian Conservation Areas ................................................................... D-3
 

Riparian Management Objectives ............................................................ D-6
 

Riparian Trend Analysis Worksheet ......................................................... D-9
 

Riparian Trends for Stream Segments ................................................... D-10
 

Water Quality Restoration Plans ............................................................ D-21
 

Allotment Summaries................................................................................E-1
 

Malheur Resource Area ............................................................................. E-3
 

Jordan Resource Area ............................................................................E-155
 

Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations ................................... F-1
 

Recreational Opportunity Spectrum ........................................................ H-1
 

Off-Highway Vehicle Use .......................................................................... I-1
 

Visual Resource Management Class Objectives........................................J-1
 

Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria and Legal Requirements ..................... L-1
 

Wildland Fire Appropriate Management Response .................................M-1
 

Best Management Practices ..................................................................... O-1
 

Effects of Intensity and Season of Grazing ............................................. R-1
 

Standard Implementation Features and Procedures for


 Rangeland Improvements .......................................................................... S-1
 

Areas Removed from Livestock Grazing ................................................. T-1
 

Potential Recreation Sites, Trails, and Improvements of Existing Sites . U-1
 

Monitoring ................................................................................................W-1
 

Maps ......................................................................................................... X-1
 

Areas of Federal, State and Private Land ..................................................... 4
 

Geographic Management Areas ................................................................. 18
 

Mineral Leasing Management .................................................................... 32
 

Mineral Restrictions ................................................................................... 36
 

Locatable Mineral Withdrawls ................................................................... 36
 

Special Status Plant Species ....................................................................... 45
 

Special Status Animal Species ................................................................... 53
 

Herd Management Areas ............................................................................ 57
 

Areas with Livestock Grazing Discontinued ............................................. 59
 

Special Recreation Management Areas ...................................................... 61
 

Off-Highway Use Designations.................................................................. 66
 

Visual Resource Management Classes ....................................................... 67
 

Specific Management for ACEC’s/RNA’s ................................................. 69
 

Eligible and Administratively Suitable Wild and Scenic Study Rivers ... 102
 

Wilderness Study Area Additions ............................................................. 105
 
Record of Decision 

Record of Decision
 

for the
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management
 

Plan
 

Bureau of Land Management
 

Vale District
 

Vale, Oregon
 

i 
Southeasteastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision 

for the
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan
 

Introduction 

This Record of Decision (ROD) approves the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM’s) plan to 

manage the public lands within the Malheur and Jordan Resource Areas of the Vale District 

during the next 20 years and beyond. 

The Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan (SEORMP) is a general resource 

management plan for 4.6 million acres of BLM administered public lands primarily in Malheur 

County with minor acreage in Grant and Harney Counties, Oregon. The SEORMP establishes 

guidance for managing a broad spectrum of land uses and allocations including livestock 

grazing management, wild horse management, land tenure adjustments, off-highway motorized vehicle use, wild, scenic and recreation river designations, mineral management, vegetation management and areas of critical environmental concern (ACECs). The SEORMP 

contains resource objectives, land use allocations, management actions and direction needed 

to achieve program goals. The SEORMP consolidated, updates and replaces the existing land 

management guidance for the Malheur and Jordan Resource Areas. 

Decision Summary 

The decision is hereby made to approve the attached plan as the Resource Management Plan 

for the Malheur and Jordan Resource Areas of the Vale District. The plan was prepared under 

the regulations implementing the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 CFR 

1600). An environmental impact statement was prepared for this plan in compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. The plan is nearly identical to the one set 

forth in the Proposed SEORMP published in November of 2001. 

The following is a summary of the major components of the approved SEORMP: 

Meet or exceed Air Quality Standards. 

Provide opportunities for exploration and development of energy and mineral resources while 

protecting other sensitive resources. 

Provide for an appropriate management response on all wildfires, while providing for fire 

fighter and public safety and protecting resource values. 

Recognize and utilize fire as a critical natural process to protect, maintain, and enhance 

resources. 

Restore, protect, and enhance the diversity and distribution of desirable vegetation communities including perennial native and desirable introduced plant species. Provide for their 

continued existence and normal function in nutrient, water, and energy cycles. 

ii 
Record of Decision 

Manage big sagebrush cover in seedings and on native rangeland to meet the life history 

requirements of sagebrush-dependent wildlife. 

Control the introduction and proliferation of noxious weed species and reduce the extent and 

density of established weed species to within acceptable limits. 

Manage ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, and western larch communities to emphasize forest 

health. 

Manage western juniper and aspen woodlands to restore and promote productivity and 

biodiversity. 

Manage public land to maintain, restore, or enhance populations and habitats of special 

status plant and animal species. 

Manage public lands by ensuring that surface water and ground water influenced by BLM 

activities comply with or are making progress toward achieving State of Oregon water quality 

standards for beneficial uses as established per stream by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 

Manage riparian/wetland areas for the restoration, maintenance, or improvement of riparian 

vegetation, habitat diversity, and associated watershed function to achieve healthy and 

productive riparian areas and wetlands. 

Restore, maintain, or improve habitat to provide for diverse and self-sustaining communities 

of fishes and other aquatic organisms. 

Facilitate the maintenance, restoration, and enhancement of bighorn sheep populations and 

habitat on public land. 

Manage riparian areas so they provide diverse and healthy habitat conditions for wildlife. 

Manage upland habitats so that the forage, water, cover, security and structure necessary for 

wildlife are available on public land. 

Maintain and manage wild horse herds in seven established herd management areas (HMA’s) 

of Vale District and Heath Creek-Sheephead HMA of Burns District at appropriate management levels (AML’s) to ensure a thriving natural ecological balance between wild horse 

populations, wildlife, livestock, vegetation resources, and other resource values. Enhance 

and perpetuate special and unique characteristics that distinguish the respective herds. 

Provide for a sustained level of livestock grazing consistent with other resource objectives 

and public land use allocations. 

Provide and enhance developed and undeveloped recreation opportunities, while protecting 

resources, to manage the increasing demand for resource-dependent recreation activities. 

Designate and manage 673,069 acres in five Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMA’s), 

and 3,962,193 acres in two Extensive Special Recreation Management Areas (ERMA’s). 

Manage off-highway vehicle (OHV) use to protect resource values, promote public safety, 

provide OHV use opportunities where appropriate, and minimize conflicts among various 

users. Designate public lands for OHV use as “Open” on 2,615,066 acres, “Limited” on 

2,004,369 acres, and “Closed” on 15,826 acres. 

Manage public land actions and activities in a manner to be consistent with visual resource 

management (VRM) class objectives. Designate and manage 1,308,297 acres as VRM Class I, 

iii 
Southeasteastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

217,226 acres as VRM Class II, 639,657 acres as VRM Class III, and 2,469,509 acres as VRM 

Class IV. 

Retain and/or designate 26 areas totaling 206,257 acres as Areas of Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACECs). 

Protect and enhance outstandingly remarkable values (ORV’s) of congressionally designated 

national wild and scenic rivers, and provide interim protection of ORV’s of rivers found to be 

administratively suitable for inclusion in the national wild and scenic river system. Continue 

to manage the congressionally designated Main Owyhee (120 miles, 35,240 acres), West Little 

Owyhee (58 miles, 12,520 acres) and North Fork Owyhee (10 miles, 1,247 acres) components of 

the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System (NWSRS), as prescribed in their 1993 management plan, compliant with the Oregon District Court’s decision. Recommend and manage four 

river segments (42.5 miles) as administratively suitable for designation as wild and scenic 

rivers. Release from further wild and scenic river consideration 145.5 miles of eligible study 

river segments determined to be non-suitable administratively for wild and scenic river 

designation. 

Continue managing 32 wilderness study areas (WSA’s —1,273,015 acres) under BLM’s 

“Interim Management Policy for Land under Wilderness Review” (IMPLWR). Include in 

adjacent WSA’s certain other BLM-administered lands identified in the 1991 “Wilderness 

Study Report, Oregon” which are determined to have wilderness values and manage them 

under the IMPLWR. 

Manage caves determined to be significant and caves nominated for significance which 

require more data to determine significance in compliance with the 1988 “Federal Cave 

Resources Protection Act” and BLM’s “Oregon and Washington Interim Cave Management 

Policy”. 

Manage public land and pursue partnerships to provide social and economic benefits to local 

residents, businesses, visitors, and future generations. 

Provide for the protection and conservation of cultural and paleontological resources. 

Increase the public’s knowledge of, appreciation for, and sensitivity to cultural and paleontological resources. Consult and coordinate with American Indian groups to ensure their 

interests are considered and their traditional religious sites, landforms and resources are 

taken into account. 

Meet public needs for use authorizations such as rights-of way, leases and permits consistent 

with other resource objectives. 

Acquire and maintain legal public access to public land consistent with other resource 

objectives. 

Eliminate unauthorized use of public land. 

Lands are identified for retention and acquisition to consolidate public land holdings while 

retaining and acquiring land with high and public resource values. 

Establish right-of-way corridor routes and corridor avoidance and exclusion areas. 

iv 
Record of Decision 

Alternatives Considered
 

Development of management alternatives for the Proposed Southeastern Oregon Resource 

Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (PSEORMP/FEIS) was guided by the 

“National Environmental Policy Act” (NEPA), BLM resource management planning regulations, and comments from the public that were received on the Draft SEORMP/EIS. The basic 

goal for developing alternatives was to prepare different combinations of resource uses to 

address identified issues and management concerns and to resolve conflicts among uses. A 

range of resource management actions and allocations was developed for resources related to 

identified issues, and comments received from the public. 

Seven alternatives were described and analyzed in detail by a BLM interdisciplinary planning 

team in the PSEORMP/FEIS. Alternative A emphasized commodity production with constraints on commodity production for the protection of sensitive resources being the least 

restrictive possible within the limits defined by law, regulation, and BLM policy. Alternative B 

represented current management, or the no action alternative required by NEPA regulations. 

It is based on implementation of the Northern and Southern Malheur Management Framework 

Plans (MFP’s), as amended. Alternative C was the agency’s preferred alternative in the Draft 

SEORMP. It identified management actions for a high level of natural resource protection 

and improvement in ecological conditions while providing for commodity production. 

Alternative D emphasized natural values and the functioning of natural systems. Commodity 

production would be substantially constrained to protect sensitive resources or accelerate 

improvement in their condition. Alternative D2 excluded commodity and certain other public 

uses from areas with sensitive resource values, while emphasizing the functioning of natural 

systems. Alternative E excluded commodity uses and limited other public uses, while 

emphasizing the functioning of natural systems. In contrast to Alternative D and D2, this 

alternative would have authorized no commodity production and would have included only 

those actions necessary to maintain safety and natural values. 

The Proposed RMP was the agency preferred alternative in the PSEORMP/ EIS. It was 

developed by the interdisciplinary planning team following review and consideration of 

public comments received on the draft document. This alternative allowed for a high level of 

natural resource protection and improvement in ecological conditions while providing for 

commodity production. 

Management Considerations, Environmental Preferability 

Environmental preferability is judged using the criteria in the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (NEPA). Title 1, Section 101 (b) of NEPA established the following goals: 

•	 Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations; 

•	 Assure for all Americans a safe, healthful, productive, and esthetically and culturally 

pleasing surroundings; 

•	 Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk 

to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; 

•	 Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and 

maintain, whenever possible, an environment which supports a diversity and variety of 

individual choice; 

•	 Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high 

standards of living and share a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and 

•	 Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable 

recycling of depletable resources. 

v 
Southeasteastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

The decisions in this ROD comprise the selected alternative, which is a composite of various 

elements of the seven alternatives considered and analyzed in the EIS. The mix of alternative 

solutions to issues involves land use allocations and management directions and blends the 

best solutions for overall management. The Proposed RMP is the alternative selected and 

approved for the SEORMP and ranks first in overall environmental preferability because it 

best meets the six broad policy NEPA goals. The alternatives considered were in varying 

degrees of compliance with the goals. The SEORMP has been determined to be environmentally preferable when considering these goals, the human environment, the natural environment and the agency mission. This alternative is projected to improve and sustain healthy 

resource conditions while providing for economic needs and demands for resource commodities and values on a sustained basis. Based on the comparison of the alternatives in Chapter 

4 of the Final EIS and as summarized in Table S-1, the SEORMP is the environmentally 

preferred alternative. 

Mitigation 

Appropriate mitigation has been incorporated into the decision for the SEORMP including 

specifications for management actions and resource guidelines. All practical means to avoid 

or minimize environmental impacts during implementation of the plan have been adopted. 

Mitigation is subject to change as new techniques become available. 

Implementation 

Implementation of the SEORMP will begin upon signing of the Record of Decision (ROD). 

Some RMP decisions require immediate action and will become effective upon signature of 

this ROD. Other decisions do not require immediate action, but are identified for implementation during the life of the SEORMP. Some decisions will require action only when an activity 

is initiated. 

Implementation will occur according to an Implementation Plan to be developed by the 

Malheur and Jordan Field Managers. The Implementation Plan serves as a link between 

BLM’s planning and budgeting processes. Information in the Implementation Plan will help 

to ensure that existing management and uses are brought into conformance with SEORMP 

decisions; establish priorities, identify time frames and costs for implementing decisions; 

provide a basis for tracking and documenting progress in SEORMP implementation; and 

assist in developing budget proposals. 

Monitoring 

The SEORMP will be monitored and evaluated on an on-going basis in order to determine the 

effectiveness of the SEORMP and the need for plan maintenance, amendment or revision as 

provided for in 43 CFR 1610.4-9, 1610.5-4, 1610.5-5 and 1610.5-6. More detailed information on 

monitoring is included in Appendix W. 

Public Involvement 

Members of the general public and representatives of Indian tribes, organizations, public 

interest groups, and Federal, State and local agencies participated throughout the planning 

process for the SEORMP, including scoping of issues, review of proposed planning criteria, 

wild and scenic rivers eligibility evaluation, review of the Draft SEORMP and review of the 

vi 
Record of Decision 

PSEORMP/FEIS. These entities were kept informed during SEORMP development through 

mailings, public meetings, media announcements, Federal Register notices, personal meetings, telephone conversations and briefings. The BLM responded to comment letters on the 

Draft SEORMP, considered pubic comments when developing the Preferred Alternative and 

preparing the Proposed RMP, and considered protests of the Proposed RMP when developing the RMP approved by this Record of Decision. Public involvement will continue, as 

appropriate, throughout the life of the plan and during implementation. 

vii 
Alternatives

Table S-1, Summary comparison of SEORMP/FEIS alternatives in acres (unless otherwise noted)1 

Alternatives 

Resources A B C D D2 

Air Prescribed burning limitations (acres/year) Rangeland 30,000 4,000 30,000 30,000 30

Forestland 300 150 300 300 Energy and Minerals2 Leasable Minerals Closed 1,343,307 1,404,466 1,357,095 1,393,981 1,625

Areas of critical environmental concern 0 57,443 0 18,798 264

 Designated national wild and scenic rivers 

49,007 49,007 49,007 49,007 49

Administratively suitable wild study rivers 0 996 7,788 32,636 7

 Steens Mtn CMPA mineral withdrawl 100

Wilderness study areas 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,273Wilderness study area additions 3,280 0 3,280 3,280 3

No surface occupancy 45,587 2,022 224,756 272,770 15

Administratively suitable wild and scenic study rivers 2,953 0 2,953 19,245 2Areas of critical environmental concern 31,279 990 223,821 245,527 

 Oregon Trail3 0 1,032 0 0 

Special recreation management area (Succor Creek) 11,355 0 0 11,355 1

Special status plants 0 0 903 903 

Special or seasonal stipulations 2,286,205 0 2,150,350 2,089,732 2,035

Areas of critical environmental concern 0 0 6,235 0 Big game winter range 2,232,584 0 2,097,390 2,037,025 1,982Sage grouse lek sites 88,397 0 86,497 84,974 48

1 Changes in acreage figures between the Draft SEORMP and Final SEORMP are based upon updated GIS information and reflect 2 Due to overlap, the acres subheadings will not equal total closed acres. These figures show total area for each of the closed, NSO

of overlap with other closures.
 

3 In all other alternatives, this resource is protected under the ACEC prescription
 

viii
Table S-1, Summary comparison of SEORMP/FEIS alternatives in acres (unless otherwise noted) 

Alternatives 

Resources A B C D D2 

Locatable minerals Closed 1,386,091 1,347,023 1,507,592 1,615,471 1,62

Administrative recreation sites 790 0 790 790 

Areas of critical environmental concern 35,994 0 155,998 228,638 264Designated national wild and scenic rivers 49,007 49,007 49,007 49,007 4Administratively suitable wild study rivers 0 996 7,788 32,636 

Special Recreation Management Area (Succor Creek) 0 0 0 11,355 1

 Steens Mtn CMPA mineral withdrawal 10

Special status plant (Harper) 0 0 903 903 

Wilderness study areas 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,27Wilderness study areas addition 3,280 0 3,280 3,280 

Saleable minerals Closed 1,445,023 1,408,228 1,576,108 1,658,898 1,63

Administrative sites 790 0 790 790 

Administratively suitable study rivers 2,953 996 10,540 51,881 1

Areas of critical environmental concern 74,669 62,201 214,842 248,947 264Designated national wild and scenic rivers 49,007 49,007 49,007 49,007 4Riparian conservation areas 9,525 0 9,525 9,525 Special Recreation Management Area (Succor Creek) 0 0 0 11,355 1

Special status plant (Harper) 0 0 903 903 

Steens Mtn CMPA mineral withdrawal 10

Wilderness study areas 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,273,015 1,27

Wilderness study areas addition 3,280 0 3,280 3,280 

Forest and Woodlands (acres/20 years) Commercial Harvest 4,407 1,057 2,644 0 Forest management for old growth characteristics 1,175 0 2,351 5,877 Western juniper treatments 124,500 41,500 124,500 83,000 8

ix
Table S-1, Summary comparison of SEORMP/FEIS alternatives in acres (unless otherwise noted) Alternatives Resources A B C D D2 

Water Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas (miles) 1,269 1,269 ,1269 1,269 

Management emphasis RCA stream length RCA stream length and contributing watershed RCA stream length and contributing watershed RCA stream length and contributing watershed RCA st

length contribwatersh

Fish and Aquatic Habitat Management emphasis Game species Game/ native species at stream Scale Native species at watershed scale Native species at watershed scale Native species 

watershscale 

Wildlife Habitat Riparian habitat emphasis Game species 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balancgame/ nongam

Upland habitats capable of supporting sagebrush obligates (%) 50+/-10 Big game winter range 70+/-10 0+ 90+ Other upland habitat emphasis Game species 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balancgame/ nongam

Special Status Animal Species Upland habitats capable of supporting sagebrush obligates (%) 50+/-10 Big game winter range 70+/-10 90+ 90+ Other upland habitat emphasis Game species 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balanced game/ nongame 

Balancgame/ nongam

Bighorn sheep acres available for occupancy, release and capture 2,888,000 800,000 2,888,000 2,888,000 2,888,0

x
Table S-1, Summary comparison of SEORMP/FEIS alternatives in acres (unless otherwise noted) 

Alternatives 

Resources A B C D D2 

Wild Horses Appropriate management level Decrease Maintain Maintain Increase Increa

Rangeland Grazing Total AUMs initially allocated 420,584 420,584 420,584 420,584 28

Estimated AUM change long term (%) +0 to 10 +0 to 5 +/- 10 -0 to 20 -0 Approximate acres not allocated to livestock grazing 50,600 41,900 50,600 50,600 1,45New Projects (% of 1987-1996 construction level) 150 100 20 5 Estimated new fences to protect sensitive resources (miles) 750 525 300 50 Recreation (number) / acres Special Recreation Management Areas (6) 864,952 (2) 352,331 (4) 661,739 (5) 673,094 (5) 67Extensive Recreation Management Areas (2) 3,770,310 (2) 4,282,931 (2) 3,973,523 (2) 3,962,168 (2) 3,96

Off-Highway Vehicles Open 3,267,125 2,660,155 3,036,508 1,336,644 1,23

Limited 1,337,554 1,939,915 1,581,521 3,280,179 3,38Closed 30,583 35,193 17,233 18,439 1

Visual Resources 4 

Class I 79,476 80,392 104,080 1,312,269 1,31Class II 1,426,758 1,416,418 1,420,816 245,781 24Class III 646,941 638,955 642,661 623,094 62Class IV 2,481,492 2,498,902 2,467,110 2,453,523 2,45

4 Acreage figures represent public lands that have been inventoried and given a VRM classification. 

xi
Table S-1, Summary comparison of SEORMP/FEIS alternatives in acres (unless otherwise noted) Alternatives Resources A B C D D2 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern Number/total acres5 24/91,366 8/104,475 27/234,627 29/264,357 29/26Relevant and Important Values Bighorn sheep and habitat 2/24,142 2/24,142 3/114,493 3/114,493 3/11 Columbia spotted frog and habitat 1/950 2/17,892 2/18,212 2/1 Cultural values 3/33,265 2/71,290 3/51,871 3/63,913 3/6 Historic values 3/34,416 2/71,290 3/55,169 3/67,211 3/6 Geologic features 3/52,831 5/101,528 5/82,028 5/86,190 5/8 Paleontological resources 1/755 1/755 1/755  Plant community types/vegetative cells 19/73,141 4/43,244 19/83,835 20/100,466 20/10 Scenic values 6/59,074 3/83,759 8/187,120 8/199,482 8/19 Special Status animals 

2/29,530 2/35,881 3/39,267 3/39,267 3/3

 Special Status fish and habitat 2/1,008 1/1,977 3/17,950 4/20,530 4/2 Special Status plants and habitat 

7/62,763 4/65,964 9/134,510 9/135,590 9/13

 Sage grouse and habitat 

4/9,875 4/10,231 4/13,244 4/1

Wildlife and habitat 7/49,196 7/72,260 7/64,411 7/79,912 7/7

Wild and Scenic Rivers number/miles/acres Designated rivers 3/188/ 49,007 3/188/ 49,007 3/188/ 49,007 3/188/ 49,007 

4

Administratively suitable 1/13.5/ 3,973 1/3.6/ 996 4/42.5 11,761 22/188/ 56,155 

Wilderness Study Area Addition 

Acres added 3,280 0 3,280 3,280 3

Vegetation Native herbaceous seeding Considered Considered Preferred Emphasized Emphas

Nonnative herbaceous seeding Emphasized Considered Considered None None Upland Shrub cover Minimum Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Heavy Modera

Heavy 

5 Due to overlap of relevant and important values, the acres in subheadings will not equal total ACEC acres. 

xii
Southeastern Oregon
 

Resource Management Plan
 

Bureau of Land Management
 

Vale District
 

Vale, Oregon
 

1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Purpose and Need
 

The Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan (SEORMP) was prepared to provide 

the BLM, Vale District, with a comprehensive framework for managing public land (see Map 

Gen-1) administered by the Malheur Resource Area (MRA) and Jordan Resource Area (JRA). 

The purpose of the SEORMP is to ensure that public land is managed for multiple use and 

sustained yield in accordance with the "Federal Land Policy and Management Act" (FLPMA) 

of 1976. A primary goal of this plan is to develop management practices that ensure the longterm sustainability of healthy and productive land, consistent with principles of ecosystem 

management. The plan also considers the science used in the broad-scale management 

direction described in the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP). 

This RMP will replace land use planning decisions in the existing Northern and Southern 

Malheur Management Framework Plans. These plans have guided the management of BLMadministered land for the past 18 years or more. The decisions that are still valid from these 

plans have been carried forward and are incorporated into this SEORMP. Also, existing 

activity plans, e.g., livestock allotment management plans and wildlife habitat management 

plans, will continue to be in effect. They will be evaluated and changed, if needed, to be in 

conformance with the RMP. 

This plan established parameters for all resources on BLM-administered land in these two 

resource areas, with the exception of the wilderness suitability recommendations of existing 

wilderness study areas (WSA’s) in the planning unit. The recommendations for wilderness 

suitability have been previously analyzed in the 1989 "Oregon Wilderness Final Environmental Impact Statement" and are outside the scope of this planning process. 

In order to facilitate referencing to the Proposed Southeastern Oregon Resource Management 

Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement (PSEORMP/FEIS), appendix letters are the 

same as in that document. 

Planning Area 

The planning area considered in this document is 4.6 million acres. It is spread over a total of 

about 6.5 million acres in southeastern Oregon. This area covers nearly 4.5 million acres of 

BLM administered land in Malheur County and some BLM-administered land in Grant and 

Harney Counties. In addition to BLM-administered land, the planning area contains private, 

State, and other land. Table 1 shows the amount of land in various ownership classes in each 

resource area. Acreages listed throughout this document were compiled by various means 

and from numerous sources and, in many cases, acreages are only approximations. Hence, 

some figures may not total accurately or may be inconsistent when viewed out of the context 

in which they are used. However, Table 1 is from the geographic information system (GIS) 

and is the most accurate display available. 

The planning area is bounded on the east by Idaho, on the south by Nevada, on the north by 

the Vale District’s Baker Resource Area, and on the west by the Burns District’s Three Rivers 

and Andrews Resource Areas. Most of the public land is contiguous, with some scattered or 

isolated parcels (see Map GEN-2 and RELI-1). 

The planning area occupies the northern extent of the Great Basin division of the Intermountain Region. Physiographic provinces include much of the Basin and Range, the Owyhee 

Uplands, Blue Mountain, and Western Snake. The regional area and general vegetation 

2 
3
 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Table 1 .—Acres of Federal, State, and private land in each resource area and in the planning 

area (PSEORMP Table 1-1) 

Surface Jurisdiction Malheur RA Jordan RA Planning Area 

BLM 

Malheur County 

Harney County 

Grant County 

Subtotal 

1,982,572 

21,426 

9,299 

2,013,297 

2,462,711 

124,640 

2,587,351 

4,445,283 

146,066 

9,299 

4,600,648 

Other Federal Agencies 

Malheur County 

Harney County 

Grant County 

Subtotal 

51,842 

51,842 

48,487 

48,487 

100,329 

100,329 

State of Oregon 

Malheur County 

Harney County 

Grant County 

Subtotal 

101,467 

25,344 

126,811 

176,347 

5,909 

182,256 

277,814 

31,253 

309,067 

Private 

Malheur County 

Harney County 

Grant County 

Subtotal 

1,081,194 

35,326 

12,411 

1,128,931 

274,364 

39,017 

313,381 

1,355,558 

74,343 

12,411 

1,442,312 

TOTAL 3,320,881 3,131,475 6,452,356 

4 
classification is known as the Intermountain Sagebrush Province/Sagebrush Steppe Ecosystem. 

The Sagebrush Steppe Ecosystem covers much of eastern Oregon and Washington, southern 

Idaho, and portions of northern Nevada, California, and Utah. This ecosystem contains a 

broad diversity of landform and vegetation types, ranging from vast expanses of sagebrushcovered plateaus to rugged mountains blanketed with western juniper woodland and grassland. 

Scoping Issues 

As a result of the scoping process, nine comprehensive planning issues were identified. The 

following is a discussion of each of the issues with ideas and questions to consider in 

resolving the issue. 

Issue 1: Upland Management 

How will the BLM manage resource uses to improve unacceptable upland conditions or 

maintain acceptable upland conditions? 

The vegetation on upland range provides the foundation for many uses of resources on 

public land. Structurally diverse plant communities provide habitat for wildlife as well as 

forage for domestic animals. A healthy cover of perennial vegetation stabilizes the soil, 

increases infiltration of precipitation, slows surface runoff, prevents erosion, provides clean 

water to adjacent streams, and enhances the visual quality of public land. Concern has been 

expressed that resource uses may affect the natural function and condition of upland 

communities. 

Issue 2: Riparian Areas and Wetlands 

How will the BLM manage resource uses to improve unacceptable riparian conditions or 

maintain acceptable riparian conditions? 

The vegetation in riparian areas and wetlands provides the foundation for many uses of 

resources on public land. Structurally diverse plant communities provide habitat for wildlife 

as well as forage for domestic animals. In addition, healthy riparian areas and wetlands 

stabilize the soil, act as a “sponge” releasing water throughout the year, prevent erosion, and 

improve water quality for adjacent streams. Some people have expressed concern that 

resource uses may affect the natural function and condition of riparian areas and wetlands. 

Among the activities that can affect riparian areas and wetlands are grazing, recreational use, 

forest and woodland management, mineral exploration and mining, road construction and 

maintenance, and Off-highway vehicle (OHV) use. 

Issue 3: Forest and Woodlands Management 

How will the BLM maintain or improve forest and woodland communities, and how will 

woodlands be managed to maintain or improve rangeland and wildlife habitat? 

The expansion of western juniper woodlands into other plant communities, riparian areas, and 

quaking aspen groves and an increase in the density of historic woodlands may be detrimental to other plants and watershed functions. 

5 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Forested areas are subject to various demands for products, including sawtimber, wood 

chips, firewood, tree boughs, and mushrooms. Forests and woodlands also provide habitat 

for many wildlife species, help protect watersheds, and have aesthetic values that are difficult 

to quantify. 

Issue 4: Energy and Minerals 

How will the BLM manage energy and mineral resources on public land? 

The planning area contains a wide variety of energy and mineral resources, including 

significant occurrences of gold, silver, mercury, uranium, bentonite, zeolite, diatomite, and 

geothermal resources. Very small amounts of coal, natural gas, and oil have been reported. 

Although the area contains enormous reserves of saleable minerals such as sand, gravel, and 

rock aggregate, large-scale use of these resources has been rare. The area contains significant occurrences of rockhounding materials, including thundereggs, picture jasper, and 

petrified wood. 

Issue 5: Special Management Areas 

Should existing special management areas (SMA’s) be continued or expanded, and are there 

additional areas suitable for designation? 

SMA’s, land designated and managed for unique or significant features or values, include: 

• ACEC’s 

• WSA’s 

• NWSR’s 

• Caves 

• Historic interpretive sites and districts 

• National trails 

• Other areas of national significance 

Issue 6: Fire Management 

How should the BLM manage wildland fire to be consistent with resource objectives while 

protecting life and property? 

Historically, wildfire played an important role in ecosystem processes in the planning area. 

Existing plans do not address the possible use of wildland fire as a management tool. 

Issue 7: Recreation Management 

How should the BLM manage recreation opportunities for both developed and dispersed 

recreation uses? 

Outdoor recreation use within the planning area is expanding. There is demand for both 

developed and undeveloped recreation opportunities. Fishing, hunting, hiking, camping, 

driving for pleasure, floatboating, OHV use, and rockhounding account for most recreation 

activity within the planning area. 

Issue 8: Fish, Wildlife, and Plants, Including Special Status 

Species 

6 
How will the BLM provide for fish and wildlife habitat, botanical resources, and special status 

species while considering other resource uses? 

Each species in the planning area contributes to biological diversity. Fish, wildlife, and plants 

(including special status species) may be affected by competition for resources on public 

land. 

Issue 9: Land and Realty 

Where should the BLM consider exchanging BLM-administered land for other land with 

higher public values or consider selling isolated or difficult-to-manage land? What level of 

access to public land should the BLM achieve? Should the BLM consider selling land for 

public purposes and community expansion? 

More than two-thirds of the planning area is public land administered by the BLM. Land 

exchanges with the State and with private individuals have allowed the BLM to acquire land 

with special resource values and to consolidate holdings. Some BLM land may be exchanged 

or sold in the future to provide for expansion of communities or other local needs. 

Physical access to the planning area ranges from good to poor, depending on location. As 

the demand grows for public land resources, the need for legal public access to some areas 

will increase. 

Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study 

A number of issues identified through the scoping process are beyond the scope of this plan. 

For example, issues related to private and State land were eliminated because this document 

prescribes management only for BLM-administered land. Issues related to potential changes 

in Federal law, e.g., laws relating to energy and mineral development, grazing, and wilderness 

designation or release of WSA’s, are outside the scope of the plan because they hinge on 

congressional actions. 

No issues of environmental justice were raised during scoping. There do not appear to be 

any minority or economically disadvantaged groups that will be adversely and disproportionately affected by BLM actions under this SEORMP. 

Any proposed grasshopper or cricket control projects will be considered and either accepted, 

rejected, or accepted with additional mitigation measures based on land use allocations and 

management constraints in the approved RMP as well as additional information which may 

become available concerning sensitive species and indirect environmental consequences. No 

insecticide use is expected to be authorized under any circumstances in designated wilderness areas, NWSR corridors or river segments found administratively suitable for NWSR 

designation, ACEC’s, or in WSA’s. Pesticide use will also be significantly constrained, if 

allowed at all, within one-quarter mile of special status bird habitats. 

Although noxious weed control and other vegetation manipulation is identified in the plan, 

the methods were not analyzed. These are fully analyzed in the “Vegetation Treatment on 

BLM Land in the 13 Western States EIS” and the “Northwest Area Noxious Weed Control 

Program EIS.” 

Military overflights are under the jurisdiction of other Federal agencies including the military, 

who are responsible to obtain public involvement as these are considered for analysis. BLM 

7 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

provides information during any analysis that is conducted to develop mitigation measures 

as it relates to the management of public lands. BLM works with the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FFA) to establish and maintain air navigation corridors. The military training 

routes (MTR) and military operation areas (MOA) include the Idaho Air National Guard, 

Whidbey Island Navel Air Station, Mountain Home Air Force Base, and Seattle Center. 

Within the Taylor Grazing Act (TGA), the Secretary of Interior is authorized “in his discretion, 

by order to establish grazing districts or additions thereto and/or to modify the boundaries 

thereof . . . which in his opinion are chiefly valuable for grazing and raising forage crops.” (43 

U.S.C. § 315) As a result, “chiefly valuable” determinations were made with implementation 

of TGA in the1930’s to differentiate public domain within grazing districts and public domain 

outside. All public lands in the SEORMP planning area are within the Vale Grazing District. 

The Act defined processes for administering public land livestock grazing within grazing 

districts under a permit system, different from those processes for administering livestock 

grazing outside grazing districts under a lease system. Reconsideration of lands within the 

Vale Grazing District which are “chiefly valuable for livestock grazing” was not an issue 

identified during scoping and was not reconsidered in this planning effort. The SEORMP 

does identify areas from which livestock grazing is discontinued to meet resource management objectives. Additionally it identified areas from which livestock are excluded to meet 

resource management objectives and a process by which these areas may be periodically 

reconsidered and additional areas may be excluded. 

Public Participation 

Public participation in the planning process began with publication of a “Notice of Intent” in 

the Federal Register (Vol. 60, No. 164) on August 24, 1995, and distribution of a scoping 

notice to potential interested parties on September 1, 1995. The scoping notice sent to nearly 

2,400 individuals, organizations, and user groups — identified preliminary issues and topics 

to be addressed in the SEORMP/EIS and asked for public comment. The notice also announced nine public meetings on the SEORMP/EIS that were held in Vale, Burns, Jordan 

Valley, Diamond, Bend, and Portland, Oregon; McDermitt and Denio, Nevada; and Boise, 

Idaho, in September 1995. 

The scoping process was the opportunity to identify concerns, needs, and management 

opportunities for the Bureau of Land Management to consider during preparation of the 

SEORMP/EIS. Information gathered from the public, groups, or BLM determined the range of 

actions, alternatives, and impacts that will be addressed. The more than 120 people who 

attended the public meetings provided many valuable suggestions. The interdisciplinary 

team preparing the SEORMP/EIS also received and considered a number of written scoping 

comments from individuals, organizations, and agencies. Public participation was particularly 

important in developing of the planning criteria for the SEORMP/EIS. 

Preliminary alternatives and planning criteria were distributed to the public for review and 

comment on March 1, 1996. The numerous comment letters that were received were considered by the interdisciplinary team in revising the issues, planning criteria, and proposed 

alternatives. The planning criteria were approved by the Vale and Burns BLM District 

Managers in May, 1996. 

The Draft SEORMP/EIS was made available to the public on November 1, 1998, after a “Notice 

of Availability of the Draft SEORMP/EIS “ was published in the Federal Register (Vol. 63, No. 

204) on October 22, 1998. During the 90-day comment period, 266 letters were received from 

interested parties. A “Summary of Public Comments” report was made available to interested 

parties during May 1999. During the comment period, a series of open house meetings was 

held throughout the State and in McDermitt, Nevada. 

8 
The Proposed RMP and Final EIS was prepared following consideration of public comments 

on the draft document and in response to internal BLM direction. The PSEORMP/ FEIS was 

released for a 30 day protest period which began on November 9, 2001. 

A total of two protest letters were received by the Director, BLM in Washington, D.C. 

Resolution of these protests by the Director did not result in any changes to the proposed 

plan that was published in the Proposed Plan/Final EIS document. The SEORMP was 

approved by the BLM Oregon State Director on September 30, 2002. The approved 

SEORMP is the same as the Proposed Plan. 

The SEORMP is republished as a part of this document to display those decisions, management actions and allocations, along with applicable appendices, tables and maps, that are to 

be implemented over the life of the plan. Information that was presented in the Proposed 

Plan/Final EIS document that was informational or analytical has not been included in this 

document but will be taken into consideration, along with additional information that may 

become available during plan implementation. 

Planning Criteria 

Planning criteria are guidelines influencing all aspects of the planning process, including 

inventory and data collection, formulation of alternatives, estimation of effects, and selection 

of the preferred alternative. Planning criteria helped to streamline the PSEORMP/FEIS 

preparation and focus; establish standards, rules, and measures to be used in the process; 

guide development of the plan; guide and direct issue resolution; and identify factors and 

data to consider in making decisions. 

General Planning Criteria 

Principles of ecosystem-based management, as well as a continuing commitment to multiple 

use and sustained yield, will guide land use decisions in the planning area. The commitment 

to multiple use will not mean that all land will be open for all uses. Some uses may be 

excluded on some land to protect specific resource values or uses. Any such exclusion, 

however, will be based on laws or regulations or be determined through a planning process 

subject to public involvement. 

This plan was prepared using the best available information. Limited inventories were 

conducted to gather additional data. The following general planning criteria was considered 

in developing the SEORMP: 

•	 existing laws, regulations, and BLM policies; 

•	 existing decisions in previous land use plans, activity plans, etc.; 

• plans, programs, and policies of other Federal agencies, state and local governments, 

and American Indian tribes; 

•	 public input; 

•	 quantity and quality of noncommodity resource values; 

• future needs and demands for existing and potential resource commodities and values; 

•	 past and present uses of public land and adjacent land; 

•	 public benefits of providing goods and services; 

•	 environmental impacts; 

•	 social and economic values; 

•	 public welfare and safety; and, 

•	 “Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Management for Public 

Land Administered by the BLM in Oregon and Washington,” August 12, 1997. 

9 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Program Planning Criteria 

In addition to the general criteria listed above, the following program-specific criteria apply to 

the SEORMP. 

Air Quality 

Under the “Clean Air Act,” BLM-administered land in the planning area is classified as Class 

II (see Glossary). All land will be managed under Class II standards unless it is reclassified by 

the State of Oregon. 

Water Quality 

The “Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1977,” as amended (known also as the “Clean 

Water Act” [CWA]), requires the BLM to be consistent with State nonpoint source management program plans and relevant water quality standards. Section 313 requires compliance 

with State water quality standards. The SEORMP incorporates best management practices 

(BMP’s, Appendix O) or other conservation measures for specific programs and activities. 

Water quality will be maintained or improved in accordance with State and Federal standards. 

Soil Management 

Limited data exist on the extent and distribution of microbiotic crusts in southeastern Oregon, 

although numerous studies have been conducted in the southern Great Basin, Colorado 

Plateau, and southwestern Idaho. Microbiotic crusts consist of lichens, bryophytes, algae, 

microfungi, cyanobacteria, and bacteria growing on or just below the soil surface (Eldridge 

and Greene 1994). Found in open spaces between larger plants, these crusts play a role in 

fixing nitrogen, filtering water, retaining soil moisture, and controlling soil erosion (Friedmann 

and Galun 1974; Belnap 1994). Cover types in the planning area that can be associated with 

substantial biological crust development include salt desert shrub, low sagebrush, big 

sagebrush, and juniper woodland. Some studies have identified that continual disturbance to 

these extremely fragile crusts may cause their degradation and contribute to incidental loss of 

ecosystem function. Activities that disturb the soil surface—including grazing, off-road 

vehicle use, recreational hiking, and other activities—can reduce the maximum potential 

development of biological crust. The importance of microbiotic crusts and their current 

location and distribution over much of the planning area will be identified, to the extent 

possible, during the proposed Order III soil survey and ecological site inventory for Vale 

District, Malheur County starting in 2003. Pertinent microbiotic crust information obtained 

from existing studies and acquired from site-specific inventory data will be incorporated into 

the evaluation and preparation process of geographic management area (GMA) plans. 

Soils will be managed to protect long-term productivity. Soils will be managed in accordance 

with BMP’s in Appendix O and would be addressed under specific resource activities. 

Vegetation Management 

Vegetation will be managed to provide for biological diversity at the landscape level, to 

protect and restore native perennial and desirable nonnative perennial species, and to 

provide for consumptive uses and nonconsumptive values, including visual quality and 

watershed condition. 

The SEORMP includes provisions for plant maintenance, watershed protection and stability, 

and wildlife habitat; and will provide for livestock, wildlife, and wild horses. 

10 
Fire and other treatment methods are considered tools to meet vegetation management 

objectives. 

Riparian Areas, Floodplains, and Wetlands 

Riparian areas, floodplains, and wetlands will be managed to restore, protect, or improve their 

natural functions relating to water storage, groundwater recharge, water quality, and fish and 

wildlife values. 

Forest and Woodland Management 

Land suitable for timber production will be managed on a sustained yield basis. All forestland 

and western juniper and quaking aspen woodlands will be managed to protect long-term 

productivity, biological diversity, and watershed values. 

The BLM will work with county, state, and Federal agencies to monitor the locations and 

spread of noxious weeds. Noxious weed control will be conducted in accordance with the 

integrated weed management guidelines and design features identified in the “Northwest 

Area Noxious Weed Control Program EIS” ( USDI-BLM 1985). Control of noxious weeds will 

occur in SMA’s, if needed, but may include certain restrictions to reduce potential impacts on 

specific values. The BLM will assess land prior to acquisition to determine whether or not 

noxious weeds are present. 

Special Status Species 

The BLM is mandated by law to assist the conservation and recovery of species listed as 

threatened or endangered or proposed for listing under the “Endangered Species Act” (ESA). 

Federal actions that may affect the well-being of these species require consultation with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). BLM policy requires that authorized actions do not 

contribute to the need to list any other special status species under the provisions of the 

ESA. The intent is to avoid the need for future listings of species as threatened or endangered. 

Wild Horses 

Forage and water will be provided to support wild horse populations at levels established in 

accordance with the “Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act.” Adjustments in range 

allocation will be based on monitoring to ensure a thriving natural ecological balance within 

herd management areas (HMA’s). 

Livestock Management 

Grazing of public land will be authorized under the principles of multiple use and sustained 

yield. Livestock will be managed to maintain or improve public land resources and rangeland 

productivity and to stabilize the livestock industry dependent on the public range over the 

long term. 

Forage will be allocated, by allotment, for livestock grazing on suitable rangeland based on 

multiple use and sustained yield objectives. Existing management systems, including those 

outlined in allotment management plans, will continue until evaluations indicate that change 

is needed to meet objectives. The process for determining livestock forage allocations 

through allotment evaluations will proceed in accordance with BLM regulations and policy. 

Livestock forage allocations—established in the Ironside and Southern Malheur grazing 

program EIS’s and subsequent agreements and decisions—will not be revised immediatly by 

11 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

this plan. Grazing management adjustments will occur on a priority basis over the life of the 

plan through the adaptive management process and subsequent agreements, decisions, or 

activity plan revisions. Authorization of livestock use in the planning area will be subject to 

change through the life of the plan. 

Fire Management 

Wildland fire, as a critical natural process will be integrated into land and resource management planning to assist in the attainment of resource management objectives. 

The use of surface-disturbing equipment to suppress wildland fires will be restricted in areas 

such as WSA’s and areas containing significant cultural or paleontological values, except 

when needed to protect human life or property. Public land affected by fire will be managed in 

accordance with multiple use objectives. 

Land Tenure Adjustments 

BLM-administered land will be retained in Federal ownership unless disposal of a particular 

parcel is determined to serve the public interest. Land may be identified for disposal by sale, 

exchange, State indemnity selection, or other authorized methods. Land types will be 

identified for acquisition based on public benefits, management considerations, and public 

access needs. Specific actions that meet land tenure adjustment criteria established in the 

SEORMP will occur with public participation and will be made in consultation with local, 

county, state, and tribal governments. 

Rights-of-way 

Public land will generally be available for land use authorizations including transportation and 

utility rights-of-way, with preference given to existing corridors. Exceptions will include areas 

specifically prohibited by law or regulation (such as WSA’s) and specific areas identified as 

unavailable because of a need to protect resource values. 

Energy and Minerals 

Except where specifically withdrawn to protect resource values, public land will be available 

for energy and mineral exploration and development subject to applicable Federal and state 

laws and regulations. 

Recreation 

All public land will be identified as being within either special recreation management areas or 

extensive recreation management areas. Some areas may be subject to special measures to 

protect resources or reduce conflicts among uses. Where there is a demonstrated need, the 

BLM may develop and maintain recreation facilities, including campgrounds, picnic areas, 

interpretive sites, boat access, and trails. 

Motorized Vehicle Use 

All public land will be designated as open, limited, or closed in regard to OHV use. Public 

safety, resource protection, user access needs, and conflict resolution will be considered in 

assigning these designations. 

Visual Resources 

The BLM will manage public land to protect the quality of scenic (visual) values in accordance with established guidelines. All public land will be designated as Visual Resource 

12 
Management (VRM) Class I, II, III, or IV. 

National Wild and Scenic Rivers System 

As required by law, streams will be evaluated for potential addition to the NWSRS. The 

evaluation will be conducted according to guidelines published by the Secretaries of Interior 

and Agriculture on September 7, 1982, and other applicable guidance. Designated NWSR’s 

will be managed in accordance with laws and existing plans. 

Wilderness Study Areas 

WSA’s designated under authority of FLPMA sections 603 and 202, will be managed in 

accordance with the “Interim Management Policy for Land under Wilderness Review” 

(IMPLWR). Changes in WSA boundaries may be considered for inholdings and minor 

adjustments of adjacent land. This planning effort will not reopen the initial wilderness 

review mandated by section 603 of FLPMA, and it will not change existing decisions, signed 

by the Secretary of the Interior, to recommend areas as suitable for wilderness designation. 

Cultural and Paleontological Resources 

Cultural and paleontological resources will be managed to maintain or enhance their scientific, 

interpretive, educational, and American Indian values. Cultural resources will be managed to 

protect American Indian interests, where possible. 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

ACEC’s are designated where special management attention is required to protect historical, 

cultural, or scenic values; natural resources or processes; or human life and safety. Management requirements for ACEC’s are identified in this plan. 

Coordination and Consistency With Other Plans
 

The Bureau planning regulations state that RMP’s shall be consistent with officially approved resource-related plans of other Federal agencies, state and local governments, and 

American Indian tribes, so long as those plans are also consistent with the purposes, policies 

and programs of Federal laws and regulations applicable to public lands, including Federal 

and state pollution control laws as implemented by applicable Federal and state air, water, 

noise and other pollution standards or implementation. 

The proposed plan is being distributed to other Federal agencies, state and local governments and Indian tribes for the opportunity for them to identify where specific inconsistencies may exist, and to suggest ways to resolve them. 

The BLM believes this plan is consistent with the officially approved resource related plans, 

policies and programs of other Federal agencies, state and local governments and Indian 

tribes 

In 1993, the BLM joined the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and other agencies to develop 

regional management strategies for public land in the Pacific Northwest, as directed by 

President Clinton. The resulting ICBEMP Draft Eastside EIS (E/EIS) has developed broadscale direction for managing BLM and national forest system lands in eastern Oregon, 

eastern Washington, Idaho, and parts of Montana. The SEORMP is consistent with those 

scientific and management philosophies developed for the Draft E/EIS. 

13 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Relationship to Other BLM Planning Documents
 

During the development of this plan, the “Northern and Southern Malheur Management 

Framework Plans,” “Ironside EIS,” “Southern Malheur EIS,” and associated rangeland 

program summaries were evaluated. Appropriate sections of these previous land use plans 

have been incorporated into this plan, and when completed, the approved plan will supersede 

all previous land use planning documents. 

BLM has three primary levels of land use planning decisions; the RMP level, the activity 

level, and the site-specific level. This RMP focuses mostly on broad resource objectives and 

direction. However, it also provides some activity-level guidance and includes some sitespecific decisions. There are several existing activity plans that are acknowledged as current 

guidance. They will be updated or modified, as necessary, to include current information 

and/or to be in conformance with the approved RMP. These plans include, but are not limited 

to, grazing allotment management plans, NWSR plans, transportation management plans, 

horse herd management area plans, recreation management plans, predator control, noxious 

weed control, standards for rangeland health, WSA interim management and wilderness 

management plans. Subsequent activity level and site-specific level planning processes will 

include appropriate public participation opportunities and NEPA compliance. 

To ensure consistency in site-specific planning and management activities, this plan has been 

coordinated with RMP’s for the Three Rivers Resource Area (Burns District) and Baker 

Resource Area (Vale District) in Oregon, the RMP for the Owyhee Resource Area (Lower 

Snake River District) in Idaho, and the Winnemucca District, Nevada. There are agreements 

and ongoing coordination for managing various activities including livestock grazing, 

ACEC’s, WSA’s, NWSR and fire suppression. 

Policy 

These are policies and decisions that existed prior to the plan being written that are outside 

the scope of the plan but may influence or constrain the decisions, or are needed to understand management of the area. 

Wilderness Study Areas 

Continued Management Direction: Until Congress acts on BLM’s wilderness recommendations or otherwise releases WSA’s for other purposes, all WSA’s designated under authority 

of FLPMA sections 603 and 202 within the planning area will continue to be managed in 

accordance with BLM’s “Interim Management Policy for Lands Under Wilderness Review” 

(Handbook H-8550-1), and other applicable regulations and policy. 

Supporting Information: FLPMA referenced and incorporated the goals and criteria of the 

“Wilderness Act” of 1964. As a consequence, the BLM was mandated under FLPMA to 

review public land for possible wilderness designation and to offer recommendations by 

October 21, 1991 through the Secretary of the Interior, to the President. In November 1980, as 

part of this review, the BLM in Oregon designated 87 WSA’s. A WSA is a parcel of public 

land determined through intensive inventories to possess certain characteristics described in 

the ”Wilderness Act.” 

14 
There are 32 WSA’s, covering 1,273,015 acres (updated GIS data, Vale District) of public 

land within the planning area, including portions of three WSA’s of Andrews Resource Area 

of the Burns District which traverse the Vale District administrative boundary. Presently, 

there are no congressionally designated wilderness areas within the planning area. 

On October 7, 1991, the President received the BLM’s “Wilderness Study Report for Oregon” 

(WSRO), a report summarizing and concluding wilderness recommendations. This report also 

identified specific parcels of BLM land and non-BLM land (if acquired) located adjacent to 

existing WSA’s to be congressionally designated as wilderness. The report identified 3,280 

acres of adjacent BLM land. Since BLM submitted the report, 860 acres of the identified nonBLM land has been acquired. The BLM recommended all or a portion of 21 WSA’s for 

congressional wilderness designation, and recommended 11 WSA’s not be congressionally 

designated as wilderness. (See map WSA- 1). 

In 1992, in accordance with FLPMA, the President submitted his wilderness recommendations 

to Congress, which has the authority to designate wilderness. The President’s wilderness 

recommendations for Oregon were the same as the BLM’s recommendations. 

Caves 

Continued Management Direction: Until nominated caves are determined significant and 

management plans are prepared to provide specific management prescriptions, caves will be 

managed in accordance with the BLM’s “Oregon and Washington Interim Cave Management 

Policy” (Federal Register, Volume 60, No. 72, April 24, 1995, pages 19077-19078). The policy 

provides protective management of all cave resource values, with required procedures for 

authorizing certain uses and restrictions or prohibition of specific human activities in and 

associated with caves until a management plan is developed for an individual or system of 

significant caves. As management plans for significant caves are developed, public input will 

be sought. 

Supporting Information: The “Federal Cave Resources Protection Act” of 1988 requires 

agencies to identify and manage, to the extent practical, cave resources determined to be 

significant. Procedures for determining the significance of caves are found at 43 CFR Part 37. 

The 1988 Act defines a cave as any naturally occurring void, cavity, recess, or system of 

interconnected passes beneath the surface of the earth or within a cliff or ledge, including 

any cave resource therein, that is large enough to permit a person to enter, whether the 

entrance is excavated or naturally formed. Rock shelters formed by an overhang or cliffs are 

not considered caves. A cave is significant if it possesses biotic, cultural, geologic/mineralogic, hydrologic, recreational, or educational or scientific values, features, or characteristics. 

A total of 85 caves have been nominated as potentially significant in the planning area: 16 in 

MRA and 69 in JRA. Each cave has been placed in one of three categories: (1) caves determined to be significant, (2) caves for which more information is needed to determine significance, and (3) caves found not to be significant. To date, within MRA, there is one cave 

determined significant, 7 caves needing more data to determine significance, and 8 caves 

determined not significant; and within JRA, 9 caves are determined significant, 46 caves 

needing more date to determine significance, and 14 caves determined not significant. The 10 

caves which, to date, have been determined to meet the significant cave criteria, and thus are 

significant caves, are: Black Wall Cave (MRA), and Bogus, Burns, Coyote Trap, Fortymile, 

Owyhee River, Pit A, Pit B, Rattlesnake, and Tire Tubes caves (JRA). Cave significance/nonsignificance will be determined as adequate information and data are compiled. The listing of 

significant caves is an inventory process and does not imply specific protection commitments. 

For those nominated caves, the determination and listing of cave significance may be 

accomplished in concert with the development of Geographic Management Plans (GMA). A 

cave management plan for a specific cave or cave group can optionally be developed and 

15 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

implemented independently in response to unacceptable damage or serious threats caused by 

human activities to known significant cave values. 

Management Framework 

Ecosystem-Based Management 

Ecosystem-based management can be viewed as hierarchical and occurring at multiple levels. 

The basic planning levels are (1) the broad scale or regional perspective depicted by the 

ICBEMP; (2) the mid scale which can be the size of a resource area or several resource areas 

and is the scale analyzed in the SEORMP, and (3) the fine scale which can be the size of 

pastures, allotments, watersheds, subwatersheds, subbasins, or other geographic subunits 

and is at the level of activity plans such as allotment management plans (AMP’s), habitat 

management plans (HMP’s), WQMP’s, or other integrated activity plans for geographic units. 

At each level of planning, implementation is periodically adjusted as management is adapted 

to changing conditions, circumstances, and new information. 

Monitoring and evaluations need to follow the same pattern, answering questions and 

measuring trends at the various levels. Certain issues and activities within the area can have 

effects at the broadest level, such as activities that affect air quality, noxious weeds, or wideranging species. Other issues or activities, such as forest health, western juniper encroachment, and species endemism, operate within smaller geographic areas. Still other issues or 

activities are mostly of local concern, such as access management and municipal watersheds. 

Monitoring strategies need to recognize this hierarchy and provide for data collection and 

evaluation at the appropriate levels. 

Broad Scale 

The ICBEMP scientific assessment is a regional level or broad-scale assessment. It covers 

public land in the RMP planning area of southeast Oregon as well as other lands in eastern 

Oregon, eastern Washington, Idaho, and parts of Montana. The scientific assessment was 

used as a context for land use and resource management analysis at lower levels of planning. 

ICBEMP Final EIS has developed an ecosystem analysis process to characterize human and 

ecological features, conditions, process, and interactions within a geographic area. A 

program will be developed that will allow information gathered locally to be compiled and 

analyzed to answer broad regional questions and use regional level assessments to better 

address broad-scale questions. The analysis will be intended to help estimate direct, indirect, 

and cumulative effects of management activities and guide the general type, location, and 

sequence of appropriate management activities within a regional area. 

Mid Scale 

The step-down from the ICBEMP scientific assessment is the SEORMP. The SEORMP is the 

mid-scale plan which links broad-scale scientific assessments with plan implementation at the 

activity level (fine-scale). It covers JRA and MRA of the Vale BLM District. The SEORMP is 

consistent with those scientific and management philosophies developed in the ICBEMP 

Final EIS. 

16 
Implementation of the RMP will be monitored on a continual basis to allow up-to-date 

response to changing conditions. Management actions arising from activity plan decisions 

will be evaluated to ensure consistency with SEORMP objectives. 

The SEORMP starts the step-down process by initiating (1) the collaboration and scoping 

process, (2) validation of the ICBEMP scientific assessment, (3) prioritization of fine-scale 

areas for review or assessment and evaluation, and (4) data gap identification. This process 

is designed to ensure that broad-scale analysis is viewed and validated within the context of 

local conditions, and it ensures that local decisions are made within the context of broadscale goals and objectives. This is accomplished by using the best available information from 

multiple-scale assessments to provide a comprehensive basis for sustainable ecosystembased management. 

Fine Scale 

The step-down from SEORMP to the fine scale is the GMA assessment, evaluation, and 

planning. The GMA’s (Table 2; Map GMA) that will be assessed and evaluated vary in size 

depending upon watersheds, issues, concerns, dependent resources, resource potentials and 

capabilities that are reviewed by interdisciplinary teams in each resource area in consultation 

with the interested public and affected land users. GMA’s and their priority for assessment 

and evaluation were derived primarily from a combination of subbasin and allotment boundaries based on a variety of issues including the following: 

• legal mandates (“Clean Water Act”[CWA], ESA, and others); 

• priorities established in existing land use plans; 

• resources at risk; 

• potential for recovery; 

• resource conflicts or controversy;
 

• opportunity for interagency or partnership assessments;
 

• field staff knowledge of the area; and 

• current ongoing management. 

This preliminary prioritization and scoping process was presented to and approved by the 

Southeast Oregon Resource Advisory Council (SEORAC) before inclusion in the SEORMP. It 

was also sent to the interested public, local, state and Federal agencies, and tribes for 

comment. 

Periodic validation of issues is an important part of fine-scale assessments and evaluations. 

The schedule for completion of GMA evaluations will be reviewed annually to determine if 

there have been any changes in resource issues, BLM policies, regulations, law or other 

concerns that will warrant a change in the priorities for each resource area. It is anticipated 

that management actions implemented in each GMA will be evaluated at least once every ten 

years by an interdisciplinary team. Based on recommendations of those evaluations, current 

activity plans within each GMA will be revised or rewritten as necessary to ensure consistency with RMP objectives. Work will focus on higher priority areas; however, other areas 

may require interim attention to address site-specific needs. 

Consultation and collaboration with interested public, affected land users, other agencies, 

counties, Tribes, and others is an important part of the process to help identify issues and to 

bring together all the existing information concerning a given area. Information assembled 

during the assessment will be evaluated to determine appropriate management actions at the 

fine scale. These evaluations will be done using an ecosystem analysis process that looks at 

human and ecological features, conditions, processes, and interactions. The evaluation 

process will also involve consultation and collaboration with affected parties. It is during this 

time that priorities for actions regarding restoration, conservation, or other management 

actions will be discussed. 

17 
Table 2.—Geographic management area descriptions and priorities by resource area (PSEORMP Table 3-2) 

Estimated 

Geographic stream 

Priority management area Allotments Acres miles Issues 

Malheur Resource Area 1 Bully Creek Cottonwood Creek (10140) Bully Creek (132) West Bench (20104) Allotment No. 2 (10201) Brian Creek (10215) Buckbrush (10218) Boston Horsecamp (113) Willow Basin (10222) Westfall (227) Rail Canyon (10205) 

Richie Flat (10214) 

Lava Ridge (10223) 

Allotment No. 3 (10202) 

West Clover Creek (10213) 

Clover Creek Individual (10210) 

Post Creek Individual (244) 

Cow Creek Individual (144) 

Ferriers Gulch (10141) 

Scratch Post Butte (228) 

Juniper Mountain (134) 

Bully Creek Reservoir (10224) 

267,681 225 Upland watershed, water quality and 

structure/diversity/productivity, fishe

wildlife habitat, juniper encroachmen

spotted frogs 

2 North Fork Malheur Whitley Canyon (10216) 

Chukar Park (225) 

Buelah Reservoir (10217) 

Agency Mountain (161) 

91,830 16 Upland watershed, bull trout, forestr

suitable study river, WSA, ACEC’s, 

encroachment, aspen, riparian, recrea

Dearmond/Murphy (10206) 

Castle Rock (10211) 

Cottonwood Creek (226) 

Butte Tree (10212) 

Malheur River (10219) 

Lockhart Mountain (224) 

Ring Butte (10208) 

Squaw Butte (233) 

Kivett (133) 

Bridge Creek West (109) 

18
Table 2.—Geographic management area descriptions and priorities by resource area (continued) 

Estimated 

Geographic stream 

Priority management area Allotments Acres miles Issues 

3 Dry Creek Freezeout (10404) 315,417 43 Upland watershed, redband trout, sp

Chalk Butte (128) vegetation composition/structure/div

Mitchel Butte (10408) weeds, recreation, administratively s

Nyssa (10403) WSA’s 

Wallrock (405) 

Butte (308) 

4 Succor Creek Tunnel Canyon (10512) 271,808 50 Upland watershed, redband trout, spo

Gordon Gulch (513) tion/structure/diversity/productivity, 

Board Corrals (10507) study river, WSA’s, ACEC’s, riparia

Three Fingers (10503) recreation, wild horses 

Rockville (10508) 

Spring Mountain (10504) 

5 Owyhee Turnbull (303) 391,147 37 Upland watershed, recreation, NWSR

Quartz Mountain (10406) plants, weeds, National Register Hist

Blackrocks (10503) Ranch) 

Birch Creek (10506) 

Schnable Creek (10510) 

Mahogany Mountain (10509) 

Lodge (10901) 

McCain Springs (10505) 

6 Sand Hills Lower Owyhee River (10502) 112,517 7 Upland watershed, realty, fire/fire reh

Blackjack (10501) plants, vegetation composition/struc

North Harper (402) use, Oregon Trail Historic District, re

Vale Butte (413) study river, ACEC’s, weeds, deer win

Vale Butte North (409) 

South Alkali (20100) 

Wheel Gulch (149) 

Bridge Gulch (124) 

Wickiup Gulch (123) 

Dry Creek Individual (135) 

East Moores Hollow (116) 

King Field (136) 

Grove Road (10107) 

Butterfield Spring (150) 

Becker Creek (10117) 

Little Valley (10407) 

Radar Hill (10410) 

19 
Table 2.—Geographic management area descriptions and priorities by resource area (continued) 

Priority 

Geographic 

management area Allotments 

E

Acres 

stimated 

stream 

miles Issues 

7 Mainstem Malheur River West Oregon Canal (230) 

Oregon Canal (10209) 

Allotment No. 4 (10203) 

Red Hills (10302) 

Harper (301) 

Jonesboro (306) 

Boney Basin (307) 

Bridge Creek (305) 

Black Butte (304) 

Allotment No. 6 (10204) 

Calf Creek (162) 

Road Gulch (229) 

Keeney Creek (10401) 

354,447 114 Upland watershed, redband trout, spo

range, vegetation composition/structu

ACEC’s, weeds, wild horses 

8 South Fork Malheur 

River/Stockades 

Black Butte (304) 

South Star Mountain (309) 

North Star Mountain (310) 

McEwen (20603) 

Venator (10605) 

273,144 40 Upland watershed, juniper encroachm

ACEC, wild horses 

20
9 

Table 2.—Geographic management area descriptions and priorities by resource area (continued) 

Estimated 

Geographic stream 

Priority management area Allotments Acres miles Issues 

Willow Creek	 Willowcreek (20105) 

Canal (152) 

Cottonwood Mountain (20102) 

Sheep Corral Creek (122) 

Thorn Flat (127) 

Poall Creek (20103) 

Dry Gulch (129) 

Canyon Creek (151) 

Phipps Creek (125) 

Jamieson (10106) 

Phipps Creek East (137) 

Phipps Creek North (139) 

Alkali Spring (20101) 

Brogan Canyon (148) 

Boswell Spring (120) 

Amelia Butte (10155) 

Cow Valley (115) 

Lyman Creek (111) 

Reservoir Butte (110) 

Malheur Reservoir (118) 

Bridge Creek East (145) 

Shasta Butte (154) 

Malheur City (130) 

Golden Eagle Mine (108) 

Alder Creek (143) 

Baldy Mountain (131) 

Boulder Creek (138) 

Ironside School (10142) 

Middle Willow Creek (121) 

Lost Valley (119) 

Ring Butte (10208) 

South Willow Creek (153) 

Ironside Mountain (112) 

98,798 40 Upland watershed, riparian, weeds, s

21 
Table 2.—Geographic management area descriptions and priorities by resource area (Continued) 

Estimated 

Priority 

Geographic 

management area Allotments Acres 

stream 

miles Issues 

Jordan Resource Area 

1 Louse Canyon Campbell (11306) 

Louse Canyon (01307) 

Anderson (01401) 

Star Valley (01402) 

521,451 179.4 Upland watershed, NWSR, WSA’s

2 Trout Creek 15 Mile (01201) 

McCormick (01202) 

Zimmerman (01203) 

Whitehorse Butte (01206) 

530,214 251.1 Upland watershed, riparian, T&E s

archeology, wildlife, weeds, recrea

3 Saddle Butte Saddle Butte (20805) 175,579 27.6 Upland watershed, NWSR, WSA’s

special status plants 

4 Jackies Butte Jackies Butte Summer (01101) 

Ambrose Maher (01102) 

213,087 56.6 Upland watershed, NWSR, WSA’s

recreation 

5 Soldier Creek Wroten (11003) 

Willow Creek (11004) 

Whitehorse (11008) 

Rattlesnake Cave (21003) 

Parsnip Peak (11009) 

Cherry Creek (11014) 

Big Horn (11005) 

Arock (21001) 

Little Antelope (11015) 

Antelope (21002) 

237,860 21.8 Upland watershed, NWSR, WSA’s, 

Rattlesnake Eiguren (11305) Albisu-Alcorta (01304) 

Sherburn (11303) 

Echave (21302) 

Ten Mile (01308) 

Gilbert (21301) 

203,593 83.1 Upland watershed, riparian, wildlif

22
Table 2.—Geographic management area descriptions and priorities by resource area (continued) 

Priority 

Geographic 

management area Allotments 

E

Acres 

stimated 

stream 

miles Issues 

7 Cow Creek Antelope Individual (11011) 

Danner Individual (11013) 

East Cow Creek (10903) 

Eiguren Individual (11006) 

Miller Individual (11012) 

Oliver (10905) 

Rome Individual (11007) 

Skinner Individual (11010) 

Bogus Creek (10904) 

Morcum (10907) 

West Cow Creek (20902) 

235,728 6.3 Upland watershed, NWSR, WSA’s, w

ation, ACEC 

8 Barren Valley Bowden Hills (10803) 

Coyote Lake (10804) 

Barren Valley (10801) 

Black Hill (01309) 

Jackies Butte West (01103) 

Crooked Creek (10806) 

Sheepheads (10702) 

433,312 0.9 Upland watershed, WSA’s, noxious w

recreation, wildlife 

23 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

The end result of the GMA evaluation process will be the development of recommendations 

for future actions affecting the management of resources and uses in the GMA. Recommendations on management changes may be implemented through activity plans, management 

agreements, or direct decisions and will depend on the complexity of issues. 

Goals 

The SEORMP has the following goals: 

1) sustain, and where necessary, restore the health of forest, rangeland, aquatic, and riparian 

ecosystems; 

2) provide a predictable, sustained flow of economic benefits within the capability of the 

ecosystem; 

3) provide diverse recreational and educational opportunities within the capability of the 

ecosystem; 

4) contribute to recovery and delisting of threatened and endangered species; and 

5) manage natural resources consistent with treaty and trust responsibilities to American 

Indian tribes. 

Desired Range of Future Conditions 

The Desired Range of Future Conditions (DRFC) portray the land, resource, or social and 

economic conditions that are expected in 50 to 100 years, or more, provided management 

objectives are achieved. This is a vision of the long-term condition of the ecosystem, and 

serves as a guide on how the public land will be managed. 

•	 Social and economic systems continue to adjust to population growth. Public land 

provides commodity and natural resource values that contribute to the local economy 

and quality of life. Public resources have become increasingly valuable, and management focuses on maintaining important values into the future. This has resulted in 

changes in the location, amount, and distribution of commodity outputs across the 

landscape. Traditional industries contribute to local economic activity, as do rapidly 

growing businesses related to outdoor recreation, high technology, agricultural 

processing, service, construction, and other nontraditional products and services. 

•	 The area provides a wide variety of recreational opportunities for a growing demand, as 

the population increases and urban dwellers exhibit a greater desire to experience the 

open spaces commonly found on public land. Additional recreation facilities, restored 

and maintained recreation sites, and more intensive management are a few of the means 

used to meet the increased demand. Protection of the natural landscape is an important 

consideration when designing recreation facilities and planning for related activities. 

Certain areas are excluded from recreational development to preserve their natural 

character. 

24 
•	 SMA’s, such as wilderness, NWSR’s, and ACEC’s, preserve the integrity of special or 

unique values over the long term. 

•	 Rangeland vegetation includes a mosaic of multiple-aged shrubs, forbs, and native and 

desirable nonnative perennial grasses. Shrub overstories are present in a variety of 

spatial arrangements and scales across the landscape level, including some large 

contiguous blocks, islands, and corridors. Shrub overstories are present in predominantly mature, late structural status. Plant communities not meeting DRFC’s show 

upward trends in condition and structural diversity. Desirable plants continue to 

improve in health and vigor. New infestations of noxious weeds are not common across 

the landscape, and existing large infestations are declining. Populations and habitat of 

rare plant species are stable or continue to improve in vigor and distribution. 

•	 Upland soils have sufficient vegetation cover to minimize accelerated soil erosion. 

Physical and chemical soil properties are adequate for vegetation growth and hydrologic function appropriate to the specific soil type, landform, and climate. 

• Western juniper dominance is limited to rock outcrops, ridges, mesas, or other sites 

where wildfire frequency is limited by site productivity. Western juniper generally 

occurs in low densities in association with vigorous shrub, grass, and forb species, 

consistent with site potential. Historic western juniper sites retain old growth characteristics. Quaking aspen communities occupy their historic range and are stable or 

improving in vigor. 

• Wildland and prescribed fire play an active role in defining the composition of vegetation and limit the dominance of woody species. 

•	 Forested land is producing healthy stands of appropriate forest species. Dominant dry 

forest tree species are Douglas fir, ponderosa pine, and western larch. Stands are 

predominantly open and are resilient to low-intensity fire; they have only normally 

expected levels of disease and insects. Examples of relict stands are retained for 

research and maintenance of biodiversity. 

•	 The amount and diversity of wildlife habitat are maintained or improved through time. 

Late-seral grass/shrublands exist in blocks of various sizes in well-distributed patterns 

across the landscape. Ongoing management of rangeland habitat components and 

conditions (such as vegetation cover, forage, and roads) and of key areas helps to 

maintain big game populations near State wildlife agency objectives. Hunting opportunities continue to be provided throughout the planning area. Improvement in the 

condition of grass/shrubland steppe and riparian areas benefits a variety of wildlife 

species by increasing the quality, quantity, and variety of habitat. Such species include 

upland game, raptors, and nongame species. Management has helped to create the 

long-term habitat changes that contribute toward restoring some sensitive species and 

toward recovery of listed species. 

• Riparian areas and stream habitat conditions have improved as a result of protection 

and management. Watersheds are stable and provide for capture, storage, and safe 

release of water appropriate to soil type, climate, and landform. Most riparian/wetland 

areas are stable and include natural streamflow and sediment regimes related to 

contributing watersheds. Soil supports native riparian/wetland vegetation to allow 

water movement, filtration, and storage. Riparian/wetland vegetation structure and 

diversity are significantly progressing toward controlling erosion, stabilizing streambanks, healing incised channels, shading water areas, filtering sediment, aiding in 

25 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

floodplain development, dissipating energy, delaying floodwater, and increasing 

recharge of ground water. Stream channels are narrower, water depth and channel 

meanders are increasing, and developing floodplains are making significant progress in 

dissipating energy at high-water flows and depositing sediment. Riparian/wetland 

vegetation is increasing in herbaceous ground cover, canopy volume (height and 

width) and in healthy uneven-aged stands of key woody plants, increasing in herbaceous ground cover, and shifting toward late succession. Surface disturbances which 

are inconsistent with the physical and biological processes described above have been 

reduced, and soils and vegetation recover naturally. 

•	 Human use of natural resources is managed to enhance fisheries, improve water quality, 

and promote healthy riparian conditions. Water quality is managed so that most 

streams are providing cool, clear, and clean water. High-quality water is in greater 

demand from all users. Better regulation of runoff has improved the water supply from 

rangelands. There is increased infiltration on upland sites, increased ground water 

recharge, increased spring flow, reduced peak flow during floods, and increased 

stability of baseflow during late summer and winter. 

•	 Large portions of the landscape have a protective soil cover of deep-rooted plants and 

litter which supports proper hydrologic function. 

•	 Management activities have been implemented on nearly all high-risk sites to facilitate 

recovery of upland, riparian, aquatic, and water quality conditions. Improved aquatic 

habitat conditions allow populations of threatened and endangered aquatic species to 

stabilize and expand into appropriate, previously occupied habitat. Populations of 

native aquatic species are increasing. 

• Water quality is improved to provide stable and productive riparian and aquatic 

ecosystems. Water quality of high-priority streams is within State standards, and the 

remaining streams have made significant progress toward attaining those standards. 

Upland, riparian, and aquatic ecosystems are stable and productive to a degree that 

leads to acceptable water quality for identified beneficial uses. Improvement has 

occurred in stream channel integrity and channel processes, under which the riparian 

and aquatic systems developed. Hydrologic and sediment regimes (the characteristic 

behavior or orderly occurrence of a natural phenomenon or process) in streams, lakes, 

and wetlands are appropriate to the surrounding soils, climate, and landform. Instream 

flows are sufficient to support healthy riparian and aquatic habitats, and stream 

functions are stable and effective. Flooding streams discharge without significant 

damage to the watershed. Riparian vegetation provides sufficient vegetation debris; 

provides adequate regulation of air and water temperatures during both summer and 

winter; and helps reduce surface erosion, bank erosion, and channel migration to levels 

characteristic of natural conditions. 

• Riparian and aquatic habitats exhibit the same characteristics that led to the evolution 

of the unique genetic fish stocks that currently exist. These habitats also support 

populations of well-distributed native and desired nonnative plant, vertebrate, and 

invertebrate populations. 

•	 Complex instream structure formed from woody debris, aquatic plants, roots, undercut 

banks, or boulders, serves as cover for all life cycle stages. 

• Biologically diverse habitats are maintained to ensure the presence of organisms and 

processes necessary to sustain native aquatic communities over the long term. Adequate spatial distribution of these communities is maintained, avoiding habitat 

fragmentation and allowing for recolonization of populations after disturbance. A 

diversity of breeding habitats for aquatic species provides clean gravels, quiet backwa26 
ters, and emergent and submergent vegetation. Rearing habitats for larvae and fry are 

available in backwaters, shallow edges, and other protected sites. 

Management Decisions 

Introduction 

Every decision through the planning process is actually a string of components. Primary 

among these components are objectives and management actions. Associated with the 

decision components are support components such as rationale and monitoring needs. The 

SEORMP is composed in such a way that the reader will be able to readily track objectives, 

rationale, management actions, and monitoring needs. The following material defines and 

expands upon these various components: 

Objectives— an expression of the desired result of management efforts. Objectives are based 

on law and regulation, reflecting the direction that management of these lands is projected to 

follow in the future. Objectives may not be completely met over the life of the land use plan 

(20 years or more). Funding and staffing levels will affect rates of implementation depending 

on the cost of prescribed management activities. 

Rationale— an expression of the primary reasoning behind why it is important to pursue the 

stated objective. 

Management actions— measures that are to be undertaken in order to attain or achieve the 

stated objective. 

Monitoring needs— information/data collected relevant to determining whether identified 

resource objectives are being accomplished. 

A monitoring plan for each resource area will be developed during the implementation of the 

land use plan, and will include a monitoring and evaluation schedule. Monitoring has been or 

will be designed in conjunction with the activity plans, or as needed to monitor specific 

objectives. 

In addition to guidance provided by resource management actions and allocations identified 

in the SEORMP, the following major processes and steps are needed to implement any 

proposed site-specific management action which is identified in the plan and/or is consistent 

with the plan: 

•	 Additional planning/environmental assessment or NEPA adequacy documentation 

would be completed to identify additional analysis needed to put the decision into 

effect. 

•	 Manualized procedures would be noted and cited where implementation of a management action is governed by specific procedures defined in manual or an approved 

handbook. 

•	 Required consultation, coordination, and cooperation with affected parties associated 

with the allocation or proposed management action would be completed. 

27 
 

 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Objectives, Rationale, Monitoring and

 Management Actions 

Air Resources 

Objective: Meet or exceed the “National Ambient Air Quality Standards” and the “Prevention of Significant Deterioration” with all authorized actions. 

Rationale: Section 118 of the “Clean Air Act” requires Federal agencies to comply with all 

Federal, State, and local air pollution requirements. Section 176(c) prohibits Federal agencies 

from taking any actions that contribute to a new violation of ambient air quality standards, 

increase the frequency or severity of an existing violation, or delay the attainment of a 

standard. It also requires Federal agencies to conform to State implementation plans. 

The “Air Quality Policy on Wildland and Prescribed Fires” issued April 23, 1998, directs 

public land managers to protect public health and welfare by mitigating the impacts of air 

pollutant emissions on air quality and visibility for all wildland and prescribed fires managed 

to achieve resource values. 

Monitoring: Fire prescriptions and mitigation measures will be reviewed and records of 

acreages/tonnages burned will be maintained. Additional smoke management mitigation 

measures, including the use of smoke modeling programs (such as simple approach smoke 

estimation models), will be done for large or long duration burns that have the potential to 

impact major population centers such as Boise, Idaho, and Baker City. 

Management Actions: Prior to the actual ignition of any prescribed fire, an approved 

prescribed fire burn plan will be in place and adhered to throughout the project. The burn 

plan will include information and techniques used to reduce or alter smoke emission levels. 

Information (including resource objectives, acres to be burned, fuel types, fuel moisture, fuel 

loading, fuel continuity, topography, location of population centers and Class 1 air sheds) 

assists fire managers in determining what weather conditions, firing methods, and mop-up 

standards should be used to minimize impacts. All prescribed fire projects will be completed 

in accordance with the “Oregon Smoke Management Plan.” The majority of fuel types in the 

planning area do not allow opportunities to reduce emissions; therefore, emissions will be 

managed by timing and atmospheric dispersal. 

Use prescribed burning to treat rangeland areas to 30,000 acres per year and forested areas to 

300 acres per year or the equivalent of 337,500 tons of fuel per year. 

Energy and Mineral Resources 

Objective 1: Provide opportunities for exploration and development of leasable energy 

and mineral resources while protecting other sensitive resources. 

Rationale: The “Mineral Leasing Act” of 1920, as amended; the “Geothermal Steam Act” of 

1970, as amended; and the “Mining and Mineral Policy Act” of 1970, declare that it is the 

continuing policy of the Federal government to foster and encourage private enterprise in the 

development of domestic mineral resources. Section 102 of FLPMA directs that the public 

28 
 

land will be managed in a manner which recognizes the Nation’s need for domestic sources 

of minerals and other resources. BLM mineral policy (1984) states that public land shall 

remain open and available for mineral exploration and development unless withdrawal or 

other administrative action is clearly justified in the national interest. The 2001 President’s 

National Energy Policy states the measures that will increase and diversify our nation’s 

sources of both traditional and alternative energy resources, improve our energy transportation network, and ensure sound environmental management. This policy was emphasized by 

Executive Order 13212 which states that BLM must “ . . . take appropriate actions, to the 

extent consistent with applicable law, to expedite projects that will increase the production, 

transmission or conservation of energy.” Executive Order 13212 provides the decisions 

made by BLM to take into account the adverse impacts on the President’s National Energy 

Policy. 

Section 102 of FLPMA also states that public land will be managed in a manner that will 

protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water and archaeological values. Refer to Appendix O for a list of BMP’s. 

Congressional action has closed wild river segments of designated NWSR’s (49,007 acres) 

and a 100,352 acre (including 35,352 acres in WSA) portion of the congressionally designated 

Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area (SMCMPA) in the southwestern area of JRA in Harney County to energy and mineral leasing. Any WSA’s, or 

portions thereof, that are not designated as wilderness and are released by Congress from 

WSA status will be open to leasing unless closed by other management actions. 

Monitoring: Inspections will be conducted to determine compliance with applicable laws, 

regulations, conditions of leases, and the requirements of approved exploration plans. Where 

mineral production is occurring, inspections will ensure an accurate accounting of materials 

removed, proper compensation to the Federal government, protection of the environment, 

public health and safety, and identification and resolution of mineral trespass. Operations in 

sensitive areas or operations with a high potential for greater than usual impacts will be 

inspected more often. 

Management Actions: Closed to leasing: This restriction involves both nondiscretionary 

and discretionary closures. Nondiscretionary closures, such as WSA’s where no surface 

disturbing activities which require reclamation are allowed, congressionally designated 

NWSR’s and a 100,352 acre portion of the congressionally designated SMCMPA, are not 

affected by this plan and their acreages are not included in Table 3 or Table 4. 

Discretionary closures are the result of management decisions arrived at through the planning process. They involve land where the resource values are considered so important that 

they outweigh any economic return that can be expected from mineral development, and 

environmental impacts resulting from lease operations could irreparably damage those 

resources. Less restrictive measures were considered in identifying these closures, but were 

considered inadequate to protect resource values contained on the parcel(s). 

Special stipulations: These are specific operating conditions imposed at the time of lease 

issuance which modify the original terms and conditions of the lease (standard lease terms). 

The special stipulations necessary to meet resource objectives for sensitive resources are 

displayed in Table 3. Exceptions, exemption or waiver of these stipulations would only be 

allowed if it can be demonstrated that existing or emerging technology can be used to meet 

RMP objectives for the identified sensitive resource. In this planning area, these stipulations 

fall into three categories, described below. 

1) No surface occupancy (NSO)—This stipulation is applied to land where the resource 

values (such as sensitive plant sites, or areas of high scenic values) are such that they 

cannot be adequately protected by the standard stipulations or less restrictive special 

stipulations such as timing limitations. In the development of this stipulation, less restrictive 

29 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

stipulations were evaluated and found to be inadequate to protect known and suspected 

values contained on the parcel. The no leasing alternative was also evaluated, but was 

considered unnecessary to protect the resources. 

2) Timing limitation—This stipulation is applied to land where the resource values (such as 

raptor nesting, sage grouse leks, or big game winter range) cannot be adequately protected 

by the standard lease terms, but yet do not require a yearlong restriction on leasing operations. Less restrictive stipulations (such as controlled surface use or standard stipulations) 

were considered in developing this stipulation, but it was concluded that they would not 

afford sufficient protection to the known and suspected resources found on the parcel(s). 

3) Other special stipulations—This stipulation does not fit the usually identified stipulation 

categories. It is applied in cases where a resource requires protection, but either covers a 

large geographic region (e.g, special status plants and animals, which are found throughout 

the planning area, but not all locations are known), or information pertaining to that resource 

may be incomplete (such as the size and location of RCA’s) and is applied to all leases. The 

application of the standard lease terms was considered in developing this stipulation(s), but 

found to provide insufficient safeguards to resolve lease concerns. 

Standard lease terms: These are the standard terms and conditions that are applied to all 

leases (sections 6 of Form 3110-11, “Offer to Lease and Lease for Oil and Gas,” and Form 

3200-4, “Offer to Lease and Lease for Geothermal Resources”). They are the only conditions 

applied to a lease where additional measures are not considered necessary to protect resource values. Standard lease terms have been superceded by other special stipulations and 

will not be applied in the planning area. 

Geophysical operations will also be subject to the proposed lease restrictions identified 

above, except for certain types of activity requiring little or no surface disturbance, such as 

gravity and magnetic surveys. 

Where discretionary, the planning area will be open to energy and mineral leasing, except in 

rivers identified as administratively suitable for designation as wild in the NWSRS (Table 14), 

and the WSA additions, both of which will be closed to energy and mineral leasing. 

The NSO stipulation will be applied to specified ACEC’s listed as NSO in Table 13; streams 

designated administratively suitable as recreational in the NWSRS (Table 14); Succor Creek 

SRMA; and selected special status plant sites near Harper. 

There will also be areas where a seasonal, or other special stipulation will be applied to 

protect values identified. These areas include some ACEC’s (Table 13, OWS); a 0.5-mile 

buffer around sage grouse leks; big game winter ranges; areas of special status plant and 

animal species and their essential habitat; and RCA’s. 

Table 3 displays the restrictions on mineral leasing in the planning area. See also Maps MIN1 and MIN-2 for the geographic locations of leasable minerals and map MIN-6 for leasing 

restrictions for the RMP. 

Objective 2: Provide opportunities for exploration and development of locatable mineral 

resources while protecting other sensitive resources. 

Rationale: The “General Mining Law” of 1872 gives the public the basic right to locate and 

develop mining claims on Federally-owned land. The “Mining and Mineral Policy Act” of 

1970 declares that it is the continuing policy of the Federal government to foster and encourage private enterprise in the development of domestic mineral resources. Section 102 of 

FLPMA directs that public land is to be managed in a manner which recognizes the Nation’s 

need for domestic sources of minerals and other resources. 

30 
 

 

Section 102 also states that public land will be managed in a manner that will protect the 

quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water 

resources, and archaeological values. Refer to Appendix O for a listing of BMP’s. 

Congressional action has closed wild segments of designated NWSR’s (49,007 acres) to 

mineral location and a portion of the southwest area of JRA in Harney County (100,352 acres) 

to mineral location due to designation of the SMCMPA, subject to valid existing rights. Past 

BLM administrative actions have closed selected administrative and recreation sites to 

mineral location (see Table 5), and they will remain withdrawn under this plan. 

Although WSA’s will be available for location of mining claims, activities on these claims will 

be limited in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Mining claims located in WSA’s not designated as wilderness would be released from IMPLWR criteria. 

Monitoring: Monitoring of activities on mining claims will be conducted to ensure compliance with the 43 CFR 3802/3809 regulations. These regulations provide for locatable mineral 

activities on public land while preventing unnecessary or undue degradation, and provide for 

reclamation of disturbed areas and coordination with State agencies. BLM policy establishes 

minimum inspection frequencies for mining operations as follows: quarterly inspections are 

required for all operations using cyanide, and biannual inspections for all other active 

operations. Operations in sensitive areas or operations with a high potential for greater than 

usual impacts will be inspected more often. 

Management Actions: The planning area will be open to mineral location and development 

except in selected SMA’s. Pursue protective withdrawals (subject to Secretarial approval and, 

for proposals greater than 5,000 acres, subject to congressional review) in ACEC’s listed as 

withdrawal in Table 13, in streams identified as administratively suitable for designation as 

wild under the NWSRS as listed in Table 14; for BLM administrative sites and developed 

recreation sites as listed in Table 5, proposed BLM recreation sites when development is 

approved and for special status plant sites near Harper (Malheur fiddleneck). These withdrawals would be for a maximum of 20 years and subject to review at the end of that period to 

determine the necessity of continuing the withdrawal. 

While WSA additions will remain open to mineral location, mineral operations will be subject 

to IMPLWR criteria; therefore, no surface-disturbing activities requiring reclamation will be 

allowed unless the operation has established “grandfathered” uses or “valid existing” rights. 

Maps MIN-3 and MIN-4 show locatable mineral resources in the planning area whileTable 4 

displays the acreage of mineral location restrictions, excluding designated NWSR’s, the 

SMCMPA withdrawn area and existing WSA’s where no surface disturbing activities requiring reclamation are allowed. 

Objective 3: Provide for public demand for saleable minerals from public land while 

protecting sensitive resources. 

Rationale: The “Material Act” of 1947, as amended, and the “Mining and Mineral Policy 

Act” of 1970 declare that it is the continuing policy of the Federal government to foster and 

encourage private enterprise in the development of domestic mineral resources. The FLPMA, 

section 102, directs that public land will be managed in a manner which recognizes the 

Nation’s need for domestic sources or minerals and other resources. BLM mineral policy 

(1984) states that public land shall remain open and available for mineral exploration and 

development unless withdrawal or other administrative action is clearly justified in the 

national interest. 

31 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Table 3. - Mineral leasing Management (PSEORMP Table 3-3a)
 

Resource of Concern MRA JRA Total Description 

acres acres acres 

Closed to leasing 

Administratively suitable wild study 

rivers 

6,340 1,448 7,788 Upon designation, NWSR's are removed 

from availability for mineral leasing. To 

protect them from adverse impacts while 

in study status, no leasing would be 

authorized, pending congessional action 

on NWSR designation. If consistent with 

other management decisions, leasing may 

be allowed in rivers not congressionaly 

designated and released from study status 

Wilderness study area additions 2,200 1,080 3,280 This public land has been added to 

WSA's and would come under IMPLWR 

criteria which allows no leasing pending 

congressional action on wilderness 

designation. Leasing may be allowed on 

land not designated as wilderness and 

released from WSA status. 

No Surface Occupancy 

ACEC's 136,506 30,806 167,312 These areas have significant resource 

values which could be advesly impacted 

by lease operations. A NSO stipulation 

would protect those values. This 

stipulation may be removed if significant 

resource values identified for protection 

through designation of the specific ACEC 

are determined to be no longer important 

and relevant. 

Administratively suitable recreational 

study river 

2,953 0 2,953 For the portion of the Owyhee River 

below the dam administratively suitable 

study river, an NSO stipulation would be 

applied, pending congressional action on 

designation. 

32 
Table 3. - Mineral leasing management (continued)
 

Resource of Concern MRA JRA Total Description 

acres acres acres 

No Surface Occupancy 

Special Status plant sites near Harper, 1,216 0 1,216 Sites near Harper which have special 

Oregon status plant habitat which would be 

adversely impacted by surface 

disturbance. NSO stipulations will be 

applied withing these areas to protect 

those values. This stipulation may be 

waived by the authorized officer if the 

plant species is no longer classified as 

special status. 

Succor Creek special recreation 11,355 0 11,355 The SRMA is situated within a relatively 

management area narrow canyon with outstanding scenic 

values and recreational opportunities. An 

NSO stipulation will be applied to 

protect those values. 

Operational timing limitations 

Big game winter range as on Map 1,261,124 784,570 2,045,694 Big game tolerance to leasing activities 

MIN-6 varies by species and is influenced by the 

intensity, duration, and timeing of 

disturbance. In areas with big game 

winter range, no development would be 

allowed from December-March 1 of each 

year. The authorized officer may grant a 

exception if site specific environmental 

analysis indicates that an action would no 

interfere with habitat function or 

compromise animal condition. The 

authorized officer may modify the size an 

timeframes of the stipulation if monitorin 

indicates that current animal use patterns 

are inconsistent with dates established fo 

animal occupation. This stipulation may 

be waived by the authorized officer if 

monitoring determines that all or specific 

portions of the project area no longer 

satisfy this functional capacity 

33 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Table 3. - Mineral leasing management (continued)
 

Resource of Concern MRA JRA Total Description 

acres acres acres 

Operational timing limitations 

Sage grouse lek sites as shown on 60,976 65,130 126,106 Sage grouse breeding activity could be 

Map MIN-6 and new sites that may disrupted by lease activity during the 

be found in the future. strutting season. A NSO stipulation will 

be applied within .5 mile of these sites 

between March 1 and June 1 of each 

year. The authorized officer may grant a 

exception to the stipulation if site specific 

environmenal analysis indicates that an 

action would not interfere with sage 

grouse strutting. The authorized officer 

may modify the size and timeframes of th 

stipulation if monitoring indicates that 

current sage grouse use patterns are 

inconsistent with dates established for 

animal occupation.,or if the proposed 

action could be conditioned so as to not 

interfere with sage grouse strutting. This 

stipulation may be waived by the 

authorized officer if monitoring determin 

that all or specific portions of the lease 

area no longer satisfy this functional 

capacity. 

ACEC values 6,013 0 6,013 These areas contain values which could 

be adversly impacted by lease 

development. NSO stipulation will be 

applied between March 1 to June 1 of 

each year. The authorized officer may 

modify the area of this stipulation if the 

ACEC designation is dropped and/or the 

values are no longer a concern. 

Other special stipulations 

State threatened and endangered, All leases All leases All leases Surface disturbing activities on all minera 

Federal candidate and Bureau leases are limited to existing roads until 

sensitive plants and animals appropriate field surrveys at appropriate 

times of year for idintification of special identification of special 

status species and their habitatis for 

proposed areas of disturbance. If special 

status species or their habitats are found 

or known to be in the area, the authorized 

officer may determine to not allow or to 

modify activities needed to ensure that 

actions are not likely to contribute to the 

need to Federally list the species. 

34 
Table 3. - Mineral leasing management (continued)
 

Resource of Concern MRA JRA Total Description 

acres acres acres 

Other special stipulations 

Riparian conservation areas All leases All leases All leases Surface disturbing activities on all miner 

leases are limited to areas outside of 

RCA's. This may require relocation of 

proposed surface disturbing activities 

more than 200 meters. Surface 

occupancy within RCA's may be allowed 

if there are no practical alternatives, 

riparian management objectives can be 

obtained, and unavoidable adverse 

impacts to aquatic recources minimized. 

35 
protective withdrawl

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Table 4. - Mineral restrictions (PSEORMP Table 3-3b)
 

Mineral category Restriction MRA 

acres 

JRA 

acres 

Total 

acres 

Leasables 

Closed to Leasing 8,540 2,528 11,068 

No surface occupancy 149,110 30,806 179,916 

Operational timing limits 1,279,342 829,672 2,109,014 

Locatables Present WSA additions (which 

allows no surface disturbance 

requiring reclamation ) and 

protective withdrawal 

124,178 3,241 127,419 

Saleables Closed to disposal 148,410 46,003 194,413 

Table 5.—Administrative and recreational locatable mineral withdrawals (PSEORMP Table 3-4) 

Location Type of site Acres 

Malheur Resource Area 

Juntura Administrative 10 

Chukar Park Recreational 90 

Riverside Recreational 35 

Leslie Gulch ACEC 11,673 

TOTAL 11,808 

Jordan Resource Area 

McDermitt # 2 Administrative 4 

Rome Launch Site Administrative 80 

Cow Lakes Recreational 511 

Antelope Campground Recreational 60 

TOTAL 655 

GRAND TOTAL 12,463 

36 
 

 

 

Section 102 of FLPMA also states that the public land will be managed in a manner that will 

protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resources, and archaeological values. Refer to Appendix O for a list of BMP’s. 

A small portion of the southwest area of JRA (in Harney County) has been closed to saleable 

mineral disposals by congressional action, except that material can be removed from existing 

community pits for road maintenance. Congressionally designated NWSR’s and WSA’s have 

been closed to saleable mineral disposals by BLM management actions. Any WSA’s, or 

portions thereof, that would be not designated as wilderness would be open to mineral 

material disposal unless closed by other management actions. 

Monitoring: Inspections of saleable mineral operations will be conducted in accordance with 

BLM policy contained in BLM Manual, section 3600. Inspections will be conducted to 

determine compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and the requirements of approved 

mining plans. Where mineral production is occurring, the goals of the saleable mineral 

inspection and enforcement/production verification program will be: (1) an accurate accounting of material removed, (2) proper compensation to the Federal government, (3) protection of 

the environment, public health and safety, and (4) identification and resolution of saleable 

mineral trespass. Operations in sensitive areas or operations with a high potential for greater 

than usual impacts will be inspected more often. 

Management Actions: The planning area will be available for saleable mineral development 

except where unacceptable conflicts exist, as determined by interdisciplinary, site-specific 

review. Saleable mineral development will not be permitted in ACEC’s as specified in Table 13, 

in streams administratively suitable for inclusion in the NWSRS, in additions to WSA’s, in 

Harper and other special status plant sites, in the Succor Creek SRMA, in BLM administrative 

sites, in developed and potential BLM recreation sites as identified in Appendix U, and within 

RCA’s or areas which may affect RCA’s. 

Map MIN-5 shows saleable minerals in the planning area andTable 4 displays the acres 

closed to saleable mineral disposal. 

Fire 

Objective 1: Provide an appropriate management response (AMR) on all wildfires, with 

emphasis on minimizing suppression costs, considering fire fighter and public safety, 

benefits, and values to be protected consistent with resource objectives. 

Rationale: “Fire, as a critical natural process, will be integrated into land and resource 

management plans and activities on a landscape scale, across agency boundaries, and will be 

based upon best available science. All use of fire for resource management requires a formal 

prescription. Management actions taken on wildland fires will be consistent with approved 

fire management plans” (“Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review,” 

December 18, 1995, and as amended by the January 2001, review and update). 

Monitoring: Monitoring will include the establishment of photo and/or study plots to 

identify actual resource changes and to determine whether or not resource objectives are 

being met. It will require close coordination with periodic reviews and post fire critiques 

occurring between resource and fire management personnel. Real time fire monitoring, 

including weather, fire behavior, fire effects, etc., will be documented and analyzed. 

Management Actions: Provide AMR on all wildfires (Appendix M, Map FIRE-2). Response 

to be based on preplanned fire criteria, resource objectives and constraints as identified in 

Appendix M and the approved District Fire Management Plan (FMP). As necessary modify 

existing FMP to reflect changes in resource objectives and constraints. 

37 
 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Objective 2: Recognize fire as a critical natural process and use it to protect, maintain, 

and enhance resources. 

Rationale: “Wildland fire will be used to protect, maintain, and enhance resources and, as 

nearly as possible, be allowed to function in its natural ecological role.”—“Federal Wildland 

Fire Management Policy and Program Review,” December 18, 1995, and as amended by the 

January 2001 review and update. 

Monitoring: Monitoring will include the use of photo and/or study plots to determine 

resource change and effectiveness of meeting resource and fire objectives. Real time fire 

monitoring, including weather, fire behavior, fuels etc., will be documented and analyzed for 

effectiveness in meeting objectives. Burn boss and cost analysis reports will be completed to 

determine cost-effectiveness of each burn project. As necessary, post-burn reviews between 

resource and fire personnel will occur. 

Management Actions: Where determined appropriate, use prescribed fire and AMR to meet 

resource and fire hazard fuels reduction objectives. The type and level of fire activity and 

fuel treatment to achieve resource objectives will be described in the District FMP. As listed 

below, identify areas according to their potential for the reintroduction of fire to meet resource 

and hazards fuels reduction: 

• Areas where fire does not need to be reintroduced (fire is not a significant component, 

or the fire regime has not been altered). 

• Areas where fire is unlikely to succeed (fire would be adverse; examples include areas 

significantly altered by fuel accumulation and species changes). In these areas 

determine appropriate, ecologically sound alternatives. 

• Areas where treatment with fire is essential or potentially effective (fire is needed to 

improve resource conditions or reduce risks). 

Require appropriate treatment of fuel hazards created by resource management and land use 

activities. Develop prescribed fire plans for areas identified for prescribed fire use. As 

necessary, modify the existing FMP to reflect changes in the level of fire activity, fuel 

treatment and prescribed fire management program necessary to achieve resource objectives. 

Rangeland Vegetation 

Objective 1: Restore, protect, and enhance the diversity and distribution of desirable 

vegetation communities including perennial native and desirable introduced plant species. 

Provide for their continued existence and normal function in nutrient, water, and energy 

cycles. 

Rationale: With passage of FLPMA and the “Public Rangelands Improvement Act” (PRIA) 

of 1978, objectives and priorities for the management of public land vegetation resources 

were more clearly defined. Guidance contained in 43 CFR 4180 of the regulations directs 

public land management toward the maintenance or restoration of the physical function and 

biological health of rangeland ecosystems. Standards of Rangeland Health and Guidelines 

for Livestock Grazing Management (S&G’s) for public land administered by the BLM in 

Oregon and Washington were approved by the Secretary of the Interior on August 12, 1997 

(USDI-BLM 1997). This objective will maintain and improve the condition and trend in plant 

communities that provide wildlife habitat, recreation, forage, scientific, scenic, ecological, and 

water and soil conservation benefits for consumptive and nonconsumptive uses. The longterm goal of vegetation management across the landscape is to maintain or improve rangeland 

condition to DRFC’s which meet management objectives, not specifically late-potential 

natural communities (PNC’s) ecological status. 

38 
 

 

Management actions authorized or implemented by BLM will influence future vegetation 

composition. These actions may include season, intensity, and duration of livestock grazing 

within diverse vegetation communities (Appendix R); the influence of fire and associated 

suppression actions; emergency fire rehabilitation and the reintroduction of grazing following 

fire; the use of natural and management-created firebreaks to protect early seral communities 

from frequent fire intervals; rehabilitation and reclamation actions following soil-disturbing 

activities; management of noxious weeds; OHV use; wild horse management; recreational 

use; and mining. 

Vegetation management has been based on existing inventories delineating the ecological 

status of vegetation communities. Management objectives have been to improve early and 

middle seral stage vegetation communities to attain late seral or PNC within the limits of 

ecological site potential. Additionally, those vegetation communities in late seral stage or 

PNC have been managed to improve or maintain those desirable conditions. The basis for 

defining ecological status and potential is site descriptions that provide a summary of 

expected species composition and variability within climax vegetation communities, as well as 

anticipated responses with management. The delineation of ecological sites is based on soils 

and climatic conditions. Management objectives within previous land use plans to attain 

late-PNC seral communities were based on the increased productivity of late-PNC seral 

communities relative to low seral communities, their greater ability to stabilize watersheds, 

and their improved role in water, nutrient, and energy cycling. Vegetation communities in latePNC seral stage express a mosaic of species composition and structure consistent with site 

potential and, as such, reflect a range of possible plant communities that should meet the 

objectives defining desired future conditions within this land use plan. 

Monitoring: Over the life of this plan, vegetation communities will be monitored to determine 

progress toward attaining DRFC’s. Monitoring to determine success in meeting vegetation 

management objectives will include periodic measurements of plant composition, vigor, and 

productivity as well as measurement of the amount and distribution of plant cover and litter 

which protects the soil surface from raindrop impact, detains overland flow, protects the 

surface from wind erosion, and retards soil moisture loss through evaporation. Additional 

data, to determine the effectiveness of established tools in meeting objectives, may include 

herbaceous or woody utilization, actual use, and climatic parameters. 

Management Actions: Upland native rangeland communities will be managed to attain a 

trend toward DRFC’s based on management objectives and site potential. Management 

actions will maintain the condition of those native communities where vegetation composition and structure will be consistent with desired conditions and natural values. Nonnative 

seedings in poor or fair condition will be managed to restore production and vigor, as well as 

to improve structural and species diversity consistent with other management objectives. 

Nonnative seedings in good or excellent condition will be managed to maintain seeding 

health, improve structural and species diversity, and ensure continued forage production. 

Upland shrub cover across the landscape will be maintained at moderate to heavy levels of 

potential for wildlife cover values (see Appendix F, Table F-1) and structural diversity in most 

native vegetation communities where potential exists and in nonnative seedings as consistent with other resource management objectives. The frequency, distribution, and ecological 

integrity of native stands of mountain shrubs will be restored and maintained where site 

potential will support these species. 

Management actions will be implemented to rehabilitate and/or vegetate plant communities 

that do not meet DRFC’s due to dominance by annual, weedy or woody species. Vegetation 

manipulation projects will be implemented primarily to direct trend toward desired conditions, 

improve structural and species diversity, and protect soil, water, and vegetation resources. 

Emphasis will be placed on the use of prescribed and wildland fire to regulate woody species 

dominance and direct vegetation composition toward desired conditions. Appropriate 

Management Response (AMR) will be implemented on wildland fires to meet vegetation 

management and other objectives. Following wildland fire, priority will be placed on the 

39 
 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

rehabilitation of rangeland vegetation communities held at risk due to dominance by annual 

and woody species. 

Seedings will be implemented with appropriate mixes of adapted perennial species. Species 

mixes will be determined on a site-specific basis dependent on the probability of successful 

establishment, risks associated with seeding failure, and other management considerations. 

Preference will be toward the use of native species, though nonnative species may be used 

when better adapted to out-compete established annual species. Use of competitive native 

species or desirable nonnative species will be emphasized in seedings within sites moderately 

and highly susceptible to degradation. Treatment configuration will emphasize the maintenance of natural values as consistent with other resource management objectives. 

Areas burned by wildland fire, including those subsequently rehabilitated, will be rested from 

grazing for one full year and through a second growing season at a minimum, or until monitoring data or professional judgment indicate that health and vigor of desired vegetation has 

recovered to levels adequate to support and protect upland function. Appropriate grazing 

use of healthy perennial vegetation communities, or areas dominated by annual species, prior 

to the two growing season limit may be allowed on a case-by-case basis, as consistent with 

objectives for improving or maintaining rangeland health and other objectives. 

Annual rangeland vegetation communities at risk from frequent fires will be protected 

through the establishment of appropriate firebreaks (such as greenstripping) using both 

desirable native and nonnative species. An emphasis will be placed on the establishment of 

effective firebreaks using seed mixes and project configurations consistent with resource 

management objectives and goals to maintain natural values. 

Objective 2: Manage big sagebrush cover in seedings and on native rangeland to meet the 

life history requirements of sagebrush-dependent wildlife. 

Rationale: This objective leads to a more detailed description of DRFC’s for Wyoming, 

mountain, and basin big sagebrush in the analysis area. 

Section 102.8 of FLPMA states that it is the policy of the United States that public land be 

managed in a manner that will protect the quality of multiple resources and will provide food 

and habitat for fish, wildlife, and domestic animals. PRIA directs improvement of rangeland 

conditions and provides for rangeland improvements including providing habitat for wildlife. 

This objective is consistent with the S&G’s (43 CFR 4180). Because rangeland supports big 

sagebrush habitat for nearly 60 percent of the planning area, managing the shrub overstory 

for multiple-use has significant benefits for wildlife. In some parts of the planning area, big 

sagebrush habitats have been affected by seedings and a variety of other events, such as 

fire, that have reduced the shrub overstory. The result has been fragmentation of shrub 

habitat. This is important because big sagebrush shrub cover is directly related to the 

support of diverse wildlife communities. Although grass and forb understories are certainly 

important to the overall suitability and health of big sagebrush habitats for wildlife, the shrub 

overstory alone accounts for a high proportion of wildlife habitat values. 

Monitoring: Monitoring will include approximations or measured values of shrub cover 

within big sagebrush habitats. 

Management Actins: Management will strive for greater than 70 percent or more of the total 

potential sagebrush habitat to achieve DRFC’s in each resource area over the long term. 

Native range and most seedings will be managed to meet the requirements of game and a host 

of nongame species. Management will be to maintain or establish diversity, mosaics, and 

connectivity of sagebrush between geographic areas at middle and fine scales. The obligation to provide sagebrush cover for its various wildlife habitat values will be met in most 

areas. The overall goal of this alternative is to emphasize plant and animal community health 

at landscape levels. To achieve DRFC’s, management will include a variety of methods to 

40 
 

 

 

 

increase or decrease big sagebrush overstory. Quantifications of shrub occurrence are 

described in Appendix F. 

Objective 3: Control the introduction and proliferation of noxious weed species and 

reduce the extent and density of established weed species to within acceptable limits. 

Rationale: FLPMA and PRIA direct BLM to “manage public lands according to the principles 

of multiple use and sustained yield” and “manage the public lands to prevent unnecessary 

degradation . . . so they become as productive as feasible.” “The Carlson-Foley Act” (Public 

Law 90-583) and the “Federal Noxious Weed Act” (Public Law 93-629) direct weed control on 

public land. The introduction and spread of noxious weeds within the planning area cause a 

decline in rangeland condition, expose soils to accelerated rates of erosion, reduce productivity, reduce dominance of individual species and communities of native plants, and reduce 

economic returns to individuals and society. 

Monitoring: In cooperation with the State of Oregon, Malheur County, adjoining counties, 

and private landowners, inventories to identify the distribution and density of identified 

noxious weeds will continue. Inventories will be repeated as necessary in subsequent years 

following control actions to identify effectiveness. 

Management Actions: The distribution and density of noxious weeds will be reduced 

through the application of approved control methods in an integrated program in cooperation 

with the State of Oregon, Malheur County, Harney County, and other adjoining counties, 

adjoining private landowners, and other affected agencies and interests (see Map SS-1). 

Control methods will include preventive management to maintain competitive vegetation 

cover and reduce the distribution and introduction of noxious weed seed; manual and 

mechanical methods to physically remove noxious weeds; biological methods to introduce 

and cultivate factors that naturally limit the spread of noxious weeds; cultural practices; and 

application of chemicals. Target species will include those identified by county, state and 

BLM weed priority lists. 

Forest and Woodlands 

Objective 1: Manage forests to maintain or restore ecosystems to a condition in which 

biodiversity is preserved and occurrences of fire, insects, and disease do not exceed levels 

normally expected in a healthy forest. Increase the dominance of ponderosa pine, Douglas 

fir, and western larch on appropriate sites in mature forests. Decrease the amount of 

Douglas fir, white fir, and grand fir where they were not historically maintained by the 

dominant fire regime. Manage forests for long-term, healthy habitat for animal and plant 

species. Provide for timber production where feasible and compatible with forest health. 

Rationale: The “Materials Act” of 1947 authorized disposal of timber on public land. Section 

102 of FLPMA requires that public land be managed for multiple use and sustained yield in a 

manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, 

air and atmospheric, water resource, and archaeological values. It also states that public land 

will be managed in a manner that recognizes the Nation’s need for domestic sources of 

minerals, food, timber, and fiber. 

Changes in forest landscapes from historical conditions include a loss of mature, scattered, 

overstory pine, western larch, and Douglas fir; a general trend toward increased densities of 

young trees; and a shift from a dominance of low intensity/high frequency fire regimes 

toward higher intensity/lower frequency. These changes have predisposed forest landscapes 

to larger scale disturbances than will naturally occur with endemic fire, insect, and disease. 

Wildlife habitat characterized historically by large fire tolerant trees has declined. Maintain41 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

ing forest health by enhancing vegetation for a diversity and abundance of animal species 

and diverse plant communities is a high priority for management. 

Monitoring: Timber sale and land treatment contracts will be monitored regularly to ensure 

management actions are performed to contract specifications and that mitigation measures are 

properly applied. An interdisciplinary team will develop appropriate monitoring on a case-bycase basis for resource-related issues relative to forest practices. Other government agencies 

will also periodically provide information relevant to monitoring, such as information on the 

progress of insect and disease activity, wildlife habitat needs, and water and air quality. 

Management Actions: All forested land (see Maps FORS-1 and FORS-2M) will be managed 

using timber harvest in conjunction with precommercial thinning, prescribed fire, and other 

techniques to achieve site-specific objectives of restoring and maintaining forest health, 

biodiversity, and wildlife habitat. Timber harvest will be permitted if identified values could 

be protected or enhanced. Intensive commercial timber harvest will be unlikely within the 

Castle Rock and North Fork Malheur River ACEC’s and administratively suitable North Fork 

Malheur NWSR because harvest would likely affect the relevant and important or outstandingly remarkable values of those areas. Approximately 4,407 acres will be available for 

potential commercial harvest. Manipulation of approximately 196 acres per year could result 

in an average annual potential sale quantity of 88,000 board feet. 

Approximately 5,877 acres of the forested land will be managed to preserve or create old 

growth forest characteristics necessary for old growth-dependent wildlife species such as 

pileated, white headed, and black-backed woodpeckers; pygmy nuthatch; and northern 

goshawks. 

Forests will continue to be managed for other products, such as firewood and posts, on a 

case-by-case basis. 

Objective 2: Restore productivity and biodiversity in western juniper and quaking aspen 

woodland areas. Manage western juniper areas where encroachment or increased density 

is threatening other resource values. Retain old growth characteristics in historic western 

juniper sites not prone to frequent fire. Manage quaking aspen to maintain diversity of 

age classes and to allow for species reestablishment. 

Rationale: FLPMA, section 102, requires that public land be managed for multiple use and 

sustained yield in a manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, 

ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archaeological values. 

Section 102 also mandates that public land be managed in a manner that recognizes the 

Nation’s need for domestic sources of minerals, food, timber, and fiber. 

The 166,000 acres of western juniper are approximately 3 to 10 times the acreage covered 100 

years ago (Karl and Leonard 1996). Western juniper has increased in distribution and density 

throughout its range, expanding into open meadows, grasslands, sagebrush steppe communities, quaking aspen stands, riparian/wetland communities, and forestland. At high densities, 

western juniper reduces herbaceous production (Bates et al. 1994), diversity and cover of 

associated plant species (Miller 1987), reduces habitat for animal species dependent on those 

plant communities, and may increase soil erosion (Buckhouse 1980). 

The distribution and health of quaking aspen stands have decreased in the past 100 to 200 

years. These declines have been attributed to reduced fire; severe browsing of quaking 

aspen suckers by livestock; expansion of tree and shrub species; and loss of suitable habitat 

where streams have down cut and water tables have been lowered due to deleterious management (Crow 1996) and natural flooding. In some areas, declines may have occurred due to 

severe browsing of quaking aspen suckers by deer and elk. Many quaking aspen stands 

contain mostly large trees with few sapling or pole-sized trees. Healthy, reproductive quaking 

42 
 

 

aspen stands are beneficial for biodiversity, wildlife habitat, and other uses such as recreational camping. 

Monitoring: An interdisciplinary team will develop appropriate monitoring on a case-by-case 

basis for each action proposed for western juniper or quaking aspen management. 

Management Actions: Western juniper management will be implemented to maintain commodity production, enhance resource values, and reduce western juniper dominance. Priority 

areas for western juniper treatments will be riparian/wetlands, quaking aspen stands, productive grasslands, forested areas, and shrublands where loss of vegetation diversity is likely. 

Treatments will be conducted to provide a mosaic pattern to meet wildlife habitat requirements. A maximum of 124,500 acres of western juniper will be treated during the life of the 

plan, using prescribed fire and/or mechanical treatment. Acres burned in wildfire situations 

will be included as part of acres treated. 

Areas where fire frequency is limited by site productivity, and which support significant 

numbers of western juniper trees more than 150 years old, will be managed to preserve old 

growth characteristics. Uses in quaking aspen stands will be managed to maintain or 

enhance distribution, density, regeneration and sustainability, and to favor regeneration of 

quaking aspen where possible. Stands will be managed for maintenance or enhancement 

using a variety of methods which may include activities such as cutting, burning, or chemical 

applications. At this time, herbicide use on BLM land for purposes other than noxious weed 

control is prohibited by a Federal court injunction. 

Special Status Plant Species 

Objective: Manage public land to maintain, restore, or enhance populations and habitats 

of special status plant species. Priority for the application of management actions will be: 

(1) Federal endangered species, (2) Federal threatened species, (3) Federal proposed 

species, (4) Federal candidate species, (5) State listed species, (6) BLM sensitive species, 

(7) BLM assessment species, and (8) BLM tracking species. Manage in order to conserve 

or lead to the recovery of threatened or endangered species. 

Rationale: Section 102.8 of FLPMA requires that public land be managed to protect the 

quality of ecological and environmental values, and where appropriate, to protect their natural 

condition. 

The ESA mandates management that leads to the conservation or recovery of Federally listed 

threatened or endangered species. This Act, as well as BLM policy, also encourages management to protect special status species that are not currently listed as threatened or endangered. 

Most plant species assigned to a special status category are limited in their distributions, 

populations, or habitats and may be at risk over various geographic areas. Where evidence 

suggests that land uses are adversely affecting special status species not currently listed as 

threatened or endangered, it is in the public interest to prevent the need for Federal listing 

under the ESA. Listing of a species as threatened or endangered may lead to restrictions on 

land uses, and under some circumstances commodity users may experience adverse socioeconomic impacts. In most cases, there are both socioeconomic and biological benefits 

associated with conserving species to avoid Federal listing. 

Maintenance, restoration, or enhancement of populations or habitat, as defined in the 

glossary of this document, may each represent appropriate BLM management depending on 

the habitat needs or specific circumstances of a species. Restoration or enhancement may 

not always be the only clear choice for BLM action regarding special status species. One 

potential limitation that could delay restoration or enhancement actions is the biological 

43 
 

 

 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

mechanisms adversely affecting a species may not be understood well enough to identify 

needed management changes. Maintenance may be a preferred course of action where 

resource conditions are already considered to be of a high quality. 

Monitoring: Monitoring will include surveys and studies to determine the distribution, 

resource conditions, and trends of special status plant species and representative habitats. 

Management Actions: Management will emphasize achieving DRFC’s that maintain, enhance, 

or restore habitats or populations of special status plant species (Table 6, Special Status Plant 

Species, Map SS-1). All special status species habitats or populations will be managed so 

that BLM actions will not contribute to the need to list the species as Federally threatened or 

endangered. Management will consist of a mix of protection, restoration, and enhancement 

actions. It will be oriented toward the development of habitats that support healthy, biologically diverse plant communities at landscape levels while meeting the needs of special status 

species. 

A variety of projects or other land use adjustments might be required to manage for special 

status species. Management could require avoidance or mitigation that may have little impact 

on land uses, while restoration or enhancement could lead to substantial adjustments in 

customary land use. 

Water Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas 

Objective 1: Ensure that surface water and ground water influenced by BLM activities 

comply with or are making progress toward achieving State of Oregon water quality 

standards for beneficial uses as established per stream by the Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality (ODEQ). 

Rationale: The “Federal Water Pollution Control Act” (commonly known as the “Clean Water 

Act” [CWA]) of 1977, as amended, requires the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, 

physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters. Mandates of the Act establish the 

EPA as administrator and the states (such as Oregon) as implementors of the Act. The BLM 

is responsible to manage the requirements of the Act on land they administer, but primacy in 

implementing the Act is retained by Oregon. BLM is required to maintain water quality where 

it presently meets EPA-approved Oregon State water quality standards and improve water 

quality on public land where it does not meet standards. State developed total maximum daily 

loads (TMDL’s) and State approved water quality management plans are required for 

waterbodies in subbasins and watersheds containing water quality limited segments (Appendix D5, Tables D5-1) (as defined by section 303(d) of the CWA) where water quality is not 

meeting standards. In addition to the Act, numerous laws, regulations, policies, and Executive orders direct BLM to manage for water quality for the benefit of the Nation and its 

economy. 

Water quality is important not only for human use but also for proper ecosystem function. 

Management practices such as grazing, mining, recreation, forest harvesting, and other forms 

of vegetation management for restoring and maintaining water quality will be designed for 

healthy sustainable and functional rangeland ecosystems as described in the 1997 S&G’s. 

Monitoring: Water quality monitoring will be conducted for various parameters using water 

quality standards and criteria established for Oregon or developed by the State through the 

TMDL process (see Appendix W). 

Management Actions: The BLM is responsible for the requirements of the CWA on public 

lands they administer, and is required to maintain water quality where it presently meets EPAapproved Oregon State Water Quality Standards and to improve water quality where it does 

not meet standards on public land. Specific water bodies within the planning area that do not 

44 
Table 6.—Special status plant species found within the planning area 1 (PSEORMP Table 2-5) 

Common name Scientific name BLM (State) status 2 Resource area 3 

Barren Valley collomia Collomia renacta SEN J, M 

Biddle’s lupine Lupinus biddlei SEN M 

biennial stanleya Stanleya confertiflora SEN M, J 

Cronquist’s stickseed Hackelia cronquistii (LT) M 

Cusick’s chaenactis Chaenactis cusickii SEN J, M 

Davis’ peppergrass Lepidium davisii (LT) J 

Ertter’s senecio Senecio ertterae (LT) M 

golden buckwheat Eriogonum chrysops (LT) M 

Greeley’s cymopterus Cymopterus acaulis var. greeleyorum SEN M 

grimy ivesia Ivesia rhypara var. rhypara (LE) M 

Mackenzie’s phacelia Phacelia lutea var. mackenzieorum SEN M 

Maheur Valley fiddleneck Amsinckia carinata (LT) M 

Mulford’s milkvetch Astragalus mulfordiae (LT) M 

Owyhee clover Trifolium owyheense (LE) M 

Packard’s mentzelia Mentzelia packardiae (LT) M 

playa buckwheat Eriogonum salicornioides SEN M, J 

playa phacelia Phacelia inundata SEN J 

slender wild cabbage Caulanthus major var. nevadensis SEN J 

Smooth mentzelia Mentzelia mollis (LE) M 

Snake River goldenweed Pyrrocoma radiatus (LE) M 

sterile milkvetch Astragalus sterilis (LT) M 

weak-stemmed milkvetch Astragalus solitarius SEN J, M 

annual dropseed Muhlenbergia minutissima ASM J 

broad-flowered chaenactis Chaenactis stevioides ASM J 

Cooper’s goldenflower Hymenoxys lemmonii ASM J 

Cusick’s giant hyssop Agastache cusickii ASM M 

desert chaenactis Chaenactis xantiana ASM J 

iodine bush Allenrolfea occidentalis ASM J 

King’s rattleweed Astragalus calycosus ASM J 

large-flowered chaenactis Chaenactis macrantha ASM J 

long-flowered snowberry Symphoricarpos longiflorus ASM J 

male fern Drypoteris filix-mas ASM J 

Malheur stylocline Stylocline psilocarphoides ASM M 

naked-stemmed phacelia Phacelia gymnoclada ASM J 

Owyhee sagebrush Artemisia papposa ASM J 

porcupine sedge Carex hystricina ASM M 

prickly-poppy Argemone munita ssp. rotundata ASM M 

Raven’s lomatium Lomatium ravenii ASM M 

Shockley’s ivesia Ivesia shockleyi ASM J 

Snake River milkvetch Astragalus purshii var. ophiogenes ASM M 

Three Forks stickseed Hackelia ophiobia ASM J 

Alvord milkvetch Astragalus alvordensis TRA J 

Bigelow’s four-o’clock Mirabilis bigelovii var. retrorsa TRA M 

Brandegee’s onion Allium brandegei TRA M 

California chicory Rafinesquia californica TRA J 

Chambers twinpod Physaria chambersii TRA M 

four-winged milkvetch Astragalus tetrapterus TRA J 

hairy wild cabbage Caulanthus pilosus TRA M 

45 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Table 6.—Special status plant species found within the planning area 1 (continued) 

Common name Scientific name BLM (State) status 2 Resource area 3 

hairy-foot plantain Plantago eriopoda TRA M 

hedgehog cactus Pediocactus simpsonii var. robustior TRA M, J 

Ibapah wavewing Cymopterus ibapensis TRA J 

Janish’s penstemon Penstemon janishiae TRA J 

King’s penstemon Penstemon kingii TRA J 

Kruckeberg’s holly fern Polystichum kruckebergii TRA J 

Lemmon’s onion Allium lemmonii TRA M 

low hawksweed Crepis modocensis ssp. modocensis TRA J 

Malheur cryptantha Cryptantha propria TRA M ,J 

narrowleaf cottonwood Populus angustifolia TRA M 

nodding melic Melica stricta TRA M 

ochre-flowered buckwheat Eriogonum ochrocephalum ssp. calcareum TRA M 

Owyhee milkvetch Astragalus atratus var. owyheensis TRA M 

Packard’s artemisia Artemisia packardiae TRA M, J 

Packard’s lomatium Lomatium packardiae TRA M 

Palmer’s evening-primrose Camissonia palmeri TRA M, J 

playa phacelia Phacelia inundata TRA J 

punctate langloisa Langloisia setosissima ssp. punctata TRA M, J 

Rose’s lomatium Lomatium roseanum TRA M, J 

salt heliotrope Heliotropium curassavicum TRA M, J 

short-lobed penstemon Penstemon seorsus TRA M 

Siberian water-milfoil Myriophyllum sibiricum TRA M 

sinister gilia Gilia sinistra ssp. sinistra TRA M 

smooth malacothrix Malacothrix glabrata TRA M, J 

Snake River cryptantha Cryptantha spiculifera TRA M 

spreading stickseed Hackelia patens var. patens TRA M 

Texas bergia Bergia texana TRA M 

Torrey’s rush Juncus torreyi TRA M 

Trout Creek milkvetch Astragalus salmonis TRA M, J 

two-stemmed onion Allium bisceptrum TRA J 

white locoweed Oxytropis sericea var. sericea TRA J 

white-flowered penstemon Penstemon pratensis TRA M 

1

 As of 2002, none of the species shown in this table is listed as threatened or endangered by the USFWS.
 

2

 SEN = BLM sensitive species; ASM = BLM assessment species; TRA = BLM tracking species; LE = listed State endangered; LT = listed State
 

threatened. Among these classifications, species classified as BLM sensitive and listed State endangered or threatened are considered most at risk. By
 

contrast, those identified as BLM tracking species are the subject of less intense concern. See the glossary for definitions of classifications.
 

3

 J = Jordan; M = Malheur.
 

46 
meet Oregon water quality standards have been placed by the State of Oregon on an EPAapproved list of water quality limited segments, as defined by section 303(d) of the CWA 

(Appendix D5, Tables D5-1, Map HYDR-2). 

As a participating partner in the endeavor to comply with appropriate state water quality 

standards, BLM is seeking ways to bring these streams into compliance and reduce the 

number of section 303(d) listed stream segments on public land. For waterbodies on the 

303(d) list, a State-developed, EPA-approved TMDL is developed. TMDL’s are designed and 

implemented to achieve water quality standards by establishing quantifiable allocations for 

allowable levels (or “load”) of individual pollutants that are assigned to sources of pollution 

for waters that are violating state water quality standards and failing to protect associated 

beneficial uses. An associated state-developed, EPA-approved WQMP is developed to 

identify management measures that are needed to meet the load allocations of the TMDL. 

The BLM’s commitment to complying with the Federal CWA and the State DEQ’s program is 

secured by the joint USFS and BLM protocol for addressing CWA section 303(d) listed 

waters. One goal of the strategy is to address all waters on BLM-administered lands within 

the timeline established by the State of Oregon DEQ. The BLM will take actions relative to 

303(d) listed waterbodies in accordance with the protocol, as follows: 

1) BLM will validate the 303(d) listing of its waterbodies. 

a) BLM will review the current 303(d) list and listing rationale to determine if the waterbody 

was correctly listed. BLM will provide the State with documentation or evidence if the 

waterbody was erroneously placed on the list while it actually meets the water quality 

standard for which it was listed. 

2) BLM will assess the effect of its management actions on the water quality parameter for 

which a waterbody is 303(d) listed. 

a) BLM management activities will be assessed for their effects on water quality for the 

standard for which it was listed. This will be done at the site-specific scale during 

evaluations of GMA’s. 

b) BLM will document and present evidence to the State where sufficiently stringent 

management measures (Appendix O) have been implemented to bring listed segments 

into compliance in a reasonable timeframe. For such situations, development of a 

TMDL and WQMP are not needed. EPA’s current interpretation of this are measures 

that will allow the waterbody to meet the water quality standard within two years. 

3) For waterbodies that remain on the 303(d) list and are affected by BLM management 

activities, BLM will develop or adjust management actions necessary to restore water quality 

and meet Oregon water quality standards. 

a) BLM will work with the State agencies and local tribes to set priorities and timelines for 

addressing listed waterbodies. 

b) BLM will develop water quality restoration plans (WQRP), described in Appendix D6, to 

address the water quality parameter at issue for lands it administers. BLM’s WQRP’s 

may be developed before or after the State’s TMDL’s and WQMP’s, depending upon 

the State’s timeframes. Once the State’s WQMP is developed, the BLM’s WQRP must 

incorporate the WQMP’s management measures to meet the TMDL’s load allocation. 

Any WQRP developed prior to a WQMP will have to be adjusted if needed to incorporate the management measures of the WQMP. 

BLM will submit WQRP’s to the State for coordination purposes. If WQRP’s are developed 

prior to TMDL’s and WQMP’s, submission of the WQRP is a means for the BLM to provide 

47 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

the State with information that may be incorporated into the TMDL and WQMP. After 

WQMP’s are developed, submission of the WQRP provides an opportunity for the State and 

BLM to jointly review BLM’s management activities for compliance with the management 

measures of the WQMP’s. 

4) BLM will implement WQRP’s upon their completion, with adjustments as necessary. 

Water resources will be managed for uses and activities that emphasize the maintenance or 

improvement of naturally occurring values while providing for commodity production and the 

attainment and maintenance of water quality standards, PFC, and DRFC’s of water resources. 

Public use and activities will be allowed along streams, other water bodies, and associated 

watershed as long as there is measurable progress toward attainment of State water quality 

standards. For streams with water quality limited segments (impaired waters) as defined by 

section 303(d) of the CWA, management activities will be implemented with the intent to 

restore water quality to levels that meet State water quality standards. 

Streams and water bodies not meeting State water quality standards and/or PFC will be 

managed to attain an upward trend in the composition and structure of key riparian/wetland 

vegetation and desired physical characteristics of the stream channel. Uses and activities 

within the RCA and contributing upland watershed areas that adversely affect water quality 

and/or lead to stream channel or riparian/wetland resource degradation will be adjusted, 

restricted, or limited if water quality and PFC cannot be attained or maintained with existing 

management. 

Management options will focus on uses and activities that allow for the protection and 

maintenance of RCA’s and upland watersheds and measurable progress toward the attainment of water quality standards and PFC, within the stream and/or RCA’s. 

Objective 2: Restore, maintain, or improve riparian vegetation, habitat diversity, and 

associated watershed function to achieve healthy and productive riparian areas and 

wetlands. 

Rationale: FLPMA directs and requires BLM to comply with State water quality standards 

and manage public land in a manner that will preserve and protect certain land in its natural 

condition. In addition to FLPMA, numerous laws, regulations, policies, Executive orders, and 

MOU’s and agreements direct BLM to manage its riparian/wetland areas for biological 

diversity, and the productivity, and sustainability for the benefit of the Nation and its 

economy. 

BLM policies relating to riparian/wetland areas include the following: 

•	 Focus management on entire watersheds using an ecosystem approach and involving 

all interested landowners and affected parties; 

•	 Achieve riparian/wetland area improvement and maintenance objectives through the 

management of existing and future uses; 

•	 Ensure that new plans and existing plans, when revised, recognize the importance of 

riparian/wetland values, and initiate management to maintain restore, improve, or 

expand them; 

• Prescribe riparian/wetland management based on site-specific physical, biological, and 

chemical condition and potential; and 

•	 Use interdisciplinary teams to inventory, monitor, and evaluate management of riparian/ 

wetland areas and to revise management where objectives are not being met. 

Monitoring: Monitoring for the attainment of DRFC’s may include the following (see 

Appendix D4, Table D4-1 for more detailed descriptions of trend parameters, and Appendix W, 

Monitoring): 

48 
 

 

•	 Assessment of PFC (Technical Reference 1737-09/11) and measurement of parameters 

identified in Appendix D3. Attainment of PFC and RMO’s is considered a minimum step 

in the process of achieving DRFC’s. PFC and the riparian objectives in most cases do 

not equate to the DRFC’s. Determination of PFC and RMO’s is an interdisciplinary 

process. 

•	 Current information on riparian/wetland areas in the planning area is based on assessments of riparian condition, trend, and PFC. 

•	 Appropriate wildlife and aquatic habitat monitoring. 

• Water quality monitoring. 

•	 Rosgen channel typing. 

Management Actions: Riparian/wetland areas (Maps HYDR-3J and HYDR-3M) will be 

managed for uses and activities within the watershed (Appendix D5, Tables D5-1 and D5-2, 

Map HYDR-1) that emphasize the maintenance or improvement of naturally occurring values 

while providing for commodity production and the attainment of PFC, RMO’s, and DRFC’s of 

RCA’s. 

Areas not in PFC will be managed to attain an upward trend in the composition and structure 

of key riparian/wetland vegetation and desired physical characteristics of the stream channel. 

Uses and activities within the RCA and contributing upland watersheds will be allowed as 

long as there is measurable progress towards attainment of State water quality standards, 

PFC, and RMO’s. 

Management options focus on uses and activities that allow for the protection and maintenance of RCA’s and upland watersheds and the measurable progress toward the attainment 

of water quality, PFC, and RMO’s within RCA’s at a positive annual rate. 

Fish and Aquatic Habitat 

Objective: Restore, maintain, or improve habitat to provide for diverse and self-sustaining 

communities of fishes and other aquatic organisms. 

Rationale: FLPMA, six Executive orders, numerous legislative acts, and other regulations 

and policies direct the BLM to manage public land to provide habitat for fish and wildlife and 

to protect the quality of water resources. The following are examples: 

FLPMA places fish and wildlife management on equal footing with other traditional land 

uses; requires that part of grazing fees be spent for “range betterment,” including aquatic and 

terrestrial wildlife habitat enhancement, protection, and maintenance where livestock range; 

and requires consideration of fish and wildlife resources before approval of land exchanges. 

The “Sikes Act” of 1974 is a congressional mandate for the BLM to “plan, develop, maintain, 

and coordinate programs for the conservation and rehabilitation of wildlife, fish, and game.” 

The ESA of 1973 provides for the protection of listed and potentially listed species and their 

habitats. Many of the listed and potentially listed fish species in the West are on land 

managed by the BLM. 

In addition, Executive orders for floodplain management and protection of wetlands provide 

further direction for protection and management of fisheries habitat. 

In watersheds with bull trout, the BLM manages resources according to the “Inland Native 

Fish Strategy” (1995). 

Through a Statewide MOU between the BLM and ODEQ, the BLM implements the CWA by 

meeting State water quality standards. Hydrologic basins covered by this SEORMP “shall be 

49 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

managed to protect the recognized beneficial uses,” which include “salmonid fish rearing 

(trout),” “salmonid fish spawning (trout),” and “resident fish (warmwater) and aquatic life.” 

The BLM’s role in the management of fish and other aquatic resources is to provide the 

habitat that supports desired aquatic plants and animals. Plants, animals, and their interactions with each other and the physical environment are part of the ecological processes 

important for the health and function of aquatic ecosystems as well as the overall rangeland 

or forest ecosystem. Species manipulations, such as introductions or removals, are under the 

authority of ODFW. 

Monitoring: Monitoring aquatic habitats will include aquatic habitat surveys, fish population surveys, macroinvertebrate sampling, water quality assessments, riparian trend analyses, 

and assessments of riparian PFC. 

Management Actions: Management emphasis is on providing habitat for fish and other 

aquatic organisms to maintain the distribution of native species among subwatersheds while 

providing opportunities for commodity uses. Nonnative species will receive less emphasis. 

Habitat will also be provided for most of the native species needed for self-sustaining aquatic 

communities. 

Management will protect, maintain, or restore riparian condition, instream processes, and 

habitat diversity so that all native aquatic species can live in predominantly natural assemblages within their present or historic subwatersheds. The purpose is to maintain a distribution of native species that will promote natural dispersal and recolonization among populations and allow species interactions that are part of ecosystem processes. 

Because management throughout a watershed is considered important for the health and 

function of aquatic ecosystems, this alternative focuses on entire watersheds where uses or 

activities may have direct or indirect effects on riparian/wetland areas. Uses or activities will 

be allowed in the watershed as long as they ensure progress toward (1) maintenance, 

protection, or restoration of instream processes and habitat diversity; (2) water quality that 

meets State standards for aquatic beneficial use; and (3) attainment of PFC and RMO’s. 

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat 

Objective 1: Maintain, restore, or enhance riparian areas and wetlands so they provide 

diverse and healthy habitat conditions for wildlife. 

Rationale: Section 102.8 of FLPMA requires that public land be managed to protect the 

quality of multiple resources and to provide food and habitat for fish, wildlife, and domestic 

animals. Rangeland health regulations identify the need to foster productive and diverse 

populations and communities of plants and animals. 

Wildlife depend on riparian/wetland areas to meet numerous life history needs. Because of 

their spatial distribution within a wide variety of upland habitats, riparian area health affects 

most game and nongame species. In managing riparian/wetlands, the BLM should consider 

the consequences and relationships of management to the life history needs of wildlife. 

PFC assessments may not disclose certain desired future conditions known to be important 

for wildlife. For example, quaking aspen-dependent bird species may require a minimum stand 

size before they can become self-sustaining as a breeding population. The grazing system 

necessary to reach this goal may require specific periods of rest or other actions which will 

exceed that necessary to attain PFC. 

50 
 

 

 

Monitoring: Refer to Appendix W, Monitoring for Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat, and 

Appendix F, Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations. Wildlife habitat conditions 

currently being measured for evaluation may continue to be measured. 

Management Actions: Manage for desired future habitat conditions that emphasize structure, 

forage, or other riparian habitat elements important to game and nongame species of wildlife. 

Objective 2: Manage upland habitats in forest, woodland, and rangeland vegetation types 

so that the forage, water, cover, structure, and security necessary for wildlife are available 

on the public land. 

Rationale: Section 102.8 of FLPMA states that it is the policy of the United States to manage 

public land in a manner that will protect the quality of multiple resources and provide food 

and habitat for fish, wildlife, and domestic animals. The PRIA directs BLM to improve 

rangeland conditions with due consideration given the needs of wildlife and their habitats. 

The character of upland vegetation (arrangements, densities, age classes, etc.) greatly 

influences wildlife habitat quality and productivity. The ICBEMP Final EIS has disclosed a 

number of broad-scale issues pertaining to wildlife habitat that support this fundamental 

relationship with the best available science. Because the character of upland vegetation can 

vary in response to Federal land use authorizations, BLM needs to consider the consequences of various land uses (such as grazing and mining) and treatments (such as commercial forest harvest, burning and seeding) to the health of wildlife habitat. The outcomes of 

what may be considered proper range or forest management may not necessarily result in 

satisfactory wildlife habitat. 

Wildlife must have a reasonable amount of protection from the adverse impacts associated 

with human activities, regardless of the source of disturbance (such as OHV’s, aircraft, etc.). 

This is especially true during breeding periods and on winter ranges where there is high 

potential for affecting survival and recruitment. Maps WLDF-1 and WLDF-2 show selected 

wildlife habitats. 

Monitoring: Monitoring includes periodic estimations or actual measured values of vegetation. Monitoring will normally be in concert with resource evaluations of various geographic 

areas. Monitoring will determine how closely GMA’s or project areas are to meeting desired 

wildlife habitat conditions. 

Management Actions: The overall goal is to generally place equal emphasis on game and 

nongame wildlife habitat needs in sagebrush steppe, forest, and woodland habitats. To the 

extent possible and practical, wildlife community connectivity and interrelationships will be 

emphasized in most habitats. Management emphasis will substantially address source 

habitats and species of focus described in the ICBEMP science. Desired wildlife conditions 

will substantially conform to the considerations described in Appendix F. 

Manage to maintain or establish connectivity of big sagebrush types between GMA’s at mid 

and fine scales. To achieve desired wildlife habitat conditions, management will include a 

variety of methods to maintain, increase, or decrease the big sagebrush overstory. 

Forest, western juniper, quaking aspen, and mountain shrub types will be managed as 

described under the Rangeland Vegetation, and Forest and Woodlands sections of this 

document. 

Special Status Animal Species
 

Objective 1: Manage public land to maintain, restore, or enhance populations and 

habitats of special status animal species (Table 7). Priority for the application of manage51 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

ment actions will be: (1) Federal endangered species, (2) Federal threatened species, (3) 

Federal proposed species, (4) Federal candidate species, (5) State listed species, (6) BLM 

sensitive species, (7) BLM assessment species, and (8) BLM tracking species. Manage in 

order to conserve or lead to the recovery of threatened or endangered species. 

Rationale: Section 102.8 of FLPMA requires that public land be managed to protect the quality 

of multiple resources and to provide food and habitat for fish, wildlife, and domestic animals. 

The ESA directs Federal agencies to manage in a way which leads to the conservation or 

recovery of Federally listed threatened or endangered species. This Act, as well as BLM 

policy, encourages management actions to protect special status species not currently listed 

as threatened or endangered. 

Most fish and wildlife assigned to a special status category are limited in their distributions, 

populations, or habitats and may be at risk over various geographic areas. Where evidence 

suggests that land uses are adversely affecting special status species not currently listed as 

threatened or endangered, it is in the public interest to prevent the need for Federal listing 

under the ESA. Emerging management issues may require BLM to expend time and effort 

towards species that are in assessment or tracking categories rather than for some listed 

species. 

Listing of a species as threatened or endangered may lead to restrictions on land uses, and 

under some circumstances commodity users may experience adverse socioeconomic impacts. 

In most cases, there are both socioeconomic and biological benefits associated with proactive measures which lead to avoidance of Federal listing. 

Maintenance, restoration, or enhancement of populations or habitat, as defined in the 

glossary of this document, may represent appropriate BLM management depending on the 

habitat needs or specific circumstances of a species. Restoration or enhancement may not 

always be the only clear choice for BLM action regarding special status species. One 

potential limitation that could delay restoration or enhancement is that the biological mechanisms adversely affecting a species may not be well enough understood in the best available 

science. Maintenance may also be a preferred course of action where resource conditions are 

of high quality (such as terrestrial source habitats in the ICBEMP Final EIS). 

Monitoring: Management for bull trout and Lahontan cutthroat trout will be in accordance 

with recovery plans and consultation with the USFWS. Refer to Appendix W, Monitoring for 

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat, and Appendix F, Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations. 

Management Actions: Management will emphasize achieving conditions that maintain, 

enhance, or restore habitats and populations regardless of their economic status. All special 

status species habitats or populations will be substantially managed so that BLM actions do 

not contribute toward the need to list these species as Federally threatened or endangered. 

Individual species requirements will be included in management prescriptions but not to an 

extent that overemphasizes the value of any one habitat. Management emphasis will substantially address source habitats and species of focus in the ICBEMP science. 

Use considerations described in Appendix F as direction for managing sagebrush wildlife 

habitat values. In so doing, BLM will be able to foster plant/animal community health and 

habitat integrity at a landscape level for game and nongame species. 

A variety of projects or other land use adjustments might be required to manage for special 

status species. Some management for maintenance could require avoidance or mitigation 

measures. Some restoration or enhancement measures could involve very specific remedies 

with the potential to lead to substantial adjustments in customary land use practices. 

52 
 

Table 7.—Special status animal species in southeastern Oregon (PSEORMP Table 2-15) 

Occupancy status 2 

BLM USFWS ODFW 

Common name Scientific name status 1 status 1 status 1 MRA JRA 

Amphibian 

Blotched tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum melanostictum TRA UN DB DB 

Columbia spotted frog Rana luteiventris C UN DB DB 

Northern leopard frog Rana pipiens SEN C SB A 

Western toad Bufo boreas TRA VU DB DB 

Woodhouse’s toad Bufo woodhousei TRA P E DB DB 

Bird 

American white pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos ASM SU SU 

Bank swallow Riparia riparia TRA UN DB DB 

Barrow’s goldeneye 3 Bucephala islandica TRA UN DM DB 

Black tern Chlidonias niger SEN SB SB 

Black-backed woodpecker Picoides arcticus SEN CR DB A 

Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus TRA SM DB 

Bufflehead 3 Bucephala albeola ASM SB DB 

Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis SEN CR DB DB 

Flammulated owl Otus flammeolus SEN U SB 

Franklin’s gull Larus pipixcan ASM DM DMU 

Grasshopper sparrow Ammodramus savannarum TRA DB SB 

Great gray owl Strix nebulosa TRA VU SB A 

Greater sandhill crane Grus canadensis ssp. TRA VU DB DB 

Least bittern Ixobrychus exilis ASM U U 

Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus SEN DB DB 

Mountain quail 3 Oreortyx pictus SEN UN DB A 

Northern bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T WR WR 

Northern goshawk Accipiter gentilis SEN CR DB DB 

Northern pygmy owl Glaucidium gnoma TRA SB SB 

Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus ssp. SEN DM DM 

Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus SEN VU DB A 

Pygmy nuthatch Sitta pygmaea ASM CR SB U 

Snowy egret Egretta thula ASM VU SB SB 

Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni ASM VU DB DB 

Three-toed woodpecker Picoides tridactylus SEN CR SB A 

Upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda SEN CR U U 

Western bluebird Sialia mexicana ASM DB SB 

Western burrowing owl Athene cunicularia SEN DB DB 

Western sage grouse 3 Centrocercus urophasianus ASM DB DB 

Western snowy plover Charadrius alexandrinus TRA U DM 

White-faced ibis Plegadis chihi SEN SB DB 

White-headed woodpecker Picoides albolarvatus SEN U A 

Williamson’s sapsucker Sphyrapicus thyroideus TRA UN SB SB 

Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus SEN DB U 

Fish 

Bull trout 3 Salvelinus confluentus T CR DM A 

Inland redband trout 3 Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp. TRA V DB DB 

Lahontan cutthroat trout 3 Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi T A DB 

Lahontan redside Richardsonius egregius ASM P E A DB 

Margined sculpin Cottus marginatus TRA V U SB 

Tahoe sucker Catostomus tahoensis ASM P E A DB 

Invertebrate 

Borax Lake ramshorn Planorbella oregonensis SEN U U 

Crooked Creek springsnail Pyrgulopsis intermedia SEN U DB 

Hotspring physa (snail) Physella sp. SEN U U 

Malheur Cave amphipod Stygobromus hubbsi SEN DB A 

Malheur Cave planarian Kenkia rhynchida BT DB A 

Malheur pseudoscorpion Apochthonius malheuri SEN DB A 

Malheur springsnail Pyrgulopsis sp. nov. SEN U DB 

Owyhee hot springsnail Pyrgulopsis sp. SEN A U 

53 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Table 7.—Special status animal species in southeastern Oregon (continued)
 

Occupancy status 2 

BLM USFWS ODFW 

Common name Scientific name status 1 status 1 status 1 MRA JRA 

Mammal 

California bighorn sheep 3 Ovis canadensis ssp. SEN DB DB 

California wolverine Gulo gulo SEN U A 

Fringed bat Myotis thysanodes SEN VU U U 

Kit fox Vulpes macrotis ssp. ASM T A DB 

Long-eared myotis Myotis evotis SEN UN SB SB 

Long-legged myotis Myotis volans SEN UN DB U 

Western big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii ssp. SEN CR DB DB 

Preble’s shrew Sorex preblei SEN DB U 

Pygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensis SEN VU DB DB 

Spotted bat Euderma maculata SEN U U 

White-tailed antelope ground squirrelAmmospermophilus leucurus TRA UN DB DB 

White-tailed jackrabbit Lepus townsendii TRA UN DB DB 

Yuma myotis Myotis yumanensis SEN U U 

Reptile 

Mohave black-collared lizard Crotaphytus bicinctores TRA VU DB DB 

Desert horned lizard Phrynosoma platyrhinos TRA VU DB DB 

Longnose leopard lizard Gambelia wislizenii TRA U DB DB 

Northern sagebrush lizard Sceloporus graciosus TRA SB DB 

Painted turtle Chrysemys picta SEN CR SB SB 

Western ground snake Sonora semiannulata TRA P E DB SB 

1 Current as of 2000. Abbreviations for BLM status, effective September 1991: SEN = sensitive species; ASM = assessment species; TRA = tracking species. Abbreviations for Federal status as assigned by the USFWS, effective spring 1996: E = endangered (taxa in danger of becoming extinct within the foreseeable future throughout all
 

or a significant portion of their range); T = threatened (taxa likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future); C = candidate (taxa for which information indicates
 

that listing may be appropriate). Abbreviations for ODFW status: UN = undetermined; CR = critical; VU = vulnerable; and PE = peripheral or naturally rare; T =
 

threatened.
 

2 Abbreviations for occupancy status: DB = documented breeder; SB = suspected breeder; DM = documented migrant; SM = suspected migrant; U = uncertain; A = absent;
 

W = winter resident; SU = summer resident, nonbreeder.
 

3 Game species.
 

54 
 

 

 

Because of the variability in habitat use by special status species, management actions could 

be required within any of the habitat types described in this plan. 

Objective 2: Facilitate the maintenance, restoration, and enhancement of bighorn sheep 

populations and habitat on public land. Pursue management in accordance with the 1997 

“Oregon’s Bighorn Sheep Management Plan” (OBSMP) in a manner consistent with the 

principles of multiple use management. 

Rationale: Section 102.8 of FLPMA states that it is the policy of the United States to manage 

the public land in a manner that will protect the quality of multiple resources and will provide 

food and habitat for fish, wildlife and domestic animals. 

Public land supplies a high percentage of the total available and currently unoccupied land 

suitable for bighorn sheep use. As the principal land-administrator of habitat capable of 

supporting bighorn sheep, BLM involvement in this program is necessary. BLM has a policy 

and responsibility to cooperate with State agencies to accommodate species management 

goals to the extent they are consistent with the principles of multiple use management. 

ODFW has been pursuing a statewide effort to restore bighorn sheep into suitable unoccupied habitat and to enhance populations in other areas. Both the BLM and the ODFW have 

agency management plans and have coordinated over the years to foster communication 

between agencies and with the public. Although the ODFW has been successfully releasing 

and managing bighorn sheep on public land since the mid-1960’s, current populations and 

distributions are still considered to be below their potential. 

Bighorn sheep are native to eastern Oregon and their presence contributes to the overall 

biological diversity and productivity of public land. There is widespread public interest in 

being able to observe them in their natural setting of eastern Oregon, and they are highly 

prized as big game. 

Monitoring: Monitoring will include ODFW survey data on the general locations and 

numbers of bighorn sheep, and livestock utilization and rangeland trend studies. 

Management Actions: The maintenance, restoration, and enhancement of bighorn sheep will 

be emphasized on approximately 2,888,000 acres as shown on Map WLDF-2. Bighorn sheep 

pioneering outside of this area will be allowed where the resulting multiple use conflicts are 

minor. 

Bighorn sheep occupancy will be planned outside of domestic sheep use areas to avoid 

conflicts associated with disease transmission. No displacement of current domestic sheep 

grazing permittees will result from bighorn sheep occupancy. Reasonable buffers between 

domestic sheep use areas and bighorn sheep use areas, based on local conditions, will be 

maintained as a mechanism to further avoid disease transmission. 

Future proposals to graze domestic sheep within bighorn sheep range will be considered for 

Malheur County on a case-by-case basis. 

Wild Horses 

Objective: Maintain and manage wild horse herds in established herd management areas 

(HMA’s) at appropriate management levels (AML’s) to ensure a thriving natural ecological balance between wild horse populations, wildlife, livestock, vegetation resources, and 

other resource values. Enhance and perpetuate special and unique characteristics that 

distinguish the respective herds. 

55 
 

 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Rationale: The “Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act” of 1971 requires the BLM to 

manage wild horses according to principles of multiple use management and to achieve a 

thriving, natural ecological balance. The color, type, conformation, size, and weight of 

members of various herds are historic characteristics and desirable to retain. 

Monitoring: Wild horses and their habitat will be monitored to schedule and implement 

gathering and to further refine and support adjustments of AML’s in each HMA. Monitoring 

will include periodic horse counts which identify age and sex composition of herds, areas of 

use by livestock and horses, climatic data, vegetation utilization, vegetation condition, and 

vegetation trend. 

Management Actions: Established boundaries of the Hog Creek, Cold Springs, Three 

Fingers, Jackies Butte, and Sand Springs HMA’s will be maintained. Because of limited 

barriers to wild horse movement between the Sheepshead HMA of the Vale District and Heath 

Creek-Sheepshead HMA of the Burns District, these two HMA’s will be combined, and the 

resulting HMA will be managed by the Vale District (See Map WLHS-1 and Table 8). The 

initial AML of the combined Sheephead/Heath Creek HMA’s will be 302 head, with a range of 

161 to 302 head. 

Though not identified as part of the Coyote Lake HMA, wild horses used Red Mountain 

North Pasture in 1971 and have continued that use since the original inventories. Red 

Mountain North Pasture will be designated a portion of Coyote Lake HMA. Horses using 

this pasture have been included in the AML for Coyote Lake HMA; thus, the AML will 

remain unchanged. After adding the Red Mountain North Pasture, the Coyote Lake HMA will 

be 194,992 acres. 

When monitoring data support a downward adjustment in the allocation of forage resources 

within HMA’s, decreases in wild horse AML’s and authorized active use by livestock will be 

implemented through the adaptive management process, based on each species’ contribution 

to the failure to meet management objectives or failure to maintain an ecological balance. 

When monitoring data identify additional available forage on a sustained basis, proportionate 

increases between wild horse AML’s and livestock authorized active use will be considered, 

as consistent with meeting other management objectives. 

Return of gathered wild horses into HMA’s will be limited to animals exhibiting the special 

and unique characteristics designated for that HMA. Selection of horses for return to the 

range will aim to maintain herd characteristics and to diversify genetic variability within herds, 

especially within those herds with a low AML. 

Established water developments supporting current wild horse populations will be maintained 

when consistent with meeting management objectives. Construction of water developments 

to minimize forage competition between wild horses and livestock and to assure a reliable 

water supply during periods of drought will be considered, consistent with other resource 

management objectives. 

Rangeland/Grazing Use 

Objective: Provide for a sustained level of livestock grazing consistent with other resource 

objectives and public land use allocations. 

Rationale: The “Taylor Grazing Act” of 1934 is the legislative authority providing for 

livestock grazing on and protection of public land. FLPMA, PRIA, and other acts, direct the 

management of public land for multiple use and sustained yield. Rangeland management 

strategies will provide for the maintenance or restoration of watershed function, nutrient 

cycling and energy flow, water quality, habitat for special status species, and habitat quality 

56 
 

Table 8. —Herd management areas and herd areas in the planning area (PSEORMP Table 2-18) 

Appropriate Appropriate 

Herd management areas (HMA) or Public management management level Forage allocation 

herd areas (HA) acres level (high end) range (AUM’s) 

Malheur Resource Area 

Hog Creek HMA 21,814 50 30–50 600 

Cold Springs HMA 29,883 150 75–150 1,800 

Three Fingers HMA 62,508 150 75–150 1,800 

Three Fingers HA 20,411 

Atturbury HA 7,906 

Cottonwood Creek HA 24,325 

Cottonwood Basin HA 7,804 

Basque HA 8,677 

Pot Holes HA 9,341 

Lake Ridge HA 3,966 

Stockade-Morger HA 22,849 

Jordan Resource Area 

Jackies Butte HMA 65,211 150 75–150 1,800 

Sheepshead HMA 136,050 200 100–200 2,400 

Sand Springs HMA 192,524 200 100–200 2,400 

Coyote Lake HMA 167,919 250 125–250 3,000 

Coyote Lake HA 59,369 

Jackies Butte HA 56,104 

57 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

for populations and communities of native plants and animals. These management strategies 

have been supported by the development of regional S&G’s (USDI BLM 1997). 

Public land found not to be suitable for livestock grazing or containing resource values that 

cannot be adequately protected from livestock impacts through mitigating measures will have 

livestock grazing discontinued. Small areas within allotments where livestock grazing is not 

compatible with other uses or values may be excluded by agreement or decision from livestock grazing. 

Monitoring: Monitoring of livestock grazing will include recording actual use, measurements 

of utilization, and climatic data. Conditions and trends of resources affected by livestock 

grazing will be monitored to support periodic analysis/evaluation and site-specific adjustments of livestock management actions. 

Management Actions: Where livestock grazing is found not to be consistent with meeting 

objectives, actions that control the intensity, duration, and timing of grazing and/or provide 

for periodic deferment and/or rest will be required to meet the physiological requirements of 

key plant species and to meet other resource management objectives. Upon determining 

through the adaptive management process that existing grazing management practices or 

levels of grazing on public land are significant factors in failing to achieve resource objectives, appropriate actions will be implemented. It is the intent of grazing management to leave 

sufficient herbaceous material in most areas to provide soil and watershed protection, to 

provide forage and cover for wildlife and wild horses, and to meet other resource objectives. 

A summary of potential interactions between livestock grazing and other resource uses or 

values is presented in Appendices F and R. 

The current grazing use authorizations (Appendix E) will be maintained until analysis or 

evaluation through the adaptive management process identifies a need for adjustments to 

meet objectives. Applicable activity plans (including AMP’s), agreements, decisions, and/or 

terms and conditions of grazing use authorizations, will be revised and implemented to ensure 

that objectives are met. 

Ten Mile Seeding within Ten Mile Allotment (01308) of JRA, which has been available for 

livestock grazing on a temporary basis only and has not been allotted to a specified livestock 

operator, will continue to be grazed on a temporary case-by-case basis to provide necessary 

livestock management flexibility, pending final disposition of the grazing authorizations in this 

area. That temporary use will continue to provide flexibility in other allotments of JRA 

following fire, fire rehabilitation, poor climatic conditions, implementation of rest or deferment 

of use in other areas to facilitate recovery of resource values, or for other reasons. Opportunities for similar management of additional areas within MRA and JRA will be pursued 

through administrative routes to provide additional flexibility to meet management objectives. 

Livestock grazing will be managed during and following drought to maintain soil and vegetation health and productivity. 

Sustained yield of forage for livestock grazing will be provided while maintaining resource 

values for long term multiple use, consistent with management objectives (Appendix E). 

Approximately 58,900 acres as identified in Table 9, Appendix T, and Maps LVST-1M and 

LVST-1J, will have livestock grazing discontinued and will be outside any livestock grazing 

allotment. Lava Butte Lower Lava Field in West Cow Creek Allotment of JRA will be available 

for livestock grazing, recognizing that the topography has not restricted livestock access to 

this area. Although not authorized by a long term permit, grazing of Historic Birch Creek 

Ranch may be authorized only on a temporary basis for administrative and/or interpretive 

purposes. 

Approximately 250 additional areas, encompassing an estimated 18,000 acres, within livestock 

grazing allotments are excluded from livestock by past decisions or agreements. These 

58 
exclusion areas protect resource values or facilities from livestock impacts. Appendix T 

lists by allotment those areas of livestock exclusion which are generally greater than 10 

acres. This listing is not inclusive of all areas from which livestock are excluded with 

implementation of this RMP. Specifically, it does not include a significant number of spring 

developments and other small areas from which livestock are excluded. Through the life of 

the RMP, adaptive management may identify additional areas which may be excluded from 

livestock grazing to meet management objectives. Similarly, grazing use may be restored to 

areas previously excluded from livestock grazing within allotments when appropriate 

livestock management can be implemented while protecting the relevant resource values. 

A combination of administrative solutions and rangeland project development will be 

implemented, as necessary, on a site-specific basis to provide a sustained level of livestock 

use while maintaining resource values. Livestock grazing systems will be retained or revised 

through the adaptive management process to meet management objectives. Structural 

rangeland projects will be implemented to facilitate meeting resource objectives rather than 

making additional forage available. Vegetation manipulation projects will emphasize the 

conversion of rangelands dominated by exotic annuals to properly functioning perennial 

communities. Standard implementation procedures for rangeland improvements are presented 

in Appendix S. 

No livestock management action will be implemented , including project construction, which 

will increase grazing use within portions of a pasture in late to PNC ecological status and 

currently not utilized or only slightly utilized by livestock, unless implementation of that 

action will result in a net benefit toward attaining natural resource management objectives 

(such as within riparian areas) within the area of limited livestock use and adjoining areas. 

Existing structural rangeland projects will be maintained where beneficial to livestock and 

other resource values. Projects which no longer meet livestock or resource management 

objectives may be abandoned and sites will be rehabilitated. 

Temporary nonrenewable grazing use (TNR) may be authorized to make additional forage 

available to livestock operators in a year of favorable growing conditions, consistent with 

meeting resource objectives. Additionally, TNR may be authorized to facilitate meeting 

Table 9.—Areas with livestock grazing discontinued (PSEORMP Table 3-8) 

Area Acres 

Malheur Resource Area 

Owyhee Wild & Scenic River Corridor 1 882 

Dunlevy-Sayer Botanical Exclosure 569 

Leslie Gulch 11,673 

Owyhee Reservoir State Park 832 

Historic Birch Creek Ranch 2 106 

Jordan Resource Area 

Jordan Craters 15,856 

Luscher Pasture 3,084 

Owyhee Wild & Scenic River Corridor 1 25,923 

1

A portion of the corridor including and/or adjacent to the Owyhee NWSR—these areas total 26,805 acres.
 

2

Grazing not authorized by permit. Grazing may be authorized only on a temporary basis for administrative and/or interpretive
 

purposes.
 

59 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

vegetation management objectives (such as reducing competition from undesirable annual 

species with desirable perennial species or reducing the quantity of standing dead herbaceous material in nonnative seedings while continuing to meet resource objectives). The 

following criteria shall be the basis for timely processing of applications for nonrenewable 

grazing authorization during the current grazing year in excess of the number of Animal Unit 

Months (AUM’s) or outside the period identified in a current grazing permit: 

•	 The area does not include lands managed under special designations such as wilderness, WSA’s, ACEC/RNA’s, administratively suitable or designated NWSR’s; 

•	 The area does not include riparian communities where PFC assessment is functional at 

risk with a static or downward trend or nonfunctional, or similar outcomes of other 

approved riparian assessment techniques, due to livestock grazing; 

•	 The pasture is not scheduled to be rested during the subject grazing year; 

• Utilization monitoring indicates the presence of a surplus of available forage or recent 

climatic conditions which contribute to production lead to the reasonable expectation 

that available forage is greater than the long term average levels on which authorized 

active use is permitted and where utilization levels, as a result of authorized active and 

TNR use, will not limit meeting resource objectives; 

•	 Where negative or adverse impacts, including indirect impacts, to any of the following 

critical elements of the human environment, as identified in manual guidance implementing NEPA, will not be present or will be mitigated: air quality, ACEC’s, cultural resources, prime or unique farmland, floodplains, native American religious concerns, 

threatened and endangered species, hazardous and solid wastes, water quality, 

wetlands or riparian zones, designated NWSR’s, wilderness, or WSA’s; 

•	 Where negative or adverse impacts, including indirect impacts, to any of the following 

resource values will not be present or will be mitigated: administratively suitable 

NWSR’s, native vegetation, seeded nonnative vegetation, wild horses, wild horse 

habitat and a thriving natural ecological balance, wildlife species, wildlife habitat, 

special status species, soils, biological soil crusts, watershed values, native American 

cultural concerns, visual resources, or high value recreation resources. 

These criteria are not intended to be used for determining when additional forage is available 

on a sustained yield basis. Authorization of annual applications for temporary nonrenewable 

grazing use will not be the basis for determining when improving forage productivity and 

resource conditions may support additional active grazing use. Where monitoring data 

indicate that a permanent increase in authorized grazing use may be possible and conflict with 

meeting resource objectives will be mitigated, a temporary increase in grazing use may be 

authorized by decision or agreement for a specified test period prior to granting a permanent 

increase. 

Recreation 

Objective: Provide and enhance developed and undeveloped recreation opportunities, 

while protecting resources, to manage the increasing demand for resource-dependent 

recreation activities. 

Rationale: FLPMA provides for recreation use of public land as an integral part of multipleuse management. Dispersed, unstructured activities typify the recreational uses occurring on 

most public land. Policy guidelines in BLM Manual 8300 direct the BLM to designate 

administrative units known as Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMA’s) where there 

is a need for a higher level of financial investment or managerial presence than is typical of 

most BLM land. See Table 10 and Map REC for SRMA acreages. Remaining public land is 

60 
 

 

designated as an Extensive Recreation Management Area (ERMA) where limited commitment of resources is required to provide extensive, unstructured recreation activities. 

In accordance with FLPMA, the BLM’s “Recreation 2000 Plan and Update” sets national 

recreation policy as follows: “BLM will emphasize resource-dependent recreation opportunities that typify the vast Western landscapes . . . while giving the public the freedom to 

choose how to spend its leisure time on BLM land within the constraints of achieving healthy 

ecosystems, resolving user conflict, and providing for health and visitor safety.” The plan 

envisions that most recreation-related development will be for protecting resource values and 

to serve as staging areas for resource-based use and not as visitor attractions in and of 

themselves. 

Monitoring: Monitoring will include periodic patrols to check boundaries, signing, and 

visitor use; to maintain facilities; to ensure visitor compliance with rules and regulations; to 

establish baseline data and observation points to determine current impacts from recreation 

use; to rehabilitate specific sites as necessary, including the development of recreation 

facilities to protect sites against continued undue recreation use impacts; and, the development of studies such as limits of acceptable change, and the implementation of other management tools to help determine appropriate levels and patterns of recreational use and the 

influences of other resource uses. Also see Appendix W. 

Management Actions: Management actions described under specific SRMA’s/ERMA’s are 

not all inclusive. As appropriate, an interdisciplinary management plan may be developed for 

SRMA’s. The plan will involve all potential management partners and provide more specific 

detail of the type, nature and extent of recreation support facilities, services, and any needed 

use and user limitations required to address public safety concerns, provide resource 

protection, resolve resource or user conflicts, and/or to meet present and foreseeable future 

recreational use demands and trends and resource needs. Each plan developed will be 

subject to meeting NEPA requirements prior to implementation. Appendix U displays information on potential recreation sites and trails and proposed improvements on existing recreation 

sites. At the time of development of new recreation sites, the need for a locatable minerals 

withdrawal (mineral withdrawls for new sites would require an amendment to the RMP) or use 

restrictions will be assessed and applied as appropriate; existing recreation sites will be 

appropriately withdrawn. Recreation activities such as, but not limited to, camping, horse 

use, campfire fuel collection, and other uses at specific recreation sites and other areas may 

be prohibited and/or restricted and posted to meet other resource management objectives. 

The general public and commercial outfitters will be informed of programs such as “Leave No 

Trace” and “Tread Lightly,” as applicable. Informational and interpretive media (such as 

Table 10.—Special recreation management areas (PSEORMP Table 3-9) 

Special recreation management area Acres 1 Resource area 

Trout Creek/Oregon Canyon 179,166 JRA 

Owyhee River Complex 462,134 JRA, MRA 

Owyhee River Below the Dam 11,239 MRA 

Oregon National Historic Trail 9,175 MRA 

Succor Creek 11,355 MRA 

TOTAL 673,069 

1 Acreage includes FERC acres. 

61 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

signs, brochures, kiosks) will be provided as appropriate to meet objectives (see Map REC). 

See Appendix H for definition of recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS). 

Special Recreation Permits (SRP’s) will be issued, as appropriate, for individuals and groups 

participating in specific recreation activities (including competitive events and commercial 

uses associated with recreational pursuits), scientific study, and educational activities. 

Authorized permits will be consistent with recreation and other resource management 

objectives and minimize resource and user conflicts. 

The BLM will establish and manage SRMA’s to provide quality recreation opportunities while 

protecting resource values. The remaining areas will be managed as ERMA’s. The BLM will 

continue management of existing recreation sites and allow for expansion of existing sites and 

establishment of new sites to protect resource values or and provide interpretation of natural 

and cultural values. Tourism opportunities will be developed when consistent with protecting natural and cultural values. Use restrictions will be implemented when necessary to meet 

other resource objectives. Recreation opportunities will be enhanced and resource values 

protected, where possible, through joint efforts with private landowners and county, State, 

and other appropriate entities. 

Potential recreation sites described in Appendix U and/or additional recreation sites will be 

established or existing sites modified, following site-specific assessment if public safety 

concerns, resource protection needs, resource or user conflict resolution, or public recreational use demands/trends justify the action. 

Special Recreation Management Areas 

Trout Creek/Oregon Canyon: Establish the Trout Creek/Oregon Canyon SRMA within JRA. 

The SRMA will encompass 179,166 acres of the Trout Creek and Oregon Canyon Mountains 

and the surrounding area in Harney and Malheur Counties. The boundaries will encompass 

five WSA’s associated with the area and extend north to include Willow Creek Hot Springs. 

The primary values of the area are outstanding scenery and opportunities for solitude and 

primitive and unconfined recreation activities, Federally-listed fish, cultural resources, 

hunting, camping, backpacking, hiking, sightseeing, nature study, and associated interpretive 

opportunities. 

Recreation sites within the SRMA will include the following existing sites: Willow Creek Hot 

Springs; a petrified wood collection site; the Mud Springs, Cottonwood Creek, Oregon 

Canyon, and Minehole Creek (Log Spring) hunter camps. Management considerations will 

include information/interpretation at appropriate access points to the SRMA and interpretive 

media at the Willow Creek site. 

Owyhee River Complex: The Owyhee River Complex SRMA at 462,134 acres (140,994 acres 

in MRA; 321,140 acres in JRA) will include the Main, West Little, and North Fork Owyhee 

NWSR corridors; a 0.5-mile-wide corridor between China Gulch and Crooked Creek; the Leslie 

Gulch, Owyhee Views and Honeycombs ACEC’s; the Honeycombs, Upper Leslie Gulch, 

Slocum Creek, Blue Canyon, Owyhee Breaks, Lower Owyhee Canyon, Upper West Little 

Owyhee and Owyhee Canyon WSA’s; about 4,100 acres between the Blue Canyon and 

Slocum Creek WSA’s; and the Three Forks Road. The SRMA’s primary values include: 

outstanding river canyon scenery, unique cultural sites, high-quality fishery, whitewater 

boating, hiking, camping, outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined outdoor recreation activities, and sightseeing opportunities. Overall management 

objectives for the area are to preserve outstandingly remarkable and high-quality scenic, 

recreational, geologic, wildlife, botanic, and cultural values and to enhance opportunities for 

high-quality outdoor recreation experiences, environmental education, and scientific studies 

while maintaining the integrity of the area’s natural systems and cultural resources. Management for the SRMA will include continuing to implement the management plans and court 

62 
 

 

orders for the Main, West Little, and North Fork Owyhee NWSR’s, the management plan for 

the Leslie Gulch ACEC, and ensure compliance with the IMPLWR and management prescriptions for the Honeycombs and Owyhee Views ACEC’s. The SRMA will be managed for 

primitive, semiprimitive nonmotorized, semiprimitive motorized, and roaded natural recreation 

opportunities and experiences. 

Recreation sites within the SRMA will include Three Forks, Owyhee Overlook, Rome Launch, 

The Hole-in-the-Ground, Birch Creek Historic Ranch, Anderson Crossing, Slocum Creek, the 

Owyhee Breaks, Deary Pasture and Wes Hawkins trails and associated amenities, and 

trailheads and other facilities of the Leslie Gulch ACEC. Each of the three trails (Owyhee 

Breaks, Deary Pasture, and Wes Hawkins) will be a point-to-point corridor with no development of treaded trail, except as needed to protect or prevent undue damage to sensitive 

resources. An existing cooperative management agreement with the BOR providing for BLM 

management of a boat ramp and associated facilities at Leslie Gulch, will be retained. 

Owyhee River Below the Dam: Establish the Owyhee River Below the Dam SRMA within 

MRA. The 11,239-acre SRMA’s boundaries and its management will coincide with and 

include those described for the Owyhee River Below the Dam ACEC, and will include a 

Watchable Wildlife corridor area and sites along the river length of the SRMA. Recreation 

values and use opportunities of the area include high-quality scenery, driving and walking/ 

hiking for pleasure, varied wildlife and historic resource viewing, photography, camping, 

hunting, fishing, and water play at the Snively Hot Springs Recreation Site. Watchable 

Wildlife, camping, swimming, fishing, hiking, and interpretation opportunities will be enhanced. Overall recreation management objectives for the area will be to provide varied 

opportunities for roaded natural, semiprimitive motorized, and semiprimitive nonmotorized 

recreation and to provide for reasonable levels of tourism, environmental education, and 

interpretation while maintaining the integrity of the area’s natural and cultural resource 

values. Management of recreation activities will be consistent with protecting ACEC and 

outstandingly remarkable river-related values, while providing for certain recreation activities 

within the SRMA to accommodate some tourism in the area. 

Management of the SRMA will be coordinated with the BOR, county, State, and other 

appropriate partners for provision of recreation support facilities and services and area 

maintenance to enhance recreational uses, experiences and tourism in the area. Recreation 

sites and management actions for the SRMA will include the provision of developed 

nonmotorized trails and amenities primarily for enhancement of wildlife viewing, fishing, 

environmental education, and resource interpretation, and the placement of appropriate 

interpretive and informational mediums. Existing primitive or unmaintained vehicle routes on 

the canyon bottom not used in conjunction with establishment of nonmotorized trails/ 

trailheads or for access through the SRMA will be closed to motorized use. Any camping on 

BLM-administered land will be limited to designated developed recreation sites (that is, 

possibly Snively Hot Springs), with adjacent non-BLM landowners within the canyon 

encouraged to provide other developed camping facilities before the Lower Owyhee Canyon 

recreation site will be constructed to meet increased public camping demands within the area. 

Recreation support facilities such as trailheads and parking areas will be located, by preference, at existing altered sites wherever possible. As appropriate, scenic and access easements/agreements will be pursued. 

Oregon Trail: The Oregon Trail SRMA will be extended to be consistent with the Oregon 

National Historic Trail ACEC (9,175 acres) and provide for the management direction indicated 

for the ACEC. Recreation management direction will emphasize public education and enjoyment of the trail and its setting while protecting important cultural resource values. The 

SRMA will be managed for semiprimitive motorized and roaded natural recreation. 

Recreation sites within the SRMA will be the Keeney Pass, Alkali Springs and Birch Creek 

interpretive sites. For Alkali Springs and Birch Creek, interpretive signing will be enhanced 

and parking facilities provided. New surface-disturbing activities observable from the trail 

63 
 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

route will be limited to those needed for management of the interpretive sites and protection 

of the trail corridor. Prior authorization for any overnight camping will be required. 

Succor Creek: Establish the 11,355-acre Succor Creek SRMA within MRA. This SRMA will 

include public land that partly surrounds the State of Oregon’s Succor Creek State Recreation 

Area. The recreation area is a linear tract along the deepest portion of the scenic Succor 

Creek Canyon that has a county road traversing it and a partially developed State-managed 

campground. Recreation-oriented resource values and use opportunities of the SRMA 

include quality scenery associated with the deeply cut and highly colorful canyon and its 

perennial stream, driving and walking/hiking for pleasure, wildlife viewing, rockhounding, 

photography, camping, and hunting. Overall recreation management objectives for the 

SRMA will be to provide varied opportunities for roaded natural and semiprimitive motorized 

and nonmotorized recreation, as well as for environmental education and interpretation, while 

maintaining the integrity of the area’s natural and cultural values. 

New rights-of-way will be avoided when feasible. Livestock use along Succor Creek and its 

immediate canyon setting of the SRMA will be managed to avoid conflicts with visitors 

during higher recreational use periods of the year. Motorized vehicle use will be limited to 

designated routes. A NSO stipulation will apply for the SRMA for leasable minerals. 

Extensive Recreation Management Areas 

Jordan: The remaining 2,116,211 acres of JRA will be the Jordan ERMA. Management will be 

primarily for semiprimitive motorized, semiprimitive nonmotorized, and roaded natural recreation opportunities. 

Recreation sites within the ERMA will include the Antelope Reservoir Campground, Highway 

95 Interpretive Site, Cow Lakes Campground, petrified wood site, and Soldier Creek 

Watchable Wildlife Loop. Management may include developing nonmotorized trail systems 

at Antelope Reservoir and Cow Lakes and, if appropriate, designating these as Watchable 

Wildlife sites. Also, interpretation for the Soldier Creek Watchable Wildlife Loop will be 

increased. 

Malheur: The remaining 1,849,973 acres of MRA will be the Malheur ERMA. Management 

will be primarily for semiprimitive motorized, semiprimitive nonmotorized, and roaded natural 

recreation opportunities. 

Recreation sites and trails within the ERMA will include Chukar Park; Twin Springs; Riverside; Castle Rock; Oasis including Watchable Wildlife facilities; Trenkel Hill Interpretive Site; 

Horseshoe Bend; Coyne Place; Hunter Spring; Snake River; the Desert, Malheur River, and 

Castle Rock Trails; and portions of the Owyhee Breaks Trail. The Malheur River Trail will 

follow the abandoned railroad grade with an option for the Desert Trail to also follow this 

route. The Desert and Owyhee Breaks Trails will have appropriate trailheads and be a pointto-point corridor with no development of treaded trail, except as needed to prevent undue 

damage to sensitive resources. The Owyhee Breaks Trail route will be from Owyhee Reservoir State Park to Birch Creek Historic Ranch. 

Management considerations affecting these sites are as follows: 

Twin Springs: will be enlarged and enclosed with developed camping units, improved 

water system, and site interpretation; the existing road through the site will be assessed 

for being rerouted around the site. Chukar Park: picnic units, a group overnight use 

area, and a recreation vehicle sanitation dump station will be added to existing facilities, 

and sanitation for the campground host site and for the recreation site’s water systems 

will be included. Riverside: completion of overnight camping units, a trailhead and 

64 
 

 

 

 

parking associated with the Desert and Malheur River Canyon Trails, and a river 

access/parking facility for floatboaters. Castle Rock: reconstruction of the exclosure 

fence and provisions for camping units, sanitation and a developed nonmotorized trail/ 

trailhead to Castle Rock and Hunter Spring. Oasis: expanded parking, camp and picnic 

units, a boat ramp and safety dock, and a developed foot trail with interpretive materials 

as a designated Watchable Wildlife site. Horseshoe Bend, Coyne Place, and Hunter 

Spring: will provide for day use and overnight camping, with exclosure fencing as 

needed. Hunter Spring will include camping amenities, an exclosure fence and a 

trailhead for Castle Rock nonmotorized recreational uses. Snake River: day use sites 

with developed boating access, if feasible, and appropriate interpretive media as 

possible designated Watchable Wildlife site. Malheur River Canyon Trail: will follow 

the abandoned railroad grade between Riverside Recreation Site to near Juntura, OR. 

Other trails, including point-to-point corridors may be developed as required to protect 

sensitive resources or address visitor, access and safety issues. The Desert and 

Malheur River Canyon Trails: will be nominated and assessed as potential components of the national recreation trail system. Access and scenic easements and/or 

rights-of-way will be pursued if needed. Partnerships in providing recreation facilities 

and services with adjacent landowners and other entities will be pursued as appropriate. 

Off-Highway Vehicles 

Objective: Manage off-highway vehicle (OHV) use to protect resource values, promote 

public safety, provide OHV use opportunities where appropriate, and minimize conflicts 

among various users. 

Rationale: Federal regulations (43 CFR Part 8340) and BLM planning guidance require the 

BLM to designate all BLM-administered land as either open, limited, or closed in regard to 

off-road (now termed “off-highway”) vehicle use. These designations are to help meet public 

demand for OHV activities, protect natural resources and ensure public safety, and minimize 

conflicts among users (refer to Appendix I for supplemental OHV information). 

Monitoring: Monitoring will include periodic patrols to check designation boundaries, 

signing, and use. Closures will be monitored to ensure public safety and protect affected 

roadbeds or areas. SRP’s will be issued with appropriate mitigative measures for commercial, 

competitive, and other organized OHV activities. Baseline data will be established and sites 

rehabilitated as necessary. Also see Appendix W. 

Management Actions: Unless otherwise specified, OHV use designations are in effect 

yearlong. Public land not designated limited or closed will be designated open to motorized 

vehicle use. For OHV designations in ACEC’s, see Table 13. In WSA’s, unless otherwise 

designated, the use of motorized and mechanical vehicles is limited to designated routes 

(WSA inventoried roads and vehicular ways still in existence). Motorized vehicle use will be 

managed in accordance with the IMPLWR. Should a WSA not be designated as wilderness, 

the OHV use designation will remain the same. Vehicle use in existing and administratively 

suitable NWSR corridors and VRM Class I areas will be limited to designated routes (see 

Table 14 for the list of suitable rivers). Emergency OHV closures or use limits may be 

implemented as necessary to protect natural and cultural resources, reduce or eliminate user 

conflicts, or protect the public from hazard areas. Commercial, competitive, and other 

organized OHV activities will be managed with SRP’s, with such activities allowed when 

consistent with protecting resource values and meeting other management objectives. OHV 

site/area signing and other implementation measures will be conducted as designations, uses, 

and resource values dictate. Recreation and administrative sites will be OHV designated 

limited to BLM developed motorized vehicle routes/areas, unless otherwise posted closed. 

65 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Closures or use limits will not apply to certain OHV uses or purposes as described in 43 CFR 

8340.0-5 (Appendix I). For public land users, such use exceptions may occur only for 

specifically described locations and associated durations within BLM authorized issued 

permits (such as livestock use, rights-of-way, or other appropriate authorizing instruments). 

Refer to Map OHV for OHV use designations and to Table 11 for a summary of OHV use 

designations by resource area. Within areas with an OHV use designation of limited to 

existing routes, motorized vehicle-supported camping, unless otherwise posted to meet other 

resource management objectives, may occur up to 150 traveled feet off an existing motorized 

route. The landing of private aircraft within WSA’s will be limited to the existing inventoried 

vehicular ways, as defined under IMPLWR, and will require prior BLM authorization. NWSR’s 

will be closed to the landing of aircraft, consistent with the approved 1993 “Main, West Little, 

and North Fork Owyhee National Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan.” The exception 

will be when conducting aerial search and/or rescue activities with BLM approval within 

WSA’s and designated NWSR corridors. 

Other OHV Use Designations by Resource Area 

MRA: OHV management specified in the approved “South Alkali Management Plan” (1995) 

will be implemented with the area designated as a seasonal use limitation within the South 

Alkali Allotment changed to limited to existing routes yearlong. Vehicle use will be limited 

along the Oregon Trail corridor. An area adjacent to the south boundary of the Keeney Pass 

segment of the Oregon Trail ACEC will be OHV use designated as Limited to designated 

routes. Abandoned or reverted railroad rights-of-way will be designated closed unless 

specifically authorized as open or limited, as determined on a segment-by-segment and caseby-case basis following appropriate assessment. OHV use will be limited to designated 

routes in the visually sensitive Succor Creek SRMA adjacent to Succor Creek State Park, as 

will three special status plant areas near Harper, two near Succor Creek, and an area containing special status plants and noxious weeds south of Vale. The routes proposed closed 

within the Owyhee Below the Dam ACEC are on file in the Vale District Office (these routes 

are too short to depict on Map OHV). Certain VRM Class II areas outside of SMA’s will be 

OHV use designated as limited to existing routes. 

Except for where designated closed or as limited to designated routes, the following public 

lands (as described by certain pastures and grazing allotments) located west and northeast of 

Vale, Oregon, and east of the Owyhee River and Owyhee Reservoir to the Idaho state line, will 

be designated limited to existing routes: Terry Basin and Juniper Basin pastures of the Black 

Butte Allotment (00304); North Racehorse and South Racehorse Pastures in the Butte 

Allotment (00308); South Chicken Creek Pasture of Allotment No. 4; and the Mesa B.C. 

((10201_01/Harper Seeding (10201_02 )) Pastures of Allotment No. 2 (10201); South Alkali 

(20100); Alkali Springs (20101); King Field Individual (00136); Blackjack (10501), Lower 

Owyhee (10502); Three Fingers (10503); Spring Mountain (10504); McCain Springs (10505); 

Birch Creek (10506); Board Corrals (10507); Rockville (10508); Mahogany Mountain (10509); 

Schnable Creek (10510); Tunnel Canyon (10512); and that portion of Strodes Basin (0519) 

within Oregon (administered by Boise, Idaho, BLM District). 

Table 11.—Off-highway vehicle use designations (acres) 1 (PSEORMP Table 3-10) 

Resource Area Open Limited Closed Total 

Malheur Resource Area 1,228,832 774,420 15,490 2,018,742
 

Jordan Resource Area 1,386,234 1,229,949 336 2,616,519
 

1 Includes FERC acres. Changes in acreage figures between the Draft and Final SEORMP are based on updated GIS information and reflect 

the best available data. 

66 
 

 

 

 

JRA: The Bretz landslide area and Buckskin Communication Site area will be closed to 

motorized use except by authorization. OHV use in the Saddle Butte Lava Flow will be limited 

to designated routes. For the area within the Owyhee NWSR corridor designated as limited 

to designated routes, the Owyhee Springs area will be extended 1 mile west, and the Three 

Forks area will be extended about 2 miles northeast. The limited to designated routes 

designation of Willow Creek WSA will be extended about 6 miles northwest. Certain additional portions of the Campbell, Jackie’s Butte Summer, Eiquren, Louse Canyon Community 

and Star Valley Community grazing allotments will be designated as limited to existing routes. 

Visual Resources 

Objective: Manage public land actions and activities in a manner to be consistent with 

visual resource management (VRM) class objectives. 

Rationale: Section 102(8) of FLPMA declares that public land will be managed to protect the 

quality of scenic values and, where appropriate, to preserve and protect certain public land in 

its natural condition. NEPA, section 101(b), requires Federal agencies to “assure for all 

Americans... esthetically pleasing surroundings.” Section 102 of NEPA requires agencies to 

“utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will ensure the integrated use of ... 

Environmental Design Acts in the planning and decision making” process. Guidelines for the 

identification of VRM classes on public land are contained in “BLM Manual Handbook 8410­

1,” Visual Resource Inventory. The establishment of VRM classes on public land is based on 

an evaluation of the landscapes scenic qualities, public sensitivity toward certain areas (such 

as certain special management areas, travel corridors and landscape settings), and the 

location of affected land from primary travel corridors (distance zoning). 

Monitoring: Use the visual contrast rating system, described in BLM Manual 8400, where 

appropriate, when assessing proposals for projects on public land. Periodically assess, and 

as needed revise and implement, measures of visual mitigation/rehabilitation activities 

conducted for surface disturbing activities (also see Appendix W). 

Table 12.—Visual Resource Management classes of public land (acres) 1 (PSEORMP Table 3-11) 

Resource Area Class I Class II Class III Class IV 

Malheur Resource Area 309,796 144,403 199,078 1,365,457 

Jordan Resource Area 998,501 72,823 440,579 1,104,052 

1 Includes FERC acres. The figures in this table represent public lands in the planning area that have been inventoried and given a VRM 

classification. Changes in acreage figures between the Draft and Final SEORMP are based on updated GIS information and reflect the best 

available data. 

67 
 

 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Management Actions: Public lands within the planning area will be managed as depicted 

on Map VRM. Table 12 shows VRM classifications. Visual resources in ACEC’s will be 

managed as displayed in Table 13. WSA’s, managed in accordance with current policy, will 

be managed under VRM Class I, subject to any change to current policy. Upon congressional designation of wilderness, any area congressionally released from further wilderness 

consideration will be managed under VRM Class II, unless inventory shows it to be Class I. 

Management of the Main, West Little, and North Fork Owyhee NWSR’s and administratively suitable study rivers with a tentative wild classification will be managed as VRM 

Class I. The corridor of the South Fork Indian Creek study river in MRA will be managed as 

VRM Class II. Manage as VRM Class III, when needed, those administrative sites, recreation sites, and other specific sites requiring developed support facilities to meet public 

health and safety requirements or to enhance approved resource based recreation use 

opportunities. 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

Objective: Designate areas of critical environmental concern (ACEC’s)/research natural 

areas (RNA’s) where relevance and importance criteria are met and special management 

attention is required to protect the values identified. 

Rationale: Section 202(c)(3) of FLPMA mandates that priority be given to the designation 

and protection of ACEC’s. These areas are defined in section 103(a) as areas where special 

management attention is required to protect and prevent irreparable damage to important 

values, resources, systems or processes, or to protect life and safety from natural hazards. 

Further guidance and evaluation criteria are found at 43 CFR Part 1610.7-2. 

Monitoring: ACEC’s will be assessed on a periodic schedule in order to evaluate maintenance and enhancement of relevant and important values and to evaluate effectiveness of 

management in maintaining those values. Monitoring may include collection of both qualitative and quantitative data. Appendix W contains additional monitoring guidelines. 

Description of management directives: ACEC’s will be designated and managed as outlined 

in Table 13. The section following the table describes each ACEC and its management. The 

descriptions are organized by resource area. Maps ACEC-M and ACEC-J show all ACEC’s. 

Management common to all ACEC’s: The areas described below will be managed to 

maintain or enhance their relevant and important values. Management actions will be 

evaluated for their effects in maintaining or enhancing the ACEC values. These actions may 

include forest management practices; livestock grazing management (including timing and 

intensity of grazing); construction of range, wildlife, and recreation projects; prescribed 

burning; western juniper control practices and other vegetation treatments; management of 

recreational activities and wild horses; and animal damage control practices. Acquisition of 

subsurface minerals and private land inholdings through willing seller(s) will be pursued, if 

applicable, to protect relevant and important values or to improve manageability. Any land 

acquired from private parties or relinquished by the BOR adjacent to the ACEC may become 

part of the ACEC if relevant and important values are present, and will be managed following 

special management described below. For development of locatable minerals, any surfacedisturbing actions beyond casual exploration will require a plan of operations if an area is 

designated as an ACEC. Opportunities to manipulate vegetation will be limited, particularly in 

ACEC/RNA’s, whose purpose is to maintain and promote natural values and processes. 

Following wildfires, ACEC/RNA’s will be allowed to revegetate naturally. Small areas may be 

seeded with native species, if the relevant and important values of the ACEC/RNA will be 

enhanced. Nonnative species will not be used in an ACEC/RNA for vegetation rehabilitation. 

Noxious weeds will be aggressively controlled using integrated weed management methods, 

68 
Table 13.—Specific management for ACEC’s/RNA’s 1 (PSEORMP Table 3-12) 

Visual 

Off- resource Road 

ACEC Rights- highway manage- Plant mainten- Le

acres of-way vehicles ment collecting ance m

Malheur Resource Area 

Black Canyon ACEC/RNA 2,644 AV L II/III 2 L L O 

Castle Rock ACEC 3 22,799 AV L II L O N

Coal Mine Basin ACEC/RNA 755 AV L II L L N

Dry Creek Gorge ACEC 3 16,082 AV L II O L N

Hammond Hill Sand Hills ACEC/RNA 3 3,712 AV L III L L O 

Honeycombs ACEC/RNA 3 15,847 AV L I L L N

Lake Ridge ACEC/RNA 3 3,825 AV L II L L O

Leslie Gulch ACEC 3 11,673 E 6 L I/II 7 L L N

Mahogany Ridge ACEC/RNA 3 682 AV L II L L N

North Fork Malheur River ACEC 3 1,810 E L I L L N

North Ridge Bully Creek ACEC/RNA 1,569 AV L III L L O

69 
Table 13.—Specific management for ACEC’s/RNA’s 1 (continued) 

Visual 

Off- resource Road 

ACEC Rights- highway manage- Plant mainten- Le

acres of-way vehicles ment collecting ance m

Oregon National Historic Trail ACEC­ 3,154 AV L II/III 9 L L N

Keeney Pass Segment 

Oregon National Historic Trail ACEC­ 5,902 AV L II L L N

Tub Mountain Segment 

Oregon National Historic Trail ACEC­ 119 AV L II O O N

Birch Creek Segment 

Owyhee River Below the Dam ACEC 3 11,239 AV L II L O N

Owyhee Views ACEC 3 52,506 AV C/L 15 I L L N

South Alkali Sand Hills ACEC 3,520 AV L III L L N

South Bull Canyon ACEC/RNA 792 AV L III L L O 

South Ridge Bully Creek ACEC/RNA 620 AV L III L L O

Spring Mountain ACEC/RNA 1,002 AV C III L NA O 

Stockade Mountain ACEC/RNA 1,767 AV L III L L O 

70
Table 13.—Specific management for ACEC’s/RNA’s 1 (continued) 

Visual 

Off- resource Road 

ACEC Rights- highway manage- Plant mainten- Le

acres of-way vehicles ment collecting ance m

Jordan Resource Area 

Dry Creek Bench ACEC/RNA 3 1,616 AV L II L L O 

Jordan Craters ACEC/RNA 3 31,370 E L I L L N

Little Whitehorse Creek Exclosure ACEC/RNA 3 58 E C II L NA N

Mendi Gore Playa ACEC/RNA 3 148 AV L II L L N

Palomino Playa ACEC/RNA 642 AV L II L L N

Saddle Butte ACEC 3 7,056 AV L II L L O 

Toppin Creek Butte ACEC/RNA 3 3,996 AV L II L L O 

1 Abbreviations: 

AV = avoidance area: granting rights-of-way (surface, subsurface, aerial) within the area should be avoided, but rights-of-way may be granted if there is m

resource values and impacts can be mitigated. 

C = closed to mineral material removal, and/or OHV use. 

E = exclusion area: rights-of-way would not be granted within the area. 

L = limited: limitations applicable to OHV use, plant collection, and road maintenance. 

OHV use: use would be limited to designated routes. Plant collecting: plant materials, including common species, may be collected by permit only. Road 

would be limited to the existing roadway; shoulder, barrow/ditch construction would be limited to only that necessary to ensure public safety and serviceab

NL = not available for mineral leases. 

NSO = no surface occupancy. Open to mineral leasing subject to NSO stipulations. 

O = open. The activity is allowed in the area. NEPA compliance and clearances for cultural resources and threatened and endangered species required for 

is subject to standard stipulations (where appropriate), NEPA compliance, and application of site-specific controls. 

OHV = off-highway vehicles. 

OWS = open with special stipulations. Open to mineral leasing activities subject to controlled surface use, seasonal timing restrictions, and/or restricted o

as riparian areas, live water, areas with special wildlife or plant features, or sensitive viewsheds). 

VRM = visual resource management. VRM classes are defined in Appendix H. 

W = withdrawal. Areas recommended (to the Secretary of the Interior) for withdrawal from operation of the mining laws (locatable mineral entry). 

2 II/III = Class II in area inventoried as VRM II; VRM III on remainder. 

3 All or a portion of this ACEC falls within an additional or proposed SMA that currently may have restricted management for activities such as OHV, VRM

71 
Table 13.—Specific management for ACEC’s/RNA’s 1 (continued) 

ACEC must meet the minimum management requirements for the SMA (such as WSA, NWSR). Management prescriptions associated with the relevant an

4 W/O = Withdrawal on 3,280 acres; open on remainder.
 5 C/O = Closed on 3,280 acres; open on remainder.
 6 E = Valid existing right-of-way would remain in effect.
 7 I/II = Areas outside vehicular corridor VRM I; VRM II on remainder.
 8 W = Withdrawal process completed September, 1999 (see text).
 9 II/III = VRM II within corridor; VRM III on remainder.
 10 W/O = Withdrawal within corridor; open on remainder.
 11 C/O = Closed within corridor; open on remainder.
 12 NSO/O = No-surface-occupancy stipulation applies within viewshed; open on remainer.
 13 W/O = Withdrawal within viewshed; open on remainder.
 14 C/O = Closed within viewshed; open on remainder.
 

15 C/L = Closed west of reservoir as depicted on OHV maps; limited on remainder.
 

72
 

such as biological control, site-specific spraying, and grubbing by hand, consistent with 

protection and enhancement of relevant and important values. Where management for a 

designated ACEC limits motorized and mechanical vehicles to designated roads and trails, 

the use of these vehicles off designated trails to maintain existing improvements and for 

livestock handling may be allowed within the ACEC after a case-by-case assessment and 

determination of need. 

Management prescriptions were developed independently of WSA and NWSR considerations. However, IMPLWR will be followed until Congress designates these areas as 

wilderness or releases them from further wilderness consideration. If the WSA is not Congressionally designated as wilderness, the prescriptions for each designated ACEC will be 

followed. 

Malheur Resource Area 

Black Canyon ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 2,644 acre Black Canyon ACEC/RNA, located north of the 

Malheur River above Jonesboro, Oregon, occupies the drainage of Black Canyon, a steep 

south-facing canyon that drains the uplands directly above the mainstem of the Malheur 

River. The drainage consists of an intermittent to perennial stream flowing just enough to 

develop riparian vegetation in the steep canyon. The uplands surrounding the drainage are 

sparsely vegetated due to the shallow soils and dry south-facing aspect. 

The relevant and important values of the ACEC/RNA are the following vegetation cells 

identified by the ONHP: stiff sagebrush/Sandberg bluegrass, western juniper/big sagebrush/ 

bluebunch wheatgrass, riparian community dominated by coyote willow with Pacific willow, 

and first to third order stream system in sagebrush zone. 

A main east-west road traverses the north end of the ACEC/RNA, and a trail goes to Willow 

Spring. The ACEC/RNA includes a portion of one livestock grazing allotment. 

The ACEC has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related gold/ 

silver/mercury deposits, moderate potential for the occurrence of both uranium and geothermal resources, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other leasable and locatable 

minerals. There is no BLM record that mining claims were ever located within the boundaries 

of the ACEC/RNA, and no demonstrated interest in either precious metals/mercury or 

uranium; consequently, the potential for development is low. Although the ACEC/RNA is 

within an area of high heat flow, an absence of nearby hot springs and an apparent lack of 

shallow (<3,000 feet deep) thermal waters indicate a low potential for development of geothermal resources. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails. The ACEC/RNA will be VRM Class II and III as identified during the 

VRM inventory for visual resources in the planning area. Plant collecting will require a 

permit. The area will be open to leasable and locatable minerals activities and closed to 

saleable minerals development. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity 

of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained or enhanced. Where adverse impacts are identified, existing 

livestock use will be adjusted using a variety of methods including fencing, reduction in 

livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be 

73 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will be maintained 

or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect values of the 

area, the proposed management for saleable minerals, livestock, OHV, rights-of-way, and other 

surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. 

Castle Rock ACEC 

Description and values: The 22,799-acre Castle Rock ACEC, located north of Juntura and 

Beulah Reservoir, includes public land adjacent to and including Castle Rock. This massive 

volcanic spire dominates the landscape and surrounding viewshed in all directions. The 

surrounding topography drops 2,000–3,000 feet within a distance of 3 miles. Because of the 

diversity of habitats in close proximity, representatives of nearly two-thirds of the wildlife 

species in the planning area spend some time in this ACEC during the year. Stands of 

ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, and mountain mahogany are located adjacent to open sagebrush-grasslands. The wildlife diversity is exemplified by the existence of desert-type bird 

species such as sage thrashers nesting less than 1 mile from blue grouse, which are associated with forested habitats. 

The relevant and important values identified for this ACEC are scenic, cultural, historic, and 

wildlife habitat. The scenic value surrounding Castle Rock is rated as a VRM Class II with 

“A” quality scenery and high sensitivity. Cultural values are associated with both prehistoric 

and historic use of the area as an important landmark for American Indians, as well as 

emigrants traveling through the area. Wildlife values are associated with the abrupt 

elevational change which has resulted in a unique area with many habitat types in close 

proximity to each other. 

A portion of the Castle Rock (3-18) WSA is located within the ACEC and cover 29 percent of 

the area. This WSA is located in the area immediately adjacent to the Castle Rock spire and 

to the west and south of Castle Rock. The BLM has recommended that this WSA not be 

congressionally designated as wilderness. Until Congress makes a determination on wilderness status, WSA’s are managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, 

surface-disturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded until Congress 

makes wilderness designation decisions. 

A north-south county gravel road bisects the ACEC, providing the main cross-country route 

for travel from Juntura to Ironside. The slopes of Castle Rock are drained by Hunter Creek, 

Spring Creek, and Jerry Canyon. Lost Creek and the Little Malheur River flow to the north 

and west of the ACEC. There are several 2-track and 4-wheel drive vehicle routes leading into 

various drainages, and several undeveloped camping locations. Numerous barbed wire/steel 

post livestock fences and a wildlife exclosure are within the ACEC. The ACEC includes 

portions of four livestock grazing allotments with variable grazing practices authorized by 

permit. 

The ACEC has a variable potential for hot springs and epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury 

deposits, ranging from low to high; most of the area has a moderate potential. It has a 

moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources, a low to moderate potential for 

the occurrence of uranium and vein gold, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other 

locatable and leasable minerals. 

No mining claims are currently located within the ACEC or immediate vicinity, although there 

has been some past interest, mainly between 1985 and 1989; consequently, it has a moderate 

potential for the development of precious metals, particularly hot springs gold/silver. Although the ACEC is within an area of high heat flow, a lack of nearby hot springs and an 

apparent absence of shallow (<3,000 feet deep) sources of thermal water indicate a low 

74 
potential for the development of geothermal resources. Mineable quantities of uranium may 

occur in the area, but an apparent lack of interest in the commodity and an absence of a 

significant domestic uranium industry indicate a low potential for the development of 

uranium. Likewise, an absence of nearby sources of oil and gas and a lack of current production indicate a low potential for the development of petroleum products. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with the 

identified relevant and important values and impacts could be mitigated. Existing rights-ofway will not be affected, and all areas will be VRM Class II. OHV use will be limited to 

designated roads and trails. Plant collecting will be authorized by permit only. Forest 

management practices such as prescribed burning, thinning, and western juniper control will 

be limited only to those actions necessary to maintain or enhance the relevant and important 

values. Road maintenance will be allowed. Mineral leases will be subject to the NSO stipulation. The 3,280 acres surrounding Castle Rock will be withdrawn from locatable minerals 

activities, and the remaining area will be open. Saleable minerals development will be closed 

on the same 3,280 acres and open within the remainder of the ACEC. Any proposed changes 

in grazing use, including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the 

relevant and important values and will be permitted if the values will be maintained or 

enhanced. Where adverse impacts are identified, existing livestock use will be adjusted using 

a variety of methods including fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in 

grazing season. Projects which may be proposed in the area will be evaluated for impacts and 

permitted where relevant and important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect values of the 

area, the proposed management for minerals, VRM, OHV, forest management, livestock, 

rights-of-way, and other surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect a more 

complete representation of the relevant and important values. 

Coal Mine Basin ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 755-acre Coal Mine Basin ACEC/RNA lies on the Oregon/Idaho 

border between Marsing, Idaho, and Jordan Valley, Oregon. The extensive and colorful ash 

beds in Coal Mine Basin contain diverse plant communities; two special status plant species 

(smooth mentzelia and Cusick’s chaenactis), which were former Category 2 candidate species 

being considered for listing under the ESA; highly scenic vistas; and fossils of both vertebrate animals and plants. The area has been recognized by BLM offices in both Oregon and 

Idaho as representing excellent examples of typical Succor Creek ash habitat for the two 

special status plant species, as well as a full complement of the more common, but also highly 

restricted, ash species. The towering ash cliffs, the colorful ash formations, and unique 

outcrops provide unusual scenic vistas for the area. 

The relevant and important values for this ACEC/RNA are two special status plant species, 

ash communities, and paleontological resources. 

An area directly adjacent to Oregon’s portion of the basin has been designated as an ACEC/ 

RNA in the Owyhee RMP in the BLM Boise District in Idaho. The ACEC/RNA includes a 

portion of one livestock grazing allotment. Fences and an unimproved road occur within the 

area. 

The ACEC has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related gold/ 

silver/mercury deposits and zeolite, a moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal 

resources and oil and gas, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other leasable and 

locatable minerals. There is no record with BLM that mining claims have ever been located 

within the boundaries of the ACEC/RNA, and no demonstrated interest in precious metals/ 

mercury, uranium, or zeolite development; consequently, the potential for development is low. 

Although the ACEC/RNA is within an area of high heat flow, an absence of nearby hot 

75 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

springs and an apparent lack of shallow (<3,000 feet deep) thermal waters indicate a low 

potential for the development of geothermal resources. Likewise, an absence of nearby 

sources of oil and gas and a lack of current production in the planning unit indicate a low 

potential for development of petroleum products. 

Specific management: Right-of-ways will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails. The ACEC/RNA will be under VRM Class II guidance. Plant collecting 

will require a permit. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/ 

barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil 

erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. Leasable activities will be 

subject to the NSO stipulation, including the low grade seams of coal found in the area. The 

area will be withdrawn from locatable minerals activity and closed to saleable minerals 

development. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved 

AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be 

evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will 

be maintained or enhanced. Existing livestock use will be adjusted using a variety of methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in 

grazing season where adverse impacts are identified by monitoring. Proposed projects in the 

area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will be 

maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect values of the 

area, the proposed management for minerals, VRM, livestock, rights-of-way, and other 

surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values, 

including the unusual scenic vistas found in this area. The ash habitats are highly fragile, are 

quickly and permanently disturbed by minimal activities across their surfaces, and require 

maximum protection to preserve their values. 

Dry Creek Gorge ACEC 

Description and values: The 16,082-acre Dry Creek Gorge ACEC is located south of Vale, 

Oregon, and west of Owyhee Reservoir. The deep canyon of Dry Creek contrasts sharply 

with the surrounding plateau of the Owyhee Uplands, which notably enhances the scenery of 

the area and offers a wide variety of landforms and contrasts between the highly colorful 

soils and dark basaltic forms along its length. The series of deep, elongated pools, formed in 

glass-rich rhyolites, is a unique geologic phenomenon resulting from the preferential erosion 

of a glass-rich vitrophyre zone in the rhyolite domes found along the stream course. Two 

special status species, inland redband trout and the Columbia spotted frog, inhabit the area. 

The relevant and important values identified in this ACEC are scenery, special status fish and 

amphibian species and associated habitat, and rare geologic features. 

Based on an evaluation of river-related resource values, those segments Dry Creek within the 

proposed ACEC, with adjacent BLM-administered land, have been determined eligible and 

recommended suitable for inclusion in the NWSRS. 

Portions of the Dry Creek (3-55) and Dry Creek Buttes (3-56) WSA’s are located within the 

ACEC. BLM has recommended that these WSA’s not be designated as wilderness. Until 

Congress makes a determination on wilderness status, WSA’s are managed in accordance 

with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, surface-disturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded until Congress makes a decision on wilderness designation. 

Numerous north-south 2-track and 4-wheel drive vehicle routes cross this ACEC, and there 

are numerous barbed wire/steel post fences and developed springs for livestock. There are 

five livestock grazing allotments within the ACEC. 

76 
The ACEC has a moderate potential for the discovery of hot springs and epithermal-related 

gold/silver/mercury deposits, uranium, oil and gas, and geothermal resources, but a low 

potential for the discovery of all other locatable and leasable minerals. While there are no 

current mining claims within the ACEC, much of the surrounding area, particularly toward the 

east end, has had a substantial amount of interest, and a number of mining claims were 

staked, largely between 1986 and 1993; consequently, the potential for development is 

considered to be moderate. Mineable quantities of uranium may occur in the area; however, a 

lack of apparent interest and an absence of a significant domestic industry indicates a low 

potential for development. Although the potential ACEC is within an area of high heat flow 

with evidence of past geothermal activity (such as hydrothermal alteration of the surrounding 

rocks), a lack of nearby hot springs indicates a low potential for development of geothermal 

resources. Likewise, a lack of nearby oil and gas occurrences and an absence of production 

within the planning area indicate a low potential for the development of oil and gas. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with the 

identified relevant and important values and impacts could be mitigated; OHV use will be 

limited to designated roads and trails; and the area will be VRM Class II. No permit will be 

required for plant collecting. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and 

shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, 

minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. Fluid leasable 

minerals activities will be subject to NSO stipulations. The area will be withdrawn from 

locatable minerals activities and closed to minerals materials activities. Livestock use will 

continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes 

in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant 

and important values and will be permitted if the values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Existing livestock use will be adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using a variety of 

methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in 

grazing season. Proposed projects will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant 

and important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have provided protection of some values of 

the area, the management for minerals, proposed rights-of-way, livestock, and other surfacedisturbing activities will adequately protect relevant and important values. 

Hammond Hill Sand Hills ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 3,712-acre Hammond Hill Sand Hills ACEC/RNA is located in a 

remote part of the Owyhee Plateau country, west of Owyhee Reservoir and south of Dry 

Creek. The ACEC/RNA occupies a series of low hills and dry washes dominated by sagebrush. It was selected to represent a series of plant communities that are found on sandy 

soils. The area is distinctly composed of very loose, sandy, silty soils derived from decomposed volcanic ash. Several dry washes disect the area and run water during and immediately 

after rain, but not enough to be considered ephemeral streams. 

The relevant and important values identified in this ACEC/RNA are the big sagebrushantelope bitterbrush/Indian ricegrass and big sagebrush-greasewood/Indian ricegrass 

vegetation cells identified by ONHP. 

A portion of one WSA is located within the ACEC/RNA. Dry Creek Buttes WSA (3-56) has 

been recommended by BLM not to be congressionally designated as wilderness. The WSA 

is currently managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, surfacedisturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded until Congress makes a 

decision on wilderness designation. 

77 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Several dirt roads through the area are maintained by the BLM as needed. The ACEC/RNA 

includes a portion of one livestock grazing allotment. 

The ACEC has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related gold/ 

silver/mercury deposits, a moderate potential for the occurrence of uranium, oil and gas and 

geothermal resource, but a low potential for the occurrence of all other locatable and leasable 

minerals. 

At present, there are 15 mining claims located in the ACEC/RNA, mainly for gold associated 

with hot springs. Consequently, there is a high potential for the development of this commodity. As there is no significant domestic uranium industry, and no apparent interest in the 

commodity, the potential for development is low. Although the ACEC/RNA is within an area 

of high heat flow, a lack of nearby hot springs and apparent absence of shallow (<3,000 feet 

deep) sources or thermal water indicate a low potential for development of geothermal 

resources. Likewise, a lack of nearby oil and gas occurrences and an absence of current 

production indicate a low potential for oil and gas development. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted if there is minimal conflict with identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to designated 

roads and trails. Plant collecting will require a permit. VRM will be Class III. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be 

limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and 

serviceability of the road. The area will be withdrawn from locatable minerals activities, 

closed to saleable minerals development, and remain open to leasable minerals activities. 

Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any 

proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for 

impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained 

or enhanced. Existing livestock use will be adjusted where adverse impacts are identified 

using a variety of methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in livestock 

numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be evaluated for 

impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to help protect values 

of the area, the proposed management for minerals, visual resources, OHV, livestock, rightsof-way, and other surface-disturbing activities will provide a more appropriate degree of 

management and protection for the relevant and important values. 

Honeycombs ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 15,847-acre Honeycombs ACEC/RNA is located on the east 

edge of Owyhee Reservoir about 20 miles south of Vale. The ACEC/RNA has high scenic 

values derived from the unusual geologic structure and colorful desert soils of volcanic 

origin. Special status plant species and the presence of California bighorn sheep contribute 

to the value of the area as an ACEC/RNA. 

The relevant and important values for the ACEC/RNA include scenery, geologic formations, 

bighorn sheep and habitat, four special status plant species (sterile milkvetch, Ertter’s 

senecio, grimy ivesia, and Owyhee clover), and big sagebrush/needleandthread grass on 

cinders plant community which meets a vegetation cell need identified by Oregon Natural 

Heritage Program (ONHP). 

A portion of the Honeycombs WSA (3-77A) comprises 100 percent of the existing ACEC/RNA 

and 99 percent of the potential addition. This WSA has been recommended suitable by BLM 

for wilderness designation and is currently managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. 

Under this direction, surface-disturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally pre78 
cluded from a WSA until Congress makes a decision on wilderness designation. The 

Honeycombs WSA is a component of the existing Owyhee River Complex SRMA. 

The ACEC/RNA is located within one livestock grazing allotment. A north-south dirt road is 

near the eastern boundary and is maintained by BLM for high-clearance and 4-wheel drive 

vehicles. The Three Fingers HMA for wild horses is also located within and surrounding this 

ACEC/RNA. 

The ACEC/RNA has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related 

gold/silver/mercury deposits, a moderate potential for the occurrence of oil and gas and 

geothermal resources, and a low to moderate potential for the occurrence of uranium. It has a 

low potential for the occurrence of all other locatable and leasable minerals. While there are 

no mining claims currently located in the ACEC/RNA, there has been past interest, especially 

between 1989 and 1993, largely in the eastern portion of the ACEC/RNA; consequently, it has 

a moderate potential for the development of hot springs and epithermal-related gold/silver/ 

mercury deposits. Although the ACEC/RNA is located within an area of high heat, a lack of 

nearby hot springs and apparent absence of shallow (<3,000 feet deep) sources of thermal 

water indicate a low potential for the development of geothermal resources. Likewise, a lack 

of nearby oil and gas occurrences and an absence of production within the planning unit 

indicate a low potential for oil and gas development. While there is a possibility of mineable 

quantities of uranium, a lack of interest in this commodity and an absence of a significant 

domestic uranium industry indicate a low potential for development of this commodity. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHVs will be limited to designated 

roads and trails. Plant collecting will require a permit. Road maintenance will be limited to the 

existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to 

control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. 

Development of leasable minerals will be subject to the NSO stipulation. The area will be 

under VRM Class I. The ACEC/RNA will be withdrawn from locatable mineral activities and 

closed to saleable minerals development. BOR land relinquished between the reservoir and 

ACEC/RNA boundaries will become part of the ACEC/RNA. Livestock use will continue 

based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any changes in grazing use, 

including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and permitted if the values will be maintained or enhanced. Existing livestock use 

will be adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using a variety of methods including 

fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects 

in the area will be evaluated for their impacts and permitted where relevant and important 

values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: Although existing management actions have partially protected values, the 

increase in size of the ACEC/RNA and proposed management within the extended area for 

minerals, livestock, and other surface-disturbing activities will fully protect the existing area 

and additional representations of the relevant and important values. The area’s soils are 

highly fragile, being quickly and permanently disturbed by minimal surface activities. 

Proposed management will adequately protect this resource. Other management as proposed 

will protect all the valued resources. 

Lake Ridge ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 3,825-acre Lake Ridge ACEC/RNA is located southeast of 

Juntura, Oregon, along Tim’s Peak road on a broad plateau dissected by steep canyons, with 

Tim’s Peak rising to the north. A naturally occurring waterhole provides a perennial source of 

water. The ACEC/RNA is dominated by low sagebrush plant communities with both low 

sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass and low sagebrush/Idaho fescue present. 

79 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

The relevant and important values identified in this ACEC/RNA are the low sagebrush/ 

bluebunch wheatgrass community and low sagebrush/Idaho fescue community vegetation 

cells identified by ONHP. Sage grouse, which frequent the area, and several leks have also 

been identified as a relevant and important value. 

Portions of two WSA’s are located within the ACEC/RNA. Gold Creek (3-33) and Camp Creek 

(3-31) WSA’s are recommended by BLM as suitable for wilderness designation. The WSA’s 

are currently managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, surfacedisturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded until Congress makes a 

decision on wilderness designation. 

The ACEC/RNA includes a portion of one livestock grazing allotment. 

The ACEC/RNA has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related 

gold/silver/mercury deposits, moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources, 

a low to moderate potential for the occurrence of uranium, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other leasable and locatable minerals. There is no record with the BLM that 

mining claims have ever been located within the boundaries of the ACEC/RNA, and no 

demonstrated interest in precious metals/mercury or uranium deposits; consequently, the 

potential for development is low. While the ACEC/RNA is located within an area of high heat 

flow, an absence of nearby hot springs and an apparent lack of shallow (<3,000 feet deep) 

indicate a low potential for the development of geothermal resources. 

Specific management: Right-of-ways will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails. Plant collecting will require a permit. The entire area will be under 

VRM Class II. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow 

ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, 

and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. Leasable minerals activities will be 

open with special stipulations subject to seasonal/timing restrictions, restricted or no uses in 

avoidance areas for sage grouse. The area will be open for locatable minerals activities and 

closed for saleable minerals development. Livestock use will continue based on existing 

permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time 

and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and 

will be permitted if values will be maintained or enhanced. Existing livestock use will be 

adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using a variety of methods, including but not 

limited to fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed 

projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important 

values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect values of the 

area, the proposed management for minerals, VRM, livestock, rights-of-way, and other 

surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values 

on the critical portions of the area. More stringent management for visual resources and 

limiting leasable minerals and saleable minerals activities will provide additional protection of 

the valued resources in this area. 

Leslie Gulch ACEC 

Description and values: The 11,673-acre Leslie Gulch ACEC is located near the southeastern 

part of Owyhee Reservoir. The diverse vegetation and highly scenic area is an attractive 

destination for visitors seeking a variety of wildland experiences. 

Relevant and important values include high scenic values associated with the colorful ash 

talus cliff, bighorn sheep and habitat, and five special status plant species, which include 

80 
 

Packard’s mentzelia, grimy ivesia, sterile milkvetch, Ertter’s senecio, and Owyhee clover. A 

detailed management plan was written for the area and signed in 1995. 

Portions of three WSA’s are located within and comprise approximately 92 percent of the 

existing ACEC. Portions of the Upper Leslie Gulch WSA (3-74), Honeycombs WSA (3-77A), 

and Slocum Creek WSA (3-75) located within the ACEC have been recommended as suitable 

for wilderness designation by BLM. The WSA’s are currently managed in accordance with 

BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, surface-disturbing activities requiring reclamation in 

WSA’s are generally precluded until Congress makes a decision on wilderness designation. 

Leslie Gulch ACEC was withdrawn from mineral entry by Public Land Order 7412 (Federal 

Register, Vol. 64, No.184, September 23, 1999) with the withdrawal effective as of September 

23, 1999. 

Specific management: All management as identified and prescribed in the Leslie Gulch 

Management Plan (1995) will be retained. Management as described in the plan includes, but 

is not limited to, the following actions. Rights-of-way will not be granted. OHV use will be 

limited to designated roads and trails. The ACEC will be under VRM Class II, except the areas 

outside the vehicular corridor will be under VRM Class I. Plant collecting will require a permit. 

Road maintenance will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, 

and ensure public safety. The area will be limited or closed to all mineral activity, including 

mineral leasing (under NSO stipulations), mineral material sale, and locatable mineral exploration and development. The area will be closed to livestock grazing. Proposed projects in the 

area, particularly recreational development, will follow management plan guidance. 

Rationale: Because of the recent date of the management plan, which provides protection 

for the relevant and important values, no further management changes will be proposed for 

this ACEC except that the VRM Class I will contribute to providing maximum protection for 

the relevant and important values. 

Mahogany Ridge ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 682-acre Mahogany Ridge ACEC/RNA is located on the 

northern and northeastern slope of Mahogany Mountain west of U.S. Highway 95 and north 

of Jordan Valley, Oregon. The ACEC/RNA includes undisturbed stands of mountain mahogany trees on parcels of the northern and western slopes of Mahogany Ridge. It fills a 

vegetation cell need for mountain mahogany-sagebrush and mountain mahogany-Oregon 

grape complex identified by ONHP and includes a higher-elevation mountain big sagebrushmountain mahogany/slender wheatgrass-bluebunch wheatgrass community. 

The relevant and important values in the ACEC/RNA include habitat for the broad-tailed 

hummingbird and other neotropical migratory birds, a special status plant species (Owyhee 

clover), and the mountain mahogany-big sagebrush vegetation communities identified by 

ONHP. 

A portion of the Upper Leslie Gulch WSA (3-74) is within the ACEC/RNA. This WSA has 

been recommended suitable by BLM for wilderness designation and is currently managed in 

accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, surface-disturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded until Congress makes a decision on wilderness 

designation. 

The ACEC/RNA is located within one livestock grazing allotment. 

The ACEC/RNA has a moderate to high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and 

epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits, moderate potential for the occurrence of 

uranium, oil and gas and geothermal resources, and a low potential for the occurrence of all 

other locatable and leasable minerals. No mining claims are currently located within the 

ACEC/RNA; however, there has been a substantial amount of past interest, largely between 

81 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

1985 and 1989; consequently, the potential for the development of hot springs and 

epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits is high. While mineable quantities of uranium 

may occur within the area, a lack of interest in the commodity and an absence of a domestic 

uranium industry indicate a low potential for development of this commodity. Although the 

area is within a zone of high heat flow, a lack of nearby surface thermal features (such as hot 

springs) and an apparent absence of shallow (<3,000 feet deep) sources of thermal water 

indicate a low potential for the development of geothermal resources. Likewise, an absence 

of nearby sources of oil and gas and a lack of production indicate a low potential for the 

development of petroleum products. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted within the ACEC/RNA only if there is 

minimal conflict with identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use will 

be limited to designated roads and trails. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing 

roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control 

runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. The 

area will be VRM Class II. Plant collecting will require a permit. Development of leasable 

minerals will be subject to the NSO stipulation. The ACEC/RNA will be closed to development of locatable minerals and saleable minerals. Livestock use will continue based on 

existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing use, 

including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained or enhanced. Where adverse 

impacts are identified, existing livestock use will be managed using a variety of methods, 

including fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed 

projects will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will 

be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: Although existing management has partially protected values of the area, the 

increase in size of the ACEC/RNA and proposed management for minerals, VRM, livestock, 

rights-of-way, and other surface-disturbing activities will enhance an extended representation 

of the relevant and important values. 

North Fork Malheur River ACEC 

Description and values: The 1,810-acre North Fork Malheur River potential ACEC is located 

northwest of Juntura, Oregon. The canyon bottom is narrow, and numerous basalt rock 

outcrops, pinnacles, spires, cliff/rim walls and talus slides add variety and interest to the 

narrow, steep canyon slopes. Ponderosa pine stands are distributed throughout the area. A 

variety of diverse, rich color combinations present in the soil, rock, vegetation and water 

provide a harmony of visual contrast. A view of the river from the rim of the canyon provides 

an outstanding scenic picture of the surrounding natural diverse terrain and variety of 

vegetation. Redband trout, a special status species, are present throughout the river. Bull 

trout, also a special status species, are present at least seasonally throughout the area. Their 

numbers have declined regionally and within the North Fork Malheur River watershed as a 

result of habitat degradation. Bull trout have been listed as threatened by USFWS under 

ESA. The Federal candidate species, Columbia spotted frog, has also been found along this 

river. The ACEC contains a regionally important diversity of resident or indigenous wildlife 

species. Of particular significance are 14 species of wildlife within the river corridor that have 

special management status. The ACEC is also a transition zone between forest and range 

wildlife habitats of eastern Oregon. These “edge” areas, where different and distinct upland 

plant communities merge, support and enhance the diversity of habitat niches in a small area 

in contrast to isolated range or forest types alone. The river’s permanent source of water 

further enriches wildlife habitat quality by supporting a wide variety of vegetation communities associated with the riparian zone. This river segment’s landform consists of steep 

canyon walls with vertical relief of more than 500 feet. 

82 
The relevant and important values identified in this ACEC are scenery, two special status 

fish and their habitat, and a special status amphibian and habitat. 

The ACEC is within the Upper North Fork Malheur River Scenic Quality Evaluation Unit of 

the Vale District under BLM’s VRM program. Based on evaluations of the river corridor, 

those segments of the river within the ACEC have been determined eligible and suitable for 

possible inclusion in NWSR System 

The steep-walled canyon limits access to the river in most places. Roads are primitive 2-track, 

usually 4-wheel drive, located at the north end of the ACEC. Portions of three livestock 

grazing allotments are located within the ACEC. 

The ACEC has a moderate to high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermalrelated gold/silver/mercury deposits, moderate potential for the occurrence of uranium and 

geothermal resources, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other locatable and 

leasable minerals. There is no record with BLM that mining claims have ever been located 

within the borders of the ACEC, and no apparent interest in mineral development in the 

immediate area; consequently, the ACEC has a low potential for mineral development. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will not be granted, OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails, and the ACEC will be under VRM Class I. Plant collecting will require a 

permit. Forest management practices will be limited only to those actions necessary to 

maintain or enhance the relevant and important values. Road maintenance will be limited to 

the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary 

to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the 

road. Leasable minerals activities will be subject to NSO stipulations. The ACEC will be 

withdrawn from locatable minerals activities and closed to saleable minerals development. 

Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any 

proposed changes in grazing use, including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for 

impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained 

or enhanced. Where adverse impacts are identified, existing livestock use will be adjusted 

using a variety of methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in livestock 

numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be evaluated for 

impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect values of the 

area, the proposed management for minerals, plant collecting, forest management, livestock, 

rights-of-way and other surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant 

and important values. 

North Ridge Bully Creek ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 1,569-acre North Ridge Bully Creek ACEC/RNA is located west 

of Westfall, Oregon, along the ridge that separates Clover Creek drainage to the north and 

Bully Creek drainage to the south. The ACEC/RNA encompasses a number of grassland 

communities that occur both as distinct communities as well as intermixed within a larger 

mosaic of types. 

The relevant and important values identified in this ACEC/RNA are the big sagebrush/ 

Thurber needlegrass community and big sagebrush-threetip sagebrush/Idaho fescue 

community vegetation cells identified by ONHP. Sage grouse and their associated habitat 

have also been identified as a relevant and important value. 

Several dirt roads and barbed wire/steel post fences crisscross the ACEC/RNA, which also 

includes a portion of one livestock grazing allotment. 

83 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

The ACEC/RNA has a moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources, a low 

to moderate potential for the occurrence of oil and gas, and a low potential for the occurrence of locatable and all other leasable minerals. There is no record with BLM that mining 

claims have ever been located within the borders of the ACEC/RNA, and no apparent 

interest in mineral development in the immediate area; consequently, the ACEC/RNA has a 

low potential for mineral development. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails. Plant collecting will require a permit. The ACEC/RNA will be VRM 

Class III. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow 

ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, 

and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. Leasable minerals activities will be 

will be open with special stipulations subject to seasonal/timing restrictions, restricted or no 

uses in avoidance areas for sage grouse. Locatable minerals activities will be open, but the 

area will be closed for saleable minerals development. Livestock use will continue based on 

existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, 

including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained or enhanced. Existing livestock 

use will be adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using a variety of methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. 

Proposed projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and 

important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management has partially served to protect values of the area, the 

proposed management for minerals, livestock, rights-of-way, and other surface-disturbing 

activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. The increased 

acreage and other associated management provide protection of a more complete representation of the valued resources in this area. 

Oregon National Historic Trail ACEC-Keeney Pass Segment 

Description and Values: The 3,154-acre Keeney Pass segment of the Oregon National 

Historic Trail ACEC is located approximately 6 miles south of Vale on Lytle Boulevard. The 

Oregon Trail was the principal travel corridor for America’s westward migration and expansion 

during the 19th century and became the most famous of western trails used by explorers, fur 

traders, missionaries, emigrants, and gold seekers. The trail was the primary route from Fort 

Boise to Vale. The scenic values of this ACEC are associated with the historical landscape 

integrity of the area. The rolling hills, covered with sagebrush, grasses and dust, have 

changed little since the emigrants passed through this country and contribute to the overall 

scenic and recreational value. 

The relevant and important values identified in this ACEC are historic; scenic; and a special 

status plant species, Cronquist’s stickseed. 

Lytle Boulevard, a two-lane asphalt county road, parallels and in some places overlies the 

Oregon Trail into Vale. It is the main road for traffic traveling south to Nyssa and Adrian in 

Oregon, Homedale in Idaho, and to U.S. Highway 95. At BLM’s Keeney Pass Interpretive 

Site, interpretive panels and a foot trail accommodate visitors along the Oregon Trail. The 

segment at Keeney Pass covers a total of 1 mile of intermittent ruts, 100 feet to 0.5-mile long. 

These ruts are all that remain of the original route crossing 8 miles on BLM land in Malheur 

County. 

Currently, the 1989 “Oregon National Historic Trail Management Plan” prescribed a sequence 

of long- and short-term management actions for the protection, preservation, interpretation 

and public recreation use of the Oregon National Historic Trail. On November 10, 1978, 

84 
Congress designated the Oregon Trail as a National Historic Trail by an amendment (Public 

Law 95-625) to the “National Trails System Act” (Public Law 90-543). The Act, which directs 

the Secretary of Interior to administer the Oregon National Historic Trail, identifies and 

protects the Oregon Trail, along with its historic remnants and artifacts, for public use and 

enjoyment. The National Park Service (NPS) has the responsibility to administer the Oregon 

National Historic Trail, providing oversight and assistance to other Federal agencies. Direct 

management of the Oregon Trail rests within the individual Federal agency having jurisdiction over the land including sites and segments. These Federal agencies are responsible for 

providing NPS with an opportunity to review management actions for the Oregon Trail. The 

Oregon Trail is an identified SRMA. Management decisions provide for Oregon Trail 

protection within a 0.5-mile wide corridor and informational signing. The 1981 NPS Oregon 

Trail management plan provides general guidance for the future protection, development, 

interpretation and management by lead agencies having direct management responsibility for 

the Oregon Trail. The NPS plan recommends specific protection and interpretation for 

Keeney Pass in the Vale District. 

The Oregon Trail in the vicinity of Keeney Pass, which includes a four-mile route of the 

Oregon Trail with intermittent wagon ruts, is a historic district enrolled in 1979 on the National 

Register of Historic Places as the Oregon Trail Historic District (Lytle Pass Area). A 0.5-mile 

wide corridor has been established to avoid and minimize surface disturbances along the 

Oregon Trail. 

A portion of one grazing allotment lies within this segment of the ACEC. One livestock 

watering reservoir is located outside the corridor and is presently dry. Numerous projects are 

scattered throughout this segment of the Oregon Trail, including cattleguards, barbed wire/ 

steel posts fences, livestock watering troughs, pipelines, waterwells, fiber optic cable line, 

crested wheatgrass seedings, and 2-track and 4-wheel drive routes. 

This segment of the ACEC has a high potential for the occurrence of uranium, and geothermal 

resources, a predominately moderate potential for the occurrence of hot springs and 

epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits, moderate potential for the occurrence of oil 

and gas and a low potential for all other leasable and locatable minerals. No mining claims are 

currently located within this segment, but interest was especially high between 1988 and 1992 

when most of the segment was covered with mining claims; consequently, the potential for 

development of hot springs and epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits is moderate. 

As this segment of the ACEC is located within and immediately adjacent to the Vale Known 

Geothermic Resource Area (KGRA), which has had recent interest in geothermal energy, the 

potential for development of this commodity is high. While mineable quantities of uranium 

may occur in the area, a lack of demonstrated interest in the commodity and an absence of a 

significant domestic uranium industry indicate a low potential for development. Although 

traces of hydrocarbons have been reported in the vicinity of the ACEC, an absence of 

demonstrated interest in the commodity and a lack of production in the planning area indicate 

a low potential for the development of petroleum products. An existing minerals pit is located 

outside the viewshed at Keeney Pass. 

Specific management: Existing designated multipurpose utility corridors will continue to be 

available for use. The ONHTMP covers the management within the 1,032-acre corridor. The 

plan dictates that the protective corridor will be VRM Class II, and where existing intrusions 

make Class II management impractical, managed as Class III; the location of range improvements will be planned so that the historic landscape of the Oregon Trail is not diminished; 

and off-road motorized vehicle use will be limited to designated roads and trails within the 

protective corridor. The plan also states nonmotorized trekking on trail remnants will be 

generally permitted under stipulated conditions; new rangeland facilities will be designed and 

85 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

placed to be visually unobtrusive within the protective corridor; minerals leases within the 

protective corridor will be issued with NSO stipulations. Under the plan, the corridor will be 

closed to saleable minerals developments; heavy equipment use for wildfire suppression 

activities will be avoided on and within 200 feet of trail remnants; rangeland drills will not be 

used within 200 feet of trail remnants; and revegetation using native plant species by aerial 

broadcast will be the preferred post-fire rehabilitation method within the protective corridor; 

livestock use will continue based on existing grazing permit stipulations and approved 

AMP’s. Management outside the 1,032 acres will include OHV use limited to designated 

roads and trails, open to minerals activities outside the viewshed, and under VRM Class III. 

Rationale: While existing management has partially served to protect values of the area, the 

additional acreage and the proposed management for minerals, rights-of-way, plant collecting, 

OHV, and livestock will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. 

Oregon National Historic Trail ACEC–Tub Mountain Segment 

Description and values: The 5,902-acre Tub Mountain segment of the Oregon National 

Historic Trail ACEC is located about 6 miles northeast of Vale, Oregon, off Highway 20 and 

5th Avenue East, and follows the county road from Alkali Spring to Lone Willow Spring. The 

Oregon Trail was the principal travel corridor for America’s westward migration and expansion 

during the 19th century and became the most famous of western trails used by explorers, fur 

traders, missionaries, emigrants and gold seekers. Charcoal samples obtained from a hearth 

excavated in 1993 yielded radiocarbon dates of AD 1680–1760 and 1800–1940. The segment 

from Alkali Spring to Lone Willow Spring consists of low rolling hills and highly eroded 

drainages covered with sagebrush and bunchgrasses. This route was the primary route of 

travel from Vale to Farewell Bend. Management decisions provide for Oregon Trail protection 

within a 0.25-mile wide corridor and informational signing for the Tub Mountain segment of 

the Oregon Trail. The BLM maintains one interpretive site at Alkali Spring which was the 

“nooning” spot for wagon trains leaving Vale. 

The relevant and important values are historic, cultural, and scenic. The scenic values of this 

ACEC are associated with the integrity of the historical landscape. The rolling hills, covered 

with sagebrush, grasses, and dust, remain relatively unchanged since the emigrants passed 

through this country and contribute to the overall scenic value. 

The ACEC segment is bisected by a county road maintained and bladed by Malheur County, 

and there are several 2-track and 4-wheel drive routes, numerous barbed wire/steel post 

fences, livestock watering troughs, water wells, corrals, and reservoirs. 

This segment of the ACEC includes portions of one grazing allotment. 

This segment of the ACEC has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and 

epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits, and uranium, a moderate to high potential for 

the occurrence of geothermal resources, a low to moderate potential for the occurrence of oil 

and gas, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other locatable and leasable minerals. 

No mining claims are currently located within the boundaries of this segment. Interest was 

high between 1986 and 1993 and several mining claims were located, mainly in the eastern 

portion of the segment, indicating a high potential for the development of hot springs and 

epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits. Mineable quantities of uranium may occur 

within the ACEC and surrounding area, but a lack of demonstrated interest and an absence of 

a significant domestic uranium industry indicate a low potential for development. Likewise, 

an absence of nearby sources of oil and gas and a lack of production indicate a low potential 

for the development of petroleum products. 

86 
Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated; OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails; and the ACEC will be VRM Class II. Plant collecting will require a 

permit. Road maintenance will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil 

erosion, and ensure public safety. Locatable minerals will be withdrawn within the viewshed 

or 0.5-mile either side of the Oregon Trail. Minerals materials development will be allowed 

only outside of the viewshed, and leasable minerals activities will be subject to the NSO 

stipulation. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be 

evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will 

be maintained or enhanced. Livestock use may be adjusted where adverse impacts are 

identified. Proposed projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where 

relevant and important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to help protect values 

of the area, the additional acreage and proposed management for minerals, OHV, plant 

collecting, and livestock will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. 

Oregon National Historic Trail ACEC–Birch Creek Segment 

Description and values: The 119-acre Birch Creek segment of the Oregon National Historic 

Trail ACEC is located about 2 miles south of Farewell Bend, Oregon, west of Interstate 84. 

The Oregon Trail was the principal travel corridor for America’s westward migration and 

expansion during the 19th century and became the most famous of western trails used by 

explorers, fur traders, missionaries, emigrants and gold seekers. The segment at Birch Creek 

was a camping area before coming to the Snake River at Farewell Bend. A wagon rut swale is 

still discernible where the trail crossed the hills on public land. The scenic value of this ACEC 

is associated with the historical landscape integrity of the area. The rolling hills and view to 

the north of Farewell Bend and the Snake River have not changed since the emigrants passed 

through this country and contribute to the overall scenic value. The BLM maintains an 

interpretive site with a fenced exclosure around the ruts, interpretive panels, a foot trail 

adjacent to the ruts, and parking turnout. 

The relevant and important values are historic and scenic. 

The ACEC is bisected by a county-maintained gravel road, has a reservoir, and rights-of-way 

for access to private land. Accessibility from Interstate 84 at Farewell Bend increases the 

attractiveness of this recreation site for the public, and the existing gravel road allows visits 

by large groups in buses as well as 2-wheel drive vehicles. This segment of the ACEC 

includes a portion of one livestock grazing allotment. 

This segment of the ACEC has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and 

epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits, moderate to high potential for the occurrence 

of uranium, moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources, and a low potential for all other locatable and leasable minerals. No mining claims are located within the 

boundaries of this segment, and very little interest has been expressed in the immediate 

vicinity. However, a substantial amount of interest has been expressed to the south, both in 

the mid-to late-1980’s and currently; consequently, this segment has a high potential for the 

development of hot springs and epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits. Mineable 

quantities of uranium may occur in the area, but an apparent lack of interest in the commodity 

and an absence of a significant domestic uranium industry indicate a low potential for the 

development of uranium. The area is within a zone of high heat flow and within 3 miles of a 

thermal spring; consequently, the potential for the development of low-temperature, direct 

heat use of geothermal resources is moderate. 

87 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use in the area will be limited to 

designated roads and trails, and the area will be VRM Class II. The area will remain open to 

current road maintenance activities, and will also be open to plant collecting. The ACEC will 

be withdrawn from locatable minerals activities and closed to saleable minerals development. 

Leasable minerals activity will be subject to the NSO stipulation. Any proposed changes in 

grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and 

important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained or enhanced. Where 

adverse impacts are identified, existing livestock use will be adjusted using a variety of 

methods including fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. 

Proposed projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and 

important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect values of the 

area, the proposed management for minerals, visual resources, livestock, rights-of-way and 

other surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important 

values. 

Owyhee River Below the Dam ACEC 

Description and values: The 11,239-acre ACEC includes public land of the Owyhee River 

canyon and its associated viewshed located just north of the Owyhee Dam. The ACEC 

includes the viewshed of BLM-administered land from near the dam to downstream approximately 13 road miles to near the siphon site. This corridor contains the controlled flowing 

Owyhee River with its associated predominately narrow canyon bottom and picturesque 

canyon slopes and walls. Paralleling the river, a two-lane asphalt county road bisects the 

ACEC. This is the main road that recreating visitors use to get to the area, which includes the 

popular Owyhee Reservoir. BLM’s Snively Hot Springs and the interpretive site of the 

existing Lower Owyhee Canyon Watchable Wildlife Area currently have limited recreation 

support facilities to accommodate visitors within the corridor. The river corridor receives 

some of the highest recreational use in the planning area and is being designated in this plan 

as a SRMA. The BOR’s approved Owyhee Reservoir RMP (April 1994) emphasizes cooperative efforts with BLM for the protection of important resource values and enhancement of 

recreation opportunities and uses within the river canyon. The BLM adheres to conditions of 

a national agreement in the management of FERC-administered land located within the ACEC. 

The relevant and important values of the ACEC include high scenic values of diverse 

landscape elements in a substantially natural setting, a special status plant species 

(Mulford’s milkvetch), the rare presence of a black cottonwood gallery in a riverine system, 

and the combined wildlife values of diverse habitat types supporting a large number of 

wildlife species and an important migratory corridor for neotropical birds. 

Other developments within the ACEC include several bladed dirt roads leading mostly out of 

the river canyon bottom from the county asphalt road, and several indiscriminate short twotrack primitive vehicle routes on the canyon bottom along the river. There is evidence of past 

minerals material extraction along the river’s floodplain. There are two communication relay 

sites, and a high voltage power line crosses the canyon corridor. The southeast portion of 

the ACEC has telephone, power line, road and irrigation water tunnel rights-of-way associated with the BOR’s Owyhee Irrigation Project. Portions of four livestock management 

allotments are within the potential ACEC. 

Controlled releases from Owyhee Dam have variable effects on the riparian ecosystem along 

the river corridor. Based on evaluations of the river corridor, those segments of the river 

within the potential ACEC, with adjacent BLM-administered land, have been determined 

eligible and suitable for possible inclusion in NWSR System. 

88 
The ACEC has a moderate to high potential for the discovery of hot springs and epithermalrelated gold/silver/mercury deposits and geothermal resources, and a moderate potential for 

the occurrence of uranium and oil and gas. It has a low potential for all other leasable and 

locatable minerals. 

While there are no current mining claims located within the ACEC, the surrounding area, 

especially the Grassy Mountain area, located some 3 miles to the northwest, has been the 

focus of intensive exploration in recent years, mainly for hot springs gold, largely between 

1986 and 1994; consequently, it has a moderate to high potential for development of hot 

springs and epithermal gold/silver/mercury deposits. Although there has been little interest 

in geothermal resources in the ACEC, the presence of two hot springs indicate moderate to 

high potential for the development of low temperature, direct-use geothermal resources. 

Mineable quantities of uranium may occur within the boundaries of the ACEC; however, a 

lack of interest in the commodity and an absence of a significant domestic industry suggests 

a low potential for development of uranium. Likewise, a lack of known occurrences and an 

absence of production indicate a low potential for the development of oil and gas resources. 

Specific management: New rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict 

with the identified relevant and important resource values and adverse impacts could be 

mitigated. Existing rights-of-way will not be affected. Provisions will be included to enable 

the performance of operations and issuance of rights-of-way needed to adequately manage 

and maintain existing authorized facilities and the BOR’s Owyhee Irrigation Project. Motorized vehicle use will be limited to designated roads and trails; some existing trails will be 

closed, and their location will be on file in the Vale District Office. The area will be VRM Class 

II. Plant collecting will require a permit. The area will be open to road maintenance. Leasable 

minerals activities will be subject to the NSO stipulation within a defined foreground 

viewshed, while the remaining area will be open with standard stipulations. The foreground 

viewshed will also be withdrawn from locatable minerals activities, with the remainder of the 

area open. The ACEC will be open to saleable minerals development, but with such activities 

within the defined foreground restricted to those past extraction sites and to the extent 

needed to allow for their rehabilitation. Proposed recreation site improvements or developments will be allowable where resource protection, public safety, health, and/or enhanced 

recreation experience will be provided while maintaining or enhancing relevant and important 

ACEC values. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be 

evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if the values 

will be maintained or enhanced. Grazing will be adjusted where adverse impacts are identified 

using a variety of methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in numbers, and 

changes in grazing season. Proposed projects will be evaluated for impacts and permitted 

where relevant and important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management has partially served to help protect values of the area, 

the management for minerals, proposed rights-of-way, OHV, livestock operations, and other 

surface-disturbing activities will provide a more appropriate degree of management of, and 

protection for, the relevant and important values. 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Description and values: The Owyhee Views ACEC includes 52,506 acres of public land 

adjacent to BOR’s 53-mile long Owyhee Reservoir and certain land adjacent to the lower most 

portion of the congressionally designated Owyhee NWSR. The ACEC consists of the 

landscape as observed from the reservoir and certain maintained roads in the area. Nearby 

ACEC’s (Leslie Gulch, Honeycombs, Dry Creek Gorge and Owyhee River Below the Dam) 

and the existing Owyhee Wild and Scenic River management area are not included in this 

ACEC. The highly picturesque landscape is rugged and largely dissected with ridges and 

89 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

steep slopes, vertical canyon walls and isolated, towering buttes of the Owyhee River 

canyonlands. Multiple deep-cut and highly scenic side canyons are cut by ephemeral 

drainages which extend to the reservoir. 

The relevant and important values of the ACEC include the high scenic properties associated 

with the area’s virtually unaltered landscape, special status bighorn sheep and habitat, and 

special status plant species (sterile milkvetch, Ertter’s senecio, and Owyhee clover). Another 

special status plant species (Cusick’s chaenactis) is suspected to grow in the area. The 

visual sensitivity of the area is elevated due to the current level and expected future increases 

of recreation use, both on the reservoir and within the ACEC. 

Portions of two WSA’s are located within the ACEC. Dry Creek Buttes (3-56) and Wild 

Horse Basin (3-77B), are recommended by BLM not to be congressionally designated as 

wilderness. 

The BOR manages Owyhee Reservoir and its associated threaded corridor of acquired private 

and withdrawn public land that encompass the reservoir. Following 4 years of extensive 

public involvement, the BOR approved its “Owyhee Reservoir RMP/EIS” in 1994. The 

agency established a citizen’s task force to assist in development of the “Owyhee Reservoir 

RMP/EIS.” Proposals for management of the RMP/EIS reflect the task force’s recommendation that the reservoir’s setting should remain in a substantially unaltered, natural state. As 

the largest reservoir in Oregon, the absence of substantial development within its highly 

scenic and visually sensitive canyon setting remains an attractive attribute for recreation 

users. There is an increasing trend of dispersed recreation use within the ACEC. Activities 

include hiking, big and small game hunting, backpacking, photography, wildlife and potential 

wild horse observation, and geologic and general sightseeing. 

The ACEC includes portions of eight livestock grazing allotments, and a portion of the Three 

Fingers Wild Horse HMA is within the area. 

The ACEC has a moderate to high potential for the occurrence, and development, of precious 

metals (particularly hot springs related gold deposits). Interest was especially high between 

1986 and 1992, with most of the exploration occurring within the Dry Creek Buttes WSA. 

Mining claims were also located in other portions of the ACEC, mainly within the Wild Horse 

Basin, Blue Canyon and Owyhee Breaks WSA’s. Presently, two picture jasper operations are 

the only minerals development activities occurring within the ACEC. 

Specific management: New rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict 

with the identified relevant and important values and impacts could be mitigated. Existing 

rights-of-way will not be affected. An OHV closed area will be located in the southwest 

portion of the ACEC, and the OHV use within the remainder of the area will be limited to 

designated roads and trails. The area will be VRM Class I. Plant collecting will require a 

permit. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch 

construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and 

ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. Leasable minerals activities will be 

subject to NSO stipulations. The area will be closed to saleable minerals development and 

withdrawn from locatable minerals activities. Livestock use will continue based on existing 

permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any changes in grazing, including time and 

intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be 

permitted if the values will be maintained or enhanced. Where adverse impacts are identified, 

existing livestock use will be adjusted using a variety of methods, including but not limited to, 

fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects 

in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values 

will be maintained or enhanced. 

90 
 

Rationale: The protection and opportunities for enhancement of a significant portion of the 

area’s important and relevant values will be fully realized by maintaining the existing landscape in a virtually unaltered state and with VRM Class I management. 

South Alkali Sand Hills ACEC 

Description and values: The 3,520-acre South Alkali Sand Hills ACEC is located northeast of 

Vale, northwest of Ontario, Oregon, and west of Henry Gulch, and encompasses several 

ridges and drainages within the low, hilly country. The potential ACEC was selected to 

represent prime habitat and critical populations for two special status plant species, 

Mulford’s milkvetch and Cronquist’s stickseed, which are found on sandy soils in small, 

localized areas within a portion of the Vale District near the town of Vale. The area represents 

the greatest concentration known for both species growing together on a global basis. 

The relevant and important values of the ACEC are the two special status plant species and 

their habitat. 

Two dirt roads run along the two main ridges of the ACEC. A portion of one livestock 

grazing allotment occurs within the ACEC. 

The ACEC has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related gold/ 

silver/mercury deposits, uranium and geothermal resources, a moderate potential for the 

occurrence of oil and gas, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other leasable and 

locatable minerals. There is no record with BLM that mining claims were ever located within 

the boundaries of the ACEC and no demonstrated interest in either hot springs precious 

metals or uranium; consequently, the potential for development is low. The ACEC is within 2 

miles of the Vale KGRA, which has had recent interest in geothermal development; consequently, the potential for development is high. Although traces of oil have been reported 

from the ACEC, a lack of demonstrated interest in the commodity, as well as a lack of current 

production, indicate a low potential for the development of petroleum products. 

Specific management: Management will remain as described in the “South Alkali Management Plan” (1995). Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails. The ACEC will be VRM Class III. Plant collecting will require a permit. 

Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure 

public safety and serviceability of the road. Leasable minerals activities will be subject to the 

NSO stipulation. The area will be withdrawn from locatable minerals activities and closed to 

saleable minerals development. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved management plans. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time 

and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and 

will be permitted if values will be maintained or enhanced. Existing livestock use will be 

adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using a variety of methods, including but not 

limited to fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed 

projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important 

values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management has partially served to protect values of the area, the 

proposed management for minerals, VRM, livestock, rights-of-way, and other surfacedisturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. 

South Bull Canyon ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 792-acre South Bull Canyon ACEC/RNA is located south of 

the Malheur River approximately 6 miles to the southeast of Juntura, Oregon, along the road 

91 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

that leads to Creston and Turnbull lakebeds. The landscape consists of a series of small 

drainages off of a low north-south ridge with relatively deep soils and large surface rocks. 

The gently sloped hills are covered by a mix of plant communities in generally late seral 

conditions. 

The relevant and important value of the ACEC/RNA is the big sagebrush-antelope bitterbrush/Idaho fescue vegetation cell as identified by ONHP. 

Several dirt roads, barbed wire/steel post fences, and reservoirs for livestock water are found 

within the ACEC/RNA, which also includes a portion of two livestock grazing allotments. 

The ACEC/RNA has a moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources, and a 

low potential for the occurrence of all other leasable and locatable minerals. Although the 

ACEC is located within an area of high heat flow, an absence of nearby surface thermal 

features (such as hot springs) and an apparent lack of shallow (<3,000 feet deep) thermal 

waters indicate a low potential for the development of geothermal resources. There is no 

record with BLM that mining claims are located within the boundaries of the ACEC/RNA and 

no demonstrated interest in locatable mineral development; consequently, the potential for 

development is low. 

Specific management: The ACEC/RNA will include a full range of vegetation communities 

and their subtle variations across the landscape. Rights-of-way will be granted only if there 

will be minimal conflict with the identified resource values and impacts could be mitigated. 

Plant collecting will require a permit. The area will be VRM Class III. OHV use will be limited 

to designated roads and trails. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and 

shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, 

minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. The area will be 

closed to saleable minerals development, while remaining open for leasable and locatable 

minerals. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved 

AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be 

evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will 

be maintained or enhanced. Existing livestock use will be adjusted where adverse impacts are 

identified using a variety of methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in 

livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be 

evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will be maintained or 

enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to help protect values 

of the area, the proposed management for saleable minerals, plant collection, livestock, rightsof-way, and other surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and 

important values. The acreage encompassed in the ACEC provides protection for a full range 

of the valued resources in this area. 

South Ridge Bully Creek ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 620-acre South Ridge Bully Creek ACEC/RNA is located west of 

Westfall, Oregon, along the ridge that separates Clover Creek drainage to the north and Bully 

Creek drainage to the south. The ACEC/RNA encompasses a number of grassland communities that occur as distinct entities intermixed within a larger mosaic of types in excellent 

ecological condition. 

The relevant and important values of the ACEC/RNA are the big sagebrush/Thurber 

needlegrass community and big sagebrush-squaw apple/Idaho fescue community vegetation 

cells identified by ONHP. Sage grouse, loggerhead shrikes, and their associated habitat have 

also been identified as relevant and important values. 

92 
Several dirt roads and barbed wire/steel post fences crisscross the ACEC/RNA, which also 

includes a portion of one livestock grazing allotment. 

The ACEC/RNA has a moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources and oil 

and gas, and a low potential for all locatable and all other leasable minerals. There is no 

record with BLM that mining claims have ever been located within the proposed ACEC/RNA 

or within the immediate vicinity, and no demonstrated interest in mineral development in the 

immediate area; consequently, the ACEC/RNA has a low potential for energy and mineral 

development. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails. Plant collecting will require a permit. The ACEC/RNA will be VRM 

Class III. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow 

ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, 

and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. Leasable minerals activities will be 

open with special stipulations subject to seasonal/timing restrictions, restricted or no use in 

avoidance areas for sage grouse. Locatable minerals activities will be open, but the area will 

be closed for saleable minerals. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity 

of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained or enhanced. Where adverse impacts are identified, existing 

livestock use will be adjusted using a variety of methods including fencing, reduction in 

livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be 

evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will be maintained or 

enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management has partially served to protect values of the area, the 

proposed management for minerals, livestock, rights-of-way, OHV, and other surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. The ACEC will 

be in one livestock grazing allotment, and the portion seeded to crested wheatgrass will be 

eliminated from the ACEC/RNA. 

Spring Mountain ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 1,002-acre Spring Mountain ACEC/RNA is located west of U.S. 

Highway 95 and north of Jordan Valley, covering a portion of the top of Spring Mountain east 

of Mahogany Mountain. The top of the mountain is a mix of mountain big sagebrush/Idaho 

fescue steppe in areas with deep soils. The northern portion of the ACEC/RNA is composed 

of steep, talus scree. This area supports stands of western chokecherry, whortleleaf snowberry, Saskatoon serviceberry, and Lewis’ mockorange. The scree tops out to a larger, 

relatively flat tableland dominated by diverse, large low sagebrush scablands. 

The relevant and important values of the ACEC/RNA are the mountain big sagebrush/Idaho 

fescue, low sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass, and riparian community dominated by 

peachleaf willow and coyote willow with quaking aspen/whortleleaf snowberry vegetation 

cells identified by ONHP. There are several quaking aspen patches associated with springs 

and north-facing talus slopes within the ACEC/RNA. 

The area is relatively free from human intrusions and virtually roadless. The ACEC/RNA 

includes a portion of one livestock grazing allotment. 

The ACEC/RNA has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related 

gold/silver/mercury deposits, moderate to high potential for the occurrence of uranium, 

moderate potential for the occurrence of both geothermal resources and oil and gas, and a 

low potential for the occurrence of all other leasable and locatable minerals. There is no 

93 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

record with BLM that mining claims were ever located within the boundaries of the ACEC/ 

RNA, and no demonstrated interest in either precious metals/mercury or uranium deposits; 

consequently, the potential for development is low. While the ACEC/RNA is located within 

an area of high heat flow, an absence of nearby hot springs and apparent lack of shallow 

(<3,000 feet deep) thermal waters indicate a low potential for the development of geothermal 

resources. Likewise, an absence of nearby sources of oil and gas and a lack of current 

production indicate a low potential for development of petroleum products. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. The area will be closed to OHV use. 

Plant collecting will require a permit. VRM will be under Class III. Leasable and locatable 

minerals activities will be open, but the area will be closed for saleable minerals. Livestock 

use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed 

changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the 

relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Existing livestock use will be adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using a variety of 

methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in 

grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted 

where relevant and important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect values of the 

area, the proposed management for minerals, visual resources, OHV, livestock, rights-of-way, 

and other surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. 

Stockade Mountain ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 1,767-acre Stockade Mountain ACEC/RNA is located approximately 55 miles southwest of Vale, Oregon, near Crowley. The target natural plant communities include a portion of the top of Stockade Mountain where extensive western juniper 

communities are found, as well as additional acres of steep northeast-facing slopes that 

include big sagebrush and low sagebrush communities identified as cell needs by ONHP. 

The relevant and important values in this ACEC/RNA include wildlife habitat and old growth 

western juniper/big sagebrush/bunchgrass communities within interspersed low sagebrush 

communities identified by ONHP. 

The ACEC/RNA is located within one livestock grazing allotment. Primitive dirt roads provide 

access to and through the area. 

The ACEC/RNA has a high potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related 

gold/silver/mercury deposits, a moderate to high potential for the occurrence of uranium, a 

moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources, and a low potential for the 

occurrence of all other leasable and locatable minerals. While there are no mining claims 

currently located within the boundaries of the ACEC/RNA, a substantial amount of interest 

was expressed between 1989 and 1994, when most of the area was covered with mining 

claims; consequently, there is a high potential for the development of hot springs and 

epithermal-related gold/silver/mercury deposits. Mineable quantities of uranium may occur in 

the area, but an absence of demonstrated interest in the commodity and a lack of a significant 

domestic uranium industry indicate a low potential for uranium development. Although the 

ACEC/RNA is within an area of high heat flow, an absence of nearby surface thermal features 

(such as hot springs) and an apparent lack of shallow (<3,000 feet deep) thermal waters 

indicate a low potential for development of geothermal resources. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted within the ACEC/RNA only if there is 

minimal conflict with identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. The ACEC/ 

94 
 

RNA will be under VRM Class III. OHV use will be limited to designated roads and trails. 

Plant collecting will require a permit. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control 

runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. The 

area will remain open to leasable minerals activities. The entire ACEC/RNA will be withdrawn 

from locatable minerals activities and closed to saleable minerals development. Livestock use 

will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed 

changes in grazing use, including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on 

the relevant and important values and will be permitted if values will be maintained or 

enhanced. Existing livestock use will be adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using 

a variety of methods, including fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in 

grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted 

where relevant and important values will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially protected values of the area, 

the proposed management for minerals, VRM, livestock, rights-of-way, and other surfacedisturbing activities will provide an appropriate degree of management of and protection for 

the relevant and important values. The increase in size of the ACEC/RNA provides a more 

complete representation of the valued resources in this area. 

Jordan Resource Area 

Dry Creek Bench ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 1,616-acre ACEC/RNA is located on the northern edge of the 

Oregon Canyon Mountains, taking in the upper basin of Dry Creek about 20 miles northwest 

of McDermitt, Nevada. The area has sizeable patches of mountain mahogany in relatively 

good condition in association with Saskatoon serviceberry. The mountain mahogany stands 

in this area are extensive, compared to other stands in the basin, and cover large areas within 

the steep drainages as well as on the small plateaus that lie at the edge of the drainages. 

The relevant and important values of this ACEC/RNA are the mountain mahogany/whortleleaf 

snowberry/Idaho fescue and mountain mahogany/big sagebrush/Idaho fescue Basin and 

Range Province vegetation cells identified by the ONHP. 

A portion of the Twelvemile WSA (3-162) is located within this ACEC/RNA . BLM has 

recommended 26,240 acres of this WSA as suitable for wilderness. WSA’s are currently 

managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, surface-disturbing 

activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded from the WSA’s until Congress makes 

a decision on wilderness designation. 

A portion of one grazing allotment is located within the ACEC/RNA. 

The ACEC/RNA has a high potential for the occurrence of uranium and geothermal resources, 

and low potential for all other leasable and locatable minerals. Mineable quantities of uranium 

may be present in the area; however, the fact that there is no record of mining claims in the 

immediate area, and no significant domestic uranium industry, indicates a low potential. 

There is, however, a moderate to high potential for the development of low-temperature, direct 

heat uses of geothermal resources. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts could be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to 

95 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

designated roads and trails. The ACEC/RNA will be under VRM Class II. Plant collecting 

will require a permit. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and 

shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, 

minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. The ACEC/ 

RNA will be open to locatable and leasable minerals development and closed to minerals 

materials activities. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and 

approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will 

be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if the 

values will be maintained or enhanced. Existing livestock use will be adjusted where 

adverse impacts are identified using a variety of methods, including but not limited to 

fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects 

in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values 

will be maintained or enhanced. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect values of the 

area, the proposed management for saleable minerals, livestock, rights-of-way, and other 

surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. 

Jordan Craters ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 31,370-acre Jordan Craters ACEC/RNA, originally established 

by the Oregon/Washington BLM State Director decision in 1975, is located 18 miles northwest of Jordan Valley and 5 miles southeast of the Owyhee River. The ACEC/RNA has high 

scenic values associated with the geology; geologically recent extrusive olivine basalt lava 

flow is one of the primary resource values in the ACEC/RNA. There are additional values for 

research of plant succession on barren rock, on plant communities in kipukas (relict islands of 

soil and plants that the lava flow missed), and on rare plants that survive in the vertical cracks 

in the lava. Also, several State sensitive wildlife species occur in the ACEC/RNA. The area 

has been the focus of several short and long-term studies on plant communities, geologic 

processes, and plant physiology with direct implications to BLM management activities. The 

Clark’s Butte Area adds at least two more lava emission sources and three lava flows of older 

and younger ages on which to study plant succession. There also is a threetip sagebrush 

community with a late seral bunchgrass understory. These flows contain lava tubes that 

serve as maternal sites for the State sensitive western big-eared bat. 

The relevant and important values identified for the ACEC/RNA are historic, cultural, scenic, 

wildlife habitat, special status animals and habitat, rare plants (numerous fern species in a 

desert environment), terrestrial plant community (threetip sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass), 

riparian plant community (freshwater pond system), and rare geologic features (multiple age 

lava flows). 

Most of the ACEC/RNA is located within the Clarks Butte (3-120) and Jordan Craters (3-128) 

WSA’s. BLM has recommended the Clarks Butte WSA as not suitable for wilderness 

designation and has recommended 23,225 acres of the Jordan Craters WSA as suitable for 

wilderness. WSA’s are currently managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this 

direction, surface-disturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded from the 

WSA’s until Congress makes wilderness designation decisions. 

Portions of five grazing allotments are included within the ACEC/RNA boundary. There are 

no major rights-of-way. 

The ACEC/RNA has a moderate potential for the occurrence of hot springs gold/silver/ 

mercury deposits and geothermal resources, a low to moderate potential for the occurrence of 

uranium, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other leasable and locatable minerals. 

There is no record with BLM that mining claims were ever located within the boundaries of 

the ACEC/RNA and no demonstrated interest in energy or mineral resources, indicating a low 

potential for development. 

96 
Specific management: Rights-of-way will not be granted. OHV use will be limited to 

designated roads and trails. The ACEC/RNA will be under VRM Class I guidance. Plant 

collecting will require a permit. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and 

shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, 

minimize soil erosion, and ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. The ACEC/ 

RNA will be open to locatable minerals activities, closed to saleable minerals activities, and 

leasable minerals activities will be subject to NSO stipulations. Livestock use will continue 

based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in 

grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and 

important values and will be permitted if the values will be maintained or enhanced. Existing 

livestock use will be adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using a variety of methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in 

grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts and permitted 

where relevant and important values will be maintained or enhanced. Fire control will not be 

initiated to protect public resources within the ACEC/RNA, but if control is necessary to 

protect private resources outside the boundary, actions will be limited to the designated 

roads. Seeding will not be permitted unless native plant materials will be used. Recreational 

uses will be discouraged except for the existing access point at Coffee Pot Craters, and no 

development will occur until appropriate public safety measures are installed and cave 

resources are protected. Camping activities on the kipukas will be by permit only. 

Rationale: While existing management has partially served to protect values of the area, the 

proposed management for minerals, livestock, rights-of-way and other surface-disturbing 

activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values. Proposed adjustments in the ACEC/RNA boundary retain the most important research areas and add additional future research areas, while land with lower research values are excluded. 

Little Whitehorse Exclosure ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 58-acre ACEC/RNA is an exclosure in a narrow canyon of Little 

Whitehorse Creek about 30 miles northwest of McDermitt, Nevada. The exclosure was 

constructed in 1972 and represents 24 years of natural recovery for the riparian and aquatic 

systems that have been excluded from grazing and other impacts. 

The relevant and important values for ACEC/RNA are the following vegetation cells identified by the ONHP: first to third order stream, high gradient reach, in sagebrush zone, with 

mountain alder and redosier dogwood; riparian community dominated by mountain alder and 

redoiser dogwood, with potential black cottonwood and riparian community dominated by 

Pacific willow and Wood’s rose. Another relevant and important value associated with this 

ACEC/RNA is the presence of Lahontan cutthroat trout, a Federally-listed threatened species 

located within Little Whitehorse Creek. 

A portion of the Willow Creek WSA (3- 152) is located within the ACEC/RNA. BLM has 

recommended 26,130 acres of the Willow Creek WSA as suitable for wilderness. WSA’s are 

currently managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, surfacedisturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded from the WSA’s until 

Congress makes a decision on wilderness designation. 

A portion of one grazing allotment is included in this ACEC/RNA. 

The ACEC/RNA has high potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources, a moderate 

potential for the occurrence of uranium, and a low potential for the occurrence of all other 

leasable and locatable minerals. There is no record with BLM of mining claims within the 

97 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

boundaries of the proposed ACEC/RNA and no demonstrated interest in locatable minerals, 

indicating a low potential for their development. There is, however, a moderate to high 

potential for the development of low-temperature, direct heat uses of geothermal resources. 

Specific management: The east and west boundaries of this ACEC/RNA are the canyon 

rims, and the upstream and downstream ends of the 1972 exclosure fence line form the north 

and south boundaries. The ACEC/RNA will be excluded from rights-of-way; the area will be 

closed to OHV use. The ACEC/RNA is under VRM Class II. Plant collecting will require a 

permit. The ACEC/RNA will be withdrawn from locatable mineral activities, closed to saleable 

minerals activities, and subject to the NSO stipulation for leasable minerals activities. No 

livestock use will be permitted within the exclosure. 

Rationale: The existing management has maintained the values of the area with existing 

activities occurring under the protection of the exclosure. ACEC/RNA designation will 

provide the public with a location for study of the riparian values the ACEC/RNA represents 

and will provide priority protection from activities that may occur in the future. 

Mendi Gore Playa ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 148-acre ACEC/RNA is located within a small enclosed basin 

approximately 1 mile northeast of Basque Station, Oregon. The dry lakebed located within the 

basin is dominated by an almost pure stand of winterfat. In addition, there are extensive 

stands of black sagebrush dominating the foothills, with a variety of bunchgrasses in the 

understory. 

The relevant and important values for this ACEC/RNA are the winterfat community and a 

small area representing a black sagebrush community which are vegetation cells identified by 

the ONHP. 

The ACEC/RNA includes a portion of one grazing allotment. 

The ACEC/RNA has a moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources and a 

low potential for all other leasable and locatable minerals. There is no record with BLM of 

mining claims within the borders of the ACEC/RNA and no demonstrated interest in energy 

or mineral resources, indicating a low potential for development. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

resource values and impacts can be mitigated. OHVs will be limited to designated roads and 

trails. The ACEC/RNA will be VRM Class II, and plant collecting will require a permit. Road 

maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction 

will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure public 

safety and serviceability of the road. Leasable minerals activities will be subject to the NSO 

stipulation, and the ACEC/RNA will be open to locatable mineral development and closed to 

saleable minerals activities. The ACEC/RNA will be closed to organized recreation activities. 

Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any 

proposed changes in grazing, including intensity of use, that could have an impact on the 

relevant and important values will be carefully evaluated. Existing livestock use will be 

adjusted where adverse impacts are identified using a variety of methods, including but not 

limited to fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed 

projects in the area will be evaluated for impacts to the relevant and important values. 

Activities adjacent to the ACEC/RNA that will congregate livestock or cause surface disturbance to the ACEC/RNA will be prohibited. 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect the values of 

the area, the proposed management for minerals, livestock, rights-of-way, and other surfacedisturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant and important values within the 

98 
winterfat community and a small area of the black sagebrush community. ACEC/RNA 

designation will provide BLM and the public with a location for the study of these values. 

Palomino Playa ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 642-acre Palomino Playa ACEC/RNA is a dry playa lake near the 

Saddle Butte Lava fields about 10 miles northwest of Burns Junction, Oregon. The dry 

lakebed is about a half-mile long and is divided by a rocky finger. The lakebed is composed 

of shrink-swell clays that hold water throughout the winter and spring and then dries with 

polygonal cracking paterns forming in the summer. The playa is best known as having one of 

the largest populations of Davis’ peppergrass, a special status perennial plant found only on 

clay soil playas in the Owyhee Uplands of Oregon and Idaho. Palomino Playa is considered 

to be a barren playa because it is not dominated by large shrubs such as silver sagebrush or 

greasewood. Its soils seem to be composed mostly of clays, which have been products of 

the decomposition of volcanic ash commonly found in the Owyhee Uplands. Other playa 

lakes have lake sediment-based soils that have resulted from pluvial lakes in large basins, or 

the soils have high concentrations of alkali salts from evaporative processes that may be 

more sandy in texture or more crystalline. The surrounding uplands are in mid to late 

ecological condition at Palomino Playa, having sustained grazing for quite some time. They 

are dominated by a shadscale saltbush-greasewood community at the lowest elevations 

immediately adjacent to the playa and by Wyoming big sagebrush-greasewood at slightly 

higher elevations. These elevational differences are actually about 10–20 feet; therefore, 

community changes mostly relate to alkaline soil conditions. Associated species in the 

shadscale saltbush/greasewood/sagebrush communities are few as even the grasses are 

reduced to a few scattered bunches of bottlebrush squirreltail. The noxious weed, halogeton, 

is common in the salt desert shrub uplands as is the weedy perfoliate pepperweed. 

The relevant and important values of this ACEC/RNA are the shadscale saltbush/bunchgrass, 

black greasewood/bunchgrass community mosaic and bare playa community vegetation cells 

as identified by the ONHP, as well as the special status plant species, Davis’ peppergrass. 

The ACEC/RNA includes a portion of one livestock grazing allotment. It also lies within the 

Sand Springs HMA. 

The ACEC/RNA has moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources, and a low 

potential for all other leasable minerals, as well as all locatable minerals. There is no record 

with BLM of mining claims within the boundaries of the ACEC/RNA and no demonstrated 

interest in energy or mineral resources, indicating a low potential for development. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts could be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to 

designated roads and trails and the existing route through the playa will be closed, if possible. The ACEC/RNA will be VRM Class II. Plant collecting will require a permit. Road 

maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction 

will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure public 

safety and serviceability of the road. Leasable minerals activities will be subject to the NSO 

stipulation. The ACEC/RNA will be open to locatable minerals activities and closed to 

saleable minerals activities. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations 

and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, 

will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if the 

values will be maintained or enhanced. Where adverse impacts are identified, existing 

livestock use will be adjusted using a variety of methods including fencing, reduction in 

livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be 

evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will be maintained or 

enhanced. 

99 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Rationale: While existing management actions have partially served to protect the values of 

the area, the ACEC designation and proposed management for minerals, livestock, OHV, 

rights-of-way, and other surface-disturbing activities will provide a more appropriate degree 

of management of and protection for the relevant and important values in this area. 

Saddle Butte ACEC 

Description and values: The 7,056-acre Saddle Butte ACEC is located about 10 miles north of 

Burns Junction. An 8.5 mile-long lava tube was created during a late Pleistocene volcanic 

eruption that covered about 80 square miles. The primary value of the ACEC is the sections 

of the original cave system that have not yet collapsed. The largest of these caves is 3,620 

feet long and as much as 80 feet wide and 47 feet tall. These caves are of scientific value in 

studies of how lava tubes are created, and how they deteriorate and collapse. A secondary 

value is the population of western big-eared bats, a State sensitive species, that inhabit the 

caves. The lava tubes also pose a threat to people inside or on top of the structures when 

they collapse. 

The relevant and important values identified for this ACEC are sensitive wildlife species and 

habitat, rare geologic features, and the lava tube cave system. 

Approximately 87 percent of the ACEC is located within the Saddle Butte WSA (3-111). The 

BLM has recommended the Saddle Butte WSA as not suitable for wilderness designation. 

WSA’s are currently managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, 

surface-disturbing activities requiring reclamation are generally precluded from the WSA’s 

until Congress makes wilderness designation decisions. The Saddle Butte HMA is also 

located within and surrounding this ACEC. The area includes a portion of one livestock 

grazing allotment. 

The ACEC has a moderate potential for the occurrence of hot springs and epithermal-related 

gold/silver/mercury deposits and geothermal resources, and a low potential for all other 

leasable and locatable minerals. There is no record with BLM of mining claims having ever 

been located within the boundaries of the ACEC and no demonstrated interest in energy or 

mineral resources, indicating a low potential for development. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts can be mitigated. Plant collecting will require a permit. 

Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and ensure 

public safety and serviceability of the road. Unauthorized spur roads to lava tube entrances 

will be returned to a natural state, and OHV use will be restricted to designated roads as 

identified in the WSA inventory. The ACEC will be open to leasable and locatable minerals 

activities and closed to saleable minerals activities. Seismic activities that may affect caves 

or bats will not be authorized. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity 

of use, will be evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if the values will be maintained or enhanced. Where adverse impacts are identified, 

existing livestock use will be adjusted using a variety of methods including fencing, reduction in livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Projects, which may be proposed 

in the area, will be evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values 

will be maintained or enhanced. If necessary to protect cave contents or human safety, BLM 

may construct gates to prevent access. 

Rationale: While existing management has partially served to protect values of the area, the 

proposed management within the extended area for minerals, rights-of-way, OHV, livestock 

operations, and other surface-disturbing activities will more adequately protect the relevant 

100 
and important values. Increasing human use in the area has created new threats that need to 

be resolved by active management. 

Toppin Creek Butte ACEC/RNA 

Description and values: The 3,996-acre Toppin Butte ACEC/RNA is located 30 miles northeast of McDermitt, Nevada, and adjacent to the Idaho stateline. The topography includes a 

gently sloping hill with a rapidly draining soil. Little water has been available for livestock on 

the Butte, and the topography still limits livestock use on the upper slopes. Two playas at 

the base of Toppin Butte contain a bare playa community and a silver sagebrush community 

that have lesser research potential. 

The relevant and important values of this ACEC/RNA are the low sagebrush/bluebunch 

wheatgrass community in excellent condition and low sagebrush/Idaho fescue plant community vegetation cells identified by the ONHP. These plant communities will be specially 

managed for current and future research. Also identified as relevant and important values are 

sage grouse and associated habitat for neotropical bird migration. 

Portions of two WSA’s are located within and comprise 100 percent of the ACEC/RNA. 

Approximately 152,040 acres of the Owyhee River Canyon WSA (3-195) has been recommended by BLM as suitable for wilderness designation. BLM has recommended Lookout 

Butte WSA (3-194) as not suitable for wilderness designation. WSA’s are currently managed 

in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. Under this direction, surface-disturbing activities 

requiring reclamation are generally precluded from the WSA’s until Congress makes a 

decision on wilderness designation. 

The ACEC/RNA includes a portion of one grazing allotment. Due to the presence of road 

6350-0-AO and a water development, the playas have been disturbed and have less value for 

research, but could be used as comparison study plots for less disturbed playas. 

The ACEC/RNA has moderate potential for the occurrence of geothermal resources and a low 

potential for all other leasable and locatable minerals. There is no record with BLM of mining 

claims within the boundaries of the ACEC/RNA and no demonstrated interest in energy and 

mineral resources, indicating a low potential for development. 

Specific management: Rights-of-way will be granted only if there is minimal conflict with 

identified resource values and impacts could be mitigated. OHV use will be limited to 

designated roads and trails. The area will be VRM Class II, and plant collecting will require a 

permit. Road maintenance will be limited to the existing roadway, and shoulder/barrow ditch 

construction will be limited to that necessary to control runoff, minimize soil erosion, and 

ensure public safety and serviceability of the road. The ACEC/RNA will be open to locatable 

and leasable minerals activities and closed to saleable minerals. Surface-disturbance will be 

deferred while soils are wet, and any future rehabilitation will be with local source native plant 

species. Livestock use will continue based on existing permit stipulations and approved 

AMP’s. Any proposed changes in grazing, including time and intensity of use, will be 

evaluated for impacts on the relevant and important values and will be permitted if the values 

will be maintained or enhanced. Existing livestock use will be adjusted where adverse impacts 

are identified using a variety of methods, including but not limited to fencing, reduction in 

livestock numbers, and changes in grazing season. Proposed projects in the area will be 

evaluated for impacts and permitted where relevant and important values will be maintained or 

enhanced. Noxious weeds will be aggressively controlled using limited methods, such as 

backpack hand sprayers, focusing on roads and other disturbed areas in and adjacent to the 

ACEC/RNA. 

101 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Rationale: The most critical vegetation resources will be protected during the life of this 

plan. Most current uses will continue without damage to the resources due to the isolation 

and natural topography. Aggressive control of weeds will assist in preventing future invasions. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Objective: Protect and enhance outstandingly remarkable values (ORV’s) of designated 

national wild and scenic rivers (NWSR’s), and provide interim protection of ORV’s of 

rivers found suitable for inclusion in the NWSRS until Congress acts. 

Rationale: The “National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act” (NWSRA) (Public Law 90-542 and 

amendments), section 1(b), states that “certain selected rivers of the Nation which, with their 

immediate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, 

fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values, shall be preserved in free-flowing 

condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit 

and enjoyment of present and future generations.” Section 5(d) requires Federal agencies to 

consider potential wild, scenic, and recreational river areas in all planning for the use and 

development of water and related land resources. Section 10(a) describes the basic management requirement of protecting and enhancing the values that caused the river to be included 

in the NWSR system. In accordance with BLM policy, all eligible rivers were evaluated for 

suitability. The planning determination of suitability provides the basis for any decision to 

recommend legislation. Factors to be considered (see section 4[a] of the NWSRA) in the 

suitability determination include: the current status of landownership and use in the area; the 

reasonably foreseeable potential uses of the land and water which will be enhanced, foreclosed, or curtailed if the area were included in the NWSR system, and the values which will 

Table 14.—Eligible and administratively suitable national wild and scenic study rivers 3 

(PSEORMP Table 3-13) 

Resource Tentative 

area River Miles Acres 1 classification 

Malheur	 Dry Creek (M15) 16.8 5,344 Wild 

Owyhee River Below the Dam (M16) 2 13.5 2 3,973 Recreational 

North Fork Malheur River (M17) 3.6 996 Wild 

Jordan	 Antelope Creek (J19) 8.6 1,448 Wild 

1 Acres based on 0.5-mile-wide corridor (0.25-mile each side), except on Antelope (J19) which is rim to rim.
 

2 Under cooperative study, includes 4.3 river miles of BOR.
 

3 These rivers have met the suitability criteria and have been determined to be administratively suitable for inclusion in NWSRS.
 

102 
 

 

be foreclosed or diminished if the river is not protected as part of the NWSR system; other 

agencies, organizations or publics interested in designation or nondesignation; administrative costs; ability of the agency to manage and/or protect the river area; historic or existing 

rights. Refer to Table 14 for suitability. 

Legal considerations specific to existing designated national wild and scenic rivers: The 

1993 “Main, West Little, and North Fork Owyhee National Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan” is currently under litigation regarding grazing management. An “Order of Modified Injunction” was filed in the District Court of Oregon on April 28, 2000. The order directed 

that certain fences and water developments (wells, pipelines and troughs) may be constructed by the grazing permittees to facilitate the elimination of grazing at “areas of concern” 

identified in the 1993 “Main, West Little, and North Fork Owyhee National Wild and Scenic 

Rivers Management Plan.” The District Court of Oregon retains jurisdiction over the case 

until a court ordered EIS is completed. The new EIS, which will require much data collection 

to support impact predictions, is projected to be complete in the year 2006. Management of 

the remainder of the designated Owyhee NWSR’s, including grazing management in areas 

other than the “areas of concern” listed in the river plan EA, will continue under the direction 

of the plan of 1993, until amended. 

Monitoring: Monitor use and ORV’s within designated and administratively suitable rivers to 

ensure protection and enhancement of ORV’s consistent with the NWSRA. Also see 

Appendix W. 

Management actions: 

Congressionally Designated Rivers 

The basic river management plan goals for the Main, West Little, and North Fork Owyhee 

NWSR’s are to (1) protect and enhance the outstandingly remarkable recreational, scenic, 

geologic, wildlife, and cultural values of the designated Main Owyhee River; (2) protect and 

enhance the outstandingly remarkable recreational, scenic, and wildlife values of the designated West Little Owyhee River; (3) protect and enhance the outstandingly remarkable 

recreational, scenic, and wildlife values of the designated North Fork Owyhee River; (4) 

ensure protection and enhancement of the values which caused these rivers to be designated 

without limiting other uses that are consistent with those goals and do not substantially 

interfere with public use and enjoyment of these values; (5) provide visitor services to 

enhance the enjoyment of the Owyhee River System while protecting the unique and sensitive resource values of the area; and (6) enhance visitor and land user appreciation of the 

important resources of these rivers. 

Manage the Main, West Little, and North Fork Owyhee NWSR’s in accordance with the 

approved 1993 river management plan, while remaining in compliance with (1) the judge’s 

opinion and order which affects livestock grazing in the plan’s “areas of concern” and (2) 

resolution of litigation. For the Main Owyhee NWSR, the Deary Pasture area of the Jackies 

Butte Allotment will be closed to livestock grazing. Livestock trailing will continue where 

feasible and in compliance with the District Court of Oregon’s direction. The acquired 

properties known as the Birch Creek Historic Ranch will be closed to application for term 

grazing permits except for temporary grazing authorizations. These will be issued at the 

discretion of the BLM for management purposes (including, but not limited to, vegetation 

manipulation or field management), administrative purposes, and interpretive needs. Designated buildings at the Birch Creek Historic Ranch will be available to the public for overnight 

use and other compatible uses consistent with public safety requirements. Opportunities for 

103 
 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

closely supervised concessionaire agreements may be pursued, consistent with protection of 

ORV’s and historic values. 

Uses within congressionally designated NWSR’s will be restricted or excluded where such 

uses are determined to degrade ORV’s or impair opportunities for enhancement of ORV’s. 

Administratively Suitable Rivers 

Provide interim protection of the ORV’s of administratively suitable rivers while awaiting a 

determination by Congress. Refer to BLM Manual 8351 for NWSR IMP guidelines. 

Approximately 42.5 miles of eligible rivers and streams (Map WSR-1) are determined to be 

administratively suitable for designation by Congress as NWSR’s (as depicted in Table 14). 

This will include three river segments in MRA: Dry Creek (16.8 miles with a tentative wild 

classification), Owyhee River Below the Dam (13.5 miles with a tentative recreational classification), and North Fork Malheur River (3.6 miles with a tentative wild classification); and 

Antelope Creek (8.6 miles with a tentative wild classification) in JRA. These river/stream 

segments and their associated interim corridors of public lands (as noted in Table 14) will be 

provided interim protection of their ORV’s while awaiting a designation determination by 

Congress. Refer to BLM Manual 8351 for NWSR interim management guidelines. Uses 

within these administratively suitable rivers will be restricted or excluded where such uses are 

determined to degrade ORV’s. 

Land Adjacent to Wilderness Study Areas 

Objective: BLM-administered land identified in the 1991 “Wilderness Study Report, 

Oregon” (WSRO) and determined to have wilderness values will be included in adjacent 

wilderness study areas (WSA’s) and managed under the “Interim Management Policy for 

Land under Wilderness Review” (IMPLWR). 

Rationale: Under FLPMA, wilderness preservation is part of BLM’s multiple-use mandate, 

and wilderness is recognized as part of the spectrum of resource values considered in the 

land use planning process. Under the wilderness review program, the existing designated 

WSA’s are managed in accordance with BLM’s IMPLWR. The general standard for interim 

management is that land under wilderness review must be managed so as not to impair 

suitability for preservation as wilderness. Wilderness characteristics and values, described in 

section 2(c) of the “Wilderness Act” of 1964 (Public Law 88-577), must be protected and 

enhanced in all WSA’s. The initial task of identifying areas suitable for wilderness preservation has been completed as mandated in FLPMA section 603, and is documented in OWFEIS 

and WSRO. In addition, and as identified in the WSRO, there are parcels of public land 

outside but immediately adjacent to WSA’s that have been recommended as suitable for 

wilderness designation. These areas will be included in the appropriate WSA and managed 

as WSA’s under authority of FLPMA sections 202 and 302. The IMPLWR will apply to these 

areas while under wilderness consideration by Congress. 

Monitoring: Monitoring and surveillance of the parcels of land added to existing WSA’s will 

be done to ensure compliance with IMPLWR. 

Management Actions: Certain tracts of land that were identified in the WSRO as non-Federal 

land identified for possible acquisition (that have since been acquired) or as adjacent Federal 

land recommended for wilderness will be added to existing WSA’s and managed under 

IMPLWR guidance. This addition will be about 3,280 acres of affected adjacent BLM land 

and 860 acres of acquired non-Federal land which, combined, affect a total of five WSA’s (see 

Table 15). See Map WSA-1 for the location of existing WSA’s in the planning area. 

104 
 

Remaining non-Federal land identified for acquisition in the WSRO will be assessed for 

wilderness characteristics when acquired as public land. If the land under consideration 

Table 15.—Land to be added to wilderness study areas identified in the 

October 1991 Oregon BLM “Wilderness Study Report” that are recommended for wilderness designation (acres) (PSEORMP Table 3-14) 

Affected WSA’s Affected adjacent BLM lands Presently affected acquired lands1 

Malheur Resource Area 

Blue Canyon (3-73) 0 40 

Gold Creek (3-33) 2,200 0 

Owyhee Breaks (3-59) 0 40 

TOTAL 2,200 80 

Jordan Resource Area 

Lower Owyhee (3-110) 100 480 

Twelvemile Creek (3-162) 980 300 

TOTAL 1,080 780 

GRAND TOTAL 3,280 860 

1 These are lands which have been acquired (1991-1997). Other non-Federal inholdings for possible 

acquisition are as identified in the 1991 Oregon BLM “Wilderness Study Report”. 

105 
 

 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

meets wilderness characteristics, then the acquired land will be included as part of an 

adjacent WSA and be managed to protect their wilderness values under the IMPLWR. 

Human Uses and Values 

Objective: Manage public land and pursue partnerships to provide social and economic 

benefits to local residents, businesses, visitors, and future generations. 

Rationale: Public land accounts for about 75 percent of the land base within the planning 

area. This land contains many valuable resources, including commodity, aesthetic, and 

recreational resources. Access to public land, permitted uses, and sale of resources all 

generate private economic activity, primarily within the local economy, but also at the state, 

national, and global economic scales. Revenues derived from BLM land are used to fund 

resource protection and development activities, and portions of these collections are shared 

with local governments or returned to the U.S. Treasury. 

Monitoring: Monitor commodity and recreational uses of public land. Tally collections and 

identify projects and activities that have been funded by commodity collections in annual 

planning updates. 

Management Actions: Work cooperatively with private, community, and local government 

groups to diversify local economies and expand new industries consistent with other 

resource objectives. Continue to provide for customary commodity uses when consistent 

with other resource objectives. 

Cultural Resources 

Objective 1: Protect and conserve cultural and paleontological resources. 

Rationale: The “National Historic Preservation Act” of 1966, as amended, mandates Federal 

agencies to protect and preserve prehistoric and historic cultural properties that are eligible or 

potentially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. 

On November 10, 1978, Congress designated the Oregon Trail as a national historic trail by an 

amendment (Public Law 95-625) to the “National Trails System Act” (Public Law 90-543). 

Under the Act, the Secretary of Interior is directed to administer the Oregon National Historic 

Trail. The stated purpose of national historic trail designation is to identify and protect the 

Oregon Trail, along with its historic remnants and artifacts, for public use and enjoyment. 

The “National Trails System Act” directed the Secretary of the Interior to prepare comprehensive management plans and adopt uniform trail markers. In 1981, the National Park Service 

completed a management plan for the Oregon Trail which identified important components of 

the trail; and recommended measures for protection, interpretation, and marking the route. In 

1989, the BLM Vale District completed the management plan for the Oregon National Historic 

Trail across the Vale District. This plan sets forth a prescribed sequence of long and short 

term management actions for the protection, preservation, interpretation and public recreation 

use of the Oregon National Historic Trail in the Vale District. 

Significant paleontological sites are protected under FLPMA. FLPMA charges the BLM to 

(1) manage public land in a manner that protects the quality of scientific and other values, and 

(2) see that land and resources are periodically and systematically inventoried. 

Monitoring: Monitor cultural/paleontological resource sites to determine site condition and 

mitigation needs. 

106 
 

 

 

 

Management Actions: Protect against illegal artifact collection, site excavation, and vandalism by patrolling potential National Register eligible sites and subregions with established 

enforcement needs. 

Manage the Oregon National Historic Trail (ONHT) in accordance with the ONHT Management Plan. Maintain and restore historic structures at the Birch Creek Historic Ranch as 

specified in the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) approved historic building report 

for that property. Inventory the ranch’s native and introduced vegetation and maintain the 

historic landscape by replacing decorative plantings in kind. 

Objective 2: Increase the public’s knowledge of, appreciation for, and sensitivity to 

cultural and paleontological resources. 

Rationale: Cultural and paleontological resources are fragile and irreplaceable when damaged. These resources are disappearing through illegal collection, excavation, and other 

vandalism. If the public feels it has equity in the Nation’s cultural heritage, the resources will 

be appreciated and better protected from vandalism. 

Monitoring: Develop and monitor presentations to the public, educational brochures, 

interpretive materials, and informational displays for the public. 

Management Actions: Provide on- or off-site interpretation of appropriate sites, including the 

following: the Chico, California, to Silver City, Idaho, wagon road; the Birch Creek Historic 

Ranch; Coffee Pot Crater (natural history); and the Oregon National Historic Trail. 

Inventory areas with high potential for fossil resources and manage for scientific as well as 

public interest values. 

Objective 3: Consult and coordinate with American Indian groups to ensure their interests 

are considered and their traditional religious sites, landforms, and resources are taken 

into account. 

Rationale: It is Federal policy to consult and coordinate with American Indian groups so that 

their rights and interests are taken into account when land use decisions are made. In 

addition, American Indian traditions are addressed in the “National Historic Preservation 

Act,” “Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act,” the “American Indian 

Religious Freedom Act,” and Executive Order 13007 (Sacred Sites). 

Monitoring: Develop procedures to track consultations and document all written, telephone, 

electronic and in-person communications; review yearly for adequacy. 

Management Actions: Limit land treatments and surface-disturbing activities within identified American Indian root gathering areas. 

Protect American Indian traditional use areas identified on public land to allow for the 

continuation of such uses. Coordinate and consult with American Indian Tribes on protection and management of their identified traditional use areas. Develop activity plans for 

American Indian traditional use areas when identified, on a case-by-case basis, in consultation with the affected tribes. 

Consider American Indian requests to practice traditional activities on specific public land not 

identified in this plan and allow for traditional uses of such public land by American Indians 

where consistent with other resource objectives. 

107 
 

 

 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Land and Realty 

Objective 1: Retain public land with high and public resource values. Consolidate public 

landholdings and acquire land or interests in land with high and public resource values to 

ensure effective administration and improve resource management in Zone 1 (see Appendix L for definitions of Zones 1, 2 and 3). Acquired land will be managed for the purposes 

for which it was acquired. Make available for disposal up to approximatley 41,000 acres 

of public land within Zone2, primarily by exchange. Make available for disposal approximately 62,100 acres of public land within Zone 3 by State Indemnity Selection, private or 

State exchange, “Recreation and Public Purpose Act” (R&PP) lease or sale, public sale, or 

other authorized method (see Appendix L). 

Rationale: Section 102 of FLPMA requires that public land be retained in Federal ownership 

unless disposal of a particular parcel will serve the national interest. Acquisition of land to 

consolidate ownership patterns will provide for more efficient land management and administration for both public and private landowners. Retention and acquisition of land containing 

significant resource values will provide for long-term protection and management of those 

values. Any acquired land or acquired interest in land will be managed for the purposes for 

which they are acquired or in the same manner as adjacent or comparable public land. 

Section 202 of FLPMA provides for disposal of public land through exchange. While this 

method will be available for use in Zones 1 and 3, it will be the primary method employed in 

Zone 2. Zone 2 has been identified as an area of limited retention and land ownership 

consolidation. 

Zone 3 lands have been identified for disposal because they meet the sales disposal criteria 

found in Section 203 of FLPMA. While public sale may be used to dispose of these lands, all 

other methods of disposal listed in this document are available for use. 

Monitoring: Review public access needs in all land tenure adjustment transactions on a 

periodic basis; apply resource monitoring procedures utilized on adjacent or comparable land 

to newly acquired land; follow normal BLM accomplishment and plan implementation tracking 

processes. 

Management actions: Acquire, maintain, and develop legal public and administrative access 

consistent with other resource values (see Map LAND-1). Consider public access needs in 

all land tenure adjustments. Make land tenure adjustments consistent with the criteria 

identified in Appendix L1. Refer to Maps LAND-2J and -2M for a depiction of land tenure 

zones. Any acquired land or acquired interest in land will be managed for the purposes for 

which they are acquired or in the same manner as adjacent or comparable public land. 

1) Retain or increase public landholdings in Zone 1 as depicted in Maps LAND-2J and 

LAND-2M with special emphasis on acquiring land with high and public resource values. 

2) Implement limited retention and consolidation of land in Zone 2, with special emphasis on 

acquiring land with high and public resource values. 

3) Acquire other interests in land, including conservation and scenic easements, to assure 

efficient administration and improve resource management. Emphasize acquisition of 

interests in areas with high and public resource values. 

4) Make Zone 3 land available for disposal by any authorized method. 

Consolidate split-estate where appropriate to improve resource management while protecting 

resource values. 

108 
 

Meet public needs for use authorizations such as rights-of-way, leases, and permits consistent with other resource objectives. Encourage right-of-way applicants to locate their 

facilities within designated corridors (Map LAND-1) to minimize impacts to other resource 

values. Maintain existing communication sites and allow new sites that will be consistent 

with other resource values. Develop site plans that enhance site quality (see Appendix L and 

Table L-2). Encourage relinquishment of no longer needed material and borrow sites that 

were established under title 23 of the “Federal Highway Act.” 

Initiate new withdrawal actions to protect high value resources or government capital 

investments. Review withdrawals in order to recommend continuations, modifications, 

revocations, or terminations. Appendix L and Table L-3 lists existing withdrawals. When 

acquiring land, determine on a case-by-case basis whether or not the land should be withdrawn from entry under the public land laws, mining laws, or mineral leasing laws. 

Acquire and maintain legal public access to public land consistent with other resource 

objectives. Existing easements and access needs are depicted on Map LAND-1. 

Roads may have a major impact on a multitude of physical and biological processes, as 

indicated in the “Scientific Assessment for the Draft Eastside EIS” (Quigley and Arbelbide 

1996). Careful planning of roads is necessary to balance human desires with protection of 

resource values. A transportation management plan will be developed by the engineering 

staff to consolidate documents outlining the BLM’s philosophy toward transportation 

management. The plan will not make specific transportation management decisions but will 

supply general guidance and direction. This document will become the district’s final 

transportation plan upon designation of arterial, collector, local, and land management roads 

and the completion of transportation management objectives that recommend specific 

management on individual roads. To ensure that resource objectives are met, standards for 

construction, maintenance, and access management for the road and trail system will be 

required. This plan will respond to the district’s ROD and approved resource management 

plan objectives to develop and maintain a transportation plan that meets resource management objectives while serving the needs of users in an environmentally sound manner. Roads 

will be addressed under specific resource activities. 

Eliminate unauthorized use of public land. Adjudicate and process unauthorized use cases 

and resolve trespass by (a) issuing authorizations, (b) terminating the use and reclaiming the 

land, and/or (c) disposing of land through exchanges and/or sales, regardless of land tenure 

zones. Such lands may be disposed of only if the unauthorized use occurred prior to the 

approval of the SEORMP. 

Public lands located in areas of survey error or hiatus may be retained or disposed of as 

deemed appropriate after considering the resources they contain and their relationship to the 

surrounding lands. 

Clean up and reclaim public land consistent with other resource objectives. 

Objective 2: Establish right-of-way corridor routes and consider potential sites for wind 

or solar energy facilities to the extent possible, taking into account avoidance areas, 

consistent with resource objectives. 

Rationale: Section 503 of FLPMA provides for the designation of right-of-way corridors and 

encourages use of rights-of-way in-common to minimize environmental impacts and the 

proliferation of separate rights-of-way. BLM policy, as described in BLM Manual 2801.13B1, 

is to encourage prospective applicants to locate their proposals within corridors. 

109 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Utility corridor widths may be reduced in size and may be limited to valid existing rights-ofway widths or the accumulation of rights-of-way widths where a particular utility corridor is 

bordered on both sides by SMA’s such as WSA’s, ACEC’s, NWSR’s, and VRM Class I and II 

areas. See Appendix L and Table L-1 for possible development limitations on corridors due to 

the location of various SMA’s. It may be necessary to refer to the appropriate SMA sections 

of this plan or records in the Vale District Office for more detailed information. 

BLM policy encourages the facilitation of siting for wind or solar energy facilities. Such sites 

may be established on public lands in the area covered by the SEORMP where not in conflict 

with valid existing uses or established resource management objectives. 

Monitoring: Normal BLM accomplishments and plan implementation tracking process. 

Management Actions: 1) Designate new utility corridors and continue or discontinue the 

designation of existing corridors for trans-district electric transmission lines identified by the 

Western Regional Corridor Study (WRCS), Federal and State highways, county or BLM 

roads, and railroads (see Appendix L, Table L-1). Corridor width will vary 500 to 6,000 feet on 

each side of the centerline of existing facilities as identified on Map LAND-1 except for the 

following: (a) where the alignment forms the boundary of an SMA, and the corridor will be 

outside the area, and (b) corridor designations will minimize impacts to natural values 

consistent with other resource values. 

Because of prior decisions and commitments made in the MFP, OWFEIS, and the WRCS, the 

location of PP&L 500-kV existing route below the Owyhee Dam will remain the same. The 

MFP recommends a route which avoided the area of the dam by detouring to the north (see 

Map LAND-1). However, prior to the signing of the ROD of the MFP, a separate decision had 

already been made by the Secretary of the Interior and representatives of the Department of 

the Interior to allow construction of the 500-kV PP&L power line along the proposed original 

north route. Although the detour was considered very early in the route selection process, 

the route was not selected as described in the MFP and thus was not implemented. The 

OWFEIS (see Map 7 of the OWFEIS) recognized the existing constructed 500-kV PP&L power 

line route as a primary recognized existing route for location of future power line interties. 

The WRCS used the existing constructed power line route and information obtained in the 

OWFEIS document for its report and maps. Therefore, the location of the PP&L 500-kV 

existing route below the Owyhee Dam will remain the same. Proposals for future interties 

through this area will be scrutinized very closely and some limitations or modifications of 

structures could be imposed in order to minimize impacts to natural resource values contained 

within the proposed ACEC and recommended NWSR below Owyhee Dam. The proposed 

dogleg route (see Item 3) will also be considered as a routing alternative. 

General centerline corridor widths will be as follows: (a) 500 feet BLM and county roads, (b) 

1,000 feet Federal and State highways, (c) 6,000 feet Interstate 84 corridor complex with 

multiple right-of-way users, (d) 1,500 feet large electric transmission interties (existing and 

proposed), (e) 1,000 feet smaller electrical transmission lines, (f) 1,000 feet large and small 

pipeline transmission lines, and (g) 1,000 feet railroads (see Appendix L, Table L-1 for existing 

and potential corridors). 

2) De-designate proposed MFP alternate 500-kV route. The PP&L 500-kV power line (north 

route) was constructed further to the south below the Owyhee Dam (see above). The MFP 

alternate 500-kV route will be replaced by the new proposed 500-kV dog leg route which will 

be located further to the north (see map LAND-1). Approximately 22 miles of public land 

right-of-way corridor will be involved. 

3) De-designate proposed PP&L power line (south route) right-of-way corridor as listed in the 

WRCS to protect natural values and avoid SMA conflicts. 

110 
4) De-designate proposed right-of-way corridor for possible BPA Arctic Gas Pipeline 

Transmission route right-of-way corridor as listed in the WRCS, as the application was 

withdrawn. To protect natural values and avoid special management area conflicts this rightof-way corridor will be eliminated. 

The de-designated corridors listed above, or portions thereof, may be redesignated if updated 

corridor studies indicate a need for them. Such redesignations may occur where not in 

conflict with valid existing uses or established resource management objectives. 

Public Involvement and Implementation 

Adaptive Management 

The PSEORMP/FEIS is based on adaptive management, which is a continuing process of 

planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation, to adjust management strategies to 

meet goals and objectives of ecosystem-based management. The concept of adaptive 

management uses the latest scientific information, site-specific information/data, and professional judgment to select the management strategy most likely to meet goals and objectives. 

The concept also acknowledges the need to manage resources under varying degrees of 

uncertainty as well as the need to adjust to new information. Through continually adjusting 

management strategies as needed, supported by monitoring or additional information, 

adaptive management will result in attainment of short- and long-term trend toward meeting 

objectives. Adaptive management provides the capability to respond quickly to monitoring 

data with consideration given to past season monitoring or preseason conditions. It also 

allows changes needed to meet long-term objectives of the RMP including direction from the 

WSRA, ESA, CWA, and S&G’s. 

Although there is widespread support for the adaptive management principle and process, 

many critics lack confidence in the Bureau’s ability to implement management based on this 

process. Thus, it is imperative that the each part of the cyclical process be implemented on 

schedule or as new data become available to ensure that appropriate management of public 

land resources is implemented. To ensure timely step-wise progression through the adaptive 

management process, GMA’s will be used to prioritize available funding. The detail, methodology, and intensity of studies chosen for a particular area will be determined by the nature 

and severity of the resource conflicts present in that area. As a result, a flexible monitoring 

plan is required to periodically change priorities and monitoring intensity, based on significant changes that indicate a need for more information. 

The following briefly describes the four parts of adaptive management: 

1) Planning/Decision—Plan development or revision is the process which includes decisionmaking. It starts with issue identification and goal development. The next step is to gather 

information necessary to develop alternatives for management direction that address the 

issues and goals. The final stage of planning is to develop alternative management strategies 

to address issues and meet the management goals and objectives, analyze the consequences 

of the alternatives, and choose a management strategy and actions for implementation. 

2) Implementation—Plan implementation is the process of putting decisions into effect. 

Objectives are defined as indicators used to measure progress toward attainment of goals. 

They address short- and long-term actions taken to meet goals and the DRFC. Unless 

111 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

otherwise stated, all objectives listed in the RMP are assumed to be implemented within the 

life of the plan. 

3) Monitoring— Monitoring is the orderly collection, analysis, and interpretation of resource 

data utilized to evaluate progress in meeting management objectives. Inventories and surveys 

are integral parts of monitoring and will be initiated as need is defined. Information gathered 

in the inventory and survey process form a baseline from which trends can be measured. 

Monitoring efforts provide information to: (1) determine if planned activities have been 

implemented; (2) detect magnitude and duration of change in conditions and trends; (3) 

increase understanding of cause and effect relationships; (4) predict impacts; and (5) assess 

whether S&G’s are being met. If monitoring studies indicate that objectives are not being met, 

or that progress is not being made toward meeting the S&G’s, management actions will be 

adjusted accordingly. The specific type and location of studies instituted will be more 

specifically identified within individual activity plans. 

Methods of monitoring are briefly identified for each program in the management decisions 

section and expanded in Appendix W, Monitoring. Monitoring methods in some programs 

are not expanded in the monitoring appendix since they are not key components of rangeland 

health assessments. At times, data pertinent to these programs are essential on a site-specific 

basis (such as cultural, mining, social/economic values) and can be a part of the evaluation 

based on the situation. Methodology and intensity of studies that are chosen for a particular 

area or scale will be determined by the nature and severity of the resource conflicts that are 

present. 

For monitoring data to be meaningful and useful over time, there must be consistency in the 

kinds and manner in which data are collected. However, a need for changes in sampling may 

occasionally arise when problems are detected. This could be during a review of the data 

collected, when analyzing and interpreting the data, or when conducting an assessment or 

evaluation. 

4) Evaluation/Assessment— Analysis and interpretation of inventory and monitoring data are 

central to identifying progress in meeting resource management objectives outlined in the 

RMP and activity plans. There are three aspects of evaluation/assessment. The first is 

evaluation of whether planned actions have been implemented. The second is evaluation of 

the resource-specific information/data to determine whether identified management objectives are being accomplished. The third aspect is the evaluation of plans to determine 

whether identified management objectives and management actions remain appropriate to 

public desires or if plans need to be revised or amended. 

The analysis and interpretation of inventory and monitoring data are critical in the evaluation 

of management actions in order to determine progress in meeting resource management 

objectives outlined in the plan. Since management adjustments may be needed periodically, a 

continual feedback loop based on new information will allow for mid-course corrections at 

time intervals appropriate to the systems, processes, and functions analyzed. 

The final stage of evaluation is the development of recommendations for changing current 

management actions, as needed, to meet objectives and ecosystem-based management goals. 

Adjustments should be related to implementation of activity plan objectives, standards and 

guidelines, and monitoring needs. Recommendations should be used to modify land use 

plans, if needed, thus continuing the adaptive management cycle. The “Annual Planning 

Update,” or its equivalent, will keep the interested public informed of actions and evaluations. 

The management objectives associated with the management decisions may not be completely met over the life of the plan (up to 20 years). Funding and staffing levels will affect 

112 
rates of implementation, and projected implementation rates may vary from alternative to 

alternative, depending on the cost of prescribed management activities. 

Implementation 

Implementation of the SEORMP will begin upon signing of the ROD. Some RMP decisions 

require immediate action and will become effective upon signature of this ROD. Other 

decisions do not require immediate action, but are identified for implementation during the life 

of the SEORMP. Some decisions will require action only when an activity is initiated. 

Implementation will occur according to an Implementation Plan to be developed by the 

Malheur and Jordan Field Managers. The Implementation Plan serves as a link between 

BLM’s planning and budgeting processes. Information in the Implementation Plan will help 

to ensure that existing management and uses are brought into conformance with SEORMP 

decisions; establish priorities, time frames and costs for implementing decisions; ensure that 

future management actions conform with the SEORMP; provide a basis for tracking and 

documenting progress in SEORMP implementation; and develop budget proposals. 

Tracking of the plan’s implementation will be accomplished primarily through the regular 

publication of planning updates detailing progress being made in both implementing actions 

and in accomplishment of objectives. Also, specific tracking mechanisms such as rangeland 

program summary (RPS), include changes in the Allotment Summary (Appendix E). Updates 

will be utilized and provide a means of keeping the interested public informed of actions and 

evaluations. 

Plan Evaluation 

The RMP will be routinely monitored and periodically evaluated to determine if plan objectives are being met, or are likely to be met, and whether the objectives continue to be valid, 

realistic and achievable. Evaluation will also assess whether changed circumstances or new 

information will substantially alter the levels or methods of activities in the plan, or result in 

impacts that will be substantially different than those that were projected. The reason for the 

evaluation is to determine whether there is significant cause for an amendment or revision of 

the plan, or whether plan maintenance is appropriate. This adaptive management approach is 

a continuing process of monitoring, researching, evaluating and adjusting management with 

the purpose of improving plan implementation and achieving RMP objectives. This approach 

should optimize the benefits and efficiency of the RMP. It will allow adjustments to be made 

to meet plan objectives, increase success and improve results. The RMP is based on current 

scientific knowledge and to be successful, it must have flexibility to adapt and respond to 

new information as the knowledge base changes. New information will be evaluated and a 

decision will be made whether to pursue adjustments or changes. New information that will 

compel a strategy adjustment may come from monitoring, research, statutory or regulatory 

changes, organizational or process adjustments or additional sources. This adjustment may 

result in the refinement of management direction or land use allocations as a plan maintenance action, or it may require a plan amendment. Adaptive management decisions may vary 

in scale from site-specific, to watershed level, to the entire resource area. 

Minor changes, refinements or clarifications in the plan may take the form of plan maintenance actions. Maintenance actions respond to minor data changes and incorporation of 

activity plans. Such maintenance is limited to further refining or documenting a previously 

approved decision incorporated into the plan. Plan maintenance will not result in expansion 

of the scope of resource uses or restrictions, nor change the terms, conditions and decisions 

113 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

of the RMP. Maintenance actions are not considered a plan amendment and do not require 

the formal public involvement and interagency coordination process undertaken for plan 

amendments. Plan maintenance will be documented as appropriate. Plan maintenance is 

provided for in the BLM planning regulations in 43 CFR 1610.5-4. 

If evaluation concludes that land use allocations or management direction need to be 

modified or if plan objectives are not achievable, a plan amendment or revision may be 

appropriate. A plan amendment or revision may also be initiated because of the need to 

consider monitoring findings, new data, new or revised policy, a change in circumstances, or 

a proposed action that may result in a change in the scope of resource uses, or a change in 

the terms, conditions and decisions of the RMP. If a plan amendment or revision is initiated, 

the procedures set forth in 43 CFR 1610.5-5 or 1610.5-6 will be followed. 

114 
Acronyms and Glossary 

Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Reader note: Refer to the list below for ORV ~ outstandingly remarkable value 

OWFEIS ~ “Oregon Wilderness Final 

Environmental Impact Statement” 

OWS ~ occupancy with stipulations 

PFC ~ proper functioning condition 

PILT ~ payments in lieu of taxes 

PNC ~ potential natural community 

PP&L ~ Pacific Power and Light 

PSEORMP/FEIS ~ “Proposed Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan/ 

Final Environmental Impact Statement” 

PRIA ~ “Public Rangelands Improvement 

Act” 

PUC ~ Public Utilities Commission 

RAIDS ~ riparian aquatic information 

data system 

RAWS ~ remote automated weather 

station 

RCA ~ riparian conservation area 

RMO ~ riparian management objective 

RMP ~ resource management plan 

RNA ~ research natural area 

ROD ~ record of decision 

ROS ~ recreation opportunity spectrum 

RPS ~ rangeland program summary 

RS ~ “Revised Statutes” 

R&PP ~ recreation and public purpose 

SCORP ~ Oregon’s “Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan” 

SEORAC ~ Southeastern Oregon 

Resource Advisory Council 

SEORMP ~ “Southeastern Oregon 

Resource Management Plan” 

SHPO ~ State Historic Preservation 

Office 

SMA ~ special management area 

SMCMPA ~ Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protective Area 

SRMA ~ special recreation management 

area 

SRP ~ special recreation permit 

S&G’s ~ “Standards of Rangeland Health 

and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing 

Management” 

TGA ~ “The Taylor Grazing Act” 

TMDL ~ total maximum daily load 

TNC ~ The Nature Conservancy 

TNR ~ temporary nonrenewable grazing 

T&E ~ threatened and endangered 

USDA ~ U.S. Department of Agriculture 

USDI ~ U.S. Department of the Interior 

USFS ~ U.S. Forest Service 

USFWS ~ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

USGS ~ U.S. Geological Survey 

VRM ~ visual resource management 

WAFWA ~ Western Association of Fish 

and Wildlife Agencies 

WFSA ~ wildland fire situation analysis 

WRCS ~ “Western Regional Corridor 

Study” 

WSA ~ wilderness study area 

WSRO ~ “Wilderness Study Report, 

Oregon” 

WQMP ~ “Water Quality Management 

Plan” 

WQRP ~ water quality restoration plan 

abbreviations or acronyms that may have 

been used in this document. 

ACEC ~ area of critical environmental 

concern 

ADC ~ animal damage control 

AML ~ appropriate management level 

AMP ~ allotment management plan 

AMR ~ appropriate management 

response 

APHIS ~ Agricultural Plant and Animal 

Health Inspection Service 

ARA ~ Andrews Resource Area 

ATV ~ all-terrain vehicle 

AUM ~ animal unit month 

BA ~ biological assessment 

BIA ~ Bureau of Indian Affairs 

BLM ~ Bureau of Land Management 

BMP ~ best management practice 

BO ~ biological opinion 

BOM ~ Bureau of Mines 

BOR ~ Bureau of Reclamation 

BPA ~ Bonneville Power Administration 

CERCLIS ~ comprehensive environmental response, Compensation and Liability 

Information System 

CEQ ~ Council on Environmental 

Quality 

CFR ~ “Code of Federal Regulations” 

CLCAS ~ “Canada Lynx Conservation 

Assessment and Strategy” 

CRMP ~ “Cultural Resources Management Plan” 

CWA ~ “Clean Water Act” 

DLCD ~ Department of Land Conservation and Development 

DOD ~ Department of Defense 

DOE ~ Department of Energy 

DOGAMI ~ Oregon Department of 

Geology and 

Mineral Industries 

DOI ~ Department of the Interior 

DPC ~ desired plant community 

DRFC ~ desired range of future conditions 

EA ~ environmental assessment 

EIS ~ environmental impact statement 

EPA ~ Environmental Protection Agency 

ER ~ entrenchment ratio 

ERMA ~ extensive recreation management area ERU ~ ecological reporting 

unit 

ESA ~ “Endangered Species Act” 

ESI ~ ecological site inventory 

E/EIS ~ “Eastside Environmental Impact 

Statement” 

FAA ~ Federal Aviation Administration 

FERC ~ Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

FLPMA ~ “Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act” 

FMP ~ fire management plan 

FWFMP ~ “Federal Wildland Fire 

Management Policy” 

GIS ~ geographic information system 

GMA ~ geographic management area 

GTR ~ green tree replacement 

HA ~ herd area 

HMA ~ herd management area 

HMP ~ habitat management plan 

HUC ~ hydrologic unit code 

ICBEMP ~ Interior Columbia Basin 

Ecosystem Management Project 

IMP ~ “Interim Management Policy” 

IMPLWR ~ “Interim Management Policy 

for Land under Wilderness Review” 

INFISH ~ “Inland Native Fish Strategy” 

JRA ~ Jordan Resource Area 

KGRA ~ known geothermic resource area 

LCDC ~ Land Conservation and 

Development Commission 

LGMP ~ "Leslie Gulch ACEC Management Plan" 

MFP ~ management framework plan 

MOU ~ memorandum of understanding 

MRA ~ Malheur Resource Area 

NCA ~ national conservation area 

NEPA ~ “National Environmental Policy 

Act” 

NHOT ~ National Historic Oregon Trail 

NHPA ~ “National Historic Preservation 

Act” 

NL ~ no leasing 

NOAA ~ National Oceanographic and 

Atmospheric Administration 

NPS ~ National Park Service 

NPSP ~ nonpoint source pollution 

NRCS ~ Natural Resources Conservation 

Service 

NRHP ~ National Register of Historic 

Places 

NSO ~ no surface occupancy 

NWSR ~ national wild and scenic river 

NWSRA ~ “National Wild and Scenic 

River Act” 

NWSRS ~ National Wild and Scenic 

River System 

OAR ~ “Oregon Administrative Rules” 

OBSMP ~ “Oregon’s Bighorn Sheep 

Management Plan” 

ODA ~ Oregon Department of Agriculture 

ODEQ ~ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 

ODF ~ Oregon Department of Forestry 

ODFW ~ Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife 

ODOT ~ Oregon Department of Transportation 

ODPR ~ Oregon Department of Parks 

and Recreation 

ODSL ~ Oregon Division of State Lands 

OHV ~ off-highway vehicle 

ONA ~ outstanding natural area 

ONHP ~ Oregon Natural Heritage 

Program 

ONHTMP ~ “Vale District Oregon 

National Historic Trail Management 

Plan” 

ORS ~ “Oregon Revised Statute” 

G-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Glossary
 

Acquired lands ~ Lands acquired for BLM administration in various ways, such as but not 

limited to: (1) any lands purchased by congressionally appropriated funds, (2) land donations, (3) land exchanges, (4) Land and Water Conservation Fund acquisitions, (5) land 

withdrawals returned to public land status through withdrawal revocations and/or relinquishments, etc., (6) split-estate acquisitions, (7) Federal agency jurisdictional transfers, (8) 

easement acquisitions, and/or (9) lands acquired by any other means. 

Activity occasion ~ A standard unit of recreation use consisting of one individual participating in one recreation activity during any reasonable portion of any one day. 

Actual use data ~ The number of livestock, kind or class of those livestock, and time period 

those livestock actually grazed a specific allotment or pasture. 

Agate ~ A variety of chalcedony that exhibits several different color patterns (such as flat 

and/or concentric bands, swirls and loops) usually caused by mineral impurities. It is 

generally used as an ornamental or gem stone. Moss, lace, and plume agate are notable 

varieties. 

Allotment management plan (AMP) ~ A plan for managing livestock grazing on specified 

public land. 

Allowable sale quantity ~ The quantity of timber that may be sold from suitable land and 

that has been included in the yield projections for the timber period specified by the land use 

plan. Usually expressed on an annual basis as the average annual allowable sale quantity. 

Alluvium ~ Material deposited on the land by water, such as sand, silt, or clay. 

All-terrain vehicle (ATV) ~ Small, 3-wheel and 4-wheel recreational vehicles capable of 

operating in rugged terrain. 

Andesite ~ A fine-grained igneous rock of intermediate composition composed of about 

equal amounts of iron and magnesium minerals and plagioclase feldspars. 

Animal unit ~ One cow, one cow/calf pair, one horse, or five sheep. 

Animal unit month (AUM) ~ The forage needed to support one cow, one cow/calf pair, one 

horse, or five sheep for one month. Approximately 800 pounds of forage. 

Appropriate management level (AML) ~ The optimum number of wild horses that 

provides a thriving natural ecological balance on the public range. 

Appropriate management response (AMR) ~ Specific actions taken in response to a 

wildland fire to implement protection and fire use objectives. 

Area of critical environmental concern (ACEC) ~ Area where special management 

attention is required to protect and prevent irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, 

or scenic values, fish and wildlife resources, or other natural systems or processes, or to 

protect humans from natural hazards. 

Argillite ~ A weakly metamorphosed clay-rich sedimentary rock. 

Asbestos ~ A group of fibrous silicate minerals, generally used in the manufacture of heat 

and fire resistant materials (such as cloth, yarn, paint, paper, brake-linings, and tile). 

G-2 
Acronyms and Glossary 

Attribute ~ A discreet feature or characteristic of biotic or physical resources that can be 

measured (example: plant density, which is the number of individuals or stems per unit 

area). 

Badlands ~ Steep or very steep, commonly nonstony, barren land dissected by many 

intermittent drainage channels, most common in semiarid and arid regions where streams are 

entrenched in soft geologic material. Local relief generally ranges from 25 to 500 feet. 

Runoff potential is very high, and geologic erosion is active. 

Band ~ A group of wild horses running together or a lone wild horse. 

Basalt ~ A dark, heavy, fine-grained silica-poor igneous rock composed largely of iron and 

magnesium minerals and calcium-rich plagioclase feldspars. 

Beneficial use ~ Any of various uses of water in an area. Water may be for agricultural, 

domestic, or industrial use, salmonid spawning, recreation, wildlife habitat, or other uses. 

Bentonite ~ A soft, plastic, porous, light-colored rock composed essentially of clay of the 

smectite group, plus colloidal silica, and produced by the devitrification and accompanying 

chemical alteration of rhyolitic tuffs or volcanic ash. It has the ability to absorb large 

quantities of water and expand several times its original volume. It is used as a sealant on 

dams and reservoirs, in drilling mud, and pet litter, and as a binder. 

Best management practices (BMP’s) ~ A set of practices which, when applied during 

implementation of management actions, ensures that negative impacts to natural resources 

are minimized. BMP’s are applied based on site-specific evaluation and represent the most 

effective and practical means to achieve management goals for a given site. 

Black acres ~ Actual burned area or actual acres treated for mechanical. 

BLM assessment species ~ Plant and animal species on List 2 of the “Oregon Natural 

Heritage Data Base,” or those species on the “Oregon List of Sensitive Wildlife Species” 

(OAR 635-100-040) that are identified in BLM Instruction Memo OR-91-57 and are not 

included as Federal candidate, State listed, or BLM sensitive species. 

BLM sensitive species ~ Plant or animal species eligible for Federal listed, Federal candidate, State listed, or State candidate (plant) status, or on List 1 in the “Oregon Natural 

Heritage Data Base,” or approved for this category by the BLM State Director. 

BLM tracking species ~ Plant and animal species on List 3 and 4 of the “Oregon Natural 

Heritage Data Base,” or those species on the “Oregon List of Sensitive Wildlife Species” 

(OAR 635-100-040) that are identified in BLM Instruction Memo OR-91-57 and are not 

included as Federal candidate, State listed, BLM sensitive, or BLM assessment species. 

Board foot ~ A unit of measure of the wood in lumber, logs, or trees. The amount of wood 

in a board 1-foot wide, 1-foot long, and 1-inch thick before finishing. 

Borax ~ An evaporite mineral (Na2B4O7. 10H2O). It is the major source of boron and is 

generally found in alkali lake deposits. It has a variety of uses (including glass and ceramics 

manufacturing, agricultural chemicals, chemical fluxes, fire retardant and preservative). 

Brine ~ Subsurface water with a high concentration of dissolved salts, usually sodium, 

potassium and/or calcium, and lesser concentrations of other salts (such as boron). 

Buffer strip ~ A protective area adjacent to an area of concern requiring special attention or 

protection. In contrast to riparian zones, which are ecological units, buffer strips can be 

designed to meet varying management concerns. 

G-3 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Burning period ~ That part of each 24-hour period when fires spread most rapidly, typically 

from 10 a.m. to sundown. 

Calcareous soil ~ A soil containing enough calcium carbonate (commonly combined with 

magnesium carbonate) to effervesce visibly when treated with cold, dilute hydrochloric acid. 

Caldera ~ A volcanic depression much larger than the original crater and generally formed 

by the violent eruption of rhyolitic magma (examples: Crater Lake, and Mahogany Mountain Caldera). 

Cave ~ See Chapter 2, Caves, for definition. 

Chalcedony ~ A cryptocrystalline variety of quartz (SiO2) consisting of microscopic fibers. 

It exhibits a myriad of colors and patterns, and is used primarily as an ornamental or gemstone. Agate, jasper and thunder eggs are varieties. 

Channeled ~ Refers to a drainage area in which natural meandering or repeated branching 

and convergence of a streambed have created deeply incised cuts, either active or abandoned, 

in alluvial material. 

Chert ~ A hard, very dense, fine-grained sedimentary rock composed largely of microscopic 

quartz (SiO2) crystals; synonymous with flint. 

Clastic ~ A rock composed of broken pieces of preexisting rock. 

Clay ~ As a soil separate, the mineral soil particles less than 0.002 millimeter in diameter. 

As a soil textural class, soil material that is 40 percent or more clay, less than 45 percent 

sand, and less than 40 percent silt. Geology: A rock or mineral fragment of any composition 

finer than 0.00016 inches in diameter. Mineral: A hydrous aluminum-silicate that occurs as 

microscopic plates, and commonly has the ability to absorb substantial quantities of water on 

the surface of the plates. 

Clayey soil ~ Silty clay, sandy clay, or clay. 

Climax vegetation ~ The stabilized plant community on a particular site. The plant cover 

reproduces itself and does not change as long as the environment remains the same. 

Coarse textured soil ~ Sand or loamy sand. 

Colluvium ~ Soil material, rock fragments, or both, moved by creep, slide, or local wash 

and deposited at the base of steep slopes. 

Commercial forestland ~ Forestland that can produce 20 cubic feet of timber per acre per 

year and that is not withdrawn from timber production. 

Commercial thinning ~ A cutting made in a forest stand to remove excess merchantable 

timber in order to accelerate growth or improve the health of the remaining trees. 

Commodities ~ Goods and services produced by industries. 

Complex, soil ~ A map unit of two or more kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas in such an 

intricate pattern or so small in area that it is not practical to map them separately at the 

selected scale of mapping. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are 

somewhat similar in all areas. 

Corrective maintenance ~ Maintenance performed on a nonroutine basis and considered to 

be a one-time only cost. 

G-4 
Acronyms and Glossary 

Craton ~ A portion of a continent that has been structurally stable for a prolonged period of 

time. 

Crown ~ The upper part of a tree or shrub, including the living branches and their foliage. 

Cryptogamic crust ~ See microbiotic crust. 

Custodial management ~ Management of a group of similar allotments with minimal 

expenditure of appropriated funds to continue protecting existing resource values. 

Deep soil ~ A soil that is 40 to 60 inches deep over bedrock or to other material that restricts 

the penetration of plant roots. 

Diameter at breast height (DBH) ~ The diameter of a tree measured 4.5 feet above the 

ground. 

Diatomite ~ A soft, crumbly, lightweight, highly porous sedimentary rock consisting mainly 

of microscopic siliceous skeletons of diatoms (single-celled aquatic plants related to algae). 

It is used for filter aids, paint filler, abrasives, anti-caking agents, insecticide carriers, and 

insulation. 

Drainage, surface ~ Runoff, or surface flow of water, from an area. 

Duff ~ A generally firm organic layer on the surface of mineral soils consisting of fallen, 

decaying plant material including everything from the litter on the surface to underlying pure 

humus. 

Earnings ~ Wages and salaries, other labor income, and proprietor’s income (including 

inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments). 

Ecological site condition ~ See ecological status. 

Ecological site inventory (ESI) ~ The basic inventory of present and potential vegetation on 

BLM rangelands. Ecological sites are differentiated on the basis of the kind, proportion, or 

amount of plant species. 

Ecological status ~ The present state of vegetation of a range site in relation to the potential 

natural community for that site. Four classes (see below) are used to express the degree to 

which the production or composition of the present plant community reflects that of the 

potential natural community (climax): 

Ecological status (seral stage) Percent of community in climax condition 

Potential natural community 

Late seral 

Mid seral 

Early seral 

76–100 

51–75 

26–50 

0–25 

Ecosystem-based management ~ (1) management driven by explicit goals, executed by 

policies, protocols, and practices, and made adaptable by monitoring and research based on 

our best understanding of the ecological interactions and processes necessary to sustain 

ecosystem composition, structure, and function; (2) any land management system that seeks 

to protect viable populations of all native species, perpetuate natural-disturbance regimes on 

G-5 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

the regional scale, adopt a planning timeline of centuries, and allow human use at levels that 

do not result in long-term ecological degradation. 

Employee compensation ~ Wages and salaries paid to employees by industries, plus the 

value of benefits and any contributions to Social Security and pension funds by the employee 

and employer. 

Enhancement of habitat for special status animal and plant species ~ Taking deliberate, 

proactive measures that are expected to make habitat conditions more productive, diverse, or 

resilient to disturbances for the benefit of special status animal and plant species. 

Enhancement of populations of special status animal and plant species ~ Taking deliberate, proactive measures in cooperation with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife or 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to meet their respective species management goals. For 

animal species, enhancement means allowing supplemental releases of fish or wildlife into 

existing populations to increase overall numbers of animals or to improve their genetic 

health. For plants, enhancement means transplanting or seeding species to supplement 

existing populations. 

Ephemeral stream ~ A stream, or reach of a stream, that flows only in direct response to 

precipitation. It receives no continuous supply from melting snow or other source, and its 

channel is above the water table at all times. 

Epithermal deposit ~ A type of hydrothermal deposit that occurs mainly as veins formed 

within 1,600 feet of the surface and with temperatures ranging from 122–392 °F. 

Erosion ~ The wearing away of the land surface by water, wind, ice, or other geologic 

agents and by such processes as gravitational creep. 

Erosion (accelerated) ~ Erosion much more rapid than geologic erosion, occurring mainly 

as a result of human or animal activities or of a catastrophe in nature, such as with fire, that 

exposes the surface. 

Erosion (geologic) ~ Erosion caused by geologic processes acting over long geologic 

periods and resulting in the wearing away of mountains and the building up of such landscape features as flood plains and coastal plains; synonymous with natural erosion. 

Escaped fire ~ A fire that has exceeded initial attack capabilities. 

Evaporite mineral ~ A mineral precipitated as a result of evaporation (example: halite). 

Extended attack situation ~ The situation when a fire cannot be suppressed with initial 

attack forces within a reasonable period of time. This type fire can usually be suppressed by 

additional forces from within the geographic area of the district and usually within 24 hours 

after suppression action has started. 

Extensive recreation management area (ERMA) ~ Area where recreation management is 

less structured (than within an SRMA) and recreation use more dispersed with minimal 

regulatory constraints and where minimal recreation-related investments are required. 

Feldspar ~ The most abundant minerals of the Earth’s crust. The two groups are Alkali and 

Plagioclase. 

Fertility, soil ~ The quality that enables a soil to provide plant nutrients in adequate amounts 

and in proper balance, for the growth of specified plants when light, moisture, temperature, 

tilth, and other growth factors are favorable. 

G-6 
Acronyms and Glossary 

Fuel type ~ An identification association of fuel elements of distinctive species, form, size, 

arrangement or other characteristics that will cause a predictable rate of spread or resistance 

to control under specific weather conditions. 

Fine textured soil ~ Sandy clay, silty clay, or clay. 

Fire effects ~ The physical, biological, and ecological impact of fire on the environment. 

Fire intensity ~ The product of the available heat of combustion per unit area of ground and 

the rate of spread of the fire. 

Fire management area ~ One or more parcels of land having a common set of fire management objectives. 

Fire regime ~ Periodicity and pattern of naturally occurring fire in a particular area or 

vegetative type, described in terms of frequency, biological severity, and area extent (Society 

of American Foresters, 1996). 

Fire return interval ~ The number of years between two successive fires documented in a 

designated area (such as the interval between two successive fire occurrences). 

Fire strategy ~ An overall plan of action for fighting a fire that gives regard to the most 

cost-efficient use of personnel and equipment in consideration of values threatened, fire 

behavior, legal constraints, and objectives established for resource management. Leaves 

decisions on the tactical use of personnel and equipment to line commanders in the suppression function. 

Fire suppression ~ All the work activities connected with fire-extinguishing operations, 

beginning with the discovery and continuing until the fire is completely extinguished. 

Flood plain ~ A nearly level alluvial plain that borders a stream and is subject to inundation 

under flood-stage conditions unless protected artificially. It is usually a constructional 

landform built of sediment deposited during overflow and lateral migration of the stream. 

Fluorite ~ Fluorospar (CaF2). A halide mineral-related to table salt (Na2Cl), and the 

principal ore of fluorine gas. Fluorite is used as a flux in the manufacture of glass, in the 

manufacturing of hydrofluoric acid (HF), and as a source of carved ornamental stones. 

Fluvial (Fluviatile) deposit ~ A sedimentary deposit laid down, transported by, or suspended in, a stream. 

Forb ~ Any herbaceous plant not a grass or a grasslike species. 

Forest health ~ The condition in which forest ecosystems sustain their complexity, diversity, 

resiliency and productivity while providing for human needs and values. 

Forestland ~ Land that is now, or is capable of being, at least 10 percent stocked by forest 

tree species such as ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, western larch, white fir, or lodgepole pine. 

Fuels ~ Includes living and dead plant materials that are capable of burning. 

Fuel type ~ An identification association of fuel elements of distinctive species, form, size, 

arrangement or other characteristics that will cause a predictable rate of spread or resistance 

to control under specific weather conditions. 

Graben ~ A fault-bounded down-dropped portion of the Earth’s crust. 

G-7 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Gravel ~ Rounded or angular fragments of rock as much as 3 inches (2 millimeters–7.6 

centimeters) in diameter. An individual piece is a pebble. 

Gravel ~ (Geology) Unconsolidated, rounded rock fragments greater than 0.08 inches in 

diameter. Sizes range from pebbles (.008–2.5 inches) to cobbles (2.5–10 inches) to boulders 

(greater than 10 inches). 

Greenstripping ~ The practice of establishing or using patterns of fire-resilient vegetation 

and/or material to reduce wildfire occurrence and size. Examples are establishing fireresilient vegetation adjacent to roads or railways, around or interspersed in valuable shrub 

stands, or within large blocks of flash fuels. 

Ground water (geology) ~ Water filling all the unblocked pores of the material below the 

water table. 

Ground yarding ~ Use of tracked or wheeled equipment to transport logs from where they 

are cut to a landing. 

Gully ~ A miniature valley with steep sides cut by running water and through which water 

ordinarily runs only after rainfall. A gully generally is an obstacle to farm machinery and is 

too deep to be obliterated by ordinary tillage; a rill is of lesser depth and can be smoothed 

over by ordinary tillage. 

Harvest unit ~ An area from which trees are harvested. Harvest method can range from 

clearcutting to individual tree selection. 

Herd ~ One or more wild horse bands using the same general area. 

Herd Area (HA) ~ A geographic area identified as having provided habitat for a wild horse 

herd in 1971. 

Herd management area (HMA) ~ A geographic area identified in a management framework plan or resource management plan for the long-term management of a wild horse herd. 

Herd management area plan ~ A plan that prescribes measures for the protection, management, and control of wild horses and their habitat on one or more HMA’s, in conformance 

with decisions made in approved management framework or resource management plans. 

High resource values ~ Lands with high resource values are considered to be public lands 

that have the caliber of resources to qualify them for inclusion in SMA’s such as ACEC’s, 

NWSR’s, WSA’s, and high resource areas such as critical wildlife habitat areas, wild horse 

herd areas, critical fish habitat areas, cultural site areas, threatened and endangered species 

habitats, etc. Long-term retention of public lands in these SMA’s is either required by law 

through congressional action or identified through the land use planning process. 

Horizon, soil ~ A layer of soil, approximately parallel to the surface, having distinct characteristics produced by soil-forming processes. 

Horst ~ A fault-bounded uplifted portion of the Earth’s crust. 

Hot-springs deposit ~ A type of hydrothermal deposit formed in a hot-springs environment. 

Hydrothermal deposit ~ A mineral deposit formed by hot, mineral-laden fluids. 

Igneous rock ~ Rock that solidified from a molten or semimolten state. The major varieties 

include intrusive (solidified beneath the surface of the Earth) and volcanic (solidified on or 

very near the surface of the Earth). 

G-8 
 

Acronyms and Glossary 

Incident commander ~ Individual responsible for the management of all incident (fire) 

operations. 

Initial attack ~ First action taken to suppress a fire, via ground and/or air. An aggressive 

suppression action consistent with firefighter and public safety and values to be protected. 

Individual tree selection cutting ~ A cutting method in which selected trees are removed 

throughout a harvest unit to meet a specific goal. Goals can range from harvest of a specific 

volume to improving the health of the remaining trees. 

Infiltration rate ~ The rate at which water penetrates the surface of the soil at any given 

instant, usually expressed in inches per hour. The rate can be limited by the infiltration 

capacity of the soil or the rate at which water is applied at the surface. 

Initial attack ~ First action taken to suppress a fire, via ground and/or air. 

Interim management policy (IMP) ~ Policy for managing public lands under wilderness 

review. Section 603 (c) of FLPMA states: “During the period of review of such areas and 

until Congress has determined otherwise, the Secretary shall continue to manage such lands 

according to his authority under this Act and other applicable law in a manner so as not to 

impair the suitability of such areas for preservation as wilderness, subject, however, to the 

continuation of existing mining and grazing uses and mineral leasing in the manner and 

degree in which the same was being conducted on the date of approval of this Act: Provided, 

that, in managing the public lands the Secretary shall by regulation or otherwise take any 

action required to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the lands and their resources 

or to afford environmental protection.” 

Intermittent stream ~ A stream, or reach of a stream, that flows for prolonged periods only 

when it receives groundwater discharge or long, continued contributions from melting snow 

or other surface and shallow subsurface sources. 

Interior drainage ~ Streams with no outlet to the sea. 

Known geothermal resource area (KGRA) ~ “An area in which the geology, nearby 

discoveries, competitive interest, or other indicia would, in the opinion of the Secretary, 

engender the belief in men who are experienced in the subject matter that the prospect for 

extraction of geothermal stream or associated geothermal resources are good enough to 

warrant expenditures or money for that purpose” [43 CFR 3200.0-5(k)]. 

Lacustrine deposit (geology) ~ Material deposited in lake water and exposed when the 

water level is lowered or the elevation of the land is raised. 

Landing ~ A location where timber is gathered for further transport. 

Limestone ~ A sedimentary rock consisting chiefly of calcium carbonate. 

Limits of acceptable change ~ For recreation management, a nine-step process used to 

define the desired resource conditions for an area and to determine acceptable levels of 

resource change due to recreation use. The process helps to develop management actions to 

avoid exceeding standards. 

Loam ~ Soil material that is 7 to 27 percent clay particles, 28 to 50 percent silt particles, and 

less than 52 percent sand particles. 

Magma ~ Molten rock from within the Earth capable of flowing like liquid. 

G-9 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Maintenance of habitat for special status animal and plant species ~ Avoidance or 

mitigation of projects and land uses so that they cause no new significant adverse impacts on 

habitats of special status animal and plant species. The quality of the habitat to be maintained is probably variable and may range from poor to excellent. The amount of habitat 

may be below its potential. Under maintenance management options, especially where 

habitat quality is low, there is some risk that species may eventually need to be listed under 

the authority of the ESA. 

Maintenance of populations of special status animal and plant species ~ Avoidance or 

mitigation of projects and land uses so that they have no new significant adverse impacts on 

populations of special status animal and plant species. Populations to be maintained may 

range from low to high over time and may be below their potential level. Under maintenance management options, especially where populations are small, there is some risk that 

species may eventually need to be listed under the authority of the ESA. 

Management framework plan (MFP) ~ BLM land use plan, predecessor to the RMP. 

Map unit ~ The basic system of description in a soil survey and delineation on a soil map. 

Can vary in level of detail. 

Mature timber ~ Trees that have passed their maximum rate of growth in terms of physiological processes, height, diameter or volume. 

MBF ~ Thousand board feet. 

Mechanical treatment ~ Use of mechanical equipment for seeding, brush management, and 

other management practices. 

Medium textured soil ~ Very fine sandy loam, loam, silt loam, or silt. 

Merchantable trees ~ Trees that are of sufficient size to be economically processed into 

wood products. 

Metamorphosed ~ Rock that has been altered in composition, texture or structure by heat 

and/or pressure. 

Microbiotic crust ~ Lichens, mosses, green algae, fungi, cyanobacteria, and bacteria 

growing on or just below the surface of soils. 

MMBF ~ Million board feet. 

Monitoring ~ The periodic and systematic collection of resource data to measure progress 

toward achieving objectives. 

Multiple use management ~ Management of public land and resource values to best meet 

various present and future needs of the American people. This means coordinated management of resources and uses to assure the long-term health of the ecosystem. 

Multiplier ~ A change in an economic measure resulting from a specified change in some 

other economic measure. 

Naturalness (a primary wilderness value) ~ An area that generally appears to have been 

affected primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of people’s work substantially 

unnoticeable. 

G-10 
 

Acronyms and Glossary 

Near natural rate of recovery ~ Synonymous with the PACFISH requirement not to 

“retard” or “measurably slow” recovery of degraded riparian features. Further defined in 

these recommendations within the context of effects that “carry over to the next year.” Any 

effect that carries over to the next year is likely to result in cumulative negative effects and 

measurably slow recovery of degraded riparian features. 

Net value change ~ The sum of the changes resulting from increases (benefits) and decreases (damages) in the value of outputs from the land area affected as the consequences of 

fire. An average dollar value per acre is assigned based on the change to all resources 

including range, watershed, wildlife, soils, and recreation. 

Nutrient, plant ~ Any element taken in by a plant essential to its growth. Plant nutrients are 

mainly nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, sulfur, iron, manganese, 

copper, boron, and zinc obtained from the soil, and carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen obtained 

from the air and water. 

Off-highway vehicle (OHV) ~ A vehicle that can be operated off of improved and regularly 

maintained roads with hardened or gravel surfaces. 

Old growth forest ~ Dry site pine stands meeting the following criteria: At least 10 trees/ 

acre that are at least 150 years of age and/or 21 inches dbh, and have a basal area of 24 

square foot/acre at least 10 acres in size; or, in very late-seral stands, at least 2 trees/acre that 

are at least 200 years of age and/or 31 inches dbh, and have a basal area of 11 square foot/ 

acre. 

Organic matter~ Plant and animal residue in the soil in various stages of decomposition. 

Overstory ~ The trees in a forest that form the upper crown cover. 

Percolation ~ The downward movement of water through the soil. 

Perennial stream ~ A stream in which water is present during all seasons of the year. 

Perlite ~ A rhyolite volcanic glass that contains more water than ordinary obsidian. It 

commonly contains a cracked texture caused by contraction during cooling. The material is 

used primarily as lightweight aggregate and as an insulator. 

Permeability ~ The quality of the soil that enables water to move downward through the 

profile, measured as the number of inches per hour that water moves downward through the 

saturated soil. 

Personal income ~ Employee compensation plus property income. 

Phase 1 fire planning ~ The first phase of a two-stage fire management planning process 

that identifies desired resource conditions and fire management direction, including fire 

management strategies, which will promote achievement of resource objectives 

pH value ~ A numerical designation of acidity and alkalinity in soil (see “reaction, soil”). 

Physiographic province ~ A geographic region with similar climatic, land form, and 

geologic features, and which is significantly different from adjacent regions. 

Picture rock ~ (Also known as picture jasper, scenic jasper.) A variety of chalcedony with 

fanciful patterns that often resemble scenery. Varieties are found in southeastern Oregon 

(examples: Owyhee jasper and McDermitt jasper). 

Pluton ~ An igneous rock that crystallized deep underground. 

G-11 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Pluvial ~ Referring to a period of greater rainfall. 

Pluvial Lake ~ A lake formed during a period of exceptionally high rainfall (such as during 

a time of glacial advance during the Pleistocene epoch) and now either extinct or existing as 

a remnant, such as Lake Bonneville. 

Porphyry deposit ~ A large, low-grade metallic mineral deposit containing disseminated 

sulfide minerals (examples: copper, gold, molybdenum, or tin). 

Prescribed burning ~ Controlled application of fire to wildland fuels in either their natural 

or modified state, under specified environmental conditions that allow the fire to be confined 

to a predetermined area and at the same time to produce the fire line intensity and rate of 

spread required to attain planned resource management objectives. 

Prescribed fire ~ Any fire ignited by management actions to meet specific objectives. A 

written, approved prescribed fire plan must exist, and NEPA requirements must be met, prior 

to ignition. 

Prescription ~ Written statement defining objectives to be attained, as well as measurable 

criteria, which guide the selection of appropriate management actions. Prescription criteria 

may include safety, economic, public health, environmental, geographic, administrative, 

social, and legal considerations under which the fire will be allowed to burn. 

Preventative maintenance ~ Scheduled servicing, repairs, inspections, adjustments, and 

replacement of parts that result in fewer breakdowns and fewer premature replacements, and 

achieve the expected life of facilities and equipment. 

Primary wilderness values ~ The primary or key wilderness values described in the 

“Wilderness Act” by which WSA’s and designated wilderness are managed to protect and 

enhance the wilderness resource. Values include roadlessness, naturalness, solitude, primitive and unconfined recreation, and size. 

Primitive and unconfined recreation (a primary wilderness value) ~Nnonmotorized and 

undeveloped types of outdoor recreation activities. Refers to wilderness recreation opportunities, such as nature study, hiking, photography, backpacking, fishing, hunting, and other 

related activities. Does not include the use of motorized vehicles, bicycles, or other mechanized means of travel. 

Productivity ~ (1) Soil productivity: the capacity of a soil to produce plant growth, due to 

the soil’s chemical, physical, and biological properties (such as depth, temperature, waterholding capacity, and mineral, nutrient, and organic matter content). (2) Vegetative productivity: the rate of production of vegetation within a given period. (3) General: the innate 

capacity of an environment to support plant and animal life over time. 

Project acres ~ (fire) Total project size. 

Public land ~ Any land or interest in land owned by the United States and administered by 

the Secretary of the Interior through the BLM. 

Public resource values ~ Lands with public resource values are considered to be any public 

lands located outside SMA’s, and high resource areas that do not have the caliber of resources to qualify them for inclusion in SMA’s and high resource areas. For these types of 

lands BLM would maintain its land tenure adjustments options within Zone 1, 2, and 3 areas. 

Any land tenure adjustments involving public lands having “public resource values” must be 

determined to be in the public interest and must meet the requirements of NEPA and the 

General Management Criteria of Appendix L. 

G-12 
Acronyms and Glossary 

Pumice ~ A glassy, rhyolitic rock exhibiting a vesicular, or frothy texture. It is generally 

used as a light weight aggregate and an abrasive. 

Pyroclastic debris ~ Rock fragments produced by a volcanic explosion. 

Range site ~ An area of rangeland where climate, soil, and relief are sufficiently uniform to 

produce a distinct natural plant community. A range site is the product of all the environmental factors responsible for its development. It is typified by an association of species that 

differ from those on other range sites in kind or proportion of species or total production. 

Rangeland ~ Land on which the potential natural vegetation is predominantly grasses, 

grasslike plants, forbs, or shrubs suitable for grazing or browsing. It includes natural 

grasslands, savannas, many wetlands, some deserts, tundras, and areas that support certain 

forb and shrub communities. 

Rangeland health ~ The degree to which the integrity of the soil and the ecological processes of rangeland ecosystems are sustained. 

Reaction, soil ~ A measure of acidity or alkalinity of a soil, expressed in pH values. Soils 

with pH values less than 7 are acidic and those with pH greater than 7 are alkaline. 

Recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) ~ A means of characterizing recreation opportunities in terms of setting, activity, and experience opportunities. 

Recreation site ~ An area where management actions are required to provide a specific 

recreation setting and activity opportunities, to protect resource values, provide public visitor 

safety and health, and/or to meet public recreational use demands and recreation partnership 

commitments. A site may or may not have permanent facilities. 

Recreational river ~ A river or section of a river that is readily accessible by road or 

railroad; it may have had some development along the shorelines and may have undergone 

some impoundments or diversions in the past. 

Regeneration ~ The new growth of a natural plant community that develops from seed. 

Rehabilitation ~ The activities necessary to repair damage or disturbance caused by wildfire 

or the fire suppression activity. 

Research natural area (RNA) ~ An area where natural processes predominate and which is 

preserved for research and education. Under current BLM policy, these areas must meet the 

relevance and importance criteria of ACEC’s and are designated as ACEC’s. 

Resource advisor ~ Resource specialist responsible to the incident commander for gathering 

and analyzing information concerning values-at-risk that may be impacted by the fire or fire 

suppression activities. 

Resource management plan (RMP) ~ A land use plan as described by the FLPMA. 

Restoration ~ Holistic actions taken to modify an ecosystem to achieve desired, healthy, and 

functioning conditions and processes. 

Restoration of habitat for special status animal and plant species ~ Taking deliberate, 

proactive measures to reestablish habitat suitable for supporting special status animal and 

plant species. 

G-13 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Restoration of populations of special status animal and plant species ~ Taking deliberate, proactive measures in cooperation with the ODFW or USFWS to meet their respective 

species management goals. Restoration means reestablishing a species into a currently 

unoccupied suitable area. 

Rhyolite ~ A fine-grained light-colored silica-rich igneous rock composed largely of potash 

feldspars and quartz. 

Rift ~ A graben of regional extent; it marks a zone where the entire crust is ruptured under 

tension. 

Right-of-way ~ A permit or an easement authorizing the use of public land for certain 

specified purposes, commonly for pipelines, roads, telephone lines, electric lines, reservoirs, 

etc. Also, the reference to the land covered by such an easement or permit. 

Right-of-way corridor ~ A parcel of land identified by law, Secretarial order, through a land 

use plan or by other management decision as being the preferred location for existing and 

future right-of-way grants and suitable to accommodate one type of right-of-way or one or 

more rights-of-way that are similar, identical or compatible. 

Rill ~ A steep-sided channel resulting from accelerated erosion. A rill is generally a few 

inches deep and not wide enough to be an obstacle to farm machinery. 

Riparian/wetland areas ~ See Chapter 2, Water Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas 

section, Riparian and Wetland Definitions, Processes, Functions, and Patterns. 

Risk assessment ~ Assessing the chance of fire starting, natural or human-caused, and its 

potential risk to life, resources and property. 

Rock fragments ~ Rock or mineral fragments having a diameter of 2 millimeters or more 

(examples: pebbles, cobbles, stones, and boulders). 

Runoff ~ The precipitation discharged into stream channels from an area. The water that 

flows off the surface of the land without sinking into the soil is called surface runoff. Water 

that enters the soil before reaching surface streams is called ground water runoff or seepage 

flow from ground water. 

Saline soil ~ A soil containing soluble salts in an amount that impairs the growth of plants. 

A saline soil does not contain excess exchangeable sodium. 

Salvage cutting ~ Removal of trees that are dead or in imminent danger of being killed by 

injurious agents. 

Sand ~ (geology) A rock fragment or detrital particle between 0.0025 and 0.08 inches in 

diameter. 

Scenic river ~ A river or section of a river that is free of impoundments and whose shorelines are largely undeveloped but accessible in places by roads. 

Schist ~ A metamorphic rock characterized by coarse-grained minerals oriented approximately parallel. 

Section 202 lands ~ Lands being considered for wilderness designation under section 202 of 

FLPMA. 

Sediment ~ Soil, rock particles and organic or other debris carried from one place to another 

by wind, water or gravity. 

G-14 
Acronyms and Glossary 

Selection cutting ~ Removal of individual or small groups of trees to meet predetermined 

goals for the remaining stand. 

Seral stage ~ See ecological status. 

Series, soil ~ A nationally-defined soil type set apart on distinct soil properties that affect use 

and management. In a soil survey, this includes a group of soils that have profiles that are 

almost alike, except for differences in texture of the surface layer or of the underlying 

material. All the soils of a series have horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, 

and arrangement. 

Shallow soil ~ A soil that is 10 to 20 inches deep over bedrock or to other material that 

restricts the penetration of plant roots. 

Sheet erosion ~ The removal of a fairly uniform layer of soil material from the land surface 

by the action of rainfall and surface runoff. 

Silica ~ Silicon dioxide (SiO2), occurring in both crystalline (such as quartz, cristobalite, 

and chalcedony) and amorphous (such as opal) form, as well as impure (such as diatomite, 

and chert) forms, and combined as silicates for numerous significant minerals (such as 

feldspars or amphiboles). 

Silt ~ Geology: A rock fragment or detrital particle smaller than very fine sand and larger 

then coarse clay, ranging from 0.0024 to 0.00016 inches in diameter and commonly having a 

high content of clay minerals. As a soil separate: Individual mineral particles ranging in 

diameter from the upper limit of clay (0.002 millimeter) to the lower limit of very fine sand 

(0.05 millimeter). As a soil textural class: Soil that is 80 percent or more silt and less than 

12 percent clay. 

Simple approach smoke estimation model ~ A straight-line Gaussian plume dispersion 

model designed as a screening tool to predict maximum particulate concentrations and visual 

impacts from prescribed fire. The model simulates emissions, transport, dispersion, and 

optical effects of any inert pollutant over flat terrain. 

Skid trails ~ Pathways along which logs are dragged to a landing for further transportation. 

Skidding ~ A commonly used term for the yarding of logs to a landing. 

Slash ~ The branches, bark, treetops, reject logs, and broken or uprooted trees left on the 

ground after logging. 

Slate ~ A compact, fine-grained, platy metamorphic rock formed from shale or claystone. 

Slope ~ The inclination of the land surface from the horizontal. Percentage of slope is the 

vertical distance divided by horizontal distance, then multiplied by 100. For example, a 

slope of 20 percent is a drop of 20 feet in 100 feet of horizontal distance. 

Smectite ~ A group of clay minerals, characterized by a three-layer crystal lattice, that is 

capable of absorbing water molecules between the layers of the crystal lattice allowing it to 

expand several times its original volume. Montmorillonite and Hectorite smectites are the 

major constituents of the bentonites found the planning area. 

Sodic (alkali) soil ~ A soil having so high a degree of alkalinity (pH 8.5 or higher) or so high 

a percentage of exchangeable sodium (15 percent or more of the total exchangeable bases), 

or both, that plant growth is restricted. 

G-15 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Soil ~ A natural, three-dimensional body at the Earth’s surface. It is capable of supporting 

plants and has properties resulting from the integrated effect of climate and living matter 

acting on earthy parent material, as conditioned by relief over periods of time. 

Soil association ~ A group of soils geographically associated in a characteristic repeating 

pattern and defined and delineated as a single soil map unit. 

Soil classification ~ The systematic arrangement of soils into groups or categories on the 

basis of their characteristics. 

Soil compaction ~ An increase in soil bulk density of 15 percent or more from the undisturbed level. 

Soil complex ~ A map unit of two or more kinds of soils in such an intricate pattern or so 

small in area that it is not practical to map them separately at the selected scale of mapping. 

Soil productivity ~ The capacity of a soil for producing a specified plant or sequence of 

plants under specific management. 

Soil profile ~ A vertical section of the soil extending through all its horizons and into the 

parent material. 

Soil survey ~ A field investigation resulting in a soil map showing the geographic distribution of various kinds of soil and an accompanying report that describes the soil types and 

interprets the findings. 

Soil texture ~ The relative proportions of sand, silt, and clay particles in a mass of soil. 

Solitude (a primary wilderness value) ~ The state of being alone or remote from habitations; 

a lonely, unfrequented, or secluded place. The intent is to evaluate the opportunity for 

solitude in comparison to habitations of people. 

Special recreation management area (SRMA) ~ An area where recreation is one of the 

principal management objectives, where intensive recreation management is needed, and 

where more than minimal recreation-related investments are required. 

Special status species ~ Plant or animal species known or suspected to be limited in 

distribution, rare or uncommon within a specific area, and/or vulnerable to activities that 

may affect their survival. Lists of special status species are prepared by knowledgeable 

specialists throughout the State of Oregon; BLM prepares a list of State sensitive species 

predominantly based on the lists prepared biennially by ONHP. 

Special stipulation ~ A specific operating condition or limitation added to a mineral lease to 

protect sensitive resources. It modifies the original terms and conditions of that lease. 

Stand ~ A community of trees occupying a specific area and sufficiently uniform in species, 

age, spacial arrangement and condition as to be distinguishable from trees on surrounding 

lands. 

Stream channel ~ The hollow bed where a natural stream of surface water flows or may 

flow; the deepest or central part of the bed, formed by the main current and covered more or 

less continuously by water. 

Structure, soil ~ The arrangement of primary soil particles into compound particles or 

aggregates. 

G-16 
Acronyms and Glossary 

Sunstone ~ A calcium-rich variety of plagioclase feldspar that exhibits a pink to red metallic 

shimmer when viewed perpendicular to the surface. The shimmer is caused by light reflecting off the surface of minute parallel platelets of native copper suspended in the stone. 

Supplemental wilderness values ~ Includes ecological (such as vegetation, wildlife, and 

overall biological/botanical processes and values associated with the natural environment), 

geological, scientific, educational, scenic, and historic values. When present they can 

enhance primary wilderness values, but are not mandated by Congress. 

Sustained yield ~ Maintenance of an annual or regular periodic output of a renewable 

resource from public land consistent with the principles of multiple use. 

Talc ~ A very soft, light green mineral (Mg3Si4O10 (OH2)), found in basic igneous rocks 

and metamorphosed dolomites (CaMg (CO3)2). It is used in a wide variety of applications 

(such as filler, cosmetics, lubricants and as a source of ornamental stone). 

Talus ~ Rock fragments of any size or shape, commonly coarse and angular, derived from 

and lying at the base of a cliff or very steep rock slope. The accumulated mass of such loose, 

broken rock formed chiefly by falling, rolling, or sliding. 

Terrace (geologic) ~ An old alluvial plain, ordinarily flat or undulating, bordering a river, a 

lake, or the sea. 

Terrane ~ A suite of similar rocks transported by crustal movements into a position where 

they are separated from dissimilar rocks by faults. 

Thinning ~ A cutting made in a forest stand to remove or kill excess timber in order to 

accelerate growth or improve the health of the trees that remain. 

Thriving natural ecological balance ~ The condition of the public range when resource 

objectives related to wild horses in approved land use and/or activity plans have been 

achieved. 

Thunderegg ~ An agate, opal, or chalcedony-filled nodule deposit formed in rhyolitic lavas 

or tuffs. 

Trend ~ The direction of change in ecological status observed over time. Trend is described 

as toward or away from the potential natural community, or as not apparent. 

Tuff ~ Volcanic ash or rock composed of compacted ash. 

Upland (geology) ~ Land at a higher elevation, in general, than the alluvial plain or stream 

terrace; land above the lowlands along streams. 

Utilization ~ The proportion or degree of the current year’s forage production that is 

consumed or destroyed by animals (including insects); may refer either to a single plant 

species, a group of species, or to the vegetation as a whole; synonymous with use. 

Values-at-risk ~ Any or all natural resources, improvements or other values that may be 

jeopardized if a fire occurs (value-at-risk, risk of resource values). 

Vegetation manipulation ~ Alteration of present vegetation by using fire, plowing, or other 

means to manipulate natural succession trends. 

G-17 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Visit – A unit of measure for evaluating the amount of recreational activity on public land; 

equivalent to one person spending any part of a day recreating on public land. 

Visual resource classes ~ Refer to Chapter 2. 

Volcanic arc ~ A curved, linear belt of volcanoes. 

Volcaniclastic ~ A sedimentary rock consisting largely of lava fragments, volcanic glass, and 

crystals. 

Wild horses ~ Unbranded and unclaimed horses that use public land as all or part of their 

habitat, or that have been removed from such land by an authorized officer but have not lost 

their status under section 3 of the “Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act.” 

Wild river ~ A river or section of a river that is free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds and shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. 

Wilderness inventory ~ A written description of resource information and data, and a map 

of those public lands that meet the wilderness criteria as established under Section 603 (a) of 

FLPMA and Section 2 (c) of “The Wilderness Act.” 

Wilderness study area (WSA) ~ A roadless area or island that has been inventoried and 

found to have wilderness characteristics as described in section 603 of FLPMA and section 2 

(c) of “The Wilderness Act.” WSA’s were administratively designated by BLM following 

evaluation of wilderness inventories. 

Wildfire ~ Any fire occurring on wildland that is not meeting management objectives and 

thus requires a suppression response. An unwanted wildland fire. 

Wildland fire ~ Any nonstructure fire, other than prescribed fire, that occurs in the wildland. 

Wildland fire situation analysis (WFSA) ~ A decision-making process that evaluates 

alternative management strategies against selected safety, environmental, social, economical, 

political, and resource management objectives as selection criteria. 

Woodland ~ A forest community occupied primarily by noncommercial species such as 

juniper, mountain mahogany or aspen. 

Xenolith ~ A fragment of rock distinctly different from the igneous rock in which it is 

enclosed; a foreign intrusion into rock. 

Yarding ~ The moving of logs from the stump to a landing for further transportation. 

Zeolite ~ A group of hydrated silicates of aluminum with alkali metals. They contain a 

porous molecular structure that allows them to selectively trap individual molecules within 

that structure. Zeolites are used in water purification and decontamination systems, animal 

feed supplements, drying agents, and for soil improvement. 

G-18 
Appendix D1 - Riparian/Wetland Areas 

Appendix D1 - Riparian/Wetland Areas 

BLM depicts natural riparian/wetland areas as resources whose capability and potential is 

defined by the interaction of three components: (1) vegetation, (2) landform/soils, and (3) 

hydrology; while the functioning condition of these natural riparian/wetland areas are 

characterized by the interaction of these elements. 

One of the main goals of the BLM is to have riparian/wetland areas in proper functioning 

condition (PFC). An overall objective of this goal is to achieve an advanced ecological 

status, except where resource management objectives, including PFC, would require an 

earlier successional stage, thus providing the widest variety of vegetation and habitat 

diversity for wildlife, fish, and watershed protection. 

In the past, considerable effort has been expended to inventory, classify, restore, enhance, 

and protect riparian/wetland areas, but the effort has lacked consistency. No single classification, survey, inventory, or rating methods or systems have previously been developed to 

satisfy the complex interactions of healthy riparian/wetland areas. These areas are in 

dynamic equilibrium with streamflow forces and channel aggradation/degradation processes 

producing change with vegetative, geomorphic, and structural resistance. Ecological status 

determination of riparian/wetland vegetation does not necessarily take into account or 

address needed information that will be contained within aquatic habitat and stream surveys 

that is pertinent to the functionality of the riparian/wetland area. This is important because 

riparian/wetland areas will attain PFC long before they achieve an advanced ecological 

status. 

When evaluating riparian/wetland areas, ecological status should not be confused with PFC. 

Riparian/wetland areas must be viewed with the understanding that the riparian system is 

inherently dynamic and PFC can and will occur within any or all ecological stages. PFC 

should be evaluated in terms of, and relationships to, all physical and biological functions 

occurring within the entire watershed, including the uplands and tributary watershed systems. 

To comprehend how riparian/wetland areas operate and how management practices are 

implemented to ensure that an area is functioning properly, the capability and potential of a 

riparian/wetland area must be understood. Assessment of existing riparian vegetation 

condition and stream channel functionality is based upon a given riparian/wetland area’s 

capability and potential. Here, capability is the highest ecological status a riparian/wetland 

area can attain given political, social, or economical constraints, whereas potential is the 

highest ecological status a riparian/wetland area can attain given no political, social, or 

economical constraints, often referred to as the potential natural community (PNC). Some 

riparian/wetland areas may be prevented from achieving their potential because of limiting 

factors such as human activities that alter the area’s capability. 

Management of riparian/wetland areas will be implemented to attain PFC as a first step to 

move habitat conditions of entire watersheds and/or their components that are comprised of 

uplands, streams, riparian/wetland areas, and lakes and ponds toward achieving terrestrial 

and aquatic objectives for attainment of DRFC’s. Management practices such as grazing, 

mining, recreation, forest harvesting, and other forms of vegetation management will be 

designed for healthy sustainable and functional rangeland ecosystems as described in the 

D-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

1997 “Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for 

Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management in the States of Oregon and 

Washington (S&G’s).” 

The next step in the attainment of DRFC’s will be to evaluate RMO’s (Appendix D3) within 

riparian/wetland areas RCA’s. RCA’s occupy that portion of watersheds where aquatic and 

riparian dependent resources receive primary emphasis for the maintenance, protection, and 

restoration of ecosystem processes and functions. RMO’s are generally instream and 

riparian characteristics expressed as values for stream channel conditions and provide 

criteria to help assess aquatic, water quality, and riparian/wetland goals and objective 

attainment of desired future conditions. The DRFC’s of riparian/wetland areas usually fall 

between PFC and the biological potential of RCA’s supported by RMO’s. Although attainment of PFC essentially assures that stream and riparian/wetland areas function and are on 

an improving trend, PFC may not be the final endpoint to reaching desired conditions. 

Management priorities in upland watershed areas and RCA’s will focus prescriptions for the 

attainment of these desired conditions. 

To summarize, PFC and ecological site status are two different characteristics of riparian/ 

wetland systems. A site in any ecological status may be in functioning condition. Riparian/ 

wetland areas should be judged on the functions that it provides compared to functions that 

should be present in relation to entire watersheds. All riparian/wetland systems should not 

be expected to have identical physical and biological functions. Riparian/wetland health 

(functioning condition), an important component of watershed condition, refers to the 

ecological status of vegetation, the geomorphic and hydrologic development, and the degree 

of structural integrity exhibited by the riparian/wetland area. 

D-2 
Appendix D2 - Riparian Conservation Areas 

Appendix D2 - Riparian Conservation Areas 

Introduction 

Riparian systems are water-influenced areas that include streams and other aquatic ecosystems. Riparian conservation areas (RCA’s) are portions of watersheds where aquatic and 

riparian-dependent resources receive primary emphasis and where management activities are 

subject to specific standards and guidelines. RCA’s include traditional riparian corridors, 

wetlands, intermittent streams, and other areas that help maintain the integrity of aquatic 

ecosystems by: (1) influencing the delivery of coarse sediment, organic matter, and woody 

debris to streams; (2) providing root strength for channel stability; (3) shading the stream; 

and (4) protecting water quality. 

In RCA’s, maintenance, protection, and restoration of aquatic processes and functions are 

emphasized and goals and objectives for aquatic and riparian habitats are met. Conservation 

needs for aquatic and riparian systems can be summarized by the following four principles: 

1) A stream requires nutrient inputs and energy to sustain its biological functions; 

2) Riparian-associated plants and animals rely on the vegetation adjacent to streams; 

3) Small streams are more affected by hillslope processes than larger streams; and 

4) The likelihood of disturbances resulting in instream effects increases as adjacent slopes 

become steeper. 

Ecological function, processes, and disturbance mechanisms are guides for use and protection priories in riparian areas. Boundaries between riparian areas and upslopes may need 

adjustment to address each of the larger-scale disturbance effects that may negatively or 

positively affect unique habitats or sensitive species in riparian environments. The actual 

size of riparian areas depends on local characteristics that define them; the dimensions of 

entire riparian areas are not always proportional to the size of aquatic systems. 

RCA’s are delineated into zones or gradients of influence, with an inner zone (Zone 1) where 

many primary processes and functions occur and an outer zone (Zone 2) where processes 

and functions occur but at different, less important (secondary) levels to the stream channel. 

The outer riparian zone also functions as a transition and buffer between upslope uses and 

disturbances and the aquatic environment. Zoning delineates major influence areas, establishing a basis for different levels of disturbance and vegetation management in each zone. 

This scheme sets the foundation for cumulative effects determination that is spatially 

sensitive in considering watershed disturbance. 

Although the concept of zones applies to forestland and rangeland environments, it is more 

difficult to apply in rangelands. For the purposes of this document, zones are delineated only 

in forested environments. In rangeland environments, floodprone width is used to delineate 

RCA’s. 

Forested Lands 

Zone 1 is the inner riparian area; it is the primary riparian community and energy influence 

area, and is most important for protection and maintenance of instream conditions. It also 

serves to transition processes, functions, and disturbances from streams to floodplains and 

adjacent riparian areas. Zone 1 is the area most sensitive to land management activities. 

D-3 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Zone 2 is the outer riparian area; it supports additional riparian area processes and functions 

(for example, microclimate) and also is a buffer area capable of absorbing disturbances from 

the uplands. It is the interface and transition between the inner riparian area and the uplands. 

In steeper landscapes where soils are subject to surface erosion, this zone may need extension using the slope adjustment factor. This extended area is referred to as Zone 2b. 

Areas with landscapes or that are unstable or landslide prone will also be included in the 

RCA. 

RCA Delineation Process 

RCA delineation is based on three indicators: (1) site potential tree heights, (2) extent of 

flood prone width; or (3) riparian vegetation width; whichever provide the greatest protection to aquatic and riparian resources. 

Site potential tree height (SPTH)—The definition of “site potential tree” for purposes of 

defining widths is: “The average maximum height of the tallest dominant trees (200 years or 

older) for a given site class” (FEMAT 1993, p.V-34). 

The following site potential tree height shall be used as a minimum height for the forested 

potential vegetation group (PVG) in the planning area. PVG = dry forest, minimum SPTH 

(feet) = 120. 

Slope adjustment factor—Adjustment of stream RCA widths for slope uses a curve based on 

probable sediment travel distance from concentrated sources of erosion and sediment from 

roads (Ketcheson and Megahan 1996). 

The process for delineation of forested riparian areas (perennial and intermittent streams) 

involves dividing RCA’s into two zones: 

A) Minimum Widths for Perennial Streams 

Zone 1 equals one site potential tree height, or the extent of the flood prone area, 

or the extent of wet and moist riparian vegetation, whichever best maintains, 

protects, and restores the aquatic environment. Zone 2 equals one site potential 

tree height or the extent of dry riparian vegetation (Zone a), plus any width 

added from slope adjustment curve (Zone b). 

B) Minimum Widths for Intermittent Streams 

Zone 1 equals one-half site potential tree height, or the extent of the flood prone 

area, or the extent of wet and moist riparian vegetation, whichever best maintains, protects, and restores the aquatic environment. Zone 2 equals one-half site 

potential tree height, or the extent of dry riparian vegetation (Zone 2a), plus any 

width added from slope adjustment curve (Zone b). 

C) Additional RequirementsApplicable forAll Streams 

Additional special consideration is necessary where there are landslides and in 

landslide prone or unstable areas. Landslide prone determination shall be based 

on the procedure outlined in Tang and Montgomery (1995) or other comparable 

techniques. 

D) Total RCAWidth 

Total RCA width is the sum of the widths determined from Steps A through C. 

D-4 
Appendix D2 - Riparian Conservation Areas 

Rangeland Streams 

The process of delineation for rangeland riparian RCA’s (perennial or intermittent streams) 

relies on flood prone widths by stream type, or the extent of potential natural riparian 

vegetation, whichever provides the greater protection to aquatic and riparian resources. 

Riparian vegetation can be delineated by aerial photographs or field inspection. Floodplain 

area is essentially equivalent to floodprone width defined by Rosgen (1994). 

The following steps can be used to determine the flood prone area. It is suggested that field 

units develop relationships between bankfull width and drainage area or use existing 

relationships for their area. 

1) Determine bankfull width for the drainage area above the point on the stream. 

2) Determine the stream type using Rosgen stream type (Rosgen 1994) from aerial photographs or existing classification data. 

3) Select entrenchment ratio (ER), which is the average maximum, for the particular stream 

types from the following: 

Stream type A B C E F G 

Entrenchment ratio 1.4 2.2 5.3 56.9 1.2 1.3 

Entrenchment: Vertical containment of stream and the degree to which it is incised in the 

valley floor. 

Entrenchment ratio: Ratio of the width of the flood prone area to the bankfull surface width 

of the channel. 

Because entrenchment ratio is not applicable in D streamtypes (braided systems), riparian 

width shall be determined on a case-by-case basis using site-specific or local information. 

4) Calculate the floodprone area by multiplying the bankfull width and entrenchment ratio. 

Floodprone area: Width measured at an elevation which is determined at twice the maximum bankfull depth of the stream. 

Local drainage area and bankfull width relationships should be used in place of graphs. 

Likewise, if field verified entrenchment ratios are known, this data should also be used in 

place of the average maximums shown in step 3. 

Forested Land and Rangeland Ponds, Lakes, Reservoirs, and Wetlands 

RCA’s for ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than 1 acre are either: 

•	 the body of water or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, 

•	 the extent of the seasonally saturated soil, 

•	 the extent of moderately and highly unstable areas, 

•	 a distance equal to the height of one site potential tree, or 

•	 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the maximum pool elevation of constructed ponds and reservoirs or from the edge of the wetland, pond, or lake, 

whichever is greatest. 

For ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands less than 1 acre, the above RCA delineation shall 

apply, except that the minimum slope distance shall be 100 feet. 

D-5 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Appendix D3 - Riparian Management Objectives 

Introduction 

Riparian management objective (RMO) values for stream channel conditions, when used in 

combination with objectives for this plan, provide criteria to help assess attainment of 

aquatic and riparian goals as described in the Desired Range of Future Conditions, Chapter 3. 

These values (“Interim Bull Trout Habitat Conservation Strategy,” 1996; formulated from 

PACFISH (Decision Notice/Decision Record for the Interim Strategies for Managing 

Anadromous Fish-Producing Watersheds in Eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and 

Portions of California [1995]) strategy and may be further refined by the Interior Columbia 

Basin Ecosystem Management Project) provide a description and characterization of 

watershed, riparian, and stream channel processes and existing conditions that can be 

expected to be achieved over time. 

As indicated below, some RMO’s apply to forested ecosystems, some to rangeland ecosystems, and some to all ecosystems. Actions that reduce habitat quality are inconsistent with 

the purpose of this plan’s direction. However, the intent of RMO’s are not to establish a 

ceiling for what constitutes good habitat conditions. 

The following statements provide the intent for the use of the RMO’s and their purpose in a 

comprehensive program: 

1) RMO’s are criteria (quantitative and/or qualitative) to help evaluate progress towards 

attainment of watershed, aquatic, and riparian goals described within the DFRC. 

2) Interim RMO’s are not to be viewed as independent from other components of the aquatic 

conservation strategy; rather, they are part of an aquatic conservation program. RMOs are 

not always sensitive to immediate effects but rather exhibit response to cumulative effects 

and factors influencing channel history over time. 

3) Interim RMO’s do not replace state and Federal water quality standards promulgated 

under the CWA or state laws, but they should complement these standards in providing 

measurable habitat attributes. 

Procedure for RMO Application 

RMO’s apply to all perennial streams and intermittent fish bearing streams during those 

times that the streams support aquatic life. Effects of land management activities on intermittent streams may influence the attainment of RMO’s in perennial streams. All instream 

and riparian variables should be used, in combination, to provide a comprehensive synopsis 

of watershed, riparian, and aquatic conditions, since placing emphasis on interpretations of 

individual variables may lead to erroneous conclusions related to watershed, riparian, and 

aquatic conditions. RMO application or development can follow these steps: 

1) The values apply where ecologically attainable. Locally developed RMO’s (quantitatively 

and/or qualitatively derived) supported with information from ecosystem analysis is preferred 

because of the variable nature of streams within the project and planning areas. Stream 

conditions can vary from disturbances and channel evolution histories that influenced 

channel form and conditions. It is recommended that district(s) staff conduct their own 

analysis due to the variable conditions in the planning area. Staff should consider using 

similar techniques described by Overton et al. (1995) to define appropriate RMO’s. RMO’s 

should be developed from evaluations of reference conditions in similar landforms, climate, 

stream type and valley bottom settings, and potential vegetation. In all cases, the rationale 

D-6 
Appendix D3 - Riparian Management Objectives 

supporting these changes, and the effects of the changes shall be documented. 

2) Use information from step 1 to develop management actions for conserving or restoring 

watershed, riparian, and channel processes. 

3) Monitor implementation and effectiveness of management if they have the intended 

results. Provide feedback information for future management objectives, action, and 

evaluation of RMO’s. 

RMO Criteria 

Instream habitat features
 

Pool Frequency (all systems):
 

Wetted width (feet)10 20 25 50 75 100 125 150 200 

Pools per mile 96 56 47 26 23 18 14 12 9 

Temperature: No measurable increase in maximum water temperature (7 day moving 

average of daily maximum temperature measured as the average of the maximum daily 

temperature of the warmest consecutive 7-day period). Maximum water temperature will be 

below 59 °F within adult bull trout holding habitat and below 48 °F within bull trout spawning and rearing habitats. 

Maximum water temperatures below 64 °F within anadromous fish migration and rearing 

habitats and below 60 °F within anadromous fish spawning habitats. 

Large woody debris (forested systems): >20 pieces per mile; >12 inch diameter; >35 foot 

length. 

Bank stability (rangeland systems): >80 percent stable in non-forested systems. 

Lower bank angle: >75 percent of banks with <90 degree angle (such as undercut). 

Width/depth ratio: <10, mean wetted width divided by mean depth. 

Riparian Vegetation 

Applies to all forest and range riparian areas: mature and old forest, and late ecological 

status rangeland riparian conditions adapted to fire regimes and other disturbances characteristic for the site. Riparian vegetation RMO’s should be measured by the percent similarity of 

current riparian vegetation to the mature forest and late ecological status range riparian 

community/composition. The percent similarity shall be greater than 60 percent (USDA 

1992). The stepwise procedure for determining similarity is outlined in the riparian vegetation RMO discussion. 

Procedure for determining riparian vegetation RMO: Functionality of aquatic and 

riparian environments can be fully evaluated with the inclusion of riparian vegetation. 

Riparian vegetation is generally more sensitive to immediate effects from management 

activities. In some vegetation and valley bottom settings, riparian vegetation can be responsive to restoration in short timeframes. Most instream RMO’s are dependent upon riparian 

vegetation condition; therefore, a riparian vegetation RMO was included. 

The following steps summarize a five-step method “Riparian Plant Association Groups and 

Associated Valley Bottom Types of the Columbia River Basin” (Manning and Engelking 

D-7 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

1995) that could be used to assess and determine similarity of current riparian vegetation to
 

potential riparian vegetation.
 

1) Identify the potential vegetation group in which the riparian area occurs.
 

2) Identify potential vegetation type and valleybottom type.
 

3) Identify potential riparian vegetation.
 

4) Determine existing riparian vegetation group.
 

5) Compare potential riparian vegetation group to existing riparian vegetation group.
 

The existing riparian vegetation should be at least 60 percent similar to the potential vegetation to meet the RMO. If there is less than 60 percent similarity and it is not attributable to
 

absence of the potential riparian vegetation group within the valley bottom setting, then
 

management actions that move riparian vegetation toward the potential should occur.
 

D-8 
Appendix D4 - Riparian Trend Analysis Worksheet 

Appendix D4 - Riparian Trend Analysis Worksheet 

Table D4-1.—Riparian trend analysis worksheet by category 

Usual study methods Downward indicators Indicators of no change Upward indicators 

used to show trend 

Woody riparian (A) Studies indicate a decline (A) Studies indicate no change (A) Studies indicate an increase 

•Aerial imagery in the overall number of key in the overall number of key in the overall number of key 

•Photo point studies woody plants woody plants woody plants 

•Key plant utilization studies (B) Studies indicate a decline (B) Studies indicate no change (B) Studies indicate an 

in the ‘overall canopy volume in the overall canopy volume increasein the overall canopy 

(height and width) of key (height and width) of key volume (height and width) 

woody plants woody species of key woody plants 

(C) Studies indicate that (C) Studies indicate no (C) Studies show that healthy 

vegetation removal is change in the age class uneven-aged stands of key 

preventing the establishment structure of key woody plants woody plants are present 

of uneven-aged classes of key 

woody plants 

Herbaceous cover 

•Aerial imagery (D) Studies indicate a decline (D) Studies indicate no change (D) Studies indicate an increase 

•Line intercept transects in the overall amount of in the overall amount of in the overall amount of 

herbaceous ground cover herbaceous ground cover herbaceous ground cover 

(E) Studies indicate that (E) Studies indicate no change (E) Studies indicate that 

herbaceous species composition in the herbaceous species herbaceous species composition 

has shifted toward more early composition has shifted toward more latesuccession species succession species 

Stream banks and channel 

•Stream channel (F) Studies indicate an increase (F) Studies indicate no change (F) Studies indicate a decrease 

form measurements in the amount of streambank in the amount of streambank in the amount of streambank 

•Aerial imagery erosion attributable to trampling erosion attributable to trampling erosion attributable to 

•Photo point studies damage damage trampling damage 

(G) Studies show that water (G) No changes in depth G) Studies show that water 

depth is decreasing measurements depth is increasing 

(H) Studies show that stream (H) No change in stream (H) Studies show that stream 

channel is widening channel channel width is narrowing 

(I) Studies show incised (I) No change in channel depth (I) Studies show that incised 

channels are widening channels are healing with 

vegetation cover 

(J) Studies show that stream (J) No change in number and (J) Studies show that stream 

meanders are decreasing and type of stream meanders meanders are increasing 

channel is straightening 

Water quality 

•Water turbidity samples (K) Increase in populations of K) Sampling indicates no (K) Increase in populations of 

•Fish and aquatic fish and aquatic insects tolerant (change in the composition of fish and aquatic insects 

insect samples of high turbidity, low oxygen aquatic insects and fish intolerant of high turbidity, 

levels, high temperatures, or low oxygen levels, high 

presence of contaminants temperatures, or presence of 

contaminants 

(L) Sediment transport is (L) Studies show no change in (L) Sediment transport is 

increasing relative to baseline the amount of sedimentation decreasing relative to 

data baseline data 

D-9 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Appendix D5 

Riparian Trends for Stream Segments 

D-10 
Appendix D5 - Riparian Trends for Stream Segments 

Table D5-1.—Riparian trends for stream segments on public land in the Malheur and Jordan 

Resource Areas 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Stream	 Miles Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Upper Quinn Drainage (Hydrologic unit 16040201) 

McDermitt Creek	 13.8 Up Yes Yes LSTS, NATV, COLD, HATV 

0.1 Unknown Yes Yes COLD
 

Dry Creek 3.3 Unknown
 

Hot Creek 0.3 Up
 

Cowboy Creek	 4.6 Up
 

Lasa Creek 2.1 Unknown
 

Lasa Creek TR 3.3 0.3 Unknown
 

Mine Creek 2.1 Up
 

Mine Creek East Fork 2.5 Static
 

Mine Creek East Fork TR 2.5 0.4 Static
 

Mine Creek West Fork 3.7 Up
 

Indian Creek 8.2 Unknown Yes Yes LCTR
 

0.2 Up
 

Indian Creek TR 5.5 0.9 Unknown
 

Indian Creek TR	 8.0 1.3 Unknown 

Cottonwood Creek	 3.8 Up Yes 

4.0 Unknown
 

Spring Creek 1.7 Up
 

Spring Creek TR 1.7 1.0 Up
 

McDermitt Creek North Fork 4.5 Up
 

McDermitt Creek North Fork TR 2.3 2.1 Up
 

McDermitt Creek North Fork TR 2.9 0.5 Up
 

McDermitt Creek TR 5.5 1.3 Unknown LSTS, NATV, COLD 

McDermitt Creek TR 8.6 0.8 Unknown LSTS, NATV, COLD 

McDermitt Creek TR 27.8 1.3 Unknown LSTS, NATV, COLD 

McDermitt Creek TR32.2 0.9 Up 

0.1 Unknown
 

Payne Creek 4.0 Up
 

Sage Creek 4.2 Up Yes Yes LCTR
 

Sage Creek TR 5.8 1.2 Up
 

Sage Creek TR 8.1 1.6 Up
 

Sage Creek TR 8.1 TR 0.9 0.7 Up
 

Sage Creek TR 8.8 0.5 Up LCTR
 

Sage Creek TR 9.0 0.7 Up
 

Line Canyon 1.4 Up
 

Line Canyon TR 2.1 1.2 Up
 

Turner Creek 3.6 Up
 

Oregon Canyon Creek 7.6 Unknown Yes HATC 

Fish Creek 2.2 Unknown COLD 

Jaca Creek 2.0 Unknown 

Jaca Creek TR 6.7 0.4 Unknown
 

Jaca Creek TR 7.2 0.2 Unknown
 

D-11 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Stream Miles Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Jaca Creek TR 7.5 0.5 Unknown 

Jackson Creek 2.1 Unknown 

Jackson Creek Middle Fork 0.6 Unknown 

Jackson Creek TR 5.3 1.9 Unknown 

Jackson Creek TR 8.9 0.5 Unknown 

Moonshine Canyon 1.0 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek East Fork 4.9 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek South Fork 1.8 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon CR S Fork TR 0.5 1.2 Unknown 

Oregon CN CR S F TR 0.5 TR 0.7 0.8 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 8.3 0.4 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 10.3 0.6 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 17.1 3.9 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Ck TR 17.1 TR 10.3 3.3 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 27.8 1.3 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 27.9 0.3 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 28.3 1.2 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 29.7 0.5 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 29.8 0.4 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek TR 30.6 0.7 Unknown 

Oregon Canyon Creek West Fork 1.7 Unknown 

Rock Creek 1.0 Unknown 

Rock Canyon 0.5 Unknown 

School House Creek 0.6 Unknown 

Shearing Corral Creek 2.4 Unknown 

Simpson Creek 1.0 Unknown 

St. Martin Creek 0.4 Unknown 

Tenmile Creek 7.0 Unknown HATC 

Cottonwood Creek 3.2 Unknown 

Tenmile Creek TR 8.3 1.3 Unknown 

Tenmile Creek TR 9.5 2.2 Unknown 

Tenmile Creek TR 11.6 2.4 Unknown 

Tenmile Creek TR 16.2 1.3 Unknown 

Trail Canyon 1.0 Unknown 

Trail Canyon TR 1.9 0.9 Unknown 

Middle Snake–Succor Drainage (17050103) 

Succor Creek 5.3 Up Yes NATV 

1.5 Unknown 

Antelope Creek 2.7 Unknown 

Carter Creek 0.6 Unknown Yes 

Carter Creek South Fork 1.7 Up REDB 

Carter Creek South Fork TR 3.8 0.6 Up 

Dog Creek 3.4 Unknown 

Dog Creek TR 2.9 0.6 Unknown 

Hog Creek 1.3 Unknown 

McBride Creek 0.7 Unknown 

Pole Creek 1.7 Unknown 

Spring Creek 5.4 Unknown 

Spring Creek TR 5.1 0.8 Unknown 

Spring Creek TR 6.3 2.3 Unknown 

Whiskey Creek 0.1 Unknown 

D-12 
Stream Miles 

Whiskey Creek TR 0.5 2.6 

Wilson Creek 2.7 

Wilson Creek TR 1.5 1.2 

Appendix D5 - Riparian Trends for Stream Segments 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Middle Owyhee Drainage (17050107) 

Owyhee River 53.2 

Antelope Creek 42.0 

Antelope Creek TR 6.5 0.8 

Antelope Creek TR 17.0 0.8 

Antelope Creek TR 21.5 3.3 

Antelope Creek TR 41.6 0.7 

Antelope Creek TR 41.9 1.0 

Antelope Creek TR 42.4 1.6 

Field Creek 16.0 

Pole Creek 11.9 

Cavieta Creek 2.1 

Pole Creek TR 2.4 0.5 

Pole Creek TR 8.7 1.0 

Pole Canyon TR 22.5 TR 3.0 0.3 

Steer Canyon 2.5 

Steer Canyon TR 7.6 1.6 

Steer Canyon TR 7.6 TR 0.2 1.9 

Hansen Flat Creek 0.7 

Hansen Flat Creek TR 4.7 0.2 

Hansen Flat Creek TR 4.9 0.2 

Hansen Flat Creek TR 5.7 0.4 

Trail Creek 7.0 

Trail Creek TR 3.0 1.5 

Trail CR TR3.0 TR0.6 TR1.8 0.2 

Trail Creek TR 5.3 1.7 

Trail Creek TR 5.7 1.7 

Owyhee River North Fork 2.7 

Cherry Creek 0.5 

Owyhee River Middle Fork 0.5 

Owyhee River West Little 7.3 

49.1 

Dry Canyon TR 2.8 0.3 

Dry Canyon TR 5.0 0.2 

Dry Canyon TR 5.4 0.4 

Jack Creek 7.3 

Deep Creek 2.5 

Lake Fork 1.6 

Massey Canyon 3.0 

Massey Canyon TR 0.1 0.9 

Massey Canyon TR 1.0 1.2 

Owyhee River West Little TR 36.8 0.8 

Owyhee River W L TR36.8 TR0.6 0.5 

Owyhee River W L TR36.8 TR0.9 0.4 

Owyhee River West Little TR 52.2 0.8 

Toppin Creek 5.2 

Soldier Creek 0.4 

Coburn Creek 0.6 

Unknown Yes Yes REDB, NATV, WARM, HATC 

Unknown Yes NATV 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown NATV 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown REDB, NATV, WARM 

Unknown NATV 

Unknown 

Static Yes REDB, NATV 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

D-13 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Stream Miles Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Toppin Creek 1.6 Unknown 

Spring Creek 0.7 Unknown 

Spring Branch Creek 2.1 Unknown 

Willow Creek 7.2 Unknown 

Jordan Drainage (17050108) 

Jordan Creek 3.0 Unknown Yes NATV, WARM 

Chicken Creek 1.3 Unknown 

Chicken Creek TR 2.3 0.2 Unknown 

Chicken Creek TR 2.8 0.5 Unknown 

Cow Creek 2.6 Unknown WARM 

Mahogany Creek 0.7 Unknown Yes 

Fish Creek 1.7 Unknown Yes HATC 

Fish Creek TR 2.7 1.2 Unknown 

Fish Creek TR 2.8 1.0 Unknown 

Old Maids Creek 2.6 Unknown 

Old Maids Creek TR 4.6 1.0 Unknown 

Thomas Creek 1.4 Unknown 

Horse Creek 0.4 Unknown 

Sheep Spring Creek TR 7.7 1.2 Unknown 

Trib No. 1 to Antelope Res 0.6 Unknown 

Trib No. 2 to Antelope Res 1.5 Unknown 

Trib No. 3 to Antelope Res 0.4 Unknown 

Crooked-Rattlesnake Drainage (17050109) 

Crooked Creek 4.8 Unknown Yes NATV 

Bone Creek 0.4 Unknown NATV 

Dry Creek 11.7 Unknown 

0.4 Down 

Rattlesnake Creek 24.0 Unknown Yes NATV, HATC 

Battle Creek 4.4 Unknown 

Isaac Canyon 0.8 Unknown 

Battle Creek TR 0.8 0.5 Unknown 

Battle Creek TR 12.5 3.9 Unknown 

Deer Creek 2.5 Unknown 

Little Rattlesnake Creek 9.3 Unknown 

Rattlesnake Creek TR 27.6 1.7 Unknown 

Woolhawk Canyon 7.2 Unknown 

Lower Owyhee Drainage (17050110) 

Owyhee River 30.3 Up Yes Yes REDB, NATV, WARM 

31.0 Unknown 

Birch Creek (Owyhee Reservoir) 3.4 Static NATV 

Birch Creek 2.4 Unknown 

Bogus Creek 3.4 Up 

3.9 Unknown 

Dry Creek 13.5 Unknown Yes REDB, NATV, WARM 

Butte Creek 2.1 Unknown 

Butte Creek TR 6.3 7.9 Unknown 

Wildcat Creek 3.6 Unknown 

Wildcat Creek TR 5.4 0.3 Unknown 

D-14 
Stream 

Cold Spring Creek 

Cold Spring Creek TR 0.3 

Juniper Creek 

Skull Creek 

Indian Creek 

Jackson Creek 

Owyhee River TR 64.5 

Owyhee River TR 65.1 

Rock Spring Canyon 

Spring Creek 

(Twin Spr CR) Twin Springs CR TR 5.2

Willow Creek 

Crowley Creek 

Burnt Flat Creek 

Lower Crowley Creek 

L. Crowley Creek TR 2.0 

Road Canyon 

Miles 

6.2 

4.1 

3.2 

3.3 

4.5 

5.1 

0.4 

1.1 

0.8 

2.4 

0.9 

6.2 

2.5 

1.9 

2.3 

2.1 

0.7 

Appendix D5 - Riparian Trends for Stream Segments 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Static 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Static 

Unknown

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Down 

Upper Malheur Drainage (17050116) 

Malheur River 

Bull Canyon 

Malheur River North Fork 

Little Malheur River 

Lost Creek 

Warm Springs Creek 

Bendire Creek 

Hunter Creek 

Hunter Creek TR 4.4 

Willow Basin Creek 

Willow Basin Creek TR 2.5 

Willow Basin Creek TR 2.7 

Willow Basin Creek TR 2.9 

Malheur River South Fork 

Granite Creek 

Lower Malheur Drainage (17050117) 

Malheur River 

Black Canyon 

Calf Creek 

Cave Canyon 

Cottonwood Creek 

Basin Creek 

Camp Creek 

Tims Creek 

3.8 

6.2 

1.1 

3.7 

1.1 

0.9 

3.1 

2.3 

6.3 

1.7 

0.8 

3.7 

0.6 

0.6 

0.9 

0.3 

2.3 

1.8 

5.0 

0.5 

0.9 

1.1 

1.8 

0.4 

1.8 

9.7 

3.5 

1.6 

0.1 

3.6 

5.1 

1.2 

Up Yes Yes NATV, HATC 

Unknown 

Up Yes Yes BUTR, REDB, NATV, HATC 

Static 

Static Yes Yes REDB, NATV 

Unknown Yes 

Static 

Up 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown Yes Yes NATV, HATC 

Up Yes 

Unknown 

Up Yes Yes REDB, NATV, HATC, WARM 

Unknown 

Up REDB 

Static 

Up REDB, NATV 

Static 

Unknown 

Up Yes REDB, NATV 

Static 

Unknown 

Up 

Unknown 

Unknown REDB 

Unknown 

D-15 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Stream Miles Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Keeney Creek 11.0 Unknown NATV 

Long Creek 2.8 Unknown 

Wildcat Creek 1.7 Unknown 

Malheur River TR 41.9 0.3 Up 

4.2 Unknown 

Gold Creek 5.4 Up Yes REDB 

Henry Gulch 1.0 Up 

Hog Creek 1.7 Up Yes REDB 

2.4 Static 

7.4 Unknown 

Hunter Creek 2.3 Up Yes 

3.2 Down 

Canyon Creek 0.7 Up REDB 

0.9 Down 

0.4 Unknown 

Chalk Canyon 3.4 Unknown 

Conroy Canyon 1.8 Unknown 

Dinner Creek 1.9 Unknown 

(Sand Hollow) Negro Rock Canyon 9.6 Unknown 

Pole Creek 2.0 Up Yes REDB, NATV 

0.2 Down 

Simmons Gulch 3.9 Up 

Spring Creek 2.1 Unknown 

Squaw Creek 11.3 Up REDB, NATV 

Squaw Creek South Fork 2.3 Static 

Willow Spring Creek 1.5 Unknown 

Bully Drainage (17050118) 

Bully Creek 3.8 Unknown Yes Yes REDB, NATV 

3.8 Unknown 

Bully Creek North Fork 2.1 Up 

0.8 Down 

2.8 Unknown 

Bully Creek North Fork TR 5.4 1.7 Unknown 

Bully Creek TR 24.0 0.6 Unknown 

Clover Creek 2.7 Down Yes REDB, NATV 

1.5 Unknown 

Buckbrush Creek 1.6 Up 

6.1 Static 

Buckbrush Creek TR 5.1 2.3 Unknown 

Clover Creek South 4.1 Unknown 

Clover Creek South TR 0.9 0.9 Unknown 

Clover Creek South TR 2.6 0.6 Unknown 

Clover Creek South TR 3.2 0.7 Unknown 

Clover Creek South TR 3.4 0.4 Unknown 

Clover Creek South TR 3.6 0.5 Unknown 

Clover Creek South TR 3.9 0.6 Unknown 

Clover Creek TR 13.3 0.6 Unknown 

Clover Creek TR 14.8 3.3 Unknown 

Clover Creek TR 26.7 0.2 Unknown 

Clover Creek TR 27.1 0.4 Unknown 

Clover Creek TR 27.3 0.3 Unknown 

D-16 
Appendix D5 - Riparian Trends for Stream Segments 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Stream Miles Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Clover CR TR 27.4 TR 0.7 TR 0.1 0.3 Unknown 

Clover Creek TR 27.41 1.8 Unknown
 

Clover Creek TR 27.41TR 0.4 0.2 Unknown
 

Clover Creek TR 27.41TR 0.7 0.9 Unknown
 

Clover Creek TR 27.42 1.6 Unknown
 

Deep Creek 0.7 Unknown
 

Deep Creek TR 2.1 0.3 Unknown
 

Hay Canyon 1.9 Unknown
 

Log Canyon 4.3 Unknown
 

Birch Creek 1.9 Unknown 

Birch Creek TR 1.2 0.9 Unknown
 

Pancake Creek 2.5 Unknown
 

Rail Canyon 3.2 Down REDB, NATV
 

Rail Canyon TR 1.3 0.7 Unknown 

Rail Canyon TR 1.3 TR 0.2 0.3 Unknown
 

Rail Canyon TR 2.3 0.3 Unknown
 

Rail Canyon TR 2.4 0.2 Unknown
 

Rail Canyon TR 2.5 0.3 Unknown
 

Rail Canyon TR 3.1 0.1 Unknown
 

Reds Creek 5.8 Up NATV 

0.8 Static
 

Brady Creek 1.2 Unknown REDB
 

Brady Creek TR 0.3 1.2 Unknown
 

Brian Creek 1.9 Static 

Cottonwood Creek at Reservoir 3.7 Up NATV, HATC 

0.6 Down 

4.3 Unknown
 

NG Creek 1.7 Up Yes
 

6.1 Down 

3.2 Unknown
 

Swede Flat Creek 0.8 Unknown
 

Rock Cabin Creek 4.8 Down
 

Rock Cabin Creek TR 1.9 3.2 Unknown 

Cottonwood Creek 0.7 Up Yes REDB, NATV, HATC 

8.5 Static
 

Cottonwood Creek South Fork 0.3 Static REDB, NATV
 

6.0 Unknown
 

Cottonwood CR South Fork TR 1.9 1.7 Unknown
 

Cottonwood C SF TR 1.9 TR 0.8 0.7 Unknown
 

Cottonwood CR South Fork TR 2.2 1.6 Unknown
 

Cottonwood CR South Fork TR 3.0 1.3 Unknown
 

Cottonwood CR South Fork TR 3.7 2.1 Unknown
 

Cottonwood Creek TR 10.0 4.4 Unknown
 

Cottonwood Creek TR 12.0 3.2 Unknown
 

Cottonwood Creek West Fork 6.6 Static REDB, NATV
 

Cottonwood CR West Fork TR 7.0 1.6 Unknown 

Dry Creek 7.6 Unknown 

Dry Creek East Prong 8.0 Down 

Dry Creek TR 3.3 6.9 Unknown 

Dry Creek TR 3.3 TR 3.9 0.8 Unknown 

Dry Creek TR 12.9 1.9 Unknown 

Godding Creek 3.3 Unknown REDB, NATV 

D-17 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Stream Miles Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Beaver Dam Creek 2.1 Unknown 

Indian Creek 2.0 Static 

1.0 Down 

0.4 Unknown 

Indian Creek North Fork 7.7 Unknown 

Indian Creek North Fork TR 8.5 2.0 Unknown 

Indian Creek South Fork 2.0 Up Yes REDB, NATV 

2.0 Unknown 

Gregory Creek 7.1 Unknown 

Gregory Creek TR 4.4 1.8 Unknown 

Gregory Creek TR 4.4 TR 1.8 0.6 Unknown 

Gregory Creek TR 6.4 1.1 Unknown 

Indian Creek South Fork TR 5.1 1.5 Unknown 

Indian Creek South Fork TR 7.2 2.0 Unknown 

Indian CR S Fork TR 7.2 TR 1.3 1.5 Unknown 

Indian CR S Fork TR 7.2 TR 2.3 1.2 Unknown 

Swamp Creek 4.7 Static 

North Bully Creek 2.6 Down 

McArthur Creek 2.8 Down 

McArthur Creek TR 1.9 0.8 Unknown 

Puckett Creek 1.7 Down 

Puckett Creek TR 1.0 0.7 Down 

South Bully Creek 4.6 Down REDB, NATV 

South Bully Creek TR 4.5 0.1 Down 

Whiskey Gulch 1.4 Unknown 

Steamboat Creek 3.6 Unknown 

Kitten Canyon 1.7 Unknown 

Steamboat Creek TR 2.3 1.4 Unknown 

Steamboat Creek TR 3.4 0.6 Unknown 

Steamboat Creek TR 3.7 0.6 Unknown 

Willow Drainage (17050119) 

Willow Creek 3.8 Up Yes Yes 

0.7 Unknown 

Basin Creek 0.3 Up 

Black Creek 3.9 Static 

Dry Gulch 2.8 Unknown Yes 

Dry Gulch TR 11.8 0.5 Up 

Dry Gulch TR 12.4 3.0 Unknown 

Dry Gulch TR 14.6 1.4 Static 

Kern Creek 4.4 Unknown 

Mill Boulder Creek 0.5 Unknown 

Milk Branch Boulder Creek 0.7 Unknown 

Mud Creek 2.6 Unknown 

Phipps Creek 2.0 Unknown 

Pole Creek 3.2 Down Yes 

Shasta Gulch 1.8 Up 

0.3 Static 

Sheep Corral Creek (Poison Creek) 2.0 Unknown 

Turner Creek 3.7 Down 

Willow Creek Middle Fork 0.5 Unknown 

D-18 
Stream 

Waterfall Creek 

Willow Creek North Fork TR 2.1 

Bridge Creek (Willow CR South Fork) 

Miles 

0.2 

3.3 

1.2 

Appendix D5 - Riparian Trends for Stream Segments 

1988 1998 

DEQ 303(d) 

water water 

quality quality 

Trend assessment limited Fish species in stream1 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Brownlee Reservoir Drainage (17050201) 

Birch Creek 0.3 Unknown 

Alvord Lake Drainage (17120009) 

Antelope Creek 

Antelope Creek TR 15.6 

Antelope Creek TR 16.3 

Little Antelope Creek 

Fish Creek 

Fish Creek South Fork 

Twelvemile Creek 

Twelvemile Creek TR 15.0 

Dry Creek 

Dry Creek TR 7.1 

Whitehorse Creek 

Cottonwood Creek 

Doolittle Creek 

Doolittle Creek TR 0.5 

Dry Creek 4.2 

Fifteenmile Creek 

Fifteenmile Creek TR 4.6 

Fifteenmile Creek TR 9.4 

Little Whitehorse Creek 

Little Whitehorse Creek TR 10.6 

Little Whitehorse Creek TR 10.9 

Sheepline Canyon 

Whitehorse Creek TR 19.2 

Whitehorse Creek TR 24.3 

Whitehorse Creek TR 24.3 TR 0.4 

Whitehorse Creek TR 24.3 TR 1.2 

8.4 

0.5 

1.9 

4.7 

6.5 

1.1 

8.9 

2.4 

8.1 

1.4 

15.2 

6.1 

0.7 

8.3 

0.8 

Up 

10.9 

4.0 

0.8 

14.0 

0.2 

3.6 

3.5 

0.9 

1.7 

0.8 

0.5 

Unknown LCTR 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Up Yes LCTR 

Up LCTR 

Static 

Up Yes LCTR 

Up 

Up Yes LCTR 

Up 

Up 

Up Yes Yes LCTR 

Up 

Up LCTR 

Up 

Up 

Up 

Up 

Up 

Whitehorse Creek TR 27.2 

Willow Creek 15.5 

Willow Creek TR 21.8 

Willow Creek TR 26.6 

Willow Creek TR 26.9 (Jaw Bone) 

Willow Creek TR 26.9 TR 1.2 

Willow Creek TR 26.9 TR 2.6 

Willow Creek TR 26.9 TR 2.7 

Willow Creek TR 29.4 

1.2 

Up 

2.8 

2.9 

1.9 

2.5 

1.2 

0.3 

0.2 

1.7 

Up 

Yes Yes LCTR 

Down 

Up 

Up 

Up LCTR 

Up 

Up 

Up 

Up 

1

 If a fish species is noted as present, the species may not be in all stream reaches, and all stream reaches may not have fish. Definitions of species abbreviations are: BUTR 

= bull trout; COLD = nonnative coldwater species, such as brook trout; HATC = hatchery fish; LCTR = Lahontan cutthroat trout; LSTS = Lahontan redside and Tahoe 

sucker; NATV = native species; may include game and nongame fish; REDB = redband trout; TRHY = cutthroat/rainbow trout hybrid; WARM = nonnative warmwater 

species, such as smallmouth bass. 

D-19 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Table D5-2.—Hydrologic subbasins corresponding to 4th-field hydrologic unit codes within the 

planning area (PSEORMP Table 2-9) 

Stream 

Acres Stream miles Stream 

HUC planning miles planning miles 

Subbasin number Acres total area Acres BLM total 3 area BLM 3 

Great Basin Region 2,227,200 1 339,035 299,255 767 2 767 668 

Black Rock Desert-Humbolt Subregion 2,227,200 1 339,035 299,255 767 2 767 668 

Upper Quinn 16040201 2,227,200 339,035 299,255 767 2 767 668 

Pacific Northwest Region 15,854,810 7,915,359 5,629,423 29,779 17,394 11,528 

Middle Snake Subregion 11,207,480 5,641,809 3,879,043 22,016 13,346 8,572 

Middle-Snake-Succor 17050103 1,480,560 202,845 154,280 3,434 532 336 

South Fork Owyhee 17050105 1,190,400 4,670 4,670 381 9 9 

East Little Owyhee 17050106 582,400 1 83,845 83,805 2982 159 158 

Middle Owyhee 17050107 948,230 760,760 639,245 2,241 1,748 1,386 

Jordan 17050108 773,530 390,370 243,705 1,869 981 528 

Crooked-Rattlesnake 17050109 834,510 794,779 728,533 1,954 1,853 1,702 

Lower Owyhee 17050110 1,329,410 1,329,410 998,805 2,970 2,970 2,111 

Middle Snake-Payette 17050115 178,020 97,625 7,320 463 240 10 

Upper Malheur 17050116 1,598,670 514,110 298,680 3,278 1,108 518 

Lower Malheur 17050117 575,750 575,750 426,055 1,559 1,559 1,052 

Bully 17050118 385,170 385,170 251,135 937 937 523 

Willow 17050119 502,520 502,520 108,670 1,111 1,111 199 

Brownlee Reservoir 17050201 828,310 75,415 31,945 1,521 139 40 

Oregon Closed Basins 4,647,330 2,273,550 1,750,375 7,763 4,048 2,956 

Alvord Lake 17120009 1,350,400 1 384,047 302,047 2,353 2 782 610 

1 Acreage based on USGS data (P. Seaber, F. Kapinos, G. Knapp. 1984. State Hydrologic Unit Maps. USGS Open-File Report 84-704). All other
 

acreages listed in table based on GIS data.
 

2 Covers only the portion of the subbasin in Oregon; does not include portion in Nevada.
 

3 Includes perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral drainage channels.
 

D-20 
 

Appendix D6 - Water Quality Restoration Plans 

Appendix D6 - Water Quality Restoration Plans
 

If site-specific GMA evaluations determine that BLM management actions are contributing to 

the reason for the 303(d) listing, the BLM will develop water quality restoration plans 

(WQRP’s). These plans provide the specific actions that the BLM will implement to bring 

303(d) listed waters into compliance with water quality standards within a reasonable 

timeframe. 

In some instances, the BLM may evaluate GMA’s and complete WQRP’s before the State 

develops its TMDL’s and WQMP’s. When this occurs, the BLM will submit its WQRP’s to 

the State so that the State may use the information to develop the TMDL’s and WQMP’s. To 

facilitate possible incorporation of the BLM’s WQRP information and management actions 

into the State’s WQMP’s, the BLM will develop its WQRP’s using the Oregon DEQ’s 

guidance document for developing WQMP’s. The WQRP’s will, therefore, include or 

address the elements described below to the extent possible:

 1) Condition assessment and problem description;

 2) Goals and objectives;

 3) Proposed management measures;

 4) Timeline for implementation;

 5) Identification of responsible participants;

 6) Reasonable assurance of implementation;

 7) Monitoring and evaluation;

 8) Public involvement;

 9) Maintenance of effort over time; and 

10) Discussion of costs and funding. 

WQRP’s that are developed and incorporated into GMA’s or other site-specific activity plans 

to address 303(d) listed streams may include components of existing plans or incorporate 

them by reference where they are consistent with the ten elements, in particular goals, 

objectives, reasonable assurance of implementation, and maintenance of effort over time. 

WQRP’s will tier to or incorporate by reference the three resource management plans and 

approved records of decision, including the objectives, methodologies, criteria, best management practices (Appendix O), and livestock grazing practices and project development 

(Appendixes R and S) both for the uplands and riparian/wetland areas. 

In some instances existing activity plans (agreements, permits, biological assessments and 

opinions, or other documents that stipulate management) that address 303(d) listed streams 

will require assessment of current management direction for concurrence with the ten 

elements. Plans that have not fully entertained all elements may need to be readdressed or 

supplemented to the extent possible with additional information for consistency. The 

augmented activity plans would then fulfillment WQRP requirements. 

D-21 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Element 1: Condition Assessment and Problem Description
 

The WQRP will identify the impaired water quality standards and beneficial uses as identified 

in Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 340 of listed waterbodies and stream segments. The 

beneficial uses that are most impacted by nonpoint source pollutants on public land are 

salmonid fish spawning and salmonid fish rearing, although aesthetics, resident fish and 

aquatic life, and water contact recreation could also be affected. 

Descriptions of subbasins, upland, riparian, and stream conditions in general are in Chapter 

2, as are the human-caused activities that can affect water quality. Although human-caused 

point-source pollution occurs in the subbasins, most of the pollution related to BLM activities is nonpoint source. In general, the relationship between the upland and riparian conditions to water quality are identified in Table D6-1. 

Water quality in the area also naturally varies greatly depending on topography, elevation, 

proximity to spring sources, climate, and other factors that are outside of human control. 

Late summer stream flows are naturally affected by high elevations of the upper portions of 

watersheds, the depth of the snowpack, the timing and duration of the snowmelt, and the 

level of saturation or dryness of the landscape. Several water quality parameters, including 

water temperature, dissolved oxygen, and instream habitat availability, are consequently 

affected throughout entire stream systems depending upon location within the watershed. 

The size of the watershed and amount of ground water recharge from springs or subsurface 

flow are also factors that influence the level of downstream erosive forces, which can affect 

the amount of sedimentation and quality of instream habitat. Water temperature can be 

affected by ambient air temperature and exposure to solar radiation, as affected by elevation, 

topography, aspect, annual temperature variation, and season, all of which are not under 

human control. Dependent upon soils, topography, climate, and elevation, different areas of 

the watersheds have different potential vegetative communities. These and natural disturbances, such as wildfire, can affect the soil surface protection and soil infiltration capability 

of the uplands and riparian areas. This, in turn, can affect the level of sedimentation and 

water volume in the streams. 

D-22 
Appendix D6 - Water Quality Restoration Plans 

Table D6-1.—Watershed conditions and relationship to nonpoint source pollution 

Watershed 

condition Description NPS pollution: relation to watershed condition 

I. Upland A. Insufficient 

vegetative basal 

and canopy cover 

to protect surface soils 

•Sedimentation: Soil surface erosion in uplands 

•Turbidity: Sedimentation from soil surface erosion in uplands 

•Habitat modification: Siltation of spawning gravels from sedimentation and 

reduction in primary productivity from turbidity 

B. Insufficient vegetation 

to allow soil infiltration 

•Flow modification: Reduced water retention 

•High sedimentation: High peak runoff causing upland soil surface erosion and 

riparian bank erosion 

•High turbidity: Sedimentation from erosion in uplands and riparian area 

•Habitat modification: Siltation of spawning gravels from sedimentation and 

reduction in primary productivity from turbidity 

•High temperature: Low summer flow and reduced cool ground water inflow 

•Low dissolved oxygen: High temperature reduces oxygen solubility 

II. Riparian area A. Streambank shade 

insufficient to prevent 

excessive warming from 

direct solar radiation 

•High temperature: Increased exposure, allowing solar heating 

•Low dissolved oxygen: High temperature reduces oxygen solubility 

•Algal growth: High temperature from solar heating 

•Turbidity: High algal growth 

B. Insufficient bank 

stability allowing excessive 

streambank erosion 

•Sedimentation: Streambank erosion 

•Flow modification: Reduced floodplain development resulting in reduced water 

retention causing increased spring peak flows and decreased summer ground water 

inflow 

•High temperature: Streambank erosion resulting in widening of stream allowing 

increased solar heating; reduced shade from overhanging banks; low summer flows 

and reduced cool ground water inflow 

•Low dissolved oxygen: High temperature reduces oxygen solubility 

•Algal growth: High temperature from solar heating 

•Turbidity: High algal growth and sediments from bank erosion 

•Habitat modification: Reduced point bar formation for pool formation in outer 

meander curves; reduced cover from undercut banks; reduced cover due to shal 

lower waters; reduced edgewaters and floodplains for refuge from high runoff 

velocities and for fry habitat; reduced spawning gravel availability due to sedimentation 

C. Vegetation sparse or 

not vigorous, causing 

reduced infiltration 

•Flow modification: Reduced water retention

•High temperature: Low summer flow and reduced cool ground water inflow 

•Sedimentation: Increased peak flow causing streambank erosion 

•Habitat modification: See above on bank stability 

D. Vegetation sparse, 

reducing filtering capability 

•Sedimentation: Higher input of upslope sediments 

D-23 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Element 2: Goals and Objectives 

The goal of the WQRP is to meet applicable Oregon water quality standards. This will occur 

through implementation of BMP’s, implementation of rangeland standards and guidelines, 

and watershed restoration, as accomplished through the achievement of the desired range of 

future conditions (DRFC’s), described in Chapter 1. The goals, objectives, and management 

directives in the PSEORMP/FEIS, described in Chapter 3, address DRFC and the expected 

result in improvement for water quality, riparian/wetland areas, vegetation in upland areas, 

habitat for special status species, and fisheries and aquatic habitat in general. 

Watershed restoration is assumed to be defined by the potential of the area. For example, in 

areas where deep channel entrenchment has occurred such that the top of the bank is much 

greater than the bankfull stage, restoration is limited to the potential floodplain development 

within the incised channel and continued shifts in localized erosion and deposition if the 

channel is still moving toward equilibrium. Achievement of the water quality goal through 

watershed restoration would be by implementing the necessary management to meet the 

PSEORMP/FEIS objectives, BMP’s (Appendix O), and the 1997 “Standards for Rangeland 

Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for Public Lands Administered by 

the Bureau of Land Management in the States of Oregon and Washington (S&G’s).” 

Grazing administration regulations for the BLM (43 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 4, 

1780 and 4100) set forth the requirement to manage to “. . . promote healthy, sustainable 

rangeland ecosystems; to accelerate restoration and improvement of public rangelands to 

promote properly functioning conditions; . . . and to provide for the sustainability of the 

western livestock industry and communities that are dependent upon productive, healthy 

public rangelands.” S&G’s were developed pursuant to 43 Code of Federal Regulations, 

Subpart 4180 and approved August 12, 1997. Standard 4 directly states the water quality 

goal: “Surface water and ground water quality, influenced by agency actions, complies with 

State water quality standards.” Standards 1 and 2 address the properly functioning condition 

of the watersheds. Standards 3 and 5 reflect the ecological processes in the watershed and 

habitat for native species. Watershed restoration and, therefore, water quality will be 

achieved through the attainment of Standards 1, 2, 3 and 5. The relationship of these 

standards to watershed conditions affecting water quality are identified in Table D6-2. 

D-24 
Appendix D6 - Water Quality Restoration Plans 

Table D6-2.—Standards for Rangeland Health and relationship to watershed condition factors 

(Table D6-1) contributing to nonpoint source pollution 

Relationship to watershed condition factor (Table D6-1) 

Standard Description contributing to nonpoint source pollution 

1 Upland soils exhibit •Protection of surface soils will increase because the improvement in species and 

infiltration and permeability structural diversity will result in increased vegetative basal and canopy cover to 

rates, moisture storage and reduce erosive energy due to overland flow and precipitation. (IA) 

stability that are appropriate •Soil infiltration will increase because the improvement in species and structural 

to soil, climate and diversity will result in increased vegetative basal and canopy cover to intercept 

landform. overland flow and precipitation. (IB) 

2 Riparian/wetland areas are •Streambank shade will be increased through improvement of shade-providing 

in properly functioning riparian woody species. (IIA) 

physical condition •Streambank stability will improve through improvement of herbaceous and woody 

appropriate to soil, climate, species to provide root mass to provide a matrix for holding the soil particles Z 

and landform. together. (IIB) 

•Infiltration will be improved through increase in basal and canopy vegetative cover 

to intercept overland flow and precipitation. (IIC) 

•Filtering capability will be improved through increase in basal vegetative cover to 

intercept sediments from overland flow, including floodplain overflow. (IID) 

3 Healthy, productive and •Protection of surface soils will increase because the improvement in species and 

diverse plant and animal structural diversity will result in increased vegetative basal and canopy cover to 

populations and commun­ reduce erosive energy due to overland flow and precipitation. (IA) 

itiesappropriate to soil, •Soil infiltration will increase because the improvement in species and structural 

climateand landform diversity will result in increased vegetative basal and canopy cover to intercept 

are supported by overland flow and precipitation. (IB) 

ecological processes of •Streambank shade will be increased through improvement of shade-providing 

nutrient cycling, energy flow riparian woody species. (IIA) 

and the hydrologic cycle. •Streambank stability will improve through improvement of herbaceous and woody 

species to provide root mass to provide a matrix for holding the soil particles 

together. (IIB) 

•Infiltration will be improved through increase in basal and canopy vegetative cover 

to intercept overland flow and precipitation. (IIC) 

•Filtering capability will be improved through increase in basal vegetative cover to 

intercept sediments from overland flow, including floodplain overflow. (IID) 

5 Habitats support healthy, •Habitat modification that is adverse to the fish species will be reduced as habitat is 

productive and diverse restored to support viable populations. (IA-B, IIA-D, IIIA) 

populations and commun­ •Temperature, sedimentation, algal growth, turbidity, summer flow, and dissolved 

ities of native plants and oxygen should be at levels that support viable populations of the fish species. (IAanimals (including special B, IIA-D, IIIA) 

status species and species 

of local importance) appropriate to soil, climate and 

landform. 

D-25 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Element 3: Proposed Management Measures 

The WQRP’s will incorporate adaptive management strategies, as described in Chapter 1, to 

address and accomplish resource objectives on public lands for all permitted uses and 

activities. This adaptive strategy will evaluate permitted uses and activities, recommend and 

initiate adjustments as needed to meet the desired resource objectives, and monitor results 

for effectiveness. Effectiveness will be evaluated through implementation of monitoring 

plans associated with each WQRP. 

The WQRP will address restoration or protection of the upland vegetation as well as the 

riparian/wetland areas for attainment and maintenance of water quality standards. Table D6­

3 identifies the more pertinent management actions by alternative from Chapter 3 that will 

result in progress toward meeting the S&G’s and watershed conditions that affect water 

quality. WQRP’s will include site-specific management activities that are in compliance 

with the management actions identified in Table D6-3 and in the approved ROD’s. 

Element 4: Timeline for Implementation 

Implementation of WQRP’s will begin with completion of appropriate NEPA analysis and 

decision. Most of the activities that affect riparian condition and water quality will be 

evaluated within the first 5 to 10 years of implementation. Implementation of management 

directives to meet plan objectives will occur initially within higher priorities areas based 

upon input from the public, and local, state, and federal agencies. 

Specific timeframes for meeting standards will be dependent upon stream segment and 

landscape priorities. Any use or activities on public land that presently or in the future will 

not lead to the attainment of water quality standards, PFC, and RMO’s in riparian/wetland 

areas (RCA’s) will be adjusted to result in improvements in meeting plan objectives and the 

beneficial uses of each stream system. 

Element 5: Identification of Responsible Participants 

The State’s WQMP’s may address lands administered by the BLM, other state and federal 

agencies, and private landowners. The level to which various public and private participants 

enter into required roles, responsibilities, and commitments will be determined by land 

ownership and the position and pattern of property within the watershed or subbasins. The 

WQRP addresses the lands administered by the BLM. 

Element 6: Reasonable Assurance of Implementation 

WQRP’s will be implemented because the BLM is required to comply with the CWA and 

meet Oregon standards for water quality. BLM conformance requirements with these 

standards for Public Lands, including the SEORMP planning area, are reiterated in the 

S&G’s. In addition, CFR 4180.2.c states, “The authorized officer shall take appropriate 

action as soon as practicable but not later than the start of the next grazing year upon 

determining that existing grazing management practices or levels of grazing use on public 

lands are significant factors in failing to achieve the standards ... made effective under this 

section.” The BLM and the ODEQ have also entered into a memorandum of agreement, 

April 1990, that provides a framework for the two agencies to “cooperate on projects of 

mutual concern to protect water quality statewide and to benefit the people of the State of 

Oregon.” 

In addition to the CWA, other numerous laws, regulations, policies, and Executive orders 

direct BLM to manage for water quality for the benefit of the nation and its economic, social, 

and recreational needs. 

D-26 
 

Appendix D6 - Water Quality Restoration Plans 

Water quality is not only important for beneficial human uses but also for proper ecosystem 

function. Management practices for grazing, mining, recreation, forest and woodland product 

harvest, and other forms of surface disturbing activities or vegetative management for 

restoring and maintaining water quality will be designed for healthy sustainable and functional rangeland ecosystems. Desired healthy and functional ecosystems requirements are 

described in the S&G’s and in the standards for aquatic/riparian strategies in “An Assessment of Ecosystem Components in the Interior Columbia Basin and Portions of the Klamath 

and Great Basins” (2000). 

Element 7: Monitoring and Evaluation 

The WQRP is an adaptive management strategy; therefore, if monitoring indicates that 

progress is not occurring, evaluations will be conducted on existing situation and any 

required adjustments will be implemented to meet the objectives. A monitoring plan will be 

developed and incorporated into the WQRP to address the specific objectives, management 

directives, and methodologies. 

Monitoring for WQRP’s for each stream, watershed or subbasin will be dependent upon the 

issues and problems identified for that particular geographic area. Potential monitoring 

parameters may be those that are identified as “potential indicators” in the S&G’s. The 

approach to monitoring will be to monitor to the intensity and frequency needed to address 

each listed segment on a case-by-case basis. 

Element 8: Public Involvement 

The WQRP’s will be developed with cooperation from the public at scheduled public scoping 

meetings and public review. This required public scoping will occur during the development 

of the WQRP and provide the public a platform to input their concerns and comments on 

resource issues and management objectives. 

It is the BLM’s intent that public comments on the listed 303(d) streams, the parameters of 

their listing, and any management measures which address them will serve as partial fulfillment of the public comment requirement for a WQRP. In addition to the information given in 

this SEORMP, WQRP’s may incorporate other site-specific or geographic area NEPA documents, such as an environmental assessments, on which public comment has been or will 

have been solicited. 

Element 9: Maintenance of Effort Over Time 

Implementation of the WQRP’s directives will continue on all streams until the water quality 

standard is met. Whenever possible and practical, WQRP’s will be developed that address 

several streams at a time and include streams that are not on the 303(d) list at the time of plan 

development. Also, WQRP planning efforts may be combined with other water quality 

planning efforts to avoid duplication of effort and provide the most effective means of 

addressing water quality issues at the watershed scale. 

Element 10: Discussion of Costs and Funding 

Guarantee of commitment to outyear budgets is not possible for the BLM because appropriations and priorities are subject to annual Congressional action. The BLM will make every 

attempt to secure funding for implementation of approved WQRP’s, including monitoring and 

required projects. Depending upon the responsible participants, BLM will attempt to develop 

alternatives to secure needed funding, including matching-funds and cost-sharing. 

D-27 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

D-28
 
Malheur Resource Area of Vale District administers livestock grazing within 123 allotments, and Jordan 

Resource Area administers livestock grazing within 45 allotments. Following is a summary of the 

current management for each allotment, including authorized livestock grazing levels and management 

objectives specific to individual pastures. “ Management Considerations with Implementation of the 

Resource Management Plan” identifies known concerns within each allotment which will be addressed 

during scheduled evaluation/analysis of implementation of existing activity plans, or the development 

of new activity plans. The listing of resource concerns in each allotment may not be all inclusive, as 

other issues within a given allotment may be identified as information becomes available. Implementation of appropriate management actions to implement decisions of the RMP and regional Standards and 

Guidelines for Rangeland Health at the allotment scale will follow evaluation/analysis as summarized in 

the adaptive management process. 

Allotment summaries will be updated during the allotment evaluation/geographic analysis process. The 

public will be informed of activity plan changes through planning updates following coordination with 

interested publics. 

Allotments summaries are ordered by allotment number. Following is an alphabetical listing of 

allotments in MRA and JRA to assist the reader in finding allotments of interest. 

E-1
Allotment #4 (10203)
 

Allotment #6 (10204)
 

Amelia Butte (10155)
 

Baldy Mountain (00131)
 

Becker Creek (10117)
 

Beulah Reservoir (10217)
 

Birch Creek (10506)
 

Black Butte (00304)
 

Blackjack (10501)
 

Board Corrals (10507)
 

Boney Basin (00307)
 

Boston Horse Camp (00113)
 

Boswell Spring (00120)
 

Boulder Creek (00138)
 

Brian Creek (10215)
 

Bridge Creek (00305)
 

Bridge Creek East (00145)
 

Bridge Creek West (00109)
 

Bridge Gulch (00124)
 

Brogan Canyon (00148)
 

Buckbrush (10218)
 

Bully Creek (00132)
 

Butte (00308)
 

Butte Tree (10212)
 

Butterfield Spring (00150)
 

Calf Creek (00162)
 

Canal (00152)
 

Canyon Creek (00151)
 

Castle Rock (10211)
 

Chalk Butte (00128)
 

Chukar Park (00225)
 

Clover Creek Individual (10210)
 

Cottonwood Creek (00226)
 

Cottonwood Creek (10140)
 

Cottonwood Mountain (20102)
 

Cow Creek (00144)
 

Cow Valley (00115)
 

Dearmond-Murphy (10206)
 

Dry Creek Individual (00135)
 

Dry Gulch (00129)
 

East Moores Hollow (00116)
 

ElDorado Creek (00146)
 

Ferrier Gulch (10141)
 

Freezeout (10404)
 

Golden Eagle Mine (00108)
 

Gordon Gulch (00513)
 

Grove Road (10107)
 

Harper (00301)
 

Ironside Mountain East (00114)
 

Ironside Mountain 

West (00112)
 

Lodge (10901)
 

Lost Valley (00119)
 

Lower Owyhee (10502)
 

Lyman Creek (00111)
 

Mahogany Mountain (10509)
 

Malheur City (00130)
 

Malheur Reservoir (00118)
 

Malheur River (10219)
 

McCain Springs (10505)
 

McEwen (20603)
 

Middle Willow Creek (00121)
 

Mitchell Butte (10408)
 

North Harper (00402)
 

North Star Mountain (00310)
 

Nyssa (10403)
 

Oregon Canal (10209)
 

Phipps Creek East (00137)
 

Phipps Creek North (00139)
 

Phipps Creek West (00125)
 

Poall Creek (20103)
 

Post Creek (00244)
 

Quarry (00147)
 

Quartz Mountain (10406)
 

Radar Hill (10410)
 

Rail Canyon (10205)
 

Red Hills (10302)
 

Reservoir Butte (00110)
 

Richie Flat (10214)
 

Ring Butte (10208)
 

Road Gulch (00229)
 

Rockville (10508)
 

Schnable Creek (10510)
 

Scratch Post Butte (00228)
 

Shasta Butte (00154)
 

Sheep Corral Creek (00122)
 

South Alkali (20100)
 

South Star Mountain (00309)
 

South Willow Creek (00153)
 

Spring Mountain (10504)
 

Squaw Butte (00233)
 

Thorn Flat (00127)
 

Three Fingers (10503)
 

Tunnel Canyon (10512)
 

Turnbull (00303)
 

Vale Butte North (10409)
 

Vale Butte South (00413)
 

Venator (10605)
 

Wallrock (00405)
 

West Bench (20104)
 

West Clover Creek (10213)
 

Resource 

Area 

15-Mile Community (01201)
 

Albisu-Alcorta (01304)
 

Ambrose-Maher (01102)
 

Anderson (01401)
 

Antelope (21002)
 

Antelope Individual (11011)
 

Arock (21001)
 

Barren Valley (10801)
 

Bighorn (11005)
 

Black Hill (01309)
 

Bogus Creek (10904)
 

Bowden Hills (10803)
 

Campbell (11306)
 

Cherry Creek (11014)
 

Coyote Lake (10804)
 

Crooked Creek (10806)
 

Danner Individual (11013)
 

East Cow Creek (10903)
 

Echave (21302)
 

Eiguren (11305)
 

Eiguren Individual (11006)
 

Gilbert (21301)
 

Jackies Butte Summer (01101)
 

Jackies Butte Winter (01103)
 

Little Antelope (11015)
 

Louse Canyon Community (01307)
 

McCormick (01202)
 

Miller Individual (11012)
 

Morcom (10907)
 

Oliver (10905)
 

Parsnip Peak (11009)
 

Rattlesnake (21003)
 

Rome Individual (11007)
 

Saddle Butte (20805)
 

Sheepheads (10702)
 

Sherburn (11303)
 

Skinner individual (11010)
 

Star Valley Community (01402)
 

Ten Mile (01308)
 

West Cow Creek (20902)
 

Whitehorse (11008)
 

Whitehorse Butte (01206)
 

Willow Creek (11004)
 

Wroten (11003)
 

Zimmerman (01203)
 

E-2 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-3

Malheur Resource Area
 

BLM allotment name: GOLDEN EAGLE MINE Allotment number: 00108 

Management category: C BLM acres: 276 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,990 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 46 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 46 Total acres: 2,266 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Golden Eagle 2266 12 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 20 5 5.1 

Pronghorn 10 0 0.9 

Elk 5 5 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Golden Eagle Willow Creek 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-4

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BRIDGE CREEK Allotment number: 00109 

Management category: C BLM acres: 40 

Number of pasture(s): 1 Private acres: 820 

AMP implemented: No State acres: 0 

Season of use: Undefined Other Federal acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 4 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 Total acres: 860 

Total AUM’s: 4 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bridge Creek 860 5 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 0 7.1 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 10 0 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-5

BLM allotment name: RESERVOIR BUTTE Allotment number: 00110 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,088 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 12,859 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 617 

Active AUM’s: 61 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 121 

Total AUM’s: 182 Total acres: 14,564 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Reservoir Butte 3742 4 Unknown Unknown J 

South Reservoir Butte 10,822 9 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 10 17.3 

Pronghorn 35 50 1.3 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-6

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: LYMAN CREEK Allotment number: 00111 

Management category: C BLM acres: 79 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,512 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 7 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 7 Total acres: 2,591 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Lyman Creek 2,591 3 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 0 15.3 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 5 0 3.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-7

BLM allotment name: IRONSIDE MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 00112 

WEST 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,050 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,837 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 124 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 124 Total acres: 4,887 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

West 4,887 21 Late Native Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage Demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 0 15.3 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 25 0 17.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

West Waterfall Creek 0.2 Unkn 

West Middle Fork Willow Creek 0.5 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-8

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BOSTON HORSE CAMP Allotment number: 00113 

Management category: C BLM acres: 708 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,420 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 83 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 162 

Total AUM’s: 245 Total acres: 2,128 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Boston Horse Camp 2,127 33 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 15 13.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 15 15 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Boston Horse Camp Cottonwood Creek-at reservoir 0.3 Static 0.3 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-9

BLM allotment name: IRONSIDE MOUNTAIN EAST Allotment number: 00114 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,122 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 13,960 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 140 Other Federal acres: 44 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 140 Total acres: 16,126 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East 16,126 16 Late Native Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage Demand (AUM) 

Deer 300 0 61.1 

Pronghorn 50 50 8.6 

Elk 75 0 52.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

East Bridge Creek 1.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
E-10

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: COW VALLEY Allotment number: 0115 

Management category: C BLM acres: 468 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 35,273 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 43 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 37 

Total AUM’s: 80 Total acres: 35,741 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Cow Valley 35,741 1 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 200 25 45.8 

Pronghorn 75 75 12.9 

Elk 250 50 21.0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-11

BLM allotment name: EAST MOORES HOLLOW Allotment number: 0116 

Management category: C BLM acres: 639 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 4,245 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 54 Other Federal acres: 78 

Suspended AUM’s: 56 

Total AUM’s: 110 Total acres: 4,962 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East Moores Hollow 4,962 13 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 125 40.8 

Pronghorn 10 20 2.6 

Elk 10 25 24.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-12

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: MALHEUR RESERVOIR Allotment number: 0118 

Management category: C BLM acres: 346 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,594 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 56 Other Federal acres: 46 

Suspended AUM’s: 24 

Total AUM’s: 80 Total acres: 2,986 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Malheur Reservoir 2,986 12 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 30 10 8.2 

Pronghorn 25 50 6.4 

Elk 10 25 24.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-13

BLM allotment name: LOST VALLEY Allotment number: 0119 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,040 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 5,492 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 58 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 152 

Total AUM’s: 210 Total acres: 6,532 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Lost Valley 6,532 16 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 45 0 9.2 

Pronghorn 5 0 0.4 

Elk 10 0 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-14

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BOSWELL SPRING Allotment number: 0120 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,131 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 4,708 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 30 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 90 

Total AUM’s: 120 Total acres: 5,839 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Boswell Spring 5,839 19 Early Native Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 30 16.3 

Pronghorn 5 5 0.9 

Elk 15 15 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Boswell Spring Willow Creek 0.5 Unkn Yes 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-15

BLM allotment name: MIDDLE WILLOW CREEK Allotment number: 00121 

Management category: C BLM acres: 477 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,299 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 45 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 45 Total acres: 2,776 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Middle Willow Creek 2,776 17 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 30 10 8.2 

Pronghorn 25 0 2.1 

Elk 10 10 14 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-16

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SHEEP CORRAL CREEK Allotment number: 00122 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,378 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,431 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 337 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 337 Total acres: 4,809 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Sheep Corral Creek 4,809 29 Late Native Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 75 25.5 

Pronghorn 25 50 6.4 

Elk 15 0 10.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-17

BLM allotment name: WICKIUP GULCH Allotment number: 00123 

Management category: C BLM acres: 855 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,290 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 118 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 22 

Total AUM’s: 140 Total acres: 4,145 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Gulch 4,145 21 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementations of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 75 25.5 

Pronghorn 10 20 2.6 

Elk 5 30 24.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-18

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BRIDGE GULCH Allotment number: 00124 

Management category: C BLM acres: 3,931 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,854 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 169 Other Federal acres: 4 

Suspended AUM’s: 319 

Total AUM’s: 488 Total acres: 5,789 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bridge 5,789 68 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 125 40.8 

Pronghorn 10 20 2.6 

Elk 5 30 24.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-19

BLM allotment name: PHIPPS CREEK WEST Allotment number: 00125 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,732 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,404 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 155 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 155 Total acres: 3,136 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

West 3,136 55 Early Native Unknown A 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 30 40 14.3 

Pronghorn 25 50 6.4 

Elk 5 15 12.6 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

West Phipps Creek 0.5 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-20

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: THORN FLAT Allotment number: 00127 

Management category: M BLM acres: 3,439 

AMP implemented: 1981 Private acres: 610 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 987 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 987 Total acres: 4,049 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Black Creek 2,255 98 Early Native Static B 

Gum Creek 1,793 68 Late Native Staic-Up A 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 50 20.4 

Pronghorn 35 35 6.0 

Elk 5 25 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-21

BLM allotment name: CHALK BUTTE Allotment number: 00128 

Management category: C BLM acres: 469 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,680 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 65 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 65 Total acres: 2,149 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Chalk Butte 2,149 22 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 10 15 6 

Pronghorn 15 25 3.4 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-22

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: DRY GULCH Allotment number: 00129 

Management category: C BLM acres: 902 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,114 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 62 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 78 

Total AUM’s: 140 Total acres: 2,016 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Dry 2,016 45 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 15 25 8.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 5 5 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations:1 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-23

BLM allotment name: MALHEUR CITY Allotment number: 00130 

Management category: M BLM acres: 1,167 

AMP implemented: 1987 Private acres: 256 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 289 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 39 

Total AUM’s: 328 Total acres: 1,423 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Malheur City 1,423 82 Early Native Static A 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 20 5 5.1 

Pronghorn 15 30 3.9 

Elk 15 15 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Malheur City Shasta Gulch 1.8 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-24

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BALDY MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 00131 

Management category: M BLM acres: 3,230 

AMP implemented: 1987 Private acres: 1,140 

Season of use: 04/01–10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 520 Other Federal acres: 780 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 520 Total acres: 5,150 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Baldy Mountain (includes land within 

Baker resource area) 5,150 63 Middle Native Static A 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 5 16.3 

Pronghorn 30 15 3.9 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-25

BLM allotment name: BULLY CREEK Allotment number: 00132 

Management category: M BLM acres: 5,095 

AMP implemented: 1982 Private acres: 7,281 

Season of use: 10/15-04/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 980 Other Federal acres: 482 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 980 Total acres: 12,858 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bully Creek 12,858 40 Early Native Up A, E 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 800 200 57.1 

Pronghorn 25 75 8.6 

Elk 5 5 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-26

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: KIVETT Allotment number: 00133 

Management category: C BLM acres: 243 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,188 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 26 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 20 

Total AUM’s: 46 Total acres: 3,431 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Kivett 3,431 7 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 0 10.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 15 0 10.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-27

BLM allotment name: JUNIPER MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 00134 

Management category: C BLM acres: 788 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,262 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 126 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 126 Total acres: 3,050 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Juniper 3,050 26 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 0 10.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 15 15 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-28

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: DRY CREEK INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 00135 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,058 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,820 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 99 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 181 

Total AUM’s: 280 Total acres: 4,878 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Dry Creek 4,878 42 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 100 30.6 

Pronghorn 15 25 3.4 

Elk 15 30 31.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-29

BLM allotment name: KING FIELD INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 00136 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,085 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 4,995 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 61 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 55 

Total AUM’s: 116 Total acres: 6,080 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

King 6,080 18 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 40 100 28.5 

Pronghorn 10 15 2.1 

Elk 5 5 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Malheur forget-me-not Special Status plants 
E-30

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: PHIPPS CREEK EAST Allotment number: 00137 

Management category: C BLM acres: 601 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,612 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 35 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 49 

Total AUM’s: 84 Total acres: 3,213 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East 3,213 19 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 100 27.5 

Pronghorn 10 50 5.1 

Elk 5 25 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-31

BLM allotment name: BOULDER CREEK Allotment number: 00138 

Management category: C BLM acres: 357 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 4,994 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 31 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 53 

Total AUM’s: 84 Total acres: 5,351 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Boulder 5,351 7 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 70 5 15.3 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Boulder Milk Ranch Boulder Creek 0.7 Unkn 

Boulder Mill Boulder Creek 0.5 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-32

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: PHIPPS CREEK NORTH Allotment number: 00139 

Management category: C BLM acres: 3,711 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,572 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 734 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 50 

Total AUM’s: 784 Total acres: 6,283 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Mine Hill Pasture East 2,641 62 Middle Native Down A, J 

Rim Rock 3,642 57 Middle Native Down A, J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 100 30.6 

Pronghorn 15 30 3.9 

Elk 15 25 28 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Rim Rock Phipps Creek 1.5 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-33

BLM allotment name: ALDER CREEK Allotment number: 00143 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,241 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,135 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 198 Other Federal acres: 56 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 198 Total acres: 4,432 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Northwest 1,164 51 Potential Native Unknown A, J 

Middle 1,101 24 Unknown Unknown A, J 

North 762 5 Middle Native Unknown A, J 

East 883 36 Middle Native Unknown A, J 

Southwest 523 5 Middle Native Unknown A, J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 30 5 7.1 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-34

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: COW CREEK Allotment number: 00144 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,851 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 4,766 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 112 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 218 

Total AUM’s: 330 Total acres: 7,617 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Cow Creek 7,617 37 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 25 20.4 

Pronghorn 25 25 4.3 

Elk 15 15 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-35

BLM allotment name: BRIDGE CREEK EAST Allotment number: 00145 

Management category: C BLM acres: 952 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 7,586 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 78 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 87 

Total AUM’s: 165 Total acres: 8,538 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bridge Creek 2,852 3 Unknown Unknown J 

South Bridge Creek 5,686 15 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 0 20.4 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 20 0 14 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-36

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: ELDORADO CREEK Allotment number: 00146 

Management category: C (administered by Baker RA) BLM acres: 354 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,123 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 31 Other Federal acres: 48 

Suspended AUM’s: 29 

Total AUM’s: 60 Total acres: 1,525 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Eldorado 1,525 23 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 20 5 5.1 

Pronghorn 15 30 3.9 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-37

BLM allotment name: QUARRY Allotment number: 00147 

Management category: C BLM acres: 79 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 80 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 2 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 13 

Total AUM’s: 15 Total acres: 159 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

QUARRY 159 50 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

The 40 acre federal parcel is within a Federal Aid Material Site right-of-way; not available for grazing. 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 0 0 0 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-38

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BROGAN CANYON Allotment number: 00148 

Management category: I BLM acres: 2,116 

AMP implemented: 1992 Private acres: 1,158 

Season of use: 04/01-10/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 360 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 360 Total acres: 3,274 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Lower Canyon 779 57 Unknown Static D 

Upland 1,362 54 Middle Native Up A 

Diversion Dam 225 84 Middle Native Up D 

Smith Private 422 67 Early Native Static A,D 

Chrome Mine 486 95 Early Native Up A,D 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 75 20.4 

Pronghorn 25 25 4.3 

Elk 5 20 17.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Lower Canyon Willow Creek 1.2 Up Yes 

Diversion Dam Willow Creek 0.9 Up Yes 

Smith Private Willow Creek 0.4 Up Yes 

Chrome Mine Basin Creek 0.3 Up 

Chrome Mine Willow Creek 1.3 Up Yes 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-39

BLM allotment name: WHEEL GULCH Allotment number: 00149 

Management category: C BLM acres: 760 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,181 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 50 Other Federal acres: 22 

Suspended AUM’s: 32 

Total AUM’s: 82 Total acres: 1,963 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Wheel 1,963 40 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 50 15.3 

Pronghorn 5 15 1.7 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited 1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 

1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-40

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BUTTERFIELD SPRING Allotment number: 00150 

Management category: C BLM acres: 594 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 8,649 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 398 

Active AUM’s: 39 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 35 

Total AUM’s: 74 Total acres: 9,640 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Butter 9,640 6 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 100 30.6 

Pronghorn 10 15 2.1 

Elk 5 5 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Malheur forget-me-not Special Status plant 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-41

BLM allotment name: CANYON CREEK Allotment number: 00151 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,211 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 5,328 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 35 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 25 

Total AUM’s: 60 Total acres: 6,539 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Canyon 6,539 19 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of resource management plan:­

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 50 20.4 

Pronghorn 5 5 0.9 

Elk 5 20 17.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-42

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: CANAL Allotment number: 00152 

Management category: C BLM acres: 435 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,190 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 16 Other Federal acres: 19 

Suspended AUM’s: 41 

Total AUM’s: 57 Total acres: 1,644 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Canal 1,644 26 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 10 35 9.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-43

BLM allotment name: SOUTH WILLOW CREEK Allotment number: 00153 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,669 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 5,148 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 85 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 85 Total acres: 6,817 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

South Willow 6,817 24 Late Native Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementations of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 0 15.3 

Pronghorn 10 0 0.9 

Elk 20 0 14 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-44

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SHASTA BUTTE Allotment number: 00154 

Management category: C (Administered by Baker RA)BLM acres: 236 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,650 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 21 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 40 

Total AUM’s: 61 Total acres: 3,886 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Shasta 3,886 6 Late Native Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 40 10 10.2 

Pronghorn 25 0 2.1 

Elk 50 50 70 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Shasta Shasta Gulch 0.3 Static 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-45

BLM allotment name: AGENCY MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 00161 

Management category: I BLM acres: 4,149 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,185 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,400 Other Federal acres: 1,123 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,400 Total acres: 8,457 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Water Gulch 3,511 54 Middle Native Static 

Agency Mountain 2,299 88 Middle Native Static 

Angus 784 23 Middle Native Static 

Reservoir Field 786 14 Unknown Unknown 

Orchard 1,077 13 Unknown Unknown 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 92 117 48 

Pronghorn 25 0 20 

Elk 28 30 262 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited 1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 

1 1998 303(d) list. 
E-46

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: CALF CREEK Allotment number: 00162 

Management category: I BLM acres: 18,510 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,033 

Season of use: 03/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,793 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,793 Total acres: 20,543 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Stemler Basin 4,173 99 Late Native Static 

Dishrag 6,388 99 Middle Native Static 

Cave Creek 551 99 Early native Static 

Lake Ridge 3,530 91 Late Native Static-Up 

Lower Calf Creek 1,678 48 Late Native Unknown 

Upper Calf Creek 830 89 Middle Native Unknown 

Chalk Camp 2,247 76 Unknown Unknown 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Cave Creek Stream Exclosure 450 99 Unknown Unknown 

Grasshopper FFR 696 4 Unknown Unknown 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 91 116 47 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 28 30 262 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Dishrag Warm Springs Creek 0.4 Static 

Cave Creek Cave Canyon 0.6 Unkn 

Lower Calf Creek Calf Creek 1.8 Up REDB 

Upper Calf Creek Calf Creek 0.4 Static REDB 

Cave Creek STEX Cave Canyon 1.4 Unkn 1 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-47

BLM allotment name: LOCKHART MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 00224 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,598 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,604 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 214 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 214 Total acres: 5,202 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Lockhart 5,202 31 Late Native Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 10 17.3 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 15 0 10.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-48

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: CHUKAR PARK Allotment number: 00225 

Management category: C BLM acres: 856 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 762 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 35 Other Federal acres: 98 

Suspended AUM’s: 46 

Total AUM’s: 81 Total acres: 1,716 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Chukar Park 1,716 50 Unknown Unknown J 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Chukar Park Campground Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 75 20.4 

Pronghorn 25 0 2.1 

Elk 15 15 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Chukar Park STEX North Fork Malheur River 0.3 Up BUTR Yes 

1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-49

BLM allotment name: COTTONWOOD CREEK Allotment number: 00226 

Management category: C BLM acres: 853 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 957 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 68 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 124 

Total AUM’s: 192 Total acres: 1,810 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Cottonwood Creek 1,810 47 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 5 6 

Pronghorn 10 0 0.9 

Elk 15 10 17.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1 1998 303(d) list. 
E-50

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: WESTFALL Allotment number: 00227 

Management category: M BLM acres: 1,425 

AMP implemented: 1990 Private acres: 125 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 327 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 327 Total acres: 1,550 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Westfall Seeding 1,550 92 Poor Seeding Down B 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 25 15.3 

Pronghorn 5 5 0.9 

Elk 10 20 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-51

BLM allotment name: SCRATCH POST BUTTE Allotment number: 00228 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,013 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 8,542 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 158 

Active AUM’s: 132 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 132 Total acres: 9,713 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Sctatch 9,713 10 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 65 15 16.3 

Pronghorn 25 0 2.1 

Elk 30 75 73.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-52

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: ROAD GULCH Allotment number: 00229 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,174 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 12 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 3,751 

Active AUM’s: 12 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 12 Total acres: 4,937 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Road Gulch 4,937 24 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 5 5.1 

Pronghorn 5 5 0.9 

Elk 5 10 10.5 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-53

BLM allotment name: WEST OREGON CANAL Allotment number: 00230 

Management category: C BLM acres: 638 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 785 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 46 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 46 Total acres: 1,423 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

West Oregon Canal 1,423 45 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 15 5 4 

Pronghorn 5 0 0.4 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-54

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SQUAW BUTTE Allotment number: 00233 

Management category: C BLM acres: 289 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,914 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 35 Other Federal acres: 7 

Suspended AUM’s: 32 

Total AUM’s: 67 Total acres: 2,210 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Squaw 2,210 13 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

`J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 5 5.1 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 10 0 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-55

BLM allotment name: POST CREEK Allotment number: 00244 

Management category: C BLM acres: 816 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 4,292 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 98 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 222 

Total AUM’s: 320 Total acres: 5,108 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Post 5,108 16 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 0 10.2 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 10 0 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-56

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: HARPER Allotment number: 00301 

Management category: I BLM acres: 55,463 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,394 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 4,809 Other Federal acres: 445 

Suspended AUM’s: 1,130 

Total AUM’s: 5,939 Total acres: 58,302 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Simmons Gulch 26,392 97 Late Native Static D 

Shearing Plant 10,205 91 Early Native Static D 

Rufino Butte 9,692 93 Late Native Static A 

Indian Camp 10,455 98 Late Native Static A 

Shearing Plant Stock Driveway 512 100 Early Native Static A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Squaw Creek Reservoir Exclosure 16 100 Unknown Unknown D,L 

McCloud Reservoir Enclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown K 

Avery Creek Reservoir Enclosure 1 100 Late Native Static K 

Perry FFR 1,025 58 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

K) Grazed reservoir enclosure with no management objective identified 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 150 51 

Pronghorn 20 20 3.4 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Simmons Gulch Gold Creek 5.4 Up REDB 

Simmons Gulch Malheur River 0.2 Up 

Simmons Gulch Simmons Gulch 3.9 Up 

Simmons Gulch South Fork Squaw Creek 2.3 Static 

Simmons Gulch Spring Creek 2.1 Unkn 

Simmons Gulch Squaw Creek 8.8 Up REDB 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-57

Shearing Plant Cottonwood Creek 2.8 Up REDB 

Shearing Plant Wildcat Creek 1.7 Unkn 

Perry FFR Malheur River 0.9 Up 

Indian Camp Pasture Keeney Creek 4.4 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Lake Ridge ACEC 
E-58

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: TURNBULL Allotment number: 00303 

Management category: M BLM acres: 79,609 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 26,206 

Season of use: 04/01-01/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 6,964 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 6,964 Total acres: 105,815 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Slaten 5,045 79 Late Native Up A 

Juniper Mountain (includes Frying Pan and Dowell) 31,070 87 Middle Native Static B 

Whiskey Spring (includes Private Land Pasture) 22,609 27 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Clark Flat 26,356 85 Early Native Static A 

Sand Basin 18,610 98 Middle Native Static A 

Jackson Creek 1,243 98 Middle Native Static A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Rinehart Ranch 882 47 Middle Native Static B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 175 50.9 

Pronghorn 15 15 2.6 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Slaten Butte Creek TR 6.3 0.3 Unkn 

Clark Flat Burnt Flat Creek 1.9 Unkn 

Sand Basin Jackson Creek 2.6 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Cedar Mountain WSA 

Lower Owyhee WSA 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-59

BLM allotment name: BLACK BUTTE Allotment number: 00304 

Management category: I BLM acres: 47,586 

AMP implemented: 1992 Private acres: 3,002 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 1,848 

Active AUM’s: 5,779 Other Federal acres: 1,619 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 5,779 Total acres: 54,055 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Juntura Seeding 1,427 68 Good Seeding Down B 

Butte 4,630 87 Late Native Static-Down A 

Terry Basin 5,142 90 Middle Native Up B 

Meeker Mountain 6,275 95 Late Native Static A 

Juniper Basin 1,166 100 Good Seeding Down B 

Potholes 10,253 90 Middle Native Static-Down E 

Water Gulch 7,684 98 Late Native Up A 

Sheep Rocks 3,905 87 Middle Native Static A 

Parks 3,065 92 Middle Native Static E 

McGetrick 2,079 66 Middle Native Static B 

Weisner 4,107 87 Late Native Unknown D 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Moritz 1,033 82 Early Native Static D 

FFR 277 87 Unknown Unknown B, J 

Riverside FFR 3,312 54 Unknown Unknown B, J 

ODFW Headquarters Stream Exclosure 438 6 Unknown Unknown L 

Riverside Recreation Site Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; no suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 450 500 193.6 

Pronghorn 15 150 14.1 

Elk 25 25 35 

Within bighorn sheep range 
E-60

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Moritz Malheur River 1.0 Unkn Yes 

Potholes Warm Springs Reservoir 0.1 Up 

Sheep Rock Malheur River 0.4 Up Yes 

Weisner Malheur River 0.9 Up Yes 

Riverside FFR Malheur River 0.1 Up Yes 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Biddle’s lupine Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-61

BLM allotment name: BRIDGE CREEK Allotment number: 00305 

Management category: M BLM acres: 13,535 

AMP implemented: 1973 Private acres: 1,790 

Season of use: 04/01-11/30 State acres: 70 

Active AUM’s: 1,178 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,178 Total acres: 15,395 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Willow Spring 3,968 96 Middle Native 

Tables 5,242 100 Middle Native 

Dugout-Bridge Gulch 6,185 75 Middle Native 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 200 355 112.1 

Pronghorn 15 50 5.6 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Upland Trend 

Static 

Down 

Static 

Objective 1 

E 

A, E 

E 

Tables Bull Canyon 3.2 Unkn 2

 1998 303(d) list. 

. 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Willow Spring Bull Canyon 3.0 Unkn 
E-62

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: JONESBORO Allotment number: 00306 

Management category: I BLM acres: 20,068 

AMP implemented: 1985 Private acres: 6,764 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 319 

Active AUM’s: 2,661 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 2,661 Total acres: 27,151 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Sperry Creek 2,020 99 Middle Native Down A, E 

Indian Creek 2,715 77 Middle Native Unknown A, E 

Trail Creek 5,611 65 Middle Native Static A, E 

Saddle Horse 5,381 97 Middle Native Up A, E 

Horse Camp 2,084 50 Early Native Static A 

Antelope Swales 911 100 Middle Native Static B, E 

Dinner Creek 3,903 97 Early Native Up A 

Tims Peak 1,078 28 Middle Native Up B,E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Canyon Creek Stream Exclosure 90 100 Early Native Up L 

Canyon Creek Reservoir Exclosure 3 100 Early Native Up L 

Hunter Creek Riparian Exclosure 760 100 Early Native Up L 

Jonesboro FFR 2,595 7 Middle Native Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; no suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 200 500 142.6 

Pronghorn 15 25 3.4 

Elk 50 50 70 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Horse Camp Hunter Creek 1.3 Down 

Dinner Creek Canyon Creek 0.9 Unkn REDB 

Dinner Creek Canyon Creek 0.4 Up REDB 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-63

Dinner Creek Dinner Creek 1.9 Unkn 

Dinner Creek Hunter Creek 0.1 Down 

Hunter Creek Stream EX Canyon Creek 0.1 Down REDB 

Hunter Creek Stream EX Hunter Creek 1.7 Down 

Hunter Creek Stream EX Hunter Creek 0.1 Up 

Canyon Creek Stream EX Canyon Creek 0.2 Unkn REDB 

Canyon Creek Stream EX Canyon Creek 0.4 Up REDB 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Camp Creek Group WSAs 
E-64

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

 

 

BLM allotment name: BONEY BASIN Allotment number: 00307 

Management category: M BLM acres: 17,136 

AMP implemented: Private acres: 5,780 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 2,662 Other Federal acres: 15 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 2,662 Total acres: 22,931 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Lower Field 10,074 85 Middle Native Static E 

Private 4,944 28 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Upper Field 7,259 98 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Horse Camp FFR 654 15 Unknown Unknown J 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specific management objective. 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 200 350 112.1 

Pronghorn 15 15 2.6 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Lower Field Chalk Canyon 3.4 Unkn 

Lower Field Conroy Canyon 1.8 Unkn 

Lower Field Hunter Creek 2.3 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

South Bull Canyon ACEC 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-65

BLM allotment name: BUTTE Allotment number: 00308 

Management category: M BLM acres: 27,307 

AMP implemented: 1985 Private acres: 1,192 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 128 

Active AUM’s: 2,056 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 2,056 Total acres: 28,627 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

North Racehorse 4,923 90 Middle Native Static-Up A 

South Racehorse 7,515 96 Middle Native Unknown A, D, E 

North Butte Creek 4,532 91 Middle Native Static B 

Middle Butte Creek 6,924 100 Middle Native Static B 

South Butte Creek 4,732 98 Late Native Static-Up B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East Copeland Reservoir Enclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown K 

Racehorse Seeding Enclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown A 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

K) Grazed reservoir enclosure with no management objective identified 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 150 200 71.3 

Pronghorn 25 25 4.3 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

South Racehorse Cottonwood Creek 1.3 Unkn REDB 

South Racehorse Squaw Creek 2.5 Up REDB 

North Butte Creek Butte Creek 2.1 Unkn 

North Butte Creek Wildcat Creek 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Malheur fiddleneck Special Status plant 
E-66

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SOUTH STAR MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 00309 

Management category: I BLM acres: 49,757 

AMP implemented: 1991 Private acres: 7,323 

Season of use: 04/01-01/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 5,394 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 5,394 Total acres: 57,080 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Granite Creek 3,879 99 Late Native Static A 

Horse Queen 4,662 100 Late Native Static A 

Atturbury 9,620 82 Middle Native Static B 

West Chapman 6,153 99 Late Native Static-Down A 

East Chapman 7,738 79 Late Native Unknown A 

Road Canyon 16,092 78 Late Native Static A 

Creston Brush Control 5,241 97 Late Native Static-Down A 

Canyon 3,694 97 Late Native Up D 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 450 200 132.5 

Pronghorn 75 25 8.6 

Elk 25 25 35 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Atturbury Crowley Creek 1.6 Unkn 

Road Canyon Little Crowley Creek 2.3 Unkn 

Road Canyon Little Crowley Creek TR 2.0 2.1 Unkn 

Road Canyon Road Canyon 0.7 Down 

Creston Brush Control Granite Creek 1.8 Unkn 

Canyon Granite Creek 2.3 Up 1 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Barren Valley Collomia Special Status plant 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-67

BLM allotment name: NORTH STAR MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 00310 

Management category: M BLM acres: 91,702 

AMP implemented: 1987 Private acres: 6,283 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 3,824 

Active AUM’s: 9,030 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 9,030 Total acres: 101,809 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Slaughter Gulch 14,811 96 Late Native Down A 

Cottonwood Basin 8,040 97 Late Native Static A 

Monument 32,336 94 Late Native Static B 

Wildcat Coldspring 35,855 83 Middle Native Down A 

Basque 9,380 93 Potential Native Unknown D 

Upper Meadows Seeding 550 100 Unknown Unknown J 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Arrien FFR 836 6 Unknown Static A 

Upper Meadows Reservoir Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; no suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 450 100 112.1 

Pronghorn 125 25 12.9 

Elk 25 25 35 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Monument Skull Creek 3.3 Unkn 

Wildcat Coldspring Butte Creek TR 6.3 7.1 Unkn 

Wildcat Coldspring Coldspring Creek 6.2 Unkn 

Wildcat Coldspring Coldspring Creek TR 0.3 4.1 Unkn 

Wildcat Coldspring Wildcat Creek 3.4 Unkn 
E-68

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Wildcat Coldspring Wildcat Creek TR 5.4 0.3 Unkn 

Basque Malheur River 1.4 Up Yes 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Cold Springs Wild horse management area (HMA) 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-69

BLM allotment name: NORTH HARPER Allotment number: 00402 

Management category: M BLM acres: 28,358 

AMP implemented: 1982 Private acres: 2,403 

Season of use: 04/01-10/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 4,208 Other Federal acres: 209 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 4,208 Total acres: 30,970 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Needham Well 5,045 87 Early Native Static-Up A 

North Harper Seeding West 2,237 98 Fair Seeding Down E 

North Harper Seeding East 2,093 100 Good Seeding Static E 

Johnson Gulch 5,560 92 Early Native Static A 

West Canal 4,764 81 Early Native Static A 

Boulevard Seeding 1,982 85 Early Native Static-Down 

East Cow Hollow 1,081 100 Middle Native Down E 

Lincoln Bench 5,544 95 Early Native Static A 

West Page Seeding 1,003 100 Good Seeding Static-Down E 

East Page Seeding 1,267 100 Good Seeding Static-Down E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Needham Well/Lincoln Bench Botanical Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Keeney Pass Interpretive Site 74 100 Unknown Unknown L 

FFR 320 100 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 75 25.5 

Pronghorn 90 90 15.4 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 
E-70

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Oregon Trail ACEC 

Malheur forget-me-not, Mulford’s milkvetch Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-71

BLM allotment name: WALLROCK Allotment number: 00405 

Management category: M BLM acres: 87,194 

AMP implemented: 1990 Private acres: 908 

Season of use: 03/01-02/28 State acres: 81 

Active AUM’s: 6,656 Other Federal acres: 4,035 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 6,656 Total acres: 92,218 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Dry Creek Butte 48,698 91 Middle Native Static-Up B 

West Juniper 15,825 98 Middle Native Static A 

Schaeffer 17,716 99 Late Native Static B 

North McNulty 4,254 99 Early Native Static A 

Hub Field 2,076 97 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Antelope Flat Seeding 3,238 100 Fair Seeding Down B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Page Place FFR 412 44 Middle Native Static J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 200 300 101.9 

Pronghorn 100 125 19.3 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 
E-72

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

West Juniper Dry Creek 0.8 Unkn REDB 

West Juniper Juniper Creek 2.7 Unkn 

Schaeffer Juniper Creek 0.3 Unkn 

McNulty North Juniper Creek 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Dry Creek Gorge ACEC 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Sand Hammond Hills ACEC 

Dry Creek Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic River 

Dry Creek WSA 

Dry Creek Buttes WSA 

Seeding condition 

Sterile milkvetch, Cusick’s chaenactis Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-73

BLM allotment name: VALE BUTTE SOUTH Allotment number: 00413 

Management category: C BLM acres: 278 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 0 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 36 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 36 

Total AUM’s: 72 Total acres: 278 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

South Vale Butte 278 100 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 15 25 8.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-74

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: GORDON GULCH Allotment number: 00513 

Management category: I BLM acres: 1,771 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 0 

Season of use: 10/01-12/01; 02/01-05/01 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 161 Other Federal acres: 42 

Suspended AUM’s: 119 

Total AUM’s: 280 Total acres: 1,813 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Gordon Gulch 1,813 98 Late Native Static-Down B, D 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 75 22.4 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Gordon Gulch Birch Creek 2.6 Static 

Gordon Gulch Indian Creek 2.0 Static 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Wildhorse Basin WSA 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-75

BLM allotment name: JAMIESON Allotment number: 10106 

Management category: C BLM acres: 82 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 281 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 5 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 19 

Total AUM’s: 24 Total acres: 363 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Jamison 364 23 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 40 13.2 

Pronghorn 0 20 1.7 

Elk 5 20 17.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-76

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: GROVE ROAD Allotment number: 10107 

Management category: C BLM acres: 397 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 4,365 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 22 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 42 

Total AUM’s: 64 Total acres: 4,762 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Grove 4,762 8 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 100 30.6 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-77

BLM allotment name: BECKER CREEK Allotment number: 10117 

Management category: C BLM acres: 3,374 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 10,863 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 92 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 475 

Total AUM’s: 567 Total acres: 14,237 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Becker Creek 14,237 24 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 150 45.8 

Pronghorn 25 50 6.4 

Elk 25 25 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Snake River goldenweed Special Status plant 
E-78

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: COTTONWOOD CREEK Allotment number: 10140 

Management category: I BLM acres: 738 

AMP implemented: 1990 Private acres: 623 

Season of use: winter / early spring State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 38 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 49 

Total AUM’s: 87 Total acres: 1,361 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Cottonwood Creek 1,361 54 Early Native Up D 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 125 30.6 

Pronghorn 0 10 0.9 

Elk 5 50 38.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Cottonwood Creek Cottonwood Creek 1.0 Up 0.8 0.1 0.1 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-79

BLM allotment name: FERRIER GULCH Allotment number: 10141 

Management category: C BLM acres: 354 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 4,232 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 28 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 26 

Total AUM’s: 54 Total acres: 4,586 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Ferrier 4,586 8 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 45 0 9.2 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 10 0 7 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-80

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: IRONSIDE SCHOOL Allotment number: 10142 

Management category: C BLM acres: 79 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,254 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 4 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 4 Total acres: 1,333 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Ironside 1,333 6 Unknown Unknown B 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 30 10 8.2 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 15 15 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-81

BLM allotment name: AMELIA BUTTE Allotment number: 10155 

Management category: C (administered by Baker RA) BLM acres: 797 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 5,229 

Season of use: 04/01-04/30 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 13 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 13 Total acres: 6,026 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Amelia 6,026 13 Unknown Unknown B 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 

Pronghorn 15 25 3.4 

Elk 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-82

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: ALLOTMENT #2 Allotment number: 10201 

Management category: I BLM acres: 48,499 

AMP implemented: 1994 Private acres: 7,665 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 7,480 Other Federal acres: 371 

Suspended AUM’s: 1,320 

Total AUM’s: 8,800 Total acres: 56,535 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Mesa 5,582 100 Late Native Static-Up B 

Harper Seeding 3,000 96 Poor Seeding Static B 

North Bully Creek 5,402 98 Middle Native Static-Down D 

Wildhorse 9,805 75 Early Native Static A 

South NG Seeding 4,529 98 Fair Seeding Static-Down B 

Bully Creek Seeding 2,697 89 Poor Seeding Static-Down A 

North NG Seeding 3,395 100 Good Seeding Static-Down B 

Mountain 10,933 100 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Holding 1,472 89 Early Native Unknown A 

Dry Creek 1,871 89 Early Native Unknown A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

NG Creek Riparian 568 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Cottonwood Wildlife Stream Exclosure 497 86 Unknown Unknown L 

Jordan FFR 5,271 21 Early Native Unknown J 

FFR 538 25 Early Native Unknown J 

NG Wildlife Area 119 100 Unknown Unknown L 

NG Holding 319 100 Early Native Unknown A 

North Bully Holding 91 100 Unknown Unknown none 

0201 Riparian Stream Exclosure 446 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Cottonwood Rehab Stream Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown AD 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; no suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 200 400 122.3 

Pronghorn 10 50 5.1 

Elk 15 50 45.5 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-83

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

North Bully Creek Bully Creek 3.0 Unkn Yes 3.0 

North Bully Creek Bully Creek TR 24.0 0.6 Unkn 0.6 

North Bully Creek NG Creek 0.6 Up 0.6 

North NG Seeding NG Creek 2.5 Unkn 1.1 1.4 

Mountain Cottonwood Creek- at Reservoir 4.0 Static 1.2 2.0 0.8 

Mountain Solders Canyon 1.4 Unkn 1.4 

Mountain East Prong Dry Creek 4.5 Down 2.7 1.8 

Mountain NG Creek 4.8 Down 0.8 0.5 3.5 

NG Creek Riparian NG Creek 1.2 Down 1..2 

Cottonwood Wildlife STEX NG Creek 0.5 Up 0.3 0.2 

Cottonwood Wildlife STEX Cottonwood Creek 0.6 Up 0.6 

FFR NG Creek 0.6 Up 0.6 

FFR Swede Flat Creek 0.7 Unkn 0.7 

NG Holding NG Creek 0.7 Unkn 0.7 

NG Holding Cottonwood Creek- At Reservoir 0.3 Up 0.3 

0201 Riparian STEX Cottonwood Creek- At Reservoir 1.9 Up 1.9 1 1998 303(d) list. 
E-84

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: ALLOTMENT #3 Allotment number: 10202 

Management category: I BLM acres: 77,848 

AMP implemented: 1993 Private acres: 14,963 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 94 

Active AUM’s: 13,480 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 607 

Total AUM’s: 14,087 Total acres: 92,906 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Jones 11,881 87 Late Native Static-Up B 

North Black Canyon 5,915 93 Middle Native Static-Down A 

South Black Canyon 8,153 99 Middle Native Static-Down A 

East Cottonwood Seeding 2,507 100 Good Seeding Static-Down B 

West Cottonwood Seeding 4,817 99 Good Seeding Down B 

Ke;say Butte 707 98 Late Native Static-Up A 

Swamp Creek Seeding 4,379 92 Fair Seeding Static-Down A 

North Gregory Creek 6,696 96 Middle Native Static A 

Indian Creek 3,800 89 Unknown Static-Up B 

South Gregory Creek 6,015 100 Middle Native Static-Down A 

North Studhorse 10,108 92 Middle Native Static-Up B 

South Studhorse 5,324 100 Late Native Static-Down B 

Lower Pole Creek 3,113 71 Middle Native Static-Up D 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Becker Horse Camp FFR 3,076 26 Middle Native Unknown J 

Wilson Creek FFR 274 57 Middle Native Unknown J 

Hanna Station FFR 2,081 37 Middle Native Unknown J 

Upper Pole Creek FFR 6,564 69 Middle Native Unknown J 

West Creek FFR 1,943 9 Middle Native Unknown J 

Dice FFR 960 16 Middle Native Unknown J 

Becker FFR 1,597 48 Middle Native Unknown J 

Westfall FFR 2,123 72 Middle Native Unknown J 

Pence Spring Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Allotment #3 Reservoir Exclosure 11 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Zotto Reservoir Exclosure 71 54 Unknown Unknown L 

Cooper Reservoir 5 100 Unknown Unknown K 

Gregory Creek Reservoir 12 100 Unknown Unknown K 

South Gregory Creek Reservoir 14 100 Unknown Unknown K 

Big Flat Reservoir 9 100 Unknown Unknown K 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-85

FFR 849 27 Unknown Unknown J 

South Fork Indian Creek Stream Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

K) Grazed reservoir enclosure with no management objective identified 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 600 300 183.4 

Pronghorn 50 0 4.3 

Elk 30 75 73.5 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Jones Cottonwood Creek 4.8 Static 4.8 

Jones Cottonwood Creek TR 10.0 3.1 Unkn 3.1 

Jones Cottonwood Creek TR 12.0 3.2 Unkn 3.2 

Jones South Fork Cottonwood Creek TR 3.70.8 Unkn 0.8 

Jones West Fork Cottonwood Creek 0.1 Static REDB 0.1 

North Black Canyon Cottonwood Creek 3.4 Static REDB 3.4 

North Black Canyon Cottonwood Creek TR 10.0 1.3 Unkn 1.3 

North Black Canyon South Fork Cottonwood Creek 0.6 Unkn REDB 0.6 

North Black Canyon West Fork Cottonwood Creek 2.5 Static REDB 1.1 1.4 

South Black Canyon South Fork Cottonwood Creek 

TR 1.9 TR 0.8 0.7 Unkn 0.7 

South Black Canyon South Fork Cottonwood Creek TR 2.21.6 Unkn 1.6 

South Black Canyon South Fork Cottonwood Creek TR 3.01.3 Unkn 1.3 

South Black Canyon South Fork Cottonwood Creek 3.2 Unkn REDB 2.4 0.8 

South Black Canyon South Fork Cottonwood Creek TR 1.91.7 Unkn 1.7 

South Black Canyon South Fork Cottonwood Creek TR 3.71.3 Unkn 1.3 

East Cottonwood Seeding Willow Spring Creek 1.1 Unkn 

West Cottonwood Seeding Willow Spring Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Swamp Creek Seeding Cottonwood Creek 0.7 Up 0.3 0.4 

Swamp Creek Seeding Indian Creek 2.1 Static 0.9 1.2 
E-86

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Swamp Creek Seeding Swamp Creek 2.4 Static 2.4 

North Gregory Creek Gregory Creek 4.3 Unkn 1.9 0.6 1.8 

North Gregory Creek Gregory Creek TR 4.4 1.1 Unkn 1.1 

North Gregory Creek Gregory Creek TR 6.4 1.2 Unkn 1.2 

Indian Creek South Fork Indian Creek 1.9 Up REDB 1.9 

Indian Creek South Fork Indian Creek 1.9 Unkn REDB 0.6 1.3 

Indian Creek South Fork Indian Creek TR 7.2 0.2 Unkn REDB 0.2 

South Gregory Creek Gregory Creek TR 4.4 TR 1.8 0.5 Unkn 0.5 

South Gregory Creek West Fork Cottonwood Creek 1.9 Static REDB 1.9 

South Gregory Creek Gregory Creek 1.0 Unkn 1.0 

South Gregory Creek Gregory Creek TR 4.4 0.7 Unkn 0.7 

South Gregory Creek Swamp Creek 2.2 Static 2.2 

North Studhorse South Fork Indian Creek 0.9 Unkn REDB 0.9 

North Studhorse South Fork Indian Creek TR 7.2 TR 2.30.1 Unkn 0.1 

North Studhorse South Fork Indian Creek TR 7.2 1.9 Unkn REDB 1.2 0.7 

North Studhorse South Fork Indian Creek TR 7.2 TR 1.31.5 Unkn 1.5 

North Studhorse South Fork Indian Creek TR 7.2 TR 2.31.1 Unkn 1.1 

South Studhorse West Fork Cottonwood Creek 2.0 Static REDB 2.0 

Lower Pole Creek FFR Pole Creek 2.0 Up REDB Yes 0.6 1.4 

Wilson Creek FFR South Fork Indian Creek 0.2 Up 0.2 

Wilson Creek FFR South Fork Indian Creek TR 5.1 0.1 Unkn 

Hanna Station FFR North Fork Indian Creek 0.1 Unkn 0.1 

Upper Pole Creek FFR West Fork Cottonwood Creek TR 7.01.6 Unkn 1.6 

Upper Pole Creek FFR Pole Creek 0.3 Unkn REDB Yes 

West Creek FFR Indian Creek 0.2 Unkn 

Dice FFR Cottonwood Creek 0.4 Static REDB 0.4 

Westfall FFR Gregor y Creek 1.8 Unkn 1.8 

Zotto RSEX South Fork Indian Creek TR 5.1 0.2 Unkn 

Unallocated Swamp Creek 0.2 Static 1 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-87

BLM allotment name: ALLOTMENT #4 Allotment number: 10203 

Management category: M BLM acres: 57,125 

AMP implemented: 1985 Private acres: 514 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 93 

Active AUM’s: 5,502 Other Federal acres: 693 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 5,502 Total acres: 58,425 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

West Willow Creek Seeding 2,482 100 Fair seeding Down A 

East Willow Creek Seeding 3,170 100 Fair seeding Static A 

North Gravel 8,291 100 Middle native Static A 

South Gravel 7,792 96 Middle native Static-Up A 

North Chicken Creek Seeding 2,195 100 Fair seeding Static A 

West Mid Chicken Creek Seeding 1,673 100 Fair seeding Down A 

East Mid Chicken Creek Seeding 2,182 90 Fair Seeding Static A 

South Chicken Creek Seeding 2,880 97 Fair Seeding Down A 

Hog Creek 10,405 100 Late Native Static-Up B 

West Miller Creek 9,935 99 Late Native Static-Up A 

East Miller Creek 6,299 96 Late Native Static-Down D 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

South Cottonwood Reservoir Exclosure 24 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Coyne Riparian Stream Exclosure 285 44 Unknown Unknown L 

Pats Reservoir Exclosure 8 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Hog Creek Stream Exclosure 804 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Sheep Spring Reservoir Exclosure Unknown 100 Uknown Unknown L 

Chicken Creek Noodlebowl Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Malheur Fiddleneck Botanical Ex #1, 

Ex #2, Ex #3 and Ex #4 Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; no suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 300 600 183.4 

Pronghorn 50 50 8.6 

Elk 30 50 56 
E-88

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Hog Creek South Fork Cottonwood Creek 2.2 Unkn 2.2 

Hog Creek Hog Creek 7.1 Unkn 

West Miller Creek Black Canyon 1.1 Static REDB 

West Miller Creek Black Canyon 0.9 Up REDB 

East Miller Creek Hog Creek 2.4 Static REDB 

South Cottonwood 

Re-seeding South Fork Cottonwood Creek 0.3 Static 0.3 

Coyne Riparian STEX Malheur River 0.5 Up 

Coyne Riparian STEX Spring Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Hog Creek STEX Hog Creek 1.7 Up REDB 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Hog Creek Wild horse management area (HMA) 

Sage grouse habitat 

Malheur fiddleneck Special Status plants 

Black Canyon ACEC 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-89

BLM allotment name: ALLOTMENT #6 Allotment number: 10204 

Management category: M BLM acres: 6,696 

AMP implemented: 1986 Private acres: 356 

Season of use: 03/15-05/15; 09/01-11/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,201 Other Federal acres: 311 

Suspended AUM’s: 339 

Total AUM’s: 1,540 Total acres: 7,363 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Juniper Gulch 7,280 92 Middle Native Up A, D 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Malheur River Stream Exclosure 83 95 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 150 200 71.3 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 10 20 21 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Juniper Gulch Malheur River 0.5 Unkn 

Malheur River STEX Malheur River 1.3 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-90

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: RAIL CANYON Allotment number: 10205 

Management category: I BLM acres: 22,641 

AMP implemented: 1995 Private acres: 3,879 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 3,023 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 3,023 Total acres: 26,520 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

West Rock Creek 1,870 92 Middle Native Static-Down A 

East Chastain 2,151 99 Middle Native Static A 

West Chastain 3,647 83 Middle Native Static A 

Kitten Canyon 6,193 99 Middle Native Up A 

East Crow Creek 4,434 99 Late Native Up D 

West Crow Creek 3,021 99 Late Native Up A 

East Rock Creek 627 99 Middle Native Unknown 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Home FFR 1,643 41 Early Native Up J 

Lost Creek FFR 2,429 34 Late Native Unknown J 

FFR 502 32 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 250 25 56 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 30 0 21 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-91

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

West Rock Creek North Fork Bully Creek 0.1 Unkn 0.1 

East Chastain North Fork Bully Creek 1.3 Unkn 1.3 

West Chastain North Fork Bully Creek 1.1 Unkn 1.1 

Kitten Canyon South Clover Creek 1.9 Unkn 0.1 1.7 0.1 

Kitten Canyon South Clover Creek TR 2.6 0.6 Unkn 0.6 

Kitten Canyon South Clover Creek TR 3.2 0.7 Unkn 0.7 

Kitten Canyon South Clover Creek TR 3.4 0.4 Unkn 0.4 

Kitten Canyon Steamboat Creek 3.5 Unkn 3.5 

Kitten Canyon Steamboat Creek TR 2.3 1.4 Unkn 1.4 

Kitten Canyon Steamboat Creek TR 3.4 0.6 Unkn 0.6 

Kitten Canyon Steamboat Creek TR 3.7 0.6 Unkn 0.6 

Kitten Canyon Godding Creek 1.5 Unkn 0.1 1.4 

Kitten Canyon Kitten Canyon 1.7 Unkn 1.7 

Kitten Canyon McArthur Creek 1.7 Down 1.7 

East Crow Creek Rail Canyon 3.2 Down REDB 2.5 0.7 

East Crow Creek Rail Canyon TR 1.3 0.7 Unkn 0.7 

East Crow Creek Rail Canyon TR 1.3 TR 0.2 0.3 Unkn 0.3 

East Crow Creek Rail Canyon TR 2.3 0.3 Unkn 0.3 

East Crow Creek Rail Canyon TR 2.4 0.2 Unkn 0.2 

East Crow Creek Rail Canyon TR 2.5 0.3 Unkn 0.3 

East Crow Creek South Clover Creek 1.2 Unkn 0.6 0.6 

East Crow Creek South Clover Creek TR 0.9 0.9 Unkn 0.9 

East Crow Creek Clover Creek 2.0 Down REDB 0.6 1.4 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek 0.7 Down REDB 0.7 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek TR 26.7 0.2 Unkn 0.2 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek TR 27.1 0.4 Unkn 0.4 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek TR 27.3 0.3 Unkn 0.3 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek TR 27.41 1.8 Unkn 1.1 0.7 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek TR 27.41 TR 0.4 0.2 Unkn 0.2 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek TR 27.41 TR 0.7 0.9 Unkn 0.9 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek TR 27.4 TR 0.7 TR 0.1 0.3 Unkn 0.3 

West Crow Creek Clover Creek TR 27.42 1.6 Unkn 1.6 

West Crow Creek South Clover Creek 0.9 Unkn 0.4 0.5 

West Crow Creek South Clover Creek TR 3.6 0.5 Unkn 0.5 

West Crow Creek South Clover Creek TR 3.9 0.6 Unkn 0.6 
E-92

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

West Crow Creek Lost Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Home FFR Bully Creek 0.6 Unkn 

Lost Creek FFR Lost Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Lost Creek FFR McArthur Creek 0.2 Down 

Lost Creek FFR McArthur Creek TR 1.9 0.8 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Beaver Dam WSA 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-93

BLM allotment name: DEARMOND-MURPHY Allotment number: 10206 

Management category: M BLM acres: 35,980 

AMP implemented: 1986 Private acres: 10,470 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 6,503 Other Federal acres: 122 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 6,503 Total acres: 46,572 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Mahogany Mountain 4,214 79 Middle Native Static A 

Pole Gulch 3,600 97 Middle Native Down B 

Castle Rock 10,578 93 Late Native Static B 

Beulah Seeding 1,697 90 Fair Seeding Unknown A 

Hunter Mountain 2,328 88 Late Native Static B 

Hunter Creek 2,850 73 Late Native Static B 

Morton 1,780 100 Middle Native Static A 

Butler 2,012 100 Middle Native Static A 

Murphy Reservoir 528 100 Middle Native Unknown A 

West Bendire 482 94 Early Native Unknown A 

East Bendire 855 98 Early Native Static A 

West Munker 1,185 88 Late Native Static B 

North Munker 2,035 100 Late Native Static B 

South Munker 1,977 100 Late Native Static B 

Lost Creek 2,037 15 Unknown Unknown 

Warm Spring Creek 438 43 Unknown Unknown 

Upper Warm Spring Creek 835 28 Unknown Unknown 

Emmigrant Hill 1,178 19 Unknown Unknown 

School Section 835 52 Unknown Unknown 

Homestead 637 0 Unknown Unknown 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 2,477 49 Middle Native Unknown 

FFR 830 25 Unknown Unknown 

FFR 792 12 Unknown Unknown 

FFR 391 38 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 
E-94

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 450 250 142.6 

Pronghorn 25 0 2.1 

Elk 30 50 56 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Mahogany Mountain Warm Springs Creek 1.3 Static 

Castle Rock Bendire Creek 1.5 Unkn 

Castle Rock Hunter Creek TR 4.4 0.8 Unkn 

Castle Rock Hunter Creek 1.7 Unkn 

Hunter Mountain Bendire Creek 1.1 Unkn 

Hunter Mountain Bendire Creek 0.1 Up 

Murphy Reservoir Bendire Creek 0.7 Up 

Murphy Reservoir Willow Basin Creek 0.7 Unkn 

West Bendire Bendire Creek 1.4 Up 

East Bendire Bendire Creek 0.6 Unkn 

South Munker Warm Springs Creek 1.4 Static 

FFR Bendire Creek 0.8 Unkn 

School Section Willow Basin Creek 0.6 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Castle Rock ACEC 

North Fork Malheur Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic River 

Castle Rock WSA 

Working with Forest Service in Coordinated Resource Management Plan with similar goals and objectives 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-95

BLM allotment name: RING BUTTE Allotment number: 10208 

Management category: C BLM acres: 394 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,799 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 32 Other Federal acres: 3 

Suspended AUM’s: 73 

Total AUM’s: 105 Total acres: 3,196 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

West Ring 1,316 15 Unknown Unknown J 

East Ring 1,880 10 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 0 20.4 

Pronghorn 10 0 .9 

Elk 50 0 35 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1 1998 303(d) list. 
E-96

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: OREGON CANAL Allotment number: 10209 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,288 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,945 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 94 Other Federal acres: 166 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 94 Total acres: 3,399 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Oregon 3,399 38 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 50 15.3 

Pronghorn 0 5 0.4 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-97

BLM allotment name: CLOVER CREEK INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 10210 

Management category: C BLM acres: 3,459 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 12,937 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 248 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 205 

Total AUM’s: 453 Total acres: 16,396 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Clover Creek 16,396 21 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementations of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 150 25 35.7 

Pronghorn 15 0 1.3 

Elk 30 30 42 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Clover Creek Clover Creek 0.3 Unkn REDB 0.3 

Clover Creek Clover Creek TR 14.8 2.1 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-98

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: CASTLE ROCK Allotment number: 10211 

Management category: I BLM acres: 19,831 

AMP implemented: 1993 Private acres: 10,137 

Season of use: 03/20-11/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 4,816 Other Federal acres: 1,285 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 4,816 Total acres: 31,253 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Castle Rock 4,131 95 Late Native Static-Up A 

Clevenger Butte #1 1,515 99 Middle Native Unknown A 

Clevenger Butte #2 2,284 76 Late Native Static-Up B 

Duck Pond 1,691 86 Middle Native Unknown A 

South Rockpile 3,820 29 Late Native Unknown B 

North Rockpile 3,413 37 Middle Native Static-Up A 

House 2,281 51 Early Native Static-Up A 

Poison 1,424 97 Late Native Unknown B 

Heifer 830 99 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Hat Butte 3,126 68 Late Native Static-Up B 

Sheep Rock 1,813 83 Middle Native Static-Down A 

East Rockpile 918 69 Late Native Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 4,007 30 Middle Native Unknown 

Horse Flat Reservoir Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown 

Hunter Spring Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 125 50 35.7 

Pronghorn 10 0 0.9 

Elk 100 0 70 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-99

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Clevenger Butte #1 Lost Creek 0.9 Unkn 

North Rockpile North Fork Malheur River 1.2 Static REDB Yes 1.2 

BUTR 

Poison Little Malheur River 0.1 Static REDB Yes 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Castle Rock WSA 

Beaver Dam WSA 

Castle Rock ACEC 

North Fork Malheur River ACEC 

North Fork Malheur Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic River 
E-100

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BUTTE TREE Allotment number: 10212 

Management category: C BLM acres: 604 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,286 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 69 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 54 

Total AUM’s: 123 Total acres: 1,890 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Butte 1,890 32 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementations of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 10 9.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 20 0 14 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-101

BLM allotment name: WEST CLOVER CREEK Allotment number: 10213 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,713 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 7,520 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 235 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 200 

Total AUM’s: 435 Total acres: 10,233 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

West Clover 10,233 27 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementations of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 150 25 35.7 

Pronghorn 35 0 3 

Elk 30 15 31.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Beaver Dam WSA 
E-102

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: RICHIE FLAT Allotment number: 10214 

Management category: I BLM acres: 17,504 

AMP implemented: 1994 Private acres: 2,233 

Season of use: 04/01-11/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 3,168 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 381 

Total AUM’s: 3,549 Total acres: 19,737 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

South Ridge 2,500 90 Early Native Static-Up E, F 

North Ridge 3,790 100 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Richie Flat Seeding 1,380 96 Fair Seeding Static-Down E, F 

West Log Creek 5,533 90 Early Native Static-Down A 

East Log Creek 4,375 99 Early Native Static-Down A, D 

Poison Butte Seeding 780 100 Poor Seeding Unknown E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Richie Flat FFR 1,379 1 Early Native Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

F) Maintain the integrity of enclosures constructed for wildlife benefits 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 40 125 33.6 

Pronghorn 15 25 3.4 

Elk 5 15 14 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

North Ridge Clover Creek 0.8 Unkn 0.8 

North Ridge Clover Creek TR 14.8 1.2 Unkn 

West Log Creek Birch Creek TR 1.2 0.9 Unkn 0.9 

West Log Creek Birch Creek 2.0 Unkn 0.5 1.5 

West Log Creek Deep Creek 0.3 Unkn 

West Log Creek Deep Creek TR 2.1 0.1 Unkn 

West Log Creek Log Creek 4.2 Unkn 4.2 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-103

East Log Creek Reds Creek 5.7 Up 0.6 2.9 2.2 1 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

South Ridge Bully Creek ACEC 

North Ridge Bully Creek ACEC 
E-104

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

 

BLM allotment name: BRIAN CREEK Allotment number: 10215 

Management category: M BLM acres: 4,815 

AMP implemented: 1995 Private acres: 90 

Season of use: 04/01-11/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,090 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,090 Total acres: 4,905 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

North Mountain 1,018 99 Late Native Unknown B 

South Mountain 1,812 97 Late Native Unknown B
 

North NG Seeding 1,171 98 Fair Seeding Unknown A
 

South NG Seeding 904 98 Fair Seeding Static-Up A 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 15 10.2 

Pronghorn 15 10 2.1 

Elk 5 15 14 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Mountain Brady Creek 1.1 Unkn 1.1 

Mountain Brady Creek TR 0.3 1.1 Unkn 1.1 

Mountain Brian Creek 1.8 Static 0.2 1.6 

Mountain Buckbrush Creek 2.1 Static 2.1 

Mountain Buckbrush Creek TR 5.1 0.1 Unkn 0.1 

Mountain Buckbrush Creek TR 5.5 0.6 Unkn 0.6 

Mountain Reds Creek 0.8 Static 0.8 

North NG Seeding Solders Canyon 1.0 Unkn 1.0 

South NG Seeding Solders Canyon 0.2 Unkn 0.2 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-105

BLM allotment name: WHITLEY CANYON Allotment number: 10216 

Management category: M BLM acres: 14,340 

AMP implemented: 1988 Private acres: 3,336 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 2,376 Other Federal acres: 1,263 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 2,376 Total acres: 18,939 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Burnt Mountain 4,589 99 Middle Native Down A, E 

Pete Mountain 5,446 73 Early Native Down A, E 

West Juniper 3,388 89 Middle Native Static A, E 

Little Malheur 4,895 57 Middle Native Static B, E, J 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

PJ#1 FFR 621 2 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 150 50.9 

Pronghorn 5 0 0.4 

Elk 45 25 49 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Little Malheur N Fork Malheur River 1.0 Static BUTR 

REDB 0.4 0.2 0.4 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

North Fork Malheur River ACEC 

Little Malheur Pasture mostly private along river; however, managing pasture under riparian objectives 
E-106

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BEULAH RESERVOIR Allotment number: 10217 

Management category: I BLM acres: 12,008 

AMP implemented: 1991 Private acres: 6,640 

Season of use: 03/15-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 2,560 Other Federal acres: 979 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 2,560 Total acres: 19,627 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Antelope 3,743 41 Middle Native Static B 

Lower Poverty 717 98 Middle Native Static A 

Upper Poverty 1,138 95 Middle Native Static A 

Moonshine 1,049 95 Early Native Static A, E 

Jack Creek 2,025 100 Middle Native Unknown A, E 

Big Seeding 541 41 Fair Seeding Down B 

Burnt Field 309 100 Middle Native Unknown A, E 

Scab 1,358 72 Middle Native Down A 

Little Seeding 151 62 Fair Seeding Unknown A 

West M J Field 1,664 53 Middle Native Unknown D 

River Field 723 61 Late Native Unknown D 

Bennet 386 100 Unknown Unknown J 

Poverty Flat 869 10 Unknown Unknown J 

Mud Spring 317 99 Unknown Unknown J 

Horse 221 4 Unknown Unknown J 

Upper Creek 639 13 Unknown Unknown J 

Creek 1,126 24 Unknown Unknown J 

East M J Field 505 62 Unknown Unknown J 

North Homestead 2,146 63 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 275 350 127.4 

Pronghorn 25 0 2.1 

Elk 85 100 129.5 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-107

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

River Field North Fork Malheur River 1.2 Static BUTR 

REDB Yes 1.2 

East MJ Field North Fork Malheur River 1.0 Static Yes 1.0 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Redband trout, Bull trout Special Status fish 

North Fork Malheur Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic River 

North Fork Malheur River ACEC 
E-108

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

 

 

 

 

BLM allotment name: BUCKBRUSH Allotment number: 10218 

Management category: I BLM acres: 20,072 

AMP implemented: 1995 Private acres: 960 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 2,797 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 462 

Total AUM’s: 2,259 Total acres: 21,032 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Buckbrush Seeding 2,797 100 Fair Seeding Static-Down 

Upper Buckbrush 3,509 99 Middle Native Static-Up 

Lower Buckbrush 3,518 98 Middle Native Static-Up 

Turnout 2,839 100 Middle Native Static 

Lower Mountain 2,388 100 Late Native Static-Up B 

Upper Mountain 2,759 98 Late Native Static-Up 

Salters 395 23 Unknown Static 

Gathering 557 84 Early Native Static A 

State Pasture 2,266 82 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 150 75 45.8 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-109

Pronghorn 10 15 2.1 

Elk 5 20 17.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Buckbrush Seeding Buckbrush Creek 1.7 Up 0.9 0.8 

Buckbrush Seeding Pancake Creek 0.9 Unkn 0.9 

Buckbrush Buckbrush Creek 3.5 Static 0.7 2.8 

Buckbrush Buckbrush Creek TR 5.1 1.1 Unkn 1.1 

Buckbrush Buckbrush Creek TR 5.5 0.7 Unkn 0.7 

Buckbrush Dry Creek 2.7 Unkn 2.7 

Turnout Solders Canyon 2.1 Unkn 0.8 1.3 

Turnout Solders Canyon TR 3.9 0.5 Unkn 0.5 

Turnout East Prong Dry Creek 3.5 Down 1.3 2.2 

Mountain Dry Creek 4.9 Unkn 2.0 2.9 

Mountain Dry Creek TR 12.9 1.9 Unkn 1.9 

Mountain Buckbrush Creek 0.6 Static 0.6 

Mountain Buckbrush Creek TR 5.1 1.1 Unkn 1.1 

Mountain East Prong Dry Creek 0.1 Down 

State Solders Canyon 2.2 Unkn 2.2 

State Solders Canyon TR 3.9 0.3 Unkn 0.3 1 1998 303(d) list. 
E-110

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

 

BLM allotment name: MALHEUR RIVER Allotment number: 10219 

Management category: C BLM acres: 781 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,516 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 53 Other Federal acres: 3 

Suspended AUM’s: 117 

Total AUM’s: 170 Total acres: 3,300 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Malheur Riparian 2,260 7 Unknown Unknown 

Malheur River 997 58 Unknown Unknown 

L M Riparian Stream Exclosure 43 100 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 30 15 9.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 5 0 3.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF LM 

Riparian STEX Little Malheur River 1.0 Static REDB Yes 1 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-111

BLM allotment name: WILLOW BASIN Allotment number: 10222 

Management category: I BLM acres: 43,461 

AMP implemented: 1995 Private acres: 6,534 

Season of use: 04/01-11/30 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 7,006 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 1,117 

Total AUM’s: 8,123 Total acres: 49,995 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Juniper Spring 7,229 93 Middle Native Down A 

North Cottonwood Seeding 1,560 89 Poor Seeding Down D 

Indian Creek 5,424 98 Middle Native Static-Down A 

Pan Handle 3,406 88 Early Native Static-Down A 

North Fork 1,460 79 Middle Native Down D 

State Block 2,590 100 Middle Native Unknown A 

Willow Basin Creek 9,091 99 Middle Native Down D 

Bully Creek 11,041 91 Middle Native Down 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 5,538 50 Early Native Unknown 

Shroyer FFR 569 70 Unknown Unknown 

FFR 2,087 53 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 400 100 101.9 

Pronghorn 5 25 2.6 

Elk 5 15 14 
E-112

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Juniper Springs North Fork Indian Creek 3.7 Unkn 3.1 

Juniper Springs North Fork Indian Creek TR 8.5 2.0 Unkn 2.0 

North Cottonwood Seeding Indian Creek 0.9 Down 0.5 0.4 

Indian Creek North Fork Indian Creek 3.0 Unkn 3.0 

Indian Creek South Fork Indian Creek TR 5.1 1.3 Unkn 

Pan Handle Indian Creek 0.2 Unkn 0.2 

Pan Handle North Fork Indian Creek 0.8 Unkn 0.8 

North Fork North Fork Bully Creek 0.8 Down 0.3 0.2 

State Block North Fork Bully Creek 0.3 Unkn 0.3 

State Block North Fork Bully Creek, TR 5.4 1.7 Unkn 1.7 

Willow Basin Creek Willow Basin Creek TR 2.9 0.9 Unkn 

Willow Basin Creek Willow Basin Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Willow Basin Creek Bendire Creek 1.6 Unkn 

Willow Basin Creek Bendire Creek 0.1 Up 

Willow Basin Creek Willow Basin Creek TR 2.5 0.6 Unkn 

Willow Basin Creek Willow Basin Creek 2.4 Unkn 

Willow Basin Creek Willow Basin Creek TR 2.7 0.6 Unkn 

Bully Creek Beaver Dam Creek 2.1 Unkn 1.3 0.8 

Bully Creek Bendire Creek 0.8 Unkn 

Bully Creek Godding Creek 1.8 Unkn REDB 1.5 

Bully Creek McArthur Creek 1.4 Down 1.4 

Bully Creek North Bully Creek 2.6 Down 0.8 0.7 1.1 

Bully Creek Puckett Creek 1.7 Down 0.9 0.8 

Bully Creek Puckett Creek TR 1.0 0.6 Down 0.6 

Bully Creek South Bully Creek 4.6 Down REDB 4.6 

Bully Creek South Bully Creek TR 4.5 0.1 Down 

Bully Creek Whiskey Gulch 1.4 Unkn 1.4 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Castle Rock ACEC 

Beaver Dam WSA 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-113 

BLM allotment name: LAVA RIDGE Allotment number: 10223 

Management category: I BLM acres: 11,074 

AMP implemented: 1991 Private acres: 1,225 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,722 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,722 Total acres: 12,299 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Hay Canyon 2,392 95 Late Native Unknown B 

East Lava Seeding 2,240 84 Fair Seeding Static I 

West Lava Seeding 1,879 90 Poor Seeding Static I 

North Bully 3,001 100 Early Native Static B 

South Bully 2,016 87 Early Native Unknown A, D 

South Hay Canyon 772 63 Late Native Unknown B 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

I) Maximize availability of fall green-up for winter deer/antelope use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 50 30.6 

Pronghorn 5 25 2.6 

Elk 10 25 24.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Hay Canyon Clover Creek 0.1 Unkn 0.1 

Hay Canyon Clover Creek TR 13.3 0.6 Unkn 0.6 

Hay Canyon Deep Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Hay Canyon Deep Creek TR 2.1 0.2 Unkn 

Hay Canyon Hay Canyon 1.9 Unkn 1.9 

East Lava Seeding Bully Creek 0.2 Unkn 

South Bully North Fork Bully Creek 2.1 Up 0.8 1.3 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

South Ridge Bully Creek ACEC
 

North Ridge Bully Creek ACEC
 
E-114

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BULLY RESERVOIR Allotment number: 10224 

Management category: C BLM acres: 640 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,922 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 74 Other Federal acres: 80 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 74 Total acres: 2,642 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bully Reservoir 2,642 24 Unknown Unknown A 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

Management consideration with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 25 11 

Pronghorn 5 5 0.9 

Elk 15 5 14 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Allotment not delineated in GIS (acreage is estimated) 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-115

BLM allotment name: RED HILLS Allotment number: 10302 

Management category: I BLM acres: 51,477 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 4,390 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 5,348 

Active AUM’s: 3,982 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 918 

Total AUM’s: 4,900 Total acres: 61,215 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Squaw Creek Seeding 5,505 97 Poor Seeding Down A 

Lake Ridge 22,565 96 Late Native Static D 

Red Butte 9,841 96 Middle Native Static A 

Cherry Creek 14,928 99 Middle Native Static A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Coleman FFR 1,088 9 Unknown Unknown J 

Coyote Well State Block 7,275 1 Unknown Unknown J 

Tims Peak Reservoir Enclosure 14 100 Unknown Unknown K 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

K) Grazed reservoir enclosure with no management objective identified 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 350 500 173.2 

Pronghorn 100 50 12.9 

Elk 50 50 70 
E-116

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Lake Ridge Camp Creek 5.1 Unkn REDB 

Lake Ridge Cottonwood Creek 6.3 Up REDB 

Lake Ridge Long Creek 2.8 Unkn 

Lake Ridge Tims Creek 1.2 Unkn 

Lake Ridge Wildcat Creek 0.1 Unkn 1 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Lake Ridge ACEC 

Camp Creek Group WSA’s 

Sage grouse habitat 

Golden buckwheat Special Status plant 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-117

BLM allotment name: KEENEY CREEK Allotment number: 10401 

Management category: I BLM acres: 59,439 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 4,337 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 4,632 

Active AUM’s: 7,119 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 7,119 Total acres: 68,407 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Callahan 11,020 100 Late Native Static-Down E 

Little Valley Seeding 2,536 100 Fair Seeding Static-Down A 

North Winter Springs Seeding 1,005 100 Fair Seeding Static-Down I 

South Winter Springs Seeding 1,093 97 Fair Seeding Static-Down I 

Hunter 11,780 98 Middle Native Static B 

East Hunter 3,755 99 Late Native Static A 

Freezeout 6,334 99 Late Native Static E 

Drip Springs 4,209 93 Middle Native Up A 

Chukar 1,650 100 Middle Native Static A 

Keeney Creek Riparian 4,374 96 Late Native Up A,D 

Quicksand 10,046 99 Late Native Static E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Winters Place FFR 6,707 29 Middle Native Unknown J 

Stacey Cabin Exclosure 40 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Callahan Stream Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Riley Place State Block 3,855 13 Unknown Unknown J 

Drip Spring Water Gap Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown A,D 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

I) Maximize availability of fall green-up for winter deer/antelope use 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 50 30.6 

Pronghorn 100 100 17.1 

Elk 0 0 0 
E-118

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Callahan Malheur River TR 41.9 3.2 Unkn 

Callahan Malheur River TR 41.0 0.1 Up 

Little Valley Seeding Malheur River TR 41.9 0.2 Unkn 

Winter Spring Seeding Basin Creek 0.8 Unkn 

Chukar Basin Creek 2.8 Unkn 

Keeney Creek Riparian/ 

Drip Spring Water Gap Keeney Creek 6.0 Unkn 

Winters Place FFR Cottonwood Creek 0.3 Unkn REDB 

Winters Place FFR Cottonwood Creek 0.6 Up REDB 

Winters Place FFR Keeney Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Stacey Cabin Exclosure Malheur River TR 41.9 0.3 Up 

Callahan STEX Basin Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Callahan STEX Basin Creek 0.1 Up 

Riley Place State Block Keeney Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Quicksand Pasture Keeney Creek 0.4 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Biddle’s lupine Special Status plant 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-119

BLM allotment name: NYSSA Allotment number: 10403 

Management category: I BLM acres: 67,865 

AMP implemented: 1999 Private acres: 778 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31+ State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 5,882 Other Federal acres: 8,310 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 5,882 Total acres: 76,955 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

North Mud Spring 5,322 95 Late Native Static-Down B 

South Mud Spring 3,067 100 Late Native Static B 

North Rock Creek 8,152 100 Middle Native Static A, D 

Sagebrush 12,175 100 Middle Native Static A 

Ryefield Seeding 3,752 100 Good Seeding Static-Down B 

Grassy Seeding 2,971 100 Good Seeding Up B 

Grassy Mountain 30,369 83 Late Native Static-Up B 

South Rock Creek 7,318 100 Middle Native Static A, D 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 1,174 84 Unknown Unknown J 

Ryefield Reservoir Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Rock Creek Riparian Stream Exclosure (Owyhee River) 2,644 61 Unknown Unknown A, D, L 

Sagebrush Reservoir Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown L 

North Grassy Mountain Reservoir Enclosure 12 100 Unknown Unknown K 

Sagebrush Spring Enclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown K 

Mud Spring Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Mud Spring Reservoir Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

K) Grazed reservoir/spring enclosure with no management objective identified 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; no suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 20 50 14.3 

Pronghorn 15 15 2.6 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 
E-120

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

North Rock Creek Rock Spring Canyon 0.8 Static 

Grassy Mountain Owyhee River 0.1 Up Yes 

Rock Creek Riparian Owyhee River 4.4 Up Yes 

Rock Creek Riparian Owyhee River 7.3 Up Yes 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Sage grouse habitat 

Biddle’s lupine, Mulford’s milkvetch, solitary milkvetch, Malheur forget-me-not, Cusick’s chaenactis Special Status plants 

Owyhee Below the Dam ACEC 

Dry Creek Gorge ACEC 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Owyhee River Below the Dam Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic Rivers 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-121

BLM allotment name: FREEZEOUT Allotment number: 10404 

Management category: M BLM acres: 130,470 

AMP implemented: 1989 Private acres: 13,926 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31+ State acres: 2,620 

Active AUM’s: 11,590 Other Federal acres: 147 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 11,590 Total acres: 147,163 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Double Mountain 12,665 98 Middle Native Down A 

Sand Hollow Seeding 3,285 98 Good Seeding Static E 

Canyon 21,528 99 Middle Native Static A 

North Kane Spring 10,651 98 Middle Native Up A 

South Kane Spring 8,114 100 Middle Native Up A 

Freezeout Lake 21,537 100 Late Native Static B 

South Freezeout 12,771 99 Late Native Static B 

Hurley Spring 33,654 98 Late Native Static B 

Cow Hollow Seeding 1,549 100 Good Seeding Static B 

West Sand Hollow Seeding 905 100 Good Seeding Static B 

Double Mountain Seeding 891 100 Late Native Static B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Twin Spring Exclosure 18 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Kane Spring Reservoir Exclosure 66 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Russell FFR 5,443 18 Unknown Unknown J 

Bishop FFR 6,533 23 Unknown Unknown J 

Twin Spring Reservoir Enclosure 13 100 Unknown Unknown K 

Rye Field FFR 2,345 51 Unknown Unknown J 

Hoo Doo State FFR 3,055 9 Unknown Unknown J 

Freezeout Creek FFR 2,139 23 Late Native Static J 

Double Mountain Botanical Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Upper Flowing Well Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Lower Flowing Well Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

DM Spring and Reservoir Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Little DM Spring Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives)| 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

K) Grazed reservoir enclosure with no management objective identified 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 
E-122

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Management considerations with implementation of resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 250 50 61.1 

Pronghorn 100 100 17.1 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Sand Hollow Seeding Negro Rock Canyon 0.4 Unkn 

Canyon Negro Rock Canyon 7.7 Unkn 

South Freezeout Twin Springs Creek TR 5.2 0.9 Unkn 

Hurley Spring Dry Creek 12.7 Unkn REDB 

West Sand Hollow Seeding Negro Rock Canyon 1.3 Unkn 

Bishop FFR Negro Rock Canyon 0.3 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Dry Creek Gorge ACEC 

Dry Creek Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Dry Creek WSA 

Sage grouse habitat 

Biddle’s lupine, Malheur forget-me-not, Mulford’s milkvetch Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-123

 

BLM allotment name: QUARTZ MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 10406 

Management category: M BLM acres: 95,424 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 7,469 

Season of use: 3/1 - 2/28 State acres: 12,162 

Active AUM’s: 7,472 Other Federal acres: 9,093 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 7,472 Total acres: 124,148 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Cedar Mountain 21,848 98 Late Native Static B 

Willow Spring 16,255 72 Late Native Static D 

Red Butte 48,102 88 Late Native Static B 

Hole-in-the-Ground 7,681 94 Late Native Static D 

South McNulty 11,185 100 Middle Native Static-Down E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Mud Flat FFR 4,067 1 Unknown Unknown J 

Mud Flat State FFR 14,953 17 Late Native Static J 

Greeley Bar Exclosure 55 100 Late Native Static O 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 400 400 163.0 

Pronghorn 50 50 8.6 

Elk 25 25 35 

Within bighorn sheep range 
E-124

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Willow Spring Owyhee River 3.7 Up REDB Yes 0.9 

Hole-In-The-Ground Owyhee River 3.2 Up REDB Yes 2.0 1.2 

Greeley Bar Owyhee River 0.5 Up REDB Yes 0.5 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Dry Creek Buttes WSA 

Cedar Mountain WSA 

Owyhee Breaks WSA 

Lower Owyhee WSA 

Sterile milkvetch, Cusick’s chaenactis Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-125

BLM allotment name: LITTLE VALLEY Allotment number: 10407 

Management category: M BLM acres: 14,392 

AMP implemented: 1988 Private acres: 1,557 

Season of use: 04/01-12/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,373 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,373 Total acres: 15,949 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

North Vine Hill 1,084 100 Late Native Up B 

East Vine Hill 2,500 100 Early Native Up A 

South Vine Hill 1,983 100 Early Native Static-Up B 

Rabbit Farm 5,705 93 Late Native Up B 

Little Valley Native 4,387 74 Middle Native Static A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Vines Hill Reservoir Exclosure 18 100 Unknown Unknown L 

FFR 271 100 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; no suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 60 22.4 

Pronghorn 25 50 6.4 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Little Valley Brush Control Malheur River TR 41.9 0.8 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Malheur forget-me-not, Biddle’s lupine, Mulford’s milkvetch Special Status plants 
E-126

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: MITCHELL BUTTE Allotment number: 10408 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,778 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 158 

Season of use: 05/01-08/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 152 Other Federal acres: 388 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 152 Total acres: 3,324 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Mitchell Butte 3,324 89 Middle Native Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 15 25 8.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Below the Dam ACEC 

Owyhee River Below the Dam administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic River 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-127

BLM allotment name: VALE BUTTE NORTH Allotment number: 10409 

Management category: C BLM acres: 252 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 255 

Season of use: 04/01-04/30 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 10 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 10 Total acres: 507 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

North 507 50 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 15 25 8.2 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-128

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: RADAR HILL Allotment number: 10410 

Management category: M BLM acres: 4,534 

AMP implemented: 1995 Private acres: 982 

Season of use: 03/01-05/31; 10/01-12/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 686 Other Federal acres: 10 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 686 Total acres: 5,526 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

North Radar Hill 3,367 71 Early Native Unknown A 

South Radar Hill Seeding 2,159 99 Good Seeding Down B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 125 35.7 

Pronghorn 10 25 3 

Elk 2 5 4.9 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Malheur forget-me-not Special Status plant 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-129

BLM allotment name: BLACKJACK Allotment number: 10501 

Management category: M BLM acres: 13,613 

AMP implemented: 1989 Private acres: 1,841 

Season of use: 04/15-10/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,050 Other Federal acres: 4,028 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,050 Total acres: 19,482 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East 9,934 85 Middle Native Up B, E 

West 9,072 61 Middle Native Static B, E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Brown Butte Wildlife Upland Exclosure 476 48 Early Native Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives)
 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 75 25.5 

Pronghorn 75 100 15 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Below the Dam ACEC 

Owyhee River Below the Dam Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Mulford’s milkvetch and Malheur forget-me-not Special Status plants 
E-130

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: LOWER OWYHEE Allotment number: 10502 

Management category: M BLM acres: 1,211 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: <1 

Season of use: 03/01-11/30 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 244 Other Federal acres: 524 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 244 Total acres: 1,735 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Lower Owyhee 1,735 85 Middle Native Unknown B 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 45 65 22.4 

Pronghorn 5 10 1.3 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Below the Dam Proposed ACEC 

Owyhee River Below the Dam Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic Rivers 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-131

BLM allotment name: THREE FINGERS Allotment number: 10503 

Management category: I BLM acres: 122,506 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 23,033 

Season of use: 03/01-02/28 State acres: 2,534 

Active AUM’s: 9,981 Other Federal acres: 7,638 

Suspended AUM’s: 4,653 

Total AUM’s: 14,634 Total acres: 155,711 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Sheephead Seeding 8,467 98 Unknown Static B 

Camp Kettle North 7,804 93 Late Native Unknown D 

Camp Kettle South 6,139 76 Late Native Unknown D 

Devils Gate 4,098 9 Late Native Static-up B 

McIntyre 7,656 99 Middle Native Up A 

Saddle Butte 9,438 99 Middle Native Static-up A 

Bannock 12,825 100 Late Native Up A 

Sulpher Spring Seeding 1,895 97 Unknown Static-up B 

Riverside 54,524 89 Middle Native Static-up A 

Blackrocks 15,016 70 Middle Native Static-up D 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 27,849 28 Unknown Unknown J 

Succor Creek Botanical Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Saddle Butte Reservoir Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Three Fingers Reservoir Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Antelope Test Plot Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown C 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and test plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 750 1000 356.6 

Pronghorn 25 15 3.4 

Elk 20 20 28 

Within bighorn sheep range 
E-132

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Camp Kettle North Succor Creek 0.5 Up 

Camp Kettle South Succor Creek 2.4 Up 

Saddle Butte Succor Creek 0.8 Up 

Bannock Carter Creek 0.3 Unkn 

FFR Dog Creek 0.2 Unkn 

FFR Mahogany Creek 0.3 Unkn 

FFR Spring Creek 2.0 Unkn 

FFR Succor Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Leslie Gulch Spring Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Blackrocks Owyhee River 2.3 Up Yes 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Three Fingers Wild Horse Management Area (HMA) 

Blue Canyon WSA 

Slocum Creek WSA 

Upper Leslie Gulch WSA 

Honeycombs WSA 

Leslie Gulch ACEC 

Honeycombs ACEC 

Owyhee clover, sterile milkvetch, grimy ivesia Special status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-133

BLM allotment name: SPRING MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 10504 

Management category: I BLM acres: 43,222 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,179 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 6,473 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 2,887 

Total AUM’s: 9,360 Total acres: 46,402 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Spring Creek Seeding North 1,374 88 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Spring Creek Seeding South 2,700 97 Excellent Seeding Static-Down B 

Falen Seeding 551 97 Unknown Static-Up E 

Spring Basin Seeding North 1,404 88 Unknown Static E 

Carter Creek Seeding 2,733 99 Unknown Static B 

Shalerock 5,257 98 Late Native Static-Up A 

Old Maid Seeding North 915 100 Unknown Static E 

Sagehen Basin 2,228 99 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Spring Basin Seeding South 2,092 100 Unknown Static E 

Spring Mountain Seeding 2,067 94 Unknown Static B 

Spring Mountain Native Range 19,563 97 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Sheaville 932 94 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Old Maid seeding South 1,621 100 Unknown Static E 

Sticky Joe Seeding 959 99 Unknown Static E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 2,005 13 Unknown Unknown J 

Dog Creek Pit Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Carter Wildlife Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Mahogany Test Plot Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown C 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 300 75 76.4 

Pronghorn 75 25 8.6 

Elk 40 40 56 
E-134

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Spring Creek Seeding Spring Creek 1.3 Unkn 

Carter Creek Seeding Carter Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Carter Creeek Seeding Spring Creek 1.8 Unkn 

Carter Creek Seeding Spring Creek TR 5.1 0.8 Unkn 

Carter Creek Seeding Spring Creek TR 6.3 1.1 Unkn 

Shalerock South Fork Carter Creek TR 3.8 0.1 Up 

Shalerock South Fork Carter Creek 1.7 Up REDB 

Shalerock Spring Creek 2.4 Unkn 

Shalerock Spring Creek TR 6.3 1.1 Unkn 

Old Maid Seeding North Old Maids Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Sagehen Basin Mahogany Creek 0.5 Unkn 

Spring Basin Seeding Dog creek 0.7 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Seeding Dog Creek 1.0 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Seeding Hog Creek 1.3 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Seeding Whiskey Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Seeding Whiskey Creek TR 0.5 1.5 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Native Range Dog Creek TR 2.9 0.6 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Native Range Dog Creek 1.4 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Native Range Old Maids Creek 2.0 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Native Range Old Maids Creek TR 4.6 1.0 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Native Range Thomas Creek 1.4 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Native Range Whiskey Creek TR 0.5 1.1 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Native Range Wilson Creek TR 1.5 1.1 Unkn 

Spring Mountain Native Range Wilson Creek 2.7 Unkn 

Old Maid Seeding South Old Maids Creek 0.5 Unkn 

FFR Wilson Creek TR 1.5 0.1 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Spring Mountain ACEC 

Sage grouse 

Owyhee clover, sterile milkvetch, smooth blazingstar Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-135

BLM allotment name: MCCAIN SPRINGS Allotment number: 10505 

Management category: I BLM acres: 9,587 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 0 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,949 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 953 

Total AUM’s: 2,902 Total acres: 9,587 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East Blue Canyon 2,425 100 Late Native Static B 

McCain Spring Seeding 3,971 100 Unknown Static-Up E 

Road Reservoir 3,190 100 Middle Native Up B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bench Reservoir Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Blowout Reservoir Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives)
 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 50 25.5 

Pronghorn 50 50 8.6 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Jordan Craters ACEC 

Jordan Craters WSA 
E-136

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BIRCH CREEK Allotment number: 10506 

Management category: I BLM acres: 9,993 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2 

Season of use: 03/01-05/15; 11/–02/28 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,099 Other Federal acres: 1,574 

Suspended AUM’s: 308 

Total AUM’s: 1,407 Total acres: 11,571 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Birch Creek 2,970 89 Unknown Static-Up D 

West Blue Canyon 4,560 100 Late Native Up B 

Island Field 3,026 60 Unknown Unknown D 

South Blackrocks 1,015 100 Middle Native Unknown B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

Management consideration with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 100 40.8 

Pronghorn 15 15 2.6 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Birch Creek Birch Creek 2.4 Unkn 

Birch Creek Owyhee River 0.6 Up REDB Yes 

Island Field Owyhee River 5.3 Up REDB Yes 0.1 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Owyhee Breaks WSA 

Blue Canyon WSA 

Ertter’s groundsel, sterile milkvetch Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-137

BLM allotment name: BOARD CORRALS Allotment number: 10507 

Management category: I BLM acres: 55,675 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,725 

Season of use: 03/01-02/28 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 4,182 Other Federal acres: 3,587 

Suspended AUM’s: 1,778 

Total AUM’s: 5,960 Total acres: 60,986 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Alkali 18,254 94 Middle Native Static A, D 

Board Corral 6,874 99 Late Native Up B 

Wildhorse Basin 16,961 82 Late Native Static-Up B 

Antelope 17,393 98 Late Native Up B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Antelope Spring 18 100 Unknown Unknown L 

FFR 1,485 48 Unknown Unknown J 

Alkali Experimental Plots 1 & 2 Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown C 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 250 300 112.1 

Pronghorn 50 0 4.3 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Alkali Succor Creek 1.4 Up 

Board Corral Birch Creek 0.9 Static 

Board Corral Indian Creek 2.6 Static 

Antelope Antelope Creek 2.5 Unkn 

FFR Antelope Creek 0.2 Unkn 
E-138

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

FFR Succor Creek 1.2 Unkn 

FFR Succor Creek 0.2 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Three Fingers Wild Horse Management area (HMA) 

Honeycombs WSA 

Wildhorse Basin WSA 

Sterile milkvetch, Owyhee clover, smooth blazingstar Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-139

BLM allotment name: ROCKVILLE Allotment number: 10508 

Management category: I BLM acres: 22,711 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,027 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 2,688 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 1,445 

Total AUM’s: 4,133 Total acres: 23,738 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Top Spray North 5,710 100 Middle Native Static A 

Top Spray South 4,023 100 Middle Native Static-Up A 

McBride Creek 7,025 93 Middle Native Static A 

Rockville Seeding North 2,343 95 Unknown Static-Down B 

Rockville Seeding South 1,424 94 Poor Seeding Static-Down B 

Ion 2,528 95 Late Native Static B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 685 77 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 300 81.5 

Pronghorn 50 75 10.7 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Top Spray South Pole Creek 0.2 Unkn 

McBride Creek Pole Creek 1.5 Unkn 

McBride Creek Succor Creek 2.5 Unkn 

Rockville Seeding North 0.1 Unkn 

Rockville Seeding North McBride Creek 0.7 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Smooth blazingstar, Sterile milkvetch Special Status plants 
E-140

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: MAHOGANY MOUNTAIN Allotment number: 10509 

Management category: I BLM acres: 40,142 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,840 

Season of use: 03/25-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 5,683 Other Federal acres: 357 

Suspended AUM’s: 2,811 

Total AUM’s: 8,495 Total acres: 44,339 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Grasshopper 3,951 97 Late Native Static E 

Gin 4,225 77 Late Native Down E 

Mahogany Mountain 6,083 99 Late Native Static-Up A 

Stove 2,994 99 Late Native Static E 

Shellrock South 6,698 95 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Shellrock North 4,616 100 Middle Native Static A 

Fish Creek 6,491 92 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Tableland Annex 5,382 86 Late Native Static B 

Schnable Creek Seeding North 1,538 100 Unknown Static E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 1,419 55 Unknown Unknown 

FFR 942 12 Unknown Unknown 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives)
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 500 25 107 

Pronghorn 50 0 4.3 

Elk 40 40 56 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Grasshopper Willow Creek 1.8 Unkn 

Gin Willow Creek 3.8 Unkn 

Stove Willow Creek 0.6 Unkn 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-141

Fish Creek Fish Creek 1.8 Unkn 

Fish Creek Fish Creek TR 2.7 1.0 Unkn 

Fish Creek Fish Creek TR 2.8 1.0 Unkn 

FFR Fish Creek TR 2.7 0.1 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Mahogany Ridge ACEC 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Mahogany Ridge ACEC 

Ertter’s groundsel, Owyhee clover Special Status plants 
E-142

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SCHNABLE CREEK Allotment number: 10510 

Management category: M BLM acres: 5,575 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 17 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,416 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 693 

Total AUM’s: 2,109 Total acres: 5,592 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

P Pot 4,491 100 Late Native Static B 

Schnable Creek Seeding South 1,102 98 Unknown Static E 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities
 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives)
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 50 20.4 

Pronghorn 250 250 42.9 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Jordan Craters ACEC 

Jordan Craters WSA 

Sage grouse habitat (special status species) 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-143

BLM allotment name: TUNNEL CANYON Allotment number: 10512 

Management category: I BLM acres: 13,106 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1 

Season of use: 03/21-12/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,380 Other Federal acres: 179 

Suspended AUM’s: 615 

Total AUM’s: 1,995 Total acres: 13,285 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Tunnel Canyon 9,522 98 Middle Native Static-Up E 

Basque Brush Control 3,762 100 Middle Native Static-Down E 1

 Current allotment management objectives:
 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives)
 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 200 300 101.9 

Pronghorn 15 35 4.3 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Below the Dam ACEC 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Wildhorse Basin WSA 
E-144

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: VENATOR Allotment number: 10605 

Management category: M BLM acres: 21,353 

AMP implemented: 1990 Private acres: 7,393 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 897 

Active AUM’s: 2,309 Other Federal acres: 44 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 2,309 Total acres: 29,687 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

North Field 1,066 57 Middle Native Unknown B 

Jake Hughes 2,473 92 Late Native Unknown A 

Steer 2,633 96 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Homestead 3,024 21 Late Native Unknown B 

Lower Field 4,593 16 Middle Native Unknown B 

Heifer 4,007 86 Late Native Up A 

North Deadman 5,618 93 Middle Native Up B 

South Deadman 6,273 94 Middle Native Up B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 350 200 112.1 

Pronghorn 50 50 8.6 

Elk 100 100 14 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-145

BLM allotment name: LODGE Allotment number: 10901 

Management category: M BLM acres: 17,436 

AMP implemented: 1975 Private acres: 89 

Season of use: 04/01-10/30 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 3,150 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 3,150 Total acres: 17,525 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

West 6,084 100 Unknown Unknown H 

East 11,441 99 Unknown Unknown B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

H) Reverse the downward trend of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 100 40 

Pronghorn 100 150 21.4 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Jordan CratersACEC 

Owyhee Breaks WSA 

Jordan Craters WSA 
E-146

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SOUTH ALKALI Allotment number: 20100 

Management category: I BLM acres: 35,348 

AMP implemented: 1992 Private acres: 1,620 

Season of use: 03/01-02/28 State acres: 5 

Active AUM’s: 6,837 Other Federal acres: 56 

Suspended AUM’s: 767 

Total AUM’s: 7,604 Total acres: 37,029 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Tub Mountain 19,189 95 Early Native Static A 

Sand Hills East 3,756 99 Early Native Down A 

Sand Hills West 6,636 99 Early Native Down A 

Alkali Flat 5,344 99 Early Native Down A 

Henry Gulch 2,918 99 Early Native Unknown D 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Alkali Springs Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Alkali Test Plots 3, 4, and 5 Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Alkali Botanical Exclosures (burn and no burn) Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Henry Gulch Stream Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 250 600 173.2 

Pronghorn 25 50 6.4 

Elk 50 150 140 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Henry Gulch Henry Gulch 1.0 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Oregon Trail ACEC 

South Alkali Sand HillsACEC 

Curlew habitat 

Oregon Trail 

Malheur forget-me-not, Mulford’s milkvetch Special Status plants 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-147

BLM allotment name: ALKALI SPRING Allotment number: 20101 

Management category: I BLM acres: 26,901 

AMP implemented: 1991 Private acres: 6,742 

Season of use: 03/01-02/28 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 5,757 Other Federal acres: 43 

Suspended AUM’s: 7 

Total AUM’s: 5,764 Total acres: 33,686 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bierman Seeding 3,416 96 Fair Seeding Static-Up A 

Chicken creek 3,014 57 Middle Native Static A 

Farewell Bend Seeding 1,586 83 Good Seeding Up A 

Love Seeding 1,232 99 Middle Native Static-Down A 

Road canyon 2,157 82 Early Native Down A 

McCarthy 3,306 83 Early Native Unknown A 

Badger 355 96 Early Native Unknown A 

Pine Ridge 1,609 89 Early Native Unknown A 

Mud Spring Seeding 948 100 Fair Seeding Unknown E 

East Mud Spring 4,601 93 Unknown Static-Up E 

West Mud Spring 6,198 95 Unknown Static-Up E 

Love Reservoir 903 100 Early Native Unknown A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 4,359 24 Unknown Unknown J 

McDowell Spring Exclosure (2) 2 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Dry Gulch Stream Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Birch Creek O.T. Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 175 350 107 

Pronghorn 25 50 6.4 

Elk 10 25 24.5 
E-148

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Chicken Creek Birch Creek 0.3 Unkn 

Mud Spring Seeding Dry Gulch TR 14.6 1.4 Static 

East Mud Spring Dry Gulch TR 11.8 0.3 Up 

East Mud Spring Dry Gulch TR 12.4 3.0 Unkn 

West Mud Spring Dry Gulch 2.8 Unkn 

West Mud Spring Dry Gulch TR 11.8 0.2 Up 

West Mud Spring Dry Gulch TR 14.6 0.1 Static 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special Management emphasis: 

Oregon Trail ACEC 

Snake River goldenweed Special Status plant 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-149

BLM allotment name: COTTONWOOD MOUNTAINAllotment number: 20102 

Management category: I BLM acres: 33,290 

AMP implemented: 1995 Private acres: 991 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 

Active AUM’s: 7,018 Other Federal acres: 151 

Suspended AUM’s: 365 

Total AUM’s: 7,383 Total acres: 34,432 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Poison creek 2,401 78 Middle Native Static-Up I 

Turrner Creek 6,977 100 Middle Native Static A 

Kern Creek 16,450 98 Middle Native Static A 

Morrison 2,136 96 Early Native Static-Up A 

Hope Butte Seeding 3,932 99 Good Seeding Static-Down I, E 

Hope Flat Seeding 2,530 94 Poor Seeding Static I, E 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Poison Creek Reservoir Exclosure 6 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Cottonwood Mountain Upland Exclosures 1, 2, and 3 Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Morrison Reservoir Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 

Hope Butte Pit Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range (eg browse or grass/forb/shrub composition objectives) 

I) Maximize availability of fall green-up for winter deer/antelope use 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; no suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 150 250 81.5 

Pronghorn 75 75 12.9 

Elk 10 50 42 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Poison Creek Sheep Corral Creek 0.6 Unkn 

Turner Creek Mud Creek 0.6 Down 

Turner Creek Sheep Corral Creek 1.5 Unkn 

Turner Creek Turner Creek 2.8 Down 

Turner Creek North Fork Willow Creek TR 2.1 3.0 Unkn 
E-150

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Kern Creek Cottonwood Creek- At reservoir 0.5 Up 0.1 0.4 

Kern Creek Kern Creek 4.4 Unkn 

Kern Creek Mud Creek 2.0 Down 

Kern Creek Rock Cabin Creek 4.7 Down 4.7 

Kern Creek Rock Cabin Creek TR 1.9 3.1 Unkn 3.1 

Morrison North Fork Willow Creek TR 2.1 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-151

BLM allotment name: POALL CREEK Allotment number: 20103 

Management category: M BLM acres: 3,460 

AMP implemented: 1992 Private acres: 983 

Season of use: 04/01-11/30 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 589 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 130 

Total AUM’s: 179 Total acres: 4,443 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Poall Creek 4,413 92 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Poall Creek Riparian Exclosure 30 100 Unknown Unknown D,L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 125 40.8 

Pronghorn 10 25 3 

Elk 15 30 31.5 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Poall Creek Black Creek 3.9 Static 

Poall Creek Pole Creek 3.2 Down 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-152

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: WEST BENCH Allotment number: 20104 

Management category: M BLM acres: 1,079 

AMP implemented: 1993 Private acres: 8 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 193 Other Federal acres: 19 

Suspended AUM’s: 18 

Total AUM’s: 211 Total acres: 1,106 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East 626 100 Early Native Up E 

West 480 94 Early Native Static-Up E 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

E) Maintain/improve deer/antelope winter range 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 125 40.8 

Pronghorn 0 0 0 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-153

BLM allotment name: WILLOW CREEK LIVESTOCK Allotment number: 20105 

Management category: M BLM acres: 3,585 

AMP implemented: 1992 Private acres: 85 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 492 Other Federal acres: 155 

Suspended AUM’s: 492 

Total AUM’s: 0 Total acres: 3,824 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East 1,644 95 Early Native Up A 

West 2,180 92 Early Native Static A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Willow Creek Upland Exclosure Unknown 100 Unknown Unknown L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 100 27.5 

Pronghorn 0 10 0.9 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-154

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: MCEWEN Allotment number: 20603 

Management category: M BLM acres: 63,053 

AMP implemented: 1994 Private acres: 42,934 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 280 

Active AUM’s: 6,011 Other Federal acres: 1,164 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 6,011 Total acres: 107,431 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Lower Swamp 10,222 44 Late Native Static B 

Vischer 14,141 35 Middle Native Static B 

Hickey 13,194 80 Late Native Up B 

Hughes 9,604 61 Late Native Static B 

East Swamp Creek 7,615 64 Late Native Static B 

Stockade 28,587 61 Early Native Static-Up B 

Duck Pond 12,525 76 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Big Flat 7,087 72 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Swamp Creek FFR 4,456 5 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 500 150 132.5 

Pronghorn 100 65 90 

Elk 50 50 70 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Duck Pond Crowley Creek 0.8 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Juniper population increase in Stockade pasture 

Bitterbrush population and vigor for deer range 

Stockade Mountain ACEC 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-155

Jordan Resource Area
 

BLM allotment name: JACKIES BUTTE SUMMER Allotment number: 01101 

Management category: M BLM acres: 208,536 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 21,803 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 379 

Active AUM’s: 14,274 Other Federal acres: 3,878 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 14,274 Total acres: 234,596 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

China Gulch Seeding North 6,735 99 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

China Gulch Seeding South 3,336 100 Good Seeding Static-Up B 

Dry Creek Native 65,249 99 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Skull Creek East 1,499 100 Middle Native Static B 

Skull Creek West 2,385 100 Late Native Static B 

Eastside 44,259 100 Middle Native Static B 

Rome South 33,980 58 Early Native/ 

Fair Seeding Static B 

Mill Pasture 5,425 100 Fair Seeding Static B 

Indian Fort 56,477 99 Middle Native Static B 

Dry Creek Seeding 8,607 99 Fair Seeding Static B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Rome North 11,799 35 Early Native/ 

Fair Seeding Static D, L 

Crows Nest Reservoir Exclosure 9 100 Unknown Unknown D, L 

Hardin Stream Exclosure 72 100 Unknown Unknown D, L 

Dry Creek Upland Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown C, D, L 

Owyhee Springs Reservoir Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown D, L 

Sand Hollow Watergap 184 100 O 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction; Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management Considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 
E-156

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 150 52 

Pronghorn 100 325 137 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Dry Creek Native Dry Creek 0.4 Down 

Dry Creek Native Dry Creek 11.7 Unkn 

Eastside Antelope Creek 0.3 Unkn 

Rome South Crooked Creek 0.7 Unkn 

Rome South Owyhee River 1.0 Unkn 1.0 

Rome North Crooked Creek 1.3 Unkn 

Rome North Crooked Creek 0.5 Unkn 

Indian Fort Owyhee River 0.6 Unkn 

Hardin Stex Dry Creek 0.1 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Jackies Butte Wildhorse Management Area (HMA) 

Antelope Creek Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic River 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-157

BLM allotment name: AMBROSE-MAHER Allotment number: 01102 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,908 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 212 

Season of use: 10/15-05/15 State acres: 7 

Active AUM’s: 517 Other Federal acres: 654 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 517 Total acres: 3,781 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Ambrose-Maher 3,225 94 Middle Native Static-Up B,D 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Warm Springs Exclosure 556 O 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction; Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management consideration with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 20 50 16 

Pronghorn 20 20 19 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Ambrose-Maher Antelope Creek 0.7 Unkn 

Amborse-Maher Owyhee River 1.6 Unkn 1 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Antelope Creek Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
E-158

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: JACKIES BUTTE WINTER Allotment number: 01103 

Management category: C BLM acres: 19,357 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 834 

Season of use: 11/01-01/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 485 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 485 Total acres: 20,191 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Jackies Butte 20,191 96 Early Native/
 

Good Seeding Static-Up B, J
 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 30 250 67 

Pronghorn 40 150 58 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-159

BLM allotment name: 15-MILE COMMUNITY Allotment number: 01201 

Management category: I BLM acres: 309,603 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 12,990 

Season of use: 03/01-10/31 State acres: 138 

Active AUM’s: 21,146 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 21,146 Total acres: 322,731 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Frenchie North 10,324 76 Middle Native Static B 

Jug Spring 3,193 100 Middle Native Static-Down B 

Green Pond 33,448 100 Middle Native Static D 

Whitehorse 2,148 98 Middle Native Static D 

V Pasture 21,433 99 Middle Native Static D 

Oregon Canyon Brush Control 4,263 100 Middle Native Static B 

Oregon Canyon Seeding West 2,496 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Oregon Canyon Seeding East 3,047 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Schoolhouse Seeding East 2,678 96 Good Seeding Static B 

Schoolhouse Seeding West 1,348 81 Good Seeding Static B 

Etchart Seeding 3,660 98 Good Seeding Static B, H 

Jaca Seeding 3,536 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

McDermitt Seeding East 5,827 100 Fair Seeding Static B 

McDermitt Seeding West 7,569 100 Fair Seeding Static B 

Buckbrush 11,795 97 Middle Native Static B 

Angel Canyon Seeding 4,529 99 Good Seeding Static B 

Angel Canyon Native 16,711 100 Late Native Static B 

Blue Mountain 71,238 98 Middle Native Static B 

Basque Seeding West 1,840 96 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Basque Seeding East 2,069 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Sheep Corral Brush Control 2,348 100 Middle Native Static B 

Summit North 1,552 100 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Summit South 1,681 100 Middle Native Static B 

Pronghorn 15,083 100 Middle Native Static B 

Overshoe Seeding South no data - B 

Overshoe Seeding North 12,429 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Jackson Creek North 30,645 99 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Jackson Creek South 7,375 99 Middle Native Down H 

Twelve Mile Seeding 2,589 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Buckbrush Seeding 2,736 100 Good Seeding Static-Up B,I 
E-160

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

 

 

 

 

Cascade Brush Control 13,714 100 Middle Native Static B 

Dry Creek 3,282 99 Middle Native Static D 

Burro Seeding 1,864 100 Good Seeding Static B 

Dry Farm South 3,948 74 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Dolittle Spring Exclosure 8 100 Middle Native Unknown D 

Mules Ear Reservoir Exclosure 5 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Blue Mountain Pit Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Blue Mountain #4 Reservoir Exclosure 6 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Cascade (Harper) Reservoir Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Dawson Reservoir Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Mud Spring Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Overshoe Guzzler Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown F 

Overshoe Seeding Upland Exclosure 2 100 Good Seeding/ 

Unknown Unknown C 

Twelve Mile Upland Exclosure (3-Man Butte) 2 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Bobcat Guzzler Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown F 

Cotote Guzzler Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown F 

Dry Ridge Guzzler Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown F 

Jackson Creek Spring Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown D 

McDermitt Upland Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown C 

FFR 1,242 5 Unknown Unknown B, J 

Private 162 20 Unknown Unknown B, J 

Oregon Canyon Reservoir Number 2 Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Oregon Canyon Reservoir Number 1 Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Dinky Reservoir Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Jug Spring 341 100 Unknown Unknown D 

FFR 7,336 11 Unknown Unknown B, J 

FFR 1,202 84 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

F) Maintain the integrity of enclosures constructed for wildlife benefits 

H) Reverse the downward trend of upland vegetative communities 

I) Maximize availability of fall green-up for winter deer/antelope use 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-161

Deer 550 550 249 

Pronghorn 100 190 112 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Jug Springs Dry Creek Trib. Doolittle 1.6 Up 

Green Ponds Antelope Creek Trib. 15.6 0.5 Unkn 

Green Ponds Antelope Creek Trib. 16.3 1.9 Unkn 

Green Ponds Dry Creek 5.1 Unkn 

Green Ponds Dry Creek Trib. 7.1 1.4 Unkn 

Green Ponds Fish Creek 1.0 Unkn 

Green Ponds Little Antelope Creek 4.3 Unkn 

Green Ponds South Fork Fish Creek 0.3 Unkn 

Green Ponds Twelvemile Creek 6.6 Unkn 

Green Ponds Twelvemile Creek Trib. 15.0 2.4 Unkn 

Green Ponds Whitehorse Creek Trib. 24.3 0.6 Up 

Green Ponds Whitehorse Creek Trib. 24.3 Trib. 

1.2 0.1 Up 

Whitehorse Whitehorse Creek 2.3 Up 

V Pasture Cottonwood Creek 0.7 Static 

V Pasture Cottonwood Creek 6.1 Up 

V Pasture Oregon Canyon Creek 7.2 Unkn 

V Pasture Oregon Canyon Creek, E. Fork 4.9 Unkn 

V Pasture Oregon Canyon Creek, S. Fork 1.8 Unkn 

V Pasture Oregon Canyon Creek, W. Fork 1.7 Unkn 

V Pasure Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 29.7 0.5 Unkn 

V Pasture Oregon Canyon Trib. 29.8 0.4 Unkn 

V Pasture Oregon Canyon Trib. 30.6 0.7 Unkn 

V Pasture S. Fork Oregon Canyon Trib. .5 

Trib. .7 0.8 Unkn 

V Pasture S. Fork Oregon Canyon Trib. .5 1.2 Unkn 

V Pasture Sheepline Canyon 0.3 Up 

V Pasture Whitehorse Creek 6.5 Up 

V Pasture Whitehorse Creek Trib. 24.3 1.0 Up 

V Pasture Whitehorse Creek Trib. 24.3 Trib. 

.4 0.8 Up 

V Pasture Whitehorse Creek Trib. 24.3 Trib. 

1.2 0.4 Up 

V Pasture Whitehorse Creek Trib. 27.2 1.2 Up 
E-162

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Etchart Seeding Trail Canyon 0.3 Unkn 

Jaca Seeding Jaca Creek 0.2 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Cottonwood Creek 3.3 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Fish Creek 2.2 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Jaca Creek 1.9 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Jaca Creek Trib. 6.7 0.4 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Jaca Creek Trib. 7.2 0.2 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Jaca Creek Trib. 7.5 0.5 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Moonshine Canyon 1.0 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 8.3 0.4 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Rock Creek 1.5 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native School House Creek 0.6 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Simpson Creek 1.0 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Trail Canyon 0.7 Unkn 

Angel Canyon Native Trail Canyon Trib. 1.9 0.9 Unkn 

Blue Mountain Dry Creek 1.5 Unkn 

Blue Mountain Oregon Canyon Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Blue Mountain Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 27.8 1.3 Unkn 

Blue Mountain Oregon Canyon Trib. 27.9 0.3 Unkn 

Blue Mountain Oregon Canyon Trib. 28.3 1.2 Unkn 

Jackson Creek North Battle Creek Trib. 12.5 0.2 Unkn 

Jackson Creek North Jackson Creek Trib. 5.3 1.9 Unkn 

Jackson Creek North Jackson Creek M. Fork 0.6 Unkn 

Jackson Creek North Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 17.1 Trib. 

10.3 3.2 Unkn 

Jackson Creek North Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 17.1 3.6 Unkn 

Jackson Creek South Jackson Creek 2.0 Unkn 

Jackson Creek South Jackson Creek Trib. 8.9 0.5 Unkn 

Twelvemile Seeding Dry Creek 1.2 Unkn 

Twelvemile Seeding Twelvemile Creek 2.2 Unkn 

Dry Creek Doolittle Creek 1.0 Up 

Dry Creek Dry Creek Trib. Doolittle 2.6 Up 

Dry Creek Sheepline Canyon 2.6 Up 

Doolittle SPEX Doolittle Creek 0.1 Up 

Mules Ear RSEX Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 17.1 

Trib. 10.3 0.1 Unkn 

Blue Mountain #4 RSE Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 17.1 0.2 Unkn 

Dawson RSEX Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 17.1 0.1 Unkn 

FFR Dry Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Jug Springs Doolittle Creek 1.8 Up 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-163

Leuscher Doolittle Creek 1.3 Up 

Luescher Doolittle Creek Trib. .5 0.8 Up 

Lueshcer Fifteenmile Creek 1.2 Up 

Luescher Whitehorse Creek 5.0 Up 

Luescher Whitehorse Creek Trib. 19.2 0.5 Up 1 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Bowden Hills and Trout Creek Mountain Group WSA 

Archeology 

Dry Creek Bench ACEC 

Mendi Gore Playa ACEC 

Lahontan cutthroat trout Special Status fish 
E-164

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: MCCORMICK Allotment number: 01202 

Management category: I BLM acres: 56,831 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,068 

Season of use: 03/20-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 6,301 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 2,561 

Total AUM’s: 8,862 Total acres: 58,899 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Sheepline Brush Control 2,395 97 Middle Native Static H 

Payne Creek 12,917 92 Late Native Static B 

Indian Creek 17,552 96 Middle Native Static-Down D 

Cash Canyon 5,491 100 Early Native Static D 

Deafenbaugh 13,738 99 Middle Native Static D 

Bretz Seeding 3,067 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Flat Top Seeding 3,732 99 Poor Seeding Static-Down B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bretz Test Plot 2 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Bretz Reservoir Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Sheepline Spring Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Gopher Spring Exclosure 1 100 Middle Native Unknown D 

Chicken Spring Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown D 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

H) Reverse the downward trend of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 75 39 

Pronghorn 30 30 29 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-165

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Sheepline Brush Cont. Doolittle Creek 1.2 Up 

Sheepline Brush Cont. Fifteenmile Creek 0.9 Up 

Sheepline Brush Cont. Sheepline Canyon 0.6 Up 

Payne Creek East Fork Mine Creek 2.5 Static 

Payne Creek East Fork Mine Creek Trib. 2.5 0.4 Static 

Payne Creek Payne Creek 0.6 Up 

Payne Creek West Fork Mine Creek 3.7 Up 

Indian Creek Cottonwood Creek 1.0 Up 

Indian Creek Cowboy Creek 1.7 Up 

Indian Creek Indian Creek 5.6 Unkn 

Indian Creek Indian Creek 0.2 Up 

Indian Creek Indian Creek Trib. 5.5 0.9 Unkn 

Indian Creek Indian Creek Trib. 8.0 1.3 Unkn 

Indian Creek Lasa Creek 2.1 Unkn 

Indian Creek Lasa Creek Trib. 3.3 0.3 Unkn 

Indian Creek Spring Creek 1.7 Up 

Indian Creek Spring Creek Trib. 1.7 1.0 Up 

Cash Canyon Cottonwood Creek 0.6 Unkn 

Cash Canyon Cottonwood Creek 0.1 Up 

Cash Canyon Indian Creek 2.5 Unkn 

Cash Canyon McDermitt Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Cash Canyon McDermitt Creek 2.9 Up 

Deafenbaugh Rip Cottonwood Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Deafenbaugh Rip Cottonwood Creek 2.8 Up 

Deafenbaugh Rip McDermitt Creek Trib. 8.6 0.8 Unkn 

Gopher Spring SPEX Doolittle Creek 0.1 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Trout Creek Mountain Group WSAs 

Archelogy 

Lahontan cutthroat trout Special Status fish 
E-166

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: ZIMMERMAN Allotment number: 01203 

Management category: I BLM acres: 31,688 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,333 

Season of use: 04/01-11/30 State acres: 8 

Active AUM’s: 5,249 Other Federal acres: 21,485 

Suspended AUM’s: 522 

Total AUM’s: 5,771 Total acres: 54,514 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain (within Oregon) Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Homestead (includes land within Nevada) 3,360 60 Middle Native Unknown D 

Payne Creek Seeding 693 100 Excellent Seeding Static D 

Mine Creek Seeding 1,209 100 Excellent Seeding Static D 

Pinky 6,101 92 Middle Native Static D 

Riser (entire pasture within Nevada) 7,710 0 Middle Native Static B 

Turner 10,167 99 Late Native Static D 

Dry Creek (includes land within Nevada) 13,115 53 Middle Native Static D 

Disaster Peak Seeding North 4,775 98 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Long Ridge (includes land within Nevada) 6,182 4 Unknown Unknown A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Disaster Peak Upland Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Disaster Peak Reservoir Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Homestead FFR (includes land within Nevada) 1,199 4 Unknown Unknown J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 75 39 

Pronghorn 20 20 19 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-167

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Homestead Dry Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Payne Creek Seeding Payne Creek 2.7 Up 

Mine Creek Seeding Cowboy Creek 0.2 Up 

Mine Creek Seeding Hot Creek 0.1 Up 

Mine Creek Seeding Mine Creek 1.8 Up 

Pinky Cowboy Creek 2.6 Up 

Pinky Hot Creek 0.2 Up 

Pinky McDermitt Creek 0.3 Up 

Pinky Mine Creek 0.2 Up 

Pinky Payne Creek 0.6 Up 

Turner Dry Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Turner McDermitt Creek 7.6 Up 

Turner McDermitt Creek Trib. 27.8 1.3 Up 

Turner McDermitt Creek Trib. 32.3 0.2 Unkn 

Turner McDermitt Creek Trib. 32.3 0.9 Up 

Turner N. Fork McDermitt Creek 1.0 Up 

Turner Turner Creek 2.1 Up 

Dry Creek Dry Creek 3.1 Unkn 

Dry Creek Line Canyon 1.4 Up 

Dry Creek Line Canyon Trib. 2.1 1.2 Up 

Dry Creek Sage Creek 4.2 Up 

Dry Creek Sage Creek Trib. 5.8 1.2 Up 

Dry Creek Sage Creek Trib. 8.1 1.6 Up 

Dry Creek Sage Creek Trib. 8.1 Trib. 0.9 0.7 Up 

Dry Creek Sage Creek Trib. 8.8 0.5 Up 

Dry Creek Sage Creek Trib. 9.0 0.7 Up 

Disaster Peak Seeding Turner Creek 0.8 Up 

Disaster Peak RSEX Turner Creek 0.1 Up 

Long Ridge McDermitt Creek 1.3 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Trout Creek Mountain Group WSAs 

Lahontan cutthroat trout Special Status fish 
E-168

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: WHITEHORSE BUTTE Allotment number: 01206 

Management category: I BLM acres: 124,821 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 14,544 

Season of use: 03/16-08/31 State acres: 166 

Active AUM’s: 9,287 Other Federal acres: 2,018 

Suspended AUM’s: 1,691 

Total AUM’s: 10,978 Total acres: 141,549 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Fish Creek Seeding South 3,845 100 Good Seeding Static B 

Fish Creek Seeding North 3,345 100 Good Seeding Static-Up B 

Buckskin Seeding 7,221 86 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Frenchie South 11,472 57 Middle Native Static B 

Whitehorse Seeding 3,894 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

15-Mile 20,150 98 Middle Native Static-Up D 

Red Mountain South 29,435 87 Late Native Static D 

Red Mountain North 27,073 93 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Willow 25,529 93 Middle Native Static-Up D 

Willow Butte Seeding 4,505 99 Fair Seeding Static B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #3 27 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #4 87 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #5 15 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #6 19 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #7 54 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Upper Willow Creek Stream Exclosure 69 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Middle Willow Creek Stream Exclosure 25 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Lower Willow Creek Stream Exclosure 18 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Campground Stream Exclosure (KOA) 14 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Beaverdam Stream Exclosure 28 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Upper Little Whitehorse 1991 Stream Exclosure 130 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Little Whitehorse #1 Stream Exclosure 35 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Little Whitehorse #2 Stream Exclosure 13 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Little Whitehorse #3 Stream Exclosure 54 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Little Whitehorse #4 Stream Exclosure 37 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Whitehorse Seeding Upland Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Private 4,062 25 Unknown Unknown J 

Doolittle Cow Camp 135 100 Unknown Unknown K 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-169

Lower Luescher Stream Exclosure 236 82 Unknown Unknown D 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

K) Grazed enclosure with no management objective identified 

M) Stabilize meadow soils 

N) Manage for aspen regeneration and survival 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 400 400 181 

Pronghorn 50 50 48 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Fish Creek Seeding South Fish Creek 0.9 Unkn 

Fish Creek Seeding South S. Fork Fish Creek 0.7 Unkn 

Fish Creek Seeding North Fish Creek 2.2 Unkn 

Frenchie South Antelope Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Frenchie South Fish Creek 2.5 Unkn 

Frenchie South Little Antelope Creek 0.5 Unkn 

Whitehouse Seeding Little Whitehouse Creek 0.7 Up 

15-Mile Doolittle Creek 2.2 Up 

15-Mile Fifteenmile Creek 8.8 Up 

15-Mile Fifteenmile Creek Trib. 4.6 4.0 Up 

15-Mile Fifteenmile Creek Trib. 9.4 0.8 Up 

15-Mile Whitehorse Creek Trib. 19.2 0.4 Up 

Red Mountain South Little Whitehorse Creek 0.2 Up 

Red Mountain South Willow Creek 0.1 Down 

Red Mountain South Willow Creek 7.6 Up 

Red Mountain North Willow Creek 2.8 Down 

Willow Little Whitehorse Creek 5.2 Up 

Willow Little Whitehorse Creek Trib. 10.9 3.6 Up 

Willow North Fork McDermitt Creek 3.5 Up 

Willow North Fork McDermitt Creek Trib. 2.9 0.5 Up 

Willow Willow Creek 2.3 Up 
E-170

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Willow Willow Creek Trib. 21.8 2.0 Up 

Willow Willow Creek Trib. 26.6 1.9 Up 

Willow Willow Creek Trib. 26.9 2.4 Up 

Willow Willow Creek Trib. 26.9 Trib. 1.2 1.2 Up 

Willow Willow Creek Trib. 26.9 Trib. 2.6 0.3 Up 

Willow Willow Creek Trib. 26.9 Trib. 2.7 0.2 Up 

Willow Willow Creek Trib. 29.4 1.7 Up 

Willow Butte Seeding Willow Creek 0.1 Up 

Willow Butte Seeding Willow Creek Trib. 21.8 0.9 Up 

Willow Creek STEX #3 Willow Creek 0.5 Up 

Willow Creek EXCL #5 Willow Creek 0.3 Up 

Willow Creek EXCL #4 Little Whitehorse Creek 1.2 Up 

Upper Willow Creek South Willow Creek 1.1 Up 

Middle Willow Creek Willow Creek 0.4 Up 

Lower Willow Creek South Willow Creek 0.4 Up 

Campground STEX (KOA) Willow Creek 0.3 Up 

Beaverdam STEX Willow Creek 0.6 Up 

Willow Creek #6 STEX Willow Creek 0.4 Up 

Willow Creek #7 STEX Willow Creek 1.1 Up 

Upper Little Whitehorse Little Whitehorse Creek 1.6 Up 

Little Whitehorse #1 Little Whitehorse Creek 0.8 Up 

Little Whitehorse #2 Little Whitehorse Creek 0.3 Up 

Little Whitehorse #3 Little Whitehorse Creek 1.1 Up 

Little Whitehorse #4 Little Whitehorse Creek 0.9 Up 

Private Little Whitehorse Creek 0.7 Up 

Doolittle Cow Camp Doolittle Creek 0.6 Up 

Willow Creek STEX #4 Willow Creek 0.4 Up 

Lower Luescher Whitehorse Creek 1.3 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Coyote Lake Wild Horse Management Area (HMA) 

Trout Creek Mountain Group WSAs 

Archeology 

Lahontan cutthroat trout Special Status fish 

Little Whitehorse Creek ACEC 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-171

BLM allotment name: ALBISU-ALCORTA Allotment number: 01304 

Management category: M BLM acres: 14,122 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 783 

Season of use: 03/16-10/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,006 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,006 Total acres: 14,905 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

The Breaks 8,870 92 Late Native Static-Up B 

Andy Fife 2,784 99 Late Native Static A 

Lazy T 3,252 99 Early Native Static B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 10 50 14 

Pronghorn 15 15 14 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

The Breaks Shearing Corral Creek 2.4 Unkn 

The Breaks Tenmile Creek Trib. 8.3 1.3 Unkn 

The Breaks Tenmile Creek Trib. 9.5 2.2 Unkn 

The Breaks Tenmile Creek 0.4 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-172

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

 

BLM allotment name: LOUSE CANYON COMMUNITY Allotment number: 01307 

Management category: M BLM acres: 131,754 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 2,652 

Season of use: 03/01-10/31 State acres: 23 

Active AUM’s: 11,235 Other Federal acres: 756 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 Bureau of Indian Affairs 2 

Total AUM’s: 11,235 Total acres: 135,187 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Drummond Basin 15,050 98 Late Native Static B 

Steer Canyon Seeding 11,272 99 Good Seeding Static B 

Pole Creek Seeding 15,586 98 Excellent Seeding Static A 

Louse Canyon 51,678 99 Late Native Static B,D 

Upper Louse Canyon 31,162 99 Late Native Static B,D 

Frenchman Creek Seeding 1,476 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Wilkinson Fence 2,972 70 Unknown Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Rawhide Spring Exclosure 5 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Steer Canyon (Rawhide) Upland Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown C, D 

Cold Wind Reservoir Exclosure 7 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Wilkinson FFR 1,595 86 B, J 

Anderson Crossing Exclosure 377 O 

Upper West Little Owyhee Exclosure 4,001 O 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction; Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 150 20 36 

Pronghorn 60 0 47 

Elk 0 0 0 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-173

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Drummond Basin Antelope Creek 1.1 Unkn 

Drummond Basin Antelope Creek 0.3 Unkn 

Drummond Basin Owyhee River 0.5 Unkn 

Drummond Basin Owyhee River 0.1 Unkn 

Drummond Basin Pole Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Drummond Basin West Little Owyhee River 3.0 Unkn 

Steer Canyon Seeding Field Creek 6.0 Unkn 

Steer Canyon Seeding Pole Creek Trib. 2.4 0.3 Unkn 

Pole Creek Seeding Pole Creek 3.4 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Dry Canyon Trib. 5.0 0.2 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Dry Canyon Trib. 5.4 0.4 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Pole Creek Trib. 22.5 Trib. 3.0 0.3 Unkn 

Louse Canyon West Little Owyhee Trib. 36.8 Trib. 0.6 0.5 Unkn 

Louse Canyon West Little Owyhee Trib. 36.8 Trib. 0.9 0.4 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Cavieta Creek 2.1 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Deep Creek 2.5 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Dry Canyon Trib. 2.8 0.3 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Jack Creek 6.8 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Lake Fork 1.6 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Massey Canyon 2.9 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Massey Canyon Trib. 0.1 0.9 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Massey Canyon Trib. 1.0 1.2 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Pole Creek 8.0 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Pole Creek Trib. 2.4 0.2 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Pole Creek Trib. 8.7 1.0 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Steer Canyon 2.5 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Steer Canyon Trib. 7.6 1.6 Unkn 

Louse Canyon Steer Canyon Trib. 7.6 Trib. 0.2 0.5 Unkn 

Louse Canyon West Little Owyhee River 4.9 Static 

Louse Canyon West Little Owyhee River 11.7 Unkn 

Louse Canyon West Little Owyhee River Trib. 36.8 1.5 Unkn 

Louse Canyon West Little Owyhee River Trib. 52.2 0.8 Unkn 

Frenchman Creek Seeding St. Martin Creek 0.4 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Upper West Little Owyhee WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
E-174

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: TEN MILE Allotment number: 01308 

Management category: M BLM acres: 3,581 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 54 

Season of use: 03/16-06/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 664 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 664 Total acres: 3,635 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Ten Mile Seeding 3,635 98 Good Seeding Static B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 5 5 2 

Pronghorn 15 15 14 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-175

BLM allotment name: BLACK HILL Allotment number: 01309 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,247 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 28,217 

Season of use: 11/01-02/28 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 103 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 103 Total acres: 30,464 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Black Hill 30,464 7 Middle Native Static B,J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 5 5 2 

Pronghorn 15 25 16 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Black Hill Crooked Creek 0.1 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-176

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: ANDERSON Allotment number: 01401 

Management category: M BLM acres: 39,319 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 88 

Season of use: 03/01-07/31 State acres: 73 

Active AUM’s: 2,857 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 2,857 Total acres: 39,480 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bull Flat 12,959 100 Early Native Static A 

Spring 8,728 100 Middle Native Static A 

North 12,122 99 Middle Native Static B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Five Bar Exclosure 869 O 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction; Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 50 17 

Pronghorn 45 20 39 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Toppin Creek Butte ACEC 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Antelope Creek Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic River 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-177

BLM allotment name: STAR VALLEY 

COMMUNITY Allotment number: 01402 

Management category: M BLM acres: 188,202 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 40 

Season of use: 03/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 6,890 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 6,890 Total acres: 190,328 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

North Stoney Corral 57,248 100 Middle Native Up A 

Tristate Pasture 45,782 100 Middle Native Static B 

South Tent Creek 52,160 99 Middle Native Up A 

North Tent Creek 33,052 100 Middle Native Up A 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Anderson Crossing Exclosure 363 O 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction; Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 0 5 

Pronghorn 90 0 70 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

South Tent Creek Jack Creek 0.5 Unkn 

North Tent Creek West Little Owyhee River 1.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Upper West Little Owyhee WSA 

Lookout Butte WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Davis’ peppergrass Special Status plants 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
E-178

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SHEEPHEAD Allotment number: 10702 

Management category: M BLM acres: 152,037 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,102 

Season of use: 03/01-02/28 State acres: 602 

Active AUM’s: 3,949 Other Federal acres: 829 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 3,949 Total acres: 154,570 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Sheepheads 68,549 99 Middle Native Static B 

West Ryegrass 16,886 97 Unknown Unknown B 

Palomino Hills 51,173 99 Late Native Static B 

East Ryegrass 17,955 94 Late Native Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bone Creek Reservoir Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown D,L 

Rock Corral Spring Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown D,L 

Sheepheads Upland Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown C,L 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

L) Maintain/improve resource conditions or protect facilities through livestock exclusion; not suitable for livestock use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 250 150 89 

Pronghorn 75 50 68 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Sheepshead Wild horse Management Area (HMA)
 

Sand Springs Wild horse Management Area (HMA)
 

Sheepshead Mountain Group WSA
 

Saddle Butte WSA
 

Sheepshead Mountain Group WSA
 

Sage grouse habitat (special status species)
 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-179

BLM allotment name: BARREN VALLEY Allotment number: 10801 

Management category: M BLM acres: 12,915 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 0 

Season of use: 11/01-03/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 204 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 204 Total acres: 12,915 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

South 3,479 100 Late Native Unknown B 

North 9,433 100 Late Native Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bedground Reservoir 4 100 Unknown Unknown K 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 25 11 

Pronghorn 0 25 5 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

South Dry Creek 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-180

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: BOWDEN HILLS Allotment number: 10803 

Management category: M BLM acres: 82,609 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 2,244 

Season of use: 01/17-03/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,927 Other Federal acres: 113 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,927 Total acres: 84,965 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bowden Hills 84,964 97 Late Native Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bowden Guzzler Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown F 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

F) Maintain the integrity of enclosures constructed for wildlife benefits 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 150 57 

Pronghorn 100 150 105 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Bowden Hills WSA 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-181

BLM allotment name: COYOTE LAKE Allotment number: 10804 

Management category: M BLM acres: 162,858 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 15,500 

Season of use: 11/01-03/15 State acres: 80 

Active AUM’s: 3,196 Other Federal acres: 18,655 

Suspended AUM’s: 381 

Total AUM’s: 0 Total acres: 197,093 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Sand Gap 37,373 98 Middle Native Static B 

Coyote Lake 159,720 79 Unknown Unknown B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 125 41 

Pronghorn 75 120 80 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Alvord Desert WSA 

Coyote Lake Wild Horse Management Area (HMA) 

Davis’ peppergrass, Solitary milkvetch Special Status plants 
E-182

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: CROOKED CREEK Allotment number: 10806 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,289 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 5,952 

Season of use: 11/01-02/28 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 144 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 144 Total acres: 7,241 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Crooked Creek 7,241 18 Middle Native Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementations of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 10 10 5 

Pronghorn 50 50 48 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Crooked Creek Bone Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Crooked Creek Crooked Creek 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-183

BLM allotment name: EAST COW CREEK Allotment number: 10903 

Management category: M BLM acres: 45,176 

AMP implemented: 1976 Private acres: 5,748 

Season of use: 04/01-11/30 State acres: 61 

Active AUM’s: 6,444 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 1,715 

Total AUM’s: 8,159 Total acres: 50,985 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Hooker Creek North 741 100 Excellent Seeding ? Static B 

Hooker Creek South 1,475 91 Late Native Static B 

Jordan Valley North 1,375 98 Excellent Seeding? Static B 

Jordan Valley South 3,757 34 Excellent Seeding? Static B 

Big Ridge North 1,736 100 Excellent Seeding? Static B 

Big Ridge South 1,683 100 Excellent Seeding? Static B 

Barlow Brush Control 5,256 100 Middle Native Static-Down H 

Cowgill 5,049 92 Middle Native Static B 

Boulder 9,160 87 Late Native Static B 

Lava 12,276 97 Late Native Static B 

Downey Canyon 1,251 100 Good Seeding? Static-Up B 

Little Sandy West 1,598 100 Excellent Seeding? Static B 

Little Sandy North East 1,158 100 Excellent Seeding? Static-Down H 

Little Sandy South 997 100 Excellent Seeding? Static B 

Bennett North 897 100 Middle Native Unknown B 

Bennett South 528 81 Middle Native Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Little Sandy Spring Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown F 

Downey Canyon FFR 2,020 46 B, J 

Jim Spring Exclosure 6 100 Unknown Unknown F 

Cow Creek Upland Exclosure 11 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Goodyear Reservoir Exclosure 9 100 Unknown Unknown K 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

F) Maintain the integrity of enclosures constructed for wildlife benefits 

H) Reverse the downward trend of upland vegetative communities 

K) Grazed reservoir enclosure with no management objective identified 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 
E-184

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 250 175 95 

Pronghorn 100 150 105 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-185

BLM allotment name: BOGUS CREEK Allotment number: 10904 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,835 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 273 

Season of use: 02/16-03/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 250 Other Federal acres: 761 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 250 Total acres: 3,969 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bogus Creek 3,969 91 Early Native Static-Up B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

1) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 125 150 63 

Pronghorn 100 150 105 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Bogus Creek Bogus Creek 3.0 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Lower Owyhee WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Cultural (Potter Cove) 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
E-186

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: OLIVER Allotment number: 10905 

Management category: M BLM acres: 5,097 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 239 

Season of use: 04/01-09/30 State acres: 1,592 

Active AUM’s: 560 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 560 Total acres: 6,928 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Oliver 6,928 74 Middle Native Unknown B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 75 29 

Pronghorn 100 100 96 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Oliver Cow Creek 0.7 Unkn 

Jordan Craters Cow Creek 0.5 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Jordan Craters WSA 

Jordan Craters ACEC 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-187

BLM allotment name: MORCOM Allotment number: 10907 

Management category: C BLM acres: 5,051 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 0 

Season of use: 11/01-03/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 214 Other Federal acres: 981 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 214 Total acres: 6,033 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Morcom 5,866 99 Middle Native Static-Up B ,J 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Greeley Bar Exclosure 167 O 1

 Current allotment management 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction; Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management considerations with implementations of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 75 26 

Pronghorn 10 10 10 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Morcom Owyhee River 2.1 Up 

Morcom Owyhee River 0.3 Up 

Morcom Owyhee River 0.6 Up 

Morcom Owyhee River Trib. 64.5 0.4 Unkn 

Morcom Owyhee River Trib. 64.5 0.1 Unkn 

Morcom Owyhee River Trib. 65.1 0.2 Unkn 

Morcom Owyhee River Trib. 65.1 0.9 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Lower Owyhee WSA 

Owyhee Breaks WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Owyhee Views ACEC 

Ertter’s groundsel Special Status plants 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
E-188

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: WROTEN Allotment number: 11003 

Management category: I BLM acres: 16,237 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 3,960 

Season of use: 04/01-11/30 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 2,636 Other Federal acres: 279 

Suspended AUM’s: 330 

Total AUM’s: 2,966 Total acres: 20,197 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Brickey Springs Seeding 3,334 91 Excellent Seeding Down B 

Wildcat 2,816 100 Early Native Static A 

Coffee Pot 6,300 99 Late Native Static H 

Chicken Creek 6,405 48 Late Native Up D, H 

Brickey North Seeding 656 100 Excellent Seeding Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 685 63 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

H) Reverse the downward trend of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 50 17 

Pronghorn 40 40 38 

Elk 0 10 45 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Chicken Creek Chicken Creek 1.3 Unkn 

Chicken Creek Chicken Creek Trib. 2.3 0.2 Unkn 

Chicken Creek Chicken Creek Trib. 2.8 0.5 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-189

BLM allotment name: WILLOW CREEK Allotment number: 11004 

Management category: I BLM acres: 68,500 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 2,199 

Season of use: 04/01-08/31 State acres: 52 

Active AUM’s: 10,521 Other Federal acres: 169 

Suspended AUM’s: 1,639 

Total AUM’s: 12,160 Total acres: 71,020 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Dry Lake 9,209 100 Middle Native Static B 

Indian Canyon West 2,912 100 Late Native Static H 

Indian Canyon East 2,062 100 Middle Native Up H 

Flat Creek 7,687 100 Middle Native Up B 

Flat Creek North 2,669 99 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Rim Basin Seeding 4,191 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Groundhog 1,648 100 Late Native Static A 

Willow Creek North 3,275 100 Late Native Static B 

Frank Maher Flat Brush Control 3,741 99 Middle Native Static B 

Gluch Seeding West 1,831 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Gluch Seeding East 1,270 99 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Gluch Seeding North 2,405 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Willow Creek West 6,989 97 Late Native Up H 

Willow Creek East 5,132 92 Late Native Up B 

Horse Ridge 4,754 100 Late Native Up B 

Jaca Seeding West 1,571 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Jaca Seeding East 1,826 88 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Black Butte 2,395 100 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Castro Pit Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown D 

FFR 5,350 75 Unknown Unknown B, J 

Castro Spring Exclosure D 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

H) Reverse the downward trend of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 
E-190

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 25 27 

Pronghorn 75 75 72 

Elk 0 25 113 

Within range of bighorn sheep 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Willow Creek North Willow Creek 1.2 Unkn 

Frank Maher Flat Brush Control Willow Creek 0.7 Unkn 

Gluch Seeding East Willow Creek 0.5 Unkn 

Willow Creek West Coburn Creek 0.5 Unkn 

Willow Creek West Spring Branch Creek 2.1 Unkn 

Willow Creek West Willow Creek 2.0 Unkn 

Willow Creek East Horse Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Willow Creek East Toppin Creek Trib. To Soldier 1.6 Unkn 

Black Butte Willow Creek 2.7 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-191

BLM allotment name: BIGHORN Allotment number: 11005 

Management category: M BLM acres: 5,671 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 0 

Season of use: 04/08-12/31; 09/15-12/31 State acres: <1 

Active AUM’s: 1,040 Other Federal acres: 102 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,040 Total acres: 5,773 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East 2,057 100 Unknown Static B 

West 3,021 100 Unknown Up B 

Mud Flat 695 100 Unknown Static-Up B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 10 20 7 

Pronghorn 10 45 16 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within range of bighorn sheep 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
E-192

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: EIGUREN INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 11006 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,575 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 2,533 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 301 Other Federal acres: 40 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 301 Total acres: 4,148 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Eiguren Individual 4,148 39 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 50 20 

Pronghorn 50 75 53 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Eiguren Individual Jordan Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Eiguren Individual Jordan Creek 1.7 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-193

BLM allotment name: ROME INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 11007 

Management category: C BLM acres: 2,319 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 311 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 70 Other Federal acres: 138 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 70 Total acres: 2,768 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Rome Individual 2,768 89 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 50 20 

Pronghorn 15 15 14 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Rome Individual Jordan Creek 0.1 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-194

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

 

BLM allotment name: WHITEHORSE Allotment number: 11008 

Management category: I BLM acres: 25,890 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 7,504 

Season of use: 04/08-06/15 State acres: 40 

Active AUM’s: 4,391 Other Federal acres: 1,259 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 4,391 Total acres: 34,693 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

East 14,564 98 Unknown Down A 

West 10,848 100 Unknown Static A 

Three Forks Trailing 2,281 91 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 300 83 

Pronghorn 60 40 54 

Elk 0 25 113 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Three Forks and Owyhee River ACECs 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-195

BLM allotment name: PARSNIP PEAK Allotment number: 11009 

Management category: C BLM acres: 726 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,026 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 126 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 126 Total acres: 1,752 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Parsnip Individual 1,752 41 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 170 62 

Pronghorn 15 0 12 

Elk 0 25 113 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-196

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SKINNER INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 11010 

Management category: C BLM acres: 3,082 

AMP implemented: Private acres: 4,150 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 178 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 178 Total acres: 7,232 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Skinner Individual 7,232 43 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 50 20 

Pronghorn 75 75 72 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-197

BLM allotment name: ANTELOPE INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 11011 

Management category: C BLM acres: 608 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 1,247 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 54 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 54 Total acres: 1,856 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Antelope Individual 1,856 33 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 50 20 

Pronghorn 15 15 14 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Antelope Individual Jordan Creek 0.4 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-198

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM alotment name: MILLER INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 11012 

Management category: C BLM acres: 1,087 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 1,159 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 117 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 117 Total acres: 2,246 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Miller Individual 2,246 48 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 50 20 

Pronghorn 15 15 14 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-199

BLM allotment name: DANNER INDIVIDUAL Allotment number: 11013 

Management category: C BLM acres: 329 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 289 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 33 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 33 Total acres: 618 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Danner Individual 618 53 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 35 50 20 

Pronghorn 10 10 10 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-200

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: CHERRY CREEK Allotment number: 11014 

Management category: C BLM acres: 610 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 0 

Season of use: 04/08-06/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 66 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 66 Total acres: 610 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Cherry Creek 610 100 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 150 57 

Pronghorn 35 35 34 

Elk 25 25 225 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-201

BLM allotment name: LITTLE ANTELOPE Allotment number: 11015 

Management category: C BLM acres: 497 

AMP implemented: None Private acres: 0 

Season of use: Undefined State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 109 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 109 Total acres: 497 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Little Antelope 497 100 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 25 65 21 

Pronghorn 5 0 4 

Elk 0 0 0 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-202

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SHERBURN Allotment number: 11303 

Management category: M BLM acres: 45,338 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 596 

Season of use: 03/01-11/30 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 3,771 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 3,771 Total acres: 45,934 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Bankofier Seeding 4,073 98 Excellent Seeding Static B 

High Peak 17,292 98 Late Native Static B 

Hanson Flat North 12,812 99 Late Native Static B 

Hanson Flat South 7,923 99 Late Native Static B 

High Peak Seeding 2,600 100 Excellent Seeding Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

FFR 1,234 99 Unknown Unknown B, J 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 50 28 

Pronghorn 75 0 59 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Bankofier Seeding Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 10.3 0.1 Unkn 

High Peak Cottonwood Creek 3.2 Unkn 

High Peak Oregon Canyon Creek Trib. 10.3 0.5 Unkn 

High Peak Tenmile Creek Trib. 11.6 2.3 Unkn 

High Peak Tenmile Creek 5.1 Unkn 

Hanson Flat North Hanson Flat Creek Trib. 4.7 0.2 Unkn 

Hanson Flat North Antelope Creek Trib. 21.5 0.1 Unkn 

Hanson Flat North Hanson Flat Creek 0.6 Unkn 

Hanson Flat North Hanson Flat Creek Trib. 5.7 0.2 Unkn 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-203

Hanson Flat North Tenmile Creek Trib. 11.6 0.1 Unkn 

Hanson Flat North Tenmile Creek Trib. 16.2 1.3 Unkn 

Hanson Flat North Tenmile Creek 1.4 Unkn 

Hanson Flat North Trail Creek 2.9 Unkn 

Hanson Flat North Trail Creek Trib. 3.0 0.4 Unkn 

Hanson Flat South Trail Creek Trib. 3.0 Trib. 0.6 Trib. 1.8 0.2 Unkn 

Hanson Flat South Tenmile Creek Trib. 11.6 0.1 Unkn 

Hanson Flat South Trail Creek 3.1 Unkn 

Hanson Flat South Trail Creek Trib. 3.0 1.1 Unkn 

Hanson Flat South Trail Creek Trib. 5.3 1.7 Unkn 

Hanson Flat South Trail Creek Trib. 5.7 1.7 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-204

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: EIGUREN Allotment number: 11305 

Management category: M BLM acres: 67,329 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 437 

Season of use: 03/05-11/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 5,799 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 5,799 Total acres: 67,765 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Eiguren North 15,306 100 Middle Native Static B 

Eiguren South 18,784 99 Middle Native Static B 

Winter Area North 4,482 100 Early Native Static A 

Winter Area South 2,863 94 Middle Native Static A 

Chimney Creek 20,098 99 Middle Native Static B 

Beber Seeding 1,987 87 Excellent Seeding Static-Down B 

Bull Creek Seeding 4,230 100 Good Seeding Static-Up B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Rattlesnake #2 Reservoir Exclosure 11 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Chimney Guzzler Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown F 

Little Grassy Guzzler Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown F 1

 Current allotment management objectives:1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

F) Maintain the integrity of enclosures constructed for wildlife benefits 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 50 28 

Pronghorn 70 45 63 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Eiguren North Rattlesnake Creek 2.1 Unkn 

Eiguren South Antelope Creek 0.3 Unkn 

Eiguren South Little Rattlesnake Creek 2.6 Unkn 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-205

Eiburen South Rattlesnake Creek 4.9 Unkn 

Winter Area South Rattlesnake Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Chimney Creek Rattlesnake Creek 0.8 Unkn 

Rattlesnake #2 RSEX Little Rattlesnake Creek 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-206

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: CAMPBELL Allotment number: 11306 

Management category: M BLM acres: 161,429 

AMP implemented: No Private acres: 438 

Season of use: 03/01-10/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 14,154 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 14,154 Total acres: 161,867 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Twin Springs South 9,824 100 Late Native Static-Down B 

Twin Springs North 14,793 100 Late Native Static-Up B 

Twin Springs Middle 7,166 99 Late Native Static-Up B 

Peacock 28,583 100 Late Native Static-Up B 

Sacramento Hill 19,355 99 Late Native Static-Up B 

Starvation Seeding 15,472 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Horse Hill 42,811 100 Late Native Static B 

Lorribeau Holding 1,864 97 Late Native Unknown B 

Starvation Brush Control 19,024 100 Late Native Static B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Sacramento Hill Upland Exclosure 7 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Peacock Upland Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Bell Spring Exclosure 7 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Five Point Reservoir Exclosure 9 100 Unknown Unknown K 

Lucky Seven FFR 2,940 88 Unknown Unknown J 

Upper West Little Owyhee Exclosure 963 O 1 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

J) Pasture dominated by private land and managed custodial with no specified management objective 

K) Grazed reservoir enclosure with no management objective identified 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction; Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 10 10 5 

Pronghorn 100 50 87 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-207

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Twin Springs South Antelope Creek 0.8 Unkn 

Twin Springs Middle Antelope Creek 2.6 Unkn 

Sacramento Hill Antelope Creek 6.3 Unkn 

Sacramento Hill Antelope Creek Trib. 6.5 0.8 Unkn 

Sacramento Hill Field Creek 0.9 Unkn 

Starvation Seeding Antelope Creek 9.7 Unkn 

Starvation Seeding Field Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Horse Hill Antelope Creek 13.4 Unkn 

Horse Hill Antelope Creek Trib. 17.0 0.7 Unkn 

Horse Hill Antelope Creek Trib. 21.5 0.5 Unkn 

Horse Hill Antelope Creek Trib. 41.6 0.7 Unkn 

Horse Hill Antelope Creek Trib. 41.9 1.0 Unkn 

Horse Hill Antelope Creek Trib. 42.4 1.4 Unkn 

Horse Hill Field Creek 8.7 Unkn 

Horse Hill Steer Canyon Trib. 7.6 Trib. 0.2 1.4 Unkn 

Horse Hill Trail Creek 1.1 Unkn 

Horse Hill West Little Owyhee River 0.4 Static 

Lorribeau Holding West Little Owyhee River 2.0 Static 

Bell Spring SPEX Antelope Creek Trib. 42.4 0.2 Unkn 

Starvation Brush Control Antelope Creek 5.8 Unkn 

Starvation Brush Control Antelope Creek Trib. 17.0 0.1 Unkn 

Starvation Brush Control Field Creek 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Upper West Little Owyhee WSA 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Antelope Creek Administratively suitable National Wild and Scenic River 
E-208

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: SADDLE BUTTE Allotment number: 20805 

Management category: M BLM acres: 175,841 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 9,172 

Season of use: 11/01-03/31 State acres: 623 

Active AUM’s: 6,314 Other Federal acres: 3,889 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 6,314 Total acres: 188,142 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Saddle Butte 186,028 95 Unknown Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Chuckar Guzzler Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Rim Guzzler Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Clark Guzzler Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Bull Creek Watergap 308 100 O 

Ryegrass / Sand Spring / Granit Creek Watergap 2689 86 O 

Fletcher Trails Watergap 494 93 O 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

O) Domestic livestock grazing permanently eliminated in accordance with the Order of Modified Injunction; Civil No. 98-97-RE 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 200 100 66 

Pronghorn 225 465 259 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-209

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Sand Springs Wild Horse Management Area (HMA) 

Lower Owyhee WSA 

Saddle Butte WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Solitary milkvetch, Davis’ peppergrass, Cusick’s chaenactis Special Status plants 

Redband trout Special Status fish 

Palomino Playa ACEC 

Saddle Butte Lava Tubes ACEC 
E-210

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: WEST COW CREEK Allotment number: 20902 

Management category: M BLM acres: 135,794 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 680 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 9,591 Other Federal acres: 1,297 

Suspended AUM’s: 2,309 

Total AUM’s: 11,900 Total acres: 137,771 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Riley Horn 11,352 100 Middle Native Static B 

Mud Creek East 7,368 100 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Mud Creek West 11,052 100 Middle Native Static-Up A 

Bogus Creek Seeding 4,820 100 Excellent Seeding Static A 

Navarro V Seeding 8,844 ? Good Seeding Static-Up B 

West Crater Brush Control 17,928 99 Middle Native Static B 

Clarks Butte 26,187 99 Middle Native Static B 

Spray 8,934 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Arock 15,928 97 Good Seeding Static-Up A 

Owyhee Butte #1 3,650 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Owyhee Butte #2 2,713 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Owyhee Butte #3 1,729 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Owyhee Butte #4 3,109 99 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Dog Lake East 6,250 100 Early Native Static B 

Dog Lake West 5,751 99 Early Native/ 

Excellent Seeding Static B 

Annex East 1,120 100 Middle Native Unknown B 

Annex West 933 100 Middle Native Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Owyhee Butte Upland Exclosure 7 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Mud Flat Upland Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Bogus Creek Stream Exclosure #1 (Bench) 13 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Bogus Creek Stream Exclosure #2 (Falls) 10 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Bogus Creek Stream Exclosure #3 (Runaway)removed? 10 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Bogus Creek Stream Exclosure #4 (Lowest) 7 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Indian Camp Upland Exclousre 13 100 Unknown Unknown D? 

Bogus Lake Exclosure 33 100 Unknown Unknown D? 

Owyhee Butte BB Exclosure #1 2 100 Unknown Unknown A 

Owyhee Butte BB Exclosure #2 1 100 Unknown Unknown I 

Dog Lake Reservoir Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown A 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-211

1 Current allotment management objectives: 

A) Improve the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

I) Maximize availability of fall green-up for winter deer/antelope use 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 250 350 138 

Pronghorn 250 250 240 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Bogus Creek Seeding Bogus Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Navarro V Seeding Bogus Creek 0.7 Unkn 

Navarro V Seeding Crooked Creek 0.4 Unkn 

Navarro V Seeding Crooked Creek 1.6 Unkn 

Navarro V Seeding Owyhee River 9.8 Unkn 

Navarro V Seeding Owyhee River 1.2 Unkn 

West Crater Brush Control Bogus Creek 0.1 Up 

Spray Bogus Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Bogus Stream EXCL #1 Bogus Creek 0.2 Up 

Bogus Creek STEX #2 Bogus Creek 0.2 Up 

Bogus Creek STEX #3 Bogus Creek 0.2 Up 

Bogus Creek STEX #4 Bogus Creek 0.1 Up 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Lower Owyhee WSA 

Jordan Craters WSA 

Clarks Butte WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Redband trout Special Status fish 

Jordan Craters ACEC 

Owyhee Views ACEC 
E-212

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: AROCK Allotment number: 21001 

Management category: M BLM acres: 65,186 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 614 

Season of use: 04/01-10/15 State acres: 1,155 

Active AUM’s: 11,045 Other Federal acres: 1,664 

Suspended AUM’s: 492 

Total AUM’s: 11,537 Total acres: 68,619 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Tankey East 4,198 100 Middle Native Static B 

Tankey West 5,476 96 Middle Native Static B 

Monument South Seeding 2,546 99 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Dry Creek West 4,529 99 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Dry Creek East 4,399 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Rock Creek Seeding 3,151 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Noon 7,293 100 Late Native Static-Up B 

Little Grassy South 3,848 84 Early Native Unknown B 

Little Grassy North 8,072 97 Middle Native Unknown B 

Monument Native North 3,119 100 Early Native Static B 

Bull Pasture 1,727 95 Middle Native Static D 

Field #1 2,419 99 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Field #2 1,463 99 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Field #3 3,070 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Field #4 2,036 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Field #5 2,011 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Round Mountain North 2,044 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Round Mountain South 2,117 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Pinto Horse 5,076 89 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Rock Creek Reservoir Exclosure 8 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Noon Reservoir Exclosure 16 100 Unknown Unknown D 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-213

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 450 130 

Pronghorn 100 100 96 

Elk 0 15 68 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
E-214

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: ANTELOPE Allotment number: 21002 

Management category: I BLM acres: 51,443 

Number of pasture(s): 19(15 w/ Antelope Reservoir 4) Private acres: 633 

AMP implemented: Yes State acres: 0 

Season of use: 04/01-09/30 Other Federal acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 9,964 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 Total acres: 52,076 

Total AUM’s: 9,964 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Parsnip East 2,781 100 Unknown Unknown H 

Antelope West 2,047 100 Excellent Seeding Static-Up B 

Antelope East 2,117 96 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Sheep Spring Seeding 798 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Soldier Creek Seeding Southeast 498 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Soldier Creek Seeding East 959 91 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Soldier Creek Seeding West 1,061 94 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Greeley North 3,384 99 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Greeley South 3,684 100 Excellent Seeding Static B 

Rock 11, 491 100 Late Native Static B 

Black Butte North 2,324 100 Late Native Static B 

Black Butte South 2,611 100 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Parsnip West 7,213 99 Middle Native Static-Down H 

Antelope Flat 4,790 100 Good Seeding Static-Down H 

Cantor 4,341 93 Early Native Unknown B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Greeley Annex Reservoir Exclosure 486 100 Early Native Unknown D 

Native Annex Reservoir Exclosure 753 100 Middle Native Unknown D 

Seeding Annex Reservoir Exclosure 628 100 Early Native Unknown D 

CCC (Jordan Valley) Upland Exclosure 67 100 Unknown Unknown C 

Parsnip Peak Exlosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Tom Skinner Reservoir Exclosure 5 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Cantor Corral Pit Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Antelope Rim Spring Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Gluch Pit Eclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Cantor Corral Spring Exclosure 2 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Hicks Canyon Reservoir Exclosure 5 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Gluch Spring Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown D 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-215

Round Peak Spring Exclosure 7 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Sagehen Upland Exclosure 4 100 Unknown Unknown C 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

H) Reverse the downward trend of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 100 300 94 

Pronghorn 100 100 96 

Elk 0 50 225 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Parsnip East Spring Creek 0.6 Unkn 

Sheep Spring Seeding Sheep Spring Creek Trib. 7.7 1.2 Unkn 

Black Butte South Willow Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Parsnip West Trib no. 1 to Antelope Reservoir 0.6 Unkn 

Parsnip West Trib no. 2 to Antelope Reservoir 1.2 Unkn 

Antelope Flat Trib no. 2 to Antelope Reservoir 0.4 Unkn 

Antelope Flat Trib no. 3 to Antelope Reservoir 0.2 Unkn 

Gluch SPEX Spring Creek 0.1 Unkn 

Sagehen UPEX Trib no. 3 to Antelope Reservoir 0.1 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-216

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: RATTLESNAKE Allotment number: 21003 

Management category: C BLM acres: 3,488 

Number of pasture(s): 1 Private acres: 623 

AMP implemented: None State acres: 4,049 

Season of use: Undefined Other Federal acres: 526 

Active AUM’s: 374 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 Total acres: 8,686 

Total AUM’s: 374 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Rattlesnake Individual FFR #1 3,296 44 Unknown Unknown B 

Rattlesnake Individual FFR #2 1,297 63 Unknown Unknown B 

Rattlesnake Individual FFR #3 2,566 13 Unknown Unknown B 

Rattlesnake Individual FFR #4 1,528 92 Unknown Unknown B 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 50 23 

Pronghorn 10 25 12 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

(None known) 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Owyhee Canyon WSA 

Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River 

Redband trout Special Status fish 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-217

BLM allotment name: GILBERT Allotment number: 21301 

Management category: M BLM acres: 55,581 

AMP implemented: Private acres: 508 

Season of use: 04/01-10/31 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 4,480 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 4,480 Total acres: 56,089 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Battle Creek North 5,827 99 Late Native Static B 

Battle Creek South 5,922 99 Late Native Static-Up B 

Woolhawk 17,920 99 Middle Native Static B 

Battle Mountain 14,436 99 Middle Native Static B 

Rattlesnake 11,979 99 Middle Native Static-Up B 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Joe Spring Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Deer Creek Spring Exclosure 3 100 Unknown Unknown D 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 75 5 17 

Pronghorn 100 25 83 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Woolhawk Battle Creek Trib. 0.8 0.5 Unkn 

Woolhawk Rattlesnake Creek 8.2 Unkn 

Woolhawk Woolhawk Canyon 7.2 Unkn 

Battle Mountain Battle Creek 2.2 Unkn 

Battle Mountain Battle Creek Trib. 12.5 3.7 Unkn 

Battle Mountain Deer Creek 2.5 Unkn 

Battle Mountain Isaac Canyon 0.8 Unkn 

Rattlesnake Battle Creek 2.3 Unkn 

Rattlesnake Rattlesnake Creek 2.3 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 
E-218

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan

BLM allotment name: ECHAVE Allotment number: 21302 

Management category: M BLM acres: 17,709 

AMP implemented: Yes Private acres: 0 

Season of use: 05/01-10/15 State acres: 0 

Active AUM’s: 1,595 Other Federal acres: 0 

Suspended AUM’s: 0 

Total AUM’s: 1,595 Total acres: 17,709 

Pasture/area characteristics and objectives: 

Pasture/Areas Acreage % Public domain Upland Condition Upland Trend Objective 1 

Pastures identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Battle Mountain 5,978 100 Late Native Static B 

Rattlesnake 4,814 100 Late Native Static B 

Antelope Flat 6,915 100 Middle Native Static-Up H 

Areas not identified in the annual grazing schedule 

Antelope Flat Upland Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown C 

East Battle Mountain Spring Exclosure 1 100 Unknown Unknown D 

Echave Reservoir Enclosure 12 100 K 1

 Current allotment management objectives: 

B) Maintain the ecological condition of upland vegetative communities 

C) Maintain the integrity of research and study plots 

D) Maintain/improve the condition of riparian vegetative communities 

H) Reverse the downward trend of upland vegetative communities 

K) Grazed reservoir enclosure with no management objective identified 

Management considerations with implementation of the resource management plan: 

Provide habitat for: 

Species Summer Winter Forage demand (AUM) 

Deer 50 5 12 

Pronghorn 125 0 98 

Elk 0 0 0 

Within bighorn sheep range 

Pastures with riparian and DEQ water quality considerations: 

Water Proper functioning condition 

quality assessment completed (miles) 

Pasture Stream Miles Trend Fish limited1 PFC FARU FARN FARD NF 

Battle Mountain Little Rattlesnake Creek 2.8 Unkn 

Battle Mountain Rattlesnake Creek 3.0 Unkn 

Battle Mountain Rattlesnake Creek Trib. 27.6 1.7 Unkn 

Rattlesnake Little Rattlesnake Creek 3.5 Unkn 

Rattlesnake Rattlesnake Creek 2.4 Unkn 

Antelope Flat Antelope Creek Trib. 21.5 2.7 Unkn 

Antelope Flat Little Rattlesnake Creek 0.2 Unkn 

East Battle Mountain Rattlesnake Creek Trib. 27.6 0.1 Unkn 
Appendix E - Allotment Summaries

E-219

Notalloc Owyhee River 0.2 Unkn 1

 1998 303(d) list. 

Special management areas: 

Archeology 
E-220

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan
Appendix F - Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations 

Appendix F - Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and 

Considerations 

Introduction 

Chapter 3 describes the DRFC’s for land, resource, and social and economic conditions that
 

are expected to be present on public land in 50 to 100 years if the plan management objectives are achieved. Because the DRFC’s are descriptions associated with long term BLM
 

management, they provide limited direction for wildlife habitat assessments and prescriptions over the next 20 years. Due to this limitation, Appendix F has been included here to
 

provide more descriptions of habitat characteristics important to wildlife that will be incorporated into activity plans and evaluated in both the short and long term. The following text
 

will help to explain how BLM intends to:
 

1) Meet the four general wildlife objectives stated in Table 3-1 regarding upland habitats,
 

riparian habitats, special status species, and bighorn sheep.
 

2) Meet the quality of wildlife habitat that is implied in the S&G’s.
 

3) Provide a direct link to annual RMP progress, adopt appropriate objectives/terms/conditions in BLM activity plans, and prescribe appropriate activity plan monitoring.
 

This appendix is not intended to be an exhaustive list of criteria but it does address a wide
 

variety of fundamental wildlife habitat issues in forests and rangelands.
 

Due to economic and social constraints associated with implementation of the PSEORMP/
 

FEIS, it is assumed that some of these desired conditions and mitigations are not going to be
 

fully attained at all times or in all places on the public land. Where they cannot be fully
 

attained, it is assumed that either wildlife concerns have been outweighed by other resource,
 

social, or economic values, or site potential and other environmental factors such as weeds or
 

frequent fire are preventing their attainment at the present time.
 

F-1: Wildlife Habitat Security and Disturbances 

Security is a fundamental component of wildlife habitat health. Disturbance to habitat 

security (defined herein as unavoidable or unintended harassment to animals resulting from 

noise and activity) is known to adversely affect wildlife populations and productivity. 

Levels of big game winter mortality may increase where human activities cause additional 

physiological stress to animals already coping with intense cold and wet conditions. For 

species such as birds, annual recruitment of young may be diminished or eliminated altogether when disturbances occur during the nesting or mating season. Consequently, impacts 

to animal security during the breeding or wintering season that are caused by disturbance 

need to be avoided or minimized in BLM authorizations. Generally speaking, disturbances 

during the summer and fall time period have less potential to inflict serious adverse impacts 

to wildlife than when they occur during wintering or breeding seasons. 

As a general rule, the public can expect that land use authorizations which may impact special 

status species, raptors, and big game will require some form of mitigation to protect habitat 

security values. Refer to Table 3-3a for a description of the security protection measures that 

will be applied to any disturbing activity when needed. Special stipulations not shown in 

Table 3-3a may be applied for unique circumstances unforeseen in this document. 

Security threats to wildlife can originate from a wide range of activities which may include, 

but are certainly not limited to, OHV use, grazing, minerals exploration or development, 

recreational use, forest management operations, prescribed fire activities, or actions associF-1 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

ated with rights of way. Road locations and densities typically play a very significant and 

interrelated role in protecting or diminishing wildlife security. 

Avoidance or mitigation of disturbing activities can usually be accomplished by prescribing 

adjustments to the timing, location, or duration of authorized actions. In some instances, 

project denial may be the only appropriate course of action where resource values are high 

and mitigation or avoidance cannot reasonably be made. The appropriate measures necessary for the protection of wildlife need to consider the nature of proposed actions, the 

species affected, and the time of year the action is expected to occur. As described in Table 

3-3a, exceptions, modifications, and waivers may be applied to proposed actions that affect 

wildlife. 

General wildlife seasons of use for the planning area are as follows: 

Winter: Normally begins for most eastern Oregon wildlife by December and ends by early 

March. 

Breeding: Normally begins in early March and extends through the month of June. A few 

species, such as owls, begin breeding in winter months. 

Summer–Fall: Normally begins in July and extends through November. 

F-2: Structural Projects 

Powerlines will be configured and located according to the best current technical guidance 

for wildlife mitigation. The intent is to avoid or reduce the potential for instances of 

electrocution, collision, or avian predation (hunting perches that may affect some species 

such as sage grouse) or other avoidable adverse impacts. New power-lines should be 

installed within existing power line corridors whenever possible to limit the number of 

potential electrocution and collision hazard areas. “Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines” (1996) is one example of several technical references BLM will use to 

provide protection for raptors. 

Fences for livestock grazing administration will be designed to conform to BLM Manual 

1737-1 which prescribes wire spacing and types (smooth, barbed, or net types) depending on 

the wildlife species that occupy a project area. These standards will accommodate most 

wildlife movements and minimize the risks of injuries or death due to entanglement and 

collisions. Fence routing needs to mitigate adverse consequences to wildlife especially in 

migration corridors and big game winter ranges. Proposed fence locations may be adjusted 

in order to avoid congregation of livestock in important wildlife habitats. 

Escape ramps (expanded metal panels) will be installed in all new livestock troughs or 

installed in concert with scheduled maintenance in order to reduce or eliminate the potential 

for wildlife entrapment and drowning. 

Spring sources developed for the purpose of delivering water into a livestock trough will 

leave some of the native source flow intact where possible. This will protect endemic 

molluscs, amphibians, or other wildlife vulnerable to spring dewatering. Exclosure fencing 

should accompany spring developments to protect wetland vegetation if grazing systems do 

not allow for the attainment of PFC (see Water Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas 

sections of this document). Troughs connected with spring developments should be placed 

away from riparian and wetland habitats to reduce livestock trampling damage to wet areas. 

Trough overflow at springs should be controlled with float valves or else delivered back into 

the native channel. 

F-2 
Appendix F - Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations 

Water developments such as reservoirs, pipelines, and guzzlers may benefit some species of 

wildlife such as antelope, chukar partridge, and bighorn sheep by providing new sources of 

drinking water. Judgment as to whether developed water will be an overall benefit or 

detriment to wildlife habitat and populations is dependent upon the area of consideration and 

the species effected. Maintaining habitats free of new water developments accessible to 

livestock will normally be considered a beneficial wildlife habitat conservation measure in 

high quality native range (refer also to F-3). 

F-3: Grazing Use Considerations for Upland Habitats 

Unless specified with rationale, the following factors will be considered consistent with the 

protection of most wildlife habitat values in activity plans. 

Key area selection for monitoring activity plan performance (effectiveness monitoring) is 

based on habitat type, land-form, and/or fence locations at reasonable distances from water 

accessible to livestock or wild horses. One or more key species of wildlife and wildlife 

seasons of use need to be identified for activity plan evaluation purposes. 

1) Grazing systems should incorporate periodic yearlong rest and/or growing season deferment. 

2) Key grass forage species on native ranges should be grazed at stocking levels that allow 

for maintenance or improvement of plant vigor and recruitment of young plants. 

3) Native range should be grazed in such a way that a patchy appearance comprised of 

lightly to moderately grazed and ungrazed areas are prevalent throughout most of the 

pasture. The rangeland may be topped, skimmed, or grazed substantially in patches. In so 

doing, a combination of seasonally important habitat values important to wildlife will be 

present including grazed (conditioned) forage plants and areas with high quality cover and 

structure (ungrazed or slightly grazed vegetation). 

Livestock grazing described as a thorough search (heavy trampling, limited standing 

herbaceous cover, and uniformly grazed key forage plants) is limited to areas near watering 

facilities such as troughs and reservoirs. Heavy utilization patterns do not dominate the 

appearance of the landscape and vegetation structure at the end of the growing season. Most 

young plants are undamaged subsequent to grazing use and low value herbaceous plants are 

left ungrazed. 

4) TNR livestock grazing use in native range should be avoided to protect forage, cover and 

structure values for wildlife. Where it is permitted for the attainment of other management 

objectives, TNR grazing use should conform to utilization levels that are less than or equal 

to 40 percent as defined in this document and BLM technical references. 

5) Native upland range that is not grazed by domestic livestock is a desired wildlife habitat 

condition. It is generally in limited supply and typically provides very high quality structure 

and native forage for wildlife use. Maintenance of currently ungrazed native range conditions by avoiding new water developments, salting, and fencing is considered a beneficial 

mitigating measure for the protection of wildlife habitat values. 

6) Crested wheatgrass seedings should be grazed periodically in such a way that spring or 

fall green-up or conditioned forage is available for Canada geese, big game, or other species. 

Light use and nonuse by livestock in seedings for long periods of time will diminish green 

forage values for wildlife because grass plants become rank and unpalatable. 

7) Green-up and conditioned forage: Green-up (new vegetative growth initiated by growing 

F-3 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

season moisture) is valuable to wildlife because it provides succulent, nutritious, and easily 

digested forage. Nearly all classes of wildlife from songbirds to big game can be observed 

consuming green-up whenever and wherever it is available throughout the year. Domestic 

livestock and wild horses also consume green-up for its palatability and nutritional qualities. 

The value of green-up for wildlife is highest on habitats used during the spring, winter, or 

fall. 

The nutritious character of spring green-up prepares animals for the physiological demands 

of breeding activity and therefore it can be directly tied to animal population productivity. 

Where green-up is available on winter ranges it helps animals to maintain their physiological 

condition and therefore it can be directly tied to population survival. Where green forage has 

been unavailable for prolonged periods due to drought or normal summer conditions, it helps 

to restore overall animal health and therefore it can be tied directly to animal population 

recovery from cyclic or seasonal stress. 

Conditioned forage (areas that have been burned or grazed by livestock) also tends to 

provide green vegetation that is sought out by wildlife. Consequently, grazing and burning 

can both be of benefit to wildlife by providing a higher volume and greater availability of 

succulent, nutritious, and easily digested forage. However, conditioned forage on native 

range from fires and grazing use is not in limited supply. Consequently, the need for more 

conditioned forage (resulting from livestock use) to benefit wildlife on native range is quite 

limited. Moreover, the structural characteristics and values of shrubby cover will need to be 

carefully weighed before emphasizing the desirability of providing more conditioned forage 

on public land through prescribed fire (see F-5). 

8) Quaking aspen (apart from riparian habitats) and mountain shrub species should exhibit 

healthy growth forms, structure and plant vigor. Uneven-aged stands of aspen and mountain 

shrubs should be prevalent and grazing systems should include rotations that allow for seed 

production and seedling establishment. Grazing systems need to allow for the likelihood of 

maintaining or improving forage, cover, and structural features important to game and 

nongame species. 

F-4: Grazing Use Considerations for Riparian/Wetland 

Habitats 

At a minimum, grazing use needs to be consistent with providing those conditions which are 

necessary to promote properly functioning riparian/wetland areas. 

There is no single management strategy that will meet all riparian needs for wildlife and 

there is no single tool for measuring activity plan performance that can be applied in every 

riparian area. This is because riparian site potential and current conditions are highly 

variable. The appropriate tool for monitoring activity plan performance is determined by the 

important wildlife resources present. Specific riparian objectives therefore need to be 

applied at the activity plan level in light of all these variables. 

Where maintaining or improving vegetative trend is judged to be inadequate for obtaining 

desired wildlife habitat conditions, a desired plant community (DPC) objective will be used 

to address wildlife habitat management in riparian areas. Appendix D4, Table D4-1, 

describes the common indicators of riparian trend and how they will generally be interpreted 

in evaluations. 

Where needed, DPC objectives will address one or more of the following habitat elements 

important to wildlife: 

Systems capable of supporting woody and herbaceous species: age composition, structural 

characteristics (height, volume, etc.), species distribution and abundance of key woody 

F-4 
Appendix F - Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations 

species. Distribution, composition, and abundance of key herbaceous species including 

grasses, forbs, sedges, and rushes. Reproductive success and grazing utilization of key 

herbaceous or woody species 

Systems with little or no capability to support woody species: distribution, composition, and 

abundance of key herbaceous species including grasses, forbs, sedges, and rushes. Reproductive success and grazing utilization of key herbaceous species. 

F-5: Management of Vegetation Within Steppe Rangelands 

Occupied by Sage Grouse and Other Species that use Sagebrush Habitats 

General Values of Shrubby and Herbaceous Cover for Wildlife 

Wildlife diversity and productivity is profoundly influenced by the relative abundance, 

structure, and spatial arrangement of sagebrush communities (refer to Chapter 2, Wildlife 

and Wildlife Habitat, Figure 2-1 PSEORMP & FEIS). Management of sagebrush communities that is appropriate to soil, climate, and landform needs to incorporate the following 

overstory and understory components which contribute towards healthy wildlife habitats: 

Shrub overstory: Big sagebrush, low sagebrush, and other shrubby species within the 

genus Artemisia provide primary sources of wildlife habitat structure, food, and cover. 

Herbaceous understory: Grasses and forbs provide primary sources of wildlife habitat 

structure, food and cover. Herbaceous cover also provides indirect food sources for wildlife 

by supporting the environments that produce insects consumed by birds and other small 

animals. 

Two important tables of habitat information are included in this section that will be used as 

tools for wildlife habitat evaluation purposes: Table F-1 describes general relationships of 

wildlife use at various shrub overstory canopy measures; and Table F-2 describes the amount 

and arrangement of habitat that is desired at mid scales (GMA’s) and fine scales (pastures). 

Used in combination, these two tables will enable BLM to craft GMA objectives, multi-scale 

monitoring and a process that is able to address cumulative effects of management actions. 

BLM will also be able to determine whether or not future actions conform to objectives for 

wildlife habitat in sagebrush rangelands. 

Exceeding the fine scale (pasture level) percents (acreages) for shrub cover values shown in 

Table F-2 may be necessary in order to compensate for currently fragmented habitats and/or 

where it is likely that fragmentation will continue due to fire history and frequency. Determining activity plan objectives can only be made after considering existing cover conditions 

at mid scales and larger, and in light of wildlife survey or habitat relationships data. This 

will be accomplished as a part of the rangeland health assessment process. 

Important species of wildlife, in addition to sage grouse, that use big sagebrush habitats are: 

Nongame species: sage thrasher, Brewer’s sparrow, sage sparrow, black-throated sparrow, 

gray flycatcher, loggerhead shrike, pygmy rabbit, sagebrush vole. 

Game species: mule deer, elk, and pronghorn. 

Desired Amounts and Arrangements of Sagebrush Habitats 

F-5 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Structural characteristics and general distribution at mid scales (GMA’s): Shrub cover 

capable of supporting the life history requirements of sage grouse and other wildlife that use 

sagebrush habitats (such as Classes 3, 4, and 5 from Table F-1)should be present at multiple 

scales, over a large area, and in a variety of spatial arrangements (such as at a landscape 

level and with connectivity present). This should include a central core of sagebrush habitat 

which is present in large contiguous blocks as well as some other habitat arrangements such 

as islands, corridors, and mosaic patterns. Each of these patterns have significance to 

wildlife within geographic areas. 

Wildlife objectives for sagebrush communities in individual pastures, allotments, and GMA’s 

will be determined on the basis of factors such as: (1) presence of sage grouse and their 

seasonal life history needs, (2) existing native shrub cover patterns and characteristics within 

each GMA, (3) the frequency and reasonably foreseeable likelihood of fire, and (4) locations 

of seedings and their shrub overstory conditions. 

Shrub cover should be present that shows some mix of height and age classes but with an 

overall emphasis on the presence of communities with shrubs in a mature structural status 

per Thomas et al. (1984). 

Big sagebrush shrub cover on native range at fine scales (pastures): Shrub overstories 

capable of supporting sage grouse and other species that use sagebrush habitats should be 

present on at least 50 to 75 percent of the surface acreage of livestock management pastures 

capable of supporting big sagebrush communities. For example: a 1000-acre native-range 

pasture that is a Wyoming, mountain, or basin sagebrush type should provide shrub cover 

capable of supporting sage grouse and other species that use sagebrush habitats on at least 

500 to 750 acres (such as Classes 3, 4, and 5 from Table F-1). 

Big sagebrush shrub cover on seeded range at fine scales (pastures): Shrub overstories 

capable of supporting sage grouse and other species that use sagebrush habitats should be 

present on at least 25 to 50 percent of the surface acreage of livestock management pastures 

capable of supporting a big sagebrush community. For example: a 1000-acre seeded pasture 

that is a Wyoming, mountain, or basin sagebrush habitat type should provide adequate shrub 

cover capable of supporting sage grouse and other species that use sagebrush habitats on at 

least 250 to 500 acres (such as Classes 3, 4, and 5 from Table F-1). 

Herbaceous understory on native range at fine scales (pastures): Herbaceous understory 

composition throughout most native range habitats should exhibit multiple species of native 

forbs and grasses consistent with site potential at mid, late, or PNC seral stages. 

Herbaceous understory on seeded range at fine scales (pastures): Herbaceous cover 

composition in seedings should support one or more adapted forb species. 

F-6 
 

Appendix F - Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations 

Table F-1.—General habitat relationships of sagebrush canopy cover (as determined by line 

intercept) and herbaceous understory composition to wildlife habitat values and use (also see 

Figure F-1) 

Class 1 No sagebrush canopy cover— 

Class 1(A): Plant communities that are dominated by native grasses and forbs which generally 

provide a portion of habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. 

These plant communities are typically observed after fire, before sagebrush species recolonize. These 

plant communities are desirable to achieve in a patchy, mosaic pattern within the sagebrush-steppe, 

intermingled with Class 2(A, C), Class 3(A, B, C), Class 4(B), and Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy 

cover) plant communities. 

Class 1(B): Plant communities that are dominated by introduced annual grasses and forbs such as 

cheatgrass, medusahead, and tumblemustard, which do not provide habitat needs for sage grouse and 

other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. These plant communities are not desirable to sustain 

in their present condition if the sites are capable of supporting a sagebrush plant community(ies). 

Before converting to annual grasses and annual forbs, these Class 1(B) plant communities were more 

likely to have been Wyoming big sagebrush or basin big sagebrush plant communities than either low 

sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush plant communities (Miller and Eddleman 2000). These plant 

communities are biologically and physically unstable because of high risk for repeated fire. High plant 

density of these annual plants, combined with great amounts of litter, effectively eliminate biological 

soil crusts. The combination of these conditions inhibit native plant recovery. 

Class 1(C): Plant communities that are dominated by seedings of crested wheatgrass or other exotic 

perennial grasses which generally do not provide habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that 

use sagebrush-steppe habitats. These plant communities are lacking in sagebrush canopy cover either 

because a sagebrush seed source is lacking, or there has not been sufficient time elapsed for sagebrush 

species to recolonize the seeding. These plant communities are not desirable to sustain in their present 

condition if the sites are capable of supporting a sagebrush plant community(ies). 

Class 1(D): Plant communities that are closed woodlands dominated by species such as western 

juniper. Particularly in the mountain big sagebrush and low sagebrush plant communities, western 

juniper encroachment and increasing density can result in near total loss of sagebrush canopy cover 

(Miller and Eddleman 2000). These Class 1(D) plant communities do not provide habitat needs for 

sage grouse (sage grouse did not select western juniper communities in central Oregon for nesting or 

winter habitat [BLM 1994; Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe 

habitats. In many of these plant communities, excessive livestock grazing pressure and/or fire suppression have been the main contributors to their formation. These plant communities have depleted 

herbaceous understories in addition to depleted shrub canopy cover, and could have depleted biological 

soil crusts if the sites are capable of supporting biological soil crusts. The depletion of the shrub, 

herbaceous, and biological soil crust cover can result in accelerated erosion on these sites. These plant 

communities are not desirable to sustain in their present condition if the sites are capable of supporting 

a sagebrush plant community(ies) and supported a sagebrush plant community(ies) before the western 

juniper encroached. 

Class 2 Trace to 5%— 

Class 2(A): Plant communities that are dominated by native grasses and forbs with some recruitment of 

sagebrush species, which provide a portion of habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use 

sagebrush-steppe habitats. These plant communities are typically observed after fire, when sagebrush 

species are recolonizing. These plant communities are desirable to achieve in a patchy, mosaic pattern 

F-7 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

within the sagebrush-steppe, intermingled with Class 1(A), Class 2(C), Class 3(A, B, C), Class 4 (B), and 

Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy cover) plant communities. 

Class 2(B): Plant communities that are dominated by introduced annual grasses and forbs such as 

cheatgrass, medusahead, and tumblemustard, where sagebrush species are generally declining in 

abundance attributable to too frequent of fire. These plant communities are typically not providing 

habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. These plant 

communities are not desirable to sustain in their present condition if the sites are capable of supporting 

a sagebrush plant community(ies). These plant communities are biologically and physically unstable 

because of high risk for repeated fire. High plant density of these annual plants, combined with great 

amounts of litter, effectively eliminate biological soil crusts. The combination of these conditions 

inhibit native plant recovery. 

Class 2(C): Plant communities that are dominated by seedings of crested wheatgrass or other exotic 

perennial grasses, where sagebrush species are in the early stages of recolonization. These plant 

communities might not be providing the complex shrub-grass-forb cover and food needs of sage 

grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat, but if there is active recolonization of 

sagebrush species, there is high future likelihood for providing habitat needs. These plant communities 

are desirable to sustain if they are moving successionally to greater abundance of sagebrush species. 

Class 2(D): Plant communities that are woodlands dominated by species such as western juniper. 

Particularly in the mountain big sagebrush and low sagebrush plant communities, western juniper 

encroachment and increasing density can result in near total loss of sagebrush canopy cover (Miller 

and Eddleman 2000). These plant communities do not provide habitat needs for sage grouse (sage 

grouse did not select western juniper communities in central Oregon for nesting or winter habitat 

[BLM 1994; Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. In 

many of these Class 2(D) plant communities, excessive livestock grazing pressure and/or fire suppression have been the main contributors to their formation. These plant communities have depleted 

herbaceous understories in addition to depleted shrub canopy cover, and could have depleted biological 

soil crusts if the sites are capable of supporting biological soil crusts. The depletion of the shrub, 

herbaceous, and biological soil crust cover can result in accelerated erosion on these sites. These plant 

communities are not desirable to sustain in their present condition if the sites are capable of supporting 

a sagebrush plant community(ies) and supported a sagebrush plant community(ies) before the western 

juniper encroached. 

Class 3 Greater than 5%, up to 15%— 

Class 3(A): Plant communities supporting low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush, with an 

understory of native grasses and forbs (typically about 10% grass canopy cover and less than 10% forb 

canopy cover), and intact biological soil crusts in interplant spaces, represent the potential natural 

vegetation for these plant communities ( Miller and Eddleman 2000). Class 3(A) low sagebrush or 

Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities provide habitat needs for sage grouse (such as winter 

habitat [Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat. They are 

desirable to sustain in a patchy, mosaic pattern within the sagebrush-steppe, intermingled with Class 

1(A), Class 2(A, C), Class 3(B, C), Class 4(B), and Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy cover) plant 

communities. 

Class 3(B): Plant communities supporting basin big sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush, with an 

understory of native grasses and forbs, which are typically moving successionally to greater abundance 

of sagebrush species and are not yet at the potential natural vegetation for these two plant communities. Despite this, Class 3(B) basin big sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush plant communities 

provide habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat. Their 

presence in a mosaic, intermingled with Class 1(A), Class 2(A, C), Class 3(A, C), Class 4(B), and 

Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy cover) plant communities, should be considered desirable for 

sagebrush-steppe habitat. It should be recognized however, that these Class 3(B) plant communities 

F-8 
Appendix F - Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations 

are probably transitory and should be permitted to move successionally to Class 4 (see Class 4(B) for 

more detail). 

Class 3(C): Plant communities that are dominated by seedings of crested wheatgrass or other exotic 

perennial grasses, where sagebrush canopy cover is on the increase attributable to sagebrush colonization. While not providing the quality of habitat that Class 3(A) or Class 3(B) plant communities do, 

because typically there is not a diverse grass or forb component in these seedings, Class 3(C) plant 

communities do provide added structure because of the sagebrush, which provides habitat for some 

wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat. 

Class 4 Greater than 15%, up to 25%— 

Class 4(A): Plant communities supporting low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush, which typically 

show a decrease in native grass and forb canopy cover (particularly where sagebrush canopy cover is 

20% or greater [Miller and Eddleman 2000]), and biological soil crust development, compared with 

Class 3(A) low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities. Disturbances such as 

excessive livestock grazing pressure are often contributory to development of Class 4(A) plant 

communities (Miller and Eddleman 2000). Class 4(A) is not the potential natural vegetation, nor a 

desirable outcome, for these two plant communities when the inherent capabilities of soils, landform, 

and climate are factored in. However, Class 4(A) plant communities can provide some habitat needs 

for sage grouse (such as winter habitat [Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use 

sagebrush-steppe habitat. 

Class 4(B): Plant communities supporting basin big sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush, with an 

understory of native grasses and forbs, more often than not represent the potential natural vegetation 

for these plant communities. Class 4(B) plant communities provide habitat needs for sage grouse (such 

as nesting and brood-rearing habitat [Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat. Their presence in a mosaic, intermingled with Class 1(A), Class 2(A and C), 

Class 3(A, B, C), and Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy cover) plant communities, should be 

considered desirable for sagebrush-steppe habitat. 

Class 4(C): Plant communities supporting mountain big sagebrush or low sagebrush, with tree 

seedlings (particularly western juniper) in the understory. Particularly in the mountain big sagebrush 

and low sagebrush plant communities, western juniper encroachment and increasing density can result 

in near total loss of sagebrush canopy cover (Miller and Eddleman 2000). These Class 4(C) plant 

communities currently provide habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrushsteppe habitats. However, with continued growth and increasing density of the western juniper, 

sagebrush will decline and these plant communities will transition and at some point not provide 

habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. On many of these 

Class 4(C) plant communities, excessive livestock grazing pressure and/or fire suppression have been 

the main contributors to their formation. These plant communities are not desirable to sustain in their 

present condition if the sites are capable of supporting a sagebrush plant community(ies) and supported 

a sagebrush plant community(ies) before the western juniper encroached. 

Class 5 Greater than 25%— 

Class 5(A): Plant communities supporting basin big sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush, with an 

understory of native grasses and forbs, can represent the potential natural vegetation for these plant 

communities, particularly for canopy cover that ranges from 25% to less than 35% (Miller and 

Eddleman 2000). However, as sagebrush canopy cover approaches 35%, the understory of native 

grasses and forbs decreases. Class 5(B) basin big sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush plant communities can provide habitat needs for sage grouse (such as nesting and brood-rearing habitat [Miller and 

Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat (such as pygmy rabbit). Class 

5(B) that has sagebrush canopy cover in the range of 25% to less than 35% is probably within the 

range of what the soils, landform, and climate would sustain for these two plant communities, whereas 

F-9 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

canopy cover Class 5(B) that approaches or exceeds 35% in these two plant communities is probably 

undesirable and a result of excessive livestock grazing pressure and/or fire suppression 

Class 5(B): Plant communities supporting low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush, which typically 

are depauperate in understory native grasses and forbs (Miller and Eddleman 2000) and often have an 

understory composed of exotic annuals such as cheatgrass and mustards. Understory native grasses, 

forbs, and biological soil crusts would be primarily restricted to microsites beneath shrub canopies and 

would rarely be found in interspace microsites. Disturbances such as excessive livestock grazing 

pressure are often contributory to development of Class 5(A) plant communities (Miller and Eddleman 

2000). Although these low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities can provide some 

habitat needs for sage grouse (e.g. winter habitat; Miller and Eddleman 2000) and other wildlife that 

use sagebrush-steppe habitat, these Class 5(A) plant communities are not the potential natural vegetation, nor a desirable outcome, for these two plant communities when the inherent capabilities of soils, 

landform, and climate are factored in. 

F-6: Appropriate Management Actions in Sagebrush Habitats for Meeting Wildlife Habitat Needs 

Appropriate management actions (BLM approved mechanical, chemical, biological, or firerelated means) that are consistent with management for wildlife in sagebrush ecosystems 

include: 

1) Restore rangelands that are depleted in structure and plant composition due to past uses, 

fires, and weed invasions. Restoration with multiple native species is preferable to using 

introduced species such as crested wheatgrass. However, if native species cannot be established because (1) native seed sources are not available, or (2) intense competition from 

other undesirable vegetation is very likely to limit the success in establishing natives, then 

introduced grasses with a shrub component (crested wheatgrass and shrubs) will be considered preferable to taking no rehabilitation action at all. Fire and weed threats to remaining 

areas of good quality native range need to be reduced or eliminated where possible. 

2) Reduce the level of western juniper encroachment into rangeland sites that threaten sage 

grouse as a result of habitat loss and hunting perches for avian predators. Use mechanical 

means, rather than fire, where the risk of exacerbating fire cycles associated with invasive 

species (such as cheatgrass) is high. 

3) Modify landscape character in monotypic stands of sagebrush where there is reason to 

believe that such action would enhance wildlife habitat values and not further exacerbate 

problems associated with fragmentation. 

4) Restore habitat complexity, diversity, and structure in at least portions of rangelands 

currently dominated by monoculture stands of adapted grasses (nonnative). This action is 

considered appropriate if the area is judged to be of substantial consequence to the connectivity of individual geographic areas and the outcome would benefit critically important 

wildlife habitats (such as areas of concentrated or otherwise highly significant wildlife use). 

5) Delay the timing of certain crested wheatgrass retreatments (treatments for the purpose of 

encouraging more grass production) where the status of sage grouse winter use and breeding 

activity is uncertain. Prescribe treatments based on documented field survey data that 

address sage grouse absence or presence. 

6) Use cultural practices to establish greenstrips in order to diminish the chances for further 

loss of quality sagebrush habitats to wildfire. This is especially true for quality sage grouse 

habitats that adjoin fire prone, cheatgrass-dominated areas. 

F-10 
 

Appendix F - Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations 

7) Where necessary, bring livestock utilization levels or seasons of use into conformance 

with herbaceous cover requirements in sage grouse nesting habitats. 

F-7: Western Juniper Woodland Management Considerations 

Habitats that support western juniper should provide the following kinds of characteristics 

important to wildlife: 

1) Patches of thermal and hiding cover sufficient to meet the habitat requirements of mule 

deer and elk. 

2) Scattered mature trees suitable for nesting raptors such as ferruginous hawks. 

3) Limited juniper presence in rangelands where sage grouse forage and cover values are 

threatened or where predation by raptors may be affecting limited grouse populations. 

4) Maintenance of all large trees (approximately 24 inch diameter measured 1 foot above 

ground) with nesting/hiding cavities used by various species of small mammals and birds. 

5) Downed trees for small animal refugia and big game hiding cover. 

6) Vegetation mosaics within project sites so that the result of treatments is approximately 50 

percent juniper habitat and 50 percent shrub/grassland habitat. The patch size and layout of 

cover types resulting from projects (burning or cutting) is dependent upon wildlife that use 

the area and cover conditions within the geographic area being effected 

F-8: Forest Management Considerations 

Due to the fact that forested habitat in MRA is on the southern edge of the Blue Mountains, 

it will be desirable to maintain old growth characteristics wherever they are present. Actions 

which promote the attainment of old growth character in the long term will be considered 

beneficial for wildlife habitat values. 

Green Tree Replacement (GTR), Snags, and Down Woody Debris in Forested Habitats 

There are at least 30 bird and 23 mammal species in the Blue Mountains Region that use 

snags for nesting or shelter. Sixteen bird species are excavators. At least 179 species of 

vertebrates (5 amphibians, 9 reptiles, 116 birds, and 49 mammals) make some use of 

decaying logs. 

Snag, green tree replacements for snags (GTR) and down woody debris guidelines are 

needed to protect wildlife populations at the 60 to 70 percent level. Commercial harvest of 

large trees and existing tree insect infestations have created shortages in snags and green tree 

replacements. The harvest of dead/dying trees and fire killed trees could exacerbate snag, 

GTR, and woody debris deficits. Snags, GTR, and woody debris recommendations at the 

project level will vary depending upon whether existing forest conditions for wildlife are 

determined to be (1) desirable, (2) undesirable, or (3) burned. 

Both hard and soft snags at approximately equal numbers are required to meet the needs of 

various birds species for nesting and foraging. The desired snag tree species are fir, larch, 

and ponderosa pine. 

Desirable forest conditions: The desired forest condition has all size green trees with 

snags, down woody debris, less than 12 percent soil compaction and insects endemic rather 

F-11 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

then epidemic. Any harvest should leave healthy trees of all size classes and approximate 

species mix for the site. The following table lists number of trees by sizes to be retained for 

future snags and number of snags by size classes. 

Size Green tree replacement Snags 1 

10–12 7 1 

13–20 20 3 

20 + 6 1 1 More small trees and snags must be retained if large tree numbers are inadequate. 

Undesirable forest conditions: GTR and snags may be difficult to maintain at desired 

levels. Healthy green trees may not be available in all size classes, species mixes, or poorly 

distributed over the land base. Also, snag distribution, size classes and species mixes may be 

deficient. The target for snags and GTR is the same as in a healthy forest, but not all green 

trees saved may be healthy. 

Burned forest conditions: As few or no green trees may be available, snags or dead trees 

must be preserved at a higher level than in a desirable forest condition. Large snags are the 

habitat element that will be deficient over time as the young forest is reestablished. Four 

snags/acre over 20 inches dbh should be maintained as snags will begin to fall at approximately 10 years. Eventually this will leave a deficit of large snags. The small snags would 

be replaced in approximately 40 years as the new forest is regenerated. Large snags will be 

missing from 10 to 120 years or more. 

Western juniper: Care must be taken not to substitute juniper for pine and larch when 

addressing species such as pileated and black-backed woodpeckers. 

Grand fir: Other snag elements to consider are green grand fir trees over 25 inches that 

have hollow centers. If these trees have a broken top exposing the hollow center, they are 

even more valuable. Numerous birds and mammals use these broke-top snags for nesting, 

roosting, and winter hibernation. These trees are not distributed across the landscape, as 

many have already been cut. Because many wildlife species use these trees, most or all large 

green-cull fir trees should be saved. 

Snag Location and Distribution 

Snags should be distributed evenly across the landscape to provide optimum habitat. As 

snag levels are not evenly distributed, snag numbers should be averaged and monitored on 

40-acre patches. 

If possible, snags should be located where land relief will give protection from prevailing 

winds. Snags can be grouped within these protection areas and averaged over a 40-acre 

parcel. Solitary snags need to be left where they can be retained. Solitary snags are very 

important as the create the down woody material needed over the landscape, and some birds 

prefer open land for foraging, especially the flycatchers. 

Snags can be created if a surplus of green trees are available. If surplus green trees are not 

available, it is recommended not to sacrifice green trees as this will lengthen the time period 

for future snag recruitment. 

Down Woody Debris 

Current research indicates that 10 logs/acre or 10 tons/acre is a minimum. Down woody 

debris provides nutrient capital, water economy, soil organic reserves, structural component, 

and plant and animal habitat. 

Treatment of Ant Hills 

F-12 
 

Appendix F - Wildlife Habitat Descriptions and Considerations 

Ants are a primary predator of many forest insects. Ant hills should be protected from 

logging, controlled fire, etc. 

F-9: Bighorn Sheep Guidelines 

Management pertaining to bighorn sheep, domestic sheep, and goats is specified within the 

BLM “Revised Guidelines for Management of Domestic Sheep and Goats in Native Wild 

Sheep Habitats” (1997). These guidelines, which may be modified by agreement among the 

parties involved, will be reviewed at least every 5 years by a work group of representatives 

from the livestock industry, State wildlife agencies, BLM, and native wild sheep organizations. 

F-10: Calculation of Big Game Forage Demand 

Big game numbers used to set forage demand in this plan were supplied by the State of 

Oregon, Department of Fish and Wildlife, and are based on State-approved management 

objectives (MO’s) and benchmark levels by seasons of use and grazing allotment. 

Adhering to the descriptions of grazing use in F-3 of this section would allow BLM to meet 

upland wildlife forage needs within the the planning area. Conflicts regarding forage 

availability for wildlife will be addressed on a case basis within periodic rangeland health 

evaluations. Evaluations may disclose the need for an allotment-specific wildlife forage 

allocation where desired conditions described under upland utilization are not being met. 

Bighorn sheep forage demand was not calculated in Appendix E. Specific locations of 

bighorn sheep use at the pasture level throughout the plan area was not possible. Nevertheless, bighorn sheep forage will be considered in the course of evaluations similar to pronghorn, deer, and elk. 

Big game forage demand in Appendix E, Allotment Summaries, was established by using the 

three mathematical calculations described below. These calculations are consistent with the 

“Three Rivers Resource Management Plan” (1991) in Burns District, and they use locally 

adapted studies on dietary 

overlap cited in Vavra and Sneva (1978). 

Mathematical Calculations Used for Determining Wildlife Forage Demand 

1) Land ownership differences: The percentage of the grazing allotment administered by 

BLM was multiplied by the MO/benchmark number to determine the number of big game 

supported on public land versus other ownerships such as state or private. 

2) Body mass differences: The number of big game at MO/benchmark levels supported on 

BLM lands was then divided by a factor of 5.3 (for deer), 7.0 (for pronghorn), and 2.4 (for 

elk) to determine the number of each species that would potentially consume forage equal to 

one AUM, which is defined as 800 pounds of air dry forage. (The figure derived from this 

calculation is referred to as the unadjusted forage demand because it does not factor the 

dietary differences between livestock and big game.) 

3) Dietary preference differences: The unadjusted forage demand was then multiplied by 

factors of 0.18 for deer, 0.10 for antelope, and 0.70 for elk to reflect the differences in forage 

preferences between livestock and big game (this figure is referred to as the adjusted forage 

demand). For example: The adjusted big game forage demand (sometimes referred to as the 

competitive AUM’s) needed to support 50 mule deer on an allotment with 80 percent public 

land over a period of 12 months would be 86.4 AUM’s [50 deer x 12 months x 18 percent 

dietary overlap x 80 percent public land]. 

F-13 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

F-14
 
Appendix H - Recreational Opportunity 

Appendix H - Recreational Opportunity Spectrumi 

The Recreation Opportunity spectrum (ROS) provides the conceptual framework for inventory, planning, and management of the recreation resource. The ROS recognizes that people 

differ in their needs and in the experience they desire. Also, the resource base is not uniform; 

it varies in its potential for providing recreation experiences. The ROS provides a way to 

characterize either the capability of a resource to provide an experience or the demand for an 

experience in terms of the activity opportunity and setting opportunity provided or demanded. Therefore, recreation opportunities can be expressed in terms of three components: 

the activities, the setting, and the experience. The possible combinations of these three 

components are arranged along a continuum, or spectrum. The ROS is divided into six 

classes, with each class defined in terms of its combination of activity, setting, and experience 

opportunities. The six classes are primitive, semiprimitive nonmotorized, semiprimitive 

motorized, roaded natural, rural, and urban. As conceived, the spectrum has application to all 

land, regardless of ownership or jurisdiction. The classes are described below with the 

inventoried acreage and percentage within each resource area. Maps displaying the ROS 

classes are located in the Vale District office. 

Primitive 

This is essentially an unmodified natural environment of fairly large size. Use of motorized 

vehicles is prohibited. There is an extremely high probability of experiencing isolation, 

closeness to nature, and self-reliance on outdoor skills. Activities may include hiking, nature 

study, fishing, cross-country skiing, and floatboating. (MRA, 102,325 - 4%; JRA, 51,625 ­

2%) 

Semiprimitive Nonmotorized 

This is a predominantly natural or natural-appearing environment of moderate to large size. 

Minimum on-site controls and restrictions may be present. Use of motorized vehicles is 

prohibited. There is a high probability of experiencing isolation, closeness to nature, and 

self-reliance in outdoor skills. Activities may include camping, hunting, snowshoeing, and 

floatboating. (MRA, 549,468 - 27%; JRA, 976,592 - 37%) 

Semiprimitive Motorized 

This is a predominantly natural or natural-appearing environment of moderate to large size. 

User interaction is low, but there is evidence of other users. Minimum on-site controls and 

restrictions may be present. Use of motorized vehicles is permitted. There is a moderate 

probability of experiencing isolation, closeness to nature, and self-reliance in outdoor skills. 

Activities may include boating, motor biking, specialized landcraft use, mountain climbing, 

driving for pleasure, camping, and picnicking. (MRA, 1,349,527 - 67%; JRA 1,452,838 ­

56%) 

Roaded Natural 

This is a predominantly natural-appearing environment with moderate evidence of humans. 

Evidence usually harmonizes with the natural environment. Management provides for the 

use of conventional motorized vehicles. There is an equal probability to experience affiliation with other user groups and for isolation and interaction with the natural environment. 

Challenge and risk opportunities are not very important, although testing of outdoor skills 

may be. Opportunities for both motorized and nonmotorized recreation are available. Activities may include bus touring, water skiing, walking, canoeing, sledding, and driving for 

pleasure. (MRA, 117,579 - 6%; JRA, 130,060 - 5%) 

H-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Rural 

This is a substantially modified environment. Resource modifications and utilization practices are to enhance specific recreation activities. Facilities are designed for use by a large 

number of people. Motorized use and parking opportunities are available. The probability of 

user interaction is moderate to high, as is the convenience of sites and opportunities. These 

factors are generally more important than the physical setting. Wildland challenges and 

testing of outdoor skills are generally unimportant. Activities may include interpretive 

services, swimming, bicycling, recreation cabin use, and skiing. (MRA, 3,610 <1%; JRA 

5,419 <1%) 

Urban 

This is a substantially urbanized environment, although the background may have naturalappearing elements. Renewable resource modernization and urbanization practices are to 

enhance specific recreation opportunities. Vegetative cover is often exotic and manicured. 

Large numbers of users can be expected on-site and in nearby areas. Facilities for highly 

intensified motor-vehicle use and parking are available. The probability of user interaction 

is high, as is the convenience of sites and opportunities. Experiencing natural environments 

and uses of outdoor skills are relatively unimportant. Opportunities for competitive and 

spectator sports and for passive uses are common. Activities may include resort lodging, ice 

skating, team sports participation, tour boat use, and picnicking. (None in either resource 

area). 

H-2 
 

Appendix I - Off-Highway Vehicle Use 

Appendix I - Off -Highway Vehicle Use 

Terms and Conditions 

For the purposes of this RMP the terms “off -road vehicle” and “off-highway vehicle” (OHV) 

have the same meaning. The following terms are defined as stated in 43 CFR 8340.0-5: 

Off-road vehicle ~ any motorized vehicle capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: (1) any nonamphibious registered 

motorboat; (2) any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for 

emergency purposes; (3) any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the authorized 

officer; (4) vehicles in official use; and (5) any combat or combat support vehicle when used 

in times of national defense emergencies. OHV use is subject to operating regulations and 

vehicle standards set forth in 43 CFR 8341 and 8342. 

Open area designation ~ any area where all types of vehicle use are permitted at all times, 

anywhere in the area subject to the operating regulations and vehicle standards set forth in 43 

CFR 8341 and 8342. 

Closed area designation ~ an area where OHV use is prohibited. Use of OHV’s in closed 

areas may be allowed for certain reasons; however, such use shall be made only with the 

approval of the authorized officer. 

Limited area designation ~ an area restricted at certain times, in certain areas, and/or to 

certain vehicular use. These restrictions may be of any type, but can generally be accommodated within the following categories: number of vehicles, types of vehicles, time or season 

of vehicle use, permitted or licensed use only, use on existing roads and trails, use on 

designated roads and trails, and other restrictions. 

For clarification of terms (as applied in this SEORMP) for types of motorized 

vehicle travel within certain areas, the following definitions and conditions apply. The 

described public lands for these designations are depicted on Map OHV-RMP. 

Seasonal motorized vehicle use limitation ~ to meet management objectives on 

certain described public land areas, motorized vehicle travel is limited to certain and/ 

or all designated and/or existing motorized vehicle routes (roads and motorized trails) 

during a certain period of the year. Seasonal restrictions can apply within areas 

designated as OHV limited and OHV open. 

Limited to designated routes ~ a described area of public land with an OHV limited 

designation where motorize vehicle travel is restricted to specific roads and motorized 

trails (and motorized ways in WSA’s). Any specific motorized route within the 

described area not documented as a designated route is closed to motorize vehicle 

travel, and may be reclaimed if determined needed to meet management objectives. 

Designated routes are documented in the Vale BLM District Office. 

Limited to existing routes ~ a defined public land area with an OHV limited 

designation where motorized vehicle travel is restricted to those approved roads and 

motorized trails in existence at the time of SEORMP ROD. Establishment of any 

additional (new or extension of existing) motorized vehicle routes requires prior BLM 

approval. Unapproved routes are subject to closure and reclamation. 

I-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

I-2 
Appendix J - Visual Resource Management 

Appendix J - VRM Class Objectives 

FLPMA requires the BLM to consider the effects of management actions on the visual quality 

of the landscape. To protect visual resources, all public land is inventoried to determine its 

visual resource management (VRM) classification. The VRM objectives for each of four 

possible classifications are described below. 

Class I—The objective of this classification is to preserve the existing character of the 

landscape. This class provides for natural ecological changes, and it allows limited management activity. The level of change should be very low and must not attract attention. Class I 

is assigned to those areas where a management decision has been made to preserve a natural 

landscape. This includes areas such as wilderness study areas, the wild sections of NWSR’s, 

and other congressionally and administratively designated areas. 

Class II—The objective of this classification is to retain the existing character of the 

landscape. The level of change to landscape characteristics should be low. Management 

activities may be seen but should not attract the attention of a casual observer. Any changes 

must conform to the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture found in the predominant 

natural features of the characteristic landscape. 

Class III—The objective of Class III is to partially retain the existing character of the 

landscape. Moderate levels of change are acceptable. Management activities may attract 

attention but should not dominate the view of a casual observer. Changes should conform to 

the basic elements of the predominant natural features of the characteristic landscape. 

Class IV—The objective of Class IV is to provide for management activities that require 

major modification of the landscape. These management activities may dominate the view 

and become the focus of viewer attention. However, every effort should be made to minimize the impact of these projects by carefully locating activities, minimizing disturbance, 

and designing the projects to conform to the characteristic landscape. 

J-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

J-2 
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Maps LAND-2J and -2M depict three zones that identify the public land for potential land 

tenure adjustments (such as acquisition or disposal), consistent with existing regulations and 

BLM policy. Section 102(a)(1) of FLPMA provides that “. . . the public lands be retained in 

Federal ownership unless as a result of the land use planning procedure provided for in this 

Act, it is determined that disposal of a particular parcel will serve the national interest . . .” 

Management guidelines specific to each zone are described below. 

Zone 1: Retention/Acquisition 

Zone 1 land has been generally identified for retention in public ownership. These are also 

areas where emphasis will be placed on acquisition of land containing high resource values 

through such methods as exchange, purchase, donation or public agency jurisdictional 

transfers. Zone 1 land may contain significant visual, wildlife, watershed, vegetative, 

cultural and other resource values and are generally well blocked. Land within Zone 1 with 

public resource values may be exchanged for other Zone 1 land with high resource values 

(see glossary for definitions of high resource values and public resource values). 

The following management criteria will be applied to land tenure adjustments involving 

Zone l land within the planning area: 

•	 Land within SMA’s such as NW1/4SR boundaries, wilderness areas, WSA’s, ACEC’s, 

outstanding natural areas (ONA’s), and research natural areas (RNA’s) will be retained 

in public ownership. Private land within these designated areas represents potential 

acquisition priorities. 

•	 Land Sale exception in Zone 1 - Small parcels of public land adjacent to private land 

holdings in a Retention-Zone 1 area which are difficult or uneconomical to manage 

may be considered for exchange or sale under disposal-Zone 3 criteria. Also, parcels 

of land identified by State, local, or other Federal entities for public purpose or 

community needs may be considered for exchange or sale under disposal Zone 3 

criteria. 

Zone 2: Land Exchange 

Zone 2 land has been identified for limited retention and consolidation of ownership. Public 

land within this zone may be exchanged for Zone 1 or 2 non-Federal land with high resource 

values. Zone 2 public land generally has fragmented landownership patterns or relatively 

lower resource values than are present in Zone 1. These are areas where emphasis will be 

placed on acquisition of land containing high resource values through such methods as 

exchange, purchase, donation or public agency jurisdictional transfers and disposal by 

exchange to create consolidated public land areas. Zone 2 land will not be sold except as 

stated under management criteria listed below. 

L-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

The following management criteria will be applied to land tenure adjustments involving Zone 

2 land within the planning area: 

•	 Land within SMA’s such as NW1/4SR boundaries, wilderness areas, WSA’s, ACEC’s, 

ONA’s, and RNA’s will be retained in public ownership. Private land within these 

designated areas represents potential acquisition priorities. 

•	 Land sale exception in Zone 2 - Small parcels of public land adjacent to private land 

holdings in a Land exchange-Zone 2 area which are difficult or uneconomical to 

manage may be considered for sale under disposal-Zone 3 criteria. 

•	 Public purpose land sale exception in Zone 2 - parcels of public land may be sold to 

meet public and community needs. 

Zone 3: Disposal 

Zone 3 land generally has low or unknown resource values. This land is potentially suitable 

for disposal by such methods as public agency jurisdictional transfers, or state indemnity 

selection (state in lieu selection), or “Recreation and Public Purpose Act” (R&PP) lease or 

patent, exchange or sale unless significant recreation, wildlife, watershed, Special Status 

species, cultural resources or other significant resource values are identified as a result of 

site-specific analysis. This zone may include land needed for community expansion, small 

parcels located adjacent to private inholdings within and/or adjacent to large blocks of public 

land being retained by BLM, parcels on which unauthorized use exists, and land included 

within survey hiatus. Zone 3 land may be exchanged for land with greater resource values in 

Zones 1 and 2. A legal description of Zone 3 is presented in Table L-4. 

The following management criteria will be applied to land tenure adjustments involving 

Zone 3 land within the planning area: 

•	 If acquisition interest is shown, in writing, for Zone 3 land by local, county or state 

governments, BLM will consider their needs to accommodate community expansion or 

other public purposes. 

•	 If Zone 3 parcels are found unsuitable for disposal they will be retained and included 

under the Zone 1 or 2 designation. 

General Management Criteria 

Land Exchanges 

Land exchange is the preferred method for consolidating land ownership. The following 

general management criteria will be applied when considering land exchanges within the 

planning area. To be considered to be in the public interest, exchanges must: 

•	 facilitate access to public land and resources, or 

•	 maintain or enhance important public values and uses, or 

•	 maintain or enhance local social and economic conditions; and 

•	 facilitate implementation of other goals and objectives of the RMP. 

It is important to minimize the impact to the local tax base by emphasizing exchanges rather 

than direct purchases. 

Direct Purchases 

Direct purchases of non-Federal lands may occur when the same public interest general 

management criteria apply as described under Land Exchanges above. 

L-2 
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Disposal of Land by Sale 

Public land or tracts to be sold must meet at least one of the following disposal criteria stated 

in section 203 of FLPMA: 

•	 “Such tract because of its location or other characteristics is difficult and uneconomic 

to manage as part of the public lands, and is not suitable for management by another 

federal department or agency; or 

•	 Such tract was acquired for a specific purpose and the tract is no longer required for 

that or any other federal purpose; or 

•	 Disposal of such tract will serve important public objectives, including but not limited 

to, expansion of communities and economic development, which cannot be achieved 

prudently or feasibly on land other than public land and which outweigh other public 

objectives and values, including, but not limited to, recreation and scenic values, which 

would be served by maintaining such tract in federal ownership.” 

Generally, exchanges are the preferred method of disposal but sales will be utilized when: 

•	 It is required by national policy; or 

•	 It is required to achieve disposal objectives on a timely basis, and where disposal 

through exchange would cause unacceptable delays; or 

•	 Disposal through exchange is not feasible. 

The preferred method of selling public land will be by competitive bidding at public auction 

to qualifying purchasers. However, modified competitive bidding procedures may be used 

when there is no legal public access to a tract, when necessary to avoid jeopardizing an 

existing use on adjacent land, or to avoid dislocation of existing public land users. 

Public land may be sold by direct sale at fair market value when: 

•	 such land is needed by state or local governments; or 

•	 directsale is needed to protect equities arising from authorized use; or 

•	 directsale is needed to protect equities resulting from inadvertent unauthorized use 

that was caused by survey errors or title defects; or 

•	 there is only one adjacent landowner. 

Methods of Disposal 

Methods of disposal for implementing land disposal actions include the following: (a) BLM 

and other Federal jurisdictional transfers; (b) transfers to state and local agencies (such as 

R&PP patents, in-lieu selections, airport patents); (c) State exchanges; (d) private exchanges; 

(e) sales; (f) Indian allotments; and (g) desert land entries. 

Public Parcels Within Privately-Owned Land 

Scattered parcels of public land located within consolidated private areas could be exchanged or sold. Land exchanges will be the preferred method of disposal because this 

would maintain the current public and private land bases. Parcels of public land may be 

exchanged for land with greater resource values within BLM retention areas. 

Subsurface Mineral Interests 

Section 209(b) of FLPMA allows for the disposal of public mineral estate to the surface 

owners. Section 205 allows for the acquisition of land on interests consistent with the 

mission of the department. 

L-3 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Appropriate Environmental Review 

Site-specific environmental analysis and documentation in conformance with NE1/4PA, 

including completion of categorical exclusion check lists and plan conformance determinations where appropriate, will be accomplished for each proposed land program action. 

Interdisciplinary impact analysis will be tiered within the framework of this and other 

applicable environmental documents. 

L-4 
Table L-1.—Rights-of-way corridors (existing and proposed) 1 

Corridors 

with possible 

Currently Single development 

occupied use Multiple use Designated corridor width (ft)2 limitations 3 

Corridor (yes - no) UT TR (UT & TR) 500 1,000 1,500 6,000 WSA ACEC NWS

Existing 

Star Valley Y X X X 

US Hwy 95 Y X X X 

Fields/McDermitt-Harney Elec Substa Y X X X X 

Whitehorse/Fields/Denio Jct US Hwy 95 Y X X X 

US Hwy 95/Soldier Creek Y X X 

Soldier Creek/Three Forks Y X X X X X 

Whitehorse Butte/Three Forks Y X X 

State Hwy 78 Y X X X 

Cow Lakes/US Hwy 95 Y X X 

Folly Farms (Or Hwy 78)/Crowley Y X X 

PP&L 500-kV Intertie North Route N X X X X X 

US Hwy 20 (Juntura/Harper) Y X X X 

Venator/Riverside Y X X X 

Interstate Hwy 84 corridor area Y X X X 

Existing to be deleted 

BPA/Arctic Gas Pipeline Tran Rt N X X 5 (Deleted from alternatives A, C, D, E

Proposed PP&L 500-kV Trans L N X X (Deleted from alternatives A, C, D, E

BPA/Arctic Gas Pipeline Tran Rt N X X 5 (Deleted from alternatives A, C, D, E

MFP alter 500-kV route N X X (Deleted from alternatives A, C, D, E

Proposed/additions 

McDermitt Creek Road Y X X 

McDermitt Creek Harney El Y X X 

OR/ID State Line Y X X 

Cow Creek Y X X 

Harper (US Hwy 20)/Crowley Y X X X 

Proposed 500-kV Route-Dog Leg N X X 

L-5
Corridors 

with possible 

Currently Single development 

occupied use Multiple use Designated corridor width (ft)2 limitations 3 VRM 

Corridor (yes - no) UT TR (UT & TR) 500 1,000 1,500 6,000 WSA ACEC NWS

US Hwy 26 Y X X 

Juntura (US Hwy 20)/Riverside Y X X X 

US Hwy 20 Juntura/Harney Co L Y X X X 

US Hwy 20 Harper/Vale Y X X 

1 Definitions: Single use utility (UT) and transportation (TR) corridors will allow a single type of lineal right-of-way to be located within a 

of lineal rights-of-way that will be permitted will be the same as listed in the multiuse utility and transportation corridor definition listed bel

a single use instead of a combination of several different types of rights-of-way. More than one right-of-way of the same type will be perm

generally for cross-country power transmission/interties lines, pipelines or county, State, or Federal roads and are already in operation and e

when other right-of-way needs are identified and should be located in the single use utility corridor, the single use utility corridor could be c

corridor at management’s discretion in the future without further plan amendment. Multiuse utility and transportation (UT & TR) corridors 

types of lineal rights-of-way to be located within a single corridor route. The types of lineal rights-of-way that will be permitted to coexist 

not limited to, railroads, highways or roads, power transmission and/or distribution lines, pipelines (natural gas, crude oil, product, coal slur

(buried and/or overhead), etc. These corridors are generally already in operation. Limitations may be imposed if the right-of-way use woul

cultural and/or historical resources, or cause a high impact on visual or environmental aspects of the corridor route. Each right-of-way will 

on a case-by-case basis. 

2 Source: the 1993 “Western Regional Corridor Study” (WRCS) was used for guidance to determine the designated corridor widths. 

3 Where the corridor forms the boundary of an SMA, the corridor will be outside the SMA. Refer to appropriate sections of this plan for po

4 Mileages shown are entire routes within planning area only (numbers are rounded). Mileages outside planning area are subject to review b

 Designated corridor widths are not reflected in miles of corridor. 

5 The MFP proposed BPA/Arctic Gas pipeline transportation route corridor width is 0.5-mile (2,640 feet). 

L-6
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Table L-2.—Existing and potential communication sites on public land in the planning area 

Communication site 

Current use 1 

Single Multi-user 

user site site 

Site Status 

Existing Potential 

Develop site plans 1 

Existing Planned Unplanned Area 

Blue Mountain X X X JRA 

Pharmacy Hill X 2 X X JRA 

High Peak X X X JRA 

Rome X X X JRA 

FAA Vortac Withdrawal 

and NOAA Site 3 X X X JRA 

Tankey Pasture X X X JRA 

Red Mountain X X JRA 

Basque Station X X JRA 

Rattlesnake Weather 

Monitoring Station X X X JRA 

Grassy Butte Weather 

Monitoring Station X X X JRA 

Rhinehart Butte X X X MRA 

Dry Peak (Cottonwood Mountain) X 2 X X MRA 

Monument Peak X 2 X X MRA 

Owyhee Ridge Complex X X X MRA 

Sheaville (building not occupied) X X MRA 

Black Butte X 2 X X MRA 

Castle Rock X X MRA 

Kelsey Butte Weather 

Monitoring Station X X X MRA 

Owyhee Ridge Weather 

Monitoring Station X X X MRA 

Red Butte Weather 

Monitoring Station X X X MRA 

Vines Hill Weather 

Monitoring Station X X X MRA 

Tub Mountain X X MRA 

Ironside Mountain X X MRA 

Juniper Mountain X X MRA 

Rock Creek Butte X X MRA 

L-7 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Brown Butte X X MRA 

Coyne Point X X X MRA 

1

 If user demand at a single user site moves the site to a multiuser site category or a potential site becomes a single or multi-user site through user demand, BLM reserves the

 right to develop a site plan for a particular site as user demand increases over the life span of the land use plan. 

2 A site where BLM and private property lines divide a portion of the site. Development may be occurring on either BLM or private land or both on the same site. 3

 NOAA site communication site right-of-way is issued, granted, and administered by BLM with FAA concurrence. FAA has site jurisdiction. 

L-8 
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Table L-3.— Existing withdrawals on public land within the planning area 

Resource Withdrawal Withdrawal order Mineral Total 

area agency 1 Type of withdrawal and date segregation acres 2 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 70 E.O. 3-8-1920 Non-Metal 40 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 61 E.O. 2-25-1919 Non-Metal 161 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 81 E.O. 11-26-1921 Non-Metal 237 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 83 E.O. 4-15-1922 Non-Metal 80 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 84 E.O. 6-7-1922 Non-Metal 40 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 87 E.O. 11-9-1923 Non-Metal 160 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 91 E.O. 6-13-1925 Non-Metal 560 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 94 E.O. 9-25-1925 Non-Metal 160 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 107 S.O. Intpr. 196 4-16-1912 Non-Metal 40 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 107 S.O. Entpr. 160 4.-17-1926 Non-Metal 120 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 107 S.O. Intpr. 221 4-17-1926 Non-Metal 160 

Malheur BLM Public Water Reserve 118 E.O. 2-31-1929 Non-Metal 280 

Malheur BLM Reservoir Site Reserve 2 Beulah/Bully Creek 3 E.O. 3-31-1911 Non-Metal 1,081 

Malheur BLM/BOR 4 Reservoir Site Reserve 2 Warm Springs 3 E.O. 3-31-1911 Non-Metal 930 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Malheur River 3 S.O. 9-2-1914 Mining 2 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Malheur River 3 S.O. 11-4-1914 Mining 22 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Owyhee River 3 S.O. 3-17-1916 Mining 200 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Owyhee River 3 S.O. 11-5-1919 Mining 367 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Owyhee River 3 S.O. 2-5-1923 Mining 6,764 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Owyhee River 3 S.O. 3-28-1925 Mining 24,332 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Owyhee River 3 S.O. 4-16-1936 Mining 160 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Owyhee River 3 S.O. 2-18-1937 Mining 80 

Malheur BOR Owyhee Project Owyhee River 3 S.O. 4-30-1945 Mining 40 

Malheur BOR Vale Project–Vale 3 S.O. 12-14-1926 Mining 2,918 

Malheur BOR Vale Project–Vale 3 S.O. 3-18-1929 Mining 511 

Malheur BOR Vale Project–Vale 3 S.O. 2-9-1932 Mining 80 

Malheur BOR Vale Project–Vale 3 S.O. 5-2-1933 Mining 160 

Malheur BOR Vale Project–Vale 3 S.O. 1-4-1943 Mining 110 

Malheur BOR Vale Project–Vale 3 PLO 2661 4-23-1962 Mining 240 

Malheur BOR Reservoir Site 2 Payette/Boise 3 S.O. 5-17-1905 Mining 0.02 

Malheur BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 3 E.O. 7-2-1910 4,863 

Malheur BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 3 E.O. 2-15-1916 6 2,600 

Malheur BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 3 E.O. 7-27-1918 6 2,633 

Malheur BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 3 E.O. 8-29-1919 6 10,706 

Malheur BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 175 E.O. 2-28-1911 464 

Malheur BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 260 E.O. 4-16-1912 987 

Malheur FERC Power Project 1971 FPC O 11-30-1951 Mining 987 

Malheur BLM Power Site Classification USGS O 11-30-1951 461 

Malheur USFWS Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge PLO 3168 7-31-1963 Mining 4 

Malheur USFWS Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge PLO 4366 2-12-1968 Mining 1 

Malheur Dear Flat National Wildlife Refuge Unsurveyed Islands Mining 60 

Jordan BLM Administrative Site and Airport PLO 5980 9-2-1981 Surface entry 

and Surface Zone Protection McDermitt (OR-23735) and Mining 514 

Jordan BLM Administrative Site and Airport Surface PLO 6624 9-25-1986 Surface entry 

Zone Protection Burns Jct. (OR-36355) and Mining 1,063 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 61 E.O. 2-25-1919 Non-Metal 240 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 64 S.O. Intpr. 7 6-5-1919 Non-Metal 200 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 86 E.O. 2-18-1923 Non-Metal 800 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 87 E.O. 11-9-1923 Non-Metal 877 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 91 E.O. 6-13-1925 Non-Metal 366 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 107 S.O. Intpr. 140 4-17-1926 Non-Metal 1,358 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 107 S.O. Intpr. 177 4-17-1926 Non-Metal 720 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 107 S.O. Intpr. 199 4-17-1926 Non-Metal 80 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 148 E.O. 6019 2-7-1933 Non-Metal 480 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 150 E.O. 2-20-1933 Non-Metal 40 

Jordan BLM Public Water Reserve 64 E.O. 6-5-1919 Non-Metal 74 

L-9 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Resource Withdrawal Withdrawal order Mineral Total 

area agency 1 Type of withdrawal and date segregation acres 2 

Jordan BLM Main, West Little, North Owyhee NW1/4SR’s PL 98-494-1984 and OR 

Mining 59,520 7 

Omnibus NW1/4SRA of 1988 

Jordan BLM “Steens Mountain Cooperative 

Management and Protection Act of 2000” CAB H.R.-4828, See footnote 8 100,352 

10-30-2000 

Jordan BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 3 E.O. 7-2-1910 13,519 

Jordan BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 3 E.O. 7-27-1918 6 14,202 

Jordan BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 399 S.O. Intrp. 28 7-27-1918 1,275 

Jordan BLM/FERC 5 Power Site Reserve 399 E.O. 7-27-1918 961 

Jordan BIA Indian Grazing Reserve Act of Congress 1-17-1936 17,029 

Jordan BIA Indian Grazing Reserve Proposed OR-2773 11-23-1967 400 

Wilderness 

Jordan BIA Indian Grazing Reserve Temporary Wilderness S.O. 7-7-1933 400 

in Aid of Legislation 

Jordan FAA VORTAC PLO 3451 ANS 9-23-1964 Mining 52 

Jordan FAA VORTAC PLO 2970 ANS 3-18-63 Mining 15 

Jordan FAA VORTAC ANS S.O. 8-14-1948 Mining 60 

1 Abbreviations: BLM = Bureau of Land Management; FERC = Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; BIA = Bureau of Indian Affairs; FAA = Federal Aviation
 

Administration; BOR = Bureau of Reclamation; USGS = U.S. Geological Survey; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
 

2 Acreage figures for MRA and JRA are from 1981 MFP documents and may not reflect current acreage figures.
 

3 Where BLM withdrawals (Reservoir Site Reserve 2) overlap BOR withdrawals, BOR has jurisdiction, but it’s still a BLM withdrawal.
 4

 BOR has undivided half interest in Reservoir R/W TD-025873.
 

5 These withdrawals are managed in accordance to the July 20, 1966 national MOU between the BLM and FERC.
 

6 These withdrawals are actually the modification dates (survey interpretations), and original withdrawals were dated 7-2-1910.
 

7 Acreage determined from “Main, West Little, and North Fork Owyhee National Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan” (Sept. 1993: Overview, p. 2)
 

8

 “Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Act of 2000”—withdrawn from location, entry, patent under mining laws and operation of mineral leasing,
 

geothermal leasing, and minerals material laws. However, the BLM may permit the development of saleable minerals from existing sources for road maintenance only
 

(section 201 of the Act).
 

L-10 
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Table L-4.—Land potentially suitable for disposal (Zone 3) 

Tract Legal description Acres Tract Legal description Acres 

Malheur Resource Area SM0263 sec. 33, SE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

T. 13 S., R. 38 E., 

SM0242 sec. 34, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 T. 13 S., R. 42 E., 

SM0242 sec. 35, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0264 sec. 33, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0242 sec. 35, NW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

T. 14 S., R. 38 E., 

T. 13 S., R. 39 E., SM0245 sec. 3, lot 4 39.74 

SM0243 sec. 31, NW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0245 sec. 3, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0244 sec. 33, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0246 sec. 9, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0244 sec. 33,E1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0247 sec. 10, NW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0244 sec. 33, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0248 sec. 13, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0248 sec. 13, SE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

T. 13 S., R. 40 E., SM0248 sec. 13, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0250 sec. 14, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0248 sec. 14, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0251 sec. 14, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0248 sec. 14, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0252 sec. 22, NW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0248 sec. 23, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0253 sec. 23, NW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0249 sec. 24, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0253 sec. 23, E1/2 W1/2 160.00 SM0248 sec. 24, W1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

SM0261 sec. 24, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0254 sec. 25, lot 4 29.80 T. 14 S., R. 39 E., 

SM0253 sec. 26, E1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0244 sec. 4, lot 1 39.45 

SM0244 sec. 4, lot 2 39.46 

T. 13 S., R. 41 E., SM0244 sec. 4, lot 3 39.48 

SM0255 sec. 17, NE1/4 160.00 SM0265 sec. 5, SE1/4 MW 40.00 

SM0255 sec. 17, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0266 sec. 7, lot 3 35.49 

SM0256 sec. 18, lot 2 39.87 SM0267 sec. 17, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0258 sec. 19, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0267 sec. 17, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0257 sec. 19, lot 2 39.80 SM0268 sec. 19, E1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0257 sec. 19, E1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0268 sec. 20, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0259 sec. 20, SW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0268 sec. 20, N1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0258 sec. 20, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0269 sec. 30, lot 6 3.48 

SM0260 sec. 28, NW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0269 sec. 30, lot 7 2.99 

SM0258 sec. 29, N1/2 NW1/4 SM0269 sec. 30, lot 8 2.50 

except MS-759 patent 55.00 SM0269 sec. 30, lot 9 1.74 

SM0258 sec. 29, SW1/4 NW1/4 SM0298 sec. 34, NW1/4 160.00 

except MS-759 patent 6.00 SM0298 sec. 34, S1/2 320.00 

SM0258 sec. 29, NW1/4 SW1/4 

except MS-759 patent 25.00 T. 14 S., R. 40 E., 

SM0258 sec. 29, SW1/4 SW1/4 SM0270 sec. 3, S1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

except MS-32 patent 37.00 SM0270 sec. 3, N1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0258 sec. 30, E1/2 SM0270 sec. 4, lot 2 40.36 

except MS-759 patent 317.00 SM0270 sec. 4, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0258 sec. 30, E1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0270 sec. 4, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0262 1 sec. 31, NE1/4 160.00 SM0271 sec. 7, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0033 sec. 31, S1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 5.00 SM0051 sec. 9, NW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0262 1 sec. 31, E1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

SM0262 1 sec. 31, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 T. 14 S., R. 41 E., 

SM0262 1 sec. 31, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0263 sec. 4, lot 3 40.18 

SM0262 1 sec. 32, lot 1 13.00 SM0273 sec. 5, lot 2 40.07 

SM0262 1 sec. 32, lot 2 17.62 SM0292 sec. 12, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0262 1 sec. 32, lot 3 25.35 SM0289 sec. 15, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0262 1 sec. 32, lot 4 7.33 SM0290 sec. 17, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0262 1 sec. 32, lot 5 12.59 SM0291 sec. 20, NE1/4 160.00 

SM0262 1 sec. 32, lot 6 21.78 SM0291 sec. 20, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0262 1 sec. 32, lot 7 9.61 SM0291 sec. 20, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

L-11 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Tract Legal description Acres Tract Legal description Acres 

SM0291 sec. 20, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0299 sec. 4, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0291 sec. 21, N1/2 320.00 SM0299 sec. 4, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0274 sec. 22, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0299 sec. 4, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0275 sec. 23, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0299 sec. 4, SE1/4 160.00 

SM0293 sec. 24, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0300 sec. 10, NE1/4 160.00 

SM0293 sec. 24, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0300 sec. 10, E1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

SM0293 sec. 24, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0300 sec. 10, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0293 sec. 24, SE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0300 sec. 10, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0293 sec. 24, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0301 sec. 12, All 640.00 

SM0293 sec. 24, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0302 sec. 26, NW1/4 160.00 

SM0276 sec. 34, S1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0305 sec. 26, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0302 sec. 26, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

T. 14 S., R. 42 E., SM0302 sec. 27, All 640.00 

SM0277 sec. 1, lot 3 40.15 SM0303 sec. 29, W1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0278 sec. 2, lot 3 0.09 SM0303 sec. 29, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0279 sec. 2, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0303 sec. 29, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0280 sec. 7, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0303 sec. 29, SW1/4 160.00 

SM0281 sec. 10, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0303 sec. 29, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0282 sec. 11, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0304 sec. 34, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0281 sec. 11, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0304 sec. 35, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0282 sec. 12, N1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0302 sec. 35, W1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

SM0282 sec. 12, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0305 sec. 35, E1/2 E1/2 160.00 

SM0282 sec. 12, SW1/4 160.00 SM0305 sec. 36, All 640.00 

SM0282 sec. 12, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0282 sec. 13, N1/2 N1/2 160.00 T. 15 S., R. 40 E., 

SM0282 sec. 13, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0306 sec. 23, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0282 sec. 14, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0308 sec. 29, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0293 sec. 19, lot 2 40.34 SM0307 sec. 29, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0293 sec. 19, S1/2 NE1/4 0.00 SM0307 sec. 29, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0293 sec. 19, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0305 sec. 30, lot 2 39.87 

SM0293 sec. 19, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0305 sec. 30, lot 3 39.86 

SM0283 sec. 22, All 640.00 SM0305 sec. 30, lot 4 39.85 

SM0283 sec. 23, S1/2 320.00 SM0305 sec. 30, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0284 sec. 24, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0305 sec. 30, E1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0284 sec. 25, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0305 sec. 30, W1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0283 sec. 26, NW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0305 sec. 30, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0283 sec. 26, N1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0305 sec. 31, lot 1 39.92 

SM0305 sec. 31, lot 2 39.94 

T. 14 S., R. 43 E., SM0305 sec. 31, lot 3 39.96 

SM0285 sec. 6, lot 7 59.61 SM0305 sec. 31, lot 4 39.98 

SM0285 sec. 6, SE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0305 sec. 31, W1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0286 sec. 7, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0305 sec. 31, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0287 sec. 7, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0305 sec. 31, E1/2 W1/2 160.00 

SM0288 sec. 18, lot 3 59.44 SM0305 sec. 31, SE1/4 160.00 

SM0284 sec. 30, lot 1 57.58 

SM0284 sec. 30, lot 2 57.20 T. 15 S., R. 41 E., 

SM0284 sec. 30, lot 3 56.84 SM0309 sec. 4, lot 2 40.34 

SM0284 sec. 30, lot 4 56.28 SM0309 sec. 4, lot 3 40.38 

SM0284 sec. 30, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0309 sec. 4, lot 4 40.42 

SM0309 sec. 4, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

T. 15 S., R. 37 E., SM0309 sec. 4, NW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0294 sec. 20, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0310 sec. 18, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0294 sec. 20, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0311 sec. 19, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0294 sec. 20, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0312 sec. 32, NW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0295 sec. 28, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0313 sec. 35, NW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0296 sec. 32, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0297 sec. 32, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 T. 15 S., R. 42 E., 

SM0297 sec. 32, SW1/4 160.00 SM0314 sec. 14, NE1/4 160.00 

SM0034 sec. 14, NE1/4 160.00 

T. 15 S., R. 39 E., SM0315 sec. 18, E1/2 E1/2 160.00 

SM0299 sec. 4, lot 1 41.17 SM0035 sec. 27, E1/2 NW1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SM0299 sec. 4, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0316 sec. 35, SW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

L-12 
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Tract Legal description Acres Tract Legal description Acres 

SM0316 sec. 35, S1/2 320.00 SM0328 sec. 13, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0328 sec. 13, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

T. 15 S., R. 43 E., SM0328 sec. 14, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0003 sec. 32, NE1/4 NE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 SM0327 sec. 14, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0327 sec. 14, NW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

T. 15 S., R. 44 E., SM0327 sec. 15, NE1/4 160.00 

SM0014 sec. 14, N1/2 SW1/4 NE1/4 20.00 SM0327 sec. 15, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0014 sec. 14, NW1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 10.00 SM0329 sec. 17, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0329 sec. 20, E1/2 320.00 

T. 15 S., R. 45 E., SM0329 sec. 21, W1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

SM0010 sec. 16, SE1/4 NW1/4 SW1/4 10.00 SM0330 sec. 21, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0022 sec. 16, NW1/4 NW1/4 SE1/4 10.00 SM0329 sec. 21, NW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0011 sec. 17, S1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 5.00 SM0331 sec. 22, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0012 sec. 18, W1/2 SW1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4 5.00 SM0332 sec. 22, E1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0013 sec. 20, NW1/4 SW1/4 NE1/4 10.00 SM0329 sec. 29, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0013 sec. 20, N1/2 SE1/4 NW1/4 20.00 SM0329 sec. 29, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

T. 16 S., R. 37 E., T. 16 S., R. 41 E., 

SM0318 sec. 8, SW1/4 160.00 SM0333 sec. 5, lot 1 45.03 

SM0321 sec. 13, S1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0334 sec. 8, SW1/4 160.00 

SM0321 sec. 13, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0334 sec. 8, W1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0320 sec. 18, SE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0334 sec. 17, E1/2 320.00 

SM0319 sec. 18, E1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0335 sec. 17, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0320 sec. 18, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0335 sec. 18, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0335 sec. 19, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

T. 16 S., R. 38 E., SM0334 sec. 20, NE1/4 160.00 

SM0322 sec. 2, SW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0334 sec. 21, W1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

SM0323 sec. 12, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0336 sec. 24, NW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0324 sec. 13, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0337 sec. 31, lot 3 26.56 

SM0324 sec. 13, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0337 sec. 31, lot 4 26.89 

SM0337 sec. 31, lot 9 27.22 

T. 16 S., R. 39 E., 

SM0305 sec. 1, lot 1 39.96 T. 16 S., R. 42 E., 

SM0305 sec. 1, lot 2 39.89 SM0316 sec. 1, lot 1 41.26 

SM0305 sec. 1, lot 3 39.81 SM0316 sec. 1, lot 2 41.19 

SM0305 sec. 1, lot 439.74 SM0316 sec. 1, lot 3 41.11 

SM0305 sec. 1, S1/2 N1/2 160.00 SM0316 sec. 1, lot 4 41.04 

SM0304 sec. 2, lot 4 41.02 SM0316 sec. 1, S1/2 N1/2 160.00 

SM0305 sec. 2, lot 1 39.88 SM0316 sec. 2, lot 1 40.98 

SM0305 sec. 2, lot 2 40.26 SM0316 sec. 2, lot 2 40.96 

SM0304 sec. 2, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0316 sec. 2, lot 3 40.93 

SM0305 sec. 2, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0316 sec. 2, lot 4 40.91 

SM0305 sec. 2, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0316 sec. 2, S1/2 N1/2 160.00 

SM0304 sec. 3, lot 1 41.31 SM0316 sec. 2, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0304 sec. 3, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0316 sec. 3, lot 1 40.84 

SM0323 sec. 6, E1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0317 sec. 3, lot 3 40.60 

SM0323 sec. 6, W1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0316 sec. 3, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0323 sec. 7, lot 1 35.29 SM0316 sec. 3, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0323 sec. 7, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0316 sec. 3, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0323 sec. 7, E1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

SM0323 sec. 7, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 T. 16 S., R. 46 E., 

SM0325 sec. 12, NW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0046 sec. 3, lot 1 67.17 

SM0324 sec. 18, lot 2 35.49 SM0046 sec. 3, lot 2 67.27 

SM0047 sec. 3, S1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

T. 16 S., R. 40 E., SM0047 sec. 3, SW1/4 160.00 

SM0326 sec. 4, lot 2 40.27 SM0038 sec. 4, N1/2 S1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 10.00 

SM0327 sec. 10, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0038 sec. 4, NW1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 NW1/4 2.50 

SM0327 sec. 10, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0038 sec. 5, lot 1 67.51 

SM0328 sec. 12, E1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0038 sec. 5, N1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SM0328 sec. 12, W1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0038 sec. 5, S1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SM0328 sec. 13, W1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0048 sec. 9, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0328 sec. 13, N1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0048 sec. 10, S1/2 S1/2 160.00 

L-13 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Tract Legal description Acres Tract Legal description Acres 

SM0056 sec. 13, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 T. 19 S., R. 37 E., 

SM0017 sec. 15, SW1/4 NE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 SM0023 sec. 1, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0338 sec. 23, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0049 sec. 1, W1/2 NW1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SM0339 sec. 27, S1/2 320.00 

SM0339 sec. 28, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 T. 19 S., R. 39 E., 

SM0340 sec. 32, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0348 sec. 8, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0341 sec. 32, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0349 sec. 8, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0339 sec. 32, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0351 sec. 16, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0339 sec. 33, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0350 sec. 16, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0339 sec. 33, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0352 sec. 17, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0339 sec. 33, NW1/4 160.00 

SM0339 sec. 33, N1/2 SW1/4 80.00 T. 19 S., R. 40 E., 

SM0339 sec. 34, W1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0353 sec. 9, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0339 sec. 34, N1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0354 sec. 10, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0339 sec. 34, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0339 sec. 34, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 T. 19 S., R. 43 E., 

SM0342 sec. 35, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0002 sec. 4, lot 2 40.86 

T. 16 S., R. 47 E., T. 19 S., R. 45 E., 

SM0053 sec. 7, lot 4 39.83 SM0004 sec. 6, NW1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 10.00 

SM0053 sec. 7, SE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0053 sec. 18, lot 1 40.00 T. 20 S., R. 37 E., 

SM0053 sec. 18, lot 2 40.00 SM0001 sec. 26, W1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 SW1/4 5.00 

SM0054 sec. 18, lot 4 40.00 SM0050 sec. 35, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0055 sec. 18, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

T. 20 S., R. 39 E., 

T. 17 S., R. 39 E., SM0036 sec. 28, SE1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 10.00 

SM0346 sec. 28, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

T. 20 S., R. 44 E., 

T. 17 S., R. 44 E., SM0030 sec. 2, SW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0347 sec. 2, SW1/4 160.00 SM0030 sec. 2, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0031 sec. 3, E1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 20.00 

T. 17 S., R. 46 E., SM0031 sec. 3, E1/2 NE1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 5.00 

SM0342 sec. 2, lot 1 40.10 

SM0342 sec. 2, lot 2 40.18 T. 20 S., R. 45 E., 

SM0342 sec. 2, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0037 sec. 10, N1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 15.00 

SM0343 sec. 3, lot 3 40.15 

SM0343 sec. 3, lot 4 40.05 T. 21 S., R. 37 E., 

SM0344 sec. 4, lot 4 40.11 SM0356 sec. 9, E1/2 E NE1/4 40.00 

SM0344 sec. 5, lot 1 40.23 SM0356 sec. 9, E1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 20.00 

SM0345 sec. 5, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0356 sec. 10, W1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 20.00 

SM0356 sec. 10, W1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 20.00 

T. 18 S., R. 36 E., 

SM0021 sec. 24, NE1/4 NE1/4 NW1/4 10.00 T. 21 S., R. 38 E., 

SM0032 sec. 9, S1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 5.00 

T. 18 S., R. 40 E., 

SM0007 sec. 3, lot 4 38.92 T. 23 S., R. 46 E., 

SM0018 sec. 8, SW1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4 2.50 SM0009 sec. 28, NE1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 10.00 

SM0018 sec. 8, S1/2 S1/2 NE1/4 NW1/4 10.00 SM0015 sec. 33, W1/2 W1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 5.00 

SM0018 sec. 8, SE1/4 SE1/4 NW1/4 NW1/4 2.50 

SM0019 sec. 9, S1/2 S1/2 SW1/4 NE1/4 10.00 T. 24 S., R. 36 E., 

SM0019 sec. 9, S1/2 SE1/4 NW1/4 20.00 SM0365 sec. 35, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0020 sec. 10, SW1/4 SW1/4 NE1/4 SE1/4 2.50 

T. 24 S., R. 46 E., 

T. 18 S., R. 41 E., SM0016 sec. 4, lot 3 26.41 

SM0024 sec. 14, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SM0016 sec. 4, lot 4 26.30 

SM0025 sec. 14, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0016 sec. 4, lot 6 40.00 

SM0026 sec. 17, E1/2 E NE1/4 NW1/4 10.00 

T. 25 S., R. 36 E., 

T. 18 S., R. 42 E., SM0365 sec. 2, lot 1 41.03 

SM0008 sec. 19, lot 3 40.20 SM0365 sec. 2, lot 2 40.96 

SM0008 sec. 19, lot 4 40.07 SM0365 sec. 2, lot 3 40.90 

L-14 
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Tract Legal description Acres Tract Legal description Acres 

SM0365 sec. 2, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 T. 26 S., R. 37 E., 

SM0365 sec. 2, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0393 sec. 4, lot 1 52.84 

SM0365 sec. 2, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0365 sec. 2, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 T. 26 S., R. 39 E., 

SM0365 sec. 2, SE1/4 160.00 SM0391 sec. 14, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0366 sec. 10, NE1/4 160.00 SM0390 sec. 14, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0366 sec. 10, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0389 sec. 22, W1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0367 sec. 12, All 640.00 SM0389 sec. 22, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0368 sec. 14, All 640.00 SM0389 sec. 22, NW1/4 160.00 

SM0369 sec. 24, All 640.00 SM0392 sec. 34, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

T. 25 S., R. 37 E., T. 26 S., R. 40 E., 

SM0370 sec. 16, All 640.00 SM0380 sec. 1, lot 4 13.78 

SM0371 sec. 18, lot 1 39.25 SM0380 sec. 1, NW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0371 sec. 18, lot 2 39.30 SM0394 sec. 18, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0371 sec. 18, lot 3 39.36 SM0394 sec. 19, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0371 sec. 18, lot 4 39.41 SM0395 sec. 19, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0371 sec. 18, E1/2 320.00 SM0394 sec. 19, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0371 sec. 18, E1/2 W1/2 160.00 SM0395 sec. 20, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0372 sec. 20, All 640.00 SM0395 sec. 20, SE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SM0373 sec. 28, All 640.00 SM0395 sec. 20, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0374 sec. 30, lot 1 39.68 SM0395 sec. 29, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0374 sec. 30, lot 2 39.72 SM0395 sec. 29, SW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0374 sec. 30, lot 3 39.76 SM0395 sec. 29, W1/2 320.00 

SM0374 sec. 30, lot 4 39.80 SM0395 sec. 29, SE1/4 160.00 

SM0374 sec. 30, E1/2 320.00 SM0395 sec. 30, E1/2 320.00 

SM0374 sec. 30, E1/2 W1/2 160.00 SM0395 sec. 31, lot 4 37.66 

SM0375 sec. 32, S1/2 320.00 SM0395 sec. 31, lot 5 41.20 

SM0377 sec. 34, N1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0395 sec. 31, lot 6 40.72 

SM0376 sec. 34, E1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0395 sec. 31, lot 7 40.24 

SM0376 sec. 34, SE1/4 160.00 SM0395 sec. 31, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0395 sec. 31, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

T. 25 S., R. 38 E., SM0395 sec. 31, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0378 sec. 35, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0395 sec. 32, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0378 sec. 35, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0395 sec. 32, SW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0395 sec. 32, W1/2 320.00 

T. 25 S., R. 40 E., SM0395 sec. 32, W1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0379 sec. 25, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SM0396 sec. 33, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0379 sec. 26, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SM0395 sec. 33, W1/2 NW1/4 80.00 

SM0379 sec. 35, E1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SM0395 sec. 33, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0380 sec. 36, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SM0380 sec. 36, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 T. 26 S., R. 42 E., 

SM0397 sec. 24, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

T. 25 S., R. 41 E., SM0397 sec. 24, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0381 sec. 30, lot 1 39.62 

SM0381 sec. 30, E1/2 NW1/4 80.00 T. 26 S., R. 46 E., 

SM0381 sec. 30, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0027 sec. 4, lot 3 41.01 

SM0028 sec. 28, SW1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 2.50 

T. 26 S., R. 36 E., 

SM0045 sec. 4, SE1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 NE1/4 2.50 T. 27 S., R. 36 E., 

SM0045 sec. 4, S1/2 S1/2 S1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 5.00 SM0388 sec. 1, lot 2 40.23 

SM0382 sec. 8, W1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SM0388 sec. 1, SW1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0383 sec. 22, All 640.00 SM0388 sec. 1, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0385 sec. 26, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

SM0384 sec. 26, N1/2 N1/2 160.00 T. 27 S., R. 40 E., 

SM0384 sec. 26, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SM0395 sec. 6, lot 3 40.72 

SM0385 sec. 26, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0395 sec. 6, lot 4 36.87 

SM0052 sec. 28, NE1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 10.00 SM0395 sec. 6, lot 5 35.95 

SM0386 sec. 36, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SM0395 sec. 6, lot 6 35.25 

SM0387 sec. 36, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SM0395 sec. 6, lot 7 34.55 

SM0395 sec. 6, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

L-15 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Tract Legal description Acres Tract Legal description Acres 

SM0395 sec. 6, E1/2 SW1/4 80.00 T. 29 S., R. 41 E. 

SM0395 sec. 7, lot 1 34.12 SJ0180 sec. 11, N1/2 NE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SM0395 sec. 7, N1/2 NE1/4 160.00 

SM0395 sec. 7, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 T. 29 S., R. 44 E. 

SJ0181 sec. 16, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

T. 27 S., R. 45 E., SJ0182 sec. 20, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0029 sec. 26, W1/2 W1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 10.00 SJ0183 sec. 21, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SJ0184 sec. 28, N1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 20.00 

T. 27 S., R. 46 E., SJ0182 sec. 29, E1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SM0039 sec. 13, SW1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 2.50 SJ0182 sec. 29, N1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 20.00 

SM0040 sec. 14, E1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 20.00 SJ0182 sec. 29, N1/2 S1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 

SM0041 sec. 14, NE1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4 10.00 

SM0039 sec. 24, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 T. 29 S., R. 46 E. 

SM0042 sec. 25, E1/2 E SE1/4 NW1/4 10.00 SJ0232 sec. 15, NW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SJ0232 sec. 15, NW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

T. 27 S., R. 47 E., SJ0233 sec. 34, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SM0043 sec. 31, lot 2 33.47 SJ0233 sec. 34, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SJ0233 sec. 34, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

T. 28 S., R. 44 E. SJ0233 sec. 34, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SM0193 sec. 14, W1/2 NW1/4 SE1/4 20.00 SJ0444 sec. 35, SE1/4 160.00 

SM0194 sec. 23, W1/2 NE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

T. 29 S., R. 47 E. 

T. 28 S., R. 45 E. SJ0235 sec. 30, lot 3 35.72 

SM0206 sec. 19, E1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 20.00 SJ0235 sec. 30, lot 4 35.67 

SM0206 sec. 19, SW1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 10.00 

SM0207 sec. 20, N1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 T. 30 S., R. 38 E. 

SM0208 sec. 26, S1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 SJ0149 sec. 1, N1/2 N1/2 N1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 5.00 

SM0209 sec. 26, S1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 20.00 SJ0149 sec. 2, N1/2 NE1/4 NE1/4 NE1/4 SE1/41.25 

T. 28 S., R. 46 E. T. 30 S., R. 43 E. 

SM0228 sec. 14, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SJ0222 sec. 14, W1/2 320.00 

SM0229 sec. 14, N1/2 NW1/4 80.00 SJ0224 sec. 20, 640.00 

SM0044 sec. 14, SE1/4 NE1/4 NE1/4 10.00 SJ0223 sec. 26, 640.00 

SM0229 sec. 14, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SM0229 sec. 14, NE1/4 SW1/4 40.00 T. 30 S., R. 44 E. 

SM0229 sec. 14, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SJ0212 sec. 2, lot 1 40.40 

SM0229 sec. 15, SE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SJ0212 sec. 2, lot 2 40.22 

SM0230 sec. 15, NW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SJ0212 sec. 2, lot 3 40.03 

SJ0212 sec. 2, lot 4 39.85 

Subtotal 37,744.61 SJ0212 sec. 2, S1/2 N1/2 160.00 

SJ0212 sec. 2, S1/2 320.00 

Jordan Resource Area SJ0213 sec. 12, 640.00 

T. 28 S., R. 36 E. SJ0214 sec. 28, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SJ0448 sec. 14, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 SJ0214 sec. 28, W1/2 320.00 

SJ0214 sec. 28, SE1/4 160.00 

T. 28 S., R. 37 E. SJ0214 sec. 28, W1/2 NE1/4 80.00

SJ0449 sec. 3, NW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

T. 30 S., R. 45 E. 

T. 28 S., R. 44 E. SJ0215 sec. 4, lot 1 40.22 

SJ0195 sec. 25, SW1/4 NW1/4 SE1/4 10.00 SJ0215 sec. 4, lot 2 40.50 

SJ0197 sec. 36, N1/2 NE1/4 SW1/4 20.00 SJ0215 sec. 4, lot 3 40.78 

SJ0196 sec. 36, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SJ0215 sec. 4, lot 4 41.06 

T. 28 S., R. 45 E. SJ0215 sec. 4, S1/2 N1/2 160.00 

SJ0210 sec. 34, N1/2 N1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 10.00 SJ0215 sec. 4, N1/2 S1/2 160.00 

SJ0210 sec. 35, N1/2 NW1/4 NE1/4 20.00 SJ0215 sec. 4, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 

SJ0210 sec. 35, N1/2 N1/2 SE1/4 NW1/4 10.00 SJ0216 sec. 6, lot 1 40.54 

SJ0210 sec. 35, N1/2 N1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 10.00 SJ0216 sec. 6, lot 2 40.39 

SJ0216 sec. 6, lot 3 40.23 

T. 28 S., R. 46 E. SJ0216 sec. 6, lot 4 41.40 

SJ0179 sec. 13, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SJ0216 sec. 6, lot 5 41.29 

SJ0178 sec. 26, N1/2 N1/2 SE1/4 NW1/4 10.00 SJ0216 sec. 6, lot 6 41.25 

SJ0192 sec. 30, lot 2 40.80 SJ0216 sec. 6, lot 7 41.22 

L-16 
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Tract Legal description Acres Tract Legal description Acres 

SJ0216 sec. 6, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 T. 32 S., R. 40 E. 

SJ0216 sec. 6, SE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SJ0155 sec. 14, All 639.64 

SJ0216 sec. 6, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SJ0156 sec. 22, All 640.00 

SJ0216 sec. 6, SE1/4 160.00 SJ0157 sec. 24, All 640.00 

SJ0217 sec. 8, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SJ0158 sec. 26, All 640.00 

SJ0217 sec. 8, SE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SJ0159 sec. 36, All 640.00 

SJ0217 sec. 8, W1/2 320.00 

SJ0217 sec. 8, SE1/4 160.00 T. 32 S., R. 41 E. 

SJ0219 sec. 10, N1/2 NE1/4 80.00 SJ01641 sec. 4, lot 1 40.14 

SJ0219 sec. 10, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SJ01641 sec. 4, lot 2 39.99 

SJ0219 sec. 10, S1/2 N1/2 160.00 SJ01641 sec. 4, lot 3 39.83 

SJ0219 sec. 10, S1/2 320.00 SJ01641 sec. 4, lot 4 39.68 

SJ0220 sec. 16, W1/2 E1/2 160.00 SJ01641 sec. 4, S1/2 N1/2 160.00 

SJ0220 sec. 16, E1/2 E1/2 160.00 SJ01641 sec. 4, S1/2 20.00 

SJ0220 sec. 16, SW1/4 160.00 SJ0165 sec. 6, lot 4 39.86 

SJ0218 sec. 18, lot 1 41.51 SJ0165 sec. 6, lot 5 39.85 

SJ0218 sec. 18, lot 2 41.54 SJ0165 sec. 6, lot 6 39.75 

SJ0218 sec. 18, lot 3 41.56 SJ01661 sec. 8, All 640.00 

SJ0218 sec. 18, lot 4 41.59 SJ0167 sec. 18, lot 1 40.33 

SJ0218 sec. 18, E1/2 320.00 SJ0167 sec. 18, lot 2 40.36 

SJ0218 sec. 18, E1/2 W1/2 160.00 SJ0167 sec. 18, lot 3 40.38 

SJ0221 sec. 20, All 640.00 SJ0167 sec. 18, lot 4 40.41 

SJ0174 sec. 32, lot 1 42.34 SJ0167 sec. 18, E1/2 320.00 

SJ0167 sec. 18, E1/2 W1/2 160.00 

T. 30 S., R. 46 E. 

SJ0234 sec. 2, lot 4 39.70 T. 32 S., R. 44 E., 

SJ0234 sec. 2, lot 4 39.70 SJ0175 sec. 4, SE1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 10.00 

SJ0205 sec. 8, SW1/4 160.00 SJ0176 sec. 9, W1/2 NW1/4 NE1/4 NE1/4 5.00 

SJ0177 sec. 16, W1/2 NW1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4 5.00 

T. 30 S., R. 47 E. 

SJ0236 sec. 6, lot 1 37.33 T. 32 S., R. 45 E., 

SJ0236 sec. 6, lot 2 37.43 SJ0198 sec. 3, SE1/4 NE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 

SJ0236 sec. 6, lot 3 37.52 SJ0199 sec. 9, SE1/4 SW1/4 NE1/4 10.00 

SJ0236 sec. 6, lot 4 37.61 SJ0200 sec. 9, S1/2 NE1/4 SW1/4 20.00 

SJ0201 sec. 10, NW1/4 NE1/4 NW1/4 10.00 

T. 31 S., R. 41 E. SJ0202 sec. 11, W1/2 NE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SJ0152 sec. 8, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SJ0203 sec. 33, S1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SJ0151 sec. 10, N1/2 320.00 

SJ0151 sec. 10, N1/2 S1/2 160.00 T. 32 S., R. 46 E., 

SJ0151 sec. 10, S1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SJ0185 sec. 14, S1/2 S1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 10.00 

SJ0153 sec. 12, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SJ0185 sec. 14, S1/2 S1/2 SE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 

SJ0450 sec. 14, W1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SJ0187 sec. 23, E1/2 NE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 5.00 

SJ0154 sec. 14, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 SJ0186 sec. 23, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SJ01502 sec. 18, E1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 20.00 SJ0187 sec. 23, E1/2 SW1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 5.00 

SJ04511 sec. 20, E1/2 320.00 SJ0187 sec. 23, SE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 10.00 

SJ04511 sec. 20, E1/2 W1/2 160.00 SJ0187 sec. 23, E1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 20.00 

SJ04521 sec. 22, S1/2 320.00 SJ0187 sec. 23, E1/2 W1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 10.00 

SJ04531 sec. 26, All 640.00 SJ0187 sec. 23, N1/2 NE1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 5.00 

SJ04541 sec. 28, All 640.00 SJ0187 sec. 23, NE1/4 NW1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 2.50 

SJ04551 sec. 34, All 640.00 SJ0188 sec. 27, W1/2 NW1/4 NE1/4 NW1/4 5.00 

SJ0456 sec. 36, W1/2 320.00 SJ0189 sec. 27, SW1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 10.00 

SJ0190 sec. 28, S1/2 SW1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4 5.00 

T. 31 S., R. 42 E. SJ0191 sec. 34, N1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 20.00 

SJ0171 sec. 13, NE1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 2.50 

SJ0170 sec. 14, E1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 NE1/4 5.00 T. 33 S., R. 39 E., 

SJ0170 sec. 14, W1/2 NW1/4 SE1/4 20.00 SJ0144 sec. 14, S1/2 NE1/4 80.00 

SJ0169 sec. 14, N1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 5.00 SJ0145 sec. 14, SW1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SJ0169 sec. 14, NW1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 SJ0146 sec. 22, E1/2 NE1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4 5.00 

SJ0172 sec. 24, NE1/4 NE1/4 NW1/4 10.00 SJ0147 sec. 24, E1/2 320.00 

SJ0173 sec. 24, N1/2 N1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 SJ0148 sec. 36, E1/2 E1/2 160.00 

SJ01682 sec. 30, SE1/4 NW1/4 4.00 SJ0457 sec. 36, W1/2 E1/2 160.00 

SJ0457 sec. 36, W1/2 320.00 

L-17 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Tract Legal description Acres Tract Legal description Acres 

T. 33 S., R. 40 E., SJ0119 sec. 29, NE1/4 NE1/4 40.00 

SJ0160 sec. 12, All 640.00 SJ0120 sec. 29, NE1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 NW1/4 2.50 

SJ0161 sec. 16, All 640.00 SJ0120 sec. 29, S1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 NW1/4 5.00 

SJ0162 sec. 24, NE1/4 160.00 SJ0121 sec. 29, SE1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 2.50 

SJ0162 sec. 24, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 SJ0122 sec. 29, N1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 20.00 

SJ0162 sec. 24, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SJ0122 sec. 29, N1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 5.00 

SJ0163 sec. 36, All 640.00 SJ0123 sec. 29, NW1/4 NW1/4 SE1/4 10.00 

SJ0123 sec. 29, N1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 SE1/4 5.00 

T. 33 S., R. 45 E., SJ0124 sec. 30, SE1/4 NE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 

SJ0204 sec. 4, lot 1 39.87 SJ0125 sec. 30, E1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 5.00 

SJ0126 sec. 31, lot 4 34.10 

T. 33 S., R. 46 E., SJ0128 sec. 31, N1/2 NW1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 5.00 

SJ0226 sec. 27, S1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 20.00 SJ0128 sec. 31, SW1/4 NW1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 2.50 

SJ0226 sec. 27, W1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 20.00 SJ0127 sec. 31, N1/2 NE1/4 SW1/4 20.00 

SJ0226 sec. 28, S1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 20.00 SJ0127 sec. 31, SW1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4 10.00 

SJ0227 sec. 34, W1/2 NW1/4 NE1/4 20.00 SJ0127 sec. 31, NW1/4 NW1/4 NW1/4 SE1/4 2.50 

T. 33.50 S., R. 39 E., T. 41 S., R. 39 E., 

SJ0457 sec. 36, lot 3 25.11 SJ0109 sec. 10, S1/2 N1/2 SW1/4 NE1/4 10.00 

SJ0148 sec. 36, lot 1 25.36 SJ0109 sec. 10, S1/2 SW1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SJ0148 sec. 36, lot 2 25.20 SJ0109 sec. 10, SW1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 2.50 

SJ0457 sec. 36, lot 4 24.93 SJ0110 sec. 11, SW1/4 NW1/4 SW1/4 10.00 

SJ0148 sec. 36, SE1/4 160.00 SJ0111 sec. 11, SW1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 2.50 

SJ0457 sec. 36, SW1/4 160.00 SJ0113 sec. 13, S1/2 S1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 10.00 

SJ0112 sec. 14, S1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4 5.00 

T. 33.50 S., R. 40 E., SJ0113 sec. 14, S1/2 NW1/4 SE1/4 NE1/4 5.00 

SJ0163 sec. 36, lot 1 21.84 SJ0113 sec. 14, S1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SJ0163 sec. 36, lot 2 26.17 SJ0114 sec. 14, NE1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 2.50 

SJ0163 sec. 36, lot 3 26.15 SJ0115 sec. 15, NE1/4 NE1/4 NE1/4 NE1/4 2.50 

SJ0163 sec. 36, lot 4 26.12 SJ0117 sec. 22, lot 1 4.55 

SJ0163 sec. 36, lot 5 33.38 SJ0117 sec. 22, lot 2 4.36 

SJ0163 sec. 36, lot 6 33.40 SJ0117 sec. 22, lot 3 4.18 

SJ0163 sec. 36, SW1/4 160.00 SJ0116 sec. 24, NE1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4 10.00

SJ0163 sec. 36, W1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SJ0116 sec. 24, NE1/4 NW1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4 2.50 

T. 37 S., R. 37 E., T. 41 S., R. 40 E., 

SJ0225 sec. 4, W1/2 SW1/4 SW1/4 NE1/4 5.00 SJ0131 sec. 2, lot 5 20.00 

SJ0225 sec. 4, W1/2 W1/2 NW1/4 SE1/4 10.00 SJ0131 sec. 2, NE1/4 NW1/4 40.00 

SJ0107 sec. 9, S1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 5.00 

T. 37 S., R. 46 E., SJ0107 sec. 9, SW1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 2.50 

SJ0141 sec. 30, E1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 5.00 SJ0108 sec. 15, W1/2 W1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 10.00 

SJ0141 sec. 30, SE1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 SJ0105 sec. 17, S1/2 S1/2 SE1/4 SW1/4 10.00 

SJ0142 sec. 31, SE1/4 SE1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4 2.50 SJ0105 sec. 17, NE1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 2.50 

SJ0105 sec. 17, S1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 20.00 

T. 38 S., R. 41 E., SJ0103 sec. 18, lot 4 35.39 

SJ0143 sec. 30, lot 1 40.76 SJ0104 sec. 19, lot 2 35.96 

SJ0143 sec. 30, lot 2 40.69 SJ0106 sec. 20, lot 2 38.12 

T. 40 S., R. 40 E., T. 41 S., R. 42 E., 

SJ0131 sec. 22, S1/2 NE1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 5.00 SJ0130 sec. 4, N1/2 SE1/4 80.00 

SJ0131 sec. 22, SE1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4 10.00 

SJ0131 sec. 23, S1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 5.00 T. 41 S., R. 43 E., 

SJ0131 sec. 23, SW1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 10.00 SJ0132 sec. 9, S1/2 SE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SJ0132 sec. 9, NE1/4 SE1/4 40.00 

T. 40 S., R. 42 E., SJ0134 sec. 10, W1/2 SW1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SJ0129 sec. 34, S1/2 SW1/4 80.00 SJ0133 sec. 10, S1/2 N1/2 NW1/4 40.00 

SJ0129 sec. 34, SW1/4 SE1/4 40.00 SJ0134 sec. 10, W1/2 NE1/4 NW1/4 SE1/4 5.00 

SJ0126 sec. 36, E1/2 SE1/4 80.00 SJ0134 sec. 10, W1/2 NW1/4 SE1/4 20.00 

SJ0126 sec. 36, E1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 20.00 SJ0134 sec. 10, W1/2 NW1/4 SW1/4 SE1/4 5.00 

SJ0135 sec. 14, W1/2 SW1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 5.00 

T. 40 S., R. 43 E., SJ0135 sec. 14, N1/2 SW1/4 NW1/4 20.00 

SJ0118 sec. 21, N1/2 NW1/4 NW1/4 SW1/4 5.00 SJ0135 sec. 14, E1/2 SW1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 5.00 

L-18 
Appendix L - Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

Tract Legal description Acres 

SJ0135 sec. 14, SE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 10.00 

SJ0140 sec. 14, W1/2 W1/2 E1/2 SW1/4 20.00 

SJ0136 sec. 15, S1/2 NE1/4 NE1/4 20.00 

SJ0136 sec. 15, E1/2 SE1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4 5.00 

SJ0446 sec. 17, SW1/4 SW1/4 40.00 

SJ0137 sec. 17, S1/2 SW1/4 SE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4 1.25 

SJ0137 sec. 17, SE1/4 SE1/4 ‘SW NW1/4 2.50 

SJ0138 sec. 17, N1/2 NW1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4 5.00 

SJ0480 sec. 19, lot 5 5.82 

SJ0481 sec. 19, lot 6 5.81 

SJ0483 sec. 19, lot 7 5.82 

SJ0445 sec. 19, lot 8 14.65 

SJ0482 sec. 19, lot 10 4.26 

SJ0447 sec. 20, lot 4 39.58 

SJ0139 sec. 21, lot 1 41.77 

Subtotal 24,316.9 

TOTAL 62,061.60 3 

1

 May be encumbered by mining claims. 

2

 Subject to reservation of section 24 “Federal Power Act.” 

3 This figure is rounded to 62,100 for narratives and tables 

. 

Table L-5-Increased costs of alternative utility routing to bypass Owyhee river below the Dam 

ACEC (east-west electric transmission corridor dog leg option). 

Design Cost per mile 20-mile cost1 

Single circuit 500 kV, lattice design 

construction for 50/50 terrain2 $581,330 $11,626,600 

Administrative and corporate overheads $197,650 $3,953,000 

Operations and maintenance $1,767 $35,340 

Losses, based on 1000mW average load 

60 percent LF $12,197 $243,940 

TOTAL $792,944 $15,858,880 

Double circuit 500 kV, lattice design 

Construction for 50/50 terrain2 $1,057,460 $21,149,200 

Administrative and corporate overheads #359,530 $7,190,600 

Operations and maintenance $3,400 $68,000 

Losses, based on 1000mW average load, 

60 percent LF $16,823 $336,460 

TOTAL $1,437,213 $28,744,260 

1

Cost analysis is done on the entire 20-mile route (17 miles of route is on public land).
 

2

 Does not include land costs or environmental costs. Cost information for this analysis was provided at BLM request by Randall W. Melzer, BLM Team Lead, Department
 

of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Vancouver, Washington, in letter dated May 6, 1997.
 

L-19 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

L-20
 
 

Appendix M - Wildland Fire Appropriate Management Response 

Appendix M - Wildland Fire Appropriate Management 

Response 

Use of appropriate management response (AMR) on all wildland fire allows agency administrators the ability to choose from a full spectrum of fire suppression actions. Although all 

wildland fires must have an appropriate action taken to suppress them, not all wildfires need 

to be suppressed with the same level of intensity. Appropriate suppression actions, whether 

aggressive, high intensity or low intensity actions, will be based on preplanned analysis and 

executed to minimize suppression costs plus resource losses, consistent with land management objectives, including the threat to life and property. 

Preplanned analysis criteria has been identified through the Phase One Fire Management 

Planning Process (see glossary) in which an interdisciplinary team of resource, fire, and line 

management representatives classified public land into the two different management 

categories (Map FIRE-2). Categories identified below are consistent with criteria outlined in 

BLMs’ Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601, Appendix C). Category A below is equivalent 

to category B in the handbook while category B below is equivalent to category C in the 

handbook. Although no lands were identified as fitting the other categories in the handbook 

they may be identified as more information becomes available and the District Fire Management Plan (FMP) is maintained or revised. More detailed site specific information on resource 

objectives, constraints, mitigation and fuel treatment considerations relative to the categories 

will be maintained and revised as necessary in the District FMP. Categories are listed as 

follows: 

Category A 

Those lands where wildland fire should be excluded, using only prescribed fire to achieve 

the desired resource conditions or management of the area. The AMR for these lands will be 

designated as full suppression. In multiple fire situations, with fires occurring within both 

land categories, suppression priorities will be given to those fires burning within this 

classification of land. When multiple fires occur within Category A, suppression priority 

will be based on the threat or potential threat to public safety, structures, private property, 

and improvements. 

Criteria used to determine Category A land include: 

• Protecting public safety; 

• Protecting rural/urban interface; 

• Threat to private land; 

• Protecting capital improvements; 

• Protecting administrative/recreational sites; 

• Maintaining or enhancing forage; 

• Minimizing loss of shrub cover; 

• Minimizing increase in annual vegetation types; 

• Limiting or reducing medusahead, cheatgrass, and other noxious species; 

• Providing diverse perennial species; 

• Protecting habitat for special status plant species; 

• Protecting Federal and State lands identified under fire protection agreements. 

M-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Category B 

Those lands where wildland fire could/should be used in addition to prescribed fire to meet 

desired resource conditions or management. Under this category of land the AMR could 

vary based on predetermined fire and resource criteria (see attached fire and resource 

criteria) for land in and adjacent to the fires location. In multiple fire situations, Category A 

land will, with the exception of threat to life, receive higher priority for suppression actions 

than will Category B land. 

While all wildland fires will receive a suppression response, that response will not always be 

full suppression. Theoretically, less than full suppression responses would occur only 

during spring early or late summer and fall months, dependant on weather conditions, or in 

multiple fire situations when suppression forces are not adequate to respond to all going 

fires. With multiple fires burning, suppression actions will occur in order of priority, with 

lower priority fires receiving suppression action as forces become available. All other fires 

receiving less than full suppression actions must meet the following fire criteria thresholds: 

•	 Fire located within Category B land; 

•	 Live fuel moisture in big sagebrush at 120 percent or more with 10-hour fuel stick 

readings of 5 percent or above or live fuels of 95 percent or above and 10-hour fuel 

stick reading of 8 percent or above; 

•	 Predicted, maximum sustained wind speed of 10 mph (obtained from fire weather 

forecast); 

•	 Observed and predicted fire behavior will continue to meet resource management 

objectives; 

•	 No threat to public safety; 

•	 Not a threat to private, State or other Federal land (unless those lands are under a 

signed mutual agreement with the landowner or agency for less than full suppression 

actions); 

•	 Fires ignition is not suspected to be arson; 

•	 Actions are in accordance with the “Northwest Geographic Area Preparedness Level 

3” (this level is based on the number of fire suppression resources that are committed 

to ongoing fire suppression activities within the northwest area, as more resources are 

committed the level raises). 

If any of these criteria are exceeded the AMR becomes that of full suppression, with the only 

exception to this occurring in a multiple fire situation where suppression actions are based on 

priority. 

Within Category B, land resource considerations will be addressed and updated annually to 

reflect appropriate changes in the values to be protected. Resource criteria has been identified as to those criteria which may lead to full suppression actions and those criteria which 

may lead to less than full suppression actions, those criteria include but are not limited to the 

following. 

Resource criteria which may lead to full suppression action include but are not limited to: 

•	 Burning vegetation resources with commodity values; 

•	 Burning within the perimeter of an area burned within the last 10 years; 

•	 Burning within the perimeter of a fire rehabilitation area; 

•	 Burning within given vegetation types/habitat (key winter range, big sagebrush/bitter 

brush, annual grasslands, shrub/annual grassland, rabbit brush/grassland, forested land, 

and salt desert shrub); and 

•	 Burning more than one-third of a subwatershed in a 3-year period. 

M-2 
Appendix M - Wildland Fire Appropriate Management Response 

Resource criteria which may lead to less than full suppression actions include but are not 

limited to: 

•	 Burning within riparian areas; 

•	 Burning within designated ACEC/RNA areas (allow to monitor natural processes); 

•	 Burning within a WSA; 

•	 Burning within given vegetation types (western juniper, quaking aspen); 

•	 Burning at 5,000 feet elevation or above (vegetation communities capable of natural 

rehabilitation); or 

•	 Burning within an area that has a prescribed fire plan in place. 

The authorized officer (district manager or designated representative) has the authority to 

modify fire and resource criteria for either category of land based on site-specific resource 

management objectives identified through the adaptive management process. 

M-3 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

M-4
 
Appendix O - Best Management Practices 

Appendix O - Best Management Practices 

Best management practices (BMP’s) are those land and resource management techniques 

designed to maximize beneficial results and minimize negative impacts of management 

actions. Interdisciplinary site-specific analysis is necessary to determine which management 

practices would be necessary to meet specific goals. BMP’s described in this appendix are 

designed to assist in achieving the objectives for maintaining or improving water quality, soil 

productivity, and the protection of watershed resources. These guidelines will apply, where 

appropriate, to all use authorizations, including BLM-initiated projects. Modifications may 

be necessary on a site-specific basis to minimize the potential for negative impacts. Each of 

the following BMP guidelines is a part of the coordinated development of this plan and may 

be updated as new information becomes available. Applicants can suggest alternate conditions that could accomplish the same result. 

BMP’s are selected and implemented as necessary, based on site-specific conditions, to meet 

water, soil, and watershed objectives for specific management actions. This document does 

not provide an exhaustive list of BMP’s. Additional BMP’s may be identified during an 

interdisciplinary process when evaluating site-specific management actions. Implementation 

and effectiveness of BMP’s need to be monitored to determine whether the practices are 

achieving water, soil, and watershed objectives and accomplishing the desired goals. 

Adjustments will be made as necessary to ensure objectives are met and as needed to 

conform with changes in BLM regulations, policy, direction, or new scientific information. 

These BMP’s are a compilation of existing policies and guidelines and commonly employed 

practices to minimize water quality degradation from nonpoint sources, and the loss of soil 

productivity, and provide guidelines for aesthetic conditions within watersheds from surface 

disturbing activities. 

BMP’s are considered one of the primary mechanisms to achieve Oregon water quality 

standards and reduce impacts from nonpoint source pollution. Nonpoint sources of pollution 

result from natural causes, human actions, and the interactions between natural events and 

conditions associated with human use of the land and its resources. Nonpoint source 

pollution is caused by diffuse sources rather than from a discharge at a specific, single 

location. Such pollution results in alteration of the chemical, physical, and biological 

integrity of water. 

BMP’s are defined as methods, measures or practices selected on the basis of site-specific 

conditions to ensure that water quality will be maintained at its highest practicable level. 

BMP’s include, but are not limited to, structural and nonstructural controls, operations, and 

maintenance procedures. BMP’s can be applied before, during, and after pollution-producing activities to reduce or eliminate the introduction of pollutants into receiving waters (40 

CFR 130.2(m), Environmental Protection Agency Water Quality Standards Regulation). 

BMP’s are identified as part of the NEPA process, with interdisciplinary involvement. 

Because the control of nonpoint sources of pollution is an ongoing process, continual 

refinement of BMP design is necessary. This process can be described in these five steps: 

(1) selection of design of a specific BMP; (2) application of the BMP; (3) monitoring; (4) 

evaluation; and (5) feedback. Data gathered through monitoring is evaluated and is used to 

identify changes needed in BMP design, application, or in the monitoring program. 

Road Design and Maintenance 

1) Design roads to minimize total disturbance, to conform with topography, and to minimize 

disruption of natural drainage patterns. 

O-1 
SoutheasternOregon Resource Management Plan 

2) Base road design criteria and standards on road management objectives such as traffic 

requirements of the proposed activity and the overall transportation plan, economic analysis, 

safety requirements, resource objectives, and minimizing damage to the environment. 

3) Locate roads on stable terrain such as ridgetops, natural benches, and flatter transitional 

slopes near ridges and valley bottoms and moderate sideslopes and away from slumps, slide 

prone areas, concave slopes, clay beds, and where rock layers dip parallel to the slope. 

Locate roads on well-drained soil types; avoid wet areas. 

4) Construct cut and fill slopes to be approximately 3(h):1(v) or flatter where feasible. 

Locate roads to minimize heights of cutbanks. Avoid high, steeply sloping cutbanks in 

highly fractured bedrock. 

5) Avoid head walls, midslope locations on steep, unstable slopes, fragile soils, seeps, old 

landslides, sideslopes in excess of 70 percent, and areas where the geologic bedding planes 

or weathering surfaces are inclined with the slope. Implement extra mitigation measures 

when these areas can not be avoided. 

6) Construct roads for surface drainage by using outslopes, crowns, grade changes, drain 

dips, waterbars and/or insloping to ditches as appropriate. 

7) Sloping the road base to the outside edge for surface drainage is normally recommended 

for local spurs or minor collector roads where low volume traffic and lower traffic speeds are 

anticipated. This is also recommended in situations where long intervals between maintenance will occur and where minimum excavation is wanted. Out-sloping is not recommended on steep slopes. Sloping the road base to the inside edge is an acceptable practice 

on roads with steep sideslopes and where the underlying soil formation is very rocky and not 

subject to appreciable erosion or failure. 

8) Crown and ditching is recommended for arterial and collector roads where traffic volume, 

speed, intensity and user comfort are considerations. Recommended gradients range from 0 

to 15 percent where crown and ditching may be applied, as long as adequate drainage away 

from the road surface and ditch lines is maintained. 

9) Minimize excavation, when constructing roads, through the use of balanced earthwork, 

narrowing road widths, and end hauling where sideslopes are between 50 and 70 percent. 

10) If possible, construct roads when soils are dry and not frozen. When soils or road 

surfaces become saturated to a depth of 3 inches, BLM-authorized activities should be 

limited or cease unless otherwise approved by the authorized officer. 

11) Consider improving inadequately surfaced roads, that are to be left open to public traffic 

during wet weather, with gravel or pavement to minimize sediment production and maximize 

safety. 

12) Retain vegetation on cut slopes unless it poses a safety hazard or restricts maintenance 

activities. Roadside brushing of vegetation should be done in a way that prevents disturbance to root systems and visual intrusions (such as avoid using excavators for brushing). 

13) Retain adequate vegetation between roads and streams to filter runoff caused by roads. 

14) Avoid riparian/wetland areas where feasible; locate in these areas only if the roads do not 

interfere with the attainment of PFC and RMO’s. 

15) Minimize the number of unimproved stream crossings. When a culvert or bridge is not 

feasible, locate drive-through (low water crossings) on stable rock portions of the drainage 

channel. Harden crossings with the addition of rock and gravel if necessary. Use angular 

O-2 
Appendix O - Best Management Practices 

rock if available. 

16) Locate roads and limit activities of mechanized equipment within stream channels to 

minimize their influence on riparian areas. When stream crossing is necessary, design the 

approach and crossing perpendicular to the channel where practical. Locate the crossing 

where the channel is well-defined, unobstructed, and straight. 

17) Avoid placing fill material in floodplain unless the material is large enough to remain in 

place during flood events. 

18) Use drainage dips instead of culverts on roads where gradients will not present a safety 

issue. Locate drainage dips in such a way so water will not accumulate or where outside 

berms prevent drainage from the roadway. Locate and design drainage dips immediately 

upgrade of stream crossings and provide buffer areas and catchment basins to prevent 

sediment from entering the stream. 

19) Construct catchment basins, brush windrows, and culverts in a way to minimize sediment transport from road surfaces to stream channels. Install culverts in natural drainage 

channels in a way to conform with the natural streambed gradients with outlets that discharge onto rocky or hardened protected areas. 

20) Design and locate water crossing structures in natural drainage channels to accommodate 

adequate fish passage, provide for minimum impacts to water quality and RCA’s, and 

capable of handling a 100-year event for runoff and floodwaters. 

21) Use culverts that pass, at a minimum, a 50-year storm event and/or have a minimum 

diameter of 24 inches for permanent stream crossings and a minimum diameter of 18 inches 

for road crossdrains. 

22) Replace undersized culverts and repair or replace damaged culverts and down spouts. 

Provide energy dissipators at culvert outlets or drainage dips. 

23) Locate culverts or drainage dips in such a manner as to avoid discharge onto unstable 

terrain such as head walls or slumps. Provide adequate spacing to avoid accumulation of 

water in ditches or road surfaces. Culverts should be placed on solid ground to avoid road 

failures. 

24) Proper sized aggregate and riprap should be used during culvert construction. Place 

riprap at culvert entrance to streamline water flow and reduce erosion. 

25) Establish adapted vegetation on all cuts and fill immediately following road construction 

and maintenance. 

26) Remove berms from the down slope side of roads, consistent with safety considerations. 

27) Leave abandoned roads in a condition that provides adequate drainage without further 

maintenance. Close abandoned roads to traffic. Physically obstruct the road with gates, 

large berms, trenches, logs, stumps, or rock boulders as necessary to accomplish permanent 

closure. 

28) Abandon and rehabilitate roads no longer needed. Leave these roads in a condition that 

provides adequate drainage. Remove culverts. 

29) When plowing snow for winter use of roads, provide breaks in snow berms to allow for 

road drainage. Avoid plowing snow into streams. Plow snow only on existing roads. 

30) Maintenance should be performed to conserve existing surface material, retain the 

O-3 
SoutheasternOregon Resource Management Plan 

original crowned or out-sloped self-draining cross section, prevent or remove rutting berms 

(except those designed for slope protection) and other irregularities that retard normal 

surface runoff. Avoid wasting loose ditch or surface material over the shoulder where it can 

cause stream sedimentation or weaken slump-prone areas. Avoid undercutting back slopes. 

31) Do not disturb the toe of cut slopes while pulling ditches or grading roads. Avoid 

sidecasting road material into streams. 

32) Grade roads only as necessary. Maintain drain dips, waterbars, road crown, in-sloping 

and out-sloping, as appropriate, during road maintenance. 

33) Maintain roads in SMA’s according to SMA guidance. Generally, retain roads within 

existing disturbed areas and sidecast material away from the SMA. 

34) When landslides occur, save all soil and material usable for reclamation or stockpile for 

future reclamation needs. Avoid side casting of slide material where it can damage, overload, and saturate embankments, or flow into down-slope drainage courses. Reestablish 

vegetation as needed in areas where vegetation has been destroyed due to side casting. 

35) Strip and stockpile topsoil ahead of construction of new roads, if feasible. Reapply soil 

to cut and fill slopes prior to revegetation. 

36) Existing roads should be utilized whenever possible rather than constructing new road 

systems. 

Surface-Disturbing Activities 

1) Special design and reclamation measures may be required to protect scenic and natural 

landscape values. This may include transplanting trees and shrubs, mulching and fertilizing 

disturbed areas, use of low profile permanent facilities, and painting to minimize visual 

contrasts. Surface-disturbing activities may be moved to avoid sensitive areas or to reduce 

the visual effects of the proposal. 

2) Above ground facilities requiring painting should be designed to blend in with the 

surrounding environment. 

3) Disturbed areas should be contoured to blend with the natural topography. Blending is 

defined as reducing form, line, and color contrast associated with the surface disturbance. 

Disturbance in visually sensitive areas should be contoured to match the original topography, 

where matching is defined as reproducing the original topography and eliminating form, line, 

and color caused by the disturbance as much as possible. 

4) Reclamation should be implemented concurrent with construction and site operations to 

the fullest extent possible. Final reclamation actions shall be initiated within 6 months of the 

termination of operations unless otherwise approved in writing by the authorized officer. 

5) Fill material should be pushed into cut areas and up over back slopes. Depressions should 

not be left that will trap water or form ponds. 

Rights-of-way and Utility Corridors 

1) Rights-of-way and utility corridors should use areas adjoining or adjacent to previously 

disturbed areas whenever possible, rather than traverse undisturbed communities. 

2) Waterbars or dikes should be constructed on all of the rights-of-way and utility corridors, 

O-4 
 

Appendix O - Best Management Practices 

and across the full width of the disturbed area, as directed by the authorized officer. 

3) Disturbed areas within road rights-of-way and utility corridors should be stabilized by 

vegetation practices designed to hold soil in place and minimize erosion. Vegetation cover 

should be reestablished to increase infiltration and provide additional protection from 

erosion. 

4) Sediment barriers should be constructed when needed to slow runoff, allow deposition of 

sediment, and prevent transport from the site. Straining or filtration mechanisms may also 

be employed for the removal of sediment from runoff. 

Forest Management 

1) Design harvest units and forest health treatments to blend with natural terrain. 

2) Consider clearcutting only where it is silviculturally essential to accomplish site-specific 

objectives. Areas with fragile watershed conditions or high scenic values should not be 

clearcut. 

3) When soils or road surfaces become saturated to a depth of 3 inches, BLM-authorized 

activities, such as log yarding and hauling, should be limited or cease unless otherwise 

approved by the authorized officer. 

4) Scatter unmerchantable material (tops, limbs, etc.) in cutting units and treatment areas, 

consistent with fuel loading limitations. 

5) Ground yarding systems are not recommended on slopes that are of 30 percent or greater. 

6) Utilize designated skid trails and haul roads, where feasible, when ground yarding timber 

harvest operations. 

7) Locate skid trails on upper slope positions, as far as possible from surface water. Avoid 

skidding across drainage bottoms or creating conditions that concentrate and channelize 

surface flow. 

8) Use directional felling, when applicable, to minimize skidding distance and locate skid 

trails as far as possible from sensitive areas. 

9) Install waterbars and apply native seed, when available, to skid trails and landings prior to 

temporary seasonal closures and following harvest operations. Consider ripping or 

subsoiling on skid trails and abandoned haul roads to reduce compaction where soil and 

slope conditions permit. 

10) When ground or cable yarding, logs should be fully, or at least have the lead end, 

suspended. 

11) Locate landings away from surface water. Design landings to minimize disturbance 

consistent with safety and efficiency of operation. 

12) Use low ground pressure grapple equipment, if possible, when piling slash. 

13) Conduct forested land treatments when soil surfaces are either frozen, dry, or have 

adequate snowpack to minimize impacts to soil and water resources. 

O-5 
SoutheasternOregon Resource Management Plan 

Fire Suppression 

1) Minimize surface disturbances and avoid the use of heavy earth-moving equipment where 

possible, on all fire suppression and rehabilitation activities, including “mop-up,” except 

where high value resources (including lives and property), are being protected. 

2) Install waterbars and seed all constructed firelines with native or adapted nonnative 

species as appropriate. 

3) Avoid dropping fire retardant that is detrimental to aquatic communities on streams, lakes, 

ponds and in riparian/wetland areas. 

4) The location and construction of hand lines should result in minimal surface disturbance 

while effectively controlling the fire. Hand crews should locate lines to take full advantage 

of existing land features that represent natural fire barriers. Whenever possible, handlines 

should follow the contour of the slope to protect the soil, provide sufficient residual vegetation to capture and retain sediment, and maintain site productivity. 

5) Suppression in riparian areas should be by hand crews when possible. 

Prescribed Burning 

1) To protect soil productivity, burning should be conducted if possible, under conditions 

when a low-intensity burn can accomplish stated objectives. Burn only when conditions of 

organic surface or duff layer have adequate moisture to minimize effects to the physical and 

chemical properties of the soil. When possible, maximize the retention of the organic 

surface or duff layer. 

2) Slash should not be piled and burned within riparian/wetland areas. If riparian/wetland 

areas are within or adjacent to the prescribed burn unit, piles should be fire lined or scattered 

prior to burning. 

3) When preparing the unit for burning, avoid piling concentrations of large logs and stumps; 

pile small material (3 to 8 inches diameter). Slash piles should be burned when soil and duff 

moisture are adequate to reduce potential damage to soil resources. 

Livestock Grazing Management 

Rangeland projects and improvements are constructed as a portion of adaptive management 

to reduce resource management conflicts and to achieve multiple use management objectives. Standard design elements and procedures for rangeland improvements are summarized in Appendix S. They have been standardized over time to mitigate impacts and will be 

adhered to in the construction and maintenance of rangeland projects within the planning 

area. 

Effects of grazing by large herbivores are summarized in Appendix R. Grazing schedules 

are developed and adjusted through the adaptive management process on an allotment 

specific basis. This is to mitigate impacts to resource values and progress toward multipleuse management objectives and sustainability of desirable values. 

Mining 

1) Reclaim all disturbed surface areas promptly, preforming concurrent reclamation as 

necessary, and minimize the total amount of all surface disturbance. 

O-6 
Appendix O - Best Management Practices 

2) All surface soil should be stripped prior to conducting operations, stockpiled, and reapplied during reclamation, regardless of soil quality. Minimize the length of time soil remains 

in stockpiles and the depth or thickness of stockpiles. When slopes on topsoil stockpiles 

exceed 5 percent, a berm or trench should be constructed below the stockpile to prevent 

sediment transport off site. 

3) Strip and separate soil surface horizons where feasible and reapply in proper sequence 

during reclamation. 

4) Locate soil stockpiles and waste rock disposal areas away from surface water to minimize 

off-site drainage effects. 

5) Establish vegetation cover on soil stockpiles that are to be in place longer than 1 year. 

6) Construct and rehabilitate temporary roads to minimize total surface disturbance, consistent with intended use. 

7) Consider temporary measures such as silt fences, straw bales, or mulching to trap sediment in sensitive areas until reclaimed areas are stabilized with vegetation. 

8) Reshape to the approximate original contour all areas to be permanently reclaimed, 

providing for proper surface drainage. 

9) Leave reclaimed surfaces in a roughened condition following soil application. 

10) Complete reclamation and seeding during the fall if possible. 

Noxious Weed Management 

1) All contractors and land-use operators moving surface-disturbing equipment in or out of 

weed infested areas should clean their equipment before and after use on public land. 

2) Control weeds annually in areas frequently disturbed such as gravel pits, recreation sites, 

road sides, livestock concentration areas. 

3) Consider livestock quarantine, removal, or timing limitations in weed infested areas. 

4) All seed, hay, straw, mulch, or other vegetation material transported and used on public 

land weed-free zones for site stability, rehabilitation or project facilitation should be certified 

by a qualified Federal, State, or county officer as free of noxious weeds and noxious weed 

seed. All baled feed, pelletized feed and grain transported into weed-free zones and used to 

feed livestock should also be certified as free of noxious weed seed. 

5) It is recommended that all vehicles, including off-road and all-terrain, traveling in or out 

of weed infested areas should clean their equipment before and after use on public land. 

For additional controls on noxious weed management please refer to the “Northwest Area 

Noxious Weed Control Program” (1987), its associated “Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement” and the “Vale District Fire-Year Noxious Weed Control Program Environment Assessment” (1987) with extensions. 

Developed Recreation 

1) Construct recreation sites and provide appropriate sanitation facilities to minimize impacts 

to resource values, public health and safety, and minimize user conflicts of approved 

activities and access within an area as appropriate. 

O-7 
SoutheasternOregon Resource Management Plan 

2) Minimize impacts to resource values or to enhance a recreational setting. Harden site and 

locations subject to prolonged/repetitive concentrated recreational uses with selective 

placement of gravel or other porous materials and allow for dust abatement, paving and 

engineered road construction. 

3) Use public education and/or physical barriers (such as rocks, posts, vegetation) to direct or 

prelude uses and to minimize impacts to resource values. 

4) As appropriate, employ limitations of specific activities to avoid or correct adverse 

impacts to resource values. 

5) Employ land use ethics programs and techniques such as “Leave No Trace” and “Tread 

Lightly.” Use outreach efforts of such programs to lessen needs to implement more stringent 

regulatory measures to obtain resource protection. 

O-8 
 

Appendix R - Effects of Intensity and Season of Grazing 

Appendix R - Effects of Intensity and Season of Grazing
 

Introduction 

Interest is often focused on impacts to vegetation resources from livestock management 

actions, though direct impacts to a number of other resource values may occur. The composition, structure, diversity, and juxtaposition of plant communities resulting from livestock 

management actions provide indirect consequences for other uses and benefits. Livestock 

impacts to vegetation resources, both negative and positive, occur due to defoliation and 

browsing, as well as the physical impacts associated with the presence of livestock. Although livestock grazing in cold desert steppe plant communities is seldom necessary to 

meet vegetation management objectives, negative impacts can be maintained within acceptable limits with implementation of appropriate management actions. Many successful 

livestock grazing strategies have been developed to achieve specific ecological or management objectives. The effectiveness of meeting objectives when implementing a given 

strategy depends on a number of factors including associated resource values, ecological 

characteristics, physical characteristics, and livestock management practices (Cook 1971; 

Heady 1975; Laycock and Conrad 1981; Holochek et al. 1989). General trends may hold 

true in the relative effectiveness of different grazing strategies to meet specific management 

objectives, but site-specific strategies are required to integrate the interactions of unique 

physical features present within a pasture and the juxtaposition of that pasture within an 

allotment and across the landscape. Though the ecological consequences of implementing a 

given grazing strategy occur at the pasture level or smaller, livestock operations dependent 

on public land forage resources require grazing schedules which support animals on public 

and/or private land throughout the year. 

The consequences of short-term impacts of livestock use, both in upland and riparian 

communities, are related to the season in which livestock graze a vegetation community as 

well as the intensity, duration, and frequency of use in a given year (Reed et al. 1999). 

Long-term consequences result from the sequence of annual use a vegetation resource 

receives, the severity of use, the competitive response of individual vegetation species to 

selective grazing or browsing by herbivores, and the resultant changes to community 

composition. Season and intensity of livestock grazing use in riparian communities, as well 

as in upland communities, has been found by a number of authors to affect riparian function 

and the attainment of other riparian-related objectives (Elmore 1991; Elmore and Kauffman 

1993; Chapman 1987; Belsky et al. 1997; Kinch 1989; Myers 1987; Platts 1989). Periodic 

opportunities for recovery of health and vigor and for recruitment of new individuals into 

upland and riparian communities are also required to maintain or improve vegetation 

conditions for the amenity values of current and potential vegetation resources as well as 

commodity production. 

Grazing and other activities that disturb the soil surface can reduce the maximum potential 

development of biological crusts. The potential for biological crust development is highest 

within salt desert shrub, Wyoming big sagebrush, basin big sagebrush, low sagebrush, black 

sagebrush, or stiff sagebrush vegetation communities receiving 12 inches of precipitation per 

year or less in mid- to late-seral ecological condition. Continuous season-long grazing is 

harmful to microbiotic crusts. Likewise, short-duration grazing strategies characterized by 

intense physical impacts to the soil surface are harmful to biological crusts, especially on 

rangeland characterized by wet winter and dry summer climatic conditions as in the planning 

area. 

R-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Intensity of Use
 

Short-term grazing impacts to vegetation resources result from the combination of utilization 

levels, the season of use, and the duration of use. For the purposes of analysis, light utilization is generally defined as up to 40 percent, moderate utilization is defined as from 41 to 60 

percent, and heavy utilization is defined as 61 percent and greater. Generally, the vigor of 

key grass species can be sustained with light and moderate utilization, while heavy utilization reduces photosynthetic tissue below levels needed to maintain root reserves, diminishing 

the vigor of key species. However, the timing of grazing use relative to plant phenology and 

the occurrence of repeat grazing of individual plants are usually considered more important 

factors affecting the health and vigor of key species as well as changes to vegetation community composition. Light and moderate utilization during periods when plants are withdrawing reserves from roots for growth, during regrowth, or during seed formation will impact 

herbaceous species greater than the same level of utilization during periods when the plant is 

not actively growing. A review of the literature by Anderson (1991), pertaining to the 

effects of defoliation and vigor recovery of bluebunch wheatgrass, revealed a high sensitivity 

to utilization during the active growing season, especially when that use occurred when the 

plant was entering the boot stage, a period early in its seed producing stage of growth. 

Utilization levels of thirty to forty percent under deferred grazing systems or one time 

utilization levels greater than 50 percent during the growing season have been shown to 

cause significant reductions in vigor and productivity. Time frames necessary for recovery 

may extend beyond the average two to four year cycle frequently used in grazing rotations. 

One review of the classic long-term stocking rate and grazing system studies identified a 

general ability to meet objectives, including productivity of primary forage plants, livestock 

performance and financial returns, when moderate stocking involves 50 percent use in 

southern pine forests, humid grasslands, or annual grasslands. Within semi-arid, desert, and 

coniferous forest rangelands, plant communities most common in the southeast Oregon 

planning area, research was consistent in showing that moderate grazing involved about 35 

to 45 percent use of forage (Holechek et al. 1999) . 

Forb species tend to not have the ability to regrow following grazing. While grasses tend to 

have growing points close to the soil surface, growing point of forbs are elevated with 

growth. As a result, grasses are less likely to have growing points removed with light to 

moderate levels of grazing while growing points of forbs are easily removed, even with light 

grazing. Additionally, some forbs are highly palatable and sought out by grazing animals, 

especially sheep. 

Long-term impacts of moderate to heavy utilization are dependent on individual plant 

species’ ability to maintain health and vigor, recover from impacts, and remain competitive 

while being utilized by grazing animals. The composition of a vegetation community, as it 

relates to the relative palatability of different plant species available for grazing, will affect 

measured utilization and subsequent levels of competition between individual plants. 

Although stocking rates are usually established to limit utilization to light or moderate 

levels, factors affecting livestock distribution will cause some areas where animals tend to 

concentrate to be utilized to a heavy degree, while other areas may remain unused or only 

slightly used. 

The intensity of livestock use will also affect other resource values, including the ability to 

meet management objectives which relate to standing vegetation material and ground cover 

remaining after use. As utilization levels are increased, canopy cover of grazed and browsed 

plants declines. Additionally, deposition of protective plant litter to the soil surface and 

incorporation of litter into the soil is decreased. As a result, increased utilization can reduce 

cover of bare ground by vegetation material and litter, increase puddling of clay soils by 

raindrop impact, reduce rates of infiltration of precipitation, and reduce permeability and 

moisture storage of soils. Excessive utilization levels can contribute to increased overland 

R-2 
Appendix R - Effects of Intensity and Season of Grazing 

flow of precipitation and snowmelt, soil erosion, siltation of streams, and a decline in surface 

water quality affecting beneficial uses. Benefits to sagebrush dependent wildlife species of 

retaining standing herbaceous vegetation subsequent to livestock use are identified in 

Appendix F. 

Light use or nonuse by domestic livestock for long periods of time in nonnative seedings, 

primarily crested wheatgrass, diminish green forage values for wildlife because grass plants 

become rank and unpalatable. Periodic moderate grazing makes available spring or fall 

green-up (new vegetative growth initiated by growing season soil moisture) or conditioned 

forage for Canada geese, big game, or other wildlife species. Green-up is valuable to 

wildlife because it provides succulent, nutritious, and easily digested forage. Nearly all 

classes of wildlife from songbirds to big game can be observed consuming green-up whenever and wherever it is available throughout the year. Domestic livestock and wild horses 

also consume green-up for its palatable and nutritional qualities. 

The value of green-up for wildlife species is highest within habitats used during fall, winter, 

and early spring. Where green-up is available on winter ranges, it helps animals to maintain 

their physiological condition and therefore can be directly tied to winter and early spring 

survival. The nutritious character of spring green-up prepares some animals for the physiological demands of spring breeding activity and therefore it can be tied to animal population 

productivity. Where green forage is unavailable for prolonged periods due to drought and 

normal summer conditions, green-up helps to restore animal health and therefore can be tied 

directly to wildlife recovery from cyclic or seasonal stress. 

Domestic livestock grazing which retains a patchy appearance including lightly to moderately grazed and ungrazed areas within native rangeland may benefit wildlife habitat values 

by providing a combination of seasonally important values. Grazed portions may provide 

conditioned forage for some wildlife species during late summer, fall, and winter, though 

conditioned forage is seldom a limiting factor on native rangeland. Ungrazed or lightly 

grazed portions provide high quality cover and structure for hiding and thermal value. 

Native upland range that is not grazed by domestic livestock is a desirable wildlife habitat 

condition. It is generally in limited supply and typically provides very high quality structure 

and native forage for wildlife use. Maintenance of ungrazed native range conditions by 

avoiding new water developments, salting, and fencing is considered a beneficial mitigating 

measure for the protection of wildlife habitat values. Additionally, ungrazed areas provide 

refuge for wildlife from domestic livestock and livestock management activities. 

Season of Use 

Livestock impacts to public land resources are dependent on the season of use as it relates to 

timing of grazing during the growth cycle of plants (see Table R-1), spacial and seasonal 

conflicts with annual life cycles of wildlife species, physical condition of resources, and 

other factors. All dates referenced are approximations dependent on elevation and climatic 

conditions and need to be interpolated on a site-specific basis. Analyzed seasons overlap due 

to variation in the growing conditions between years and a lack of clear seasonal divisions in 

anticipated impacts to existing or potential resource values. Thus, impacts resulting from 

livestock use early or late during any season may also be accurately define by described 

impacts during the proximate season based on those variables. 

Winter (November 1 to March 1) 

Upland herbaceous plants are mostly dormant during the winter season of use with the 

exception of some photosynthesis by new growth after fall and winter precipitation and 

during warming weather trends, primarily on south exposed slopes. Forage quality of cured 

standing herbaceous vegetation is moderate to low, improving when mixed with new growth 

or browse from palatable shrubs. Light to moderate utilization of standing cured herbaceous 

R-3 
 

Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Table R-1.—Approximate growth stage dates for key species 

Peak of Peak of 

Start of flower- Seed Dorm- Start of flower- Seed DormSpecies growth ing ripe ancy growth ing ripe ancy 

4,000 feet elevation 4,700 feet elevation 

Bluebunch wheatgrass 03/15 06/15 07/15 08/15 03/25 06/25 08/15 09/01 

Idaho fescue 04/01 07/01 08/01 09/15 04/05 07/01 08/15 10/01 

Crested wheatgrass 1,2 03/10 06/10 08/01 09/01 03/15 06/10 08/01 09/01 

Bottlebrush squirreltail 03/25 06/01 07/01 08/01 03/25 06/01 07/01 08/01 

Thurber’s needlegrass 03/25 06/15 07/15 09/01 04/01 06/15 07/15 09/01 

Sandberg bluegrass 2 03/10 04/15 05/15 06/15 04/01 05/05 06/15 07/15 

Antelope bitterbrush 3 04/10 06/05 07/30 11/01 04/10 06/05 09/15 11/01 

6,000 feet elevation 7,500 feet elevation 

Bluebunch wheatgrass 04/25 07/15 08/15 09/15 05/10 07/20 09/01 10/15 

Idaho fescue 05/10 07/20 09/01 10/01 05/20 07/25 09/10 10/15 

Crested wheatgrass 1,2 N/A 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Bottlebrush squirreltail 05/01 06/25 08/01 09/01 05/01 06/25 08/01 09/01 

Thurber’s needlegrass N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Sandberg bluegrass 2 04/15 06/25 08/01 09/01 05/01 07/01 08/01 09/01 

Antelope bitterbrush 3 05/01 07/01 08/20 11/01 05/01 07/01 10/01 11/01 

1

 Key species for seeded areas. 

2

 Key species for deer and antelope spring range. 

3

 Key species for deer winter range. 

4 N/A = plant does not occur at this elevation. 

vegetation is not detrimental to health and vigor of plants. Light to moderate defoliation of 

new growth usually is not detrimental to maintenance of health and vigor of herbaceous 

species since soil moisture will be available for spring and early summer growth, regrowth, 

and completion of the annual cycle prior to soil moisture depletion. Grazing of fall sprouting 

annual species may reduce competition with desirable perennial herbaceous species during 

the following growing season. Light to moderate utilization levels will retain adequate 

standing material and litter for soil protection from wind erosion, rainfall impact, and late 

winter and spring runoff. Heavy utilization levels will expose the soil surface to these 

negative impacts, especially on sites with marginal potential to produce a reasonable 

vegetation cover and in years with limited growth of protective vegetation cover. The 

potential for repeated grazing of localized areas, resulting in heavy utilization, is present with 

severe weather conditions and snow accumulation reducing livestock distribution. Negative 

impacts intensify on palatable shrub species when snow accumulation makes herbaceous 

species unavailable. Livestock management actions to maintain animal distribution are 

oftentimes limited by weather and accessibility. 

Winter use is usually the least detrimental to soils and to dormant riparian herbaceous and 

woody vegetation. Herbaceous riparian species are mostly dormant in this season with some 

active photosynthesis occurring during warming trends when plants are free of snow and ice 

cover. During these fair weather periods, dormant woody riparian species may be used to 

some degree; therefore, may be subject to live twig growth being removed. Riparian communities tend not to be used by livestock during moderate weather conditions where cold air 

drainage settles into low-lying areas throughout the majority of the winter. Dramatic recovery 

rates have occurred in riparian areas when cold drainage patterns and/or the availability of 

R-4 
 

Appendix R - Effects of Intensity and Season of Grazing 

alternate livestock water keep livestock away from streams. Where winter temperatures are 

moderate and cold air does not settle into low-lying areas, dormant woody riparian species 

can be negatively affected by browsing or trampling when livestock movement is restricted. 

The potential for livestock to concentrate in riparian communities to avoid severe weather 

conditions and attempt to drift to base property feeding grounds requires a high level of 

livestock management activity to avoid negative impacts to riparian vegetation resources at a 

time when access to public land is limited. Winter use provides rest during the growing 

period every year, promotes plant vigor, seed and root production, and seedling establishment. It may be the period of greatest use of browse species by both livestock and wildlife 

depending on temperatures, snow depth and duration, availability of other feed, animal 

concentration, forage/browse preference, and the extent of the woody plant community. A 

full understanding of expected livestock use patterns is necessary using this strategy or land 

use objectives may not be achieved. Utilization levels of herbaceous riparian species should 

be limited to maintain adequate material on streambanks and floodplains for protection during 

late winter and spring runoff. Heavy grazing during the winter can eliminate the streambank 

vegetation mat needed to prevent soil erosion from winter and spring floods or ice events. 

Throughout the winter, frozen soil and streambanks are more resilient to mechanical damage 

thereby minimizing streambank shear, thus resulting in little bank damage. 

Areas suitable for winter grazing by livestock are, at times, also prime winter range for 

native large herbivores. Spacial conflicts for habitat and conflicts for limited forage are 

more common than at other times of the year. With snow cover of herbaceous species, 

livestock browse of shrub species may remove a valuable winter source of feed for wild 

herbivores. Viability of mountain shrub species as well as quaking aspen recruitment may 

by jeopardized with winter use of these vegetation communities by livestock. 

Winter grazing may have the least impact to biological crusts as identified in the ICBEMP 

Final EIS. Early winter grazing when soils are wet or frozen is not harmful to biological 

crust cover. Heavy grazing that persists into late winter and early spring however becomes 

harmful because it limits time available for regrowth of lichens and algae. These organisms 

can continue to grow from late winter through early spring because of optimal soil water 

conditions, but growth is disrupted if heavy livestock grazing persists. After early to late 

spring, soil water conditions are no longer optimal for biological crust development. These 

impacts to biological crusts appear to be applicable to salt desert shrub and adjacent dry 

sagebrush cover types in the planning area. 

Spring (February 1 to May 1) 

Early growth of herbaceous species, primarily cool season species, occurs with rising soil 

temperatures. Minimal impacts to plant vigor and health occur with light to moderate 

utilization of early growth when adequate soil moisture is available for regrowth and 

completion of the annual growth cycle. Moderate utilization, in years with minimal soil 

moisture available for regrowth after use, could deplete plant vigor and health, especially 

during periods of critical growth. Heavy to severe defoliation can expose the soil surface to 

future erosive forces of wind and water. Additionally, heavy utilization can remove structural diversity valued for wildlife habitat. Use of palatable annual species early in this 

period may reduce competition with desirable native perennial species when grazing is 

removed and adequate soil moisture remains to complete growth cycles. 

Early growth of herbaceous vegetation contains high water content and thus, when combined with leached old growth, has only moderate forage quality, improving after mid-March 

in most years. The hazard of compaction of wet soils with hoof action of livestock may be 

present, resulting in a reduction of infiltration and soil moisture holding capacity in finetextured soils. Opportunities for good livestock distribution are present with more locations 

of available water and cool air temperature. 

R-5 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Riparian vegetation communities are less vulnerable to negative impacts from livestock use 

during this season for a number of reasons. Improving forage quality in upland communities 

will draw livestock from riparian communities as will available alternate water sources 

located outside streamside riparian communities. Spring use normally results in better 

livestock distribution between riparian and upland areas due to flooding of riparian areas and 

presence of highly palatable forage on the uplands. Also, cooler seasonal temperatures allow 

livestock to forage longer between visits to water sources. Opportunities for regrowth of 

herbaceous species are present through the remainder of the growing season. Most woody 

riparian species do not initiate growth until late spring, resulting in lower palatability than at 

other seasons of the year. If periods of use allow for adequate regrowth and do not correspond to the seasons of woody riparian species reproduction, grazing during this period can 

be very beneficial to riparian areas, especially in establishing woody plants. Conversely, this 

can be detrimental to upland grasses if grazing strategy results in utilization during the 

critical part (shoot elongation) of their growing season. Heavy defoliation and physical 

impacts by livestock can expose banks and floodplains to the hydraulic energy of high spring 

streamflow and peak runoff. Heavy use on finer textured soils in riparian areas with steep 

gradients may cause soil compaction, accelerated streambank losses or increased erosion 

rates. Hoof action can result in trampling of seed and litter into wet soil, although on some 

saturated soils, plants are more easily uprooted by grazing animals than would be possible 

later in the year. Care must be taken to prevent streambank hoof shearing and to leave 

adequate carryover vegetation for bank protection and silt filtering during spring runoff. 

Wild native herbivores typically reach their lowest physical condition during this period, 

especially in years with heavy snowfall and limited forage availability. As a result, the 

potential for competition between livestock and wildlife species early during spring use is 

great on winter ranges. Activities associated with livestock management during this period 

can also increase stress to wildlife species, especially within areas of raptor nesting habitat. 

Early spring grazing may have the potential for low impact to biological crusts as identified 

in the 2000 “Interior Columbia Basin Supplemental Draft EIS,” especially when that use 

exceeds slight to light in intensity. 

Upland Growing Season (April 1 to July 15) 

Upland plants are actively growing, removing carbohydrates from roots and crowns for early 

growth, regrowth, and seed formation. Herbaceous plants are susceptible to defoliation 

impacts as a result of the depletion of carbohydrates in roots and crowns, especially with 

moderate to heavy utilization, repeated grazing, and/or frequent growing season use. Grass 

species are especially susceptible to impacts from defoliation during seed formation and seed 

stalk elongation, due to the increased withdrawal of carbohydrate reserves from roots and 

crowns. Opportunities for regrowth and completion of the annual growth cycle after 

defoliation are limited, especially in years of below average precipitation. Introduced 

perennial bunchgrass species are better adapted to maintaining vigor with defoliation than 

native herbaceous species, having evolved with the grazing pressure of more large herbivores. Soil compaction from the physical presence of livestock remains a concern with 

moist soils, especially in areas with shallow and fine-textured soils. Upland shrub species 

reach maximum growth withdrawing shallow soil moisture early and deeper water reserves 

as the season progresses. Opportunities for good livestock distribution during the early 

portion of this season are present with more locations of available water, high palatability of 

high quality forage, and cool air temperature. Repeated use during the growing season can 

be expected to reduce vigor and health of desirable perennial herbaceous species and lead to 

trends away from desired future conditions. 

Riparian vegetation communities initiate active growth during this season, especially during 

the later portion. Impacts to riparian resources are minimal with light to moderate utilization 

levels on herbaceous and woody species and minimal physical impacts. Livestock begin to 

R-6 
 

Appendix R - Effects of Intensity and Season of Grazing 

concentrate in riparian vegetation communities as the season progresses for higher quality 

forage, browse, water, and shade with higher ambient temperatures. Opportunities for 

regrowth of herbaceous vegetation following use remain throughout the summer with 

available moisture in riparian soils. Desirable woody riparian species become vulnerable to 

impacts from moderate to heavy use mid-way through this season when active growth is 

initiated. Heavy levels of utilization or high levels of physical impacts can expose banks and 

floodplains to impacts from high streamflows during late spring and summer flooding. 

Late spring grazing may have the potential for moderate impact to biological crusts as 

identified in the 2000 “Interior Columbia Basin Supplemental Draft EIS,” especially when 

that use exceeds slight to light in intensity. 

Summer (July 1 to October 31) 

A deferred season of use provides for livestock grazing after most of the upland species have 

reached seed-ripe stage and replenished carbohydrate reserves. Most upland plants, including native and introduced bunchgrass species, have completed their annual growth cycles 

and have entered senescence. As a result, upland communities have declining forage quality 

and lower palatability to wildlife and domestic herbivores. Livestock will tend to turn to 

palatable browse species, especially when herbaceous utilization levels become heavy late 

during this period, to maintain a given level of nutrition when mixed with lower quality 

herbaceous feeds. With the onset of senescence, native upland vegetation communities are 

less susceptible to negative impacts of light to moderate defoliation. Introduced perennial 

bunchgrass species are better adapted to maintaining vigor with defoliation than native 

herbaceous species, having evolved with more large herbivores. Heavy to severe defoliation 

can expose the soil surface to future erosive forces of wind and water. Livestock distribution 

away from water sources is limited by high ambient temperatures increasing the need for 

frequent watering and causing cattle to graze primarily during the evenings and throughout 

the night, while becoming less active during daylight hours. Localized impacts occur with 

defoliation and the physical impacts of livestock, especially near water sources and other 

areas of concentrated activity. Additionally, nutrient concentration will occur in areas of 

concentrated livestock activity. 

Riparian vegetation species, both woody and herbaceous are actively growing with a 

sustained source of water available for continued photosynthesis. The potential for regrowth 

of herbaceous species remains through most of the summer, while soil moisture and temperatures are maintained. Regrowth of woody riparian species, especially Lewis’ mockorange, is 

limited after moderate to heavy use, especially late in the period. Forage value and palatability are high from standing riparian herbaceous and woody growth. The potential for poor 

livestock distribution, away from riparian communities, exists as the availability of stock 

water in upland communities declines, forage value in upland communities declines, and 

with higher ambient temperatures. Livestock tend to concentrate in riparian vegetation 

communities for water, high quality green forage, and shade when intensive livestock 

management is lacking. Use during this period typically provides no rest during the growing 

period for plant vigor, reproduction, or litter accumulation and generally results in heavy 

utilization of woody riparian vegetation, trampling damage, soil compaction, and accelerated 

streambank erosion. Since rest is never provided, riparian plants do not replace food 

reserves in roots; seed may or may not be produced. Concentration of livestock in riparian 

areas results in heavy use of woody and herbaceous riparian species. Impacts to riparian 

values are typically greater during summer and early fall use than at other seasons of the 

year. 

Competition between wildlife species and livestock is usually minimal when summer 

utilization levels are maintained at light to moderate levels. Those wildlife species that are 

mobile tend to inhabit portions of the range less used by livestock, while those less mobile 

species tend not to be significantly impacted so long as utilization levels and related management activities do not disrupt habitat and security. 

R-7 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Summer grazing may have the potential for high impact to biological crusts as identified in 

the 2000 “Interior Columbia Basin Supplemental Draft EIS,” especially when that use 

exceeds slight to light in intensity. 

Fall (September 15 to December 15) 

Herbaceous upland plants remain senescent with minimal new growth and some regrowth 

during warming conditions when soil moisture has been replenished by fall precipitation. 

Upland herbaceous health and vigor is not impaired with light to moderate utilization of 

cured standing materials. Heavy to severe use may expose soils to erosion from wind and 

water for an extended period through the initiation of spring growth. Cooler ambient 

temperatures, with some fall regrowth of upland herbaceous species, may provide for better 

livestock distribution than during summer. Forage quality of upland herbaceous species 

remains low, though improving with the initiation of new fall growth. Livestock will retain a 

percentage of palatable browse species in their diets, when available, to maintain a given level 

of nutrition by combining it with lower quality herbaceous feeds. 

Riparian herbaceous and woody species enter dormancy with cool temperatures and freezing 

conditions. Opportunities for limited livestock grazing of pastures containing riparian values 

are present so long as utilization levels on herbaceous and woody species do not impair 

riparian function with peak streamflows. Moderate to heavy use of riparian herbaceous 

species, with little opportunity for regrowth to facilitate sediment retention, may expose 

banks and floodplains to hydraulic forces of high streamflow during winter and spring 

runoff. The potential for improved livestock distribution, away from riparian communities, 

is greater than during summer use, though less than during spring use. During years with 

extended summer heat and drought, livestock water may be limited to riparian communities. 

Use during this season can be detrimental to riparian vegetation if heavy utilization of woody 

species occurs because temperatures are warm, fall green-up has not occurred, or utilization 

is not closely monitored. Fall grazing usually allows for less soil compaction in riparian 

areas; although streambank damage may be considerable from hoof action shearing if 

excessive fall precipitation occurs. Livestock impacts to riparian vegetation are directly 

related to the intensity of livestock management practices implemented by operators. 

Livestock’s use of big game winter range can limit the availability of both herbaceous and 

browse species for wildlife during subsequent winter periods as identified in the section on 

winter use. Competition between livestock and wildlife species increases with greater levels 

of utilization and the resultant increase of browse species in livestock diets. 

Late fall grazing may have the potential for low impact to biological crusts as identified in 

the 2000 “Interior Columbia Basin Supplemental Draft EIS,” especially when that use 

exceeds slight to light in intensity. 

Seasonlong 

Seasonlong grazing of a pasture generally begins during the growing season and extends to 

the end of the period of authorized use, typically into the fall period. Many of the impacts 

associated with use during the growing season occur with seasonlong use. Additional 

impacts occur from localized livestock concentration late in the season as sources of water 

diminish, as forage quality in upland communities declines, and as ambient temperatures 

rise. The effects of seasonlong grazing on species composition are largely dependent on the 

degree of utilization on the key species. Although the proposed stocking rates are designed 

to achieve moderate levels of utilization on most areas, factors such as terrain, location of 

fences and water, and vegetation types available, prevent uniform patterns of grazing. Heavy 

R-8 
 

Appendix R - Effects of Intensity and Season of Grazing 

grazing will inevitably occur in some areas while light utilization will occur in others. A trend 

away from desired future conditions is expected in areas receiving moderate to heavy 

utilization on an annual basis, especially when that use occurs during critical growing 

periods. 

Livestock tend to concentrate in riparian communities from summer on, when these areas are 

available. Decreases in woody and herbaceous riparian species are expected to occur in 

streamside riparian vegetation communities accessible to livestock under seasonlong use. 

Livestock prefer green herbaceous and new growth of woody species within riparian 

communities as upland communities dry and loose forage quality in late summer. This 

strategy typically provides no rest during the growing period for plant vigor, reproduction, or 

liter accumulation. It generally results in heavy utilization of woody riparian vegetation, 

trampling damage, soil compaction, and accelerated streambank erosion. 

No pastures in the planning area are scheduled for yearlong (March 1 through February 28) 

grazing by domestic livestock. 

Exclusion (No Scheduled Livestock or Wild Horse Use) 

Defoliation of herbaceous and shrub species is limited to that which occurs from insect and 

native herbivore use. Except in instances when native herbivore numbers are high, upland 

utilization levels during the growing season and dormant seasons are light. In any year, 

small areas of concentrated native herbivore use may have moderate to high utilization 

levels. Residual standing herbaceous material and litter accumulation is greater than with 

scheduled use by livestock or wild horses in any season. Soil protection from rain impact is 

high, limiting erosion and improving soil structure and infiltration. The initiation of herbaceous growth with warming spring soil temperatures may be slightly delayed due to greater 

interception of solar radiation by standing and down litter. 

The complete elimination of livestock and wild horses from riparian vegetation communities 

in many cases provides for a more rapid rate of recovery of both herbaceous and woody 

components than will scheduled use in any season. Residual herbaceous material and a 

diverse age structure of woody species will protect streambanks during peak flows of all 

seasons. In the absence of consideration of the ecological linkages between upland, riparian, 

and aquatic communities, potential rates of recovery of riparian communities may be limited 

when upland management plans are not designed to restore and protect the entire landscape. 

Grazing Schedules 

Livestock grazing schedules are implemented to provide opportunity for unacceptable 

resource conditions to improve, to maintain resource values which are consistent with the 

DRFC and other management objectives, or to avoid unacceptable impacts to resource 

values or conflicts between uses of public land resources. Anticipated short and long-term 

impacts from annual use of a pasture during any one season are presented above. Though 

some established grazing schedules provide for annual use of a pasture during one specified 

season, more often the mix of management objectives associated with a given pasture can 

better be met by varying the season of use over a repeating cycle of two or more years. 

Multiyear grazing schedules are primarily developed with varied seasons of use through an 

established rotation to allow desirable vegetation species the opportunity to regain vigor and 

health for future growth, productivity, and sustainability of resource values. Similarly, 

opportunities for recovery from grazing impacts to other resources, specific to a season of 

use, may be provided by varying the season in which livestock graze a pasture. Long-term 

and cumulative impacts of implementing a grazing scheme will define trend toward future 

vegetation communities and resource conditions. 

R-9 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Conversely, constraints necessary to meet multiple management objectives may limit opportunities for grazing use to one short period annually, or no scheduled use in some years, to 

ensure that all management objectives are met. Examples include the compounding effects of 

objectives to improve riparian function or meet other riparian management objectives while 

maintaining upland stability and function. Though scheduled use during the upland growing 

season annually may be compatible with objectives to improve riparian function, health and 

vigor of desert steppe vegetation communities can seldom be improved or maintained with 

annual growing season defoliation. Similarly, scheduled deferment of grazing use until after 

seed-set may be compatible with meeting upland vegetation management objectives while not 

maintaining healthy riparian vegetation communities which support proper functioning 

condition. As a result, the combined objectives may further constrain opportunities for 

varied seasons of use. 

Speciality Pastures 

Construction of fences and use of other barriers to livestock movement may be utilized to 

create speciality pastures and implement grazing schedules consistent with meeting specific 

management objectives when resource values, such as riparian vegetation communities, are 

present in only a portion of an existing pasture. Development of speciality pastures is 

applicable in areas where resource values encompass a small enough area to justify fencing 

and to manage them separately from areas that are solely comprised of upland vegetation 

communities and few other resource values. Speciality pastures may continue to be grazed 

while meeting objectives or excluded from livestock use. Construction of fences to create 

corridor or riparian pastures allows riparian recovery or maintenance while allowing grazing 

of other uplands sites to occur with grazing strategies providing for more livestock use. 

Riparian pastures are normally areas of rangeland containing both upland and riparian 

vegetation communities large enough to support some livestock use while managed to attain 

riparian, water quality, and/or aquatic objectives, as opposed to stream side pastures created 

through corridor fencing. Total rest of riparian pastures is required at times during the first 

few years of corrective management of a deteriorated riparian area where the objective 

includes the establishment of shrub or tree growth above the reach of livestock. As riparian 

vegetation within riparian pastures regains vigor and productivity, available forage for 

livestock use may often be increased while continuing to meet management objectives. 

Corridor pastures are generally excluded from livestock use, or used only for trailing 

purposes, since the areas enclosed are usually too small and narrow for proper grazing. 

Grazing Rotations 

Most multiyear grazing schedules can be defined as either a deferred-rotation or rest-rotation 

schedule. Both types of grazing schedules were designed primarily to promote plant vigor, 

seed production, seedling establishment, root production, and litter accumulation for herbaceous plants in upland ecosystems. Deferred rotation grazing schedules provide for one or 

more years of grazing use after seed-set, following one or more years of growing season use. 

In its simplest form, a deferred rotation grazing schedule within a pasture provides for a 2­

year rotation cycle with 1 year of use during the critical period of plant growth followed by 1 

year of deferment of use until after the growing season. More conservative schedules 

provide for a higher proportion of deferment than years of use during the period of active 

growth. Rest-rotation schedules allow for similar opportunities for recovery with one or 

more years of the grazing rotation in which no use is scheduled. Caution should be implemented to ensure that higher levels of utilization during use periods of a pasture do not 

preclude meeting management objectives while providing for rest in other pastures. At 

moderate utilization levels, either rest-rotation or deferred-rotation grazing systems can 

allow for adequate recovery of upland herbaceous root growth and associated carbohydrate 

storage following the impacts of critical season defoliation. The number of years of rest or 

deferment necessary to meet vegetation management objectives is dependent on a number of 

factors including resource conditions, soil and climatic factors, and the intensity of grazing 

use. With an increase in the proportion of years of rest or deferred use to the number of 

R-10 
Appendix R - Effects of Intensity and Season of Grazing 

years of use during the critical season, the opportunity for recovery and maintenance of plant 

health and vigor is improved. Recovery following heavy use during the critical growing 

season may require a substantial number of rest or deferment years to provide adequate 

opportunities for recovery of health and vigor, especially when growth conditions are poor or 

if the vegetation resource is in poor ecological condition. 

Most rest-rotation and deferred-rotation grazing schedules, designed for the physiological 

needs of herbaceous upland plants, can be successful within wide, low gradient sedge, rush, 

and grass-dominated riparian sites, provided utilization levels in riparian communities are 

maintained within acceptable limits. These strategies have been found to maintain species 

diversity and productivity of meadow systems when use is deferred in these areas until after 

seedripe. This promotes seed and root production, seedling establishment, and total growing 

period rest for each pasture every year. The need for additional livestock management may 

be necessary to maintain livestock distribution. Riparian herbaceous species having a 

natural potential to regrow following use provide for recovery and maintenance of resource 

values in years of the rotation when grazing occurs during the growing season. Caution in 

years of mid to late season use should ensure that cover necessary to buffer erosion from 

floods and ice is maintained and to trap sediment during high flow events. Similarly, in 

years of the rotation when grazing occurs during a season with high soil moisture, caution 

should be implemented to prevent trampling and shear damage to banks. 

Rest rotation and deferred-rotation schedules are usually inappropriate for shrub-dominated 

riparian areas, especially in the primary stages of willow establishment and development. 

Establishment and growth of woody riparian species, which is attained in years when the 

pasture is rested or during a season of use compatible with progress toward attaining riparian 

objectives, may be nullified in the years of use when grazing occurs during a period not 

consistent with maintenance or improvement of riparian values. Maintenance of established 

riparian communities containing a woody component may ultimately result in a population 

of only mature decadent stands of woody species, providing no ongoing replacement of 

younger stands. When these schedules are implemented, levels of use of woody riparian 

species must be monitored because utilization occurring during the summer months has been 

found to limit woody plant succession on gravel bars and other scoured areas along stream 

channels. Heavy utilization during late grazing periods can lead to removal of vegetation 

needed to protect streambanks from ice and water scouring. 

Improvement of vegetation composition toward desired conditions may require recruitment 

of new individuals of desired species through seeding, planting or natural regeneration from 

vegetation materials on site. Establishment of desirable seedlings into a vegetation community may require a sequence of rest and/or deferment years to avoid defoliation and physical 

impacts of livestock presence. Similarly, recruitment of new shoots of desirable woody 

species in upland and riparian may require more than 1 year of rest to establish old wood, 

which is less palatable, and to allow growth above the reach of domestic herbivores. Removal of livestock from riparian vegetation communities may be required to allow these 

communities to recover herbaceous and woody species composition adequate to attain 

functioning condition. Upon improvement to functioning condition, a grazing schedule 

consistent with maintaining riparian function may be implemented. 

Generally within desert steppe vegetation communities, no more than one period of use of a 

given pasture is planned in any 1-year’s grazing schedule. An exception is spring/fall use in 

which livestock are removed in the spring while sufficient soil moisture is available for 

regrowth. Fall use occurs after most vegetation species have completed their growth cycle 

and are dormant. This schedule is used primarily within seedings of nonnative perennial 

bunchgrasses to maintain productivity and availability of species adapted to grazing use. 

R-11 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

R-12
 
Appendix S - Standard Implementation Features and Procedures 

Appendix S - Standard Implementation Features and 

Procedures 

Rangeland projects and improvements are proposed and completed as a portion of adaptive 

management implementation to help reduce resource management conflicts and to achieve 

multiple use management objectives. The following standards and design elements will be 

adhered to in constructing rangeland improvements within the planning area. Design 

elements have been standardized over time to mitigate impacts encountered during rangeland 

improvement installation. 

•	 Preparation of site-specific NEPA documentation of analysis of the proposed project 

(EIS, EA, categorical exclusion, or administrative determination) will be required prior 

to implementation. Proposed rangeland improvements may be modified or abandoned 

or an EIS may be required if the analysis indicates that significant adverse environmental impacts cannot be avoided or mitigated. 

•	 A wilderness inventory of public land within the planning area has been completed as 

required by FLPMA. As a result of this inventory, certain Federal land in the planning 

area was designated as WSA’s. All rangeland management activities, including project 

development and maintenance, in WSA’s will be consistent with BLM’s IMPLWR 

unless and until the area is removed from the study category (either wilderness 

designation or the WSA is released by Congress). Impacts of actions proposed within 

WSA’s will be assessed, before implementation of any management activities, to 

ensure that they meet policy. 

•	 Every effort will be made to avoid adverse impacts to cultural resources. A cultural 

resources inventory will be completed prior to any surface-disturbing activities 

associated with the implementation of proposed rangeland improvements. This will be 

part of the preplanning steps of a project and the results will be part of the NEPA 

compliance prior to implementation. If significant cultural values are identified, 

mitigating actions may include relocation, redesign or abandonment of the project. 

However, where mitigation is not possible, the BLM will consult with the SHPO and 

the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. This is in accordance with the programmatic memorandum of agreement by and between the BLM, the Council, and the 

National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, dated January 14, 1980, 

which sets forth a procedure for developing appropriate mitigative measures, in 

compliance with section 106 of the “National Historic Preservation Act” (1966). 

Management adherence to agreed upon mitigative measures will be implemented in 

compliance with these regulations. 

•	 If a project could potentially affect any listed or proposed threatened or endangered 

species or its critical habitat, consultation with the USFWS will be initiated (ESA). 

The project may be modified, relocated, or abandoned in order to meet ESA requirements. If a project may contribute to the need to list a Federal candidate or Bureau 

sensitive species, a technical assistance request will be made to the USFWS. Any 

disturbances to Bureau assessment and/or tracking species will be documented. 

Mitigating actions to minimize impacts to all special status species will be incorporated 

where practical and feasible. 

•	 Projects which have the potential to adversely affect relevant or important values in 

ACEC’s will be evaluated to identify potential impacts. Proposed actions would be 

redesigned to avoid adverse impacts, appropriate mitigating actions will be required, or 

the proposed project would be abandoned to maintain the relevant and important 

values for which the ACEC was designated. 

•	 Surface-disturbing activities associated with project implementation will be held to a 

minimum necessary to complete the project. Disturbed soil will be rehabilitated to 

S-1 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

blend into surrounding soil surfaces and vegetated as needed with adapted perennial 

species to stabilize soils and preclude invasion and dominance of undesirable and 

weedy species. 

•	 Projects which manipulate vegetation composition, including seedings and woody 

species control projects, will be completed primarily to direct vegetation composition 

toward desired conditions and to enhance and sustain multiple use values. The 

preferred method for control of woody species is burning with management ignited or 

natural ignited fire, but may include cutting, chaining, or spraying of herbicides. 

Vegetation treatment projects will be designed and implemented utilizing irregular 

patterns of treatment consistent with topography, VRM, and site potential. Design will 

provide optimum edge effect for visual quality and desirable landscape diversity for all 

values. Layout and design will be coordinated with interested publics, including 

ODFW. 

•	 Seeding of herbaceous and shrub species will be accomplished primarily by use of 

rangeland drill or similar techniques to enhance the probability of seeding success. 

Broadcast seeding of herbaceous and shrub species will occur on small disturbed areas, 

rough terrain, and rocky areas where drilling is inappropriate. Proposed seeding within 

WSA’s or RNA’s will be addressed on a case-by-case basis in accordance with 

policies. Additionally, current and accepted technologies (including drilling, broadcast 

seeding, and planting of seedlings) will be implemented to ensure the success of 

establishment of desired species mixtures and attainment of desired future conditions 

within vegetation communities. Methods of establishment used will be determined on 

a site-specific basis during project planning. Seed mixtures will be determined on a 

site-specific basis to include perennial species adapted to climatic and edaphic conditions, based on the best available information from appropriate State and local rangeland and wildlife experts. Where rangeland drills are used, slopes will be drilled on the 

contour to minimize soil movement. All seedings, including those areas rehabilitated 

following wildland fire, will be deferred from livestock grazing for a minimum of two 

growing seasons and until seedlings have established vigor, to allow seeding establishment. Additional herbaceous production resulting from vegetation manipulation 

projects and fire will not be allocated for use until monitoring data support that it is 

available on a sustained basis. 

•	 The existing road and trail system will be utilized to provide access for rangeland 

project construction and maintenance. Unimproved trails and tracks may be developed 

to reach construction sites unless this action is inconsistent with the management of 

SMA’s. Other means of access may be required. New trails and tracks would continue 

to be used for project maintenance. Any new authorized road construction will be in 

accordance with standard operating procedures and BMP’s for road construction. 

•	 Normal maintenance of existing projects and new projects will occur, as consistent with 

original design, through the life of the plan in order to support authorized uses of 

public land. Maintenance can include activities such as replacement of pipeline 

sections, fencepost and wire replacement, cleaning of reservoirs within the original 

disturbance area, replacement of water troughs, cleaning and maintenance of spring 

boxes, cleaning or resetting of cattleguards, and maintenance of livestock handling 

facilities. While maintenance of existing facilities may occur in SMA’s, there may be 

further mitigation actions required to ensure that values of these places are not impaired. 

•	 A visual resource contrast rating procedure will be employed to minimize adverse 

impacts created by proposed projects on the landscape. 

•	 Additional design features are identified in the following discussion of the individual 

types of improvements. 

•	 Reservoir development would involve the construction of pits and dams to impound 

surface water for livestock, wildlife, and other resource values. Rights to use water on 

public land associated with the construction of reservoirs and pits will be acquired, 

perfected, maintained and administered under the substantive and procedural laws of 

the State of Oregon. Pits will be constructed in playas, dry lake-beds, and other natural 

S-2 
Appendix S - Standard Implementation Features and Procedures 

depressions. Dams will be constructed in drainages. Water storage capacity of pits or 

reservoirs would generally be less than 2.0 acre-feet. Fill material to complete dam 

construction may come from the impoundment area or a borrow area outside the 

impoundment area. Excavated material from pits may be piled adjacent to the pit. 

Topsoil will be stockpiled to be used for rehabilitation of borrow areas and other areas 

stripped of soil. As consistent with resource objectives, reservoirs and pits may be 

excluded from livestock use through fencing or other means 

•	 All State of Oregon water well drilling regulations will be adhered to, both in drilling 

and equipping. A safety devise will be installed on new power line transformers to 

prevent electrocution of raptors. Metal storage tanks will be painted to blend with the 

surrounding landscape. Consistent with VRM objectives of the area, wells and 

associated structures will be located where topographic features or vegetation would 

serve to screen associated structures and disturbances from the casual observer. 

•	 Spring development will involve digging or drilling to intercept naturally occurring 

waterflow. Perforated pipe and/or collection boxes will be utilized to collect and 

divert water through a pipeline to troughs away from vegetation communities associated with spring areas. Usually, the spring source and trough overflow area will be 

fenced to prevent livestock grazing and trampling impacts to riparian vegetation 

communities. Water will be made available inside fenced spring developments for 

wildlife use. In those areas that receive recreation use, access may be provided via a 

style (stairs over a fenceline) or a walk-through devise specifically designed to 

preclude livestock passage. 

•	 Pipelines will be constructed to convey water from wells, springs, reservoirs, and other 

water sources to troughs in areas lacking adequate water to maintain appropriate 

animal distribution. Troughs will usually be placed in upland vegetation communities 

less vulnerable to livestock impacts and soil compaction. Generally, 1 to 2-inch 

diameter plastic pipe will be buried with a pipe-laying equipment consisting of a 

modified ripper tooth mounted on a tractor. Pipelines will normally be buried to a 

depth adequate to protect the development, though seldom deeper than 30 inches. 

Where obstructions prohibit pipeline burial, the pipe may be laid on the ground surface 

and covered with borrow soil. At times, reservoirs and other storage facilities may be 

constructed along pipelines. Reservoirs associated with pipelines will normally be 

fenced to exclude livestock, while providing water for wildlife use. In the event of 

equipment failure, reservoirs may provide temporary emergency water for livestock. 

Access points to and escape routes from water troughs will be provided for birds and 

small mammals. 

•	 Fences will be designed to develop a barrier to livestock movement, while minimally 

impeding wildlife movement. Established standards for fence construction on BLM 

land will be followed (BLM Manual Handbook H-1741-1). Design features will be 

developed specific to each proposed fencing project to accomplish the desired objectives while avoiding undesired impacts and controversy. Surface disturbance associated with fence construction and maintenance will be minimized. Though the canopy 

of vegetation along fencelines may be removed and scattered, no blading or scraping 

will be authorized to clear routes for fence construction. All fences will be consistent 

with the VRM class of the area. Gates will be located and constructed at appropriate 

locations to provide for livestock passage. Gates, and as appropriate cattleguards, will 

be located at road crossings to provide vehicular passage. Gates will be constructed 

adjacent to all cattleguards to provide passage by equipment which cannot cross 

cattleguards. Recreation access will be provided where fences are necessary in the 

vicinity of recreation sites. 

•	 Wildlife guzzlers will be constructed in locations with limited availability of water for 

wildlife use, primarily lower elevation desert habitats. They will consist of an apron 

designed to collect precipitation, a buried storage tank, and associated pipeline 

arrangement for delivery of water to a trough available to birds, small mammals, and 

other wildlife species. Guzzlers will normally be fenced or designed to exclude livestock 

S-3 
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

access. Projects will be designed to blend with the surrounding landscape and be 

consistent with VRM class of the area. 

•	 Prescribed fire, both management ignited and natural ignitions, will be designed and 

implemented to manage woody species dominance and to meet other land use plan 

objectives. Projects will be designed to direct vegetation communities toward desired 

future conditions and to meet management objectives for wildlife, water shed function, 

and other resource values. Additionally, vegetation manipulation projects will be 

designed to provide and maintain vegetation and structural diversity and connectivity. 

S-4 
 

Appendix T - Areas Removed from Livestock Grazing 

Appendix T - Areas Removed from Livestock Grazing 

Table T-1 is a listing of areas within the planning area from which livestock grazing is discontinued and areas within grazing allotments excluded from livestock grazing with implementation of the SEORMP. Approximately 58,900 acres will have livestock grazing discontinued. 

Approximately 250 additional areas, encompassing an estimated 18,000 acres, within livestock 

grazing allotments are excluded from livestock grazing. These exclusion areas protect 

resource values or facilities from livestock impacts. Examples of resource values and facilities 

which may require livestock exclusion for protection include, but are not limited to: identified 

riparian vegetation communities adjacent to streams, reservoirs, springs, and wetlands; 

developed water sources; special status plant or animal habitats; relevant and important 

values for which ACEC’s are designated; outstandingly remarkable values (ORV’s) for which 

NWSR’s were designated; wilderness values; research and study plots; administrative sites; 

recreation sites; archaeological sites; and waste disposal sites. The accompanying table lists 

by allotment those areas of livestock exclusion which are generally greater than 10 acres. 

This listing is not inclusive of all areas from which livestock are currently excluded. Specifically, it does not include a significant number of enclosed spring developments and other 

small areas from which livestock are excluded. Through the life of the RMP, adaptive management may identify additional areas which may be excluded from livestock grazing to meet 

management objectives. Similarly, grazing use may be restored to areas previously excluded 

from livestock grazing within allotments when appropriate livestock management can be 

implemented while protecting the values for which the area was previously excluded. 

T-1 
Table T-1.—Areas within the planning area from which livestock grazing is discontinued and areas withing gra

from livestoci grazing with implementation of the SEORMP 

Area Allotment BLM acres Jordan Resource Area Jordan Craters2 15,856 Luesher Pasture2 3,084 Owyhee Wild & Scenic River Coridor2,6 25,923 Hardin Stream Exclosure 4 Jackies Butte Summer (01101) 72 Rome North 4 Jackies Butte Summer (01101) 4167 Sand Hollow Exclosure 5 Jackies Butte Summer (01101) 6128 Warm Springs Exclosure 5 Ambrose-Maher (001102) 556 Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #3 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 27 Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #4 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 87 Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #5 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 15 

Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #6 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 19 

Willow Creek Stream Exclosure #7 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 54 

Little Whitehorse 1972 Stream Exclosure 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 66 

Upper Willow Creek Stream Exclosure 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 69 

Middle Willow Creek Stream Exclosure 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 25 

Lower Willow Creek Stream Exclosure 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 18 

Campground Stream Exclosure (KOA) 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 14 

Beaverdam Stream Exclosure 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 28 

Lower Little Whitehorse Stream Exclosure 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 12 

Upper Little Whitehorse 1991 Stream Exclosure 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 130 

Little Whitehorse Stream Exclosure #1 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 35 

Little Whitehorse Stream Exclosure #2 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 13 

Little Whitehorse Stream Exclosure #3 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 54 

Little Whitehorse Stream Exclosure #4 4 Whitehorse Butte (01206) 37 

West Little Owyhee Upland Exclosure 4 Louse Canyon Community (01307) >10(estimated) 

Anderson Crossing Exclosure 5 Louse Canyon Community (01307) 215 

Upper West Little Owyhee Exclosure 5 Louse Canyon Community (01307) 3,745 

West Little Owyhee Stream Exclosure 4 Anderson (01401) >10(estimated) 

Five Bar Exclosure 5 Anderson (01401) 869 

Anderson Crossing Exclosure 5 Star Valley Community (01402) 363 

Jim Spring Exclosure 4 East Cow Creek (10903) 945 

Cow Creek Upland Exclosure 4 East Cow Creek (10903) 11 

T-2
Area Allotment BLM acres 

Greeley Bar Exclosure 5 Morcom (10907) 167 

Rattlesnake Reservoir Exclosure #2 4 Eiguren (11305) 11 

Upper West Little Owyhee Exclosure 5 Campbell (11306) 963 

BV Study Plot 4 Saddle Butte (20805) >10(estimated) 

Saddle Butte Guzzler Exclosure 4 Saddle Butte (20805) >10(estimated) 

Bull Creek Exclosure 5 Saddle Butte (20805) 76 

Ryegrass Exclosure 5 Saddle Butte (20805) 143 

Sand Spring Exclosure 5 Saddle Butte (20805) 36 

Granite Creek Exclosure 5 Saddle Butte (20805) 4 

Fletcher Trails Exclosure 5 Saddle Butte (20805) 227 

Bogus Stream Exclosure #1 (Bench) 4 West Cow Creek (20902) 13 

Bogus Stream Exclosure #2 (Falls) 4 West Cow Creek (20902) >10(estimated) 

Batch Lake Upland Exclosure 4 West Cow Creek (20902) >10(estimated) 

Bogus Lake Exclosure 4 West Cow Creek (20902) 33 

Noon Reservoir Exclosure 4 Arock (21001) 16 

CCC (Jordan Valley) Upland Exclosure 4 Antelope (21002) 67 

Deer Creek Spring 4 Gilbert (21301) >10(estimated) 

Malheur Resource Area 

Owyhee Wild & Scenic River Corridor 2 882 

Dunlevy-Sayer Botanical Exclosure 2 569 

Leslie Gulch 2 11,673 

Owyhee Reservoir State Park 2 832 

Historic Birch Creek Ranch 1 106 

Brogan Research Exclosure 4 Brogan Canyon(00148) >10(estimated) 

Cave Creek Stream Exclosure 4 Calf Creek (00162) 444 

Chukar Park Campground 4 Chukar Park (00225) >10(estimated)

 Squaw Creek Reservoir Exclosure 4 Harper (00301) 16 

Moritz Pasture 4 Black Butte (00304) 850 

ODFW Headquarters Stream Exclosure 4 Black Butte (00304) >10(estimated) 

Riverside Recreation Site 4 Black Butte (00304) >10(estimated) 

Canyon Creek Stream Exclosure 4 Jonesboro (00306) 90 

Canyon Creek Reservoir Exclosure 4 Jonesboro (00306) 3 

Hunter Creek Riparian Exclosure 4 Jonesboro (00306) 760 

Needham Well / Lincoln Bench Botanical Exclosures 4 North Harper (00402) >10(estimated) 

Keeney Pass 4 North Harper (00402) 74 

Cottonwood Rehab Stream Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Two (10201) >10(estimated) 

NG Creek Riparian Stream Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Two (10201) 568 

South Fork Indian Creek Stream Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Three (10202) >10(estimated) 

Allot #3 Reservoir Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Three (10202) 11 

Zotto Reservoir Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Three (10202) 38 

T-3
Area Allotment BLM acres 

Sheep Spring Reservoir Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Four (10203) >10(estimated) 

Chicken Creek Noodlebowl Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Four (10203) >10(estimated) 

South Cottonwood Reservoir Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Four (10203) 24 

Coyne Riparian Stream Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Four (10203) 71 

Pats Reservoir Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Four (10203) 8 

Hog Creek Stream Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Four (10203) 804 

Fiddleneck Botanical Exclosures 1, 2, 3, 4 4 Allotment Number Four (010203) 59 

Malheur River Stream Exclosure 4 Allotment Number Six (10204) 80 

Horse Flat Reservoir Exclosure 4 Castle Rock (10211) >10(estimated) 

Hunter Spring 4 Castle Rock (10211) >10(estimated) 

LM Riparian Stream Exclosure 4 Malheur River (10219) 43 

Sheep Rock Spring Exclosure 4 Willow Basin (10222) >10(estimated) 

Stacey Cabin and Callahan Stream Exclosures 4 Keeney Creek (10401) 44 

Ryefield Reservoir Exclosure 4 Nyssa (10403) 4 

Mud Spring and Reservoir Exclosures 4 Nyssa (10403) 17 

Rock Creek Riparian Stream Exclosure 4 Nyssa (10403) 1,605 

Sagebrush Reservoir Exclosure 4 Nyssa (10403) 2

 Lone Willow Spring Exclosure 4 Nyssa (10403) >10(estimated) 

Frog Pond Spring Exclosure 4 Nyssa (10403) <10 

Double Mountain Botanical Exclosure 4 Freezeout (10404) <10 

Upper Flowing Well Exclosure 4 Freezeout (10404) >10(estimated) 

Lower Flowing Well Exclosure 4 Freezeout (10404) >10(estimated) 

Twin Springs Exclosure 4 Freezeout (10404) 18 

Kane Spring Reservoir Exclosure 4 Freezeout (10404) 66 

DM Spring and Reservoir Exclosure 4 Freezeout (10404) >10(estimated) 

Little DM Spring Exclosure 4 Freezeout (10404) >10(estimated) 

Greeley Bar Exclosure 5 Quartz Mountain (10406) 55 

Vines Hill Reservoir Exclosure 4 Little Valley (10407) 18 

Brown Butte Wildlife Upland Exclosure 4 Blackjack (10501) 228 

Succor Creek Botanical Exclosure 4 Three Fingers (10503) >10(estimated) 

Saddle Butte Reservoir Exclosure 4 Three Fingers (10503) >10(estimated) 

T-4
Area Allotment BLM acres 

Three Fingers (10503) >10(estimated) 

Antelope Test Plot 4 Three Fingers (10503) >10(estimated) 

Dog Creek Pit Exclosure 4 Spring Mountain (10504) >10(estimated) 

Carter Wildlife Exclosure 4 Spring Mountain (10504) >10(estimated) 

Mahogany Test Plot 4 Spring Mountain (10504) >10(estimated) 

Bench Reservoir Exclosure 4 McCain Spring (10505) >10(estimated) 

Blowout Reservoir Exclosure 4 McCain Spring (10505) >10(estimated) 

Alkali Experimental Plots 1 & 2 4 Board Corral (10507) >10(estimated) 

Antelope Springs Habitat Exclosure 4 Board Corral (10507) 18 

Alkali Springs Exclosure 4 South Alkali (20100) >10(estimated) 

Alkali Test Plots 3, 4, and 5 4 South Alkali (20100) >10(estimated) 

Alkali Botanical Exclosures (burn and no burn) 4 South Alkali (20100) >10(estimated) 

Henry Gulch Stream Exclosure 4 South Alkali (20100) >10(estimated) 

Dry Gulch Stream Exclosure 4 Alkali Spring (20101) >10(estimated) 

Birch Creek O.T. Exclosure 4 Alkali Spring (20101) >10(estimated) 

McDowell Spring Exclosure 4 Alkali Spring(20101) >10(estimated) 

Tub Spring Exclosure 4 Alkali Spring(20101) >10(estimated) 

Lower Mud Spring Exclosure 4 Alkali Spring(20101) >10(estimated) 

Little Mac Stream Exclosure 4 Alkali Spring(20101) >10(estimated) 

Cottonwood Mountain Upland Exclosures 1, 2, and 3 4 Cottonwood Mountain (20102) >10(estimated) 

Morrison Reservoir Exclosure 4 Cottonwood Mountain (20102) >10(estimated) 

Hope Butte Pit Exclosure 4 Cottonwood Mountain (20102) >10(estimated) 

Poison Creek Reservoir Exclosure 4 Cottonwood Mountain (20102) >10(estimated) 

Poall Creek Riparian Exclosure 4 Poall Creek (20103) 30 

Willow Creek Upland Exclosure 4 Willow Creek Livestock (20105) 20 

Mitchell Butte Dump Exclosure 4 >10(estimated) 

1 Area from which livestock grazing is discontinued with implementation of the SEORMP; this area may be grazed only on a temporry basis for administrative and/or interpretive purposes. 

2 Areas from which livestock grazing is discontinued and removed from all grazing allotments with implementation of the SEORMP. 

3 Area previously closed to livestock grazing though opened to livestock grazing with implementation of the SEORMP. 

4 Areas from which livestock grazing is excluded though remain a portion of a grazing allotment. 

5 Areas from which livestock grazing is excluded as a result of the April 28, 2000, modified order of the United States District Court of the District of Oregon (Civil No. CV 98-97-RE) pertaining to l

concern identified by the Bureau in the 1993 “Owyhee National Wild and Scenic River Plan.” Acreage affected was identified in the fourth and fifth declaration of Jerry L. Taylor which are cited i

livestock .from these areas and acreage affected is subject to jurisdiction by the Court pending completion of the EIS and/or resolution of appeals. 

6 Includes a portion of the 4,641-acre “Deary Pasture” proposed as not allocated to livestock grazing and removed from all grazing allotments with implementation of the Proposed RMP. 

T-5
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

T-6
 
Appendix U - Potential Recreation Sites 

Appendix U 

Potential Recreation Sites, Trails, and 

Improvements of Existing Sites 

Opportunities that could enhance recreational opportunities or protect resources from 

recreation-related activities have been identified through existing planning decisions, visitor 

data collection, and inventories. In support of these opportunities, the following is a list of 

potential new recreation sites and trails, and improvements of existing sites within each 

resource area. This list is not intended to be inclusive of sites and possible improvements. 

Prior to establishment, sites and improvements would be reviewed by an interdisciplinary 

team to ensure compliance with management objectives. 

U-1 
Table U-1.—Potential recreation sites, trails, and improvements of existing sites 

Site Location Potential improvements 

Jordan Resource Area 

Wes Hawkins Trailhead T34S, R45E, Sec 22 Trailhead for hiking into Owyhee Canyon. 

Deary Pasture Trailhead T33S, R44E, Sec 34 Trailhead for hiking into Owyhee Canyon 

Willow Creek Hot Springs T38S, R38E, Sec 16 Enhance interpretation. 

Cow Lakes T28S, R44E, Sec 27,28 Improve camping sites and boat ramp; enhance waterfowl habitat and viewing 

opportunities, incorporate Watchable Wildlife program; add interpretation. Hiking 

trailhead at/near Parks Dam. 

Petrified Wood Area Signs; interpretation/information. 

Mud Springs, Cottonwood T38S, R40E, Sec 28 Signs, interpretation/information. 

Creek, Oregon Canyon, T40S, R41E, Sec 6 

Minehole Creek T40S, R40E, Sec 10 

T39S, R40E, Sec 27 

Coffee Pot Crater T28S, R43E, Sec 9 Parking barriers, interpretation, trailhead. 

Three Forks T34S, R45E, Sec 35 Camping sites’ amenities. 

Owyhee Overlook T33S, R44E, Sec 12 Parking, interpretation. 

Hole-In-The-Ground T27S, R42E, Sec 20 Interpretation. 

Birch Creek Historic Ranch T27S, R43E, Sec 18 Camping site amenities, restroom, interpretation. 

Anderson Crossing T40S, R46E, Sec 3 Signs, interpretation. 

Soldier Creek Watchable 

Wildlife Loop (see description) Signs, Interpretation. 

Antelope Reservoir T30S, R45E, Sec 32 Develop nonmotorized trail system; incorporate Watchable Wildlife program; add 

T31S, R45E, Sec 5,6,7, 18 interpretation. 

Rome T31S, R42E, Sec 30 Improve campground; develop permanent ranger station; improve interpretation. 

Highway 95 Interpretive Site T30S, R44E, Sec 36 Install toilet and picnic facilities for day use only. Improve “Taylor Grazing” 

interpretive sign. 

Malheur Resource Area 

Horseshoe Bend T21, R38E, Sec 3,10 River setting for day and overnight use along U.S. Hwy 20. 

Coyne Place T20S, R40E, Sec 33 River setting for day and overnight use along U.S. Hwy 20, exclosure. 

T21S, R40E, Sec 4 

U-2
Site Location Potential improvements 

Hunter Spring T18S, R37E, Sec 15 Day/overnight site with trailhead for Castle Rock. 

Riverside T23S, R37E, Sec 22 Day/overnight site with trailhead and boat access. 

Snake River T18S, R47E, Sec 27 Boat access, day use. Watchable Wildlife interpretation. 

Desert Trail (see Map RECRMP-1) Corridor point-to-point trail between Route 78 and near Stinkingwater Pass: trailhead

signs, information, site-specific trail tread if needed for resource protection/public safety 

Malheur River Trail (see description) Nonmotorized trail along abandoned railroad grade on Malheur River between 

Riverside, Oregon, and near Juntura, Oregon, with trail heads. 

Owyhee Breaks Trail (see description) Nonmotorized point-to-point trail between Owyhee Reservoir State Park and Birch 

Creek Historic Ranch. 

Lower Owyhee Trail (see description) Developed trail along Owyhee River below the Dam between Lower Owyhee Canyon 

Watchable Wildlife site and BOR Government Camp (varying length by alternative). 

Castle Rock Trail (see description) Developed trail from Castle Rock and Hunter Spring Recreation Sites, to include Castle 

Lower Owyhee Canyon (undetermined) Day/overnight use site on Owyhee River Below the Dam. 

Twin Springs T22S, R43E, Sec 35 Enlarge existing site, provide for day/overnight facilities, improve water system, rerout

Chukar Park T20S, R37E, Sec 27 Improve site for host and group camping, water systems, sanitation facility, day/ 

overnight facilities. 

Oasis T15S, R46E, Sec 18 Improve site: boat ramp/dock, expanded parking, picnic/camping sites, interpret Watc

Snively Hot Springs T21S, R45E, Sec 22 Improve/provide site’s day/overnight facilities, water system, parking, interpretation, 

exclosure, and trailhead. 

Lower Owyhee River T21S, R45E, Sec 14 Enhance area with additional interpretation, exclosure, and Watchable Wildlife Corrido

trailhead, satellite interpretive/viewing points. 

Castle Rock T17S, R37E, Sec 28 Improve site with exclosure, day/overnight facilities, trailhead. 

Slocum Creek/Leslie Gulch Leslie Gulch ACEC Per approved LGMP: Improve with day/overnight facilities, satellite trailheads/parking

interpretation/information. 

Alkali Springs-Oregon Trail T17S, R45E, Sec 5 Improve parking. 

Birch Creek-Oregon Trail T15S, R45E, Sec 9 Improve parking. 

Keeney Pass-Oregon Trail T19S, R45E, Sec 23 Improve parking. 

U-3
Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan 

U-4
 
 

Appendix W - Monitoring 

Appendix W - Monitoring 

Reader note: This appendix was developed in response to public comments. In general, the reader will 

be able to see the type of monitoring techniques or procedures that would be applied for each objective. Each resource area will develop a monitoring strategy based on the GMA priority areas during 

the plan implementation process. 

Table W-1.—Southeastern Oregon Resource Management Plan monitoring by objective 

Monitoring for: Monitoring method 

AIR RESOURCES 

Objective: Meet or exceed the “National Ambient Air Quality Standards” and the “Prevention of Significant Deterioration” with all 

authorized actions. 

Tons of burnable fuel, live moisture, and estimated fire • Preburn fuels assessment 

behavior to predict probable smoke emissions. 

Air quality and particulate emissions from prescribed fire • Onsite/regional monitoring equipment 

or other management actions. 

Smoke dispersal, time of dispersal, path/location of • Visual ground and air observations 

dispersal, and impacts to Class I and II air-sheds; public 

health concerns. 

Compliance with Air Resources objective above. • Field review of project implementation (Burn Boss report) 

ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES 

Objective 1: Provide opportunities for exploration and development of leasable energy and mineral resources while protecting other 

sensitive resources. 

Compliance with applicable laws, regulations, conditions • Field inspection of leasable mineral activities
 

of leases, and the requirements of approved • Applicable resource attribute sampling
 

exploration/development plans. On producing leases,
 

ensures an accurate accounting of materials removed,
 

protection of the environment, public health and safety,
 

and identification and resolution of mineral trespass.
 

Objective 2: Provide opportunities for exploration and development of locatable mineral resources while protecting other sensitive 

resources. 

Compliance with regulations and conditions of approval, • Field inspection of mining claim activities 

especially the prevention of unnecessary or undue • Vegetation and soil attribute sampling in accordance with Solid 

of disturbed areas in coordination with State agencies. Minerals degradation of the public lands, and ensuring reclamation 

Reclamation Handbook H-3042-1 

Objective 3: Provide for public demand for saleable minerals from public land while protecting sensitive resources. 

Compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and the • Field inspection of designated community pits, common use areas, and 

requirements of approved mining plans. On producing other saleable mineral extraction operations

 operations, to ensure an accurate accounting of material • Applicable resource attribute sampling

 removed, reclamation, protection of the environment, 

public health and safety, and identification and resolution of 

saleable mineral trespass. 

W-1 
Southeast Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Monitoring for: Monitoring method 

FIRE 

Objective 1: Provide an appropriate management response (AMR) on all wildfires, with emphasis on minimizing suppression costs, 

considering fire fighter and public safety, benefits, and values to be protected consistent with resource objectives. 

Fuel moisture for projecting probable fire behavior • Live fuel moisture sampling 

prior to fire ignition 

Fire history/regime for Phase 1 and future fire planning. • Data recovery/mapping of fire size and location, weather (storm 

patterns), acres burned, suppression costs, and resources value loss 

Smoke emissions for public health concerns and future • Visual, modeled, and/or measured assessments 

smoke projections. 

Validation of predicted fire behavior; effectiveness • Real-time fire behavior observation 

in meeting goals/objectives in minimizing suppression 

costs, fire fighter and public safety. 

Fire effects on biological and physical resources. • Samle/collect data on plant mortality, impacts to soil microflora and 

microfauna, nutrient cycle, regeneration, erosion, and water quality. 

Weather for projecting fire behavior. • Remote automated weather stations (RAWS) and manual stations 

Objective 2: Recognize fire as a critical natural process and use it to protect, maintain, and enhance resources. 

Provide baseline and reference for short- and long-term • Control or reference plots (untreated areas), line transects, etc.


 fire effects monitoring.
 

Visual fuels inventory: reference pre- and post-burn • Photo series
 

meeting of resource and fire objectives.
 

Predict first order (immediate) fire effects on abiotic • Pre-burn fire effects modeling
 

(individual organism or community), fuel consumption,


 thermal environment, smoke emissions, chemical
 

releases, nutrient conversion, plants/animals altered,
 

injured, or lost.
 

Tracking of real time weather and fuel conditions on-site • Pre-burn monitoring of weather and fuel conditions
 

or immediately adjacent to treatment site assists with
 

prediction of fire behavior, which in turn affects the
 

meeting of objectives and the identification of
 

concerns/issues addressing fire fighter and public safety.
 

Measurement of overall project effect (meeting of • Post burn monitoring (short/long term)
 

objectives) by identifying plant mortality, impacts to
 

soils, nutrient status, regeneration, key plant/animal
 

species disturbance, and erosion.
 

Accurate tracking of acreage treated and/or burned; results • Mapping (GPS/GIS)
 

will aid in assessing impacts on a landscape or watershed
 

basis in addition to achieving identified resources and fire
 

management objectives as they relate to individual projects.
 

W-2 
Appendix W - Monitoring 

Monitoring for: Monitoring method 

RANGELAND VEGETATION 

Objective 1: Restore, protect, and enhance the diversity and distribution of desirable vegetation communities, including perennial 

native and desirable introduced plant species. Provide for their continued existence and normal function in nutrient, water, and 

energy cycles. 

Identification of ecological sites and determination • Procedures in accordance with (1) BLM Manual 4410: Ecological 

ecological status, soils and vegetation mapping Site Inventory, and (2) BLM Technical Reference 4400-5: Rangeland 

Inventory & Monitoring Supplemental Studies 

Determination of trends in production, structure, and •Vegetation attribute sampling in accordance with (1) Sampling 

composition of vegetation. Vegetation Attributes, Interagency Technical Reference 

1996, and (2) BLM Technical Reference 4400-5: 

Rangeland Inventory & Monitoring Supplemental Studies 

Determination of soil/site stability, watershed function, • Standards of rangeland health assessments: 

and integrity of the biotic community. Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health, BLM Draft Technical 

Reference, 1999 

Measurement of utilization (livestock, wild horses, and • Grazing utilization in accordance with Utilization Studies and Residual 

wildlife) and calculation of forage production. Measurements, Interagency Technical Reference 1996 

Recording of annual, seasonal, and crop year precipitation. • Climatic conditions: NOAA climatological data and BLM RAWS data 

Objective 2: Manage big sagebrush cover in seedings and on native rangeland to meet the life history requirements of sagebrushdependent wildlife. 

Identification of ecological sites and determination of 

ecological status; soils and vegetation mapping. 

• Inventory: 

Ecological site inventory (1) BLM Manual 4410: Ecological Site 

Inventory, and (2) BLM Technical Reference 4400-5: Rangeland 

Inventory & Monitoring Supplemental Studies 

Recording of vegetation frequency, cover, density, 

production, structure, and composition. 

• Trend: 

Vegetation attribute sampling in accordance with (1) Sampling Vegetation 

Attributes, Interagency Technical Reference 1996, and (2) BLM Technical 

Reference 4400-5: Rangeland Inventory & Monitoring Supplemental 

Studies 

Objective 3: Control the introduction and proliferation of noxious weed species and reduce the extent and density of established weed 

species to within acceptable limits. 

Recording of noxious weed presence, distribution, and • Periodic ocular surveillance 

density 

FOREST AND WOODLANDS 

Objective 1: Manage forests to maintain or restore ecosystems to a condition in which biodiversity is preserved and occurrences of 

fire, insects, and disease do not exceed levels normally expected in a healthy forest. Increase the dominance of ponderosa pine, 

Douglas fir, and western larch on appropriate sites in mature forests. Decrease the amount of Douglas fir, white fir, and grand fir 

where they were not historically maintained by the dominant fire regime. Manage forests for long-term, healthy habitat for animal 

and plant species. Provide for timber production where feasible and compatible with forest health. 

Disturbances, trends in spatial distribution and stand types. • Aerial photography, photo points, and periodic ocular surveys 

Forest health • Physical and biotic attribute sampling including classification of age 

and size structure, density, cover, production; measurements for severity 

and extent of disease and/or insect infestations 

W-3 
Southeast Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Monitoring for:	 Monitoring method 

Objective 2: Restore productivity and biodiversity in juniper and quaking aspen woodland areas. Manage juniper areas where 

encroachment or increased density is threatening other resource values. Retain old growth characteristics in historic juniper sites not 

prone to frequent fire. Manage quaking aspen to maintain diversity of age classes and to allow for species reestablishment. 

Disturbances, composition, and trends in spatial • Aerial photography, photo points, and periodic ocular surveys 

distribution 

Trends in vegetation age and size class structure, density, • Vegetative attribute sampling 

cover, and reproduction attributes. 

Season and amount of plant material removed	 • Utilization studies 

SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES 

Objective: Manage public land to maintain, restore, or enhance populations and habitats of special status plant species. Priority for 

the application of management actions will be: (1) Federal endangered species, (2) Federal threatened species, (3) Federal proposed 

species, (4) Federal candidate species, (5) State listed species, (6) BLM sensitive species, (7) BLM assessment species, and (8) BLM 

tracking species. Manage in order to conserve or lead to the recovery of threatened or endangered species. 

Composition; invasion of exotic species; localized • Photo points and periodic ocular surveillance 

disturbances; trends in special status plant attributes. 

Season and amount of plant material removed.	 • Utilization studies 

Trends in special status plants and vegetation including • Vegetative attribute sampling in accordance with Measuring & 

demographic studies, density, cover, frequency Monitoring Plant Populations, BLM Technical Reference 1730-1 

WATER RESOURCES AND RIPARIAN/WETLAND AREAS 

Objective 1: Ensure that surface water and groundwater influenced by BLM activities comply with or are making progress toward 

achieving State of Oregon water quality standards for beneficial uses as established per stream by the Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality (ODEQ). 

State water quality standards	 • EPA-approved methodologies 

Stream flows (peak, low, annual)	 • Staff gages, remote gaging stations, flow measurements. 

Channel geometry and evolution	 • Stream Cross Sections TR-4341-1 & TN-387; stream channel stability 

and condition assessments, Rosgen Stream Type Classification 

Objective 2: Restore, maintain, or improve riparian vegetation, habitat diversity, and associated watershed function to achieve 

healthy and productive riparian areas and wetlands. 

Condition and functionality of riparian/wetland areas	 • Proper Functioning Condition TR 1737-9 and Assessment for Lotic 

and Lentic Riparian/Wetland Areas TR 1737-11 

Riparian/wetland attributes	 • Low level aerial photography, photo points, line transects, Cole Browse 

Season and amount of plant material removed/remaining	 • Cole Browse, herbaceous stubble height, utilization 

Determination of ecological status	 • Ecological Site Inventory/Riparian/Wetland Sites TR 1737-7 

W-4 
Appendix W - Monitoring 

Monitoring for: Monitoring method 

FISH AND AQUATIC HABITAT 

Objective: Restore, maintain, or improve habitat to provide for diverse and self-sustaining communities of fishes and other aquatic 

organisms. 

Location, distribution, movement, or numbers of aquatic • Population surveys (such as snorkling, electrofishing, redd counts, trap 

species, especially fishes netting); benthic macroinvertebrate sampling (per BLM’s aquatic 

ecosystem laboratory method) 

Stream geomorphology and aquatic habitat • Stream habitat surveys (such as ODFW Aquatic Habitat Inventory 

Method), water quality measurements, riparian/wetland condition and 

functionality assessments. 

WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT 

Objective 1: Maintain, restore, or enhance riparian areas and wetlands so they provide diverse and healthy habitat conditions for 

wildlife. 

Habitat Conditions • See Water Resources and Riparian/Wetland section 

Objective 2: Manage upland habitats in forest, woodland, and rangeland vegetation types so that the forage, water, cover, structure, 

and security necessary for wildlife are available on the public land. 

Characteristics of woody plant species in terms of age, • Cole Browse 

growth form, and current year incidence of use by grazing 

animals. 

Canopy cover characteristics of vegetation • Line intercept canopy cover, Daubenmire plots 

Plant community distribution and appearance • Remote sensing imagery, photo points 

Location, distribution, movement, or numbers of animals • Population surveys (such as breeding bird point counts) 

Habitat conditions See Forest and Woodlands and Rangeland Vegetation sections 

SPECIAL STATUS ANIMAL SPECIES 

Objective 1: Manage public land to maintain, restore, or enhance populations and habitats of special status animal species. Priority 

for the application of management actions will be: (1) Federal endangered species, (2) Federal threatened species, (3) Federal 

proposed species, (4) Federal candidate species, (5) State listed species, (6) BLM sensitive species, (7) BLM assessment species, and 

(8) BLM tracking species. Manage in order to conserve or lead to the recovery of threatened or endangered species. 

Species distribution and habitat conditions • See Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat and Fish and Aquatic Habitat sections 

Objective 2: Facilitate the maintenance, restoration, and enhancement of bighorn sheep populations and habitat on public land. 

Pursue management in accordance with the 1997 “Oregon’s Bighorn Sheep Management Plan” (OBSMP) in a manner consistent 

with the principles of multiple use management. 

Location, distribution, movement, or numbers of animals • Population surveys (primarily conducted by ODFW) 

Habitat conditions • See Rangeland Vegetation section 

W-5 
Southeast Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Monitoring for:	 Monitoring method 

WILD HORSES 

Objective: Maintain and manage wild horse herds in established herd management areas (HMA’s) at appropriate management levels 

(AML’s) to ensure a thriving, natural ecological balance between wild horse populations, wildlife, livestock, vegetation resources, 

and other resource values. Enhance and perpetuate special and unique characteristics that distinguish the respective herds. 

Recording of reproductive success and population • Aerial and/or ground horse counts 

growth as it relates to established AML’s 

Determination of wild horse grazing use • Grazing actual use/utilization in accordance with Utilization Studies and 

Residual Measurements, Interagency Technical Reference 1996; 

utilization pattern mapping 

Recording of physical and biotic attributes, trends • See Rangeland Vegetation, Special Status Plants and Animals, Water 

Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas sections 

RANGELAND/GRAZING USE 

Objective: Provide for a sustained level of livestock grazing consistent with other resource objectives and public land use allocations. 

Compliance with permitted use.	 • Livestock use supervision, ocular surveillance 

Determination of livestock grazing use	 • Grazing actual use / utilization in accordance with Utilization Studies 

and Residual Measurements, Interagency Technical Reference 1996; 

utilization pattern mapping 

Recording of physical and biotic attributes, trends	 • See Rangeland Vegetation, Special Status Plants and Animals, Water 

Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas sections 

RECREATION 

Objective: Provide and enhance developed and undeveloped recreation opportunities, while protecting resources, to manage the 

increasing demand for resource-dependent recreation activities. 

Visitation levels; trends and variances.	 • Traffic counters, site registrations, and periodic surveillance at 

recreation use locations 

Compliance with recreation site rules / permit	 • Review of recreation permits and site registrations (such as trailhead 

and stipulations; identification of users needs and trends campground 

registers) 

Conditions of resources	 • See Rangeland Vegetation, Special Status Plant Species, Water 

Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas; ocular surveillance of recreation 

activities in WSA’s and other SMA’s 

Dispersed/backcountry recreation use	 • Backcountry campsite and uses surveys, limits of acceptable change, 

photo points, user contacts 

Visitor experience/satisfaction	 • User contacts 

OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLES 

Objective: Manage off-highway vehicle (OHV) use to protect resource values, promote public safety, provide OHV use opportunities 

where appropriate, and minimize conflicts among various users. 

Conditions of resources	 • See Rangeland Vegetation, Special Status Plant Species, Water 

Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas; ocular surveillance 

OHV activities; compliance with designations	 • Permit review; ocular surveillance; user contacts 

W-6 
Appendix W - Monitoring 

Monitoring for:	 Monitoring method 

VISUAL RESOURCES 

Objective: Manage public land actions and activities in a manner to be consistent with visual resource management (VRM) class 

objectives. 

Compliance with VRM management classes	 • Project review; visual contrast ratings; ocular surveillance 

AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN 

Objective: Retain existing and designate new areas of critical environmental concern (ACEC’s)/ research natural areas (RNA’s) 

where relevance and importance criteria are met and special management is required to protect the values identified. 

Disturbances, site conditions • Aerial photography, photo points, periodic ocular surveillance, user 

contacts/compliance 

Physical and biotic attributes, trends	 • See Rangeland Vegetation, Special Status Plants and Animals, Visual 

Resources, Water Resources and Riparian/Wetland Areas sections 

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 

Objective: Protect and enhance outstandingly remarkable values (ORV’s) of designated national wild and scenic rivers (NWSR’s), 

and provide interim protection of ORV’s of rivers found suitable for inclusion in the national wild and scenic river system (NWSRS) 

until Congress acts. 

Disturbances, site conditions; use levels and trends	 • Aerial photography, photo points, periodic ocular surveillance, user 

contacts/compliance, permit review 

Physical, biotic and cultural resource attributes, trends	 • See Cultural Resources, Rangeland Vegetation, Special Status Plants 

and Animals, Visual Resources, Water Resources and Riparian/Wetland 

Areas 

HUMAN USES AND VALUES 

Objective: Manage public land and pursue partnerships to provide social and economic benefits to local residents, businesses, 

visitors, and future generations. 

Trends in future demand for resources and resource values • Track locally and regionally generated economic and demographic 

indicators 

Measurement of partnership benefits	 • Periodic tally of financial and in-kind contributions 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Objective 1: Protect and conserve cultural and paleontological resources. 

Illegal site excavation and vandalism	 • Photo points, periodic ocular surveillance, field inspection; public 

contact 

Objective 2: Increase the public’s knowledge of, appreciation for, and sensitivity to cultural and paleontological resources. 

Visitor experience, satisfaction	 • Participate in local, community events; develop informational brochures; 

Measurement of partnership benefits	 • Periodic tally of financial and in-kind contributions 

Objective 3: Consult and coordinate with American Indian groups to ensure their interests are considered and their traditional 

religious sites, landforms, and resources are taken into account. 

Traditional religious sites, landforms and resources	 • Visitation with Tribal leaders and staff; develop activity plans 

Protection and management of identified traditional use • Field inspection; periodic contact with Tribal staff 

areas 

W-7 
 

Southeast Oregon Resource Management Plan 

Monitoring for: Monitoring method 

LAND AND REALTY 

Objective 1: Retain public land with high and public resource values. Consolidate public landholdings and acquire land or interests 

in land with high public resource values to ensure effective administration and improve resource management. Acquired land will be 

managed for the purposes for which it was acquired. Make available for disposal approximately 62,100 acres of public land within 

Zone 3 by State indemnity selection, private or State exchange, “Recreation and Public Purpose Act” (R&PP) lease or sale, public 

sale, or other authorized method (see Appendix L). 

Progress of land tenure adjustments • BLM accomplishment and plan implementation tracking processes 

Objective 2: Establish right-of-way corridor routes to the extent possible, taking into account avoidance areas, consistent with 

resource objectives. 

Compliance with rights of way designations and • Authorization review; ocular surveillance; user contacts 

authorizations. 

W-8 
 

Appendix X - Maps 

Appendix X - Maps
 

ACEC-J Areas of Critical Environmenal Concern/Research Natural Areas 

Jordan Resource Area 

ACEC-M Areas of Critical Environmenal Concern/Research Natural Areas 

Malheur Resource Area 

FIRE-2 Appropriate Management Response 

FORS-1 Forested Lands in Malheur Resource Area 

GEN-1 General Location Map 

GEN-2 Land Status 

GMA Georgraphic Management Areas 

HYDR-1 Sub-basins/Precipitation 

HYDR-2 General Fish Distribution and 1998 303(d) Water Quality Limited Streams 

HYDR-3J Known Riparian Area by Trend 

Jordan Resource Area 

HYDR-3M Know Riparian Area by Trend 

Malheur Resource Area 

LAND-1 Rights of Way, Avoidance Areas, Critical Access Needs, and 

Transportation System 

LAND-2J Jordan Resource Area Land Tenure Zones 

LAND-2M Malheur Resource Area Land Tenure Zones 

LVST-1J Jordan Resource Area Livestock Grazing Allotments 

LVST-1M Malheur Resource Area Livestock Grazing Allotments 

MIN-1 Oil, Gas and Sodium Mineral Resource Potential 

MIN-2 Geothermal Resource Potential and Deep Exploration Wells 

MIN-3 Disseminated Locatable Minerals Potential 

MIN-4 Other Locatable Mineral Resources 

MIN-5 Saleable Minerals 

MIN-6 Mineral Leasing 

OHV Off Highway Vehicle Use Designations 

REC Recreation Management Areas 

RELI-1 Relief 

SS-1 Special Status Species Plants and Noxious Weeds 

VRM Visual Resource Management 

WLDF-1 Mule Deer, Pronghorn and Elk Winter Ranges 

WLDF-2 Sage Grouse Leks, Raptor Concentration Areas and Bighorn Sheep Range 

WLHS-1 Active Wild Horse Herd Management Areas 

WSA-1 Wilderness Study Areas 

WSR-1 Existing and Recommended Wild and Scenic Rivers 

X-1 


































UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Vale Field Office

100 Oregon Street

Vale, Oregon 97918

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

PRIORITY MAIL

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

Bureau of Land Management

Permit No. G-76