Prineville District Office

BLM

Fall 2006

Analysis of the Management Situation John Day Basin 

Resource Management Plan

Analysis of the Management Situation 

and 

Preliminary Public Involvement
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. 

U.S. Bureau of Land Management

John Day Basin RMP

3050 NE 3rd Street

Prineville, Oregon 97754

541-416-6700

Email: John_Day_Basin_RMP@blm.gov

Website: http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/prineville

Privacy

Comments, including names and street addresses of 

respondents, will be retained on file in the Prineville 

District Office as part of the public record for this planning 

effort. Individual respondents may request confidentiality. 

If you wish to withhold your name or street address from 

public inspection, or from disclosure under the Freedom 

of Information Act, you must state this prominently at the 

beginning of your written comment. Such requests will 

be honored to the extent allowed by law. All submissions 

from organizations or businesses, and from individuals 

identifying themselves as representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses, will be made available for 

public inspection in their entirety.
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Analysis of the

Management Situation

John Day Basin 

Resource Management Plan

Fall 2006
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— ii — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — iii —

Editor’s

Thoughts

The sun crested the ridge and light beamed down, illuminating the tent wall. After a day and night of intermittent, 

sometimes intense rain the light announced the dawn of a new day along the North Fork John Day River. 

Emerging from the tent I encountered a brilliant blue sky and grass sparkling with drops of the previous night’s 

rain. A layer cake of basalt rose above both banks of the river. To the south the slopes were covered by a jungle 

of green—trees, brush and shrubs. To the north I could clearly make out the dark cliffs separated by grassy 

slopes and punctuated by cinnamon bark ponderosa pine. My companion and guide, the river ranger, still slept in 

his tent a few feet away. 

A morning stroll was in order. Though we were floating the river there is a road a few yards from our camp. I 

traveled down the road to a spot we had noticed the previous evening. The road squeezed between the river and 

a dark basalt outcrop some 20 to 30 feet high. From the distance it appeared that a small fire had burned through 

the rocks and some of the grassy bench above. After the rain there was no evidence of recent travel on the road. 

We had not seen another person since we had launched. We would not see another person for a day and a half. 

Approaching the outcropping I discovered we were misled by appearances. The darker rock was not scorched, 

it was wet. The patch of “burned” grass was, in fact, the top of the dark basalt rock over which soil had not yet 

formed, so hardly any grass had gained a foothold. What appeared to be barren rock outcropping from the 

distance up close was a sparsely planted rock garden with flowers and grasses establishing tenuous residence in 

random niches in the rock. A small gray hornet nest hung from a shallow indentation in the rock face. Since it was 

still cool the inhabitants were not yet up. Fine with me! 

Ambling back to camp I reflected on the nature of a communal dwelling located in a beautiful yet harsh 

environment. One cannot help but be struck by the beauty surrounding you in the John Day Basin. From the 

windblown sea of grass at Horn Butte, to the river canyons of the John Day, to the broad Fox Creek and Long 

Creek valleys, and to the highlands of Sutton, Rudio, and the Aldrich Mountains the basin provides an expanse 

and variety of beautiful scenes. The rock outcropping is a microcosm of the basin—beautiful but harsh. The 

community of hornets is not unlike the communities in the basin—isolated. Many inhabitants scratch out a 

living but tenuously hang to their niche just as the hornets in their nest cling to the sloping ceiling of rock. Make 

no mistake this is a harsh land. During the summer the hornet nest is likely to experience 110o weather with 

temperatures off the rock as high as 130o or more. Inhabitants that survive the summer then must survive cold as 

low as -20o or lower. 

It takes a special kind of person to adapt to these conditions in the basin--isolation, changing local economies, 

harsh climate, beautiful setting. These breed a community of fiercely independent yet interdependent inhabitants. 

They may quarrel amongst themselves but proudly note that when a member of the community is in need, 

everyone pitches in to help. But if they perceive a threat from outside the community even the hornets might learn 

something about defending “turf.”

Humbled by the responsibility that has been entrusted to the BLM, it is with a profound sense of responsibility that 

our team of specialists embarks upon this planning effort. We will listen and we will learn. In the ebb and flow of 

social changes, economic shifts and ecologic variation, we will strive to balance the varied concerns and desires 

of those interested in using and preserving public lands for the benefit of generations to come.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— iv — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement —  —

Table of Contents

Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Purpose of the Analysis of the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Management Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Need for a New Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Geographic Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Key Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Preliminary Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Contents of the AMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Chapter 2 - Legal Authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Chapter 3 - Resource Area Profile..............................................................21

Ecoregions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Minerals Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Riparian Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Terrestrial Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Special Status Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Noxious Weeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Stream Channels and Floodplains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Water Quantity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Fisheries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

Terrestrial Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Wild Horses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Visual Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Special Management Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Cultural Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Paleontological Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

People Today in the John Day Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Socioeconomic Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Resource Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Native American Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Transportation and Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

Rights-of-way and Easements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

Withdrawals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

Land Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

Leases and Permits (Recreation and Public Purposes Act) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Livestock Grazing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

Forest Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— vi — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Fire and Fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

Mineral Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Chapter 4 - Resource Management Guidance from Existing Plans and Other Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

Livestock Grazing Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

Forest Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158

Woodlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

Riparian Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

Special Status Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

Noxious Weed Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160

Fire Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160

Water Quality and Quantity............................................................162

Fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162

Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

Wild Horse and Burro Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164

Visual Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

Special Management Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

Cultural Resource Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

Native American Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

Paleontological Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

Recreation Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

Transportation......................................................................172

Realty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

Leases and Permits and the Recreation and Public Purposes Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176

Mining and Minerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

Public Information and Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

Law Enforcement and Emergency Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Chapter 5 - Management Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

Newly Acquired Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181

Public Lands Managed by BLM Prior to Land Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181

Water Quality and Quantity, and Riparian Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181

Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

Special Designations, Wilderness Study Areas, and Wild and Scenic Rivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184

Land Ownership, Rights-of-Way and Easements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

Transportation and Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186

Livestock Grazing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

Chapter 6 - Collaborative Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

Cooperating Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

Resource Advisory Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Public Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Chapter 7 - Scoping Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

Public Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

Public Response via BLM Meetings, Letters and Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202

Preliminary Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — vii —

References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

List of Preparers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

Glossary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221

Appendix A: Special Status Plants Documented or Suspected on BLM Lands in the John Day 

 Basin Planning Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237

Appendix B: Special Status Wildlife. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .239

Appendix C: (Allotments – Summary Info., Management Categories, & S&G status). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301

Support Documents on CD

Northwest Area Noxious Weed Control Program FEIS 1985

John Day RMP Record of Decision 1985

Two Rivers RMP Record of Decision 1986

Supplement to the Northwest area Noxious Weed Control Program FEIS 1986

Northwest Area Noxious Weed Control Record of Decision 1987

Baker RMP Record of Decision 1989

FEIS Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in 13 Western States 1991

Prineville Weed Management Documents 1994

John Day Land Tenure Adjustment 1995

Sutton Mountain Coordinated Resource Management Plan Environmental Assessment 1995

Decisions Record Sutton Mountain Coordinated Resource Management Plan 1996 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management 1997

Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 2000

John Day River Management Plan 2001

Prineville District Office Eligibility Inventory of Potential Wild and Scenic Rivers 

in the John Day Basin Resource Management Plan Planning Area 2006 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— viii — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — ix —

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ACEC - Area of Critical Environmental Concern

ADT - Average Daily Traffic

AMP - Allotment Management Plan

AMS - Analysis of the Management Situation

APHIS - Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

ARPA - Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979

ASCO - Archaeological Society of Central Oregon

ASQ - Allowable Sale Quantity

ATV - All-Terrain Vehicle

AUM - Animal Unit Month

BA - Biological Assessment

BECA - Bald Eagle Consideration Area

BEMA - Bald Eagle Management Area

BLM - Bureau of Land Management

BMP - Best Management Practices

BOR - Bureau of Reclamation

BPA - Bonneville Power Administration

BS - Bureau Sensitive

CAA - Clean Air Act

CAFO - Confined Animal Feeding Operations

CEQ - Council on Environmental Quality

CFR - Code of Federal Regulations

CFS - Cubic Feet per Second

COFP - Central Oregon Fire Plan

CORA - Central Oregon Resource Area

COSSA - Central Oregon Shooting Sports Association

CRBG - Columbia River Basalt Group

CRNG - Crooked River National Grassland

CRR - Crooked River Ranch

CWA - Clean Water Act

DBH - Diameter at Breast Height

DEIS - Draft Environmental Impact Statement

DEQ - Department of Environmental Quality (Oregon)

DFC - Desired Functioning Condition

DMA - Decision Management Agency

DNF - Deschutes National Forest

DOI - Department of Interior

DOGAMI - Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (Oregon)

DR - Decision Record 

DRMP - Draft Resource Management Plan 

EA - Environmental Assessment 

EIS - Environmental Impact Statement 

EMS - Existing Management Situation

EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency 

ERMA - Extensive Recreation Management Area 

ERU - Ecological Rating Units

ESA - Endangered Species Act

ESI - Ecological Site Inventory 

FCRPA - Federal Cave Resources Protection Act 

FEIS - Final Environmental Impact Statement 

FLPMA - Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

FR - Federal Register 

FS - Forest Service 

FY - Fiscal Year

GIS - Geographic Information System 

HCA - Habitat Conservation Areas 

HCP - Habitat Conservation Plan

HMP - Habitat Management Plan

HRV - Historic Range of Variability

HUC - Hydrologic Unit Code

IBLA - Interior Board of Land Appeals

ICBEMP - Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project

IDT - Interdisciplinary Team

IMP - Interim Management Policy for Lands Under Wilderness Review

INFISH - Inland native strategies for managing fish-producing watersheds in eastern Oregon and 

Washington, Idaho, western Montana, and portions of Nevada

ISA - Instant Study Area

IWM - Integrated Weed Management Program

KLA - Known Linkage Area

LAC - Limits of Acceptable Change

LAU - Lynx Analysis Units

LWCF - Land and Water Conservation Fund

MBF - Thousand Board Feet

MLRA - Major Land Resource Area

MMBF - Million Board Feet

MMHOS - Millimhos (a millimho is a unit of electrical conductance)

MO - Management Objectives

MOU - Memorandum of Understanding

NF - National Forest

NHPA - National Historic Preservation Act

NEPA - National Environmental Policy Act

NMFS - National Marine Fisheries Service

NOALE - Northeast Oregon Assembled Land Exchange

NRCS - Natural Resource Conservation System

NRHP - National Register of Historic Places

NSO - No Surface Occupance

NSS - National Speleological Society

NWPCC - Northwest Power and Conservation Council 

OAR - Oregon Administrative Rules

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

OEF - Oregon Eagle Foundation

OHV - Off-Highway Vehicle

OMD - Oregon Military Department

ONHP - Oregon Natural Heritage Program

OPRD - Oregon State Parks and Recreation Department

ORV - Off-Road Vehicle or Outstandingly Remarkable Value

OSU - Oregon State University

OWQI - Oregon Water Quality Index

OWRD - Oregon Water Resources Department

PACFISH - Interim strategies for managing Pacific anadromous fish-producing watersheds in eastern Oregon 

and Washington, Idaho, and portions of California
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — xi —

PFC - Proper Functioning Condition

PILT - Payments In Lieu of Taxes

PNC - Potential Natural Conditions

PNW - Pacific Northwest

PRA - Pacific Recovery Area

PWR - Public Water Reserve

R&PP - Recreation and Public Purpose Act

RCA - Riparian Conservation Area

RCRA - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

RD - Ranger District

RMO - Riparian Management Objective

RMP - Resource Management Plan

RNA - Research Natural Area

ROD - Record of Decision

ROW - Right of Way

RV - Recreational Vehicle

SAR - Soil Absorbancy Ratio

SCORP - Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan

SF - South Fork

S&Gs - Standards and Guidelines

SHPO - State Historical Preservation Office

SOC - Species of Concern

SR - State Route

SRMA - Special Recreation Management Area

SRP - Special Recreation Permit

SSURGO - Soil Survey Geographic Database

SSW - State Scenic Waterways

STATSGO - State Soil Geographic Database

SUP - Special Use Permit

SVIM - Soil-Vegetation Inventory Method

SWCD - Soil and Water Conservation District

TCP - Traditional Cultural Property

T&E - Threatened and Endangered

TGA - Taylor Grazing Act of 1934

TNC - The Nature Conservancy

TMDL - Total Maximum Daily Load

UDRMP - Upper Deschutes Resource Management Plan

USC - United States Code

USDA - United States Department of Agriculture

USDI - United States Department of the Interior

USFS - United States Forest Service

USFWS - United States Fish and Wildlife Service

USGS - United States Geological Survey

VQO - Visual Quality Objectives

VRM - Visual Resource Management

WQMP - Water Quality Management Plan (State)

WQRP - Water Quality Restoration Plan (Federal)

WSR - Wild and Scenic River

WSA - Wilderness Study Area

WSRA - Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

WUI - Wildland Urban Interface
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— xii — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — ­—

Chapter 1

Purpose and Need
Insert Map 1: Planning 

Area

Map legend should say “John Day Basin RMP”
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — ­—

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Introduction

This Analysis of the Management Situation (AMS) is the first step in revising and 

consolidating three Resource Management Plans that provide guidance for managing 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands within the John Day Basin: The Two Rivers 

Resource Management Plan (RMP) (1986) addresses management of BLM lands in the 

western portion of the Planning area. The John Day RMP (1985) addresses management 

of BLM lands in most of the eastern portion of the planning area, and the Baker RMP 

(1989) addresses management of BLM lands within small portions Morrow and Umatilla 

Counties that are within the planning area.

The new John Day Basin RMP will establish broad-scale desired conditions, goals, 

objectives and standards and guidelines for the management of BLM lands and 

resources within the planning area. 

Purpose of the Analysis of the

Management Situation

The purpose of the AMS is threefold: 

1. To summarize the existing conditions, trends, and management guidance for a specified “planning area,”

2. To explain the need for change by identifying preliminary issues; and to identify management opportunities, and 

3. The AMS is required to provide an initial description of the biological, physical, social 

and economic components of the environment that will be affected by the decisions 

made in an RMP.

The AMS is the foundation for subsequent steps in the planning process, such as the 

design of alternatives and analysis of environmental consequences (43 CFR 1610.4-4) 

which will be documented in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements that 

accompany Draft and Proposed Resource Management Plans. The following briefly 

outlines the planning process.

Planning Process

 Prepare Scoping Report and AMS

 Refine Issue descriptions and characterize management situation with the AMS

 Develop planning criteria and identify planning opportunities

 Prepare Draft EIS and RMP

 Refine issues, alternatives, and impact analysis input

 90 Day comment period

 Prepare Final EIS and Proposed RMP

 Develop an implementation and monitoring plan on preferred alternative 

 Provide 30 day protest period and 60 day Governor’s Review

 Prepare ROD and Approved RMP

 Identify selected alternative and respond to public comments and protests

 Implement, monitor and evaluate
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000

In the year 2000, Congress passed the Oregon Land Exchange Act. In exchange for 

public lands disposed of by this Act, the BLM acquired approximately 44,000 acres near 

the North Fork of the John Day River (see Map 2) . The Act directs management of these 

lands: 

 “Lands acquired...within the North Fork of the John Day subwatershed shall be 

administered in accordance with section 205(c) of the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act, but shall be managed primarily for the protection of native fish and 

wildlife habitat, and for public recreation.” 

The Act also provides the foundation for future management decisions beyond the 

primary criteria:

“The Secretary may permit other authorized uses within the subwatershed if the 

Secretary determines, through the appropriate land use planning process, that such uses 

are consistent with, and do not diminish these management purposes.” 

Need for a New Resource

Management Plan

The Central Oregon Resource Area, the BLM unit responsible for managing BLM lands 

within the planning area, must refer to three different management plans, each of which 

has been amended by one or more plan amendments, for direction. The complexity 

of this situation, in addition to changes in land uses, the acquisition of approximately 

44,000 acres of land near the North Fork John Day River not covered by a resource 

management plan, and new information provided by the Interior Columbia Basin 

Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) provides the impetus to complete a new, 

consolidated Resource Management Plan (RMP) for this area.

Purpose

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) directs the BLM to 

develop and revise the RMPs that guide activities on BLM managed lands. A RMP is 

a set of comprehensive, long-range decisions concerning the use and management of 

resources administered by the BLM which typically accomplishes two objectives:

1. Provides an overview of needs, objectives and goals for managing BLM lands for 

multiple uses;

2. Resolve multiple-use conflicts.

Taking into account the present needs in the basin, the purpose of the current RMP effort 

is three-fold:

1. Address all aspects of federal land management for the acquired lands in the North 

Fork John Day River area;

2. Address problems or concerns that have occurred since the completion of the previous RMPs, where these plans do not provide adequate guidance; 

3. Address problems or concerns where the guidance in the existing RMPs is insufficient or inadequate in light of current needs or demands.

John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The RMP developed as a result of this process will amend and revise portions of the 

existing RMPs, and serve to describe management guidance for the acquired lands in the 

North Fork John Day River area. The legislative mandates and BLM policy documents 

described in Chapter 2 provide limits and direction for responding to the issues described 

later in this chapter. 

Geographic Scope

This resource management planning effort will address lands primarily within the John 

Day River Basin that are managed by the Central Oregon Resource Area (CORA) of the 

Prineville District BLM. In addition lands within the Deschutes River Basin that lie within 

the boundaries of the northern portion of the Central Oregon Resource Area and lands 

that are located within the John Day Basin but fall within the Baker Resource Area of 

the Vale District will be included within the planning process. Finally the planning area 

includes an area covered by the present John Day RMP that is south of the John Day 

River in the Silvies and Malheur River Drainages. There are only three parcels of BLM 

land, totaling about 400 acres, in this last area. The planning area (Map 1) includes over 

450 thousand acres of BLM managed lands within several Oregon counties – Grant, 

Wheeler, Gilliam, Wasco, Sherman, Umatilla, Jefferson and Morrow. The boundary of the 

planning area also includes portions of Baker and Malheur counties but there are no BLM 

lands that are both within these counties and in the planning area. 

For purposes of display of detailed map information and general location references in 

the text of this document, the BLM lands within the planning area can be grouped into 

several geographical areas. These areas include:

1. Lower John Day River – these lands primarily in the canyon but also include uplands 

north of Clarno, including lands as far away as Horn Butte. 

2. Sutton Mountain/Bridge Creek – the lands upstream of Clarno to Service Creek, including the Bridge Creek, Bear Creek and Sutton Mountain areas. The south western 

portion of this area is outside of the John Day Basin.

3. Rudio Mountain/Johnson Heights – the area upstream of Service Creek to Dayville, 

including the Rudio Mountain, Squaw Creek and Johnson Heights areas.

4. South Fork John Day River – the area from Dayville and along the South Fork of the 

John Day River, Cottonwood, Birch and Rock Creeks, south to the Harney County 

and east and north of the Crook County line. 

5. Upper Mainstem – the lands in the Upper John Day Valley including Little Canyon 

Mountain, Dixie and Standard Creeks. Three BLM parcels within the planning area 

are to the south of the John Day Basin in the Silvies River watershed.

6. North Fork John Day River – the lands upstream of Monument, along the North Fork 

of the John Day River to Camas Creek, and north of Highway 402.

Key Findings 

The AMS details several findings that are summarized in the following discussion. These 

findings describe information or concerns identified prior to and during the development 

of the AMS. Many of these findings are concerns expressed by the public or identified 

by BLM. As with concerns identified by the public during the scoping process these may 

be considered “significant planning issues” if they require changes in RMP guidance and 

there is a lack of consensus concerning how to address the problems. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — ­—

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Hydrology

Many streams are lacking the physical processes necessary to achieve proper 

functioning condition and will not reach desired conditions without changes in 

management. Juniper stands in densities and locations outside of the range of historic 

variability have altered hydrologic processes in the planning area.

Some rivers and streams within the planning area have been listed by the Oregon 

Department of Environmental Quality as water quality limited. The existing resource 

management plans do not provide the framework for fostering cooperative efforts to 

address problems identified in water quality limited streams.

Forest Resources

Due to high stem densities and high basal areas the overall health of forest stands is 

declining. Trees have become stressed and are succumbing to insects and diseases. 

Insect populations have reached excessive populations in scattered stands across the 

planning area.

Fire and Fuels

A Fire Regimes and Condition Class Assessment of the John Day Basin completed in 

2002 indicated that much of the area has missed at least one disturbance event or fire. 

As the trees die and fall to the ground the stands are accumulating excessive slash loads 

and are becoming more susceptible to high intensity-stand replacement wildfires.

Current RMP guidance does not address this problem of local and national policy for 

fuels within defined wildland urban interface areas and throughout the planning area have 

not been formally incorporated into existing RMPs.

Restoration 

Vegetative conditions at some riparian and upland sites may not be capable of returning 

to historic ranges without active restoration.

Paleontological Resources

Since the 1860’s the Tertiary (65-2 million years ago) fossil resources of the John Day 

Basin have been both nationally and internationally recognized. The John Day Basin 

is one of the premiere Tertiary fossil mammal and plant areas in the world. Many fossil 

localities are on BLM managed lands.

Roads and Transportation

Many of the BLM transportation resources in the John Day Basin have never been 

designated with a maintenance level or described within a maintenance schedule.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

—  — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Many parcels of public land are not accessible to the public because there are no public 

easements on potential access roads.

The gating of roads (that do not have formal easements), by private landowners, that 

have historically provided access to BLM lands has increased in the last 10-20 years.

Access is limited for fire suppression and fuels management activities within the planning 

area. This increases response times for suppression activities which in turn lead to larger 

fire sizes and greater suppression costs.

Recreation

There are no BLM designated motorized trail or motorized vehicle route systems despite 

increasing demand. There are also no designated hiking, horseback riding or mountain 

bike trails or any other designated non-motorized trail systems.

Use from OHVs and other motorized vehicles have continued to increase throughout 

the planning area. Due to new restrictions on OHVs on National Forests in and near the 

planning area we expect increased demand for use of BLM managed lands by OHV and 

other motorized vehicles.

BLM policy requires all OHV area designations to be completed at the RMP level. 

Existing Plans do not adequately address the impacts of widespread use by OHVs.

Land Tenure Zoning Designations

Since the completion of the existing RMPs significant land tenure adjustments have 

occurred including acquisition of Sutton Mountain and the North Fork John Day lands. 

Some current zoning designations that identify whether BLM lands should be retained or 

disposed may not reflect new ownership patterns in the planning area. 

Special Designation Areas

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 required an eligibility and suitability assessment 

and determination to be conducted as a part of the resource management planning 

process. The John Day Basin includes several streams that have not been assessed. 

Characteristics of wilderness such as solitude, naturalness and primitive recreation 

are resources which have not been previously inventoried in the North Fork John Day 

acquired lands area. 

North Fork John Day River Acquired Lands

As a result of guidance provided in the Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000, the full range 

of management direction from the existing RMPs cannot be applied to acquired lands 

adjacent to the North Fork John Day River. Consequently, there is no specific long-term 

direction for managing vegetation, fish and wildlife, fire and fuels, visual resources, 

transportation and access, recreation, OHV use, livestock grazing, silviculture, wilderness 

characteristics, and other resources or activities.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — ­—

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Preliminary Issues

Based on the Key Findings of the Analysis of the Management Situation and input from 

the public, other governments and tribes we have identified several Planning Issues. The 

Planning Issues may be revised or refined as a result of comments received about the 

AMS. Planning Issues are problems that require changes in RMP direction to resolve. 

An “issue” is defined as a topic of controversy, dispute or concern over resource 

management activities or land uses within the planning area boundary. In order to be 

considered “significant” by the agency, an issue must be well defined, relevant to the 

proposed action(s) in question, and within the authority and ability of the agency to 

address in the development of a reasonable range of alternatives or mitigation measures. 

The agency must consider the issue in the environmental analysis of the various 

alternatives.

The following Planning Issues will be utilized to develop management guidance 

alternatives for the planning area. These alternatives, along with a description of the 

environmental consequences implementation of these alternatives would have on the 

public lands will be described in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 

Water Resources

The public expressed concerns over the management of riparian areas:

Management of riparian areas should be consistent according to resources

Cooperative Management Efforts

Water quality efforts should be supported in the RMP

Forest Health

The public expressed concern regarding the management of timber resources

Management guidance should allow for a range of resource management objectives

Fire and Fuels Management 

Much of the planning area has missed at least one disturbance event or fire

Current RMP guidance is unclear with respect to management in wildland urban 

interface areas

Public Land Access and Travel Management

BLM policy requires resource management plans to delineate travel management areas. 

The need to identify roads and access to BLM and private lands has been anticipated by 

the BLM as the result of changes in land status and accessibility

Public concerns include recent reduction in access as the result of closure of routes on 

BLM lands and adjacent private lands
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 10 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Off Highway Vehicle Use Designations

Designations are required by BLM policy, either open, limited or closed

The situation has changed since last plans.

The public expressed concern about OHV use in the Little Canyon Mountain Area—two 

viewpoints expressed:

Close BLM lands to protect resources

Designate large areas for OHV use to provide recreational opportunities

Land Tenure Zoning Designations

Under 43 CFR 2400 the BLM is required to identify lands that should be retained, 

disposed, or acquired to serve the national interest. Though the John Day, Baker, 

and Two Rivers RMPs did this the subsequent Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 

significantly modified land ownership in the John Day Basin creating a need to review 

and possibly change some land tenure designations.

Public concerns include BLM acquisition or disposal of lands in the Rudio Mountain area.

Special Management Areas

Wild and Scenic River (WSR) suitability recommendations

Suitability recommendations are required by BLM policy

Public concerns have a wide range:

 Include wild and scenic rivers wherever possible to protect resource values

 Exclude wild and scenic rivers because they restrict public use

Consider designations to protect specific resource values such as paleontological values

Areas with Wilderness characteristics

Policy concerning wilderness review undergoing revision

Public Concerns have a wide Range:

 Protect lands with wilderness characteristics

Do not protect land with wilderness characteristics because it limits multiple 

use management

Management of Acquired Lands in the North Fork of the John Day Area

The Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 requires a development of a management plan 

for acquired lands before multiple uses can be considered.

Guidance for all resources must be provided

Visual Resource Inventory and Designations (Scenic Quality, etc.)

 Designations are required by BLM policy

Public concerns include a broad range

All issues described above (1-7) plus:

 Grazing (comments for both pro and con)

Resolving each issue provides an opportunity to consolidate and update existing 

management into a single RMP. As a result, guidance will be tuned to the latest science 

and follow direction provided by the legislative and executive guidance described in 

Chapter 2 of the Full AMS. The ultimate result of this process will be a management 

plan that provides for a range of uses, protects natural resources, and is sensitive to the 

needs of local communities.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 11 —

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Contents of the AMS

The remainder of the AMS is organized as follows:

Chapter 2 – Legal Authorities

Listing of the laws and previous policy decisions providing a context for the types of 

decisions that must be made in an RMP.

Chapter 3 – Area Profile

Describes the physical, biological, social, and economic components of the planning area 

based on information available at the time of publication.

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

Describes the current direction for resource management in the planning area. This 

information, combined with information presented in previous chapters, helps form the 

framework for developing the proposed management opportunities (see next chapter).

Chapter 5 – Management Opportunities

Describes the preliminary issues and management opportunities, including a range of 

actions and associated outcomes which will be analyzed in the RMP.

Chapter 6 – Collaborative Planning

Summary of the collaborative planning process and a projected time-line for completion 

of the RMP and associated planning and decision steps.

Chapter 7 – Scoping Report

Describes process for collecting feedback from the public and stakeholders. Describes 

key concerns of public and stakeholders

References

List of Preparers

Glossary

Appendices

Provide detailed information referenced in text.

Support Documents

Available on CD only. Contains Record of Decisions for all RMPs subject to amendment 

or revision by this planning effort. Also includes some key documents that provide 

guidance for day to day management within the John Day Basin.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 12 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 13 —

Chapter 2

Legal Authorities
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 14 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 15 —

Chapter 2 – Legal Authorities and Plan Decisions

Legal Authorities

This section briefly describes the legal authorities and planning guidance that provide 

direction for the BLM land use planning process. These, when combined with the purpose 

and need for action, establish the scope of the land use plan and set the framework for 

the decisions to be made in the John Day Basin Environmental Impact Statement and 

Resource Management Plan. This direction may come from several sources, including 

Congress, the President, or the Legislature. Guidance and information on how to 

How BLM employees get direction to Manage Public Lands 

Direction for management of public lands administered by the BLM is multi-tiered. 

First, Congress authorized the BLM to manage lands and passed laws that provide overall objectives for 

management of those lands. While one Law, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, authorizes 

the BLM to manage specific lands, other laws can provide direction to many government agencies. For 

example, the Endangered Species Act establishes guidance that must be followed by all federal agencies to 

protect threatened and endangered species. 

The Department of the Interior or the BLM then creates regulations and policies that describe how the BLM 

will act to implement the direction of Congress. Regulations are initially published in the Federal Register 

and subsequently in the Code of Federal Regulations. 

Policy direction is then provided to the BLM staff in the form of Manuals and Handbooks. For teams 

preparing Resource Management Plans the primary references are the NEPA Manual and Handbook and 

the Planning Manual and Handbook. 

Executive Orders can also direct and guide management. These orders are issued under the authority of 

and are signed by the President. An executive order generally recognizes one or more laws and provides 

instructions for implementing those laws to one or more federal agencies. 

Laws created by congress (legislative guidance) and executive direction (executive guidance) provided 

through Department of the Interior or BLM regulations and policy and executive orders that apply to this 

planning process are listed and briefly described in this chapter.

Resource management plans establish specific objectives and guidance for managing lands within a 

defined planning area or describe specific project level stipulations. The Resource Management Plan and 

other more site specific guidance will be described in Chapter 4, Existing Management.

Project level guidance is the equivalent of a blueprint and architect instructions. Depending on the size and 

type of project, planning at this level may be almost as complex as developing a Resource Management 

Plan or may result in very simple and small document. Project specific guidance will not be addressed or 

described in this document.

A final note is that certain regulations, generated by the BLM and other Agencies, provide guidance that 

directly applies to day to day BLM activities. These include regulations for the management of cultural 

resources, protecting endangered species, many lands procedures, and several other activities. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 16 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

implement these directives and laws are developed by resource management agencies 

such as the BLM, and the departments that oversee them, such as the Department of the 

Interior. 

The following is a list of the primary legal authorities relevant to the John Day Basin RMP.

1. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), as amended, 43

U.S.C. 1701 et seq, provides the authority for BLM land use planning.

2. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq., requires the consideration and public availability of information regarding the 

environmental impacts of major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the 

human environment. This includes the consideration of alternatives and mitigation of 

impacts.

3. The Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7418, requires Federal agencies to comply 

with all Federal, State and local requirements regarding the control and abatement of air 

pollution. This includes abiding by the requirements of State Implementation Plans. 

4. The Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251, establishes objectives to restore 

and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s water.

5. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 1323, requires the Federal land 

manager to comply with all Federal, State, and local requirements regarding the control 

and abatement of water pollution in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.

6. The Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 201, is designed to make the Nation’s waters 

“drinkable” as well as “swimable.” Amendments establish a direct connection between 

safe drinking water, watershed protection, and management.

7. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), as amended, 

directs BLM to 1) conserve Threatened and Endangered Species and the ecosystems 

upon which they depend, and 2) not contribute to the need to list a species.

8. The Pacific States Bald Eagle Recovery Plan (USFWS 1986) covers the states of 

Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, California and Nevada. The Plan 

established recovery population goals, habitat management goals, and 47 management 

(recovery) zones. The High Cascades and Blue Mountain Zones (zone 11 and 9 

respectively) includes the John Day Resource Management Planning Area. The Pacific 

States Bald Eagle Recovery Plan described specific criteria for the Pacific Recovery Area 

(PRA) as necessary for delisting.

9. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq., requires the 

Federal land management agencies to identify river systems and then study them for 

potential designation as wild, scenic, or recreational rivers.

10. The Wilderness Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq., authorizes the President 

to make recommendations to the Congress for Federal lands to be set aside for 

preservation as wilderness.

11. The Antiquities Act of 1906, 16 U.S.C. 431-433, provides guidance for protecting 

cultural resources on Federal lands and authorizes the President to designate National 

Monuments on Federal lands.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 17 —

Chapter 2 – Legal Authorities and Plan Decisions

12. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 470, 

expands protection of historic and archaeological properties to include those of national, 

State, and local significance and also traditional cultural properties, and directs Federal 

agencies to consider the effects of proposed actions on properties eligible for or included 

in the National Register of Historic Places.

13.The Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA) 16 USC 470, as 

amended, defines and provides for the protection of archaeological resources on Federal 

lands, irrespective of eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places, establishes 

a permit system for resources over 100 years old, and requires agencies to provide for 

public education and continuing inventory of Federal lands.

14. Executive Order 11593 of 1971, directs Federal agencies to inventory public lands 

and to nominate eligible properties to the National Register of Historic Places.

15. Executive Order 13287 of 2003 (Preserve America), directs Federal agencies to 

provide leadership in preserving America’s heritage by actively advancing the protection, 

enhancement, and contemporary use of historic properties managed by the Federal 

Government, and by promoting intergovernmental cooperation and partnerships for the 

preservation and use of historic properties, and establishing agency accountability for 

inventory and stewardship.

16. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990, 25 U.S.C. 3001, 

establishes rights to Indian tribes and Native Hawaiians to claim ownership and 

repatriate human remains, and also funerary, sacred, and other objects, controlled by 

federal agencies and museums. Agency discoveries of such “cultural items” during land 

use activities require consultation with appropriate tribes to determine ownership and 

disposition.

17. The Treaty with the Tribes of Middle Oregon signed June 25, 1855, ratified March 

8, 1859 (14 STAT. 751), reserved rights for the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs to 

fish, off-reservation, at usual and accustomed stations and to hunt, gather resources, and 

pasture animals on public lands in common with other citizens of the United States.

17b. The Treaty with the Walla Walla, Cayuse, Etc., signed June 9, 1855, ratified March 

8, 1859 (12 STAT. 945), reserved rights for the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian 

Reservation to fish, off-reservation, at usual and accustomed stations and to hunt, gather 

resources, and pasture animals on public lands in common with other citizens of the 

United States. 

18. The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978, 42 U.S.C. 1996, establishes a 

national policy to protect and preserve the right of American Indians to exercise traditional 

Indian religious beliefs or practices including but not limited to access to religious sites. 

Agencies are to avoid unnecessary interference with traditional tribal spiritual practices. 

Also, compliance requires consultation with tribes when land uses might conflict with 

Indian religious beliefs or practices.

19. The Recreation and Public Purposes Act, as amended, 43 U.S.C. 869 et seq., 

authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to lease or convey BLM managed lands for 

recreational and public purposes under specified conditions.

20. The Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act, 30 U.S.C. 181 et seq., provides:

a. Potential oil and gas resources be adequately addressed in planning documents;

b. The social, economic, and environmental consequences of exploration and 

development of oil and gas resources be determined; and

c. Any stipulations to be applied to oil and gas leases be clearly identified.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 18 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

21. The General Mining Law, as amended, 30 U.S.C. 21 et seq., allows the location, 

use, and patenting of mining claims on sites on public domain lands of the United States. 

Amendments established a policy of fostering development of economically stable mining 

and minerals industries, their orderly and economic development, and studying methods 

for disposal of waste and reclamation.

22. The Taylor Grazing Act, 43 U.S.C. 315, authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to 

establish or add to grazing districts in vacant unappropriated and unreserved lands from 

any part of the public domain which are chiefly valuable for grazing and raising forage 

crops.

23. The Public Rangelands Improvement Act, 43 U.S.C. 1901, provides that the public 

rangelands be managed so that they become as productive as feasible in accordance 

with management objectives and the land use planning process established pursuant to 

43 U.S.C. 1712.

24. Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income Populations), (49 FR 7629), requires that each Federal 

agency consider the impacts of its programs on minority populations and low income 

populations.

25. Executive Order 13007 of 1996 (Indian Sacred Sites), (61FR104), explicitly does not create any 

new right for Indian tribes, but does requires Federal agencies to the extent practicable, permitted by 

law, and not clearly inconsistent with essential agency functions to:

a. Accommodate access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites by Indian religious 

practitioners;

b. Avoid adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites; and

c. Maintain the confidentiality of sacred sites.

26. Executive Order 13175 of 2000 (consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments) provides, in part, that each Federal agency shall establish regular 

and meaningful consultation and collaboration with Indian tribal governments in the 

development of regulatory practices on Federal matters that significantly or uniquely 

affect their communities.

27. Executive Order 13112 (Invasive Species) provides that no Federal agency shall 

authorize, fund or carry out actions that it believes are likely to cause or promote the 

introduction or spread of invasive species unless, pursuant to guidelines that it has 

prescribed, the agency has determined and made public its determination that the 

benefits of such actions clearly outweigh the potential harm caused by invasive species; 

and that all feasible and prudent measures to minimize risk or harm will be taken in 

conjunction with the actions.

28. Secretarial Order 3206 (American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust 

Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act) requires DOI agencies to consult with 

Indian Tribes when agency actions to protect a listed species, as a result of compliance 

with ESA, affect or may affect Indian lands, tribal trust resources, or the exercise of 

American Indian tribal rights.

29. The Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988, 16 USC 4301, requires federal 

agencies to identify, protect and maintain significant caves. The locations of such caves 

may be kept confidential. Protection is afforded not only to the geologic structure, but also 

the associated decorations, inhabitants, artifacts, and water resources.

30. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA, Pub. L. 94-580), as amended. 

In 1976 RCRA established a system for managing non-hazardous and hazardous solid 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 19 —

Chapter 2 – Legal Authorities and Plan Decisions

wastes in an environmentally sound manner. Specifically, it provides for the management 

of hazardous wastes from the point of origin to the point of final disposal (i.e., “cradle to 

grave”). RCRA also promotes resource recovery and waste minimization.

31. Executive Order 13212. “It is the policy of this Administration that executive 

departments and agencies (agencies) shall take appropriate actions, to the extent 

consistent with applicable law, to expedite projects that will increase the production, 

transmission, or conservation of energy.”

32. Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971, as amended, gave responsibility for the 

management and protection of these animals to the U.S. Department of the Interior to be 

administered by the BLM and to the Department of Agriculture to be administered by the 

Forest Service.

33. Executive Order 11644 (37 FR 2877), on February 8, 1972, provided that OHV 

use will be controlled and managed to protect resource values, promote public safety 

and minimize conflicts with uses of public lands. This executive order directed federal 

agencies to designate specific areas and trails on public lands where OHV use may be 

permitted and areas where OHV use may not be permitted. 

34. On May 24, 1977, President Carter amended this order with Executive Order 11989. 

This executive order further defined OHV, administrative use exemptions, and directed 

agencies to immediately close areas and trails whenever the agency determines that the 

use of OHV will cause or is causing considerable adverse effects on the soil, wildlife, and 

wildlife habitat, cultural or historic resources (42 USC 4321).

35. The Bureau of Land Management’s National Management Strategy for Motorized 

Off-Highway Vehicle Use on Public Lands (2001) provides agency guidance and offers 

recommendations for future actions to improve motorized vehicle management.

36. The Bureau of Land Management, “National Sage-Grouse Habitat Conservation 

Strategy” (2004) sets broad goals and specific actions to meet the goals for protecting 

sage grouse and sage grouse habitat.

37. The Carlson-Foley Act (PL 90-583 codified in 43 USC 1241) establishes legal 

guidance and responsibility for the management of weeds on federal lands. This law 

authorizes federal agencies to allow states to take weed control measures on federal 

lands.

38. Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000, as described in Chapter 1, requires that “lands 

acquired...within the North Fork of the John Day subwatershed be managed primarily for 

the protection of native fish and wildlife habitat, and for public recreation but that other 

authorized uses may be allowed if, through a land use planning process, it is determined 

that such uses are consistent with, and do not diminish the primary management 

purposes.”

39. BLM planning regulations (43 CFR 1610.4-3 and 1610.4-6) require that resource 

management plans consider social, economic, and institutional information.

41. Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy 2001

42. The 1995 Interim Strategies for Managing Anadromous Fish-producing Watersheds 

in Eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and Portions of California (USDA-FS & 

USDI-BLM 1995), commonly referred to as PACFISH, provides guidance for managing 

and monitoring grazing lands adjacent to streams where anadromous fish are present or 

potentially present. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 20 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 21 —

Chapter 3

Resource Area

Profile
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 22 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Bend, fold, spindle, and/or mutilate!

A Journey Through Time is the name of a scenic motor route through the heart of the John Day basin. It is a neck 

wrenching drive because one’s vision is constantly redirected from (in the spring at least) the greenish gray water of the 

river past brilliant green fields to pastel colored slopes covered by grass or brush or barren clays to layer upon layer of 

red to chocolate covered basalt. Once, approaching Picture Gorge my passenger became nervous because, as I was 

driving, I was counting obvious layers of rock the river had spindled through—11, 12, no 14 then I was certain that I had 

noted 17 layers. Besides making my passenger nervous there was a logical reason for doing this. Time! How much 

time was taken to create each layer? These were created as rapidly as it took for lava to spread across the landscape. 

Bracketing these thick rapidly created layers are sedimentary layers created over many millennia by dead things such 

as leaves, sticks, palm trees, and the remains of creatures ranging from microscopic sea creatures to extremely large 

prehistoric rhinoceros. Caps of volcanic ash spewed by ancient volcanoes separated these layers and, not inconsequently, frequently preserved the remains of plants and animals that no longer exist.

Today’s landscape is the result of a contest between the landbuilding processes and degradation process. Land building includes the introduction of flow after flow of lava, the deposition of dead plants and animals and other sediments, 

the drifted ash from violent volcanic eruptions, and the physical forces that have bent, folded, and mutilated the layers 

created by the other processes. These physical forces are caused by the shifting of huge plates of rock deep below the 

surface of the earth, usually at rates much slower than we can perceive. The occasional earthquake is evidence of brief 

periods of rapid movement as these plates slip across each other. The bending, folding and mutilating of the strata created by the other landbuilding processes do crazy things to the sensible layering process. 

The National Park Service staff at the Thomas Condon Paleontology Center has published a diagram of the sedimentary and igneous (mostly basalt but also ash) layers. Some of the craziness includes: These strata are over three miles 

thick but uppermost layer is “only” 3,000 feet above the “Goose Rock” stratum (lowest layer in this area) visible just a 

few miles downstream from Picture Gorge. Sheep Rock, about 1,100 feet above the John Day River is capped by a few 

layers of basalt but one mile south in Picture Gorge basalt flows are layered from the level of the river to about 800 feet 

above the river and the bottom layers near the river correspond to the “cap layer” on Sheep Rock.” Shifts deep below 

the surface have tilted, bent and folded these layers and as a result our view of the strata, made visible by the erosion 

of the layers by the John Day River is distorted. The tilting of the strata explains why the three miles of thickness results 

in only 3,000 feet of elevation gain—the thickness of a layer is actually better measured in many places by measuring 

the actual distance between the beginning and end of a layer rather than the vertical thickness. So if one measures from 

Goose rock to the top layer on the crest to the immediate east you get a little over 3 miles.

Layers visible near the National Monument do not necessarily exist throughout the planning area. What is important 

to remember is the general process. What is common throughout the planning area is a process that involves building 

up through a combination of volcanism and sedimentation; bending, folding and tilting resulting from the movement of 

underlying plates; and the process of erosion initiated by water moving gently at first and then rushing down rivers and 

streams within the planning area. 

As a result of this process the landform of the planning area has developed and continues to change. The variations in 

landform provide conditions for the development of varying combinations of plants and animals. On the broadest scale 

these areas have been referred to as Ecoregions. The planning area falls within two broadscale ecoregions, the Columbia Plateau and the Blue Mountains. These ecoregions are further broken into subecoregions that reflect variations in 

elevation and other topographic variables.

The following pages describe in more detail the geologic history and the characteristics of ecoregions and subecoregions within the planning area. This information provides the foundation for understanding the plant and animal communities within the planning area, why people live, work and play here, and how the natural resources are affected and 

used by residents and visitors.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 23 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Introduction

At first sight, the John Day Basin does not seem to change much. The river, green fields, 

pastel hills, brown rimrock and gentle mountains alter so slowly they don’t seem to 

change at all. This illusion dispels us when the earth suddenly moves beneath us in an 

earthquake, a landslide covers the road, or the river rapidly covers the valley in a flood. 

Other processes are hidden deep in the earth; slowly forming rocks by the inch. These 

changes are the heart of the John Day Basin landscape.

But the weather changes the landscape, too. Rains soak it in the fall, snow blankets it in 

the winter, and intense thunderstorms chew it up in the summer.

Context 

In January 2003 the Regional Executives for the USDA Forest Service, Forest Service 

Research, USDI Bureau of Land Management, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the 

National Marine Fisheries Service and the Environmental Protection Agency signed a 

Memorandum of Understanding to cooperatively implement The Interior Columbia Basin 

Strategy and to utilize the scientific findings of the ICBEMP Science, and new information 

and best available science as they are developed. The agencies developed an Aquatic/

Riparian Habitat Framework (July 2004) to clarify the Interior Columbia Basin Strategy 

relative to the aquatic and riparian habitat components. This science will be used to guide 

the amendment and revision of this plan, and project implementation. This will help to 

meet community needs for goods and services in an ecologically sustainable way.

The Aquatic/Riparian Habitat Framework includes the following six components: Riparian 

Conservation Areas (or appropriate direction accomplishing the same end, Protection 

of Population Strongholds for Listed or Proposed Species and Narrow Endemics, 

Multiscale Analysis, Restoration Priorities and Guidance, Management Direction (Desired 

conditions, objectives, management actions ), and Monitoring/Adaptive Management.

The Prineville District BLM has completed the Multiscale Analysis component by 

conducting a Subbasin assessment and prioritizing watersheds for restoration. This 

prioritization is presented in Map 3. This map also displays Subbasin ratings and 

opportunities based on assessments by other agencies.

Ecoregions

Combinations of landscape and climate create different Ecoregions. The John Day 

Planning Area falls within the Blue Mountains and the Columbia Plateau Ecoregions. 

To better understand the planning area we will look at these two Ecoregions, as well as 

“Subecoregions” or Level 4 Ecoregions. . See Map 2 and following Table 1.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan


Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 27 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Table 1: Ecoregion Acres

Ecoregion Subecoregion BLM Plan Area Acres

Columbia Plateau

Pleistocene Lake Basins 12,603

John Day Canyons 79,319

Umatilla Plateau 10,351

Umatilla Dissected Uplands 885

Blue Mountains

John Day/Clarno Uplands 275,983

John Day/ Clarno Highlands 56,440

Maritime-Influenced Zone 2,503

Cold Basins 40

Melange 8,559

Subalpine-Alpine Zone 45

Mesic Forest Zone 561

Continental Zone Highlands 8,678

Continental Zone Foothills 184

Plan Area TOTAL 456,151
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 28 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

 Columbia Plateau Ecoregion

The Columbia Plateau Ecoregion, which covers about 32,100 square miles, occurs in 

portions of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. About 20 percent of the planning area (6630 

square miles) is within this Ecoregion. The Oregon portion of the Ecoregion extends from 

the eastern slopes of the Cascades Mountains, south and east from the Columbia River 

to the Blue Mountains. The centerpiece of the Ecoregion, the Columbia River, has greatly 

influenced the surrounding area, with cataclysmic floods and large deposits of wind-borne 

silt and sand. Over time, winds scoured the floodplain, depositing silt and sand across 

the landscape and creating ideal conditions for agriculture: rolling lands, deep soil, and 

plentiful flowing rivers including the lower stretch of the John Day River. The Ecoregion is 

made up entirely of lowlands, with an arid climate, cool winters and hot summers.

The Columbia Plateau produces the vast majority of Oregon’s grain, and grain production 

is the heart of the agricultural economy. The Columbia Plateau produces the secondhighest agricultural sales per year for any ecoregion in Oregon. More than 80 percent 

of the Ecoregion’s population and employment is located in the Umatilla County portion 

of the Ecoregion, which includes Pendleton and Hermiston. Other population centers 

include The Dalles, Condon, and Heppner. Almost all of the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion 

is privately owned.

The foundation of the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion is its geology. Beginning 17 million 

years ago, massive eruptions of basalt flowed out of cracks or “vents” in the earth. These 

vents were located in northeastern Oregon, central western Idaho and southeastern 

Washington and produced lava flows over a period of 11 million years. This layering of 

basalt flows formed the Columbia River Basalt Group (CRBG) (Orr et al., 1992). Erupting 

from large fissures measuring 10 to 25 miles in length, the molten basalt filled basins 

in southeastern Washington and northeastern Oregon (Orr et al., 1992). The average 

volume of each flow was more than 100 cubic miles of basalt with some single flows 

exceeding 500 cubic miles. In total, approximately 42,000 cubic miles of basalt flowed 

over an area almost the size of the state of Washington, ranking the CRBG as the second 

largest flood basalt group in the world (Bishop, 2003; Orr et al., 1992). Southward, the 

CRBG continues to thin and tapers out in the Blue Mountains. Individual flows can be up 

to 200 feet thick, but vary substantially.

The flood basalt flows of the CRBG had dramatic effects on the Columbia River. Prior to 

eruption of the basalt flows, the ancestral Columbia River was situated far south of its 

present location. Gorge-filling basalt flows periodically plugged and disrupted the flow of 

the Columbia River, eventually forcing it northward to its modern day location.

Subecoregions of the Columbia Plateau

Within the Planning Area the Columbia Plateau contains 4 Subecoregions: the 

Pleistocene Lake Basin, Umatilla Plateau, Deschutes/John Day Canyons, and Umatilla 

Dissected Uplands. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 29 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

The Pleistocene Lake Basin is a nearly level to undulating lake plain with very little 

surface water runoff. Surface geology consists of ancient lake and flood deposits 

associated with ice plugged lakes from 2 million years ago. These glacial lakes backed 

up water then suddenly released catastrophic flood waters that permanently scarred the 

landscape on its’ way to the ocean. Lake Condon in the northeastern portion of the plan 

area is one of these ancient glacial lakes. Major vegetation is sagebrush steppe includes 

needleandthread grass, Indian ricegrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, Sandberg bluegrass, 

and basin big sagebrush. Alien cheatgrass covers broad areas. The sagebrush steppe is 

used primarily for irrigated cropland; some rangeland; and irrigated poplar tree farms for 

pulp. Crops include winter wheat, potatoes, alfalfa, and silage corn.

Elevations range from 300 to 1200 ft. There is very little relief to the landscape; only 10-

200ft. The climate is very dry. The Pleistocene Lake Basins generally receive the most 

precipitation from November through February. These winter storms bring rain to lower 

elevations and snow to higher ridges and peaks. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 7 

to 10 inches. Mean annual frost free days range from 140 to 200.

The Umatilla Plateau is a nearly level to rolling, loess-mantled plateau. Glacial features 

such as patterned-ground are common. Most streams are ephemeral. Surface geology 

was created by the Wapanum and Grande Rhonde flows of the Columbia River Basalts. 

The basalt occasionally displays erosion or deposition from glacial activity. Vegetative 

cover of the Umatilla Plateau is primarily bluebunch wheatgrass with scattered sagebrush 

steppe, Sandberg bluegrass, and Idaho fescue. Stiff sagebrush occupies very shallow 

soils sites. Introduced cheatgrass covers broad areas of this Subecoregion. Agriculture 

consists of mostly cropland and some grassland. Non-irrigated winter wheat is grown 

using the crop–fallow rotation method. Irrigated land grows winter wheat, alfalfa, and 

barley

Elevations range from 1000 to 3200 feet. Occasionally, valleys cut down several hundred 

feet from the plateau. The nearly level to rolling relief varies between 200 and 600 feel. 

Mean annual precipitation ranges from 9 to 15 inches. Most streams are ephemeral. The 

mean annual frost free days vary from 100 to 170. 

The Deschutes/John Day Canyons are very steep to precipitous canyonlands 

containing the Deschutes and John Day rivers. Surface geology is the same as the 

Umatilla Plateau but the rivers have exposed the depth of these layers. The land is 

sparsely covered by grasses and shrubs. Land is used for livestock grazing and wildlife 

habitat. Soils contain a significant amount of fragmented rock. Vegetation across this 

sagebrush steppe includes bluebunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, Sandberg bluegrass, 

Wyoming big sagebrush, and cheatgrass. White alder, mockorange, western clematis, 

and choke cherry run along narrow canyon riparian areas. 

Elevations range from 200 to 3600 feet, with deep valleys cutting down 1000 to 2000 

feet. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 9 to 14 inches. The mean annual frost free 

days vary from 100 to 190.

The Umatilla Dissected Uplands are dissected, hilly uplands with a terrace-like 

appearance. Slopes are rolling to very steep. Surface geology consists of Grand Rhonde 

Basalts with canyons cutting down through the older John Day and Clarno Formations. 

These uplands are mostly used as rangeland and wildlife habitat. In higher elevations, 

north-facing slopes are forested. Vegetation is primarily wheatgrass–bluegrass/ Idaho 

fescue, bluebunch wheatgrass, and Sandberg bluegrass. Forested, higher elevation, 

north-facing slopes contain Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, snowberry, pinegrass, and 

ninebark.

Elevations range from 1600 to 4400 ft. Hills rise and fall 500 to 1500 ft. Mean annual 

precipitation ranges from 9 to 14 inches. Mean annual from free days vary from 100- 160.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 30 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

 Blue Mountains Ecoregion

At 27,380 square miles, the Blue Mountains Ecoregion is the largest in Oregon, 

accounting for about 80 percent of the planning area (6630 square miles). Named for 

its largest mountain range, the Blue Mountains, this Ecoregion is a diverse complex 

of mountain ranges, valleys and plateaus containing deep rocky-walled canyons, 

glacially cut gorges, sagebrush steppe, juniper woodlands, mountain lakes, forests, and 

meadows. Broad river valleys support ranches surrounded and the surrounding irrigated 

hay meadows and wheat fields. Elevation influences a varied climate that ranges in 

temperature and precipitation. Overall, the Ecoregion has short, dry summers and long, 

cold winters. Much of the precipitation falls as snow and snow melt gives life to the rivers 

and irrigated fields.

Timber products and cattle production are the economic mainstays of the Ecoregion, but 

dryland wheat and alfalfa are important in the river valleys. The Ecoregion supports some 

of the finest big game hunting in Oregon and attracts tourists year-round to the scenic 

lakes and rivers, geologic features, and alpine areas that characterize the area. The cities 

of Mitchell, Dayville, Monument and John Day benefit from this thriving tourist industry.

While the Blue Mountain Ecoregion contains some of the largest intact native grasslands 

in Oregon and several conservation areas, fire suppression, selective timber harvest, 

and unsustainable grazing management have impacted habitat for wildlife. These 

changes have resulted in changes in vegetation which has increased vulnerability of 

forests to insects, disease, and effects of severe wildfire. The result has become a new 

compliment of invasive species that gain a foothold after sagebrush steppe fires move 

through the area. .

The foundation of the Blue Mountains Ecoregion is its geology. Approximately 200 million 

years ago, seas covered the entire state of Oregon. The Pacific Coast shoreline was 

in Idaho and eastern Washington (Orr et al., 1992). The Blue Mountains were a series 

of volcanic island chains (similar to present day Hawaii) off the Mainland Coast. These 

islands were perched on top a slab or plate of oceanic crust in the Pacific Ocean. (See 

Figure 1)

Figure 1:

Underlying

Geology

Drawing modified from William 

and Elizabeth Orr, published 

with permission of the authors.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 31 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

As the slabs moved toward each other, the Oceanic slab sunk beneath the North 

American Continental Slab. The Oceanic slab scrapped off the Volcanic Islands onto 

the Mainland before diving down or “subducting”under the mainland. Across 400 million 

years, many chains of volcanic islands sprouted and were scrapped or “accreted” onto 

the North American Continent. Oceanic sediment and ash from the volcanoes were 

sandwiched onto the mainland in between the volcanic islands. These series of collisions 

created new landmasses called “terranes.” This succession of terranes displaced the 

coast to its current location. 

Three terranes are recognized in the John Day planning area: Baker, Grindstone, and 

Izee. Each terrane contains unique groups of rocks and fossils. The Grindstone terrane 

contains some of the oldest rocks in Oregon. Limestone and other layered rocks from 

about 380 million years old. The Baker terrane is composed of heated and folded rocks 

from the oceanic crust. Table 2 displays the major rock types and ages of all three 

terranes. 

Between 120 and 160 million years ago, these terranes were intruded by magmas that 

later cooled to form masses of granodiorite and gabbro (Orr et al., 1992). Along with the 

magma came hot fluids that mineralized the surrounding rocks with gold-bearing veins 

(Brooks and Ramp, 1968; Bishop, 2003). 

Table 2: Accreted terranes in the planning area with rock types and age

Terrane Major Rock Types Age

Grindstone limestone, mudstone, siltstone, sandstone, 

chert, argillite

about 380 – 235 million years agp

Izee volcanic and volcaniclasitc sedimenatary rocks about 220 – 175 million years

Baker Peridotite, gabbro, basalt, shale, argillite, chromite, and dioroiteabout 285 – 175 million years

Figure 2:

Clarno Formation
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 32 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The oldest rocks that formed on the local surface of the Blue Mountain Ecoregion are of 

the Clarno Formation.(see Figure 2) Placement of these rocks began approximately 50 

million years ago during the birth of a the Clarno volcanoes in eastern Oregon (Bishop, 

2003). The Cascade Mountains were not present at that time and the Pacific Ocean 

shoreline was east of the modern day location of the Cascades (Orr, et al., 1992). Moist 

air from the Pacific Ocean created a wet tropical climate and supported lush woodlands 

and open grasslands. The Clarno volcanoes erupted large quantities of ash, rhyolite, and 

andesite. Thick, loose ash was deposited on steep volcano slopes. The ash frequently 

mixed with water to form large mudflows. These flows moved like molasses over the 

landscape, entombing both plants and animals, and preserving them as fossils. Plant 

fossils found in these deposits include petrified wood, leaves, nuts, fruits, and seeds of 

tropical hardwoods (Retallack et al., 1996). Fossilized remains of prehistoric horses and 

other mammals are also found in the Clarno Formation. 

About 33 million years ago, the climate shifted from tropical to temperate, Clarno 

volcanism ceased and a short period of erosion ensued (Bishop, 2003). Then, a new 

episode of volcanic activity commenced, producing the rocks and ash beds of the John 

Day formation (See Figure 3). The volcanoes of the John Day produced explosive ash 

eruptions and flows that blanketed much of the region. Dense clouds of hot ash swept 

across the landscape and fused into “tuffs”. Basalt, andesite, and rhyolite lavas also 

flowed from these volcanoes. Rapidly deposited ash and mud from volcanic activity 

provided ideal conditions for fossilization of the plants and animals living in the region at 

the time. Preserved leaves from dawn redwood (metasequoia) and alder are common 

in these deposits (Retallack et al., 1996). Animal fossils include various prehistoric cats, 

dogs, horses, camels, rodents, and rhinoceroses. 

Approximately 16 million years ago, massive flows of basalt erupted from large cracks 

holes near Monument and Kimberly. The lava flowed out at speeds up to 30 miles per 

hour. Layer upon layer of columnar basalt form the Picture Gorge Basalts (Orr et al., 

1992). Between the basalt layers are thin bands of silt and limestone, telling us that there 

was often a lull between successive volcanic flows. The Picture Gorge Basalts cap the 

John Day and Clarno Formations. 

Figure 3: John Day Formation
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 33 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Subecoregions of the Blue Mountains

The Blue Mountains includes nine Subecoregions in the planning area, including: 

JohnDay/Clarno Uplands, JohnDay/Clarno Highlands, Maritime Influenced Zone, 

Melange, Continental Zone Highlands, Continental Zone Foothills, Mesic Forest Zone, 

Subalpine Zone, and Cold Basins.

The JohnDay/Clarno Uplands are moderately to highly dissected hills and low 

mountains. Hills are rolling to steep and mountain slopes are steeply sloping. Scattered 

buttes occur, throughout the hills and mountains. Major valleys are formed by the John 

Day River. Surface geology consists of volcanic ash, alluvium, and piedmont gravels 

from the Clarno and John Day formations. Basalt, tuff, andesite, rhyolite, and breccia 

from Picture Gorge Basalt and other isolated volcanic activity are also part of the surface 

geology. Dominant vegetation associations include wheatgrass–bluegrass and juniper 

steppe woodland. The vegetation includes Bluebunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, basin 

wildrye, Wyoming big sagebrush, and Thurber needlegrass. Western juniper woodland 

transitions into higher elevation ponderosa pine forest. Riparian areas express white 

alder, mockorange, chokecherry, clematis, willows, black cottonwood, and water birch.

Elevations range from 1600 to 4400 feet and relief varies from 400 to 2500 feet. Mean 

annual precipitation ranges from 10 to 16 inches. Mean annual frost free days vary from 

70 to 150.

The climate of the John Day/Clarno Uplands has a noteworthy history of intense 

thunderstorms. Occasional thunderstorms produce intense precipitation that localized 

flooding (“flash floods”) occurs.

Dr. John Merriam, a University of California paleontologist, experienced just such a flood 

during a fossil hunt in 1900. On June 23, Merriam and a companion were digging near 

Bridge Creek, 6 miles downstream from Mitchell in central Oregon. They were working in 

the shade of a low cliff under a partly cloudy sky. Suddenly,

...there began to fall what might best be called balls of water. Thinking the shower 

would soon pass, we kept at work, but heavy clouds swung across the sky. During 

the next hour, as we made our way out of the area, we were exposed to one of the 

hardest rain storms I have ever seen.

Figure 4:

Picture 

Gorge

Basalts 

on top of 

Clarno 

Formation 

US Park 

Service Photo from 1925
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 34 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

That storm devastated a large area in Wheeler County. Crops were destroyed, mud- and 

rockslides were common, and farm buildings were destroyed. Eyewitnesses reported 

hailstones up to 6 inches in diameter. Fortunately, no lives were lost. Not far away from 

the site of that storm, in a secluded graveyard, are buried Nancy Wilson and three of her 

children. They died on June 2, 1884, when an intense thunderstorm sent a “wild torrent of 

muddy boulder-laden water over the flatlands of what is now Painted Hills State Park.” 

The same area was also the scene of one of the largest flash floods in the United States. 

On July 13, 1956, intense thunderstorms and heavy rain occurred near Mitchell between 

5 and 6 in the evening. During the event Bridge Creek rose from its depth of 1 foot to a 

torrent, that destroyed upwards of 20 buildings including houses, businesses, a garage, 

and a post office. A highway was blocked by washouts and mud and rock slides. People 

who had accidentally left open containers out during the 50-minute storm calculated that 

the rainfall was 3.5 inches in Mitchell and 4 inches in Girds Creek. This was more than 

25% of the area’s annual average rainfall!

Intense thunderstorms similar to those in the Mitchell area have been observed 

near Spray and most recently along the South Fork John Day River. These intense 

thunderstorms frequently wash across the John Day/Clarno Uplands, taking out roads 

and creating new river features.

The John Day/Clarno Highlands consist of moderately to highly dissected, steeply 

sloping low mountains and rolling hills. The area includes broad streams fed more by 

springs than by snow melt. Surface geology is similar to that of the John Day/Clarno 

Uplands, but also includes colluvium from the eroding Picture Gorge Basalts. Dominant 

vegetation includes western ponderosa pine forest/ open ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, 

and western juniper. Vegetation includes mountain-mahogany, snowberry, mountain big 

sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, elk sedge, Idaho fescue, and bluebunch wheatgrass. 

Riparian areas express grand fir, mountain alder, red-twig dogwood, ninebark, Wood’s 

rose, Rocky Mountain maple, and various willows. These forest and woodland areas are 

used for woodland grazing, logging, and recreation.

Elevations range from 3000 to 6200 feet. The mountains and hills rise from 200 to 2000 

feet. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 16 to 28 inches. Mean annual frost free days 

vary from 30 to 100.

The Maritime-Influenced Zone consists of gently-sloping to hilly volcanic plateaus 

and mountain valleys. Springs occur throughout this zone. Most of the surface geology 

consists of the Grande Rhonde Basalt flow which was part of the Columbia River Basalt 

Flows. Major vegetation associations include Western ponderosa pine forest, and grand 

fir–Douglas-fir forest. Most of the forest is composed of ponderosa pine with scattered 

Douglas-fir and grand fir. Dense forest understory and riparian shrub cover consists of 

snowberry, spirea, ninebark, serviceberry, and red-twig dogwood. Herbaceous ground 

cover includes heartleaf arnica, pinegrass, elk sedge, Idaho fescue, Sandberg bluegrass, 

and bluebunch wheatgrass. This forested landscape is primarily used for logging, 

grazing, wildlife habitat, and recreation.

Elevations range from 3000 to 6000 feet. The plateaus drop down 150 to 1600 feet to 

valley bottoms. The climate is moderated by moderate maritime weather and oceanic 

trends. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 20 to 40 inches. Most of this annual 

precipitation arrives in the late winter and early spring. Compared to other areas in 

Oregon, the monthly precipitation values are fairly evenly distributed. Mean annual frost 

free days range from 40 to 80.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 35 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

The Melange consists of mid-elevation mountains with few perennial streams. The 

surface geology was created by the sandwiched ocean sediments during accretion 

events and intrusions of magma through those layers. Stiff flows of the Strawberry 

volcanics cover portions of this Subecoregion. These events combine to create a 

surface geology consisting of a mix of colluvium, basalt, andesite, rhyolite, granite, 

partly metamorphosed limestone, marble, chert, argillite, shale, greywacke, serpentine, 

greenstone, and schist. Major vegetation associations are western ponderosa pine forest, 

juniper steppe woodland. Vegetation includes ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, subalpine fir, 

lodgepole pine, western larch, grand fir, grouse huckleberry, snowberry, prince’s pine, 

sidebells pyrola, twinflower, pinegrass, elk sedge, and heartleaf arnica. Riparian areas 

are vegetated with mountain alder, red-twig dogwood, prickly currant, black currant, 

Columbia monk’s hood, and bluebells. This forested landscape is used for woodland 

grazing, wildlife habitat, and mining. Only limited logging occurs due to the difficulty in 

reforesting the droughty, exposed soils. Historic placer mining for gold has altered the 

structure of many streams.

Elevations range from 3500 to 7400 ft. The local relief varies from 600 to 3400 ft. Mean 

annual precipitation ranges from 16 to 35 inches. Mean annual frost free days range from 

30 to 90.

The Continental Zone Highland consists of moderately dissected, mountainous volcanic 

plateaus. Mountain slopes are steep and scattered with cinder cones. Surface geology 

consists of colluvium and volcanic ash from the Strawberry Volcanics. Major vegetation 

associations are western ponderosa pine forest, grand fir–Douglas-fir forest, and 

sagebrush steppe/ Ponderosa pine. Vegetation includes Douglas-fir, grand fir, juniper, 

antelope bitterbrush, snowberry, mountain-mahogany, mountain big sagebrush, stiff 

sagebrush, elk sedge, pinegrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, and Idaho fescue. This forested 

area has a xeric shrub or bunchgrass understory. These highlands are used for livestock 

grazing, logging, and recreation.

Elevations range from 4000 to 6700 feet. Local relief varies from 400 to 2000 feet. Mean 

annual precipitation ranges from 16 to 30 inches. Mean annual frost free days vary from 

50 to 80.

The Continental Zone Foothills consist of hills and scattered buttes. A few perennial 

streams occur and originate in the surrounding mountain ranges. Much of the surface 

geology is basalt and ashflows from the Strawberry volcanics. Some of the Jurassic 

and Triassic graywacke, siltstone, and limestone are present across the foothills. 

Triassic layers consist of gabbro and metamorphic rock. Vegetation associations include 

sagebrush steppe/ Bluebunch wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Idaho fescue, 

Wyoming big sagebrush, Sandberg bluegrass, and, on schist, Nevada greasebush. The 

shrub- and grass-covered land is utilized for livestock grazing and wildlife habitat

Elevations range from 1800 to 6000 feet. Local relief varies from 200 to 2500 feet. Mean 

annual precipitation ranges from 9 to 18 inches. Mean annual frost free days vary from 50 

to 140.

The Mesic Forest Zone is a dissected, volcanic plateau with some mid-elevation 

mountains. Intermittent headwater streams or perennial streams that are fed by snow 

melt from adjacent mountains. Surface geology and bedrock includes basalt flows, 

volcanic ash and colluvium, associated with Picture Gorge Basalts. The Mesic Forest 

Zone geology also includes some older areas of granite, sedimentary rock, volcanic and 

partly metamorphosed sedimentary and volcanic rocks. Major Vegetation associations 

include grand fir–Douglas-fir forest. Cold slopes contain Sub alpine fir, Engelmann 

spruce, mountain hemlock, lodgepole pine, big huckleberry, grouse huckleberry, Utah 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 36 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

honeysuckle, side bells pyrola, round leaved violet, and northwestern sedge. Cool 

moist slopes exhibit grand fir, western larch, queen’s cup beadlily, and prince’s pine. 

The vegetation on drier slopes includes Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, mountain maple, 

ninebark, pinegrass, elk sedge, and bigleaf sandwort. This forested landscape is used for 

logging, woodland livestock grazing, wildlife habitat, and recreation.

Elevations range from 4000 to 7000 feet. Local relief varies from 400 to 2500 feet. These 

areas are influenced by marine air coming through the Columbia River Gorge to the west. 

Mean annual precipitation ranges from 30 to 60 inches. This comes mostly in the form of 

snow and persists into late spring. Mean annual frost free days vary from 15 to 70.

The Subalpine-Alpine Zone includes high elevation, glaciated mountains with arêtes, 

cirques, mountain slopes, tarns, permanent snowfields, and a remnant glacier. The high 

gradient streams have boulder and cobble substrates. Surface geology includes volcanic 

ash and colluvial deposits from the Strawberry Volcanics and Picture Gorge Basalts. 

Intrusive formations of basalt and andesite are the result of magma pushing up through 

layers of older rocks that changed the rocks as they cooled. The area is dotted with rock. 

Surface geology includes remnant glacial deposits associated with glaciers from glacial 

Lake Missoula, e.g., about 2 million years ago. The dominant vegetation associations 

are western spruce–fir forest and alpine meadows–barren. Common species include 

subalpine fir, whitebark pine, Engelmann spruce, and lodgepole pine. Dry south-facing 

slopes have mountain big sagebrush and Idaho fescue. Wet meadows contain heather 

and Parry’s rush. The treeline is vegetated by krummholz. Alpine meadows are marked 

by green fescue and Hood’s sedge. The highest elevations consist of rock outcrops, 

rubble land, and snowfields. This expanse of forest, meadowland, and bare rock is used 

for recreation, and wildlife habitat. The land is used for summer livestock grazing. The 

Subalpine-Alpine Zone is an important water source for lower elevation areas.

Elevations range from 6500 to 9900 feet. Local relief varies from 600 to 3000 feet. Mean 

annual precipitation ranges from 35 to 80 inches and is mostly snow. Mean annual frost 

free days vary from 10 to 30.

The Cold Basins are cold, wet valleys and basins. Most streams have been channelized, 

but undisturbed reaches are meandering, with well developed floodplains. Surface 

geology consists of recent alluvium and lacustrine deposits. Older layers are formed from 

ash and sediment. The dominant vegetation associations are sagebrush steppe and 

wetlands. Common vegetation includes sedges, mountain big sagebrush, low sagebrush, 

and Idaho fescue. Wetlands and wet meadows are covered with tufted hairgrass, Baltic 

rush, and alien Kentucky bluegrass. The pastureland, shrubland, grassland, and wetlands 

are heavily grazed by cattle and elk. Meadow hay is harvested for winter livestock feed. 

Elevations range from 3600 to 6000 feet. Local relief is mostly level. Mean annual 

precipitation ranges from 12 to 25 inches and is mostly snow. Mean annual frost free 

days vary from 20 to 50.

Mineral Resources

Much of the early history of the North, Middle and Upper John Day basins involves the 

search for the “motherlode.” For a few the search continues even today. More common 

material, such as sand, gravel, and aggregate literally form the foundation of community 

and regional infrastructure. Modern roads and building foundations would not be possible 

without these common materials. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 37 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

The BLM categorizes minerals as locatable, leasable, or saleable minerals. Locatable 

minerals are minerals for which mining claims can be located under the 1872 mining 

laws, as amended. These include precious and base metals and some non-metallic 

minerals. Saleable Minerals include common variety mineral materials such as sand, 

gravel, rock, and cinders. Leasable minerals include oil, gas, and geothermal and some 

solid mineral resources such as coal and oil shale. The distribution of mineral resources 

is described below.

Locatable Minerals

The potential for the occurrence of locatable minerals in the central and northern parts of 

the planning area is generally low because of the prevalence of relatively recent nonmineralized Columbia River Basalt flows in the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion and the 

northern portion of the Blue Mountain Ecoregion. The southern and eastern parts of the 

planning area generally have a moderate to high potential for locatable minerals due to 

scattered pockets of mineralization in the John Day and Clarno formations and in the 

accreted terrane rocks. 

Gold and Silver

Lode and placer deposits of gold and silver are present in the southern and eastern part 

of the planning area around Antone, John Day, Prairie City, Granite, and in the Greenhorn 

Mountains. Like most gold deposits, the gold found in the area is a naturally occurring 

alloy with silver (Lindgren, 1901). As a result, silver was produced as a byproduct of 

gold mining. Silver was also produced from ores including tetrahedrite, stephanite, and 

pyrargyrite. 

Copper and Lead

Ores of Copper are found in the Spanish Gulch, Canyon, Greenhorn, Susanville, Granite, 

and Quartzburg Mining Districts (Brooks and Ramp, 1968). The copper ores are present 

in the same veins that were mined for gold and silver. Copper is also present in the 

Granite District, in the Quartburg District. 

Copper deposits are also found on the Strawberry Range crest between the summit 

of Canyon Mountain and Indian Creek Butte; a few other deposits occur just outside 

the western boundary of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness (Thayer et al., 1981). 

Chalcopyrite, malachite, and chrysocolla are the primary copper-bearing minerals and 

occur mainly in lenticular quartz veins placed in gabbro host rock. All known copper 

deposits in the area are either too small or have an insufficient grade for production under 

current economic conditions. Occurrences of galena (ore of lead) are similar to that of 

copper in the planning area mining districts. 

Chromium

Deposits of chromite (ore of chromium) are located in the southeast part of the planning 

area in Grant County. Most of these deposits are in the Strawberry Range though a few 

also occur in the Greenhorn Mountains. Individual chromite deposits, ranging from a 

few hundred kilograms to 115,000 tons, occur as pods and lenses in peridotite, dunite, 

and serpentinite (Thayer, 1940; Thayer et al., 1981). At least 100 chromite deposits are 

recognized but most occurrences contain less than 100 tons. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 38 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Mercury

Cinnabar (ore of mercury) was discovered in eastern Jefferson County in 1933. Small, 

isolated cinnabar deposits occur on the east and west sides of Canyon Creek in the 

southern part of the planning area. A notable mercury deposit was discovered in 1963 

near the confluence of the East Fork of Canyon Creek and Canyon Creek (Thayer et 

al., 1981) where cinnabar occurs as fracture fillings and replacements in greywacke 

host rock. Cinnabar is also present in the Greenhorn Mining District (Brooks and Ramp, 

1968). 

Bentonite

Bentonite clay is another locatable mineral found within the planning area. Active mining 

claims are located in the area about 1.5 miles northwest of Clarno. 

Other Minerals

Deposits chrysotile asbestos, nickel, and platinum-group metals (platinum, palladium, 

and rhodium) are found in the Strawberry Range and surrounding areas (Thayer et al., 

1981). Zinc, lead, iron, arsenic, antimony, cobalt, bismuth, molybdenum, and manganese 

are all present in one or more of the mining districts in the planning area (Brooks and 

Ramp, 1968). Like copper and lead, these minerals are present in the same veins that 

contain gold and silver. Thus, minor amounts of these metals were produced from the 

gold and silver mines.

Saleable Mineral Materials

Most of the planning area has a moderate to high potential for the occurrence of mineral 

materials. The high potential areas are in and around existing mineral material quarries 

and in rock deposits with known value for aggregate uses. Most of the high potential 

areas occur in alluvial deposits of sand and gravel, the Columbia River Basalt flows and 

other volcanic rock units known or likely to have a sufficient quality for use in asphalt.

Leasable Minerals

Leasable mineral resources include oil, gas, and geothermal and some solid mineral 

resources such as coal and oil shale. Owing to the prevalence of volcanic and 

volcaniclastic sedimentary rocks in the planning area and the lack of any discoveries, 

coal, coal bed methane, oil shale and tar sands are considered to be absent from the 

planning area and are not addressed. 

Oil and Gas

The potential for oil and gas ranges from low to high across the planning area. The 

presence of oil and gas has occurred in exploratory wells drilled near the NE-SW trending 

axis of the Blue Mountains anticline. This fold represents a potential trap for oil and gas 

and is therefore considered to have a high potential for oil and gas accumulation. Farther 

away from the fold axis, the oil and gas potential falls to moderate and then to low. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 39 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Geothermal

The potential for the occurrence of geothermal energy is moderate to high across the 

planning area. Available information on existing geothermal resources comes from 8 

natural hot springs and 18 exploratory geothermal wells in the planning area. Data from 

other wells adjacent to the planning area were used to interpolate the geothermal energy 

potential to the planning area boundaries. 

All of the hot springs are scattered throughout the southeast part of the planning area. 

Each hot spring is a surface indication of geothermal energy. All but 2 of the hot springs 

have temperatures exceeding 40o C (104o F). 

The geothermal exploratory wells are somewhat evenly distributed across the planning 

area. Temperatures encountered in the wells range from 20o C (68o F) to 45o C (113o F). 

Only four of these wells have temperatures exceeding 30o C (86o F); all of the other wells 

have temperatures of 23o C (73o F) or less. 

Soils

Soils are defined by the processes that form them including climate, topography, parent 

material, and organisms living in the soil. Through time, these processes form unique soil 

types and influence what plants grow.

Climatic Factors

Climatic influences are reflected by soil temperature and moisture. In the planning area, 

we have two soil moisture regimes: dry and moist. Common soil temperature regimes in 

the planning area include warm and cool.

Soils play an integral part in vegetation community development. Plant communities are 

most noticeably influenced with extremes in soil texture and thickness of soil horizons, 

depth to restrictive layers including abrupt soil horizon boundaries, and by soil drainage 

or depth to water table.

Topographic Factors

Deep to very deep soils occur in alluvial drainages, floodplains and river terraces of the 

John Day River, and on North and Northeast facing slopes influenced by leeward soil 

deposition from the prevailing winds, and on colluvial (rockfall) foot slopes from water and 

gravity deposition. Shallow and very shallow soils occur on flat basalt table lands, and on 

upland ridge top and shoulder slopes. 

Parent Materials Factor

The soils in the Columbia Plateau are derived from weathered basalt and some wind 

deposited silt. Silty soil textures occur in the Umatilla Plateau and Pleistocene Lake 

Basins. At higher elevations, the deep loess soils become thinner. The John Day 

Canyons have a higher rock fragment content than the surrounding areas. High rock 

fragment content helps protect the soil from erosion. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 40 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The soils in the Blue Mountains are derived from a myriad of surface geology, including: 

ash, basalt flows, and partially heated and metamorphosed oceanic rocks. The Canyons 

and Highlands have shifting colluvial soils on steep canyon slopes shallow, cobbly 

soils occur in the continental zone highlands. The soil of the mesic forest zone has a 

significant ash layer that is relatively rock free and that also helps to retain moisture 

during the dry season. 

Living Organisms Factor

A functioning soil biological community includes insects, biologic crusts, and in forests 

large wood in various stages of decay. Small organisms reduce dead plants into tiny 

pieces so fungus and bacteria can rot them. They help spread bacteria and protozoa 

through the soil. 

Sensitive Soils

Sensitive soils are those soils that are more vulnerable to soil productivity loss with 

disturbance. Sensitive soils in the planning area have been modeled based on soil 

properties that make them susceptible to site degradation. These properties include steep 

slopes, soil texture, water erosion, droughty sites, and depth to bedrock. Map 5 shows 

planning area soil vulnerability to site degradation. Table 3 correlates the common soil 

associations with Subecoregions and the percent of those Subecoregions with sensitive 

soils.

Disturbances

Common soil disturbances in the planning area include timber harvest, wildfire, 

prescribed fire, off road vehicle use, poorly drained roads, livestock and wildlife grazing 

and mechanical treatment of vegetation. These and other surface disturbing activities 

can decrease soil cover and contribute to increased erosion, decreased infiltration, and 

reduced soil productivity.

Within the planning area, regions of intense off highway vehicle use are exhibiting static 

to downward trends in soil productivity. Soil productivity trends are static to improving 

in rangelands with good perennial grass cover, shrub/tree canopy cover less than 10 

percent, and grazing systems that allow for vegetation (grass) recovery and rest. With 

increases in the density of forest and juniper stands the potential for wildfire to damage 

soil productivity also increases.

Unique Soil Resources

Hydric (wet) soils, prime agriculture land, and unique biological soil crusts are key soil 

resources in the planning area. 

Hydric Soils

Hydric soils constitute only a small portion of the planning area. Hydric soils are 

associated with riparian areas in poorly drained back waters along flood plains and in 

small spring seeps through out the planning area. Soil mapping frequently excludes 

hydric soils because of the limited distribution and aerial extent.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 41 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Biologic Soil Crusts

Biologic soil crusts (BSC) are made up of tiny living plants and bacteria that grow 

together on the soil surface. They help keep the soil from washing or blowing away, 

make nitrogen, help keep out weeds, and promote the health of plant communities. In 

areas where BSCs have been lost native vascular plants have been replaced by invasive 

species such as cheatgrass or medusa head. 

The John Day Basin biological soil crust communities are unique. They are often more 

stable and more diverse than BSC communities in other parts of the west. A combination 

of relatively stable soils, moderate annual precipitation and many sunny days allow these 

BSC communities to develop quickly and withstand disturbances. However, sandy or 

clayey soil conditions promote crusts that are less tolerant of disturbance than the crusts 

in loamy volcanic soils that dominate the basin.

A globally threatened species in biological soils crusts, Texosporium sancti-jacobi, is 

widespread in the basin. This species has become rare or has been extirpated from most 

of its Oregon, Washington, Idaho and California range. This species is found in windy 

locations, such as ridgelines and hill tops. It occurs in both the loamy and sandy portions 

of the basin.

Table 3: Sensitive Soils by Soil Associations and Subecoregion

Ecoregion Subecoregion Common Soil Associations 

(% of Subecocoregion)

Percent of Subecoregion 

with Sensitive Soils

Columbia 

Plateau

Umatilla Plateau Ritzville-Walla Walla-Condon-Bakeoven (63%) 13%

Pleistocene Lake Basins Ritzville-Olex-Walla Walla-Roloff (51%) 13%

John Day Canyons Lickskillet-Wrentham-Rock OutcropBakeoven (81%) 61%

Umatilla Dissected Uplands Gwin-Waha-Simas-Gurdane (55%) 17%

Blue Mountains 

John Day/Clarno Uplands Simas-Tub-Waterbury-Gwin (51%) 27%

John Day/ Clarno Highlands Klicker-Hankins-Tolo-Bocker (63%) 30%

Maritime-Influenced Zone Klicker-Tolo-Hall Ranch-Anatone 

(77%) 14%

Melange Tolo-Klicker-Helter-Anatone (50%) 54%

Continental Zone Highlands Klicker-Tolo-Hankins-Anatone (65%) 25%

Continental Zone FoothillsAteron-Menbo-Observation-Westbutte 

(54%) 24%

Mesic Forest Zone Helter-Klicker-Tolo-Ateron (54%) 44%

Subalpine-Alpine Zone Helter-Rock Outcrop-Klicker-Ateron 

(55%) 54%


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 44 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Prime Farmland

For more than two decades, the State of Oregon has maintained a strong policy to 

protect farmland through “preservation of a maximum amount of the limited supply of 

agricultural land” (ORS 215.243). Counties inventory agricultural land, designate it in 

their comprehensive plan, and adopt policies to preserve it. The acres of BLM land zoned 

as agricultural are shown in Table 4. Lands zoned as Exclusive Farm Use (EFU), have 

restrictions designed to limit development that would conflict with agriculture. It keeps 

farmland from being divided into parcels too small for commercial agriculture.

Vegetation

Vegetation within the planning area is a product of the physical and climate properties 

associated with the Subecoregions and modifications introduced by natural processes, 

including, fire, insect infestations, disease, and floods as well as human uses such as 

grazing management, introduction of exotic species, farming, mining, fire suppression, 

and timber harvest. 

The primary disturbance element has been wildfire. Occasional episodes of insect/

disease epidemics and wind and moisture driven erosion have also formed the vegetation 

patterns across the John Day Basin. Climatic variations and associated disturbance 

elements created a landscape of vegetative conditions that varied within a range referred 

to as a Historic Range of Variability (HRV) Sagebrush and juniper dot the slopes, grass 

lines the valleys, and pine forests ring mountain peaks. Lush green vegetation trims the 

many streams, rivers and springs in the planning area. Along the plateaus swaths of 

wheat fields alternate with remnant grasslands. Spring wildflowers of lupine, balsamroot 

and paintbrush created brilliant displays of purple, yellow and red.

Table 4: Acres of BLM Land Zoned as “Agriculture”

County Zone Acres

Gilliam 56,029

Gilliam County AE Zone 56,029

Grant 124,648

Multiple Use Range MUR40 120,758

Primary Farm EFU20 3,769

Primary Farm EFU40 121

Primary Farm EFU80 0

Jefferson 22,940

Rangeland Zone RL 22,940

Morrow 438

EFU Zone 438

Sherman 37,960

EFU F1 Zone 37,960

Wasco 26,006

Wasco County A1-80 Zone 26,006

Wheeler 137,437

EFU Zone 137,437
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 45 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Riparian Vegetation

Riparian Vegetation occurs along the margins of streams, ditches, springs, seeps, and 

seasonally ponded soils in the planning area. The structure and type of vegetation is 

critical to wildlife and fish, even when it does not control stream condition and function as 

discussed in the “Stream Channels and Floodplains” section. Hardwoods such as aspen, 

some taller willows, and cottonwood supply vertical structure for neo-tropical birds. As the 

trees age and decay, cavity nesters make use of them. Vegetation also supplies shade 

to the stream and helps to cool the water. Leaves from hardwoods supply nutrients to the 

riparian and aquatic system. In some areas, these leaves can be the driving force as a 

food source for aquatic macro invertebrates and therefore for the native fish.

Riparian areas and associated vegetation continuously evolve. Lakes and ponds 

gradually fill with sediments, and rivers and stream channels move about within the valley 

floor. Vegetation types gradually develop to fit the newly created environments associated 

with movement of the stream, its soil and water features. Stable plant communities are 

short lived, except in armored bedrock or low gradient meadows. Vegetation units within 

riparian areas are constantly moving or swapping their community types. 

Riparian areas in the planning area occur as deciduous stands of trees and shrubs 

including a mosaic of herbaceous species that occur along the riparian margin. These 

woodlands and shrublands require periodic flooding and bare, moist substrates for 

reestablishment. Low-elevation canyons and draws contain shade intolerant shrubs on 

higher gradient cobble streams. On reaches with developed floodplains and finer soils 

sedges and rushes line the streambanks. In higher elevation steep-sided canyons or in 

narrow V-shaped valleys a mix of birch, alder, willow, and dogwood form thickets. Sites 

are subject to temporary flooding during spring runoff. In interrupted reaches, underlying 

gravels may keep the water table just below the ground surface, and are favored 

substrates for establishment of cottonwoods.

Some of the most common riparian/wetland plant associations include sandbar or coyote 

willow, common cattail, American Speedwell, creeping spike, 3-square bulrush, reed 

canarygrass, Torrant sedge, Great Basin wild rye, Netleaf hackberry-Lewis’ mockorange, 

alder/dogwood, peachleaf willow, and Baltic rush. Brief descriptions of these associations, 

with photos, are displayed below.

Salix exigua (Sandbar or coyote willow) 

association is a tall shrub community found 

across much of the western United States 

and is common in the planning area. In the 

Blue Mountains, this association occurs on 

gravelly or cobbly alluvial bars and banks along 

streams with a sequence of pools and riffles. 

Sites frequently contain deep fine textured soils 

overlaying cobble gravels. Between the willows 

grows a patchy herbaceous layer with reed 

canarygrass, quackgrass, bentgrasses and 

stinging nettle or thistles. This type frequently 

appears between a streamside grass or rush 

community and various more stable or drier 

shrub riparian type.

Figure 5: Coyote willow 

on Bridge Creek
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 46 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Typha latifolia (Common Cattail) is a wide 

spread association. It occurs on cobbly and/or 

gravelly alluvial bars or developing floodplains. 

It is typically found adjacent to pool/riffle 

sequence streams and recovering incised 

stream channels. This association is found at 

permanently or semipermanently flooded sites 

at the edges of lakes and ponds and in ditches, 

oxbows and backwater areas. 

The Veronica americana (American Speedwell) 

association is found mostly in streams on 

channel shelves (alluvial bars parallel to the 

banks of a stream) in extremely shallow, gentle 

gradient sections of faster-moving streams. 

Figure 7: The Veronica 

americana (American 

Speedwell) 

Along the mainstem John Day river and 

other major tributaries, a community of 

Eleocharis palustris (creeping spikerush) 

and Schoenoplectus americanus (3-square 

bulrush) line the banks and shift in relative 

dominance. This association occurs along 

the low water line with Salex exidua (coyote 

willow), and Phalaris arundinacea (reed 

canary grass) along elevations corresponding 

to higher river flow levels. Xanthium 

strumarium (cocklebur) grows among the 

willows and in sandy deposits near bankfull.

Phalaris arundinacea (reed canary grass) grows 

in open areas and on more developed soils of 

floodplains. It is extremely aggressive and often 

forms persistent, monocultures in wetlands and 

riparian areas. Infestations threaten the diversity 

of these areas, since the plant chokes out native 

plants and grows too densely to provide adequate 

cover for small mammals and waterfowl. Once 

established, reed canarygrass is difficult to 

control because it spreads rapidly by rhizomes. 

(Washington State Department of Ecology)

Figure 8: Layering of 

creeking spike rush, 3-

square full rush up to 

cocklebur on the main- stem John Day River 

Figure 9: Phalaris 

arundinacea (Reed 

canary grass)

Gary A. Monroe @ USDA-NRCS PLANTS 

Database

Figure 6: Typha latifolia

(Common Cattail)
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 47 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Carex nudata (Torrent sedge) association is 

abundant along all the forks of the John Day 

River. Torrent sedge plants are scattered 

along the lower John Day River but rarely 

form large groups. Sites are bouldery stream 

banks and narrow alluvial bars adjacent to the 

banks of streams with well developed point 

bars. Asters, field mint, spring bank clover, 

horsetails, and hairy willow-herb are scattered 

at low abundance among the boulders. The 

sedge plants grow on top of boulders with their 

root masses sitting in the stream most of the 

growing season.

Leymus cinereus Association (Great Basin 

wildrye) Association is commonly found in swales 

and at the base of alluvial fans and toeslopes in lower precipitation zones. Soils are 

generally deep and fine-textured and have moderate water holding capacity. Sites are 

moist to wet in the spring and moist to dry by mid summer. Great Basin wildrye dominates 

the site. Other herbaceous species and occasionally shrubs are minimal. 

Celtis laevigata var. reticulata-Philadelphus lewisii (Netleaf hackberry-Lewis’ mockorange) 

Association is found at low elevations along streambanks and high floodplains in high 

gradient, narrow with moderate sideslopes. This association grows in soils with high 

coarse fragment contents. Netleaf hackberry forms a scattered to dense tall shrub 

layer. Lewis’ mockorange is a co-dominant feature. Blue elderberry and oceanspray 

occasionally occur alongside the hackberry and mock orange. In the planning area, this 

association occurs along streams and rivers and where talus slopes meet the river.

Alnus rhombifolia/Cornus sericea ssp. sericea 

(White alder/Red-osier dogwood) Association. 

This association occurs mainly on the lower 

elevation streams of the Blue Mountains 

Ecoregion and sporadically in the Columbia 

Basin Ecoregion. Sites are streambanks and 

floodplains along cobbly pool/riffle streams. 

Valleys are north-facing, moderate gradient, 

narrow with moderately steep sideslopes. 

This association is probably the result of a 

disturbance event such as intense flooding. 

White alder may form an open to dense canopy 

over red-osier dogwood, netleaf hackberry and 

Lewis’ mockorange. Other shrubs may occur, including common chokecherry, elderberry, 

cascara, Wood’s rose and currants. Herbaceous species are sparse. Upland vegetation 

types adjacent to sites are sideslopes 

of sagebrush steppe, Idaho fescue and 

bluebunch wheatgrass. 

Alnus incana / Cornus sericea (Mountain alder 

/ redosier dogwood) association is found at 

moderate elevations in the Blue Mountains 

Ecoregion. It occurs in V-, box or troughshaped valleys with moderate gradients. It 

grows on streambanks, alluvial bars, and 

Figure 10: Carex nudata 

(Torrent sedge) near 

Burnt Ranch on the 

John Day River

Figure 11: Alnus 

rhombifolia (white 

alder) in Pine Hollow

Figure 12: 

Alnus incana / 

Cornus sericea 

(Mountain 

alder / 

redosier 

dogwood) 

association on 

Deer Creek
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 48 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

floodplains. Soils are shallow, skeletal, mineral alluvium over waterworked gravel and 

cobbles that remains wet throughout the growing season. In the planning area, this 

association occurs at higher elevations than the White alder association. This community 

is a closed canopy with an 8 to 10-foot tall shrub thicket of mountain alder and redosier 

dogwood. Either shrub can be dominant but both always contribute significantly to total 

cover. Mountain alder can appear as a tree above the redosier dogwood in some areas. 

This association usually contains a shorter, sparse shrub layer of Wood’s rose and 

golden current with white clematis draped among the branches.

Salix amygdaloides (peachleaf willow) 

association occurs on open, sites with 

little shade. The understory consists of 

white clematis and patches of smooth 

brome and common horsetail. Peachleaf 

willow is a rapidly growing, short-lived 

medium-sized deciduous tree that is 

typically from 20 to 40 feet tall. Peachleaf 

willow is an early successional species 

which pioneers floodplain alluvium. 

Peach leaf willow is found along the lower 

reaches of the South Fork John Day and 

in rangeland streams. 

Juncus balticus (Baltic rush) association The JUBA community type is widespread. It is 

found at moderate elevations in moderately wide, low gradient, trough- and flat-shaped 

valleys with gentle to moderate side slopes. Sites are dry to wet basins, floodplains, and 

springs. Most of the soils are fine textured and have high water holding capacity. This 

associate occurs in lower gradient, depositional reaches of the planning area streams. 

Most sites are flooded during the spring and early summer. The water table drops late in 

the growing season. Baltic rush cover ranges from 20-99%. Other herbaceous species 

found in this association include Woolly sedge (Carex pellita), Nebraska sedge (Carex 

nebrascensis), and Slender-beaked sedge (Carex athrostachya). This is a common 

association in the lower gradient reaches of tributaries in the North Fork John Day 

planning area.

Riparian Key Features

Aspen and cottonwood forest woodlands historically occur across large portions of the 

planning area. Historic photos show large riparian forests near Dayville and at Clarno 

which have vanished. Major causes of decline of black cottonwood stands in eastern 

Oregon include: conversion of stands for pasture, farmland, or urbanization, conversion 

of streams from multiple to single channel systems, and restriction of lateral movement 

of streams across floodplains. Overbrowsing by livestock, elk, and deer, reduced fire 

frequency, and logging for firewood have also had impacts. 

Cottonwood deserves special consideration in the discussion of riparian vegetation. Many 

cottonwood stands have declined in the area. Streamside black cottonwoods contribute 

to favorable aquatic habitat by providing streambank stability and reduced siltation, 

maintaining low water temperatures through shading, increasing debris recruitment for 

variable stream habitats, and providing nutrient-rich litter for aquatic food webs. Black 

cottonwood is an important source of cover for wildlife and livestock.

Along BLM streams in the Middle and North Fork subbasin, 11 small segments were 

found to contain an occasional relic cottonwood tree: Matlock, Stony, Rush, West Fork 

Boneyard, Cabin, Ditch, Squaw, Graves, Mallory, unnamed tributary to Mallory, and an 

Figure 13: Mixed riparian 

shrubs on Cougar Gulch
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 49 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

unnamed tributary to Little Wall Creek from the east. The South Fork John Day River 

drainage has relic areas of aspen and cottonwood communities along the mainstem. 

Relic areas on the tributaries are being encroached by surrounding conifers. In the Lower 

subbasin, relic areas are scattered and include portions on Long Hollow and Hay Creek. 

Native cottonwood stock is grown at Clarno. Outplantings have been successful along 

tributaries such as Bridge Creek and along the mainstem John Day River near Clarno.

Generally aspen occupy moderate, mid-elevation slopes as small, scattered stands in 

the mixed conifers of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine (3000 to 5000 feet.). A few Aspen 

woodlands appear in riparian zones at lower elevations, In the Middle and North Fork 

Subbasin BLM land, aspen was found on only three small tributaries (West Fork of 

Boneyard Canyon, No Name Creek and South Tributary to Little Wall Creek). The aspen 

were decadent or suppressed and occurred on small alluvial valleys or on the edges of 

down cutting meadows. None of the stream reaches containing aspen are in functioning 

condition, and some have a downward trend.

Terrestrial Vegetation

Terrestrial Vegetation within the planning area reflects a range of conditions represented 

by the many Subecoregions within the planning area. The following text describes the 

primary non-riparian vegetation communities found within the planning area. The BLM’s 

understanding of the distribution of terrestrial vegetation types is based on remote 

sensing data collected in 2004 and 2005. 

Figure 4: Vegetation Composition, displays existing proportions of major vegetation 

groups within the 5.5 million acres of the planning area. Percent compositions are 

for lands managed by the BLM, lands owned/managed by private owners or other 

government agencies. Of note is the larger percentage of BLM land with riparian, 

shrub species, and juniper habitats. Other land ownerships have higher percentages 

of agriculture (Private) and forest species (Primarily Forest Service). Because the 

BLM manages less than 10 percent of the planning area the proportions of the groups 

managed by the BLM barely influences the proportions for the entire planning area. 

Vegetation conditions and trends by major plant communities will be addressed in more 

detail below.

Figure 14: Vegetation Composition
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 50 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Palouse Prairie 

The Columbia Plateau Ecoregion of northeastern Oregon and southeastern Washington 

is an elevated plateau containing considerable area of open palouse grassland that 

remains unfarmed because of thin soils and a short growing season. North central 

Oregon has the largest area of remaining true palouse prairie (Holechek, 1989 pg. 87)

Disturbance

The fire return interval for sagebrush and bunch grass is estimated at 25 years. The 

native bunchgrass habitat apparently lacked extensive herds of large grazing and 

browsing animals until the later 1800s. Burrowing animals and their predators likely 

played important roles in creating small-scale patch patterns (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001 

pg. 49). Typical patch sizes were large with maximum fire sizes of 10,000 acres and an 

average of 1,000 acres (Landfire BPS 081142 – Draft, 2006).

Conditions/Influences

The Palouse prairie, also referred to as the northwest bunchgrass prairie, has had the 

highest percentage conversion into farmland of all western range types. The Palouse is 

one of the most endangered ecosystems in the U.S. with only 1% of the original habitat 

remaining; it is highly fragmented with most sites <10 acres (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001 

pg. 49). Today it is used primarily for wheat production (Holechek, 1989 pg. 87). Blue 

Bunch wheatgrass and Idaho Fescue, the two primary bunch grasses in this type are 

decreasers under heavy grazing pressure. Additionally historic over grazing and the 

increase of nonnative annual grasses such as cheat grass and Medusa head have 

altered fire return intervals and effects. Figure 14 shows the amount of agricultural 

conversion. 

Trend

Since 1900, 94% of the Palouse grasslands have been converted to crop, hay, or pasture 

lands (Map 6) (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001 pg. 491). Over-grazing and expansion of 

nonnative annual grasses and noxious weeds will continue to be a management concern.

Early seral communities dominated by nonnative annual grass stands are in a relatively 

stable state. These sites are not expected to return to native communities within the next 

50+ years without active management intervention.

Shrub Steppe

The shrub-steppe plant community occurs in lower elevations of the Blue Mountain 

Ecoregion and valley terraces and steeper slopes of the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion. 

Although western juniper can occur on these sites, fires at 10 – 20 year intervals 

relegated juniper to a subordinate position in the community or eliminated it altogether.

Disturbance

Drier low sagebrush sites averaged 87 year fire return intervals with replacement fires 

occurring every 227 years (BPS – 081127 and 091079 Draft 2006). Tall sagebrush sites 

averaged 20 year fire return intervals with replacement fires occurring every 90 years. 

Typical patch sizes ranged from 10 to 2,000+ acres (BPS – 091125, 081125, and 081080 

Draft 2006). Burrowing animals and their predators likely played important roles in 

creating small-scale patch patterns (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001 pg.51).
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 51 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Conditions/Influences

Shrub steppe communities were historically a small component of the Columbia Plateau 

Ecoregion. Patch sizes were smaller and typically tied to micro sites with Wyoming and 

Mountain sagebrush found on slopes and benches with deeper soils and low and ridged 

sagebrush on shallower rocky soils. Shrub steppe communities in the Blue Mountain 

Ecoregion were more extensive. The combination of fire control and historic grazing 

management has allowed juniper expansion and reduced the quantity and vigor of 

understory species. Many of these sites have been invaded by nonnative annual grasses 

or noxious weeds. 

Trend

Quigley and Arbelbide concluded that Big Sagebrush and Mountain Sagebrush cover 

types are significantly smaller in area than before 1900, and that Bitterbrush/Bluebunch 

Wheatgrass cover types are similar to the pre-1900 extent. More than half of the Pacific 

Northwest shrub-steppe habitat community types listed in the National Vegetation 

Classification are considered imperiled or critically imperiled (Johnson and O’Neil 

2001 pg. 51). Without active management or a change in fire control standards juniper 

expansion is expected to continue to invade these communities and decrease the shrub 

and grass components.

Numerous areas have been converted to annual grass dominated sites (Map 6) with 

expected trends being the same as those described in the Palouse Prairie described 

above.

Western Juniper Steppe

Western juniper steppe is predominantly found in the Blue Mountain Ecoregion and 

drainages (particularly north aspects) of the Columbia River Ecoregion.

Disturbance:

The presence of old growth stands of western juniper on rocky ridges and along 

small stream channels is probably a function of the protection afforded by those sites 

(Burkhardt and Tisdale, 1976). Typical patch sizes ranged from 100 to 10,000 acres 

(BPS – 091017 Draft 2006). Map 6 displays “old growth” potential and current juniper 

population extent.

Conditions/Influences

Over the past 150 years, with fire suppression, overgrazing, and climatic factors, western 

juniper has increased its range. Inland Woodlands are significantly greater in extent 

than before 1900 (Miller, 1999). As these sites become dominated by juniper understory 

species cannot thrive and in their absence natural fire can burn through these stands only 

under the most severe conditions.

Trend

Given the current fire control policies it is expected that without active intervention 

juniper will continue to expand. The majority of juniper within the analysis area became 

established within the last 100 years. The majority of these stands are reaching a state 

where juniper dominance is beginning to alter understory conditions. In the last 10 years 

private land owners and the BLM have begun to control juniper densities.


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 54 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Dry Forest (Ponderosa Pine, Mixed Conifer, Douglas Fir)

The majority of forest vegetation occurs within the Dry Forest vegetation group (receives 

12-17” of precipitation annually). Dry forests are defined as forests that were historically 

open and supported widely spaced large ponderosa pine, western larch, and Douglasfir in the overstory with little underbrush and only occasional clumps of smaller trees. 

These plant communities occur primarily in higher elevations and drainages of the Blue 

Mountain Ecoregion.

Disturbance:

The mean fire interval ranges from 48 years in drier pine sites, 6 years in moister pine 

sites, and 20 years in mixed conifer sites with replacement fires in all groups occurring 

in the 130 year range (BPS – 081053x, 081053m, and 081045 Draft 2006). Insects and 

disease created small openings and altered stand structure with some agents targeting 

overstory trees and others thinning understory trees. Typical patch sizes: Small openings 

(<2 acres) emulate spots created by low intensity fire, root rot, pockets, or insect 

disturbances.

Conditions/Influences:

Forest stands in dry forest climates are generally limited by low moisture and are 

often subject to drought. Dry forests can also be affected by limited nutrients and/or 

competition stress. Fire suppression has allowed understory densities to increase 

with a corresponding species shift to more shade tolerant species. These vegetative 

communities were also historically logged in a manner that removed the large tree 

component. Many of the remaining large trees are being stressed by understory 

competition and subject to higher risk of insect and disease, stand replacement fire, and 

drought. Stands of large diameter ponderosa pine with an open understory are one of the 

most limited conditions in the Columbia Basin. Many of the pure ponderosa pine stands 

have been converted to mixed conifer stands with understories of Douglas fir and white 

fir. In addition, the vegetation inventory shows that slash loads range from 5-80 tons per 

acre. The average slash load range is 20-30 tons per acre. This is much higher than the 

John Day RMP recommended limits of 12-15 tons per acre. “With heavy ground fuels 

and high tree densities, these dry forests are now much more likely to have severe fires”. 

(USDA FS Science Update, p.5, Sept., 2002)

The majority of forest stands within this planning area contain a large tree component; 

however stands are not dominated by large trees (Vidourek, 2005). This can be attributed 

to the fact that past green tree management projects did not remove 30-50% of the 

healthy large trees on site. However, there are few stands that are primarily composed of 

large trees. Basal areas ranging from 80-400 square feet per acre were identified during 

the forest vegetation inventory (Vidourek, 2005). The average basal area across the 

planning area is 160-200 square feet per acre.

Trend

As a result of this trend of high basal areas, trees have become stressed and are 

succumbing to insects and diseases. (Vidourek, 2005) Insect populations have reached 

epidemic populations in scattered stands across the planning area. As the trees die and 

fall to the ground the stands are accumulating excessive slash loads and becoming more 

susceptible to wild fires.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 55 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

“A large number of mixed conifer stands in the Blue Mountains have been severely 

damaged by a variety of insects and diseases, compounded by protracted drought, 

overstocking, and inappropriate past management.” “Additionally, large areas in the 

ponderosa pine type are drastically overstocked and in imminent danger of a bark 

beetle population buildup and resultant epidemic.” (Schmitt and Scott, 1993) Insect 

populations throughout the planning area are spreading each year. Due to passive forest 

management over the past nine years, insect disturbances are being left unchecked. As 

a result, many forest stands are losing trees including the larger size trees that were left 

for seed sources during past management treatments. “Once an outbreak begins, beetles 

select the largest trees in a stand. The natural resistance of trees and stand to attack 

by mountain pine beetles decreases as age and competition increase”. (Blue Mountain 

Forest Health Project, 1991 p.46) “When bark beetle mortality reduces stand density 

in unthinned stands, some of the best trees are lost, and the mortality often occurs 

in clumps, resulting in uneven distribution of growing space among remaining trees”. 

(USDA-FS, PNW-RP-508, 1999)

Currently large diameter components of these communities are at high risk of increased 

mortality.

Moist Forest (Mixed Conifer, Douglas Fir, White/Grand Fir 

and Lodgepole pine)

Some of the forest stands are pure or single species stands, but the majority are mixed 

stands to varying degrees. In general these communities occurred in large stands; 

however ponderosa pine and Douglas Fir occur as isolates and stringers associated 

with drainages. The Viable Ecosystem Guide developed by the Ochoco NF recommends 

– forest stands that are contiguous and at least 1,000 acres in size. Small openings 

(<2 acres) emulate spots created by low intensity fire, root rot, pockets, or insect 

disturbances. Large patches (500+ acres) simulate large stand replacement fires. These 

openings occurred at 70-200 year intervals (USDA Viable Guide, 1994 pg. 47 and 31).

Lodgepole Pine – The ecological status of lodgepole pine is typically that of a pioneer or 

invader species and is normally seral to other tree species such as ponderosa pine grand 

fir, or Engelmann spruce. It thrives on disturbance and can establish quickly in an area 

ravaged by fire, windthrow, insects or disease. This short lived species is dependent 

on disturbance for its regeneration, health and vigor with a fire return interval of 80 -100 

years (BPS – 091050, Draft 2006).

Disturbance

In moister areas including riparian associations stand densities may reach levels where 

insect and disease episodes had localized effects to stand dynamics including the 

removal of the largest trees. Dwarf mistletoe could be significant in those stands where 

their host species are abundant. Dwarf mistletoe alters stands by killing heavily infected 

overstory and restricting development of host understory trees. Fires were probably of 

moderate frequency (30-100 years) in presettlement times. Typical stand-replacement 

fire-return intervals are 150-500 years with moderate severity-fire intervals of 50-100 

years. Generally, wetter sites burn less frequently and stands are older than drier sites 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001 pg. 33). Hall (1976, 1980) estimates that natural under burns 

occurred every 10 years in drier sites of the Blue Mountains. Stands which occur on mid 

and upper slope positions had more frequent fires than stands in a toe slope or lower 

slope position (USDA Viable Guide, 1994).
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 56 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Conditions/Influences:

The majority of these communities are overstocked with high levels of ground fuels. In 

addition, the vegetation inventory shows that slash loads range from 5-80 tons per acre. 

The average slash load range is 20-30 tons per acre. This is much higher than the John 

Day RMP recommended limits of 12-15 tons per acre. “With heavy ground fuels and high 

tree densities, these dry forests are now much more likely to have severe fires”. (USDA 

FS Science Update, p.5, 2002). Historic over logging of the large diameter trees has left an 

overabundance of pole and small log size classes.

Trend

Many of these stands have a high risk of stand replacement fires, insect loss, and loss of 

large tree components due to competition stress.

Unique Features 

Riparian associations in the drier areas of the Columbia Ecoregion provide unique 

diversity.

• Palouse Prairie communities in the Lower John Day provide key habitats for Sensitive species and are some of the last remaining in the Columbia Basin.

• Two unique areas exist for the forest vegetation. Both contain the oldest and largest 

trees within the planning area. One is located in Timber Basin (less than 500 acres) 

at the south base of Rudio Mountain and the other is isolated near the north face of 

Aldrich Mountain (Big Canyon Creek- approximately 1100+ acres). The Timber Basin 

size was reduced significantly by the Timber Basin wildfire in August, 2000 (See Map 

6). Both areas are similar and are the closest resemblance of a stand exhibiting some 

old multi-story forest characteristics. They have some trees (ponderosa pine and 

Douglas fir) in excess of 40 inch DBH in the overstory and both have an understory of 

mixed conifers (both shade-tolerant and shade-intolerant).

• Old growth juniper stands associated with rocky rims along the main stem of the John 

Day River north of Picture gorge.

• Aspen and black cottonwood stands associated with the main stem, North, South, 

and Main stem of the John Day River, drainages, and springs.

• Western Larch communities require a unique set of disturbance conditions to become 

established. Currently population levels are declining.

Regional Context 

Vegetation patterns and trends within the planning area are generally consistent with 

findings in ICBEMP (Jones, and Hann, 1996) and other regional reviews which included:

• Overall, an increasing trend of forest cover types dominated by shade-tolerant species that are generally more susceptible to fires, insects and pathogens, and a declining trend of forest cover types dominated by shade-intolerant species that are more 

resistant to fire, insects, and pathogens.

Significant increases of grand fir/white fir, and Interior Douglas-fir were observed.

• The large tree (>20”dbh) component is believed below historic levels.

• Pole-sized seral/structural stages are found in greater abundance than at any time 

during the last several hundred years.

• Increases of the croplands and grand fir/white fir cover types, and declines of the 

fescue bunchgrass and Interior ponderosa pine types.

 Agricultural conversion of 46 percent of the big sagebrush, 79 percent of the 

Agropyron bunchgrass, and 91 percent of the fescue bunchgrass cover types.

• Conifer and juniper expansion into shrubland habitats was the predominant factor 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 57 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

responsible within 46 percent of the subbasins in which the upland woodland community type occurred above its historical range. (Jones, Hessburg, Smith, 1996).

 Western juniper woodlands in eastern Oregon with more than 10 percent canopy 

cover increased from 456,000 acres in 1936 (Cowlin et al., 1942) to 2.2 million 

acres in 1988 (Gedney et al., 1999). In much of its range, western juniper has increased the area it occupies by an estimated 10-fold in the past 130 years (Miller 

et al., 1999a).

• The introduction of European annual grasses has drastically altered disturbance 

regimes, moisture and nutrient capture capabilities, and habitat suitability.

• Significant declining trends of cottonwood/willow, Interior ponderosa pine, and western larch were observed.

• Fragmentation of landscape patterns of subwatersheds within the Blue Mountains 

and Columbia Plateau increased between historical and current periods.

• The greatest fire regime changes are associated with the dry forest vegetation types, 

such as ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir, and in shrub lands, such as mountain big 

sagebrush and big sagebrush. Fire severity has increased in all of these vegetation 

types. Fires have become less frequent (due to fire suppression) and more severe. 

Non-lethal fire regimes have become mixed-severity (a combination of stand-replacing and non-lethal fire effects) fire regimes and mixed severity fire regimes have 

become increasingly stand-replacement fire regimes. Mixed-severity and stand-replacement fire regimes are extensive.

Special Status Plants

Special status plants include those species listed by BLM as “Bureau Sensitive” and 

“Bureau Assessment” (BLM OSO, 2006) as well as plants listed by either the federal 

or state governments as “endangered” or “threatened.” (ONHIC, 2004) Plants so 

designated include species that are rare or uncommon, and face possible extinction or 

endangerment throughout all or a significant portion of their range (or within the State of 

Oregon), and for which special consideration and/or management is needed. Appendix 

A lists special status plants documented or suspected within the planning area. There 

are no federally-listed Endangered or Threatened plants known or suspected within the 

planning area.

These plants occupy small, usually isolated and scattered sites across the planning area, 

although four main locales have a greater site density: the Lower John Day River south 

of Cottonwood Bridge; the South Fork of the John Day River, BLM lands between Service 

Creek and Kimberly; and the Sutton Mountain area.

Of the five species known to occur on BLM lands within the planning area, two (South 

Fork John Day milkvetch and arrow-leaf thelypody) are endemic to the John Day Basin 

and the BLM plays an important part in their conservation. The hepatic monkeyflower is 

found only in Oregon (historically from Washington as well) with the majority of its known 

sites in the John Day Basin. Oregon sites of the dwarf evening-primrose, known also from 

eastern Washington and Idaho, are found predominantly in the John Day Basin as well.

Special status plant sites on BLM lands in the John Day Planning Area are generally 

in stable condition. Of the 108 sites referred to in Appendix A, 73% are stable, 7% 

are in downward trend and 1% in upward trend. The remaining 19% have not been 

assessed and therefore trend has not been determined. Assessment is accomplished 

through periodic monitoring visits which include counts of plants on site and a qualitative 

evaluation of their vigor, reproductive status and apparent threats.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 58 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Isolated downward trends appear to be the result of natural causes, such as longterm drought, soil slippage and flooding. Unless determined to be caused by natural 

phenomena, downward trends may be corrected through changes in management. Some 

examples of this could be implementing a change in livestock use, closures of roads 

and/or trails, removal of competing vegetation, weed control, fire treatment, and similar 

management prescriptions.

Only one site, for which there is an apparent downward trend, requires a change in the 

management of the site, and this is related to the need for a small, site-specific livestock 

exclusion fence.

Due to the inaccessible and/or inhospitable habitat occupied by the dwarf eveningprimrose, hepatic monkeyflower and South Fork John Day milkvetch, it is unlikely these 

species have ever been more numerous or in better condition than they are today. 

However, the arrowleaf thelypody and porcupine sedge occupy riparian and related 

habitat, much of which has been altered since European settlement. Remaining sites are 

mostly in areas relatively inaccessible to livestock.

Of those species listed in Appendix A, only Laurence’s milkvetch is likely to have occurred 

on BLM land within the John Day Basin and has since been extirpated from Public Lands. 

Sightings have not been recorded since the 1950s.

Special status plants contributed to the finding that botanical values are an outstandingly 

remarkable value of the John Day River, resulting in its designation as a Wild and Scenic 

River. The South Fork John Day milkvetch is found in Segment 10 and is suspected to 

occur in Segment 11. Arrowleaf thelypody, is found within Segments 3, 4 and 6 and is 

suspected to occur in Segments 10 and 11. Hepatic monkeyflower is found on moist rock 

walls in Segment 2 and is suspected to occur anywhere there are moist cliffs, particularly 

on the lower river.

Noxious Weeds

Noxious weeds and expansion of some native species (e.g., juniper) are increasing 

problems within the John Day Basin (BPA 2005). The rapidly expanding occupation of 

the John Day Basin by noxious weeds represents the single greatest threat to native 

rangeland biodiversity and recovery of less-than-healthy watersheds (Ditomaso, 2000). 

The initiation and spread of noxious plants have been furthered by human disturbances 

such as recreational use, grazing management, and fire suppression. Native 

bunchgrasses have been depleted in many areas as the range of the western juniper 

(Juniperus occidentalis) expanded. Exotic annual grasses such as cheatgrass and 

medusahead have filled the niche formerly occupied by the perennial grasses.

“Noxious” is a legal classification rather than an ecological term. Plants that can exert 

substantial negative environmental or economic impact can be designated as noxious by 

various government agencies. Noxious weeds affect livestock grazing, recreation, timber 

production, and wildlife and scenery viewing by displacing native plant species and 

lessening natural biological diversity; degrading soil integrity, nutrient cycling, and energy 

flow; and interfering with site-recovery mechanisms, such as seed banks, that allow a site 

to recover following disturbance (Quigley and Arbelbide 1997).

The weeds causing the most concern in the John Day Basin are diffuse, spotted and 

Russian knapweeds (Centaurea stoebe), Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica), yellow 

star-thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), perennial pepperweed (Lepidium perfoliatum), leafy 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 59 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

spurge (Euphorbia esula), tamarisk (Tamarix), Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium), 

purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea), leafy 

spurge (Euphorbia esula), white top (Cardaria draba), wavyleaf thistle (Cirsium 

undulatum), puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), and 

medusahead rye (Taeniatherum caput-medusae). Weeds of special concern are those 

beginning to occupy very small niches with just a few plants along the high water lines, 

and small patches on islands (mainly diffuse knapweed and Dalmatian toadflax) that 

could spread very rapidly. Also, small infestations of Russian knapweed and dalmatian 

toadflax are becoming more prevalent on the upper, sheltered alluvial flats. This is 

especially noted on almost all riparian zones below the confluence of Thirtymile Canyon 

at RM 84, but a few plants of purple loosestrife and rush skeletonweed have also been 

found and hand pulled. In the Clarno area, medusahead rye is common on the west side 

of the river to the north and south of Highway 219, in previously burned areas. It is also 

prevalent in the Murderer’s Creek drainage and in clay soils across the basin. Diffuse 

knapweed is found along the road right-of-way, south of Clarno. Russian knapweed 

is also very prevalent in the Clarno and Bridge Creek areas, and has also been found 

in many very small patches along the river almost always on the upper alluvial flats. 

Dalmatian toadflax is also found on these flats and is beginning to move up slopes in a 

few spots, especially below Thirtymile Canyon. Chemical control of Dalmatian Toadflax in 

the John Day River system is quite difficult where access is limited. The thistles (Scotch, 

bull and Canada) and poison hemlock are found most commonly at the small tributaries 

near and in riparian areas. Yellow starthistle has been found in several locations in the 

Clarno area and is especially prevalent in the upper Bridge Creek area near Mitchell. It is 

also prevalent near the Columbia River at Biggs and Horn Butte.

The BLM Prineville District coordinates weed prevention, detection, and control efforts 

with the local County Weed Boards, ODA, ODOT, National Forests, local Soil and Water 

Conservation Districts, as well as private land owners and neighborhood community 

groups. The BLM’s Partners Against Weeds Strategic Plan highlights cooperative 

partnerships to control and manage invasive and noxious weeds. BLM is a partner in the 

Bridge Creek Cooperative Weed Management Areas. The BLM has six agreements with 

the counties in the planning area. The BLM uses these partnerships to combat invasive 

weeds and conduct inventories.

Hydrology

Stream Channels and Floodplains

BLM manages land and water in 146 different watersheds in the planning area. The 

planning area includes 28,000 miles of streams including:

• Ephemeral streams which do not flow during an average water year but do flow in 

response to large precipitation events.

• Intermittent streams which flow during spring runoff of an average water year, but 

generally dry up later in the summer.

• Perennial streams which flow some water all year of an average water year.

One third of planning area streams are ephemeral, half are intermittent, and the 

remainder are perennial. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 60 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Figure 15 illustrates that BLM manages approximately 1600 miles of intermittent and 

perennial stream channels within the plan area. 

The majority of the 

perennial stream 

channels in the plan 

area occur on National 

Forest Lands while 

private land owners 

own the majority of 

the intermittent and 

ephemeral stream 

channels. This 

distribution of stream 

ownership is largely 

due to the elevation 

of subject lands 

across the planning 

area. The Forest 

Service manages the 

headwater reaches 

and high elevation 

areas. These areas 

receive the highest 

precipitation levels 

from snow and produce the majority of the water for the planning area. Private land 

ownership generally lies downhill from Forest Service, but also centers around good 

perennial water sources that were important when the area was settled. The BLM 

manages many bottomlands and dry upland hill slopes. Overall, BLM managed land 

receives the least amount of precipitation of the three major ownerships, about 7 percent. 

Most of the snowmelt has been funneled into scattered perennial streams and major 

rivers by the time the water flows down to BLM land. Although BLM ownership is the 

smallest of the three major landowners, BLM manages many miles of large streams, 

rivers and floodplains with diverse public values. 

Stream channels and flood plains are important because their shape and condition 

affect how rapidly water flows through a river system how much water is stored within 

the basins, how clean the water is, and how much erosion occurs. These functions in 

turn affect fish and wildlife habitat, agriculture, recreation and the susceptibility of local 

communities and landowners to floods.

Prior to disturbances such as 

grazing, mining, and farming 

initiated during European 

settlement, the planning area 

stream channels were generally 

well vegetated and had frequent 

interaction with their floodplains 

(Figure 16). 

Figure 15: Miles of Stream by 

Land Manager

Figure 16: Stream Channel and Flood 

Plain Configuration
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 61 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

As early land management reduced the watershed cover overland flow of 

water increased and stream channels deepened to match the increased 

supply of water and sediment. Major flood events in the 1894 were the 

likely immediate cause of the deepening of the channels. Channel incisions 

eventually lead to bank failures and subsequent channel widening (see 

Figure 17). As channel widening and bank failures continued, a new lowflow channel begins to form in debris from bank failure. Many of the stream 

channels in the plan area were in this process of this initial buildup in the 

1980s. 

The result of this process is that the new channels are usually lower than 

the predisturbance channel, and the old floodplain now functions primarily 

as a terrace. Some terraces may be the result of climatic variations and the 

associated changes in flow and sediment supply. The final stage of channel 

evolution results in a new bankfull channel and active floodplain at a new, lower 

elevation. Many stream channels in the plan area have new, lower elevation 

channels and floodplains.

The BLM has adopted Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) assessment 

(USDI-BLM, 1991) as a standard for evaluating riparian areas and uses 

this to supplement existing stream channel and riparian evaluations and 

assessments. Streams and wetlands located on BLM managed land 

have been assessed for condition using the PFC methodology. The PFC 

assessment employs a consistent approach for considering hydrology, 

vegetation, and erosion/deposition attributes and processes (Prichard, et al., 1998). The 

assessment of the on-the-ground condition refers to how well the physical processes are 

functioning.

The majority of BLM stream channels and floodplains within the planning area are not 

meeting the BLM standard of Properly Functioning Condition (PFC). On the other hand 

relatively few steam channels are non-functioning. More intermittent stream channels 

are in non-functioning condition than perennial streams, but they also have more miles 

of stream 

at potential 

and Properly 

Functioning 

Condition. The 

condition of 

inventoried 

stream 

channels in 

areas managed 

by the BLM is 

displayed in 

Figure 18.

Figure 18:

Condition of

Inventoried Stream 

Channels

Figure 17: River 

Channel 

Evolution
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 62 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The physical function of stream 

channels is based on their 

hydrology, vegetation and erosion/

deposition. These physical functions 

are captured in the 17 question 

checklist from the PFC inventory 

(see Figure 19). Figure 18 also 

summarizes the current condition 

of the physical stream processes 

in the planning area by miles 

of stream. The physical stream 

functions are in order from the least 

to greatest percentage of planning 

area streams in balance with the 

landscape.

The upper portion of Figure 19 

illustrates two generalities about 

BLM stream channels. First, is the 

relative youth of restoration process 

in the planning area. Diversity 

in age class and composition of 

riparian areas and development 

of dense streambank root masses 

are rare. These functions require 

consistent management over an 

extended period, sometimes more 

than 100 years. A second general 

observation is the need to reduce 

stream energy, which can be 

achieved by restoring sinuosity and 

width to depth ratios. A majority 

of stream channels need time 

to recruit large wood and dense 

riparian vegetation.

The three processes in the mid 

portion of Figure 19 indicate that 

many streams are still actively 

aggrading and widening. Although 

streams are connected to new 

floodplains, many of these 

new floodplains are insufficient 

for dissipating stream energy. 

Insufficient time has passed for 

large wood and overflow channels to develop under the current system condition. Many 

upland watershed conditions are still contributing to elevated stream energy, inhibiting the 

achievement of channel equilibrium. 

Physical processes including vertical stability, vegetative vigor, and flood plain 

connectivity are generally functioning across the landscape. There are currently more 

than 40 active head cuts, but most stream channels are vertically stable. Many channels, 

down cut during floods more than 100 years ago, and have reached a new equilibrium 

Figure 19: Evaluation of Riparian Processes on 

BLM Streams
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 63 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

or intercepted an erosion-resistant layer. Changes in riparian area management over 

the last 20 years have allowed growth of vigorous riparian vegetation and point bars are 

revegetating. Almost three-quarters of the stream channels have a floodplain above bankfull 

that is inundated relatively infrequently. Nevertheless, the floodplains are typically narrow 

and are just beginning to establish in the bottoms of incised and aggrading channels. As 

these floodplains establish, riparian vegetation should continue to widen.

Management across the planning area has emphasized riparian area restoration since 

the Two Rivers and John Day RMPs were signed. Since 1992, efforts to improve 

riparian habitat have benefited from prioritized aquatic and riparian habitat improvement. 

Management of timber, grazing, and road building have emphasized actions compatible 

with achieving an upward trend in stream channel and floodplain function. These 

measures have been effective to improving trend on BLM channels and floodplains. For 

example, 63 percent of at-risk riparian areas exhibited an upward trend at the time they 

were inventoried while only 9% of exhibited a downward trend.

In 2005 the condition of streams for which Properly Functioning Condition assessments 

have been completed was compared with condition of the same streams in the 1980 

Inventory stream channel condition. The results of the comparison are displayed in Table 5.

It is apparent, from Table 5, that there has been a slight improvement in condition, but 

overall the stream channels are in Fair or At-Risk condition. 

Key Features

Three stream channels have been identified as being at potential. They are an unnamed 

tributary to Rudio Creek off Miller Flat, an unnamed tributary to Franks Creek on Scott 

Creek allotment, and Marks Creek. Streams at potential are extremely rare. For the 

planning area, less than one percent of all inventoried BLM stream channels have been 

determined to be at potential. These areas provide important reference areas and provide 

bench marks for achieving desired conditions. These areas also serve an important 

function for wildlife that depend on conditions typical of a later seral stage.

Water Quality

Water quality accounts for the biological, chemical, and physical condition of a water 

body. Water quality is evaluated based on a water body’s ability to support beneficial uses 

of the water. Generally key water qualities are those that support native fish and wildlife 

and support human uses such as agriculture, recreation, and domestic water supply. 

Table 5: Stream Channel Conditions 1980s-2000s

1980 Inventory - 2000s Inventory Class 1980s 2000s

Poor - Non-Functioning 12% 5%

Fair - At-Risk 76% 74%

Good - PFC 12% 21%

Excellent - Potential <1% <1%
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 64 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) monitors selected waterbodies 

for water quality. DEQ has analyzed water quality in the John Day basin between 1995 

and 2004. Each site with sufficient data has been analyzed for general water quality. 

Table 6 illustrates that the majority of the John Day Basin major rivers have achieved a 

status of good or are in an upward trend. 

Many streams within the planning area are designated as water quality limited under 

section 303d of the Clean Water Act. Section 303(d) requires that each state develop 

water quality criteria and delineate streams that fail to meet water quality standards. 

The 303d listed streams flowing through BLM managed land in the planning area are 

displayed in Map 7 and the specific parameters for listing and stream names are included 

in Table 7.

In general, the water quality concerns expressed for the planning area are similar to the 

surrounding region. For the John Day River Basin, as with the Columbia River Basin, 

the major water quality concern has been water temperature. These water temperature 

concerns correlate to the beneficial use of fish spawning and rearing habitat.

Conditions that affect stream temperature can be grouped as near-stream vegetation and 

land cover, channel shape, and hydrology; including humidity and air temperature (see 

Figure 20). Many of these conditions are interrelated and many vary considerably across 

the landscape. For example, channel width measurements can change greatly over even 

small distances along a stream. Some conditions vary daily and/or seasonally.

Removal of riparian vegetation and the shade it provides contributes to elevated stream 

temperatures (Rishel et al., 1982; Brown, 1983; Beschta et al., 1987). Channel widening 

can similarly increase the solar radiation load. The principal source of heat energy 

delivered to the water column is solar energy striking the stream surface directly (Brown 

1970). Exposure to direct solar radiation will often cause a dramatic increase in stream 

temperatures. The ability of riparian vegetation to shade the stream throughout the day 

depends on vegetation height, width, density and position relative to the stream, as well 

as aspect the stream flows (streamside vegetation provides less shade on a north or 

south flowing stream than on an east or west flowing stream).

Table 6: Oregon Water Quality Index Status and Trends Summary

(1994-2004)

Major River Sites

At River 

Mile

Score 

out of 

100 Category Trend

Trend Magnitude

John Day River at HWY 206 39.5 80 fair No Trend

John Day River at Service Creek 157.4 85 good No Trend

North Fork John Day River at Kimberly 0.2 89 good No Trend

South Fork John Day River at Dayville 0.2 88 good Improving 2.5

John Day River upstream of Dayville 215.4 83 fair Improving 4.6
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 65 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Table 7: Name of 303d Streams with BLM 2002 Listing

Parameter and Criteria for Listing

John Day River river mile 9.7 to 181. Middle Fork John Day River river mile 0 to 69.8

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

North Fork John Day River river mile 31.7 to 86. Temperature for Spawning: 12.8 C

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Flat Creek river mile 0 to 11.7

Temperature for Spawning: 12.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Big Wall Creek river mile 0 to 21.3 Temperature for Spawning: 12.8 C

Sedimentation Little Pine Creek river mile 0 to 5.1

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Temperature for Spawning: 12.8 C John Day River river mile 0 to 9.7

South Fork John Day River river mile 0 to 57.3 Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Nelson Creek river mile 0 to 5.7

North Fork John Day River river mile 0 to 31.7 Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Canyon Creek river mile 0 to 27.5

Temperature for Spawning: 12.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Bridge Creek river mile 0 to 28.7 Cottonwood Creek river mile 0 to 16.4

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

John Day River river mile 182 to 265 Trout Creek river mile 0 to 50.7

Dissolved Oxygen for Cold water: 8 mg/l Sedimentation 

Fecal Coliform for Geometric Mean of 2 Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Sunflower Creek river mile 0 to 8.7

Ditch Creek river mile 0 to 19.5 Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Thirtymile Creek river mile 0 to 39.3

Battle Creek river mile 0 to 7.3 Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Spawning: 12.8 C

Potamus Creek river mile 0 to 18.4 John Day River river mile 36 to 40

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C pH for pH: 6.5 to 8.5

Mallory Creek river mile 0 to 14.3 Indian Creek river mile 0 to 5.4

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Sorefoot Creek river mile 0 to 7.5 Temperature for Spawning: 12.8 C

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Willow Creek river mile 0 to 51.7

Deer Creek river mile 0 to 11.9 pH for pH: 6.5 to 8.5

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Grass Valley Canyon river mile 0 to 39.8 Murderers Creek river mile 0 to 24.7

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Bear Creek river mile 0 to 4.6 Dads Creek river mile 0 to 8.6

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Gable Creek river mile 0 to 7.7 Rock Creek river mile 0 to 24.7

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C

Mountain Creek river mile 0 to 21.7

Temperature for Rearing: 17.8 C


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 68 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Stream shade is a function of landscape and stream geometry. Some of the factors that 

influence shade are listed in the Table 8. 

Figure 21 indicates water temperatures of the John Day River relative to the distance 

from the mouth of the river. The temperatures of many important tributaries are also 

indicated. 

Preliminary analysis by the BLM of changes in river width between 1944 and 2006 

indicates that the river is about 50 percent wider now than in 1944. There was also an 

increase in the number of islands; 44 in 1944 and 66 in 2005. The total acreage of islands 

also increased 42 percent.

Water Quantity

The average annual precipitation within the John Day Basin is 7.5 million acre-feet (acreft). An acre-foot is the volume of water that covers one acre to a depth of one foot. Of 

this total an average of about 1.5 million acre feet flows past the McDonald Ferry Gaging 

Station 20 miles above the mouth of the John Day River. The amount of water entering 

Figure: 20

Factors that

Affect Stream

Temperature

Dynamic

Table 8: Factors that Influence Stream Surface Shade

Description Measure

Season/Time Date/Time

Stream Characteristics Aspect, Near-Stream Disturbance Zone Width

Geographic Position Latitude, Longitude

Vegetative Characteristics Buffer Height, Buffer Width, Buffer Density

Solar Position Solar Altitude, Solar Azimuth
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 69 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

the river below this point is extremely small due to a small drainage area and low rainfall 

level. The remaining 6 million acre feet or 80% remains in the ground or evaporates or 

transpires from living things into the atmosphere. For comparison, the water balance 

across the entire United States is approximately 30% runoff plus 70% evapo-transpiration 

(Leopold, 1994). Precipitation in the Basin varies by location, elevation, and season. 

The North Fork John Day River at Monument accounts for two thirds of the average annual 

stream flow near the outlet of the John Day River at McDonald Ferry. Flow is measured 

in cubic feet per second (cfs) or amount of flow required to pass one cubic foot of water 

in one second. The average annual flow at Service Creek is almost identical to the flow 

near the River outlet below McDonald Ferry. The contribution of the North Fork John Day 

River flow increases to approximately 80% during low summer flows. Similarly during low 

precipitation years the North Fork John Day contribution to mainstem flow is magnified 

compared to years with abundant precipitation. Seasons and years of low water yield are 

particularly crucial periods for most of the plan area’s beneficial uses of water.

Regardless of the condition of BLM managed lands the impact on water conditions in 

the basin is limited. This is because the 9 percent of the John Day Basin managed by 

the BLM (measured from McDonald Gage) intercepts only 7 percent of the total volume 

of basin precipitation. By contrast, the Forest Service manages only 33 percent of the 

drainage area, but those lands intercept 43 percent of the precipitation volume of the 

basin. 

The annual flow patterns have changed since the 19th century. Historical descriptions of 

the John Day Subbasin indicate that the John Day River was once a relatively stable river 

with good summer streamflows and water quality, and heavy riparian cover. Streambanks 

were covered with dense growths of aspen, poplar, and willow; cottonwood galleries were 

thick and wide; and beaver were very abundant (Wissmar et al. 1994). Now peak flows 

Figure 21:

John Day 

River 

Surface

Temperature
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 70 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

are greater and late season flows are more diminished. It is suspected that these effects 

are due to greatly reduced rates of soil infiltration, reduced capacity for ground water / 

riparian storage, and loss of in channel storage in beaver ponds (NWPPC 2001).

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and Oregon Water Resources Department have 

jointly recognized this trend and have identified watersheds with high flow restoration 

needs for salmonid recovery. These agencies identified streams and rivers with flow 

restoration needs in a map displayed as Figure 22.

Figure 22: John 

Day River Basin 

Stream Flow 

Restoration 

Priorities
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 71 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Fisheries

The John Day River basin provides habitat for 29 documented species of native and 

non-native fish populations. Five of the native species are “special status species” 

including: Middle Columbia distinct population segment (DPS) summer steelhead DPS 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) listed under the Endangered Species Act (1973) as Threatened 

(12/23/05), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) as Threatened (6/10/98), interior redband 

trout DPS (12/23/05) (Oncorhynchus mykiss) as sensitive, westslope cutthroat trout 

(Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi) as sensitive and Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) as 

sensitive. Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is an important native game 

species that spawns in the John Day basin.

Information on trends and distribution has focused primarily on anadromous (sea run) 

salmonids, and to a lesser extent on resident salmonids and warm water game species. 

Native and introduced non-game species populations and distribution have generally not 

been assessed. Introduced game species typically have been analyzed to determine if 

the introduction was successful and if so what fishery could be sustained. 

Fall Run Pacific Lamprey and

Chinook Salmon

Pacific lamprey and a small run of fall Chinook salmon in the lower John Day River 

are species of interest in the John Day system. Although these runs have been less 

extensively monitored than other runs, restoration efforts designed to protect and restore 

habitat for spring Chinook salmon and summer steelhead will benefit these anadromous 

species and native resident species in the John Day River System.

Spring Chinook and Summer Steelhead

The John Day River system supports one of the few remaining wild runs of Spring 

Chinook salmon (Lindsey et al. 1986, OWRD 1986, Quigley and Arbelbide 1997) and 

summer steelhead (Quigley and Arbelbide 1997, OWRD 1986) in the Columbia Basin, 

providing approximately 117 miles of spawning habitat for spring Chinook and 1,800 

miles for summer steelhead (ODFW 1997). 

Salmonid habitat is similar for the various species. Summer steelhead spawn in cool, clear streams 

with suitable gravel (pea size to marble size), depth and current velocity. Steelhead enter streams 

and arrive at spawning grounds weeks or even months before they spawn and are vulnerable 

to disturbance and predation during this time. Eggs hatch in 30 to 60 days depending on water 

temperature. Fry emerge from the gravel and within a few days absorb the yolk sack and become 

free swimming. Rearing habitat is cool, clean water with an optimum temperature of 55 degrees 

Fahrenheit. Channel structure includes pools and riffle/glides with adequate depth and overhead 

cover (vegetation, banks and/or woody debris). Vegetation near the channel is desirable to reduce 

solar radiation and also provided a food base for aquatic and terrestrial insects that, in turn, serve 

as a food for fish. Summer steelhead begin to spawn as the temperature of the water warms and 

approaches optimal levels in spring to early summer depending on elevations.

Chinook salmon spawning habitat is similar to that used by steelhead although ideal 

gravels are golf-ball to baseball sized. Spring Chinook spawn in the fall and eggs 

overwinter in the gravel with emergence occurring in the spring. Rearing occurs in the 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 72 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

natal streams or adjacent cool water tributaries. Rearing habitats are the same as for 

steelhead and juvenile out migration occurs the following winter/spring on high flows.

The productivity of these populations is determined by the number of returning adults. 

Index reaches have been established by ODFW throughout the basin. These index 

reaches are monitored each year to determine the number of redds (spawning nests) and 

then extrapolated to an estimate of the number of returning adults. Table 9 displays the 

annual production goals for spring chinook salmon and summer steelhead.

Populations of desired fish species are the product of habitat features needed for the 

life stages from egg to maturity. Within the John Day basin, stream/river habitats offer 

suitable gravel for spawning, adequate high quality water for rearing and good flows for 

migrations. Out of basin influences such as hydroelectric dams, ocean conditions, harvest 

and predation play a vital role in the number of Chinook salmon and steelhead returning 

to the John Day basin.

Key Habitat quantity is a limiting factor for approximately 95 percent of the geographic 

areas for both Chinook salmon and summer steelhead. Key habitat quality refers to the key 

habitat type required of each life stage for each species. The John Day Basin Plan from 

the Northwest Power and Conservation Council identified channelization of streams and 

rivers, habitat diversity, water temperature, sediment load, and flow as limiting factors for 

steelhead and Chinook in their key habitats. (John Day Basin Revised Draft Plan 2005)

The lower 200 of miles of the John Day River functions primarily as a migration corridor 

for anadromous salmonids. Tributary streams in this portion of the basin accounts for 

an estimated 6 percent of the steelhead production in the John Day basin. A small run 

of fall Chinook salmon utilize the lower segment up towards Cottonwood Bridge for 

spawning (OWRD 1986). The upper mainstem John Day river and/or tributaries ) produce 

an estimated 18 percent of the spring Chinook salmon and 16 percent of the summer 

steelhead in the John Day basin (OWRD 1986). Increasing population trends since 1959 

for spring Chinook salmon are indicated in the upper mainstem John Day sub-basin. 

These trends are attributed to management and restoration efforts implemented over the 

last few decades (ODFW 1997). The South Fork sub-basin produces approximately 7 

percent of the summer steelhead population in the John Day basin (OWRD 1986). The 

North Fork and Middle Fork John Day sub-basins produce approximately 82 percent 

of the spring Chinook salmon and 73 percent of the summer steelhead population in 

the John Day basin (OWRD 1986). There has been no sport fishing of spring Chinook 

salmon since 1977, and the steelhead fishery has been limited to the catch and release 

of “wild” (non-adipose fin clipped) fish from 1996 to the present. Steelhead production 

takes place in the tributaries and headwaters of the river, mostly outside the river corridor 

(John Day River Proposed Management Plan 2002).

Source: ODFW (1990)

Table 9: Average Annual Goals for Spring Chinook Salmon and 

Summer Steelhead

Species Sport and tribal 

Harvest Estimates 

Natural Reproduction Escapement 

Estimates

Total Escapement 

Goal

Average

Escapement

1989-1998

Spring Chinook 

Salmon 

1,050 5,950 7,000 2,310

Summer Steelhead 11,250 33,750 45,000 8,370
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 73 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Resident Salmonids

Several species of resident salmonids inhabit the John Day River system. Interior 

Redband trout (Behnke 1992) occur throughout the basin primarily occupying river 

habitats in the upper subbasins and tributary habitats. Hatchery supplementation with 

rainbow trout occurred prior to 1986 but with the “wild fish policy” ODFW no longer 

releases hatchery fish in streams associated with the John Day River. One native 

subspecies of cutthroat trout, Westslope (Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi), is found in tributary 

streams of the upper mainstem John Day River. Westslope cutthroat were introduced 

in 1960 from Deardorff Creek to Clear Creek and South Fork Desolation Creek in the 

North Fork John Day subbasin. Yellowstone cutthroat (Oncorhynchus clarki bouvieri) and 

Lahonton cutthroat (Oncorhynchus clarki hendersoni) were stocked in certain North Fork 

John Day reservoirs in the past. 

Resident trout and Westslope cutthroat, like steelhead, spawn in the spring. Gravel size 

is smaller and depends on the size of the spawners. Resident trout can mature and 

spawn at 7-8 inches in length and continue spawning with increased growth. Incubation 

period is temperature dependent. Rearing habitats are similar to steelhead but typically 

upstream of these areas.

Rainbow trout were planted in various streams and ponds in the John Day Subbasin 

beginning in 1925 and periodically continued through 1997. Some streams only received 

one planting while other streams received 147. The streams where rainbow trout 

were consistently stocked include Canyon Creek and the John Day River in the upper 

mainstem watershed; and Camas Creek, Desolation Creek and North Fork John Day 

River in the North Fork watershed (Northwest Power and Conservation Council, 2005). 

ODFW’s “wild fish” policy suspended stocking in all streams, however, some ponds/

reservoirs with a stream outlet were stocked until 2001. These plantings were designed 

for a “put and take” sport fishery and ODFW determined the risk was low that survivors 

from these plantings would interbreed with native populations (Unterwegner, 2006).

Westslope cutthroat trout (WCT) probably never were widely distributed in the Blue 

Mountains or Columbia Plateau. Productivity has been adequate to sustain localized 

migratory and isolated populations, resulting in current populations thought to be fairly 

secure. However, this conclusion must be tempered by uncertainty regarding the 

genetic integrity of remaining populations. Most current wild populations are depressed. 

Hybridization, fragmentation and loss of migratory populations have limited healthy 

populations to a much smaller proportion of their historical range. Further, competition 

with introduced rainbow and brook trout has impacted the ability of the species to fully 

occupy its natural niche in the ecosystem (John Day Basin Revised Draft Plan 2005).

Bull trout were listed as threatened on June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31647). The John Day basin 

is included in the Columbia River Distinct Population Segment (DPS). Within the basin, 

eleven existing local populations (or stocks) were identified. Three subbasins, North Fork 

John Day, Middle Fork John Day and mainstem John Day each contain a Core Area, 

meaning the fish from the area spawn in a particular stream, at a particular season, and 

which to a substantial degree do not interbreed with any group spawning at a different 

place, or in the same place at a different season. All spawning occurs in cooler headwater 

segments of the three subbasins. The various down river segments including BLM land 

are utilized as winter rearing/foraging habitat. Presently, bull trout occur in 45 percent of 

their historical range (Quigley and Arbelbide 1997) The North Fork and mainstem John 

Day populations are considered to be at moderate risk of extinction and the Middle Fork 

John Day are at high risk of extinction (Ratliff and Howell 1992).
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 74 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Bull trout reach maturity at sizes similar to resident trout but are fall spawners. Substrate is 

normally smaller, clean gravels in headwater reaches. Bull trout prefer sites with upwelling 

rather than the typical pool tail area of other salmonids. Preferred temperatures in these 

headwater streams are cooler with the optimum about 45 degrees F. Rearing habitats are 

similar but productivity is greater in habitats with an abundance of woody debris.

Although Bull Trout historically occurred throughout the John Day Subbasin, they were 

probably never as abundant as other salmonids in the subbasin. It is certain that they 

were more abundant and more widely distributed then they are today. The current 

distribution of bull trout is clearly fragmented (Howell and Buchanan 1992). In the winter 

of 2004, ODFW documented subadult bull trout movement in the mainstem John Day 

River down to the National Park Service Interpretive Center (RM 203) and in the Middle 

Fork to the hot springs at Ritter (RM 15). Recent survey work by Oregon Department of 

Fish and Wildlife ((Hemmingsen et al 2001) detected bull trout in the mainstem John Day 

River at river mile 170 near the town of Spray, downstream of the confluence with the 

North Fork John Day. Two bull trout were radio tagged and tracked upstream during the 

summer. (John Day Basin Revised Draft Plan 2005). Both fish entered the North Fork, 

one traveling 112 mile over a period of 77 days, the other 137 miles into the tributary of 

Granite Creek to mile 3.8. Presence of bull trout at Spray confirm there is a component of 

movement along the rivers to the local population in both the North Fork and mainstem 

John Day Rivers. These fish utilize the lower river segments as winter foraging habitat 

which include segments flowing through public lands.

Introduced Smallmouth Bass and Channel 

Catfish

The John Day River also supports an increasingly popular warm water sport fishery. 

A review of habitat requirements revealed the river exhibits good conditions for both 

smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui) and channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus). Upon 

assurance that warm water species predation on salmonids would be minimal, these 

species were introduced into the John Day River below Kimberly (RM 185) in the early 

1970s (ODFW 1999). Smallmouth bass are distributed throughout the mainstem from the 

mouth to Picture Gorge (RM 205), the North Fork from the mouth to Desolation Creek 

(RM60, and the Middle Fork from the mouth to Big Creek (RM 39). This species appears 

to be increasing upstream distribution by adapting to marginal habitat conditions higher 

in the basin. Diet studies support the theory that smallmouth bass in the John Day are a 

minimal risk to migrating salmonids. Smallmouth bass have successfully filled a niche in 

the John Day River, which has developed into a nationally recognized sport fishery.

Terrestrial Wildlife

The John Day Basin contains a rich wildlife population. Wildlife within the basin utilize 

habitats that range from dense moist forest to dry shrub and grasslands. There are 378 

terrestrial species that utilize the Blue Mountains. Fifty-one of these species migrate 

through or are occasional visitors in the Blue Mountains (Thomas, 1979). There is one 

Federally listed species with reproductive habitat, one Federally listed species with 

incidental and dispersal habitat, one formerly listed species, two candidates for Federal 

listing, 21 Bureau Sensitive Species, 6 Bureau Assessment Species, and 37 Bureau 

Tracking Species (Appendix B). Mule deer (Odecoileus hemionus) and elk (Cervus

elephus) are considered locally important species. Additionally there are numerous 

neotropical migratory bird and upland game birds.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 75 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

The John Day main-stem, North, and South Forks provide Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus

leucocephalus) winter roosting habitat, potential peregrine falcon eerie habitat, California 

big horn sheep (Ovis Canadensis californiana) habitat, and neotropical migratory bird 

habitats. 285 of the 378 terrestrial species (over 75%) known to occur in the Blue 

Mountains are either directly dependent on riparian zones, or use them more than other 

habitats. Consequently, these riparian areas are the most critical wildlife habitats in the 

Blue Mountains (Thomas, 1979).

Neotropical migratory birds breed and raise young in the planning area in the spring and 

summer then migrate south to areas in Mexico and South America during the fall and 

winter. These birds range from small sparrows and warblers to large woodpeckers and 

raptors. All habitat types are utilized with riparian areas having the highest proportion of 

use.

Large ungulates, such as mule deer, elk and antelope (Antilocapra americana), are 

common year-round residents in the John Day Basin. Critical big game winter ranges 

occur in the North and South Fork of the John Day Rivers (Map 8 displays past RMP 

winter range designations). Many of the foothills along the John Day River are used as 

winter range by these species. The ODFW sets population and species management 

goals within the state. The BLM cooperates with ODFW in helping to meet these goals 

by providing an appropriate amount and quality of habitat on public land consistent with 

multiple-use management.

In 2005 ODF&W published “The Oregon Conservation Strategy”. The BLM and other 

management agencies have agreed to manage consistent with direction contained in this 

document. The Oregon Conservation Strategy identifies habitat values, Conservation 

Opportunity Areas (COAs), and suggests management considerations. See Map 3 for the 

location of COAs

North Fork John Day Acquisition Lands

The wildlife habitat acquired in the John Day Basin contains representative coniferous 

forest, riparian, montane shrub, grassland, and western juniper habitat. The acquisition 

lands contain approximately 75 miles of riparian habitat. 

The North Fork acquisition lands contain some of the most diverse riparian and 

coniferous forest communities on BLM land in the basin. The north slopes providing 

refugia for many wildlife species due to wetter communities that stay green longer during 

the hot summer months. The drainages, north slopes, and higher elevations on the north 

side of the river contain coniferous forest communities. Some of these forest communities 

are in relatively large blocks and stringers, providing contiguous habitat that benefit 

wildlife species utilizing interiors of these habitats.

The southern aspects and ridge tops on the north side of the river are dryer habitat types 

that get more solar radiation in the winter and thus provide important mule deer and elk 

winter range providing habitat for 1,200 - 1,500 elk and 3,000 to 4,000 mule deer..

The North Fork provides important wintering habitat for the bald eagle a threatened 

species, a large nesting population of Lewis’ woodpeckers (Melanerpes lewis), and lies 

within historic California Bighorn Sheep habitat.


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 78 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Key Habitat Components

Fragmentation

Fragmentation occurs when human or natural activity creates breaks in what was 

formerly more or less a contiguous habitat type. Palouse prairie habitats are some of the 

most fragmented habitats within the planning area due to agricultural conversion. This 

occurs primarily on private lands. Shrub steppe habitats are becoming more fragmented 

due to the expansion of juniper into these habitats. Forested habitats on BLM lands have 

lower levels of fragmentation than surrounding private lands. Roads and fire may also 

create breaks in habitat. For the most part, however, many roads on BLM lands are two 

track that minimally contribute to fragmentation.

Connectivity 

Connectivity at the landscape scale has not been analyzed. There are known local 

migration areas for big game moving to wintering grounds. It is also believed that 

portions of the planning area provide connectivity for species dispersal between the Blue 

Mountains, Ochoco Mountains, and the Cascade Range. Outside of fragmentation issues 

there are no known barriers within the planning area that would preclude habitats from 

being used as connectivity habitat

Road Density

Road density is a key element in determining the amount of habitat fragmentation within 

a given area. Road density analysis was completed previously utilizing a roving windows 

approach. This method assigns road density groupings to areas of land.

The following Figure 23 displays percent area of BLM land by given road density. In 

general most BLM lands are within the 0 – 2 or 2 – 4 miles per square mile range (m/m2) 

range. This analysis was base on a partial inventory of roads. 

Figure 23: Percent area by Road Density Category
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 79 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Threatened, Endangered, and Special Status 

Wildlife Species

Since 2000 the Prineville BLM has participated in a Joint Programmatic Biological 

Assessment (JPBA) with the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests for Federally Listed 

species. The JPBA established Project Design Criteria (PDC) that if followed have been 

determined to result in a Not Likely to Adversely Effect determination.

The John Day basin has a variety of special status species that are either known or 

thought to occur within its boundaries. For a list of special status species that are known 

to occur or may occur within the John Day basin, see Appendix B.

The bald eagle is listed as Threatened as described in the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA). On July 6, 1999, however, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) published 

a proposed rule to remove the bald eagle from the list of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife in the lower 48 states (50 CFR Part 17, Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 128/ July 6, 

1999/36454-36464). The action was proposed because the available data indicates that 

the bald eagle has met and exceeded recovery goals throughout Oregon.

This species is a winter inhabitant of the John Day basin, utilizing the John Day River 

corridor as a primary use area from November to March. Numerous roost areas, as well 

as a few known nest sites occur in the basin. There are no documented nests on BLM 

lands. Small tracts of BLM lands in the Rock Creek area are within a designated Bald 

Eagle Management Area (BEMA). The primary roosts are large cottonwood and conifer 

trees located throughout the river corridor. Most foraging occurs from Service Creek to 

the Blue Mountain Hot Springs on the mainstem John Day River, with the North Fork 

John Day also receiving significant use. Carrion, fish, ground squirrels and waterfowl are 

primary food sources of the bald eagle.

The Canada Lynx is currently listed as Threatened across the contiguous United States 

by the USFWS, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (50 CFR 

Part 17, Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 130/July 8, 1998/36993-37013). The analysis 

area is outside of designated lynx denning, foraging, or travel habitat. The planning area 

may be important in providing connectivity between Idaho and the Cascade Mountains 

Geographic Area, although the Snake River and Hells Canyon likely would impede lynx 

movements.

Peregrine falcon was formally de-listed in 1999; however, the peregrine will continue 

to be protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Peregrine falcons inhabit cliffs 

approximately 0.25 – 1 miles from some form of riparian habitat. In 2001 the Prineville 

District contracted a habitat analysis survey. The survey found no active sites but did 

identify 37 potential sites within the planning area. These sites had the following ratings 

for potential: 9 High, 3 High Historic, 17 Medium, and 8 Low (Pagel, 2001).

In addition, three wildlife species found in the John Day basin are federal candidate 

species, meaning that there is sufficient information on the biological vulnerability of and 

threats to these species to support proposals to list them as endangered or threatened. 

These species include the Columbia Spotted Frog, Yellow-billed cuckoo and the 

Washington ground squirrel.

Columbia Spotted Frog is currently considered a Bureau Tracking species and Federal 

Candidate by the USFWS. This species is found in the South Fork of the John Day and 

is suspected to occur in the North Fork and its tributaries. The typical habitat is large 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 80 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

wet meadows that remain damp during the summer months. No formal surveys have 

been conducted for this species; therefore the extent of the population range and size is 

unknown.

Yellow-billed cuckoo is currently considered a Sensitive species by the BLM, Critical 

species by the State, and Federal Candidate by the USFWS. This species occupies 

dense closed-canopy riparian areas with various species of willows (Csuti et al., 1997). 

Patches must be > 37 acres in size with >7 ac. of closed canopy. This species feeds 

primarily among cottonwoods. Although there are numerous cottonwood stands within the 

planning area, few approach the necessary patch size. Only one historic sighting in 1989 

near Mt. Vernon exists in any district data base. No surveys have been conducted for this 

species; therefore the extent of the population range and size is unknown.

Washington ground squirrel is currently considered an Assessment species by the BLM 

and Federal Candidate by the USFWS. Palouse Prairie habitats around Horn Butte 

provide some of the only habitat for Washington ground squirrel in Oregon.

Washington ground squirrels inhabit grasslands and shrubsteppe habitat dominated by 

big sagebrush, bluebunch wheatgrass , needle-and-thread grass, Idaho fescue, and 

Indian ricegrass. These grassland and shrubsteppe habitats are considered some of the 

rarest ecosystems in the Oregon portion of the Columbia Plateau. Washington ground 

squirrels play a number of important roles in these ecosystems, as a prey species for 

raptors and other predators, by influencing plant community composition and structure 

through selective feeding, and in the creation and use of burrow habitats used by other 

species. Washington ground squirrels are a prey item for two state sensitive species, the 

ferruginous hawk and Swainson’s hawk.

In 2002 the ODF&W completed a study of habitats and populations in the Horn Butte 

area. A total of seven Washington ground squirrel sites were confirmed – and all seven 

were located on the Fourmile Tract. Vegetation at detection sites was variable and 

most sites had a composite of grass and shrub communities present. 89% of the larger 

Horn Butte tract is comprised of Sagehill and to a lesser degree Warden soil, and since 

historical sightings were on this tract, it is significant that squirrels were not located here 

during this study (Morgan, 2002). In 2000 a wildfire burned a large portion of this area 

and thus much of the vegetation mapped was dominated by annual vegetation (Morgan, 

2002). Observations indicated that squirrel abundance and activity was relatively 

low. However, this was a one year study with populations not being monitored during 

seasons of higher squirrel activity. Due to the duration of the study, the impacts of yearly 

precipitation on population numbers and distribution are not ascertainable.

The John Day Sub-basin draft plan (BPA, 2005) states that a number of terrestrial 

wildlife species have been extirpated from the John Day Subbasin, including the 

Columbia sharp-tailed grouse, the gray wolf, the grizzly bear and the California bighorn 

sheep. Columbia sharp-tailed grouse were extirpated from Oregon in the 1960s due 

to a combination of factors, including over-hunting in the mid- to late- 19th century, the 

conversion of native habitats to crop production and habitat degradation from livestock 

grazing (Hays et al. 1998, Crawford and Coggins, 2000). Sage grouse, a species 

dependent on shrub-steppe habitat, were extirpated from the John Day Subbasin by 1955 

because of habitat conversion, overgrazing and over-hunting (Stinson et al., 2003). The 

gray wolf and grizzly bear were both extirpated from the subbasin by the 1940s, primarily 

due to predator control efforts. California bighorn sheep were extirpated from Oregon 

by 1915 due to over-hunting, unregulated domestic livestock grazing, and parasites and 

diseases carried by domestic livestock. However, these sheep have been successfully 

reintroduced in many areas of the John Day Subbasin (ODFW, 2003b).
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 81 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

“Historically, California bighorns were the most abundant wild, native sheep in Oregon 

(Toweill and Geist, 1999). They were found throughout the steeper terrain of southeast 

Oregon, and the non-timbered portions of the Deschutes and John Day River drainages, 

with the timbered regions of the Blue and Umatilla Mountains separating them from 

Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. Similar to Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, California 

bighorns were an important source of food and clothing for Native Americans, and were 

utilized heavily for food and trophies during the homesteading and early settlement 

periods of Oregon. Thousands of domestic sheep also were trailed across eastern 

Oregon, including most California bighorn habitats. This likely resulted in contact with 

bighorns which may have led to mortality as a result of livestock related diseases and 

parasites.

Attempts to protect California bighorn began as early as 1899 with regulated hunting, 

and in 1911 with full protection of bighorn sheep (Anonymous, 1911). The Steens 

Mountain Game Refuge was established in southeast Oregon around 1915 because the 

last California bighorns remaining by this time were reported there (Anonymous, 1915). 

Unfortunately this attempt failed and California bighorns were extirpated from Oregon by 

1915. Indiscriminate hunting, unregulated grazing by domestic livestock, and parasites 

and diseases carried by domestic livestock all contributed to the eventual demise of 

Oregon’s native bighorns.”

Efforts to restore California bighorn sheep to Oregon began in 1954 and eventually 

moved to the John Day basin. A list of release sites and current population estimates is 

described in Table 10. 

Table 10: Bighorn Sheep Releases and Current Population Estimates in 

the John Day Basin

Year Location of Release # of animals Current Pop. Estimate

Lower John Day River 600-650

1989 Thirtymile Canyon 14

1990 Horseshoe Bend 15

1995 Jackknife Canyon 21

1999 Little Ferry Canyon 15

2004 Red Wall 19

Mainstem and South Fork John Day River

1971 Canyon Mtn 21 Non-viable

1978 Aldrich 14 100

1981 Aldrich 4

1988 McClellan 15 120

1992 McClellan 7

North Fork John Day River

2003 Potamus 21 49-52
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 82 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

In Oregon, most California bighorn herds are non-migratory. Herd ranges generally 

provide contiguous summer and winter range and sheep are therefore year long 

residents not moving through areas of non-habitat. Thus dispersal and establishment of 

new populations in new habitats is limited. In general, California bighorn sheep prefer 

rugged, open habitats with high visibility of their surroundings. Survival is positively 

correlated with amount of cliffrock, rimrock, and rocky outcroppings. Rocky outcrops are 

particularly important for lambing and escape from predators.

ODFW works with federal land managers prior to any release to ensure habitat needs 

are met and any conflicts with domestic sheep are analyzed and adequately addressed. 

Transplant sites on private land must receive landowner approval prior to release of 

bighorn sheep. Cooperative agreements to ensure habitat integrity of release sites and 

reasonable public hunting access must be in place prior to release.

Substantial amounts of historic habitat are not currently suitable for California bighorns 

because of long-term habitat change. For example, urbanization occupies some historic 

ranges and others have been converted to other uses making these sites unsuitable for 

bighorn sheep. Fire suppression activities throughout the last 100 years have allowed 

woody plants and conifers to encroach upon once “open” habitat, decreasing their 

suitability for bighorns. Because bighorns rely on their vision as a way to avoid predators, 

dense stands of junipers or other conifers can reduce visibility and increase predator 

effectiveness. Further, junipers may compete for water and nutrients needed by forage 

plants on desert ranges and therefore can decrease forage quantity and quality as well 

as live water availability from springs and seeps. Some junipers can be beneficial by 

providing shade and escape cover in certain instances. However impacts of large dense 

stands are generally negative.

Some historic California bighorn sheep habitat along the John Day River is not currently 

inhabited. Concerns about domestic sheep, mainly mouflon, spreading disease to native 

herds of bighorns continues to be a factor. Where these concerns can be mitigated, and 

where habitat is suitable, the opportunity to reintroduce California bighorn sheep into 

native habitats remains an option. The ODFW Bighorn Sheep Management Plan (2003) 

has identified several areas in the basin where California bighorn sheep populations could 

be reintroduced or supplemented. The Prineville BLM in conjunction with ODF&W will be 

mapping existing and historic habitats; as well as identifying specific habitats for restoration.

Sage Grouse is currently considered a Sensitive species by the BLM, Vulnerable 

species by the State, and former Federal Candidate by the USFWS. The John Day 

Sub-basin draft plan (EAP, 2005) states that Sage grouse, a species dependent on 

shrub-steppe habitat, were extirpated from the John Day Subbasin by 1955 because of 

habitat conversion, overgrazing and over-hunting (Stinson et al., 2003). However, there 

have been reports of more recent sightings and the potential for occupied habitat in the 

sagebrush uplands along the South Fork John Day River and areas around Dayville. In 

2005 the BLM contracted ODF&W to survey the South Fork John Day lands in an attempt 

to better determine sage-grouse use and abundance in this area. No, additional sightings 

were recorded. Additional surveys will be required to acquire better population and 

distribution data. 

Sage-grouse historically inhabited much of the sagebrush-dominated ecosystems of 

North America. Today, sage-grouse population abundance and extent have declined 

throughout most of their historical range. Population dynamics of sage-grouse are 

marked by strong cyclic behavior; however, in the last 30 years, the peak in the cycle of 

bird numbers has declined. ODF&W allows a permit based harvest of 5% or less of sage 

grouse populations.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 83 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Habitat requirements for sage-grouse vary greatly depending on the season and lifehistory stage. Key habitat components include adequate canopy cover of tall grasses 

and medium height shrubs for nesting, abundant forbs and insects for brood rearing, and 

availability of herbaceous riparian species for late growing-season foraging. 

Resource Trends

In general, both the quantity and quality of natural wildlife habitat in the John Day basin 

have declined since Euro-American settlement. Among the many causes for this decline 

was historic logging and grazing practices, wildfire suppression, drought, agricultural 

conversion, weed invasion, human expansion into rural areas, and recreational activities. 

Habitats are constantly changing with new disturbances, both natural and unnatural. 

Some species have increased with these disturbances; others have declined.

Regional Context

Habitat conditions and trends within the John Day Basin are consistent with the finding 

of The Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Plan (ICBEMP). That plan took 

a broad view of wildlife habitats across the entire Columbia Basin through the late 1990s 

and early 2000s. In 2005 the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) did a tiered analysis 

at a finer scale focusing on the John Day Basin. 

The BPA report made several observations: Reduction of cover and vigor of big 

sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, and other shrubs, grasses, and forbs by juniper can 

have negative impacts on a multitude of wildlife species, including critical big game 

winter range. Western juniper can be an important element in the habitat for many wildlife 

species, but at densities that allow a healthy understory of shrubs and grasses (Miller, 

2001). Once juniper becomes dominant on sites understory species cover and vigor 

declines. Increasing juniper dominance at both the community and landscape levels 

will result in a general decline in plant and community diversity, resulting in a decline 

of wildlife abundance and diversity (Miller et al., 2005). Reduction of cover and vigor of 

big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, and other shrubs, grasses, and forbs by juniper 

can have negative impacts on a multitude of wildlife species, including ground nesting 

migratory birds and critical big game winter range.

Unique or Key Features

• Winter Range - Critical big game winter ranges exist on the North and South Forks of 

the John Day River.

• Caves – There are several caves that provide potential maternity and hibernacula 

habitat for bats along the South Fork and Main-stem John Day. Only the Wildhorse 

Point Cave has confirmed use by western big-eared bat. 

• Cliffs – Steep cliffs along the North and South Forks and the Main-stem of the John 

Day provide potential habitat for nesting golden eagles, prairie falcons, and peregrine 

falcons.

• The Horn Butte ACEC was designated for its long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus) nesting habitat; a management plan was prepared in 1989 proposing land 

acquisition, livestock management, noxious weed control and closure of the area to 

OHVs. Since 1989 approximately 80% of the ACEC has been burned by wildfire.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 84 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

• Palouse Prairie habitats around Horn Butte provide some of the only habitat for 

Washington ground squirrel in Oregon.

• Lewis’ Woodpecker habitat on the North Fork of the John Day

• Wintering bald eagle habitats on the North Fork of the John Day

Wild Horses

The only wild horses in the planning area are located in the Murderer’s Creek Herd 

Management Area. The herd management area spans 108,568 acres and is managed 

under the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 that mandates that these 

horses be managed in a thriving ecological balance with the land and as part of the 

natural landscape. The Bear Valley Ranger District of the Malheur National forest has 

primary responsibility for managing this herd and annually inventories the Murders Creek 

wild horse population with a ground census. The Appropriate Management Level (AML) 

for this herd management area ranges between 50-140 wild horses. The wild horse herd 

averages about 100 head.

The lineage of the Murderer’s Creek horses is diverse. Part of the lineage of horses 

found in the area by early explorers can be linked to animals that escaped from Indian 

herds assembled from horses escaped from or released by Spanish Conquistadors. It is 

also likely that many of the Murderer’s Creek horses are descendants of animals lost or 

turned loose by settlers and ranchers. 

Herd Management

Wild horse herds increase at a rate of 18% per year, so their populations, without 

controls, double about every 4 to 5 years. Wild horses have few natural predators, except 

for humans and mountain lions. Prior to the enactment of the Wild Free-Roaming Horse 

and Burro Act of 1971, wild horses were not federally protected species. Herd numbers 

were controlled by ranchers and by mustangers who hunted the horses or gathered 

them for sale. After the Act, the population control has been by mountain lions and the 

managing agencies, the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management.

Mountain lions do an adequate job of controlling wild horse numbers in only a few 

locations. The size of most herds must be controlled by the managing agencies in order 

to protect the land from overgrazing and to protect the horses from eventual starvation 

due to overgrazing. It is for the health of the land and the health of the animals that 

“excess” wild horses are removed from their territories.

Visual Resources

The variety of landscapes across the John Day basin provides a visual smorgasbord for 

residents and visitors. The 13 subecoregions within the planning area provide scenery that 

ranges from broad vistas of rolling grassland to rugged canyons to mountain peaks flanked 

by forests. While much of the area appears to be relatively undisturbed, logging, grazing, 

fire suppression, road building, mineral extraction, and the creation of infrastructure such 

as roads and utilities have left an imprint on the land and on the overall scenic quality within 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 85 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

the planning area. For the most part the sparse population and relatively small population 

centers have left much of the region relatively natural appearing.

The John Day River Basin contains an abundance of high quality scenery. Scenery 

was also identified as an outstandingly remarkable value for federally designated WSR 

segments by both Congress and the BLM.

The John Day River Canyon is a key visual element, with few public access points, 

within the planning area. This canyon is generally primitive and undeveloped. The John 

Day River slices through a high basalt plateau; winding alternately through gentle farm 

valleys, 1,000-feet deep canyons cutting through a layer cake of basalt cliffs, and steep 

rugged hills. Lush green riparian vegetation at the river edge contrasts with green-golden 

hills of grass, sagebrush, and juniper in the summer and fall. 

Exposed volcanic ash deposits and the erosion and oxidation of basalt columns have 

created unusual colors and interesting formations that have become scenic landmarks 

for river visitors floating the river. Tumultuous in the headwaters, the river is mostly calm 

in the lower reaches though punctuated by the occasional rapid. In the summer as runoff 

dwindles rapids become riffles and runs become long twisting ponds with little current.

The North, Middle and South Forks of the John Day River are also striking river 

canyons with varying basalt outcrops, vegetation and erosive features with high scenic 

beauty. Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD) identified scenery as a 

“Special Attribute” for State Scenic Waterways along the mainstem of the John Day 

and it tributaries; North Fork, Middle Fork, and South Fork John Day Rivers. Canyons 

along these river segments include vertical cliffs more than 500 feet high, composed of 

dramatic basalt rock outcrops. Sandy beaches and gravel bars appear at low water flows. 

Vegetation ranges from fir and pine trees in the uplands to high desert communities 

of sagebrush and juniper in the lowlands. Small outposts of different vegetation 

communities dot the landscape along the South, North, and Middle Forks of the John 

Day River and provide variety and contrast for the eye. Ranches, intermingled with public 

lands, add an interesting contrast. No major hydroelectric dams or developments affect 

the visual resource values in the basin.

Sutton, Rudio and Stephenson Mountains are also prominent landscape features in the 

planning area. These landscapes are towering landforms, weathered over time. The 

remaining public lands contain important visual elements and contribute to providing 

open space views on plateaus and rolling hills.

The Status of the Interior Columbia Basin; Summary of Scientific Findings Report (USDAForest Service.1996) contained several points of interest regarding scenic quality within 

the Columbia Basin consistent with the John Day Basin:

1. By the year 2045, the most value to the increasing and older human population will 

be provided by (in decreasing order) motor viewing, day use, trail use, fishing, and 

hunting. (pg. 52). This statement emphasizes by 2045, the most popular recreation 

activity by the older human population will be motor viewing, or driving for pleasure.

2. Scenic integrity is reflected by the “visual intactness” or wholeness of the landscape. Scenic integrity is not the same concept as scenic beauty, but research 

shows people frequently perceive scenic integrity and scenic beauty to be the 

same thing. Scenic integrity of USFS and BLM public lands were rated as: a) 42% 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 86 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

of USFS and BLM lands rated very high, b) 33% high, c) 17 % moderate, d) 7% 

moderately low and e) 1% very low. (p. 54). The essence of these ranking show 

that the majority of USFS and BLM public lands have a natural-appearing landscape, with a lower percent of public lands having a disturbed appearance.

3. In the Effects on Ecological Integrity and Socioeconomic Resiliency section of this 

report stated “...Local publics will be expected to continue to express preferences 

for stability in scenery and lobby to have projects put in someone else’s back 

yard....” (p.140). 

Except for newly acquired public lands on the North Fork of the John Day River all public 

lands within the planning area have been inventoried according to BLM Visual Inventory 

guidelines. Previously inventoried public lands were assigned VRM management classes 

with established guidelines, through the Two Rivers, John Day and Baker RMP/EIS 

process and the plan amendments instituted via the John Day River Management Plan. 

BLM public lands not accessible by the public have generally retained a higher level of 

natural appearance, although unauthorized motorized use on some BLM public lands 

has created routes used by off highway vehicles (OHV), degrading scenic quality. Some 

public lands accessible by motorized use have had new routes and trails created around 

Canyon City, Dixie Creek, South Fork of the John Day, and Rudio Mountain. The scenic 

quality of these public lands has been affected in these locations.

Wilderness Study Area Interim Management Guidelines that restrict all motorized use to 

existing or designated routes continue to be violated by some public land users and some 

adjacent private landowners. These activities also reduce the natural character of the 

landscape by creating new OHV routes. 

Unique or Key Features: The John Day River, North and South Forks of the John Day 

River and their river canyons, Sutton Mountain, Pat’s Cabin, Little Canyon Mountain and 

the Rudio Mountain/Johnson Heights area are all key visual features within the planning 

area. The rivers listed above are also unique features that significantly contribute to high 

scenic quality in these locations.

Special Management Designations

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

BLM has two Areas of Environmental Concern (ACECs) in the John Day Basin planning 

area: Horn Butte Curlew and Spanish Gulch. Both were designated through the Two 

Rivers RMP/EIS in 1986. These ACECs are shown on Map 9, Special Management 

Areas and Recreation Sites.

Horn Butte Curlew ACEC is approximately 6,000 acres and is located five miles east of 

Arlington, in the extreme northeast corner of the planning area. Designated for its longbilled curlew) nesting habitat, a management plan was prepared in 1989 proposing land 

acquisition, livestock management, noxious weed control and seasonal closure of the area 

to OHVs. Implementation of all planned actions except OHV management is ongoing. 

Since 1989 approximately 80% of the ACEC has been burned by wildfire. Long-billed 

curlew nesting habitat, consisting mostly of sites dominated by perennial grasses, has 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 87 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

generally been enhanced. However, the shrub steppe, as expected, has been converted 

to sites dominated by annual species, including noxious weeds (yellow starthistle and 

medusahead grass). Approximately 1,500 acres has been re-seeded to perennial 

grasses, although establishment has been poor. Weed control is ongoing. Restoration 

of this area to shrub steppe and enhancement of its curlew habitat remains an ongoing 

process.

Spanish Gulch was designated an ACEC for its historic values. This ACEC is 

approximately 335 acres and is located approximately 12 air miles west-southwest of 

Dayville, Oregon, just north of the Ochoco National Forest. In the mid-1800s this was the 

site of active gold mining, following discovery of gold in the Canyon City area to the east. 

When the Spanish Gulch area was designated an ACEC, numerous historical structures 

remained on site, including a mill, storage buildings and residences. Since designation, 

little has been done to manage or protect this area and the structures have fallen further 

into disrepair.

Wilderness

Portions of five federally designated Wilderness areas (North Fork John Day, Black 

Canyon, Monument Rock, Strawberry Mountain, and Bridge Creek) are within the 

planning area, each managed by the U.S. Forest Service. The North Fork John Day 

Wilderness is located along the upper North Fork, Black Canyon Wilderness is located 

on the west side of the South Fork John Day, Monument Rock Wilderness is located 

at the southern end of the Blue Mountains, Strawberry Mountain Wilderness is located 

southeast of John Day and Canyon City, and Bridge Creek Wilderness is located in the 

Ochoco Mountains south of Mitchell. 

Eight Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) have been identified by the BLM within the 

planning area. The Strawberry Mountain WSA (1,149 acres) consists of three individual 

units that abut the north and east boundary of the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness 

Area (USFS). The Aldrich Mountain WSA (9,395 acres) is located on the east side of the 

South Fork John Day River near Dayville. The Spring Basin WSA (6,000 acres) is located 

south of Clarno on the east side of the mainstem John Day River. The North Pole Ridge 

WSA (8,379 acres) is located north of Clarno on the mainstem. Further north along the 

mainstem is the Thirtymile WSA (7,538 acres) and the Lower John Day WSA (25,396 

acres). Two additional WSAs, Sutton Mountain (29,400 acres) and Pat’s Cabin (9,970 

acres) are located just south of the mainstem John Day River near Bridge Creek.

In a 1991 report, the BLM recommended that most of the acres contained in four WSAs 

be designated as Wilderness by Congress including Thirtymile, Lower John Day, North 

Pole Ridge, and Spring Basin. The report did not recommend Wilderness status for the 

Strawberry Mountain WSA or the Aldrich Mountain WSA. Lands acquired after 1991 were 

inventoried for wilderness characteristics, and those found to meet the WSA criteria, 

including Sutton Mountain WSA, Pat’s Cabin WSA, and a 1,240-acre addition to the North 

Pole Ridge WSA, were amended to WSA status through earlier planning documents. The 

study process for Sutton Mountain and Pat’s Cabin WSAs is not complete, and study 

reports with recommendations have not been forwarded to Congress. 

The largest current threat to the WSAs is the unauthorized use of motorized vehicles 

and the creation of new routes through this use. Off highway vehicle (OHV) trespass is 

presently occurring in nearly every WSA within the planning area. Other unauthorized 

activities are threatening individual WSAs. In Sutton Mountain WSA, the unauthorized 

cutting of old-growth juniper trees is escalating, associated with the recent popularity 


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 90 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

of hand-crafted juniper furniture. In the North Pole Ridge, Thirtymile, and Lower John 

Day WSAs, unauthorized motor vehicle use is increasing as single engine aircraft land 

on sagebrush flats along the river. The BLM has investigated cases where chainsaws 

have been used to remove vegetation to facilitate landing, aircraft tie-downs have been 

installed in the ground, and chainsaw fuel containers have been stashed. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers

Three John Day River segments are designated as Wild and Scenic through the Omnibus 

Oregon Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-558). The specific nature of 

these designations are discussed in chapter 4. The WSR segments along the John Day 

are:

• Lower John Day River mainstem; from Tumwater Falls upstream to Service Creek 

the lower the river is classified as “Recreational” and flows through a number of 

colorful canyons, broad valleys, and breathtaking terrain. This segment offers notable 

steelhead and smallmouth bass fishing; mostly flat water boating punctuated with a 

few rapids; and sites of archeological, historical and paleontological interest. 

• South Fork John Day River; from Smokey Creek upstream to the Malheur National 

Forest boundary, this segment is classified as “Recreational” and offers outstanding 

scenery, wild steelhead fishing, hunting, hiking, swimming and camping.

The Wild and Scenic Rivers are displayed on Map 9; Special Management Areas and 

Recreation Sites.

Other Wild & Scenic Rivers within the Planning Area

The North Fork of the John Day River is the only WSR managed by the Umatilla National 

Forest within the planning area. In the Malheur National Forest the Malheur River and 

the North Fork of the Malheur River contain reaches designated Wild and Scenic River. 

The outstandingly remarkable values on these Malheur river segments include Fisheries, 

Wildlife, Recreation, Scenery and Geology. 

Identification of Potential Eligible Rivers within the 

Planning Area

In May 2005, the BLM Prineville District reviewed 1,400 miles of waterways on BLM 

public land within the John Day Basin planning area. In addition data from the Northwest 

Rivers Study, the Northwest Power Planning Council Protected Rivers and the 

Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NPS 2004) were evaluated.

The eighteen waterways listed in Table 11 totaling 92.87 miles on BLM public lands, were 

identified for evaluation to determine if they met WSR eligibility criteria. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 91 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Prineville BLM enlisted a private contractor with eligibility assessment expertise, to 

conduct a detailed inventory of the 18 waterways identified above. The final eligibility 

report for the eighteen waterways is located in the folder entitled “Support Documents” on 

the attched CD. 

State Scenic Waterways

The State Scenic Waterways (SSW) program is administered by the Oregon Parks 

and Recreation Department (OPRD). OPRD has developed both statewide and river 

specific rules. These rules specify management objectives for development and uses 

within the Scenic Waterway corridor to maintain the natural beauty of the river. A total of 

approximately 317 miles of the John Day River are included in this system. 

a) The mainstem of the John Day from Tumwater Falls to Parrish Creek at river mile 170.

b) The North Fork John Day River from river mile 20, near Monument, upstream to the 

West end of the North Fork John Day Wilderness boundary

Table 11 Waterways Evaluated for Potential Wild & Scenic River Eligibility

Waterway Miles

North Fork John Day River (BLM managed sections Between Wall and Camas Creek) 26.41

Potamus Creek 2.60

Rudio Creek 3.26

Stony Creek 6.90

Graves Creek 3.29

Jericco Creek 2.28

Little Wall Creek 3.73

Mallory Creek 3.17

Ditch Creek 5.19

Wall Creek 6.27

Bear Creek 2.17

Bridge Creek 12.18

Cottonwood Creek 1.28

Little Pine Creek 1.43

Ferry Canyon 2.75

Girds Creek 2.30

Indian Creek 0.51

Jackknife Canyon 7.15

Total: 18 Waterways 92.87
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 92 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

c) The Middle Fork John Day River, from its confluence with the North Fork John Day 

River upstream to the Crawford Creek Bridge

d) The South Fork John Day River, from the north boundary of Phillip W. Schneider Wildlife Management Area (formerly Murderer’s Creek Wildlife Management Area) County 

Road 63.

River Management Trends

Implementation of Wilderness Study Area interim guidance (USDI BLM, 1995b), the John 

Day River Management Plan (USDI BLM, 2001) guidance, and a new joint BLM and 

NPS Law Enforcement Ranger have helped to protect Outstandingly Remarkable values 

such as scenic quality, recreation, fisheries, camping and dispersed recreation on the 

main-stem and South Fork John Day Rivers. Changes include improved communication 

with users, an emphasis on Leave No Trace ethics, improved riparian habitat through 

compatible grazing management, and increased on-site management of these rivers. 

Research Natural Areas

There are no Research Natural Areas within the JDRMP planning area.

Caves 

Many resources are associated with cave features, including critical wildlife habitat, 

cultural resources, recreation opportunities, and paleontological resources. “Cave” is 

defined as any naturally occurring void, cavity, recess or series of connected passages 

beneath the surface of the earth or within a cliff or ledge large enough to allow a person 

to enter. It includes any natural pit, sinkhole or other feature that is an extension of 

the entrance. Caves in the planning area have the potential to be significant as winter 

hibernacula or maternity roost sites for bats.

Caves in the planning area include features such as lava tubes, caves formed by 

pressure ridges associated with lava flows, and piping caves formed by moving water 

eroding insoluble rock. The locations of caves nominated for significance are considered 

confidential under the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act (FCRPA). Information 

concerning the specific location of any significant cave may not be made available to the 

public unless the disclosure of this information would further the purposes of the FCRPA 

and would not create a substantial risk of harm, theft or destruction of such cave.

Several caves within the planning area were identified during the significant cave 

nomination process and initial listing in 1995. Wildhorse Point Cave is the only known 

cave on BLM public land within the JDBRMP area determined to be significant by 

the BLM. This cave provides habitat for the western big-eared bat. The condition of 

Wildhorse Point Cave in the mid 1990’s when it was inventoried was excellent. 

Rock Creek Cave NW was identified in the 1995 initial listing, but it may be located on 

private land. Field surveys need to be done to verify the land status of this cave before a 

determination of significance can be made. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 93 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Other Areas Designated for Special

Management 

The Phillip W. Schneider Wildlife Management Area (formerly Murderers Creek Wildlife 

Management Area) was established along a portion of the South Fork John Day River in 

1972 by the ODFW and the BLM to better manage mule deer winter range. The area is 

now used by mule deer, elk, and bighorn sheep year-round and pronghorn during all but 

the winter season. Several thousand mule deer use the area during severe winters. This 

area also provides habitat for turkey, chukar, mountain quail, California quail, and a host 

of neotropical migratory birds.

The State of Oregon established the John Day Wildlife Refuge in 1933 along the 

lower mainstem of the John Day River. The primary purpose of this refuge is to protect 

wintering and nesting waterfowl. It includes all land within 1/4 mile of the John Day 

river mean high water line from the Columbia River upstream to Thirtymile Creek. No 

waterfowl hunting is allowed in this area. The area is open to deer and upland game bird 

hunting during authorized seasons, but hunting of these species on private lands within 

the refuge requires land owner permission.

Cultural Resources

Prehistoric sites of archaeological interest are scattered throughout the planning area. 

They are most commonly found in certain environmental locations that are heavily 

influenced by the existing geology/terrain and for the most part tend to conform to the 

same locations where people live today. For example, there is a high potential to find 

prehistoric sites near any water course or body, like rivers, streams, springs and lakes. 

Similarly, ridges and breaks (abrupt changes in topography) are likely spots to find 

evidence of past use or occupation. Steep slopes and rocky ground are less likely to 

have cultural resources of relevance, though there are exceptions.

A cultural resource is “a definite location of human activity, occupation, or use identifiable 

through field inventory (survey), historical documentation, or oral evidence. Site types 

known for this area include but are not limited to Native American stone tool making 

scatters, rock shelters, isolated artifacts, remains of living structures, pictographs and 

petroglyphs, rock stacked features, burials, historic homesteads/living structures or 

their remains, roads/trails, irrigation ditches, stock raising and management features, 

cemeteries, ferry crossings, mining features and equipment, prohibition stills, wagon 

remains, and features related to logging activities. 

On a regional basis, the John Day basin has been influenced through time by what is 

perceived as two distinct cultural areas – the Columbia Plateau to the north and the 

Great Basin to the south. The Columbia Plateau cultures are generally focused on river 

systems taking advantage of the elevation changes in that system to provide resource 

availability throughout the different seasons. Fish, berries and roots are important 

resources in this culture area. Resource storage and semi-permanent dwellings are key 

features for this area. Great Basin cultures focused on internally drained lake basins 

and other water features. Similarly, the Great Basin cultures take advantage of resource 

availability afforded in areas with relatively close elevation changes. Rabbits, waterfowl 

and roots are important resources. Storage and temporary shelters are key features. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 94 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Both groups developed relationships across and moved seasonally between these 

geographic areas as a hedge against food shortages and to increase the viability of their 

respective populations (Lebow et al 1990; Connolly et al 1993; Burtchard 1998; Hunn 

1990; Zancanella 1997).

The location of historic sites is similarly influenced by the geology/terrain and water. 

Lands adjacent to rivers, streams and springs are good locations for homestead/ranches/

farms and associated features. Mid-slope and upland settings may contain features or 

sites related to different parts of the ranching land use system. Mining site locations are 

random being dependant on the location and amount of minerals and their market value. 

Logging on any major scale was relatively late (after 1930) in the planning area due to 

limited access in the rough topography. Lumbering sites are typically found in forested 

area, though some processing sites may be located in an adjacent non-forested setting. 

Resource Condition – Archaeological resources are fragile, non-renewable resources. 

Many natural processes and human activities have an adverse affect on the condition 

and integrity of archaeological resources. The degree to which these natural processes 

and human activities negatively affect a site will depend on the site type, the setting and 

the nature of the process/activity. Natural processes (such as intense thunder storms, 

catastrophic fires, or rodents) can be quite destructive to site condition and integrity. A 

fact to remember is that natural processes are dynamic not static, and, therefore, have a 

constant influence on sites. Human activity on a site can also be quite destructive. Artifact 

collecting, unauthorized digging, bulldozing, and concentrations of livestock or people are 

just a few of the actions that can have negative affects on cultural resources. 

There are 439 archaeological sites records in the Oregon Heritage Information 

Management System (OHIMS) for the John Day basin. They extend from the mouth 

of the John Day River to its upper reaches and represent a wide variety of site types 

related to history and prehistory. The OHIMS db site record includes a condition attribute 

with several qualified selections. Of the 439 sites, 144 have Unknown condition which 

probably reflects legacy data where site condition was not noted. The remaining 295 

sites have been assigned a condition attribute. Of the 295 sites 46 are Excellent, 119 are 

Good, 39 are Fair, 79 are Poor, 11 are destroyed, and 1 is in the Other category. 

The Dalles-Canyon City road, homesteads in the Sutton Mountain area and lower 

John Day River segment, and the Dixie Mining District have been identified as possibly 

suitable for nomination to the National Register (Lebow et al. 1990). One other area was 

mentioned as possibly needing evaluation for nomination to the National Register. That 

area involved two separate clusters of prehistoric sites within the lower John Day River 

segment that were proposed as Historic Districts. One of these districts has an historic 

component. 

The following interpretive sites have been developed by the BLM and its cooperators: 

ramadas with interpretive signs were constructed at Fourmile Canyon and John Day 

Crossing (west side, McDonald’s Crossing). The BLM John Day Crossing (west side) 

interpretive site (panels with ramada) was placed on land owned by the Sherman County 

Historical Society through a Cooperative Management Agreement. 

Trends 

Cultural resources are non-renewable resources that are affected constantly by natural 

factors and sometimes by human actions. As such, most sites tend to deteriorate over 

time and some are subjected to vandalism and/or pilfering.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 95 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Paleontological Resources

Paleontological resources within the planning area are world renowned. Fossil localities 

in the Blue Mountain portion of the basin occur as steep, highly eroded ‘badlands’ 

dotting the canyon walls from river to rim. The rocks of the John Day basin have a high 

potential to produce important fossil localities. One hundred million years of ancient 

life are represented within the John Day basin. Specimens include 25 foot long marine 

reptiles from 90-95 million years ago to mammoths from the end of the Pleistocene 

Period (about 20,000 years ago). The most prominent time period represented in the 

basin is the Cenozoic Era or the Age of Mammals (65 million years ago [mya] to present). 

The John Day basin has one of the most complete rock sequences in the world for the 

period between 54 mya to 5 mya. Fossil preservation is excellent in the basin. Less 

known but equally important are geologic processes frozen in time within the basin. 

Examples include, stream and river channels, volcanic mud flows, lava infilling (of 

existing landscapes), and large volcanic ashfall events. This sequence is punctuated by 

volcanic tuffs sandwiched between old soils (paleosols) that can be reliably dated. The 

combination of long sequence, datable rocks, and good fossil preservation has made the 

John Day basin one area (known as a reference area) paleontologist/geologists use for 

understanding the ecologic changes seen in other areas of the US or the world with no or 

little control for time. 

Understanding the importance of the fossil record in the John Day Basin, Congress 

authorized the John Day Fossil Beds National Monument in 1974. The monument 

consists of three separate units, Sheep Rock, Painted Hill and Clarno. These three units 

were established in the John Day basin specifically to highlight the critically important 

fossil and geologic resources of the time period between 45-5 million years ago. 

Fossils on public lands are considered “a fragile and nonrenewable scientific record of the 

history of life on earth, and so represent an important and critical component of America’s 

natural heritage”. There are three main types of fossil resources, vertebrate (representing 

animals with backbones), invertebrate (animals without backbones) and botanical (leaves 

and wood). Trace fossils represent a rare fourth type consisting of skin impressions or 

trackways. Locations on the ground where fossils occur are known as localities, not sites. 

Geologic settings may also constitute a paleontological resource when associated with 

fossils or significant processes that created contexts for fossil preservation.

Fossils are associated with areas of land that have no or very little vegetation and expose 

the underlying rock layers. Sometime this is in small areas measured in square feet or 

larger areas encompassing many acres. Each exposure may or may not produce fossils. 

This is a characteristic of the preservation of large landscapes and what portion of that 

landscape is exposed to view. Not all parts of the ancient landscape had features that 

are necessary for animals or plants to become preserved. Exposures with fossils are 

known as localities. Some exposures are steep in nature like in the upper John Day 

river canyon, while others may be more in a horizontal position as exhibited in the plains 

adjacent to the Columbia River.

Fossil localities are scattered differentially throughout the John Day basin. What type and 

age of fossil one finds depends on your position in the canyon. Most fossil resources from 

the Tertiary Period (54 to 5 mya within the planning area are found between Thirtymile 

Creek in the lower John Day River canyon and Monument on the North Fork and around 

Dayville along the South Fork of the John Day River. Many of the better known localities 

are associated with and surround the John Day Fossil Beds National Monument and 

contribute significantly to filling in gaps in the rock sequence not exhibited on the park. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 96 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Between Clarno and Spray are rocks from the Cretaceous Period (144-65mya). These 

rocks produce a moderate amount of invertebrate fossils (primarily shell fish (mollusks), 

though a few rare joint-legged creatures (arthropods) and even more rare vertebrates 

have been located). This same area produces some Pleistocene fossils (less than 2 

mya) as well. The Prineville District office has on display a mammoth tusk removed from 

a creek within this area. Other Pleistocene fossils (bison) have been reported in the 

upper stretches of the South Fork John Day River. Pliocene fossils (5-2mya) also have 

been reported from the northern portions of the John Day basin near the Columbia River 

(Fremd et al. 1994; Orr and Orr 1999). 

There are 155 known fossil localities on BLM managed lands in the John Day planning 

area that are co-managed, through interagency agreement, by the NPS/BLM. The 

majority of these localities are known to occur in rocks that produce or are highly likely to 

produce noteworthy examples of vertebrates, invertebrates and plant fossils. There are 

additional localities, some older and some younger, that are known but have not been 

recorded. There are, however, no known paleontology localities within the Baker RA 

portion of the planning area.

Trends

The volcanic lava flows covered and preserved much of the older sediments in the John 

Day basin from erosion. The lava cap is the principal reason fossil resources and their 

geologic contexts are so well represented in the basin. Erosion is both friend and foe to 

fossil management. Erosion exposes fossils to the elements which begins a fairly rapid 

process of deterioration but also reveals them for study. 

People Today in the John Day Basin

The remainder of this chapter describes how people use the many resources of the John 

Day Basin. The initial discussion focuses on the Social and Economic Context then the 

discussion addresses a series of uses and management categories that are important 

considerations for the decisions to be made in during the John Day Basin RMP planning 

process.

Socioeconomic Context

The planning area is primarily composed of three Oregon counties – Grant, Wheeler and 

Gilliam. Portions of several other counties also occur within the planning area to a much 

lesser extent: Baker, Jefferson, Umatilla, Sherman, Wasco and Morrow. Wheeler and 

Grant counties are contained almost entirely within the John Day Basin and draw their 

social and economic character from the planning area. Gilliam, Sherman, Wasco, Morrow 

and Umatilla counties include portions of the Interstate 84 corridor and benefit from the 

more diverse social and economic opportunities a thoroughfare of this nature offers. 

Jefferson County has closer social and economic affiliations with the Central Oregon area. 

The following description of the John Day Basin social and economic environment will 

focus more on the counties contained within the John Day Basin (Grant and Wheeler), that 

function within that geographic context. These counties reflect similar trends and values in 

the remaining counties that make up small portions of the planning area.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 97 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

History

Historically, the John Day basin was minor to the early exploration of the area. From 1800 

to 1843, explorers from Lewis and Clark to John C. Fremont skirted or passed through 

the John Day country. In fact, the John Day River was named for an early trapper with the 

Astor party of 1811-12. The fur trade promoted most of the early exploration and included 

Peter S. Ogden of the Hudson Bay Company (1828-1829), John Work of the same 

company in 1830-31, and Capt. Bonneville, US Army (1832-33). The explorations of John 

C. Fremont in 1843 brought to a close the period of exploration. Fremont passed along 

what would very shortly become the Oregon Trail, the major route to westward expansion.

For nearly 20 years emigrants from the east filed through the planning area along the 

Oregon Trail on their way to the lush Willamette Valley. Few stayed on the east side 

of the Cascade Range. In 1855, a fort was established at The Dalles. That same year, 

treaties were signed between the US government and the regional tribes, and the Warm 

Springs and Umatilla Indian Reservations were established. Both these tribes ceded 

lands to the US Government but retained certain rights to continue traditional practices, 

such as gathering, hunting and fishing. Periodic conflicts between Native populations and 

Euroamerican settlers would continue until the end of the Bannock Wars in 1878. These 

conflicts effectively kept many settlers out of the interior. The Dalles became the early 

regional military and supply center for central Oregon. The military was there to protect 

travelers along the Oregon Trail. They also promoted exploration of travel routes through 

the interior to establish links to other regional forts. When gold was discovered at Canyon 

City in 1862 the military took on the added responsibility of protecting miners on their way 

to the isolated mines from Indians as well as robbers and highwaymen. One of the routes 

the military explored became The Dalles-Canyon City road. This road became the major 

route to the Oregon interior and contributed importantly to its settlement. Shortly after the 

rush the gold played out. Many miners moved on to the next “El Dorado” but some turned 

to stock raising and farming in the lush valley floor and the grassy hills of the upper John 

Day country. In the 1860s the route of the Oregon Trail became The Dalles-Walla Walla 

Road, ferrying goods and supplies east and west along the Columbia River, crossing the 

John Day River at what is now McDonald Crossing. 

Ranching was the main economic pursuit of the early emigrants in the John Day basin. 

Cattle, sheep, horses and hogs were all variably raised within the basin depending on 

market demand. In the southern Columbia Plateau portion of the planning unit ranching 

was supplanted by dry-land farming after 1878 and agriculture has been dominant ever 

since. In the Blue Mountains, ranching was an obvious economic land use that became the 

lifeblood of commerce for the next 50 years. Initially, only a few hardy souls were willing 

to settle in the Blue Mountains at great personal risk to attacks by Indians in the 1860s. 

Early homestead/ranches occurred in the Bridge Creek basin (1863), the Clarno-Pine 

Creek basin (1866) and Kahler basin (1869)). Ranching continued through the 1870s in 

the Blue Mountains with high stocking levels and open range grazing. By the end of the 

1870s the threat of Indian attacks had disappeared and settlement of the area accelerated. 

Throughout the 1880s and 1890s the open range grazing of central Oregon began to 

experience stress. Increases in people attempting to ranch, fencing the range and poor 

markets contributed to the decline in large cattle ranches. Some of the ranches turned 

to raising sheep because the market was better. All of the ranches began to experience 

shortages due to the increased pressure on the forage. The competition for forage created 

by this situation led to the infamous cattle vs. sheep “range wars” of the late 19th and 

early 20th centuries. Sheep were slaughtered by the thousands -and a few herders- by 

cattlemen determined to rid the area of the dreaded sheep. In part to settle the conflict, 

the US Government began to establish the Forest Reserve system or Forest Service to 

regulate the access and amount of grazing that would occur in the forested regions.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 98 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The land use of lumbering had its initial beginnings in the 1860s at Canyon City. The 

impact was local because the demand was local. The terrain of the John Day created 

an effective barrier to the technology of the 19th century. The timber industry of the John 

Day country didn’t really begin until the 1930’s when the technology improved enough 

to open up vehicle access to the interior. There was a minor bit of railroad logging near 

Prairie City that crept into the district from Sumpter to the north and Hines from the south. 

Truck logging was the main mode of transporting logs to mills in the John Day basin. 

Broad-scale road construction and tractor logging continued on public and private lands 

up to the 1980’s. These uses continue today, but at a much reduced extent (Lebow et al. 

1990; Beckham and Lentz 2000).

Grant County was established in 1864 from portions of Wasco and Umatilla Counties, 

making it the largest county in the state at that time. Subsequent boundary revisions 

through land transfers to Lake County (1874) and the creation of Harney (1889) and 

Wheeler (1899) Counties have shrunk Grant County to its present day configuration. The 

discovery of gold in the area in 1862 served as the impetus for population growth, and 

also created the original economic foundation. Within days of the discovery approximately 

a thousand miners were camped along the banks of Canyon Creek near present day 

Canyon City. Gold and placer mining has since declined in economic importance, but a 

diminishing number of tenacious prospectors and miners can still be found carrying on 

the legacy that first drew settlers to this area. As mining declined farming and ranching 

grew in economic importance. In addition Grant County, which includes parts of four 

national forests, became largely dependent on forest product industries. As forest 

activities have waned in the last several decades, Grant County still provides a home and 

limited resources to several lumber mills. Most recently recreational tourism has provided 

some economic benefit to the county. Hunting provides a flood of visitors to the area in 

late summer and fall as thousands of enthusiasts migrate to the area for several days 

to weeks at a time. The local towns provide limited services to these visitors through the 

end of hunting season, till the higher level of activity is replaced with the familiar calm of 

day-to-day living (Oregon State Archives, 2006). 

Wheeler County was and still is mostly a ranching community with families close enough 

together to form small towns. After the discovery of gold in Grant County, The DallesCanyon City Military Road was established to connect the prospering gold fields with 

the government in The Dalles. To reduce Indian attacks to travelers this road utilized the 

existing mail route through Mitchell. As a result by 1884 Mitchell was a flourishing area 

– even sporting a hotel. The northern portions of the county witnessed the creation and 

demise of several logging based communities between the 1930’s and 1970’s (Oregon 

State Archives, 2006). The county is internationally known for an extensive depository of 

fossils from the Cenozoic Era (National Park Service, John Day Fossil Beds 2006).

Cultural identity within the John Day Basin varies, as shown in a recent report from 

community field work commissioned by the BLM. The report suggests residents in Grant 

County relate in terms of cultural identity to Baker city and La Grande than to Bend 

for regional affiliation. In essence Grant County residents consider themselves part of 

“Eastern” Oregon. Residents in Wheeler County relate more to Prineville and Bend than 

to the Columbia River area or Baker County area. Wheeler County residents consider 

themselves part of “Central” Oregon, or “High Desert” (Preister et al., 2006). 

Population Composition and Change 

According to the US Census Bureau, Grant County’s population decreased by 7 percent 

between 1990 and 2005 with a slight increase between 1990 and 2000. Between 1990 

and 2005 Wheeler County experienced an overall 4 percent increase in population with 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 99 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

a slight decrease in population between 2000 and 2005 to 1,455. In terms of population 

Wheeler County is the smallest county in Oregon but is still less than half the size it was 

at its peak in the 1950’s (Oregon State Archives, 2006). 

The population in both Grant and Wheeler Counties has aged since 1990. Wheeler 

County is comparatively older with an average age of 48.1 years – up from 44.1 years in 

1990. Between 1990 and 2000 the largest and fastest growing age group was between 

55 and 59 years old. During the same 10 year period the age group between 20 and 

44 years old has shown a marked decrease. This indicates the population is getting 

older and the younger generation is moving away. Grant County also displays an aging 

population. While the average age is lower than Wheeler County (41.7 years old in 2000), 

this is up from 36.3 years old in 1990. The largest and fastest growing age category is 

from 45 to 49 years of age – while the population has grown from 1990 to 2000 the age 

group from 20 to 39 years old has also decreased. Again Wheeler County reflects a 

similar trend as Grant County, an aging population occurring alongside an out-migration 

of the younger generation. 

Grant and Wheeler Countries are respectively 95.7 percent and 93.3 percent white 

(Sonoran Institute, 2006). Grant County has had a colorful history associated with 

Chinese immigrants who came to work in the gold fields of Eastern Oregon. In 1879 

these immigrants made up a substantial portion of Grant County’s population numbering 

2,468 (compared to 960 whites; however in 2000 people of Asian descent made up less 

than 1 percent of the population in both Grant and Wheeler Counties. People of Hispanic 

decent have increased in number and percent of total population in Grant and Wheeler 

Counties between 1990 and 2000 (Table 12). The Hispanic population in Morrow County 

increased by 3370 between 1990 and 2000 (see figure 24 above), meaning that 80 

percent of its population increase was comprised of Hispanic people (Preister et al., 

2006). In the year 2000 Native Americans comprised 1.6 percent and 0.8 percent of 

Grant and Wheeler Counties respectively (Sonoran Institute, 2003). 

Figure 24: 

Population 

Change in 

Grant, Wheeler 

and Morrow 

counties

Source: US Census Bureau

Table 12: Number and Percent of Persons of Hispanic Origin

1990 2000

County Number Percent Number Percent

Grant 41 0.5 163 2.1

Wheeler 6 0.4 79 5.1

Morrow 197 2.6 2686 24.4
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 100 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Economic Specialization and Employment

The Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) also assessed 

the social and economic conditions of communities within the planning area. They 

grouped the counties east of the lower John Day River into the Pendleton economic 

subregion (Gilliam, Wheeler, Grant, Morrow and Umatilla), and the counties west of 

the lower John Day River (Sherman, Wasco, and Jefferson) into the Redmond/Bend 

economic subregion. Within these subregions ICBEMP identified communities that 

were relatively isolated (more than 35-50 miles from a major commercial and population 

center). This analysis determined that all the communities in the planning area were 

isolated, or constituted an isolated trade center (ICBEMP, 1998).

Economic specialization was also addressed by ICBEMP. A community was designated 

specialized in a specific sector if employment in that sector was at least as great as 

ten percent of total employment for that community. Analysis revealed that Mitchell, 

Spray (Wheeler Co.), and Monument (Grant Co.) were specialized with respect to the 

agricultural sector. Mitchell (Wheeler Co.), Long Creek, Mount Vernon, John Day and 

Prairie City (Grant Co.) were specialized with respect to the wood products manufacturing 

sector. There were no communities in the planning area specialized with regard to mining 

or service sectors. Dayville, John Day and Prairie City (Grant Co.) were all specialized 

with respect to Federal Government employment. The degree of economic specialization 

is reflected in figure 25 below, where total employment in Grant and Wheeler counties is 

disaggregated into six industry sectors.

From 1970 to 2003, total employment in Grant and Wheeler counties increased by 

19 percent. This increase is dwarfed by the state increase in total employment of 128 

percent. The employment growth seen in these counties is largely due to increases in 

service and government sector employment; 52 percent and 33 percent respectively. 

These increases largely offset decreases in manufacturing (including forest products) and 

farm related employment which decreased by 41 percent and 4.6 percent respectively 

(Sonoran Institute, 2003). 

Figure 25. 

Employment 

History of 

Grant and 

Wheeler 

counties

Source: EPS, 2003
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 101 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Of the industry sectors examined, the highest paying sector is manufacturing which 

accounted for 13 percent of total employment and on average paid $33,267 per year in 

2003. However data was not available for financial and professional business services 

sectors from the Bureau of Economic analysis. Data are often suppressed for small 

counties in order to protect information about individual businesses. Of the categories 

that have data, the largest employment sector is Trade, Transportation, and Utilities which 

accounted for 25.5 percent of total employment and paid on average $21,167 in 2003. 

From these statistics it is apparent that while the service sector has offset decreases in 

manufacturing these jobs do not pay as much. The welfare implications of these changes 

are not so clear. The large degree of out-migration noted above suggests people maybe 

moving out instead of taking lower paying jobs in the service sector. 

Unemployment

Over the last 20 years, unemployment in Grant and Wheeler counties has consistently 

remained above the national unemployment rate. From 1979 to 2004 Grant and Wheeler 

Counties have experienced average rates of unemployment of 10.5 percent and 9.8 

percent respectively. While these two counties are well above the national average of 6.3 

percent, Gilliam County has maintained an average rate of unemployment of 4.7 percent, 

well below the national average (see figure 26 below).

Personal Income and Poverty

Total personal income has increased by 37percent in Grant and Wheeler counties since 

1970 however a large portion of this increase is due to increases in non-labor sources of 

income such as interest payments and dividends. As a share of total personal income, 

non-labor income increased from 26.1 percent in 1970 to 50.9 percent in 2000. The 

share of personal income from manufacturing decreased by 14.4 percent while the 

service sector only increased by 1.3 percentage points. While again we see a shift from 

manufacturing to service sector income we must consider the additional welfare effects 

of an increase in non-labor income sources; as noted above total increases in personal 

income were largely due to increases in non-labor income increases. The impacts of 

an increase in non-labor income might occur in many industries and these increases 

represent an external injection of income into the John Day basin economy. 

Figure 26: 

Unemployment 

rate of John 

Day Basin 

counties

Source: US Census Bureau’s 

City and County Data Book
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 102 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Despite the increase in total personal income the percent of the Grant and Wheeler 

County residents living below the poverty level has fluctuated but remains close to recent 

levels (see figure 27). Between 1989 and 2003, Wheeler County’s percent below poverty 

has been the same as the state average of 11.9 percent while Grant County’s poverty 

level of 13.5 exceeds the state average level.

Revenue Sharing 

In 1976, Congress passed legislation to provide funding to counties through Payments 

in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) in order to compensate for tax revenues not received from 

Federal lands. These taxes would typically fund various services that are provided (road 

maintenance, emergency services, and law enforcement). The PILT payments are 

determined using a formula which accounts for the county acreage of federal land, county 

population and the previous years’ revenue sharing from resource uses on federal land 

(timber, range, mining etc.). Figure 28 displays previous year’s payments. 

Resource Contributions

BLM land in the planning area contributes to the livelihoods of area residents through 

subsistence uses as well as through market-based economic production and income 

generation. Public lands provide products of value to households at no or low cost 

(permit fees). These products include fuelwood, Christmas trees, wood posts, livestock, 

and materials such as sand and gravel. Additional products with subsistence value may 

include fish, game, plants, berries, and seeds. In addition, use of these products is often 

part of traditions and sustains local culture.

Figure 27. 

Percent of 

Population 

below Poverty 

level

Source: US Census Bureau, 

Small Area Income and Poverty 

Estimates

Source: National Association 

of Counties

Figure 28: 

Payments in 

Lieu of Taxes
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 103 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Niche Market Opportunities

According to community fieldwork undertaken under contract by JKA, County and local 

leadership has been active in fostering efforts at economic diversification within the 

planning area. Citizens and officials are interested in fostering a diverse economy and 

niche markets are emerging in specialty beef, eco-tourism and small non-industrial 

businesses. 

In Wheeler county ranching and recreational niche markets are developing fostering 

needed economic development. These include the Painted Hills Premium beef and the 

development of paleontological resources such as the citizen digs behind the high school 

and the Paleo Project. A steel fabrication company recently opened in Spray as well. 

Local economic development efforts in Grant County have focused on supporting and 

strengthening existing businesses, and the promotion of outdoor recreation. The growth 

of bed and breakfast establishments and specialty crafts companies may indicate a 

trend of developing market niches (JKA, 2006). Prairie City has two small wood products 

companies that focus on post and pole and juniper operations and a juniper/pine 

decorative furniture shop which sells “all the furniture we can make”, much of it through 

catalog sales (JKA, 2006). Strawberry Mountain Natural Beef opened for business in 

John Day in 2005, and currently comprises 12 ranchers from the John Day area. In 

addition, a bowstring manufacturing facility exists in Grant County’s new airport industrial 

park.

Other emerging niche markets opportunities include wind energy development in 

Sherman County and the OHV Park in Morrow County.

Non-market economic value

The value of resource goods traded in a market can be directly elicited from information 

on the quantity sold and market price. Since markets do not exist for some resources 

and environmental services, the elicitation of value is important since without these value 

estimates, these resources may be implicitly undervalued and decisions regarding their 

use may not accurately reflect their true value to society. 

Non-market values can be broken down into two categories; use and non-use values. 

The use-value of a non-market good is the value to society from the direct use of the 

asset. In the John Day Basin this occurs as recreational fishing, hunting, boating and bird 

watching. The use of non-market goods often requires consumption of complimentary 

market goods; such as lodging, gas, and fishing equipment. 

Non-use values of a non-market good reflect the value of an asset beyond any use. 

These can be described as existence, option and bequest values. Existence values are 

the amount society is willing to pay to guarantee that an asset simply exists. Existence 

values in the John Day Basin might be the value of knowing that a native steelhead 

fishery exists. Other non-use values are thought to originate in society’s willingness to 

pay to preserve the option for future use; these are referred to as option values and 

bequest values. Option values exist for something that has not yet been discovered; such 

as the future value of a plant as medicine. In the John Day Basin bequest and option 

values might exist for timber or numerous plant species. 

Non-market use and non-use values can be distinguished by the methods used to 

estimate them. Use values are often estimated using revealed preference methods 

or stated preference methods while non-use values can only be estimated using 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 104 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

hypothetical methods. While use and non-use values exist for the John Day Basin, 

evaluation may not be feasible during this RMP process. However this does not preclude 

their consideration in the planning process. 

Native American Trust Responsibilities 

Members of the Umatilla Tribe and the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs exercise 

rights to hunt, fish, and gather on lands ceded to the Federal government within the 

planning area. Much of the planning area is within the ceded lands of the Confederated 

Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWSRO). The Confederated Tribes 

of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) have limited ceded lands but strong interest 

in the planning area. The Burns Paiute have traditionally occupied portions of the upper 

John Day country. The Yakama have also expressed interest in the planning area. The 

Yakama are known to have used the area for hunting, fishing, gathering, or to attend 

social events.

Since the BLM manages portions of the ceded lands that are within the traditional use 

areas of the tribe, the BLM has a trust responsibility to provide the conditions necessary 

for Indian tribal members to satisfy their treaty rights. The BLM also acknowledges 

a responsibility to consider the interests of tribes that are known to have used BLM 

managed lands.

Currently, Native American tribes are not dependent on commodity resources from lands 

managed by the Prineville Field Office for their economic livelihood. However, they do 

use BLM public lands resources for subsistence and cultural purposes. 

Environmental Justice

Environmental justice refers to the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people 

of all races, cultures and incomes with respect to the development, implementation 

and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, programs, and policies. Executive 

Order 12898 requires Federal agencies to “identify and address the... disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and 

activities on minority populations and low-income populations.” 

Under BLM Instruction Memorandum No. 2002-164, “environmental justice populations” 

can be identified when populations by meeting either of the following criteria:

• At least one-half of the population is of minority or low-income status.

• The percentage of population of minority or low-income status is at least ten percentage points higher than for the entire State of Oregon. 

Census bureau statistics (Figures 29 and 30) suggest that neither Grant nor Wheeler 

Counties have populations that meet either environmental justice population criterion. 

However several other counties contained partially within the planning area have 

environmental justice populations (Jefferson and Morrow Counties) defined by the above 

criterion. The proportions of these counties that fall within the planning area are quite 

small and are often made up of entirely public land (Morrow County) or contain no towns, 

cities or concentrated areas of residence (Jefferson County). Thus while these counties 

contain “environmental justice populations” it is unlikely that highly localized minority or 

low-income populations exist within the JDBRMP planning area.

From Figure 30 above, no clear trends in poverty rates are apparent. While changes in 

employment from natural resource sectors to the recreation and services sectors are 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 105 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

evident, there is no evidence that increases in poverty will result. While poverty rates are 

higher in Grant and Wheeler counties than the rest of the state, they are not extremely 

so, nor any higher than other rural counties in the region. 

Resource Uses

Native American Uses

Native American Indian uses involve a range of traditional economic, social, and religious 

practices performed by indigenous tribal groups on public lands. There are many facets 

to these uses. They can range from the protection of past burial sites to concerns about 

availability and access to root gathering areas to the quality of water that contributes to 

anadromous fish runs. The BLM has legal responsibility under treaty authority, federal 

law, and formal agreements with tribes to consider tribal concerns and interests when 

planning land use actions. 

The distribution of these uses is not easily defined or well known. Many tribal members 

do not divulge this information either within a tribe or with agencies. The information the 

BLM does receive from tribes about use areas is withheld from the public as a condition 

of the special relationship between the tribes and the agency. 

Source: US Census Bureau 

County Quickfacts, 2003

Source: US Census Bureau County 

Quickfacts, 2003

Figure 29: Percent of 

County Population 

by Reported Race 

(2004)

Figure 30: Percent of 

county population 

below poverty level
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 106 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Recreation

A wide variety of recreation opportunities are provided in a variety of settings on BLM 

land throughout the John Day Basin. Some of these activities include whitewater rafting, 

kayaking, canoeing, fishing, hunting, horseback riding, riding OHVs, camping, bird 

watching, rock hounding, photography, and sightseeing. Opportunities also exist for 

driving for pleasure and sightseeing for geological, botanical, zoological, archaeological, 

historical features and points of interest. In addition to locations where BLM public land is 

concentrated, recreation also occurs on state or county roads that provide access to BLM 

and USFS public lands.

Examples of high quality sightseeing opportunities on public lands include the Journey 

Through Time Scenic Byway, which highlights the John Day Basin’s geologic and human 

history as it travels from Biggs, Oregon near the John Day River’s confluence with the 

Columbia River, parallels miles of the John Day River including the scenic Picture Gorge 

area, and continues east of the city of John Day. Other popular sightseeing routes 

include the South Fork Back Country Byway along the South Fork John Day River near 

Dayville, and the North Fork of the John Day River northeast of Monument. An important 

aspect of sightseeing is the opportunity to view and photograph wildlife ranging from tiny 

hummingbirds to deer, bighorn sheep, elk, bear, and perhaps the occasional glimpse of a 

mountain lion. Sightseeing also occurs throughout the planning area.

Visitor use of the John Day Basin has increased and the season over which use occurs 

has expanded. Estimated annual use of BLM lands within the John Day River corridor 

was approximately 96,000 use days in 2003. Approximately 40,000 use days occur on 

the uplands within the JDBRMP area. Most visitor use occurs on the John Day River 

during the spring, summer and fall. In the spring and summer, visitor congestion occurs 

at popular watercraft launch and take-out sites at Service Creek, Twickenham, Clarno, 

and the Cottonwood Bridge. Fall hunting seasons In the fall hunting season encourages a 

similar increase in visitors.

Recreation Facilities

There are 16 developed recreation sites managed by BLM within the planning area (see 

Map 9). Most of these sites are adjacent to the John Day River. None of the recreation 

sites within the planning area provide drinking water or trash receptacles. Most sites meet 

the accessibility requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

BLM manages four developed campgrounds which are also available for day-use, Big 

Bend and Lone Pine on the North Fork John Day near Kimberly, and Muleshoe and 

Service Creek on the mainstem near the community of Service Creek. Each provides 

picnic tables, campfire grates, and vault toilets and each accommodates car camping, 

except Service Creek which provides walk-in campsites. Service Creek recreation site 

is owned by the Oregon Department of Transportation and managed and maintained by 

BLM under a lease agreement. 

Four recreation sites are managed specifically for day use in the John Day Basin 

planning area. These include Monument River Access Park along the North Fork John 

Day in the town of Monument. In addition three sites exist along the mainstem of the John 

Day; Shady Grove near Spray, Clarno where State highway 218 crosses the river west of 

Fossil, and Cottonwood Bridge where State highway 206 crosses the river east of Moro. 

Clarno and Cottonwood are owned by the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department 

(OPRD) and are managed cooperatively by OPRD and BLM under a long term-lease 

agreement. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 107 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Five additional developed recreation sites are located in Wheeler County along the 

mainstem John Day River. Two sites are managed primarily for dispersed use, which 

are areas open to use with no specific locations for camping or picnicking identified. 

These are Priest Hole, which is accessible by vehicle, and Burnt Ranch Beach, which 

is accessible by foot or boat. Three additional sites are managed primarily for boat 

launching. These include Wooden Bridge, Lower Burnt Ranch, and Twickenham. 

Twickenham is available for boat launching and vehicle parking only and is a privately 

owned site managed under agreement by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and 

maintained by BLM. 

BLM manages two interpretive sites located along the historic Oregon Trail. These are 

the John Day Crossing on the west side of the mainstem John Day near McDonald 

Crossing, and the Four Mile historic site on the east side of the mainstem near the 

community of Ione. These sites contain wooden ramadas which house interpretive 

displays depicting emigrant life on the Oregon Trail. John Day Crossing is owned by 

Sherman County Historical Society, and currently managed by BLM. A small picnic site, 

Rock Creek, is located near McDonald Crossing on the east side of the mainstem. 

Within the planning area, there are many developed recreation sites managed by other 

federal, state, and county agencies. Developed campgrounds include Clyde Holliday 

State Park along State highway 26 near Mount Vernon, Bear Hollow and Shelton 

Wayside operated by Wheeler County, and approximately twelve U.S. Forest Service 

campgrounds spread throughout the Ochoco, Strawberry, and Blue Mountain Ranges. 

Several private campgrounds are also available within the planning area.

The most popular day use sites within the planning area are located within John Day 

Fossil Beds National Monument. These day use sites are set aside to study, protect and 

display the rich fossil beds and unique geological features of the John Day River Valley. 

The monument includes three separate management units; Clarno, Painted Hills, and 

Sheep Rock. The Thomas Condon Paleontology Center in the Sheep Rock Unit opened 

in 2005, and serves as the monument’s visitor center. Hiking trails, interpretive displays, 

and picnic facilities are available in all three units. A variety of city and county parks are 

also available for day use. 

Trends show a gradual increase each year in visitor use at BLM developed recreation 

sites. Use at the John Day Fossil Beds National Monument is expected to increase 

considerably as visitors discover the new Paleontology Center. With no camping facilities 

available within the monument, there is expected to be an increased demand for public 

and private campgrounds located near the monument.

Rivers, Scenic/Back-Country Byways and local events are increasingly being promoted 

as travel and tourist destinations by local Chambers of Commerce and other groups. The 

acquisition of additional public lands along the North Fork John Day as a result of the 

Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 brings a potential for new recreation opportunities to 

the region.

Recreation Activities

Rockhounding

Rockhounding is a popular recreation activity in the planning area. Some public lands in 

the planning area contain agate, quartz, calcite, zeolites, petrified wood, dendrites, thunder 

eggs, opal, ammonites and leaf fossils. These prized items occur on scattered parcels 

of public land, some of which are surrounded by private land and contain no legal public 

access.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 108 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Boating 

Floating the John Day River in a raft, kayak, canoe, driftboat, or pontoon boat is a popular 

recreational activity. When asked in a 2000/2001 social survey, 94% of respondents 

listed peace and solitude, viewing scenery and wildlife, being with friends and family, 

and riverside camping as the most important reasons they boat the John Day River. 

The most popular sections for boating include the mainstem from Spray downstream to 

Cottonwood Bridge, and the North Fork from Dale downstream to Monument. In some 

sections, multiple launch points and easy access present a variety of options for one-day 

float trips. Other sections, with little to no public road access, offer the rare opportunity for 

remote, multi-day float trips up to 8 days in length. The primary boating season extends 

from early May to mid-July, except during drought years when low water flows shorten 

the season. The difficulty of rapids ranges from Class I to Class IV and varies by river 

section and flow level. Powerboat use is regulated by river section and by season, with 

restrictions designed to provide a variety of boating opportunities throughout the river 

system as a whole, and to enhance the management goals for each river segment. 

In 2004, BLM’s boater self-issue permit system recorded 16,192 boater use days 

between Service Creek and Clarno, of which 85% consisted of overnight trips. Boating 

use is increasing at an average of 3% each year, with the greatest increase occurring 

in river sections offering opportunities for shorter trips of one to three days in length. 

On peak weekends and holidays, the number of overnight boating groups exceeds the 

number of public land campsites located within a reasonable boating distance of major 

launch points. As use levels increase, competition for public land campsites increases, 

and boating groups who are unsuccessful at finding a public land campsite stop on 

private property to camp. The BLM administers 26 Special Recreation Permits which 

authorize commercial guides and outfitters to operate a business on the John Day River. 

In 2004, commercial boating use days between Service Creek and Clarno accounted for 

10% of the total boating use days.

BLM employees staff river launch points during boating season to encourage boaters 

to care for the river by practicing Leave No Trace outdoor skills and to respect private 

property rights. Regulations limit group size to 16 people, and the use of firepans and 

river toilets is required. No fires of any kind are allowed between June 1 and September 

30. Self-issue permits, available at most river access points, are required year-round.

Fishing

Fishing is a popular recreation activity throughout Oregon and in the planning area. 

Fishing for bass, steelhead, and trout occurs on the main-stem of the John Day River 

and on the North, Middle and South Forks. To protect limited populations ODFW does not 

permit angling for bull trout and Chinook salmon on rivers and streams within the John 

Day Basin.

Steelhead fishing provides limited recreational opportunity in the John Day River and its 

tributaries as fish populations appear to be declining. Steelhead fishing generally occurs 

from November through January. Wild steelhead with unclipped adipose fins cannot be 

kept, however they can be caught if released unharmed. During most seasons some 

fin-clipped hatchery steelhead may be retained, however hatchery strays account for 

only 6-8% of the total steelhead population on the John Day River and its tributaries. The 

trout fishery has declined slightly from historic levels, but trout fishing continues to be a 

recreation opportunity enjoyed by visitors to the area.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 109 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Smallmouth bass fishing is growing in popularity and generally occurs from May to the 

end of October. The increase in popularity of bass fishing in the basin is due to word of 

mouth and media coverage in fishing publications. Consider the statement on flyfishusa.

com, “In 1971, Seventy-five Smallmouth Bass were introduced to the river. Since then, 

they have flourished! The John Day River is arguably the best Smallmouth Bass water in 

the country.” 

Hunting

Big game hunting is a major recreational activity and opportunities exist for hunting deer, 

antelope, elk, bighorn sheep, bear and cougar. A limited number of antelope, and a very 

limited number of big horn sheep tags are issued in the planning area. Local, statewide 

and out of state hunters come to hunt big game, and game-birds. A variety of predators 

are also hunted, including coyotes, cougar and bobcat.

Visitor use for hunting occurs during the summer, fall and early winter months and 

generally occurs on large tracts of BLM public land and on adjacent USFS lands. The 

Planning area includes all of the Fossil, North side, Desolation, and Murderer’s Creek 

hunting units and part of the Biggs, Heppner, Columbia Basin, Beulah, Ochoco and 

Grizzly units. These units are established and regulated by the Oregon Department of 

Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). ODFW establishes management objectives for each species 

within each hunting unit. The BLM issues special regulation permits in order to regulate 

commercial hunting on public lands. 

About 5,000 deer and 2,700 elk were harvested by sport hunters within the John Day 

Basin. Information about hunting success is provided by management unit by ODFW. 

Consequently these numbers are approximate and do not indicate the ownership of the 

land on which the animals were taken. 

Upland bird hunting occurs primarily during fall and early winter in shrub lands and 

riparian areas, with some bird seasons extending into March of the following year. 

Navigability – John Day River 

On June 14, 2005, the Oregon State Land Board adopted the findings and conclusions of a Division of State Lands report which found that the 174-mile segment of the John Day River from 

Tumwater Falls (River Mile 10) to Kimberly (River Mile 184), met the federal criteria for navigability 

designation. To be considered navigable, the river was determined to be navigable by craft used 

at the time of Oregon statehood in 1859.

Under the navigability designation, ownership of the bed and banks of the John Day was transferred to the State of Oregon; superseding previous federal or private ownership. Under this designation state ownership applies to land that lies below the mean high water level. This ownership 

declaration allows public use of the river, generally to the line of ordinary high water, for activities 

such as fishing and boating. The primary beneficiaries of this ruling are boaters and anglers now 

able to use areas previously inaccessible on what, in the past, had been considered private land. 

State ownership also requires permission from the State of Oregon for certain uses of the waterway (for example, the construction or maintenance of a dock or moorage, or the removal of 

sand or gravel). 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 110 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Waterfowl hunting for duck and geese occurs in the fall and early winter on the John Day 

River and tributary rivers. The mainstem of the John Day River is closed to waterfowl 

hunting downstream of Thirtymile Creek within the John Day Wildlife Refuge managed by 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 

Statewide the number of Oregon resident deer hunters has declined over the past 30 

years, while sales of elk tags have remained relatively constant. In contrast the number 

of non-resident elk hunters has increased over this time period. However the sale of both 

resident and nonresident deer and elk tags are anticipated to decline over the next five 

years. Nevertheless hunting for deer and elk are expected to remain popular recreational 

activities in the planning area.

Off Road Motorized Recreation

Off Highway Vehicle Use (OHV) use is allowed on the majority of BLM managed lands 

in the planning area. However on approximately 60% of these lands restrictions limit the 

season of use, and/or the routes open to OHV use. Less than 1 percent of BLM managed 

lands are closed to all OHV use. OHV use in the JDBRMP area is occurring in nearly 

every block of BLM land which is accessible to the public or to adjacent landowners, even 

where current restrictions prohibit such use. This widespread use appears to be limited 

only where steep, impassable terrain makes OHV use unfeasible. OHVs are used on 

BLM public lands throughout the year, primarily for gaining access to other recreational 

activities such as hunting, looking for horn sheds, and fishing. In addition OHV use for 

the pure fun of riding occurs in some parts of the planning area. There are no designated 

Class I, (ATV), II (4WD), or III (motorcycle) trail systems on BLM public lands within the 

planning area.

Hunters use All Terrain Vehicles (ATV refers to all OHVs less than 50 inches wide) on 

BLM lands in late summer to scout for big game, in fall to hunt and retrieve big game, and 

in fall and winter to access upland bird hunting areas. Commercial horn hunters use ATVs 

in late winter and early spring to hunt for recently dropped deer and elk antlers. 

In the vicinity of the North Fork John Day River, an interim OHV designation for the 

42,183 acres of acquired lands is in effect until this land use plan is completed. Some 

roads crossing sensitive fish streams are closed to motorized travel year-round. Use in 

other areas which provide critical deer and elk winter range, is seasonally limited to April 

16 to November 30. 

Designated Route Systems

In a designated route system, all open routes open to travel are signed as designated 

routes. All routes not marked as designated routes are closed. Designated route systems 

are in place in all WSAs, on the west side of the John Day River north of Clarno, and 

in the Murderer’s Creek area along the South Fork John Day River. However, even 

with a designated route system, OHV users regularly drive past closed signs and off of 

designated routes.

Lower John Day River

Though much of the BLM land adjacent to the lower John Day River is closed to OHV 

use due to management guidelines for Wilderness Study Areas and Wild and Scenic 

River, unauthorized use of OHVs continues to occur. In addition adjacent land owners 

and fee hunters from adjacent private lands operate OHVs on BLM lands not open to the 

general public due to lack of public access. 

Sutton Mountain Area

Two WSA’s, Sutton Mountain and Pat’s Cabin are located northwest of Mitchell and were 

designated in March, 1996, after BLM inventoried approximately 39,370 acres of public 

land for wilderness character. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 111 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Deer, elk and upland game hunters use OHVs on designated routes to access portions of 

both WSA’s, but steep topography limits use. OHV users have driven past route closure 

signs and travel off designated routes. This generally occurs during deer and elk hunting 

seasons and during upland bird seasons. 

Johnson Heights/Rudio Mountain

In the Johnson Heights area public access is available up the Squaw Creek Road, 

approximately 8 miles where public access ends. This BLM road is primitive and not 

maintained. Consequently it gets use by OHVs. As with other areas the most popular use 

is to support hunting. 

Motorized use on Rudio Mountain occurs on old logging spur roads on all of these public 

lands. Primary use of OHVs is to support hunting with occasional sightseeing trips.

South Fork John Day 

Primary use of OHVs in this area occurs in the Battle Creek Road area is to support big 

game hunting although horn hunting is also popular during the winter and spring months. 

Local ranchers may also use OHVs to manage livestock.

Upper John Day

The Little Canyon Mountain project area includes 2,498 acres of public land designated 

as open to motorized use. A 104-acre mining pit is currently used as a play area by 

trucks, ATV’s and motorcycles. The pit area also provides access to many user created 

OHV routes in the area. An irrigation ditch runs through the pit and is often diverted by 

vehicle users to create a ‘mud-bogging’ area. OHV users test their skills against steep 

and varied terrain in the area. 

The Little Canyon Mountain area has a history of mining, and many vehicle routes are 

currently used to access mining claims. In addition to mining, the pit area has historically 

been used for dumping garbage, furniture, appliances, and old car bodies, in addition 

to target shooting. Recently, the pit area has been cleaned up and barriers have been 

constructed to prevent full size vehicles from entering the area and dumping trash. The 

BLM regularly receives complaints about OHV use in this area, especially regarding 

vehicle noise.

Dixie Creek is another area receiving significant OHV use. Past mining and timber 

management activities have resulted in numerous routes on public lands in this area. 

A county road provides access to BLM lands, though scattered private lands are 

intermingled with BLM lands throughout this area. The BLM public land boundaries in this 

area are not been marked, resulting in public land use mainly by local residents. ATV, 

motorcycle and vehicle use in this area have resulted in new OHV trails being created. 

OHV use associated with mining also occurs in the Dixie Creek area. 

Motorized use on Rudio Mountain occurs on old logging spur roads on all of these public 

lands. Primary use of OHVs is to support hunting with occasional sightseeing trips.

North Fork John Day River

Roads were developed in this area where needed to harvest trees and manage cattle. 

These roads are generally located in river and creek bottoms, but some old routes that 

skirt steep side hills were constructed to harvest timber. 

Since the acquisition of additional BLM lands, there has been a continued increase 

in motorized use violations of seasonal and permanent road closures. Trespass on 

private land also continues. These violations primarily occur during deer and elk hunting 

seasons. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 112 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

OHV use on adjacent U.S. Forest Service Managed Lands

OHV use on adjacent U.S. Forest Service Umatilla, Wallowa-Whitman and Malheur 

National Forests has also increased dramatically since the mid 1980’s. OHV use on these 

forests has become a year-round recreation activity. According to the tri-forest Current 

Management Situation Report for the U.S. Forest Service Blue Mountain Plan revision 

(AMS), OHV use is associated with hunting prior to and during hunting seasons, with 

vacation & leisure-time use during summer months, and with local residents year-round.

OHV Use Trends

OHV use of BLM public lands within the planning area has dramatically increased since 

the Two Rivers, John Day and Baker RMPs were finalized in the 1980s. Increased OHV 

use on BLM public lands in the planning area has resulted from more recreation users 

coming to eastern Oregon to hunt, fish, camp, and ride OHVs for fun. These OHV users 

continue to create unauthorized trails on BLM managed land.

OHV annual sales more than tripled between 1995 and 2003, to more than 1.1 million 

ATV’s and motorcycles sold in 2003. ATV’s continue to account for more than 70% of the 

OHV market. Cordell (2005) found that in the western region that included Oregon, the 

highest average OHV user days were attributed to the 51 and older age group. However, 

in just Oregon, the age group showing the greatest participation in OHV use was “under 

age 30” at 25.3%.

The 2003 State Park Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning (SCORP) 

survey for northeastern Oregon, which includes the JDBRMP area, found motorized 

activity increasing with almost all types of riders since 1987. Specifically, this survey 

found four-wheel use had increased 48 percent, OHV riding 47 percent, motorcycle use 

73 percent, and snowmobiling increased 10.1 percent. These trends are valid for both 

BLM and U.S. Forest Service public lands since these riding opportunities are primarily 

on these public lands in this region.

In addition to the increase in the popularity of OHVs, the advancement of OHV 

technology makes for more user-friendly four wheel drive vehicles which enable 

recreation users to go cross-country and cover broader ranges of terrain than before. 

Each year BLM receives complaints associated with ATV use, specifically vehicles in 

closed areas, trespass on private lands, wildlife disturbance, and soil and vegetation 

damage due to cross-country use over muddy terrain. Public lands in riparian areas are 

particularly susceptible to damage. For example, despite an OHV closure, users enter 

the John Day River channel at Clarno, Cottonwood, and other locations during low water 

periods and drive in the channel for many miles to access the river canyon. Some OHV 

users drive into the John Day riverbed at low flows to camp, leaving behind fire rings filled 

with trash that wash into the river when flows increase. 

Conflicts continue to increase between public land users and adjacent private land 

owners who are concerned about trespass. Unauthorized OHV use is most frequent 

on BLM public lands in the North Fork of the John Day, Sutton Mountain/Pat’s Cabin 

and Spring Basin areas. Unauthorized OHV use also occurs on public lands where no 

public access is available, such as public lands on both sides of the John Day River from 

Kimberly to Tumwater Falls, Rudio Mountain, and public lands south and south west of 

Kimberly. In addition trespass is common, during the fall hunting season in game units 

such as the Heppner unit, where OHV use on USFS and BLM roads and primitive routes 

has increased.

More user-developed trails on BLM public lands and also U.S. Forest Service designated 

Class I (ATV) and Class III (motorcycle) trails are available to ride than in past years. 

Despite this increased use, there are fewer BLM and U.S. Forest Service on-site law 

enforcement officers in popular OHV use areas to manage this use. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 113 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Commercial Recreation

Some individuals do not have the knowledge, skill, equipment, or time to engage in 

and plan float, fishing, or hunting trips or any of a range of recreational activities that 

take place within the John Day Basin. As a result guide, equipment rental, and shuttle 

operations have developed to serve this population. Currently guiding and boat rentals 

involving the delivery and pick up of boats at BLM managed sites is regulated by the 

BLM. The BLM issues Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) to authorize these uses 

on the public lands and related waters. SRPs enable the BLM to manage visitor use, 

protect natural and cultural resources, and as a mechanism to authorize commercial use, 

competitive use, vending, special area use, and organized group activities or events.

Within the planning area, BLM currently administers 26 river related SRPs authorizing 

boat rental, guiding, hunting, and fishing on specified sections of the John Day River. The 

activities and areas authorized vary by individual SRP. In addition, the BLM administers 

three upland SRPs for guided hunting during specific hunting seasons and in specified 

areas. The term of each SRP ranges from one to five years based on an annual 

evaluation of the permittee’s performance. 

Between 1996 and 2006, the number of commercial SRPs for the John Day River has 

dropped from 34 to 26 due to non-renewal of an SRP by the permittee, or non-renewal 

by BLM due to failure to meet permit stipulations. Outfitter and guide services offered 

may currently exceed public demand, based on the low number of user days reported 

by guides and outfitters. Most permitted guides and outfitters are not able to generate 

adequate income by operating solely on the John Day River. Their income from the John 

Day River is used to supplement other sources of income, including guiding and outfitting 

on other rivers or income derived from other businesses or employment.

The BLM has had a moratorium on issuing new commercial guide and outfitter permits 

for the John Day River since 1996. In 2001 the John Day River Plan required a needs 

assessment to identify a need for a particular river-related service before a new 

commercial guide or outfitter permit could be issued.

An estimated 15 vehicle shuttle services are used by John Day River boaters, and none 

are currently under BLM SRP because the services do not traverse more than one mile 

of BLM-managed land or water.

There have been no competitive event or vending SRPs issued within the planning area, 

although a John Day River Plan decision allows BLM to consider issuing vending permits 

at river launch points to benefit resource protection, such as for the sale of river toilets, 

firepans, or firewood. The BLM occasionally issues SRPs for organized group activities or 

events within the planning area. 

In 2001, the Prineville District limited the availability of new SRPs for commercial, 

competitive, and organized group use on public lands within the district boundary. New 

SRP proposals will be considered for authorization for activities or events not exceeding 

seven consecutive days in length annually which do not require preparation of an 

environmental assessment. The BLM has received numerous requests for new river 

SRPs as well as new upland SRPs for guided hunting, nature hikes, and paleontological 

tours.

Transportation and Access

Primary ground transportation within the planning area is provided over a mix of federal, 

state, and county roads and highways. Except for the extreme northern portions of the 

planning area most of the John Day basin is connected by basically rural roads. While the 

surface of the Federal Highways and many of the state and county routes are generally 

in good condition these roads cross difficult terrain and wind around and over rivers, 

streams, canyons, rimrock, and mountains. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 114 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Federal Interstate, State Highways, & County Roads

BLM managed lands are accessible from federal Interstate, state highways, county roads, 

local roads and private residences. Widespread access to BLM managed public lands 

provides opportunities for a variety of recreation opportunities, range, timber and mineral 

utilization and helps provide access to different land ownerships. Local communities are 

connected by a road system that traverses and meanders through the Eastern Oregon 

landscape.

Interstate 84 parallels part of the northern end of the planning boundary along the 

Columbia River. This interstate is a major route used by travelers and commercial trucks 

between the western and eastern portions of the country. Recreationists and other public 

land users from the Portland and Seattle areas also use this interstate highway in their 

trek to public lands in the planning area.

U.S. Highway 26 is a major travel corridor through the heart of the planning area and 

extends in an east-west direction. U.S. Highway 395 bisects the eastern part of the 

planning area from North to South. US Highway 97 extends in a North – South direction 

from Madras to Biggs and forms part of the western JDBRMP planning area boundary. 

BLM GIS Road database; 2006

Table 13: Summary of U.S. and State Highway Mileage within the Planning Area

County Interstate, U.S. or State Highway Miles

Baker County Total: 0

Gilliam I-84 51.53

Gilliam SR 19 52.99

Gilliam SR 206 39.35

Gilliam SR 74 8.05

County Total: 151.93

Grant US 395 80.25

Grant US 26 76.55

Grant SR 402 34.85

Grant SR 19 19.01

Grant SR 7 7.48

County Total: 218.14

Jefferson County Total: 0

Morrow SR 207 0.06

County Total: 0.06

Sherman US 97 47.80

Sherman SR 206 16.06

Sherman I – 84 10.06

Sherman SR 216 0.50

County Total: 74.42

Umatilla US 395 2.70

 County Total: 2.70

Wasco SR 218 13.35

Wasco US 97 3.17

 County Total: 16.52

Wheeler SR 19 50.13

Wheeler US 26 45.88

Wheeler SR 207 39.79

Wheeler SR 218 19.24

 County Total 155.03

Grand Total: 619.10
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 115 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Estimated County Road mileage from BLM GIS road database; 2006

In addition to the above routes, State Highways and county roads provide access within 

the planning area. These state highways and county roads connect local communities, 

and ranches, to the John Day River, BLM, Forest Service and National Park lands. These 

routes also provide for travel within Eastern Oregon and to adjacent states. Table 13 

summarizes Interstate, U.S. and State Highway mileage within the planning area by county.

Although state and many county roads are paved, many roads are crooked and traverse 

hilly topography, increasing travel time between communities. Some county roads are 

also graveled, increasing potential for sliding off roads. During winter months travel 

between communities requires longer driving times and is frequently hazardous. In 

addition, limited county road funding limits road maintenance, road re-construction, sign 

and ditch maintenance, and snow plowing. Table 14 identifies mileage of county road 

types within the planning area, which shows a predominance of gravel, cinder or primitive 

roads maintained by counties within the planning area.

Roads Across BLM Lands

Within the planning area, a wide variety of road types are located on BLM public lands. 

Not all are maintained by BLM. Many of these roads are maintained and managed by 

entities such as the Oregon Department of Transportation, county road departments, and 

utility companies. These various road types are illustrated in figure 31 below. 

Table 14: County Transportation System in the John Day Basin RMP Area

County Paved Road Gravel, Cinder Primitive 

Surface Road Total Miles:

Baker 0 0 0

Gilliam 21 429 450

Grant 215 353 568

Jefferson 0 60 60

Morrow 0 0.9 0.9

Sherman 86 190 276

Umatilla 0 0 0

Wasco 0 22 22

Wheeler 36 335 371

Total 358 1390 1748

Figure 31: Miles of 

Road on BLM Land by 

Surface Type

Source: BLM GIS road database; 2006
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 116 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

BLM Transportation System

There are three classes of routes in the BLM transportation system: Roads, Primitive 

Roads, and Trails. A Road is a route declared a road by the owner, managed for use 

by low-clearance vehicles having four or more wheels, and maintained for regular and 

continuous use. A primitive Road is a route managed for use by four-wheel drive or high 

clearance vehicles. These routes do not normally meet any BLM road design standards. 

A Trail is a route managed for human-powered, stock, or off-highway vehicle forms of 

transportation or for historical or heritage values. 

The existing primitive road and trail network in the planning area is a combination of 

historic county roads, BLM maintained roads, roads once constructed that are maintained 

only by the passage of users, and trails created by a variety of users. Existing routes 

have been constructed in the past for livestock or timber management, mining, and travel 

between cities and ranches. Many of these roads were created several decades ago and 

continue to be used, while others are no longer useable by motorized users. No standard 

exists for the retirement or obliteration of roads after they have served their functional 

purpose. 

Recreationists, private land owners, and permittees use authorized and unauthorized 

primitive roads and trails to reach destinations throughout the John Day Basin area. BLM 

maintenance of primitive roads is done primarily on an “as-needed” basis. Unauthorized 

use on existing routes and cross-country motorized use has continued to increase 

annually. These actions continue to result in road rutting, soil compaction, increased 

muddy water runoff, disturbance to wildlife and trespass on private lands (discussions 

with Heidi Mottl, John Morris, and Greg Hampton, LEA, 2006).

BLM Roads 

Lower John Day River 

Though considered part of the Lower John Day the area immediately north of Clarno is 

displayed on the Sutton Mountain Area Map. From the town of Clarno, approximately four 

miles of BLM un-maintained primitive road extends north to a locked gate just beyond the 

Sorefoot Creek drainage. There are no other BLM managed roads across BLM lands in 

the Lower John Day Area. (See Map 10: Lower John Day Transportation and Map 11: 

Sutton Mountain Transportation) 

Sutton Mountain Area

In the Sutton Mountain area several small proportions of BLM maintained roads exist. 

North of Mitchell, an old logging road extends east to west from Highway 207 to Bridge 

Creek Road. This road is called the Myers Canyon road (BLM road 7548) and is a BLM 

maintained gravel road. The Priest Hole Rd. (BLM road 7559) is a BLM maintained 

primitive road which extends from Bridge Creek Road down to the John Day River and 

then east to the Twickenham-Bridge Creek-Cutoff County Road (see Map 11: Sutton 

Mountain Transportation.). 

Rudio Mountain and Johnson Heights Areas

Along the Franks Creek Road (BLM Road 6203), BLM has a reciprocal agreement with 

a large land owner, D.R. Johnson, which specifies that whoever uses this 9.5 mile road 

segment maintains it. BLM maintains approximately 7 miles of the Timber Basin Road, 

which is open for BLM administrative and public use. Holmes Creek Road is maintained 

by BLM and extends south for approximately 8 miles until public access ends at private 

land. Just north of the Cant Ranch the very rough, primitive and un-maintained Squaw 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 117 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Creek Road extends approximately 8 miles until private lands prevent further public 

access. (see Map 12: Rudio Mountain Johnson Heights Transportation).

South Fork John Day River

The BLM maintains approximately 23 miles of gravel road on the South Fork John 

Day River. This road is maintained on an annual basis whereas all other BLM road 

maintenance in the planning area is done on an as needed basis. Grant County Road 

Department maintains approximately 1.5 miles of paved road and 7.5 miles of gravel road 

along this river. 

Other routes off the South Fork John Day River Road are open seasonally. Jackass 

Creek and Murderer’s Creek roads are limited to designated routes and open seasonally. 

This area is managed as a Co-operative Travel Management Area by the BLM, USFS 

and ODFW. 

Two other areas in the South Fork John Day area are open seasonally: Battle Creek 

Road extends south of Highway 26 and Indian Creek road is open seasonally. (see Map 

13: South Fork John Day River Transportation)

Upper John Day 

There are 17 miles of roads on very steep terrain through public lands in the Little Canyon 

Mountain area. Many routes have no drainage built into them and rut easily due to high 

clay content. Many of these routes are used recreationally by OHV enthusiasts. Some 

routes provide access to mining claims (see Map 14: Upper John Day Transportation). 

North of Prairie City along County Road 58,a BLM spur road extends to the Malhuer 

National Forest Boundary along Dixie creek. This road is not maintained by the BLM but 

provides public access to the Malhuer National Forest in this area. 

North Fork John Day River Roads

The North Fork John Day River Access Road (BLM road 7569) is a BLM maintained road 

following the North Fork of the John Day River from its intersection with Highway 395 

downstream to the Wrightman Canyon Road (County Road 15). 

A primitive road exists downriver from the Wrightman Canyon Road (County Road 15), 

to the Wall Creek road (County Road 31). This primitive, un-maintained road parallels 

the north and west banks of the North Fork John Day River. There are 7.15 miles of road 

on BLM public lands and 7.85 miles of road on private land. No public easements exist 

through the private lands and no easements have ever been pursued or obtained by BLM 

or any other public agency. Private land owners have placed gates across this road in the 

early 1990’s and in 2005. These gates have frequently been pulled out by users. 

Two primitive, seasonally open roads lead to the north from the North Fork John Day 

River Access Road. The first, up Jericho Creek has a small spur road but either direction 

the road soon ends. Near the end of public access on the North Fork road the Mallory 

Creek Road extends into the Umatilla National Forest. There has been no maintenance 

on these roads to date. Several primitive roads that are open seasonally extend from the 

Umatilla National Forest BLM managed lands. Each of these routes ends near the top of 

rimrock overlooking the North Fork John Day River several hundred feet below. 

Public access along the North Fork is available north of the city of Monument for 7.6 

miles along County Road 31, to Wall Creek. This county road extends north, past Wall 

Creek, to BLM and Forest Service lands. At this point several un-maintained BLM roads 

are open seasonally from April 16 to November 30. (See Map 15: North Fork John Day 

Transportation).












John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 130 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Special Road Designation

State Scenic Byway 

The Journey Through Time Scenic Byway, designated by the Oregon Department of 

Transportation is approximately 286 miles long and starts at Biggs, Oregon and ends in 

Baker City. This Scenic Byway explores the history and geology of the route, connecting 

small towns from north central Oregon to Baker City and the Oregon Trail Historic Center 

in eastern Oregon.

BLM Back Country Byway

BLM’s Back County Byways program designates special roads that cross BLM land and 

are noted for their scenic attributes. There are two types of Back Country Byways.. Type 

1 byways have a paved or all-weather surface. Type 2 byways are generally not paved 

but frequently have improved gravel surface.

The South Fork John Day River Back Country Byway is the only BLM byway within the 

JDBRMP. This Type 1 & 2 byway parallels the South Fork of the John Day River through 

its windy canyon for approximately 50 miles from Dayville to the Malheur National Forest 

boundary. Fishing, hiking, primitive camping, and excellent views are available along this 

roadway. 

Forest Service Byways

The Blue Mountain Scenic Byway offers a variety of scenery along with historical sites 

and numerous recreational opportunities. Several sites of national or state significance 

are the crossing of the Oregon Trail (a National Historic District), the Wild and Scenic 

John Day River, and the North Fork John Day Wilderness. Also located along this route is 

a state-managed wildlife area and remnants of historic mining activities and settlements. 

The area traversed by this scenic route contains one of the largest Rocky Mountain elk 

herds in the nation. 

The Elkhorn Scenic Byway is located on the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. This 

Scenic Byway is a 106-mile loop through the Elkhorn Mountains; a country rich in 

scenery, history, geology, and natural resources. Different recreational opportunities are 

available along the way, including hunting, fishing, camping, picnicking, boating, skiing, 

and hiking. Special points of interest include gold mining operations and the historical 

narrow-gauge railroad grade. Signs along the way mark special points of interest 

and road junctions. The entire route is paved, however in the winter the route is not 

snowplowed between Granite and Anthony Lakes.

BLM Road Traffic Trends

Patterns of use on BLM managed roads within the planning area have not been 

systematically studied. It appears that OHV use on BLM roads, primitive roads and 

trails continues to increase throughout the planning area, especially during deer and elk 

hunting seasons. BLM public lands tend to be more popular and receive more OHV use, 

since OHV access is restricted on Forest Service lands adjacent to the planning area. 

The OHV resource area profile, describes user created trails and OHV user trends in 

more detail. Currently an assessment of use patterns on existing roads, primitive roads 

and trails is underway.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 131 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Recreation Access Trends

Private roads that were once open to the public are often no longer available for access 

to public land as private landowners place gates across these private roads. Recreational 

use of public lands has joined grazing and timber management as a primary use. 

Limitations on public access to scattered public lands and a transportation system that 

does not accommodate changing user needs has contributed to resource damage and 

increased the incidence of trespass on private lands.

Reduction in access has occurred as roads across private lands are decommissioned 

and open roads are not repaired. The location and distribution of scattered BLM lands 

require public land users to become familiar with adjacent private ownership patterns 

and routes open for public use. The fact that some BLM lands are isolated from public 

access has also led to trespass. Patterns of land ownership frequently leads to confusion 

by recreational users and sometimes in intentional trespass on privately owned lands. 

The Johnson Heights area accessed by Squaw Creek Road experiences some of the 

most persistent hunter-landowner conflicts in the planning area. The many isolated BLM 

parcels in this area are coveted by hunters and some attempt to cross private lands at 

the end of public access in order to reach these lands.

Some ranches that in the past afforded neighbors access to BLM managed lands have 

been divided or bought by “outsiders” who often manage for fee hunting. These changes 

in land ownership exacerbate the already limited access. This represents a change in 

landowner mindset, since they have historically allowed the public to drive on private 

roads to reach public lands. 

While the public at large may be excluded from enjoying BLM managed lands surrounded 

by private lands, the Private landowners and their guests frequently use OHVs to access 

public land for deer, elk, sheep and upland bird hunting. 

Similarly commercial hunting guides pay a fee to gain access to public lands through 

private property. Some motorized users have attempted to access public lands through 

private property with and without landowner permission. 

Motorized use is no longer available to the public in the Spring Basin WSA. This 5,982 

acre area is located near the east bank of the John Day River, approximately 3 miles 

south of Clarno. In past years, motorized use occurred on approximately nine miles of 

undeveloped vehicle routes in this area. This access requires crossing a 40 acre parcel 

of private land, which has been closed to the public by the landowner.

Rights-of-way and Easements

BLM land in the planning area has 249 miles of easements and 129 miles of granted 

Rights-of-way involving roads and utilities. 

Easements are acquired by the BLM in order to use the land of another for a special 

purpose or access. Rights of way are granted by the BLM to others for various purposes 

which include easements, leases, permits, or licenses to occupy, use, or traverse public 

lands. Rights-of-Way are authorizations for reservoirs, canals, ditches flumes, laterals, 

pipes, pipelines, tunnels, and other appurtenances for the storage and distribution of 

water; pipelines and other systems for the transportation of distribution of liquids and 

gases other than water or oil; transportation and distribution systems, and storage 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 132 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

facilities for solid materials; systems for generation, transmission, and distribution 

of electric energy; communications systems; roads, highways, trails, and other 

transportation facilities; and other systems and facilities which are in the public interest. 

Withdrawals

A withdrawal is a management tool used to implement resource management planning 

prescriptions. Withdrawals also represent a means to transfer administrative jurisdiction 

from one federal agency to another. In addition they are used to close public lands to 

some or all of the public land laws or mineral law, or to dedicate land for a specific public 

purpose. The restrictions generally segregate the lands from some or all the public land 

laws and some or all of the mining and mineral leasing laws for a specific period of time. 

Examples might include a dewatering limiting river flows or a withdrawal might close an 

area to non-metalliferous mining (cement quality limestone, diatomite etc.), but open to 

metal mining (gold, silver, mercury etc.). 

In the 1960’s federal inventories withdrew land along the John Day River anticipating the 

need for future hydroelectric dam sites. 

Currently the John Day Basin has spring, mineral, and power site withdrawals scattered 

throughout the planning area. 

Land Ownership

“People are moving in and staying. They don’t need the land to make a living.”

[Gilliam County Resident- JKA, 2006]

The Western landscape is dominated by open spaces broken by numerous plateaus, 

mountain ranges, occasionally fences and an increasing amount of urban and suburban 

areas. Historically, urban areas of the west specialized in the acquisition and distribution 

of products produced from the surrounding farms, ranches, and forests. The larger 

ranches were slowly divided and our modern transportation system was developed. Many 

urban centers are now surrounded by suburban areas, which are then bordered by hobby 

farms adjacent to public lands. 

In the John Day Basin planning area this transition from large landownership to a more 

fragmented ownership pattern has occurred more slowly than in many parts of the west. 

Many communities maintain a remnant dependency on the surrounding lands and have 

yet to fully experience the transition to a Western landscape characterized by suburban 

areas, and small farms surrounding urban areas. Settlement patterns are however 

changing, as long-time ranches are bought by wealthier urbanites who often purchase for 

recreation or conservation purposes (JKA, 2006). 

Ownership across the John Day Basin Planning area is dominated by Private 

landholdings which comprise 59 percent of the total 5.4 million acre planning area. USFS 

and BLM land make up 33 percent and 8 percent of the plan area respectively. State 

land, Indian Affairs, National Park, and Army Corps of Engineers make up less than 1 

percent of plan area ownership (See Map 1 and Figure 32).

The southern and eastern portions of the planning area contain a high proportion of 

public lands dominated by US forest Service land. These areas are characterized by 

USFS land in the higher elevations and BLM land in the lower elevations and drainages. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 133 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Passage of the Oregon Land Exchange Act in 2000 resulted in a land ownership 

adjustment in Northeast Oregon, primarily in Grant County. In exchange for public lands 

disposed of in this Act, the BLM acquired approximately 44 thousand acres along the 

North Fork of the John Day River. 

Leases and Permits (Recreation and Public Purposes Act)

Temporary land use permits or leases may be used to authorize such activities as 

trespass prior to resolution, access, storage, apiary sites national guard or military 

reserve training, engineering feasibility studies, and other miscellaneous short-term 

activities. In the John Day Basin Planning Area there are numerous agricultural leases on 

BLM lands for which fees are not collected. 

The Recreation and Public Purposes Act (R&PP) authorizes the sale or lease of BLM 

managed lands for recreational or public purposes to State and local governments and to 

qualified nonprofit organizations. In the John Day Basin planning area the transfer of land 

utilized for a dump to Prairie City under the R&PP Act has been attempted but has not 

occurred.

Water

Water is the fundamental resource of the John Day Basin. It enables plants to grow 

and is essential for wildlife. People need water to drink, for play, and to support livestock 

grazing, irrigation, mining and other economic enterprises. Who gets water and when and 

how they get it are questions that have dominated the west for over a century and a half. 

These questions are answered through the allocation of water rights. Surface and 

ground water are the property of the State and the Oregon Water Resources Department 

administers the water to those who have a water right. 

Water rights are important tools that have allowed BLM to accomplish a wide variety 

of their multiple use objectives. Water rights can be used to extract minerals, provide 

wildlife habitat, and preserve aquatic life. The majority of water rights on BLM land are for 

irrigation. BLM actively manages over 700 acres of the irrigation water rights under the 

John Day Wild and Scenic River Plan and the Sutton Mountain Coordinated Resource 

Management Plan. The remaining 1175 acres of irrigation occur on scattered pieces of 

agricultural land through out the plan area. Approximately one third of BLM’s water rights 

are related to mining. The majority of the mining water rights are located near John Day 

on Little Canyon Mountain. This area was hydraulically mined for gold in the late 1800s 

and early 1900s. Many of the water rights completely overlap each other and include a 

Figure 32: Land 

Ownership in the 

JDBRMP area

Source: BLM GIS database, 2006
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 134 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

200 acre irrigation water right. BLM owns approximately 220 different state administered 

water rights. BLM actively manages 23 of these. Based on the Oregon Water Resources 

Department data, between approximately 50 and 70 cfs could be diverted under BLM 

water rights. This water is scattered across the basin and is not from a single stream 

channel. The top few sources include the John Day River, Bridge Creek, the North Fork 

John Day River, Rock Creek, Bear Creek, and Little Pine Creek.

The value of BLM’s water rights in the John Day basin is magnified by the fact that the 

basin water is over allocated (more water rights than water available) for a large portion 

of the year. 

The monthly water availability is illustrated in Figure 33: Water Availability in the John Day 

Basin 4 out of 5 years.

Most water use requires that water be diverted from the river. BLM land within the John 

Day Basin contains both points of diversions and places of use for state appropriative 

water rights. 

Less than half of BLM owned points of diversions supply only BLM lands (see figure 

34). Rights of way are required for most conveyances of water across BLM land. 

On the ground conditions are 

continually changing and water 

users continually ask to upgrade, 

move, and change the construction 

of water transportation and diversion 

facilities. These require rights of 

ways when they cross BLM land. The 

interconnected nature of these water 

rights indicates the importance of 

cooperative management to this key 

resource.

BLM also holds federally reserved 

water rights for the John Day Wild and 

Scenic Rivers. The John Day River 

Plan identified the State Scenic Flows 

as interim instream flow goals until an 

instream flow study is needed for the 

adjudication of the federally reserved 

water rights. 

Many of the BLM ponds and springs 

may also be federally reserved water 

rights under PWR107. Inventories of 

ponds and springs are incomplete 

at this time. Some have been issued 

permits, applications, or certificates 

Figure 33: Water 

Availability in the 

John Day Basin 4 

out of 5 years

Water Availability in the John Day Basin 4 out of 5 years

(Diversions)

500

1000

2000

2000

2000

500

500 500

500 500

500

2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

Water Use in cfs

Water Available For Diverted

Use

State Scenic Water Flows

Certificated Instream Flows

Consumptive Use

Natural Stream Flow four out

of five years (labeled in cfs)
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 135 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

from the State of Oregon, but many have not. PWR 107 are the result of an executive 

order made by Calvin Coolidge in1926. This order withdrew every smallest legal 

subdivision of the public land surveys and all lands within one quarter mile of important 

springs and waterholes on unsurveyed lands. The primary purpose of this withdrawal was 

for current or future livestock watering and human consumption. This withdrawal includes 

springs and waterholes on land that was vacant and unappropriated and unreserved as 

of April 17, 1926. This constitutes a federal reserve right with a 1926 priority date. Springs 

and waterholes do not need to be currently inventoried in order to qualify, but it is useful 

to have the inventory completed to ensure that the water right is appropriately tracked 

during land tenure adjustments.

Livestock Grazing

Grazing is one of the most visible and established uses of BLM managed lands. The 

public lands are an integral part of ranching in the area because of their scattered 

distribution and ability to provide forage during a critical time of the year. There are 

many ranches with several hundred acres of public grazing land scattered throughout. 

Generally these lands are best managed with the adjacent private lands since it is not 

practical to fence them separately. The larger blocks of several thousand acres are 

easily managed separately from private lands. These blocks of BLM managed lands are 

generally located at elevations where they provide excellent forage from early spring to 

early summer. This is an important transition period as livestock move from winter feeding 

areas to summer ranges. It also has utility as livestock return in the fall. Livestock grazing 

is authorized on 432,600 acres or 95 percent of public land managed by the BLM in the 

planning area. Because BLM lands in the John Day Basin consisted of mostly scattered 

tracks these lands were not included in a grazing district and are managed under Section 

15 of the Taylor Grazing Act. 

Under Section 15 of the Taylor Grazing Act BLM lands within the planning area are now 

leased for grazing on an AUM (animal unit month) basis. The number of AUMs available 

was determined by range surveys completed between 1967 and 1974 in the John 

Day River basin. These surveys established the grazing use levels that continue to be 

authorized today.

There are 229 grazing allotments which vary in size from 22 acres of public land to over 

25,000 (Map 16). Since the distribution of public land is generally scattered, the number 

of acres in any one allotment tends to be small. The majority of allotments, 63 percent 

of the total, contain less than 1,000 acres of public land. A listing of the allotments and 

Figure 34: Percent of 

Ownership of Lands 

supplied water from 

BLM Owned Points of 

diversion


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 138 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

associated acres and AUMs is found in Appendix C. The total number of active AUMs is 

28,500 . As with the acreages, the number of AUMs per allotment is generally small, 71 

percent or 163 allotments contain 100 or less AUMs. Fifty allotments contain 10 or less 

AUMs. 

The BLM Prineville District completed an Ecological Site Inventory of the public lands 

in the lower John Day River basin in 1982. This inventory identified ecological sites, 

delineated geographical areas across the basin on the basis of these ecological sites, 

and assessed the ecological condition of the geographical areas with respect to what was 

believed to be their potential. 

The Two Rivers (USDI-BLM, 1986a) and the John Day (USDI-BLM, 1985) Resource 

Management Plans (RMP) prescribed monitoring, evaluation, and planning efforts to 

improve resource conditions in these scattered tracts. The RMPs prescribed priorities 

based on the presence of sensitive public resources, rating grazing allotments as 

“Improve” (I), “Maintain” (M) or “Custodial” (C). There are presently 79 Improve 

allotments, 25 Maintain, 125 Custodial, and three not assigned to a category. Generally, 

the resource conditions in the majority of allotments have been steadily improving. 

Grazing practices have changed for the benefit of vegetation, but juniper encroachment 

continues even with changes in grazing management. 

A total of 100 allotments in the planning area have completed assessments, which is 

44 percent of the total number. Out of the ones completed, 40 percent are meeting all 

standards and 60 percent are failing one standard or more. Of allotments that are failing, 

only 14 (23 percent) have livestock as a causal factor and 46 (77 percent) have some 

other factor(s) contributing to the failure. The main reasons for allotments not meeting 

standards, where livestock are not the cause, are increasing juniper stands, noxious 

weed infestations, and water quality. Overall it appears livestock are a primary contributor 

in a minority of the grazing allotments not meeting the Standards for Rangeland Health. 

In these allotments the BLM is required to take corrective action so livestock will not be 

the cause in the future. Once all the grazing allotments are assessed, there will be a clear 

picture of where problem areas exist and in most cases, why.

Urbanization and changes in ranch management are moving the emphasis on livestock 

grazing to one of hunting and recreation pursuits. More ranches are being acquired by 

individuals from large metropolitan areas who either hire a ranch manager, lease grazing 

to a neighboring rancher, or take nonuse. The trend is still small in the John Day Basin, 

but it appears to be growing.

Forest Products

To the casual visitor traveling through the John Day Basin forest resources on BLM 

lands are not immediately visible. And it true that commercially valuable trees are not as 

widespread on BLM managed lands as on some private and Forest Service managed 

lands. Nevertheless these resources are valuable. Forest vegetation has the potential to 

provide both biological/physical and socioeconomic benefits. 

This section of the AMS will address Forest Products: timber production (sawlogs), 

biomass (wood chips and hog fuel), and small vegetative products (firewood, posts, 

poles, etc.). The size, location, accessibility, and type of material available vary 

throughout the analysis area. Based on these limitations generating Forest Products is 

not feasible on all areas of forest vegetation. Map 6: Key Vegetation Elements shows 

timber management zones. These zones have sufficient forested resources to provide 

forest products if production is consistent with management objectives.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 139 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Prior to the Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 the BLM managed forested stands 

were scattered parcels throughout all of Grant County, in the eastern portion of Wheeler 

County and in the southern portions of Umatilla and Morrow counties. Forest lands 

consisted of 44,465 acres approximately 32,323 in the John Day and Two Rivers areas 

respectively. Of these lands 30,962 acres and 11,010 acres of commercial forest land 

was designated for the management of timber production. (John Day RMP Draft, 1984 

and pg. 40, Two Rivers RMP Draft, 1985). The largest acreages of forest lands occurred 

in the Rudio Mountain, Dixie Creek, Little Canyon Mountain and South Fork John Day 

River areas.

As a result of the Oregon Land Exchange act of 2000 7,567 acres of forest land were 

disposed and 11,994 acres were acquired; however not all lands disposed were within 

the planning area. Disposed lands consisted of scattered 40 and 80 acre tracts and 

larger blocks of forest stands were acquired. Most of the acquired forest stands are 

located along the North Fork of the John Day River.

The net change within the planning area amounted to an increase of 3,407 ac. of forest 

land containing 1,850 MBF. Total forested lands within the planning area before the 

Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 was 76,887 acres and is currently 80,294. Of the 

BLM managed forest lands within the planning area 47,679 acres (post Oregon Land 

Exchange Act Of 2000) have potential as commercial forestland. 

Commercial forestland on BLM is very minor (less than 1%) in relation to the total 

commercial forestland within the Interior Columbia basin. Within the Interior Columbia 

basin the BLM oversees management of approximately six million acres of commercial 

forestland (Status of the Interior Columbia Basin, PNW-GTR-385, p. 56). 

Current Uses

Prior to 1985 the forest vegetation was managed primarily for the production of timber 

while enhancing other resource values. It would be nice to know how many acres of 

forestland had been subject to harvest compared to what follows.

Within the John Day RMP area, between 1987 and 1997 a total of eleven timber 

management projects and four modifications to these projects were offered and sold. 

Total volume sold during this eleven year time span equaled 24,345 mbf (thousand board 

feet) which is an average of 2,213 mbf annually.

Since 1997, there have been four timber sales offered and sold. All four projects were 

timber salvage projects. All projects included the salvage of dead and dying trees but 

only two projects involved some commercial thinning of green trees in order to attain 

prescribed basal areas. None of these projects occurred within the area managed 

under the Two Rivers RMP during this same time span. During this nine year period 

(1997-2005) 8,604 mbf of volume was offered. That’s an average of 956 mbf annually. 

According to the John Day and Two Rivers RMPs 32,220 mbf could have been 

sustainably offered during this same nine year period.

The average annual rate of 956 mbf is typically enough volume to supply local mills for a 

period of a few weeks. Even during the most active of timber sale years the BLM in the 

past had been responsible for 1/3 or less of the necessary volume to support local mills.

Demand for timber in the planning area will continue as long as there is a demand for 

wood products. If the current passive management trend continues, this demand will not 

be fulfilled.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 140 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Firewood

The current availability of firewood meets or exceeds demand. In recent years BLM has 

been issuing permits for approximately 120 cords per year. Prior to 1985 there was a 

greater demand for firewood. At that time firewood from logging slash was considered a 

waste product and all permits were free use. More than fifty permits were issued annually 

within the John Day RMP area. In the early 1980s the BLM started selling firewood 

permits for two dollars per cord. The current cost for a firewood permit is five dollars per 

cord.

In addition to forest species, juniper slash is also made available for firewood. 

Occasionally slash piles have become available and the BLM issue free use permits in 

order to utilize the more undesirable material for firewood. In recent years there appears 

to be an increase in the amount of illegal firewood removal.

Other Vegetative Products

Demand for other vegetative products (post, pole, cones, juniper bows, biomass) has 

been steady. These products are made available upon request, generally 5-10 permits 

per year primarily for post and poles. Current supply meets or exceeds demand and is 

expected to remain adequate in the future.

The removal of forest biomass for energy production has been considered within the 

planning area. Although sufficient biomass exists on BLM lands for energy production 

many of these lands are scattered with limited access. This reduces the economic 

feasibility with current technology and infrastructure. There is a potential benefit to the 

wildland-urban interface (WUI) from removal of biomass; however, the amount of WUI in 

the planning are would not provide a substantial or sustainable amount of biomass.

Prairie Wood Products in Grant County has two cogeneration plants associated with its 

mills. While the area of forestland controlled by the BLM is small, future juniper removal 

could supplement energy production need at these plants. In 1988 Grant and Wheeler 

counties had juniper trees on more than half of their non-timber land area, indicating an 

expansion of juniper into many areas that formerly had little to no juniper (PNW-GTR-464, 

1999). 

Trend

Timber harvest volumes have declined across most ownerships since the early 1990s. 

The decline has been the most pronounced on Federal lands during that time frame. 

Figure 35, represents statewide trends. Trends within the John Day Basin are similar.

The availability of firewood material is expected to continue to increasing. The increase 

of the material is a result of the increase in mortality due to insects and diseases. As 

stressed trees die they lose their commercial value and are often available for firewood. 

However, only a small percentage of these dying trees are within a reasonable distance 

of open roads and available for firewood use. Demand for firewood in the planning area 

has been minimal and is not expected to dramatically increase within the next 10 years.

As energy demands increase and additional technologies are developed, demand for 

biomass is expected to increase and become more economically feasible.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 141 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Fire and Fuels

Fire risk, priorities for suppression and fuels treatments, and operating procedures 

have been addressed 2004 Central Oregon Fire Management Service (COFMS) Fire 

Management Plan. The COFMS organization facilitates full collaboration among member 

Federal agencies and between the Federal agencies; and State, local, and private 

entities results in a mobile fire management work force available to the full range of public 

needs. 

The Fire Management Plan designated six Fire Management Units throughout COFMS 

(see figure 36: Central Oregon Fire Management Plan—Fire Management Units)

Fire Management Unit 1 – Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)

COFMS has defined WUI as a 11/2 mi area surrounding each designated WUI 

community as well as around each intermixed polygon mapped by Oregon Department of 

Forestry. The areas meeting these criteria include:

The Fossil Beds area is composed of the area surrounding the John Day Fossil Beds 

National Monument. Vegetation is grass and shrub steppe.

The Monument area is located adjacent to the community of Monument and includes the 

communities of Kimberly, and Spray. Vegetation is primarily grass and sage with some 

timbered areas.

The Wheeler area includes WUI associated with the communities of Fossil and 

surrounding areas. Vegetation is dominated by grass and shrubs.

Other WUI communities include: Antelope, Anton, Arlington, Austin, Big Muddy Ranch, 

Biggs Junction, Canyon City, Clarno, Condon, Dayville, Grass Valley, John Day, Kent, 

Long Creek, Mayville, McDonald Crossings/Rock Creek, Mitchell, Moro, Mount Vernon, 

Prairie City, Seneca, Service Creek, Shaniko, South Fork John Day, Twickenham, and 

Wasco.

Figure 35: Timber 

Harvesting 

in Oregon by 

Ownership
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 142 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP) are being developed for many of the 

communities within the planning area. The Grant County CWPP is completed. The 

Wheeler County CWPP is in progress. Gilliam County is in the process of developing a 

Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan that will address the threat of wildfire to the communities 

within the county.

Fire Management Unit 2 – Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas

This FMU consists of designated Wilderness Study Areas on Prineville BLM District. 

Vegetation is composed of grass/shrub lands with timbered slopes of juniper and 

ponderosa pine.

Fire Management Unit 3 – Two Rivers

This FMU consists of lands administered by the BLM, primarily located along the 

Deschutes and John Day River corridors. The FMU consists of steep canyons associated 

with the Deschutes and John Day Rivers. Soils are generally shallow with surface rock. 

Vegetation is dominated by grass and shrubs. Elevation ranges from 2500 to about 500 

feet.

Limited road access and irregular 

land ownership patterns result in 

poor emergency ingress/egress. 

The John Day River corridor 

has a high fire risk and is prone 

to weedy plant invasion. Much 

of the BLM lands along the 

John day River adjoin private 

lands. The private land (mostly 

range and farmland) creates an 

agricultural interface near the 

river where river access is limited.

Fire Management Unit 4 

– Brothers

This FMU consists of lands 

administered by the BLM, 

primarily located in the southern 

and eastern portions of COFMS. 

A few scattered parcels of land 

within this FMU are located in 

the northern portions of COFMS 

within Sherman and Wasco 

Counties.

The FMU consists primarily of flat 

and rolling hill topography. Soils 

are generally shallow developed 

from basalt flows, with some 

areas of thin surface volcanic ash 

deposits. Vegetation is dominated 

by sage and other shrubs, 

Figure 36: Central 

Oregon Fire 

Management Plan—

Fire Management 

Units
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 143 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

perennial and annual grasses, and juniper. Ponderosa pine is present in foothill areas 

and adjacent to national forest areas. Elevation ranges from 2500 to 3500 feet.

Fire Management Unit 5 – Ochoco

This FMU includes the main portion of the Ochoco National Forest located near the 

center of the FPU. The FMU is located primarily within Crook, Wheeler, and Grant 

Counties.

The FMU consists of variable topography, vegetation and fuel types. Ponderosa pine 

and mixed conifer stands are abundant. Juniper and grass/sage types are also common. 

Scab stringer types are found east of Big Summit Prairie.

Fire Management Unit 6 – Deschutes (Does not occur within the planning area).

Fire Ecology

In this analysis, wildfire risk conditions are identified assigning a Fire Condition Class 

(FRCC) (USDA and USDI, 2001). Assessing FRCC can help guide management 

objectives and set priorities for treatments. The classification is based on a relative 

measure describing the degree of departure from the historical natural fire regime. This 

departure results in changes to one (or more) of the following ecological components: 

vegetation characteristics (species composition, structural stages, stand age, canopy 

closure, and mosaic pattern); fuel composition; fire frequency, severity, and pattern; and 

other associated disturbances (e.g. insect and diseased mortality, grazing, and drought).

FRCC classes serve as generalized wildfire risk rankings. The risk of loss of desired 

ecological conditions due to unwanted wildland fire increases from Fire Condition Class 1 

(lowest risk) to Fire Condition Class 3 (highest risk) within a given fire regime” (USDA and 

USDI, 2001). (see Figure 37: Fire Regime Condition Class).

Figure 37 indicates that about 65% of BLM managed lands within the Blue Mountains 

Ecoregion are in Condition class 2 or 3 and are outside the natural range of variability. 

The figure also indicates that over 95 percent of BLM Lands within the Columbia Plateau 

Ecoregion are outside the natural range of variability

Figure 39 Indicates FRCC is similar between BLM lands and those not managed by BLM 

(Other). The majority of the landscape is in FRCC 2 and 3 (Blue Mt. EcoRegion3: BLM 

- 67% / Other - 80%, Columbia Basin EcoRegion3: BLM - 97% / Other - 99%). Of note is 

the extreme departure within the Columbia Basin primarily due to agricultural conversion. 

While conditions on BLM lands are similar to those seen on surrounding lands, BLM has 

the potential to influence approximately 8% of the landbase within the planning area. 

In general most shrub steppe/juniper habitats are in Condition Classes 2 and 3. Most 

of the forested lands are in Condition Class 3. Many of the grass habitats on BLM 

managed lands have missed one or more disturbance events; however, the vegetative 

characteristics and fire intensities have not substantially changed. There are significant 

changes in the grass vegetation types throughout the planning area due to non-native 

annual grass expansion, noxious weed, and agricultural conversion. These conditions 

would put these lands in the Condition Class 3 rating. These sites would require 

extensive management actions (Restoration treatments) to allow them to function 

appropriately after disturbances such as fire.

Historical Fire Occurrence

Historic Fire Occurrence data below is a summary of the entire COFMS area contained 

in the Central Oregon Fire Management Plan. Relative acreages of FMUs by Land 

Management Agency can be ascertained from the following map.


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 146 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Fire Management Unit 1: WUI—There have been a total of 1,101 fires within this FMU 

during the period 1980 – 2002. The average annual occurrence is 50 fires per year. About 

50% of the fires are lightning caused. Forty-three fires have exceeded 100 acres in the 

last 10 years, and 15 were larger than 1,000 acres. Average annual expected burn acres 

is about 5,540 acres.

Fire Management Unit 2 – WSA: There have been a total of 781 fires within this FMU 

during the period 1980 – 2002. The average annual occurrence is 35 fires per year. About 

80% of the fires are lightning caused. Twelve fires have exceeded 100 acres in the last 

10 years, and 6 were larger than 1,000 acres. Average annual expected burn acres is 

about 1,250 acres.

Figure 37: Fire 

Regime Condition 

Class

Figure 38: Rapid 

Assessment Fire 

Regime Condition 

Class – BLM Managed 

Lands
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 147 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Fire Management Unit 3 – Two Rivers: There have been a total of 227 fires within this 

FMU during the period 1980 – 2002. The average annual occurrence is 10 fires per year. 

About 51% of the fires are lightning caused. A higher percentage of human caused fires 

occurs along the Deschutes River due to a railroad line and higher recreation use. Sixtyfive fires have exceeded 100 acres in the last 10 years, and 16 were larger than 1,000 

acres. Average annual expected burn acres is about 9,380.

Fire Management Unit 4 – Brothers: There have been a total of 648 fires within this FMU 

during the period 1980 – 2002. The average annual occurrence is 29 fires per year. 

Fire cause is 84% lightning. Seven fires have reached a size of 100 acres or larger. The 

largest was a fire in 1998 that reached a size of about 8,000 acres. Expected annual burn 

area is about 1,700 acres per year.

Fire Management Unit 5 – Ochoco: There have been a total of 1,425 fires within this FMU 

during the period 1980 – 2002. The average annual occurrence is 64 fires per year. About 

75% of the fires are lightning caused. Eight fires have exceeded 100 acres in the last 10 

years, and 2 were larger than 1,000 acres. Average annual expected burn acres is about 

1,450 acres.

Historical Fuels Treatments

Since 2001 and the National Fire Plan Implementation the fuels management program, 

which includes prescribed burning and mechanical fuels treatments (manipulation of 

vegetation with chainsaws or other equipment) is on a steady increase. Prescribed 

burning and mechanical fuels treatments for the years 1995 through 2005 is summarized 

in Table 15. For more information on silvicultural treatments of forest fuels see the Timber 

section of this document.

Figure 39: Rapid 

Assessment-Fire 

Regime Condition 

Class—Other 

Ownership
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 148 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Mineral Uses

Mining for gold and other metal ores have been important activities during the settlement 

and development of the John Day Basin. The quarrying of mineral material for 

construction purposes remains an important activity in the John Day Basin.

Locatable Minerals

Presently, there are 80 active mining claims within the planning area. 

The Canyon Mining District includes the area surrounding John Day and Canyon City. 

Notable placer deposits were mined in the John Day River and in Canyon Creek. Lode 

deposits in quartz veins were mined on Little Canyon Mountain and on Miller Mountain. 

Between the discovery in Canyon Creek in 1862 and 1908, an estimated 600,000 ounces 

of gold were produced from the Canyon Mining District (Thayer and others, 1981). 

Dredges in Canyon Creek and the John Day River produced 124,000 and 13,000 ounces 

of gold and silver respectively from 1916-1942 (Brooks and Ramp, 1968; Thayer and 

others, 1981). Relatively small amounts of gold have been produced from the Canyon 

Mining District since the last dredge was dismantled in 1942. 

The Quartzburg Mining District includes Prairie City and the Dixie Creek drainage basin. 

Placer deposits are found both in Dixie Creek and the John Day River and six lode mines 

were also worked in the area. Reliable production figures prior to 1930 are not available. 

Dredges in Dixie Creek and the John Day River produced more than 22,500 ounces of 

gold from 1930-1941 (Brooks and Ramp, 1968). 

The Spanish Gulch Mining District is relatively small and is located near Antone in 

southwest Wheeler County. Mining in the district began in 1864 (Willingham, 1982). 

Table 15: Historical Fuels Treatments

Year Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatments

1995 2411

1996 450

1997 2445

1998 673

1999 1034

2000 725

2001 12247

2002 3915 63

2003 17488 100

2004 16656 2291

2005 14665 1500

TOTAL 55221 3954
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 149 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Placer deposits in Rock and Birch Creeks were worked and some quartz veins were 

mined (Brooks and Ramp, 1968). According to Collier (1914), at least 5,000 ounces of 

gold were produced from the placer mining. This district has been designated as the 

Spanish Gulch ACEC for the historic mining structures that remain (USDI BLM, 1986).

Other productive areas included the Granite, Greenhorn, and Susanville Mining Districts 

(Brooks and Ramp, 1968). All of these districts are located in northeastern Grant County. 

Mining claims are still held in many of the historical mining districts, though most 

operations are small-scale (casual use). Present operations mainly involve small adits 

and reworking of tailings left by the larger operations of the past.

Copper

In the Granite District, the Cougar, Independence, and La Belleview mines collectively 

produced 16,275 pounds of copper (Brooks and Ramp, 1968). Another notable producer 

of copper was the Standard mine in the Quartburg District. At total of 57 tons of ore 

containing 20% copper were mined and smelted (Brooks and Ramp, 1968). Copper 

ore was also produced from other mines in other mining districts but reliable production 

figures are unavailable. 

All known copper deposits in the area are either too small or have an insufficient grade 

for production under current economic conditions.

Lead

The only notable recorded lead production was from the Cougar, Independence, and La 

Belleview mines in the Granite District; 34,598 pounds of lead were produced (Brooks 

and Ramp, 1968). Some lead was probably produced from the sulfide ores of other 

mines in other mining districts, but reliable production figures are not available.

Chromium

Historically, the chromite deposits of Grant County have not been able to compete 

with foreign sources with the exception of the three time periods of war (Thayer and 

others, 1981). Mining of the chromite deposits began in 1916 when World War I cut 

off chromium imports and continued until the war’s end in 1918. Production resumed 

in 1939 and continued through most of World War II, ending in 1944. The last phase 

of production occurred from 1951 to 1958 as the U.S. government stockpiled strategic 

minerals during the Korean War (Thayer et al., 1981; Orr et al., 1992). In all, chromite 

production in Grant County reached 30,000 tons. Some claims are held on chromite 

deposits in the planning area in anticipation of more favorable economic conditions in the 

future.

Mercury

The Horse Heaven Mine, located in eastern Jefferson County, was the largest producer 

of mercury (quicksilver) in the planning area. Mining began in 1934 and continued 

intermittently until 1958 (Brooks, 1963). During this time, 17,214 flasks of mercury were 

produced, placing the Horse Heaven Mine was among the top 5 producers in Oregon 

(Orr, et al., 1992). Other prospects and smaller mines are present in the area around 

Horse Heaven. The only other notable production was 150 flasks from the Axehandle 

mine (Brooks, 1963).
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 150 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

A notable mercury deposit was discovered in 1963 near the confluence of the East Fork 

of Canyon Creek and Canyon Creek (Thayer et al., 1981). Production from the Canyon 

Creek Mine totaled 3,830 kg between 1963 and 1968. Currently, mercury is not being 

mined anywhere in the planning area.

Cinnabar is also present in the Diadem mine in the Greenhorn Mining District (Brooks 

and Ramp, 1968). No production records are available. 

Bentonite

Bentonite clay is another locatable mineral found within the planning area. Active mining 

claims are located in the area about 1.5 miles northwest of Clarno. 

Other Minerals

Deposits chrysotile asbestos, nickel, and platinum-group metals (platinum, palladium, 

and rhodium) (Thayer et al., 1981), zinc, iron, arsenic, antimony, cobalt, bismuth, 

molybdenum, and manganese are all present in one or more of the mining districts in 

the planning area (Brooks and Ramp, 1968). Like copper and lead, these minerals are 

present in the same veins that were mined for gold and silver. Thus, minor amounts of 

these metals may have been produced from the gold and silver mines. 

Saleable Mineral Materials

Common variety mineral materials such as sand, gravel, rock, and cinders may be 

purchased at fair market value or acquired by free use permits from the BLM. Free use 

permits are generally limited to government agencies and non-profit organizations. 

Mineral materials may also be mined under a material site right of way (ROW). 

Currently, there are 15 mineral material sites (quarries) in the planning area, some of 

which have never been developed. Over the next 10 years, approximately 5,000 to 7,500 

cubic yards of mineral materials are expected to be mined annually, mostly by Grant 

County. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has 8 existing material site 

ROWs; only 2 of these sites have been developed. See Table 16)

Mineral Leasing

Fluid mineral resources including oil, gas, and geothermal and some solid mineral 

resources such as coal and oil shale are obtained from BLM-administered lands by 

leasing. Presently, no areas within the planning area are leased and no exploration is 

occurring. This situation could change as technology improves or if energy prices rise 

notably. 

Oil and Gas

Several exploratory or “wildcat” wells have been drilled in the planning area, mostly near 

Clarno and Mitchell. One well, located near Clarno, produced 4 million cubic feet of gas 

(MMCFG) (Tennyson, 1995). Oil and/or gas shows were reported in at least 12 wells, 

but none represented commercial accumulations (DOGAMI, 1989; Tennyson, 1995). 

Other evidence of oil/gas accumulations comes from numerous water wells that have 

encountered asphalt-filled fractures and cavities and small amounts of gas.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 151 —

Chapter 3 – Resource Area Profile

Geothermal

Available information on existing geothermal resources comes from 8 natural hot springs 

and 18 exploratory geothermal wells in the planning area. Data from other wells adjacent 

to the planning area were used to interpolate the geothermal energy potential to the 

planning area boundaries. 

All of the hot springs are scattered throughout the southeast part of the planning area. 

It is not known if any of these hot springs represent geothermal reservoirs capable of 

supporting a geothermal power plant.

The geothermal exploratory wells are somewhat evenly distributed across the planning 

area. Only four of these wells have temperatures exceeding 30o C (86o F).

Minimum temperatures of 100o C (212o F) are required for geothermal power plant 

development. No temperatures in wells or hot springs in the planning area have 

temperatures sufficient for electricity generation. However, temperatures of about 20o C 

(68o F) and higher have direct use applications such as aquiculture, therapeutic bathing, 

melting ice and snow, and heating homes, buildings and greenhouses. All but 4 of the 

wells and 2 of the hot springs have temperatures that are marginally into the lower limits 

of direct use. 

Table 16: Existing Mineral Material Sites in the Planning Area

Site Name Site Number Owner/Operator Instrument

Big Creek OR-037135 BLM-Grant County Community Pit

Bridge Creek N/A BLM Unknown

Magic Lantern OR-037134 BLM

Meyers Canyon N/A BLM Unknown

Meyers Canyon Hwy 207 N/A BLM Unknown

Monument Pit OR-58539 BLM-Grant County Free Use Permit

Smokey Creek OR-036867 BLM Common Use Area

Unnamed OR-02126 BLM-ODOT Material Site ROW

Unnamed TD-029897 BLM-ODOT Material Site ROW

Unnamed TD-030633 BLM-ODOT Material Site ROW

Unnamed TD-030673 BLM-ODOT Material Site ROW

Unnamed TD-031358 BLM-ODOT Material Site ROW

Unnamed TD-031780 BLM-ODOT Material Site ROW

Unnamed TD-031811 BLM-ODOT Material Site ROW

Willow Creek Quarry OR-013350 BLM-ODOT Material Site ROW

 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 152 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 153 —

Chapter 4

Existing

Management

Direction
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 154 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 155 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

Resource Management Guidance 

from Existing Plans and Other 

Sources

The John Day, Two Rivers, and Baker Resource Management Plans set objectives and 

guidance for managing resources within the planning area. While the language of each 

plan is somewhat different it is remarkable that three plans, created by different staff from 

different districts created virtually identical guidance. The following summary of guidance 

in these plans will focus on the resource categories contained within each. 

Soils

Each plan has the objective to manage soils to maintain productivity and minimize 

erosion. Most direction for soils is provided through forestland and range management.

Air

The John Day and Two Rivers plans focus on monitoring air quality. The Baker RMP does 

the same but also places emphasis on maintaining the Class II air classification assigned 

BLM managed lands under the Clean Air act, as amended (1977).

The Clean Air Act requires each state to develop, adopt and implement a State 

Implementation Plan to ensure that National Ambient Air Quality Standards are attained 

and maintained for the criteria pollutants. Federal agencies are required to ensure 

When BLM specialists identify problems that require management action they turn to Resource 

Management Plans (RMPs) and a few other key documents for guidance. The following 

Resource Management Plans provide specific direction for management of public lands within the 

John Day Basin:

John Day Resource Management Plan, published by the Burns District BLM in 1985.

Two Rivers Resource Management Plan, published by the Prineville District BLM in 1986.

Baker Resource Management Plan, published by the Vale District BLM in 1989.

Each of these plans has been amended by the John Day River Management Plan, 2001 developed by the 

Prineville District BLM. This plan provided updated direction for land management within river corridors 

in the John Day basin and serves as the congressionally required Wild and Scenic River Plan for the 

designated Wild and Scenic Rivers within the basin.

The John Day Resource Management Plan was also amended by Land Tenure Adjustment: Proposed Plan 

Amendment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the John Day Resource Management Plan (USDIBLM, 1995). This document implemented a three zone land tenure classification for lands within the John 

Day Planning area. This plan also proposed land exchanges that did not take place but were the precursor 

for the Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000. This document also addressed paleontological resources by 

considering those resources when considering whether a parcel was suitable for either disposal or 

acquisition.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 156 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

that their actions conform to applicable State Implementation Plans. None of the 

BLM lands within the John Day Basin RMP Planning Area lie within Non-Attainment 

Areas. All federal land management activities currently comply with the Oregon State 

Implementation Plan.

Vegetation

The primary focus of the John Day, Two Rivers, and Baker Resource Management Plans 

is on grazing management. However important vegetation communities and habitats are 

also addressed.

Each plan acknowledges sites/situations where natural resource objectives would take 

precedence over livestock/commodity production. One example of this in the Two Rivers 

RMP is the Horn Butte Area a few miles south of the Columbia River where allotments 

are managed to “enhance habitat of the long billed curlew.” Similarly the Oregon Land 

Exchange Act of 2000 mandates the BLM to manage lands acquired within the North 

Fork of the John Day subwatershed . . . “primarily for the protection of native fish and 

wildlife habitat, and for public recreation.” 

Livestock Grazing Management

The Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Management (BLM 

1997) provides direction for assessing the condition of rangelands and adjusting the 

management of grazing when standards are not met. Because of the detailed work 

required and number of allotments about one half of the allotments in the John Day Basin 

remain to be assessed. See Appendix C and Map14 for additional information.

The assessments, used in Oregon, rate the functionality of the ecosystem based on 

five standards as described in the Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for 

Livestock Grazing Management in Oregon and Washington:

When a standard is not met and significant progress towards meeting the standard is not 

occurring, an effort is made to identify if the causal factor is livestock grazing or another 

cause (Rangeland Health Standards Handbook H-4180-1, 2001).

If failure of a standard is due to current grazing practices and progress toward meeting 

the standard is not occurring, the BLM is required to take actions which will stop further 

damage and begin to improve conditions. This may require additional assessments or 

monitoring to determine a corrective solution along with NEPA analysis and a subsequent 

decision. The BLM is presently required to take action within 12 months after a 

determination is made (Grazing Regulations 4180.2.c.1.i). 

The Northwest Power Planning Council completed the Strategy for Salmon (Collette and 

Harrison, 1992 a, b) to outline and guide salmon recovery efforts in the Northwest. In 

response to this strategy, BLM placed emphasis on completing allotment evaluations and 

adjusting grazing management for all grazing allotments in the John Day basin that would 

affect anadromous fisheries habitat. Priority was placed on grazing allotments containing 

substantial public land riparian areas, either on the John Day River or on important 

tributaries. 

Twenty-one allotments have either an allotment management plan (AMP) or a 

coordinated resource management plan (CRMP) on them. This is a written management 

plan which directs how grazing will occur on an allotment and includes the timing of 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 157 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

livestock use, grazing intensity, grazing frequency, and grazing duration. These plans 

are fully coordinated with other resources such as wildlife so their needs have been 

considered. Allotments under a written management plan and those pastures under the 

John Day River Management Plan have adequate monitoring in place. All allotments 

and pastures which have habitat used by the Mid Columbia Steelhead and have a 

manageable amount of accessible public land will have riparian and channel studies in 

place. To date, about 60% of those pastures have existing studies. In addition, the John 

Day River Management Plan instituted grazing restrictions on portions of 52 allotments 

within the mainstem John Day WSR corridor, and 12 grazing allotments within the South 

Fork John Day WSR corridor.

Prior to the Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 grazing was authorized on the public 

lands in nine allotments along the North Fork of the John Day River. As a result of interim 

guidance most grazing has been eliminated on BLM managed lands adjacent to the 

North Fork John Day River.

Rangeland Assessments

The BLM is required to conduct monitoring of all land-use plans. Plans shall establish 

intervals and standards for monitoring and evaluation of the plan to determine how well 

land use objectives are being met. Such intervals and standards shall be based on the 

sensitivity of the resource decisions involved (43 CFR 1610.4-9). To help comply with 

these monitoring requirements, the BLM in Oregon and Washington developed the 

Rangeland Monitoring in Oregon and Washington, August 1985; which the Prineville 

District adopted into the Districts Range Monitoring Plan. This document establishes 

minimum standards for monitoring grazing allotments in the three different selective 

management categories – Maintain, Improve, and Custodial (M, I, C).

The various techniques used for monitoring are described in a series of Interagency 

Technical References developed by the BLM, Forest Service, Natural Resource 

Conservation Service, and Cooperative Extension Service. Monitoring results show 

variations, depending on site potential and climate, but generally vegetation trends 

appear to be improving. This generalization has been validated through the Standards 

and Guides Assessments.

Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management 

Project (ICBEMP)

ICBEMP contains some strategic guidance related to grazing management. The first 

item provides criteria for classifying allotments into one of three selective management 

categories. The BLM categorizes allotments as Maintain (M), Improve (I), or Custodial (C) 

(See Appendix D). ICBEMP provided following criteria for the three categories. 

Maintain Category Criteria

1. Present range condition is satisfactory

2. There is moderate or high resource production potential and production is near 

potential or moving in that direction

3. No serious resource-use conflicts or controversy exist

4. Present management appears satisfactory

5. Other criteria appropriate to EIS area
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 158 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Improve Category Criteria

1. Present range condition is unsatisfactory

2. There is moderate to high resource production potential, but currently producing at a 

low to moderate level

3. Serious resource-use conflicts or controversy exist

4. Present management appears unsatisfactory

5. Other criteria appropriate to EIS area

Custodial Category Criteria

1. Present range condition is not a factor

2. There is low resource production potential and current production is at or near 

potential

3. Limited resource-use conflicts or controversy may exist

4. Present management appears satisfactory or is the only logical practice under existing 

resource conditions

5. Other criteria appropriate to EIS area

Forest Management

The BLM is mandated by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) to 

manage public lands under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield and without 

permanent impairment to the productivity of the land and the quality of the environment. 

Each of the three plans views forestland from a multiple use perspective. That is to 

provide for commodity production while protecting or even enhancing wildlife, fisheries, 

water quantity and quality, and recreation. As with rangeland where unique qualities 

exist, such as riparian areas, special status species concerns, or wilderness or other 

special designations management may be directed toward preserving those qualities. 

For example forest management may be an absence of management in the case of 

wilderness or management may be limited to enhancing forest health or other values in 

the case of Wild and Scenic Rivers. 

Each plan identifies areas suitable for commercial forest use and provides similar 

standard operating procedures for forest practices.

The John Day River Plan amended the John Day and Baker RMPs for lands within 

Segments 10 and 11 (within South Fork John Day Wild and Scenic River boundary and 

within 1⁄4 mile of the North Fork John Day River) by restricting timber removal to “when 

necessary to reduce the risk of catastrophic timber loss due to insect infestation, disease, 

wildfire, or when public safety is of concern).

For the newly acquired lands along the North Fork John Day River the Oregon Land 

Exchange Act of 2000 limited any forest management to actions that would protect native 

fish and wildlife habitat, and support public recreation.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 159 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

Woodlands

Each plan permits fuelwood and other minor forest product harvest.

Riparian Vegetation

Each plan makes improvement of riparian vegetation a priority with a range of tools 

available to implement changes but primarily through grazing management. Key 

guidance is also provided by PACFISH. This guidance includes goals, objectives, 

standards and guidelines, and creates Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas. This plan 

covers the majority of the John Day Basin Planning area. Several watersheds in the 

Upper South Fork area are excluded due to natural barriers (Izee falls). The Riparian 

Management Objectives (RMOs) include criteria for pool frequency, water temperature, 

large wood, width/depth ratios, bank stability, and bank angle. Standards and guidelines 

are spelled out for proposed projects and activities including timber, roads, grazing, 

recreation, minerals, fire/fuels, lands, restoration activities and general riparian area 

management. Where Properly Functioning Conditions (BLM Technical Reference 1737-

9) are present, PACFISH goals relative to grazing guidelines are being met (PACFISH 

Enclosure B, 1995). 

PACFISH guidance is supplemented by A Framework for Incorporating The Aquatic 

and Riparian Habitat Component of the Interior Columbia Basin Strategy into BLM 

and Forest Service Plan Revisions (2004) (the Framework). The Framework directs 

the development of aquatic and riparian resource components for land management 

revision plans, including the John Day Basin Plan. Guidance from the Framework directs 

the major components required to replace the interim PACFISH RCAs, RMOs, and 

Standards and Guides. 

The “Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Management” (BLM 

1997) provides another source of guidance for managing riparian areas. Standard 

#2 requires that riparian-wetland areas are in properly functioning physical condition 

appropriate to soil, climate, and landform. Within the planning area, PFC assessments 

(BLM 1991) have been used as the indicator for this standard.

Special Status Plants

The three RMPs do not address management of special status plants. Each, however 

includes a list of special status plants that could possibly be present in the planning 

area. An updated list is provided in Appendix A. BLM policy is to monitor and maintain 

or improve habitat for Threatened or Endangered Species during project planning and 

implementation. Proposed project areas are subject to botanical inventory for special 

status species prior to project initiation. Federally listed Threatened and Endangered 

plant species are not known to occur or suspected to occur within the planning area.

BLM policy (BLM Manual 6840) is to conserve the species and the ecosystems upon 

which they depend, ensure that all actions authorized, funded or carried out by BLM are 

in compliance with the ESA, cooperate with the USFWS in planning and providing for the 

recovery of listed species, retain in Federal ownership all habitat essential for the survival 

or recovery of any T&E species, and consult/confer with USFWS during development 

and implementation of management plans to conserve species and their habitats. The 

types of actions and level of interaction with USFWS are dependent on the status of the 

species in question. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 160 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

For state listed species, BLM policy is to carry out management for the conservation of 

such species. State laws protecting these species apply to all BLM programs and actions 

to the extent they are consistent with FLPMA. The Oregon/Washington Special Status 

Species Policy, IM No. OR-91-57 (11/5/90, as amended by IM No. OR-91-57 change 

1, issued 8/5/91) categorizes these species as either Bureau Sensitive or Assessment. 

Bureau Sensitive Species are protected, managed and conserved in the same manner 

as Candidate Species. Assessment species must be addressed in any planning or NEPA 

documentation and are protected when possible. For Bureau Sensitive Species, BLM 

is to work with the Oregon Department of Agriculture and the State Natural Heritage 

Program to determine which species should be designated as such. The minimal level 

of protection will be the level of protection provided to candidate species, which includes 

the following actions: considering these species in land use plans; developing plans, 

strategies and assessments to conserve these species and their habitats; ensuring BLM 

actions are consistent with objectives for managing these species; and monitoring to 

determine if objectives are being met.

Noxious Weed Control

The John Day RMP is silent on the issue of weed control. The Two Rivers and Baker 

RMP recognize the need to address weed control but for the most part defer to regional 

and national guidance. Currently the BLM Prineville District operates under the noxious 

weed management protocols set forth in the District Environmental Assessment (EA) 

titled Prineville District Integrated Weed Management (EA# OR-053-3-062), which was 

based on and tiered to the following documents: Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands 

in Thirteen Western States FEIS and ROD (1991); Supplement to the Northwest Area 

Noxious Weed Control Program FEIS and ROD (1987); and the Integrated Noxious 

Weed Control; and the Northwest Noxious Weed Control FEIS (1985) and ROD (1986).

Weed prevention and control practices prescribed in the Prineville District EA includes a 

full spectrum of tools using integrated weed management concepts. The District weed 

management program contains four key components: detection, prevention, control, and 

rehabilitation. Detection is normally done using ground or remote sensing techniques. 

Prevention activities focus on public education and awareness as well as project design 

guidelines and mitigation measures. Control measures include manual, mechanical, 

chemical and biological methods. A more detailed description of the District’s weed 

management program may be found in EA# OR-053-3-062, available at the Prineville 

District Office.

Fire Management

The three RMPs emphasize prevention and suppression of wildfire to protect public 

values. Prescribed fire may be used to achieve multiple use objectives. Use of Prescribed 

fire must carried out in accordance with approved fire management plans and smoke 

management goals and objectives. The Baker RMP provides additional standard design 

features for fire management activity. In 2004 the Central Oregon Fire Management 

Service (COFMS) Fire Management Plan was developed to guide the coordination of fire 

management by the Prineville BLM, the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests, and the 

Crooked River National Grassland. 

Direction in the Central Oregon Fire Plan provides more specific guidance than provided 

by RMPs. The basic premise of the COFP is to base suppression action on values of at 

risk classes. Classes 4 through 6 call for aggressive and immediate suppression. Classes 

1 through 3 allow for more suppression options based on fire potential and availability 

of suppression resources to manage the values at risk in the wildland fire environment. 

WSAs require conditional fire suppression action. Wildland urban interface (WUI) areas 

are the top priority for fire suppression.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 161 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

Fire and Fuels

The Central Oregon Fire Plan (2002) identified Fire Management Units throughout 

Central Oregon that include BLM managed lands within the planning areas. These Fire 

Management units and associated information are used to determine fire risk and severity 

and in turn establish priorities for fuel treatments. Target fuel loads are determined on 

a case by case basis by the fuels specialist designing the fuel or vegetation treatment. 

Treatments are subject to interdisciplinary team review.

Fire Suppression

The actual suppression approach is to suppress all unplanned ignitions while allowing for 

the safety of the public and fire personnel, regardless of the risk class. This approach is 

a response to growing concern over sage grouse viability and habitat in the high desert, 

which generally is assigned lower risk class than forested areas. Cooperation with other 

state and federal agencies, as well as local fire protection organizations, is a key to fire 

suppression in the planning area and throughout Central Oregon. The Central Oregon 

Fire Plan identified Fire Management Units in order to prioritize fuels treatments and 

suppression response.

Each Fire Management Unit (Described in chapter 3) described in the Central Oregon 

Fire Management Plan identifies a set of variables that must be considered when 

managing fire and fuels. These variables include: 

Location

Characteristics

Strategic and Measurable Management Objectives Specific to the FMU

Management Constraints or Criteria Affecting Operational Implementation

Historical Fire Occurrence

The Fire Management Situation

Weather patterns influencing fire behavior and historical weather analysis

Fire Season determination

Fuels conditions in the FMU likely to influence fire behavior

Fire regime alteration

Control problems and dominant topographic features

Other elements of the fire environment affecting management

There are no existing Wildland Fire Use (WFU) Plans within the Planning Area. 

In addition to direction provided by the RMPs and the Central Oregon Fire Plan, all 

fire suppression activities are to be conducted under the guideline of the Interagency 

Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations (“The Red Book”). (5.) These standards 

require safe fire suppression operations and provide the local line officer and incident 

commander the discretion of use the most appropriate suppression response. 

Fire Closures

The BLM has authority to impose temporary restrictions on public access to public lands 

in times of extreme fire danger. This authority is not frequently invoked, but when dry, 

volatile conditions exist, restricted access to public lands can prevent ignitions. The 

industrial fire precaution levels are designed to limit certain activities that can spark a 

fire. This applies only to industrial equipment use. Complete closure during periods of 

extreme burning conditions, at level III, allows no mechanized equipment at any time. 

Partial closure, level II, restricts the use of chainsaws, cable logging operations, or 

blasting during the active burning period in the afternoons.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 162 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The BLM currently closes BLM managed lands within 1⁄4 mile of the mainstem, North 

Fork, and South Fork John Day Rivers to campfires from June 1 to October 1st.

Water Quality and Quantity

Each plan seeks to improve water quality and quantity. The John Day River Plan

amended the three RMPs by establishing interim instream flow goals for the federal 

water reserve right and specific actions for achieving the goals. Key guidance is provided 

under Clean Water Act and associated direction described in Chapter 2, Legal Mandates. 

Management of Water Quality and Quantity is largely indirect, by managing riparian 

and terrestrial vegetation, primarily through management direction for grazing, forest 

resources, travel management, and recreation. 

Fish

Each plan provides for the maintenance and restoration of aquatic habitat. The Northwest 

Power Planning Council’s Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program generated 

the Columbia Basin System Planning Salmon and Steelhead Production Plan-John 

Day River Sub-basin (ODFW 1990). The John Day River Subbasin Plan and the 

Columbia River Anadromous Fish Restoration Plan (CRITFC 1996) established spring 

Chinook salmon and summer steelhead production goals and objectives for the John 

Day subbasin. Under the Wild Fish Management Policy (OAR 635-07-525), spring 

Chinook salmon and summer steelhead are managed exclusively for wild production 

(ODFW 1990). An amendment to the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, 

known as the Strategy for Salmon (Collette and Harrison, 1992 a, b), called on resource 

management entities to implement measures designed to rebuild Columbia Basin 

anadromous fish populations. Subsequent to the Strategy for Salmon, the BLM adopted 

“PACFISH” (USDA-FS and USDI-BLM 1995), which was designed to halt the degradation 

and promote restoration of riparian areas on federal lands. 

PACFISH establishes an expectation of the characteristics of healthy, functioning 

watersheds, riparian areas, and associated fish habitats. The goals are to maintain or 

restore.

1) Water quality to a degree that provides for stable and productive riparian and aquatic 

ecosystems.

2) Stream channel integrity, channel processes, and the sediment regime (including the 

elements of timing, volume, and character of sediment input and transport) under 

which the riparian and aquatic ecosystem developed.

3) Instream flows to support healthy riparian and aquatic habitats, the stability and 

effective function of stream channels, and the ability to route flood discharges.

4) Natural timing and variability of the water table elevation in meadows and wetlands.

5) Diversity and productivity of native and desired non-native plant communities in 

riparian zones.

6) Riparian areas to:

A) Provide and amount and distribution of large woody debris characteristic of 

natural aquatic and riparian ecosystems.

B) Provide adequate summer and winter thermal regulation within the riparian and 

aquatic zones.

C) Help achieve rates of surface erosion, bank erosion, and channel migration 

characteristics of those under which the communities developed.

7) Riparian and aquatic habitats necessary to foster the unique genetic fish stocks that 

evolved within the specific geo-climatic region; and 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 163 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

8) Habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant 

vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the viability of ripariandependent communities.

In February of 1998, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) proposed listing 

the Middle Columbia River (MCR) steelhead ESU population as Threatened, under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). In April of 1997, USFWS decided to propose listing 

bull trout under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)). MCR steelhead were listed as 

threatened under the ESA on March 25, 1999 (64 FR 14517), and NMFS reaffirmed its 

threatened status on January 5, 2006 (71 FR 834). MCR steelhead critical habitat was 

designated on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52630) and the designation became effective 

January 2, 2006.Two populations were included in the proposal, bull trout in the Columbia 

River Basin, and the Klamath River Basin. On June 10, 1997 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service proposed listing the bull trout as Threatened. As a result of these proposals the 

BLM may not take any management actions that adversely affect or may contribute to the 

need to formally list these species. 

Wildlife

Existing management for wildlife habitat is described in the three RMPs, other 

supplemental coordinated RMPs, habitat management plans, environmental 

assessments, and the ESA. Benefiting wildlife is an important objective in the 

management of rangeland, forest and woodlands, and riparian areas in each of the 

management plans. Each contains list of actions to restore wildlife habitat. Habitat for 

Special status species and other locally important species are also addressed by each 

plan. The John Day River Plan amended each of the plans by phasing out irrigated, 

commercial agriculture from BLM lands adjacent to the river and its main branches and 

to use such lands to provide wildlife habitat, food and cover for wildlife, or to provide 

cottonwood stock for use in the restoration of riparian areas.

Within the river corridor and adjacent grazing pastures partially within the corridor The 

John Day River Plan also prohibits public land use by non-native and/or feral sheep, 

goats, and pigs and supports the removal of these species by the use of BLM regulations 

and/or cooperation and coordination with the Oregon Department of Agriculture, ODFW, 

and private landowners. The John Day River Plan also requires BLM lands within the 

river corridor to be managed to provide for wildlife species and habitat diversity. Crucial 

habitats are to be monitored for forage production, habitat condition changes, and overall 

effectiveness of improvements. Existing improvements that relate to wildlife habitat 

are be maintained. Habitat management plans are to be written for selected areas of 

wildlife habitat and specific wildlife objectives would be included in all activity plans. 

Existing seasonal restrictions are to be applied to mitigate impacts of human activities on 

important seasonal wildlife habitat. 

The RMPs provide the following guidance:

1) Improve and maintain vegetative condition to benefit wildlife.

2) Maintain all existing improvements and continue existing activity plans.

3) Manage upland habitat for diversity to provide for a variety of wildlife species.

4) Manage upland vegetation through grazing management and range/wildlife habitat 

development to achieve maximum wildlife habitat diversity.

5) Intensively manage commercial forestlands suitable for timber production while 

recognizing harvest restrictions or exclusions to protect wildlife and wildlife habitats.

6) Monitor, maintain, or improve habitat for threatened and endangered species.

7) Monitor, maintain, or improve winter range for deer and elk.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 164 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

8) Utilize existing road systems and limit new permanent road entries to protect wildlife 

habitat.

Forage would be provided to meet ODFW management objective numbers for deer 

and elk. Additional forage may be allocated to livestock whenever present big game 

population objectives are exceeded.

Each of the plans provide for the development of Habitat Management Plans to protect 

selected species and areas.

Cooperative Mgmt Areas (CMAs) will continue to be developed with ODFW, WDW and/or 

other affected individuals and organizations.

Special Status Wildlife

Each RMP recognizes the need to protect habitat inhabited by or potentially inhabited by 

any listed or considered for listing species. Each plan recognized the need to consult with 

the appropriate federal agency before taking an action that may affect any federally listed 

or candidate threatened or endangered species. See Appendix B for the list of Special 

Status Wildlife. Threatened and endangered and special status species habitat will 

continue to be monitored, maintained, and/or improved.

In order to protect California Bighorn Sheep The John Day River Plan modified the Two 

Rivers RMP by prohibiting grazing by domestic sheep.

Sage Grouse Management

BLM developed a National Sage-grouse Habitat Conservation Strategy (National Sagegrouse Strategy) to guide future actions for conserving sage-grouse and associated 

sagebrush habitats and to enhance BLM’s ongoing conservation efforts. BLM designed 

this National Sage-grouse Strategy around four main goals. Associated with each goal 

are specific strategies and actions that BLM will undertake to meet the goal. The four 

goals are: 

1) Improve the effectiveness of the management framework for addressing 

conservation needs of sage-grouse on lands administered by the BLM. 

2) Increase understanding of resource conditions in order to prioritize habitat 

maintenance and restoration. 

3) Expand partnerships, available research and information that support effective 

management of sage-grouse habitat. 

4) Ensure leadership and resources are adequate to continue ongoing conservation 

efforts and implement national and state-level sage-grouse habitat conservation 

strategies and/or plans.

Wild Horse and Burro Management

Wild horse and burro management occurs within designated herd management areas. 

There is one herd management area within the John Day Basin, the Murderer’s Creek 

Herd Management Area and is identified in the John Day RMP. The 108,568 acre Herd 

Management Area is located adjacent to the South Fork John Day River on Forest 

Service, state, and private lands and 34,639 acres of BLM managed land. The herd size 

is managed to range from 50 to 140 animals and is administered by the Forest Service in 

cooperation with the BLM. Any horses and burros found on BLM managed lands in other 

locations within the planning area are considered to be trespass animals and removed.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 165 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

Visual Resources

The BLM uses the Visual Resource Management (VRM) system to classify scenery 

and provide a framework for managing visual impacts of activities occurring on BLMadministered lands... Visual Resource Management (VRM) Classes specify desired 

objectives for retaining or enhancing visual quality. 

VRM Class I is the most sensitive and is applied to areas having high scenic quality, or to 

Congressionally designated areas such as Wilderness areas and Wild and Scenic Rivers. 

A recent change in BLM policy also classifies all lands within Wilderness and Wilderness 

Study Areas (WSAs) as VRM Class I, which requires that natural processes dominate the 

landscape, allowing limited management activity, provided it does not attract attention. 

According to the BLM VRM Program Manual, VRM Class I management allows natural 

ecological changes and limited management activity. Any contrast created within the 

characteristic landscape must not attract attention. Wilderness Study Areas on the Lower 

John Day River are examples of VRM Class I public land. 

VRM Class II management regarding changes in any of the basic landscape elements 

(form, line, color and texture) caused by a management activity should not be evident in 

the characteristic landscape. Contrasts are seen, but must not attract attention. Public 

lands along the Lower John Day River outside Wilderness Study Areas are examples of 

VRM Class II. All WSR segments, most non-designated segments, and portions of some 

tributaries are also classified as VRM Class II. 

VRM Class III management allows contrasts to the basic elements caused by a 

management activity to be evident, but should remain subordinate to the existing 

landscape. Public lands in Rudio Creek and Miller Flat are examples of VRM Class III. 

These public lands are located on the north slopes of Rudio Mountain and can be seen 

from the Kimberly-Monument highway.

VRM Class IV is the least sensitive class and includes areas of low scenic quality and 

are not frequently seen by many public land users. Contrasts in the landscape attract 

attention and is a dominant feature in the landscape in terms of scale, but it should repeat 

the form, line, color and texture of the characteristic landscape. Public lands in the 

high plateaus of Rudio Mountain in the vicinity of Sunflower Flats and Timber Basin are 

examples of VRM Class IV and are seldom seen.

Each of the RMPs for the John Day Basin identified the VRM classifications are shown 

on Map 18. The acreage for each VRM class is listed in Table 17. 

Table 17: Visual Resource Management Classification Acreage

Visual Resource Management Class: Approximate BLM Acreage

 Within Planning Area

VRM Class I (Highest Scenic Value) 97,00

 VRM Class II 90,085

VRM Class III 217,926

 VRM Class IV (Lowest Scenic Value) 49,572

 Total: 454,429

* VRM classifications from Record of Decisions for the Two Rivers, John Day, and Baker RMP/EISs; interim BLM VRM classification for 

private lands acquired through the 2000 Oregon Land Exchange Act; and the 2001 BLM Record of Decision for the John Day River River 

Management Plan.


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 168 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The Two Rivers, John Day, and Baker Resource Management Plans provide VRM 

management direction for projects on BLM public land. (Pg. 32, Two Rivers ROD, Pg. 

pg. 49, Baker ROD, and page 54 of the John Day Final EIS). 

“Before the BLM initiates or permits any major surface disturbing activities on public land, 

an analysis will be completed to determine adverse effects on visual qualities. Activities 

that will result in significant, long term adverse effects on the visual resources of the John 

Day or Deschutes River canyons in areas normally seen from these rivers will not be 

permitted.” 

“Activities within other areas of high visual quality that may be seen might be permitted 

if they do not attract attention or leave long term visual changes on the land. Activities 

in other areas may change the landscape but will be designed to minimize any adverse 

effect on visual quality” (Pg. 32, June, 1986 Two Rivers ROD).

The North Fork of the John Day river canyon area contains approximately 42,183 acres 

of private land that was acquired in 2002 by the Prineville District BLM, as part of the 

Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000. This acreage, in addition to approximately 10,520 

acres of existing BLM public lands were tentatively classified by BLM as VRM Class III, 

until a final VRM classification is determined through the John Day Basin RMP/EIS.

Special Management Designations

Wild & Scenic Rivers

Management direction for BLM managed Wild and Scenic Rivers within the Planning 

Area is provided by the John Day River Management Plan, Two Rivers, John Day, and 

Baker Resource Management Plan Amendments (2001). This document provided for 

management of a full range of resources and activities within the boundaries of the 

following Wild and Scenic Rivers:

Lower John Day River (Tumwater Falls upstream to Service Creek)

South Fork John Day River (Smokey Creek upstream to the Malheur National 

 Forest boundary

Guidance for all resources focused on protecting and enhancing the Outstandingly 

Remarkable values for which the Wild and Scenic River Designation was applied to these 

rivers. This guidance is referred to in the resource and use discussions throughout this 

chapter.

Wilderness

The “Interim Management Policy and Guidelines (IMP) for Lands Under Wilderness 

Review” (BLM 1995) provides guidance for managing lands under review by congress to 

determine wilderness suitability. This policy requires all lands within WSA boundaries be 

managed so as not to impair their suitability for wilderness designation. Certain activities 

conducted in WSAs before the passage of FLMPA are called “Grandfathered Uses”. 

These activities, which include grazing, mining and mineral leasing may continue in the 

same manner and degree as they occurred in 1976. Most non-motorized recreation 

activities are allowed, and users are encouraged to follow “Leave No Trace” principles. 

Motorized and mechanized travel, including trail and mountain bikes, is limited to either 

existing or designated roads and trails, and cross-county travel is prohibited. Standing 

trees may not be cut for either personal or commercial use. Any unauthorized activity 

which results in surface disturbance must be reclaimed as close to its natural condition as 

possible. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 169 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

The Sutton Mountain Coordinated Resource Management Plan (USDI-BLM, 1996) 

provides management direction for the Bridge Creek area roughly between Highway 26 

and the John Day River. Contained within this plan is direction for the management of 

the Sutton Mountain and Pat’s Cabin Wilderness Study areas. 

Caves

The RMPs are silent on management of caves. However, the Federal Cave Resources 

Protection Act of 1988 (FCRPA) requires federal agencies to identify and manage, to the 

extent practical, cave resources determined to be significant. Procedures for determining 

the significance of caves are found in 43 CFR Part 37. Significance is determined based 

on criteria for biotic, cultural, geologic, mineralogic, hydrologic, recreational, educational, or 

scientific values, features, or characteristics as defined in 36 CFR, Part 290.3 (c) and (d). 

Cultural Resource Management

Each plan is consistent with national guidance by requiring cultural resource clearances 

on all projects requiring BLM approval or initiated by the BLM that include surface 

disturbance. Areas or sites eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic 

Places will be considered for nomination. 

The Spanish Gulch Historic Mining District was designated as an ACEC’s in the Two 

Rivers RMP (1986). In addition, the Fourmile Canyon and the John Day Crossing 

(McDonald Crossing) segments of the Oregon Trail were considered “special 

management areas” in the Two Rivers RMP. Both, the Fourmile Canyon segment of the 

Oregon Trail and Spanish Gulch Historic Mining District have been formally nominated to 

the National Register of Historic Places. 

The Two Rivers and Baker RMPs specify that avoidance and mitigation are alternatives 

for enabling clearances when cultural resources are found at project locations. The John 

Day River Plan amended each of the RMPS by providing more detailed direction for the 

River corridors. This direction includes:

• Re-record known sites.

• Evaluate sites for appropriate BLM Use Categories/National Register eligibility.

• Conduct Class III inventory in areas of high probability and/or potential high use 

not previously inventoried and which are not necessarily associated with specific 

projects.

• Conduct limited site testing/salvage excavation, where appropriate.

• Apply appropriate rehabilitation/stabilization techniques to sites as needed.

• Develop and implement appropriate interpretive/public outreach/educational 

techniques.

• Pursue development of a more active role for tribal involvement (beyond that required 

by law) in any or all of the above (participating in the rehabilitation of a damaged 

site).

• Pursue development of partnerships with various internal and external entities to accomplish any or all of the above.

BLM activities must also be consistent with the laws, directives, and policies listed in 

Chapter 2.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 170 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Native American Uses

The John Day, Two Rivers, and Baker RMPs provide no specific direction for providing 

opportunities for traditional Native American Uses. The authorization for such uses may 

be found in treaties, laws, regulations, and Memoranda of Understanding between the 

BLM and tribal governments. The BLM 8120 Manual and Handbook H-8120-1 identify 

opportunities for consulting Tribes on traditional cultural uses of public lands and 

resources. Provisions for consultation prior to taking management actions are to ensure 

that opportunities to continue to practice traditional cultural activities are maintained.

Paleontological Resources

Management of Paleontological resources is a relatively new activity for the BLM. The 

John Day and Two Rivers RMPs are silent about paleontological resources. The 1995 

John Day Land Tenure adjustment considered paleontological resources and excluded 

parcels with known resources from the Z-3 designation. The John Day River Plan ROD 

(2001), however, provides specific guidance for the management of paleontological 

resources within the river corridor which is consistent with recently published BLM 

8270/H-8270-1 Manuals. The BLM manages significant fossil resources in the John Day 

region and beyond with technical assistance from the National Park Service, through an 

interagency agreement. This assistance is limited to the NPS scope of collection which 

covers fossils that are between 40 and 5 million years ago (mya).

The Baker Resource Management Plan and The John Day River Plan provide similar 

guidance for managing paleontological resources. The primary elements of paleontology 

resource management are identification, evaluation, protection and use. The BLM’s 

main “objectives are to manage them for their scientific, educational and recreational 

values, and to mitigate adverse impacts to them”. In addition, The John Day River 

Plan ROD specifically outlines additional actions for management purposes. These 

actions include conducting inventory and cyclic prospecting at all potential fossil-bearing 

localities, coordinate with the National Park Service and other outside entities to conduct 

appropriate scientific research, implement appropriate interpretive/public outreach/

educational techniques, and the development of partnerships with external entities to 

accomplish any or all or the above. 

Recreation Management

Each RMP has an objective that opportunities for recreation should be maintained and 

protected. The Baker RMP designated public lands adjacent to the North Fork John Day 

as an Extensive Recreation Management Area that is regionally and locally significant. 

The Two Rivers RMP provides recreation guidance for off road vehicle use and provides 

for the collection mineral resources by rockhounders. One objective of the John Day Plan 

is to “keep public lands and roads open for a variety of recreational uses ...”

Developed and Dispersed Recreation

The Baker RMP provides the following specific guidance:

• Limit camping to a 14-day stay.

• Inventory recreation resources.

• Develop recreation facilities on identified key parcels of public land.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 171 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

The John Day RMP provided the following guidance, “The Recreational ... resources 

will be evaluated as a part of activity and project planning. Dispersed recreational 

activities will continue commensurate with demand. Developed recreation sites where low 

public use levels and/or deteriorated facility conditions do not justify the expenditure of 

additional maintenance funds will be closed or maintenance transferred to other entities.

The John Day River Plan Amended all three RMPs by allowing the improvement or 

upgrading of developed sites within river corridors but limiting new sites to a single 

campground near the Ellingson Mill site on the South Fork John Day River. 

The John Day River Plan amended each RMP by allowing for the rehabilitation or 

closure of dispersed sites if necessary. This plan also amended the Two Rivers RMP 

by converting a small portion of an agricultural field near river mile 101 to perennial 

vegetation in order to open sites for dispersed camping.

The John Day River Plan Amended the Two Rivers RMP by initiating monitoring for a 

Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) study on the Lower John Day River to determine 

acceptable levels of camping and boating downstream from Service Creek. The John 

Day River Plan also amended each of the RMPs by proposing the utilization of an LAC 

study for other segments of the river when needed to address recreation management 

issues.

Boating Use Allocation

The John Day River Plan amended the Two Rivers RMP by proposing interim daily 

launch targets until the LAC study determines appropriate boating use levels. Until the 

LAC study is completed individuals and groups would be requested to utilize off peak 

periods to float the river and mandatory no impact camping, equipment restrictions, party 

size limits, and use fees would be imposed. Under the River plan if it is determined that 

launch limits are necessary to keep boating levels under the limits of acceptable change 

then a Common Pool system of boating permit allocation would be utilized. This system 

would require commercial users to apply for permits to boat the river in the same manner 

as private, non-commercial users. The system is based upon a system developed for the 

Deschutes River and if it is determined that the system on the Deschutes does not work 

then a different, split allocations system (in which commercial and noncommercial boater 

have separate pools of permits to draw from) would be implemented.

Motorized Boating

The John Day River Plan amended the Two Rivers RMP by prohibiting use of personal 

watercraft upstream of Tumwater Falls, permitting seasonal motorized boating between 

Tumwater Falls and Cottonwood Bridge, and closing the river between Service Creek 

and Clarno to motorized boating between May 1 and October 1 except use of one 40 

pound thrust electric motor per boat may be used during this period. The River Plan also 

amended the John Day RMP by closing the South Fork John Day to motorized boating.

Motorized Recreation

BLM-managed lands are designated as either “Open,” “Limited,” or “Closed” to motorized 

use through all BLM Resource Management Planning efforts. These designations are 

defined by the BLM’s National OHV Strategy (2000) as:
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 172 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Open: The BLM designates areas as “open” for intensive Off-Road Vehicle (ORV) use

where there are no compelling resource protection needs, user conflicts, or public

safety issues to warrant limiting cross-country travel.

Limited: The agency designates areas as “limited” where it must restrict ORV use in 

order to meet specific resource management objectives. These limitations may include: 

restricting the number or types of vehicles; limiting the time or season of use; permitted or 

licensed use only; limiting use to existing roads and trails; and limiting use to designated 

roads and trails. The BLM may place other limitations, as necessary, to protect resources, 

particularly in areas that motorized OHV enthusiasts use intensely or where they 

participate in competitive events.

It is important to note that many acres of public lands designated open, limited to 

designated roads and trails, or limited to designated roads may not be available to the 

general public because access is dependent upon permission granted by an adjacent 

landowner.

Closed: The BLM designates areas as “closed” if closure to all vehicular use is necessary 

to protect resources, ensure visitor safety, or reduce use conflicts. These designations 

are incorporated in the BLM’s 8340 Manual (issued May 25, 1982) which provides land 

managers with general guidance in managing ORVs on public lands.

Due to identification of WSAs and consequent changes in guidance for motorized use 

since the RMPs were completed RMP guidance concerning open, closed and limited no 

longer reflects on the ground management.

Special Recreation Permits

The three RMPs are silent on Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) except as amended by 

the John Day River Plan. Existing BLM policy includes the following criteria for issuing 

Special Recreation Permits:

• Type of public service to be provided by the permittee or applicant and consistency 

with management goals and objectives.

• Ability of that person to provide the service and make a business profit

• Safety of commercial customers.

• BLM workload in administering and monitoring permits.

• Other ramifications of that decision.

Generals decisions to issue SRPs are on a case by case basis. However in 2002, the 

Prineville District limited the availability of new SRPs for commercial, competitive, and 

organized group use on public lands within the district boundary. New SRP proposals 

will be considered for authorization for activities or events not exceeding seven 

consecutive days in length annually which do not require preparation of an environmental 

assessment. 

In addition to this change the John Day River Plan amended the three RMPs by including 

specific requirements John Day River commercial permits and requiring a needs 

assessment prior to the authorization of a concession permit.

Transportation

The John Day, Two Rivers, and Baker RMPs are virtually silent on the concept of 

transportation. The John Day RMP does acknowledge that keeping roads open “for 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 173 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

a variety of recreational purposes” is an objective. Each of the plans contains best 

management practices for roads created to facilitate timber harvest. The John Day River 

Plan identifies both roads to remain open and roads to be closed to protect and enhance 

Outstandingly Remarkable values associated with the Wild and Scenic River Designation. 

It also identifies some roads for maintenance. 

Realty

Within the planning area BLM’s Realty and Ownership program consists of two major 

components. 

The first is land tenure adjustments, such as acquisition of fee title or interests in private 

lands (through purchase or exchange) and the disposal of fee title or interests in public 

lands (through sale, grant, or exchange).

The second component provides various public and private entities with permission 

to use public lands for: 1) Right-of-Way (ROW) authorizations for pipelines, electric 

transmission lines, roads, communications sites, etc; and 2) use and development of 

public lands through easements, permits, and leases. See Map 19 for display of land 

tenure zones and major utility rights-of-way. 

Land Tenure

Each plan provides for managing lands for public benefit and each reflects guidance 

provided by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. The John Day and 

Two Rivers RMPs have a 3 zone system for determining whether and how to retain or 

dispose public lands (The John Day Plan was amended in February 1995 to adopt a 

3 zone system.) The first zone, Z-1, are those lands that should be retained because 

they are high value either due to special qualities or because they are an integral part of 

a block of public land that as a whole provides a public benefit. The second zone, Z-2, 

identifies lands that provide public benefit but may be exchanged for lands that provide 

equal or greater public benefits. The final zone, Z-3, identifies lands that do not provide 

substantial benefit and therefore are suitable for disposal via sale, exchange, or other 

mandated means of disposal. Typically these lands are relatively small, isolated parcels, 

frequently without public or administrative access.

The Baker RMP accomplishes the same ability to make land tenure adjustments 

through a two zone system by combining the elements of Z-1 and Z-2 into a single, Z-1, 

category. This category recognizes that lands with higher public values, including special 

management areas, will be retained while other lands within this category are be retained 

except under specific conditions that serve an important public objective.

Z-2 category in the Baker RMP provides essentially the same guidance as the Z-3 

category under the John Day and Two Rivers RMP. The Baker Plan provides more 

specific criteria for acquisition of lands than either the John Day or Two rivers plans.

Easements and Rights-of-Way

Each RMP has designated all utility/transportation corridors identified by the Western 

Utility Group in May 1980. ACECs and WSAs are considered exclusion areas for 

new rights-of-way. Baker RMP lists steps and information required for application and 

consideration of new rights-of-way while the John Day and Two Rivers plans do not. BLM 

regulations however, do require a process and certain information so the omission from 


John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 176 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

these plans does not mean a lesser standard for consideration of rights-of-way than the 

Baker RMP. Both the Baker and Two Rivers RMPs require that existing developed routes 

be the first consideration for new rights-of-way. The John Day plan provides more general 

direction that new rights-of-way be “consistent with the plan.”

Revised Statute (RS) 2477, included in the 1866 Mining Law, was intended to assist 

settlement of the West by granting rights-of-ways on public lands. While RS 2477 was 

repealed in 1976, existing claims were grandfathered. RS 2477 right-of-way claims are 

not subject to BLM determinations of validity per the January 22nd 1997 court decision 

of Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance vs. Bureau of Land Management. However this 

decision emphasized that the ruling “does not mean that the BLM is forbidden from 

determining the validity of RS 2477 rights of way for its own purposes.” In addition, the 

state or county bears the initial burden of providing appropriate evidence that the claimed 

right-of-way was properly accepted in accordance with governing state law principles 

prior to 1976. Basically, any state or county road improvements on roads with legal 

RS 2477 rights of ways are acceptable. Any proposed road improvements, beyond 

maintenance, on disputed RS 2477 claims must be validated, and the proof must be 

presented by the claimant. 

In 1976, the State of Oregon, acting through its Fish and Wildlife Commission, 

acquired a public access easement through private lands owned by the LouisianaPacific Corporation on the North Fork of the John Day River. This easement covered 

a logging road which parallels the north side of the North Fork of the John Day River, 

from its junction with State Highway 395, downriver to its junction with the Grant County 

Wrightman Canyon Road (County Road 15) (Easement of Way, State of Oregon and 

Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, 1976). Private landowners have provided easements for 

2.5 miles of road to the state of Oregon between Camas creek and Wrightman Canyon 

Road.” BLM maintains approximately 15.35 miles of BLM road and one mile of ODFW 

road along this stretch of the North Fork John Day River (See 13: North Fork John Day 

Transportation). Maintenance of roads crossing private property is based on informal 

agreements with landowners. As a new land manager in the North Fork area the BLM 

agreed to accept the land it received with the easement as an encumbrance over that 

land. 

Leases and Permits and the Recreation and 

Public Purposes Act

Leases and permits are issued for purposes such as a commercial filming, advertising 

displays, croplands, apiaries, livestock holding or feeding areas not related to grazing 

permits and leases, harvesting of native or introduced species, temporary or permanent 

facilities for commercial purposes (does not include mining claims), residential 

occupancy, ski resorts, construction equipment storage sites, assembly yards, oil rig 

stacking sites, mining claim occupancy if the residential structures are not incidental 

to the mining operation, and water pipelines and well pumps related to irrigation and 

non-irrigation facilities. Temporary authorizations under leases and permits differ from 

withdrawals in that the permitted use is short term, the BLM Retains administrative 

responsibility for the lands, and few or no permanent facilities are permitted. 

Congress enacted the Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act (1954) to authorize 

the sale or lease of public lands for recreational or public purposes to State and local 

governments and to qualified nonprofit organizations. Examples of typical uses under 

the act are historic monument sites, campgrounds, schools, fire houses, law enforcement 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 177 —

Chapter 4 – Existing Management Direction

facilities, municipal facilities, landfills, hospitals, parks, and fairgrounds. The BLM may sell 

or lease only the amount of land required for efficient operation of the projects described 

in an applicant’s development plan. 

The John Day and Two Rivers RMPs provided for permits and leases to develop public 

lands for uses that are consistent with the objectives of the RMP and do not conflict with 

other resources and uses. (Note that permits and leases involving grazing, minerals, 

recreation, and other resources are administered under those programs and are 

discussed elsewhere.) 

The Baker RMP provided for permits under the following conditions: 

(1) The use does not conflict with riparian area management, important wildlife habitat, 

recreational use of public lands, or other significant resource values.

(2) The use is compatible with historical use on adjacent private lands.

(3) The use would maintain or enhance other resource values, such as providing habitat 

requirements for game and non-game wildlife species.

The John Day River Plan amended the Two Rivers RMP by eliminating agricultural use 

of BLM administered lands along the lower John Day River. It also amended all three 

RMPs by requiring that if unauthorized agricultural use is found on BLM administered 

lands adjacent to the river that such use will be converted to perennial vegetation, tree 

and shrub propagation, wildlife food and cover plots, or the land be disposed (the Baker 

RMP already had a similar provision).

Both the Two Rivers and Baker RMPs sought to obtain access to public lands through 

purchase or easement when access was not available. The John Day RMP focused on 

maintaining existing public access.

Mining and Minerals

Each plan provides for keeping public lands open for exploration/development of mineral 

resources except when restrictions are needed to protect resource or other values. 

The Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 effectively eliminates mineral development 

on acquired lands along the North Fork John Day until an RMP is completed and 

environmental analysis finds that mineral extraction can occur without adversely affecting 

fish and wildlife habitat and recreational values. In other areas adjacent to the river, The 

John Day River Plan requires that mineral entry be subject to stipulations including no 

surface occupancy for leaseable minerals; requirements to protect water quality, scenic 

quality and vegetation plus adopting State Scenic Waterway requirements for screening 

mining operations and road construction for locatable mineral mining; and not permitting 

new sites and not renewing or renegotiating existing sites when they expire for salable 

minerals.

Public Information and Education

The Baker RMP provided the following guidance: Develop area-wide recreation maps 

and brochures for information and education.

The Two Rivers and John Day RMPs do not address Public Information and Education. 

The John Day River Plan amended each RMP by including the following direction for the 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 178 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

John Day River: “The BLM will continue these actions, as well as continue the current 

policy of discouraging media coverage and public outreach that is intended to bring more 

users to the John Day River. ... In addition, the BLM will install information boards at 

more public access points; increase personnel contacts with visitors: and create new user 

brochures, detailed land ownership maps, and interpretive signs. An information kiosk 

will be constructed on the South Fork John Day Backcountry Byway to educate the public 

about wildlife, riparian, wilderness, and weed management programs. Where trespass 

is a problem, ownership identification markers will be installed between BLM, state, and 

private lands to clearly identify land ownership and reduce trespass potential. ... The 

BLM will also increase cooperative efforts with counties, local businesses, state agencies, 

and others to provide river users with consistent information.”

Law Enforcement and Emergency Services

Each of the three RMPs were silent about Law Enforcement and Emergency Services 

until amended by The John Day River Plan. This plan added the following direction for 

the river corridor: ... commit the BLM to improve management of law enforcement and 

emergency services by increasing levels of cooperation and support for BLM and local 

agencies. 

Monitoring

Each plan provides for monitoring to determine:

1. if management actions are resulting in satisfactory progress toward achieving objectives,

2. if actions are consistent with current policy,

3. if original assumptions were correctly applied and impacts correctly predicted,

4. if mitigation measures are satisfactory,

5. if it is still consistent with the plans and policies of state and local government, other 

federal agencies, and Indian tribes, and

6. if new data are available that would require alteration of the plan.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 179 —

Chapter 5 – Management Opportunities

Chapter 5

Management

Opportunities
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 180 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 181 —

Chapter 5 – Management Opportunities

Introduction

As discussed in Chapter 1, The John Day Basin Resource Management Plan will 

revise and consolidate management decisions from portions of three existing Resource 

Management Plans. The No Action Alternative in the Draft Environment Impact 

Statement will be based on decisions contained in the existing plans. 

Many of the decisions in the existing plans are still timely and management actions 

are working well. Those decisions will be brought forward as Actions Common to All 

Alternatives in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 

The intent of this planning process is to focus on those decisions that will provide 

management direction for the acquired lands on the North Fork John Day River area, and 

decisions that will update or provide new management direction for resources, areas or 

actions that either were not addressed in previous plans, or where conditions (including 

the availability of new information or science) have extensively changed. 

These new decisions or management opportunities are listed below. They were 

developed after considering issues and concerns elevated by the public during scoping 

for the AMS, and they will serve as a starting point as we develop alternatives in the next 

stage of the John Day Basin planning process. We have not listed all resources and 

resource uses below, only those where we will be considering a range of new decisions.

For the resource/resource use groupings below, we also briefly discuss the future 

desired conditions or outcomes which are the goal of our management actions.

Newly Acquired Lands

The lands on the North Fork of the John Day River that were newly acquired by the BLM 

in 2000 will require a full set of new decisions that will cover relevant natural, biological 

and cultural resources; and decisions about resource uses and any potential special 

designations.

Public Lands Managed by BLM Prior 

to Land Exchange

Water Quality and Quantity, and Riparian 

Areas

The primary features relating to the management of water quality and quantity, which 

the BLM has jurisdiction over with the planning area, are riparian areas including stream 

channels and floodplains. While only 7% of the total basin precipitation is intercepted 

BLM-managed lands in this planning area, a majority of the miles of larger river channels 

flow across BLM lands. As such, BLM shares the responsibility for many of the potential 

actions that can affect water quality and quantity with other adjacent land managers and 

owners. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 182 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

The Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) and a resultant 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) guide revision of BLM RMPs in the Interior 

Columbia Basin. Both local conditions and the ICBEMP aquatic/riparian framework need 

to be integrated with new management direction. 

Desired Conditions

The planning area is a healthy and productive landscape where diverse stakeholders 

from within and outside the John Day Basin work together to maintain and improve 

fish and wildlife habitat in a manner that supports the stewardship efforts of local land 

managers, makes efficient use of resources and respects property rights. Sustainable, 

resource-based activities contribute to the social, cultural and economic well-being of the 

Basin.

Riparian habitat has a diversity of shrub/tree species and age classes to provide habitat 

structure for those wildlife species using this habitat type. The herbaceous component 

of riparian/wetland areas is also stable and diverse to support species that use this 

component for nesting and/or foraging activities.

Vegetation, such as juniper, which alters the basin water yield is present in densities 

and locations within range of historic variability. Overland flow is in balance with the 

landscape. Erosion associated with overland flow does not shorten flow durations in 

intermittent streams. 

Ribbons of stream flows are observed throughout the year and maintain a diverse texture 

of vegetation. Stream flows are dependable and sufficient for crop production during the 

peak of the growing season. John Day Basin wild fish run are healthy and sustainable. 

Management Opportunities

The RMP will identify criteria or thresholds for determining watersheds that may need 

special emphasis because of human health concerns, aquatic or upland ecosystem 

health, or public uses. 

This plan will incorporate ICBEMP information to develop an aquatic conservation 

strategy sufficient to protect anadromous and other native fish in the planning area. New 

science on disturbance regimes and riparian area management may be incorporated into 

the standards and guidelines for riparian areas. The mechanisms to achieve desired 

conditions for fish, water quality, water quantity, stream channels and floodplains may 

also be addressed through Best Management Practices. 

Source water protection areas for public drinking water will be incorporated into the RMP 

along with management opportunities and Standards and Guidelines.

The existing RMPs did not address water quality limited streams (listed as 303d by the 

State of Oregon). The RMP will guide implementation of the Clean Water Act to protect 

and restore water quality and support state development and implementation of water 

quality measures (such as Total Maximum Daily Loads of sediment). BLM management 

opportunities to improve water quality on the 303d listed streams are greater in streams 

with considerable BLM ownership and cooperative neighbors. 

With declining budgets, costs associated with management of water rights may be 

addressed with cooperative approaches to maintenance and utilization of water rights. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 183 —

Chapter 5 – Management Opportunities

Leasing water rights to the water resources department on a temporary basis is an 

opportunity to contribute to instream flows and maintain these rights.

Stakeholders from within and outside of the planning area can provide grants to restore 

stream channels and floodplains in a fashion that meets their objectives and provides 

for the compatible beneficial uses of these resources. Examples include the National 

Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the Nature Conservancy, and the Northwest Power and 

Conservation Council.

Higher order BLM managed stream channels and BLM managed floodplains give BLM 

the opportunity to store water in the floodplains for late season beneficial uses such 

as fishing, boating, irrigation, agriculture, etc. Restoring these floodplains presents 

opportunities to recharge alluvial aquifers and sustain the health, diversity, and 

productivity of the public lands. 

Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat

Many of the desired vegetation and wildlife habitat goals and direction in the existing 

Resource Management Plans still apply, including guidance to promote forest health and 

sustainable resources, and provide habitat for native plant, fish, and wildlife habitats. 

However, specific objectives will be reviewed and updated to include new direction and 

science from ICBEMP and to identify priority plant species and habitats.

Desired Conditions

BLM land in the John Day Basin provides wildlife habitat where adequate forage, water, 

cover, structure, and security necessary for wildlife species are available and related to 

appropriate soil, climate and landform conditions.

Upland sagebrush-grassland habitat includes a mosaic of multiple aged shrubs, native 

and desirable non-native perennial grasses, and forbs to support species that utilize 

these habitat types. Western juniper dominance is limited to those areas where fire 

frequency is limited. Forested habitats are healthy, disease and insect resistant, and have 

a variety of structural stages. 

Wildland and prescribed fires are an integral part of maintaining diverse and healthy 

upland and forested landscapes.

Non-native and/or feral sheep, goat and pig populations do not pose a threat to native 

wildlife species and their habitats.

Noxious and invasive weeds are not infesting new land, and infestations do not advance 

to large scale infestations. Large scale infestations have been isolated and controlled 

in all habitat types to reduce the threat to wildlife habitat and populations. Previously 

infested lands are re-vegetated with functional and structural groups of vegetation that 

closely match the potential ecological site description. 

Management Opportunities

Specific objectives will be reviewed to include new direction and science from ICBEMP. 

In addition the RMP will, in close coordination with Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife, describe existing and desired winter range for big game, and will address 

changes in federal listings of wildlife species with habitat in the planning area. Criteria 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 184 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

may be developed for deciding where resource uses may need to be modified to protect, 

mitigate, or restore important plant communities, wildlife habitats, and sensitive species. 

There are opportunities to improve sustainability and resiliency of terrestrial vegetation 

conditions, and reduce the risk of uncharacteristic losses from insect and disease 

outbreak or severe wildfire through management actions such as thinning stands to 

reduce densities, and use of prescribed fire to reduce amounts and concentrations of 

fuels. Determining locations and best methods for meeting these desired conditions can 

be achieved by comparing current vegetative conditions with those conditions predicted 

to occur within historic ranges. Sites with the greatest deviation from desired conditions 

may be prioritized for treatment. Implementation schedules will be updated to facilitate a 

more consistent means to meet demands and needs of the local communities within the 

planning area. 

 

BLM was authorized under the 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Act (Section 323 of P.L. 

108-7) to use stewardship contracting to reduce hazardous fuels and restore forest and 

rangeland health. Long-term contracts (up to 10 years) foster a public/private partnership 

by giving those who undertake stewardship contracts the security to invest in equipment 

and infrastructure that will enable them to productively use the biomass generated from 

these stewardship services to make products or to produce biomass energy. Local 

economies may benefit in this manner.

Fire is an important ecological component, as well as a primary public safety concern. 

The RMP will identify areas within the planning area desired conditions may be met 

through the use of wildfire as a management tool.

Special Designations, Wilderness Study Areas, and Wild and Scenic Rivers

The Resource Management Plan will identify the long-term desired condition, distribution 

and location of areas with special management emphasis. Within the John Day Basin 

planning area there are potential special management areas that contain unique or 

representative resource values. Other areas may have characteristics that make them 

eligible for consideration as a National Wild and Scenic River or Wilderness Study Areas. 

For areas which meet the relevance and importance criteria, the plan will identify goals, 

standards, and objectives for each area. Constraints and mitigation measures will be 

identified that are needed to protect the areas.

Desired Condition

The resources that led to the designation of special management areas are protected 

and guidelines for the amount and type of public uses are established. Wilderness Study 

Areas, and river segments that are considered suitable for Wild and Scenic designation, 

are managed to maintain suitability characteristics. Opportunities and partnerships for 

public education, enjoyment and interpretation for these resources are fostered.

Management Opportunities

The management guidance for the current Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

(ACEC) of Horn Butte Curlew and Spanish Gulch will be reviewed, and potential ACECs 

will be determined. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 185 —

Chapter 5 – Management Opportunities

BLM managed lands within the planning area will be assessed for wilderness 

characteristics and those areas that meet the criteria may be proposed as Wilderness 

Study Areas. This review will include proposals for potential wilderness areas that are 

submitted by the public.

All river segments in the planning area will be assessed for suitability as National Wild & 

Scenic River designation. Those sections determined suitable will be recommended for 

inclusion into the National Wild & Scenic River System (though final designation would 

be an Act of Congress), and interim management will be developed. Existing designated 

Wild and Scenic Rivers will be managed in order to protect their outstandingly remarkably 

values and maintain and enhance the outstanding river related values. 

Land Ownership, Rights-of-Way 

and Easements 

Land ownership patterns have changed since the previous RMPs were developed, 

and there is a need to review and update land tenure classifications, lands suitable for 

disposal, and rights-of-way. 

Desired Conditions

BLM lands are managed in the best ownership patterns to serve national interests 

and the needs of state and local people, including needs for lands for the economy, 

community services, recreation areas, food, fiber, minerals and fish and wildlife. 

Changes in public land ownership are considered where consistent with public land 

management policy and where these changes would result in improved management 

efficiency.

Management Opportunities

The John Day Basin RMP will determine the desired location and arrangement of 

BLM managed lands across the planning area, consistent with the goals, standards, 

and objectives for natural resources, efficiency in land management, consolidation of 

ownership, and community expansion. 

During the planning process, mutually beneficial solutions to access concerns will be 

identified, as well as areas where individual right-of-ways (ROW) may be appropriate. 

Locations for ROW corridors to minimize adverse environmental impacts of multiple, 

separate right-of-way corridors, and corridors for potential renewable energy projects will 

be assessed.

There is also an opportunity to identify conditions where existing ROWs would be 

abandoned, e.g., when combined with other compatible uses, terminated, or no longer 

necessary due to change in land ownership as a result of Oregon Land Exchange Act of 

2000. We will explore new public easement opportunities for access to lands acquired 

under the Oregon Land exchange Act of 2000.

Transportation and Access 

The RMP will delineate travel management areas and designate off-highway vehicle 

management areas within BLM managed lands across the planning area. Decisions will 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 186 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

include whether the area is open, limited or closed to motorized vehicles and acceptable 

modes of access and travel for each travel management area. 

Desired Conditions 

The transportation system meets recreational, commercial, educational and 

administrative user needs while minimizing impacts to other resource values such as 

sensitive soils, wildlife, visual quality, cultural resources, and fisheries. Routes that 

remain in the managed transportation system are managed to provide for public safety 

and resource protection. 

Management opportunities 

The RMP will examine regional and local transportation systems in the planning area, 

focusing primarily on BLM-managed roads to assess access concerns for visitors and 

local communities. Conditions or criteria would be developed to help evaluate BLMmanaged roads which currently are not classified as part of the system, to help determine 

whether they should remain in the system, or be decommissioned. 

The RMP will examine the long-term desired conditions for areas within the planning 

area that would be “open”, “limited” or “closed” to OHV use. The RMP will identify 

criteria for resolving conflicts between motorized users and adjacent residents or other 

uses of BLM-managed lands. Opportunities for areas suitable for motorized routes that 

could provide winter riding opportunities will be assessed. Adjacent county and Forest 

Service management will be incorporated into future decisions on open, limited or closed 

designation of the John Day Basin planning area. 

The RMP will provide guidance for coordination with local and state transportation 

managers to develop accurate transportation maps for the public. 

Management guidelines for motorized route maintenance will be provided.

Recreation

The Resource Management Plan will assess and identify, if suitable, any special 

recreation management areas (SRMA) and the recreation management strategies 

associated with those areas. 

Desired Condition 

A variety of land and river-based, non-motorized and motorized recreation opportunities 

are available on BLM-managed lands, resulting in enjoyable recreation experiences, 

minimizing conflicts with other public land users and promoting sustained, diverse, visitor 

use without degradation of resources.

Management Opportunities

The RMP will identify criteria for reducing conflicts between recreation users and other 

uses on BLM-managed lands. Priority actions and recreation site improvements will 

be identified. Potential for using permits or R&PP leases to address recreation-related 

opportunities will be addressed.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 187 —

Chapter 5 – Management Opportunities

Livestock Grazing

The existing RMPs made decisions about forage allocation and areas available for 

livestock grazing based on resource conditions that, for the most part, are unchanged. 

The existing plans did not, however, provide guidance for the resolution of conflicts 

between public land livestock grazing, and uses and values on public land and adjacent 

private land.

Desired Condition 

Livestock grazing occurs in a pattern across the planning area where economically 

feasible, socially compatible, and environmentally responsible, that support community 

demands and contribute to local economy and quality of life.

Management Opportunities

The RMP will develop a set of indicators to measure potential conflict in livestock 

grazing allotments. Conflicts are those between livestock grazing and resource values, 

and between livestock grazing and other uses on or adjacent to public land. When 

indicators reach a threshold, priorities will be established for actions to reduce conflicts. 

Actions may involve vegetation management to improve livestock forage or wildlife 

habitat, modifications or reductions in grazing use, or modification of other uses such as 

recreation and rights-of-way.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 188 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 189 —

Chapter 6

Collaborative

Planning
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 190 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 191 —

Chapter 6 – Collaborative Planning

Cooperating Agencies

The BLM has convened a group of local, state, and federal agencies and tribal 

governments to collaborate with the BLM during the development of the John Day Basin 

Resource Management Plan. Representatives from these agencies and tribes bring vast 

knowledge and a broad range of interests to the table and will enhance the ability of 

the BLM to identify important issues and to address them with an appropriate range of 

alternatives.

This group will meet on regular basis to review and develop content initiated by BLM 

staff. The Cooperator Group will play a key role in refining issue development, formulating 

alternatives, identifying key publics, and implementing a public involvement strategy. 

Cooperators will keep the BLM informed of new concerns for their organizations or 

community that may be relevant to the RMP process. When needed and to the extent 

that cooperator staff time is available small subgroups will be designated to work on 

specific problems during the planning process. This group will also provide prepublication 

review of key documents. 

Tribal Involvement

The BLM is guided by national policy and law and is committed to continuing consultation 

and cooperative management whenever possible. The three plans are silent on this 

topic except as modified for lands covered by the John Day River Management Plan. 

Regardless of this silence the BLM recognizes its responsibility to provide to federally 

recognized tribal governments and individuals sufficient opportunity to contribute to land 

use decisions and that those concerns or issues are given proper consideration related 

to cultural/religious and natural resources. This trust relationship is acknowledged by 

the U.S. Constitution and is based upon negotiated treaties or other agreements that 

recognize the sovereignty of American Indian Nations to govern themselves as distinct 

political communities. Treaties such as The Treaty with the Tribes of Middle Oregon 

(with tribes now on the Warm Springs Reservation, signed June 25, 1855, ratified 

March 8, 1859 (14 STAT. 751) and the Treaty of 9 June (with tribes now located on the 

Umatilla Reservation), 1855 (12 Stat. 945) acknowledged the rights of tribes to fish, offreservation, at usual and accustomed stations and to hunt, gather resources, and pasture 

animals on public lands in common with other citizens of the United States. Though a 

Though assigned the responsibility of managing over 450,000 acres of Federal Lands within the 

planning area the BLM shares a interest in the management of these lands with other federal, 

state, and local governmental agencies, Native American Tribes, local residents, visitors, and other 

individuals and organizations.

Public, governmental, and tribal involvement is mandated by CEQ regulations for implementing NEPA. This 

mandate is reflected in the BLM planning Manual and Handbook. Tribal involvement is mandated by other 

documents as described below.

More important than any law or regulation, it is just good sense to involve the public, other governmental 

agencies, and tribes in the planning process. Each of these entities has unique interests and knowledge. 

Sharing interests and knowledge in a collaborative setting contributes to the development of a plan that 

effectively addresses the significant planning issues and is more likely to meet local, regional, and 

national needs than a process without meaningful collaboration.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 192 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

treaty with the Burns Paiute was never ratified, formal recognition on October 13, 1972 

established certain rights for that tribe as well.

In April 2003 the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon 

(CTWSO), the BLM, the Forest Service, and BIA signed a Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU), “For the Purpose of Providing a Framework for Government-toGovernment Consultation and Collaboration On resource Management Plans, Proposals, 

Actions, and Policies and to Make a Statement of Mutual Benefits and Interests.” Similar 

MOUs exist between the BLM and The Burns Paiute Tribe and the Confederated Tribes 

of the Umatilla Reservation. These three MOUs describe the rights and responsibilities 

of Cooperative Management and Consultation. Consequently each tribe has been offered 

the opportunity to become involved in the planning process for the John Day Basin RMP. 

Local Government

County and municipal governments as representatives of local constituencies have 

a vested interest in land use planning involving federal lands. Lands managed by 

the BLM can provide areas for recreation as well as a source of income for residents 

of the planning area. BLM managed lands can contain roads of importance to local 

communities and frequently provide the most desirable routes for utilities. Because of 

their awareness of the needs of local communities it is important that representative of 

local government be involved in the planning process. Officials of Grant, Wheeler, and 

Sherman counties have participated in the early stages of the planning process. 

State Government

Several State agencies have jurisdiction over certain activities within the John Day Basin. 

As a result it is important that these agencies be represented in the planning process. 

The state has decided to limit participation in the planning process to three agencies: 

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

Oregon Department of Transportation. These agencies are expected to represent all 

state interests in the planning process.

Federal Government

In addition to the BLM several federal agencies have resource management 

responsibilities within the John Day Basin. Several agencies have chosen to participate 

in the John Day Basin RMP planning process. The Fish and Wildlife Service and 

National Marine Fisheries Service have oversight responsibilities for compliance with the 

Endangered Species Act. The Environmental Protection Agency is required to review and 

evaluate all Environmental Impact Statements. The Soil Conservation Service plays an 

important advisory role for private land owners in the John Day Basin and also has an 

interest in the management of public lands as well. The National Park Service and the 

U.S.D.A Forest Service each manage lands and resources adjacent to BLM managed 

lands and have shared interests with the BLM in making management of lands and 

resources complementary, while recognizing different missions, whenever possible. Each 

of the above agencies has chosen to participate in the planning process.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 193 —

Chapter 6 – Collaborative Planning

Resource Advisory Council

The John Day-Snake Resource Advisory Council (RAC) is an official federal advisory 

committee, providing advice and recommendations on all aspects of public-land 

management to the Bureau of Land Management’s Prineville, Vale, and Spokane District 

Offices and the Umatilla, Wallowa-Whitman, Malheur, and Ochoco National Forests. 

The RAC consists of local residents who represent broad interest categories: commodity 

interests, non-commodity interests, and community interests. RAC members are 

selected and appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. Representation includes:

Five members representing commodity interests such as grazing permittees, 

commercial timber, energy and mining, developed recreation and/or off-highway 

vehicle groups, and transportation & rights-of-way. 

Five members representing conservation interests such as environmental 

organizations, historic & culture interests, conservation, and dispersed recreation. 

Five members representing community interests such as elected officials, Indian 

Tribes, State resource agencies, academicians involved in natural sciences, and the 

public-at-large. 

The John Day-Snake RAC meets quarterly at various communities within the RAC’s area. 

The RAC schedules occasional field tours for specific projects or issues on their agenda. 

All RAC meetings are open to the public with a portion of each meeting reserved for the 

public to present or comment on issues for RAC consideration.

The BLM will periodically update the RAC on the progress of the planning effort. It has 

also requested that the RAC provide assistance in developing Alternatives for managing 

Off Highway Vehicle use on BLM managed lands within the planning area. 

Public Involvement

The most critical element of cooperative management is public involvement. Congress 

has mandated that the BLM manage public lands for public benefit. At the same time the 

public is not a single cohesive entity. Rather the BLM serves a diverse public with multiple 

and sometimes conflicting interests and positions about key issues. It is important that 

the diversity of public interests be represented during the planning process. Both the 

Coordination Group and the John Day/Snake RAC provide a representation of diverse 

public interests. However it is the intent of the BLM planning team to provide the public 

with direct access to the planning process. This will be accomplished in the following 

manner:

1. Public Scoping-This initial step, requesting the public provide information about public 

lands and identify problems associated with public lands in the John Day Basin has 

been completed and is described in Chapter 7.

2. Publication and public review of the Analysis of the Management Situation

3. Public participation in planning meetings held to formulate alternatives that resolve 

significant planning issues.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 194 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

4. Public comment on the Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. Comments may be submitted via U.S. mail, E-mail, or 

orally at public review meetings or via telephone.

Information Sharing

The BLM will use a number of information sharing techniques to give people the 

opportunity to share new information and to be kept up-to-date on the planning process. 

The following is a brief summary of some of those techniques.

John Day Basin Resource Management Plan Web Site

The John Day Basin RMP web site will provide information such as plan updates, 

meeting dates, plan schedule, and working documents of the Issue Teams.

The address is: http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/prineville/index.htm

Plan Updates

Periodically, consolidated “snapshot” portraits of the plan’s status will be prepared, posted 

to our web site, and mailed to our mailing list. News releases in local newspapers, and 

feature stories and broadcasts on local television and/or radio stations will be associated 

with major public meetings.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 195 —

Chapter 7 

Scoping Report
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 196 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 197 —

Chapter 7 – Scoping Report

The planning team values the role of public input in the planning process. To maximize 

public involvement we have added opportunities beyond the scoping requirements found 

in the Federal Land Policy and Management and National Environmental Policy Acts. 

The Planning Team has pursued several additional avenues to help encourage public 

participation during the development of the Resource Management Plan. We have 

hosted several, more formal, public involvement processes including public meetings and 

social and economic workshops; the team has also invited input and feedback through 

less formal means such as mail, e-mail, phone conversations and personal interactions. 

These venues are intended to invite public participation and obtain valuable feedback 

which can then be used to frame the planning process – to focus on topics of concern; to 

identify various solutions, guidance and direction; and to determine the extent of analysis 

required to reach an informed decision. 

Public Involvement

The Planning Team has invited public interaction through a variety of venues:

An electronic mailbox has been set up which can be accessed at any time to provide 

comments, concerns and feedback:

John_Day_Basin_RMP@or.blm.gov

Letters and other mailings can be sent at any time to:

John Day Basin RMP

Prineville BLM

3050 NE 3rd Street

Prineville, OR 97754

The BLM contracted the expertise of sociologists and anthropologists (James Kent 

Associates) to spend time in the planning area visiting with local officials, business 

owners, travelers and residents in order to gather information on BLM land management 

concerns.

The BLM co-hosted, with the help of Wheeler County and the cities of John Day and 

Canyon City, several Economic Profile Workshops in the planning area, with the intent to 

explore economic and social trends within the area

The BLM hosted a series of meetings open to the public throughout eastern, central and 

western Oregon, to gather public input and feedback on concerns and problems with 

BLM management in the planning area

The BLM, in conjunction with several other governmental authorities – including: 

Grant, Wheeler and Sherman counties, the Confederated Tribes of the Warms Springs 

Reservation of Oregon, US Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA Fisheries, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and Parks and Recreation 

– has established a Cooperating Agencies group to provide input and feedback to BLM 

throughout the process.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 198 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

To date the BLM has received feedback through all of these venues with the James Kent 

Associates work, Economic Profile Workshops and BLM Public Meetings/letters and emails providing the bulk of the feedback that has been received. The findings from each 

of these venues are described in the following pages.

James Kent Associates

James Kent Associates (JKA) was hired to sample viewpoints and opinions about the 

role of public lands in the basin. The fieldwork took place in Grant, Wheeler, Sherman, 

Gilliam, and Morrow Counties. This work was designed to provide the BLM with an 

understanding of how public land management affects citizens and their communities, 

identifying concerns about public land management, identifying current social and 

economic conditions, and identifying opportunities for greater community dialogue about 

alternatives for future management of public lands.

The key findings were grouped according to community life, natural resource 

management and citizen interests. In addition to these findings the report also 

recommends communication strategies for each geographic area based on coaching by 

local residents about the best time and place for meetings, key people to involve, and 

appropriate methods of local communication. Generally speaking, residents appreciate 

personal connection and want a planning process that builds off of local interests and 

includes national interests in a positive manner. Residents generally favor an approach 

that eschews the radical fringes of thought and builds a practical, moderate course of 

action for future BLM management.

Community Life:

Population in four of the five counties has declined or has remained the same over the 

last fifteen years, while Morrow County, by virtue of its Columbia River location, increased 

population substantially. No clear trend was identified with rates of poverty, although per 

capita income has dropped in real terms throughout most of the region. The population 

is older than the state or national average. Hispanics have notably increased in Morrow 

County, while only modestly increased in other areas.

The traditional economic sectors of timber, ranching, farming and mining, have slowly 

declined over the last 30 years in terms of income and employment generated in these 

counties. Like other areas of the state and nation, the economic growth has occurred 

in trades and services, particularly professional and business services, reflecting the 

retirement and recreation basis of these sectors.

County and local leadership has been active in fostering efforts at economic 

diversification with some successes, notably, wind energy development in Sherman 

County, Painted Hills Beef and the development of paleontological resources in Wheeler 

County, an OHV Park in Morrow County, and a broadening of service and recreation 

oriented businesses in Grant County. 

Settlement patterns are changing, as long-time ranches are bought by wealthier 

urbanites, who often purchase for recreation purposes, and who are seen by other 

residents as improving environmental conditions but not adding much to community life. 

Residents report that new settlement is from the “Bend spillover,” from California, and 

from the coast. A short supply of housing reported by residents is seen to be leading to 

higher housing prices.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 199 —

Chapter 7 – Scoping Report

Natural Resource Management: 

Although throughout the region there is a sense that government cannot be trusted, 

personal relationships between BLM personnel and residents tend to be very good, 

particularly with BLM’s “traditional publics” of ranchers, farmers, and the timber industry.

Communication between BLM and the “average” citizen is generally perceived to be low. 

Most people simply do not know what BLM is doing and many expressed appreciation of 

BLM’s outreach effort through James Kent Associates.

Awareness of BLM lands tends to be high among the traditional sectors and elected 

officials, but low among the general public. Related to this is a general, widespread 

confusion of people about whose land one might be on at any given moment. The desire 

for accurate maps and better information was one of the most widespread citizen issues 

in the John Day River Basin.

The most widespread citizen issue was the loss of access to public lands. People want 

the new plan to anticipate the locations of future access loss and work with them to 

preserve access in the future, or to re-acquire access to areas recently lost. High interest 

was expressed in partnering with local counties to undertake joint transportation planning 

and working together to foster greater access to public lands in the future.

The process by which individual BLM parcels are purchased or Recreation and Public 

Purpose leases are obtained is not well understood and is of key interest. There is a 

strong perception of agency inaction on this issue. 

Residents want to be part of the management planning process for the newly acquired 

lands on the North Fork of the John Day River. They are interested in fishing and hunting, 

fire and forest management, fencing, access, roads, gates, noxious weeds, “wild and 

scenic” designations, business development, and maps, and generally favor multiple 

uses. 

Although people remain skeptical that a recreation economy can ever replace a ranching 

and timber economy, new recreation-related businesses and their promotion are of 

central interest. Shooting ranges, OHV riding areas, winter recreation, and managing 

hunting effects are some of the interests.

Residents in Sherman and Gilliam Counties are most interested in the recreation 

management of the John Day River, specifically the management of floaters, optimizing 

the economic benefits of river recreation, stewardship contracting for management of 

recreation opportunities, as well as promoting continued access to BLM lands near the 

river.

Other specific issues related to public land management that were less widespread 

and more relegated to particular publics include grazing, the timber programs, fire 

suppression programs (Sherman and Gilliam Counties), and support for youth.

Residents believe there is a trend toward hunting only for the rich. They respect the right 

of ranchers to diversify their income sources through fee hunting, but lament the loss of 

hunting opportunities through lack of traditional access to private lands. Observers expect 

the demand for hunting on public lands to increase.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 200 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Citizen Interests: 

Access. Although many residents couched their concerns about access as if it was 

BLM’s responsibility, many indicated a willingness to contribute to solutions and felt that 

a community-based planning process could widen the resources available to address the 

problem and accomplish more than if BLM addressed the issue only “in house.”

Little Canyon Mountain. The success of the Little Canyon Mountain clean up generated 

ample “social capital” with which to undertake the next step in management planning for 

this area that could accommodate multiple uses. The nearby communities in this area 

appear to have capacity to contribute in positive ways to the ongoing management of this 

area.

John Day River Management. Many people believe that requiring permits for floatng the 

John Day River is inevitable in order to manage the impacts, and want to participate to 

minimize necessary regulation and optimize community benefits.

Economic Development. The role of BLM lands and their management in fostering 

needed economic development has been appreciated by residents and many advised 

that an even more concerted focus on this topic in the new land use plan is warranted, 

particularly related to the promotion of paleontological resources and recreation-oriented 

business, including the provision of BLM maps and information that would help in 

orienting visitors to the attractions of the area.

Economic Profile Workshops

In cooperation with Wheeler County and the cities of John Day and Canyon City, the 

BLM co-hosted two Economic Profile Workshops – one in Fossil, Oregon and another in 

John Day, Oregon. Both of these workshops were well attended by a wide variety of local 

officials, business owners, and residents. 

Each workshop began by identifying objectives from the participants. The Sonoran 

Institute facilitated the discussions – a major component of each workshop related to 

identifying current trends and discussing how BLM fits into those trends. The following is 

a short description of some of these trends and opportunities that were identified in each 

workshop.

Fossil Workshop:

The new availability of limited medical facilities has had a noticeable effect on the stability 

and is a huge asset to the community. 

Painted Hills Beef does a great job of marketing via internet and they are doing very well. 

Ranches are being sold and limiting access to BLM property. 

It’s been difficult to convince the older residents that we have to plan for growth.

There is something about this area that draws people in and keeps them coming back. 

Wheeler & Gilliam counties have an opportunity to shape the growth towards how they 

want to look in the future. 

The education system has drastically changed because we have no students. We have a 

declining enrollment from 218 in ’92 to 120 now. That is happening in every school. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 201 —

Chapter 7 – Scoping Report

We need to throw out some old thinking and create some new thinking. We can’t wait for 

the growth to happen-we need to change some of the zoning rules. We need to have 

mixed use zoning in the downtown district in these towns. 

There’s been a real increase in popularity in the river. The Park Service has always been 

a draw; there’s lot of opportunities for the BLM to play a part in the public lands setting/

draw to the area.

When we have festivals, we don’t have any place to park, house or feed visitors. I’m 

hoping we could get some assistance via State or BLM properties.

John Day Workshop:

The largest number of firms in Grant County are in construction and there seems to be a 

trend for that to increase. If you want a new house built in Grant County, there is a waiting 

list for up to two years. 

There are two major trends in the Monument area; one is the purchase of large tracts 

of trophy hunting lands by absentee landowners and there is the dying of the schools 

associated with young families leaving because they cannot find employment or the 

services are too marginal. The retirees are temporary, they last about 5 years when they 

realize how far it is to a hospital and they leave.

Recreation opportunities are deteriorating as the forests deteriorate, due to the lack of 

management. 

Since 1990, one-third of the employment base has disappeared; school & county 

population has dropped off; this directly correlates to drop off in timber sales with FS.

Finding dependable employees within the community is really hard. Problem of small 

business is the lack of employees that are willing to work and can pass a drug test. 

People quit good paying jobs because they can’t guarantee having time off for hunting 

season. People don’t necessarily want to work 9-5 work weeks.

The lumber industry is going down. It was the traditional industry-that is no longer true. 

In the mining industry, the dredges used to work here and now there is no mining. We 

need tourism but we need some mainstay employment and medium paying jobs. Mills 

are down to one shift. At the height of the lumber industry, there were 1,500 people 

employed-that’s gone. 

Grant County has one of the only active sawmills that exist in Eastern Oregon. 

Driving force is retirees, people with money from elsewhere, social programs, spending 

money on recreation properties, retiree’s investment. 

The timber thinning that people have been talking about is an ecological service that 

is important. I think there are other opportunities for ecological services that could be 

generated in the future. The BLM should look at that-such as native plant materials, 

ecological monitoring, planning and mapping services, weed control. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 202 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Public Response via BLM Meetings, Letters and 

Comments 

In February 2005 a Notice of Intent to complete a Resource Management Plan was 

published in the Federal Register. This initiated a 30 day public comment period during 

which the BLM directly contacted over 2500 individuals that have expressed interest 

in public lands management in the planning area. The BLM also published numerous 

announcements across Oregon through various news media. In response the BLM 

received numerous letters, e-mails, phone calls and other comments and hosted several 

public meetings. The intent of the scoping and public comment period is to invite and 

solicit information from groups or individuals interested in management of the public 

lands in the planning area. 

During this timeframe the BLM received over 270 individual responses in the form of 

letters, e-mails, phone calls and public meetings. These responses contained over 1200 

distinct and substantive comments that have been identified. Most of the letters received 

originated in the John Day area with a significant number of responses coming from the 

Portland/Hillsboro/Forest Grove area.

The BLM also hosted five public meetings in: Fossil, John Day, Pendleton, Bend and 

Forest Grove. These meetings were relatively well attended ranging from 10 attendees in 

Pendleton to 51 attendees in John Day.

Many responses were made on behalf of an organization. Table 18 displays the 

organization type as noted in the responses received.

Comments received during this process were received either via responses mailed, 

phoned, faxed or e-mailed, or responses given at a public meeting. 

Each comment was reviewed to determine the public land resource, process or topic to 

which it referred. Figure 40 displays the total number of comments received in particular 

resource categories. Most groupings are self explanatory – however Management refers 

to general public land management and Resources includes comments regarding most 

public land resources from soils to fish and wildlife and vegetation.

Table 18: Number of Comments Received by Organization 

Identification

Organization Type Number of Comments

Individual (none identified) 455

Preservation/Conservation 338

Federal Agency 32

Wood Products Industry 13

Recreational 6

Public Meetings (comment source not identified) 345
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 203 —

Chapter 7 – Scoping Report

The BLM received more comments regarding off-highway vehicle use than any other 

grouping and nearly as many as all the other groupings put together. While these OHV 

concerns spanned the entire planning area most were directed at the Little Canyon 

Mountain area just outside of Canyon City. The attention given this particular area 

prompted the BLM to hold a separate public meeting to fully explore the nature of 

concerns that are involved in the management of this area.

Other concerns include management of the North Fork John Day area for all public land 

resources including vegetation, recreation, forest management, range management, offhighway vehicle use, wildland and prescribed fire management, access and recreation, 

and special designation areas such as Wild and Scenic Rivers, Wilderness and Areas of 

Critical Environmental Concern.

Range management as well as special designation areas were identified as areas of 

concern throughout other areas within the planning boundary. General public lands 

management, the land use planning process and land tenure adjustments also received 

some attention in the public comments.

Preliminary Issues

Based on the Key Findings of the Analysis of the Management Situation and input from 

the public, other governments and tribes we have identified several Planning Issues. The 

Planning Issues may be revised or refined as a result of comments received about the 

AMS. Planning Issues are problems that require changes in RMP direction to resolve. 

Figure 40: 

Number of 

Comments 

by Resource 

Category
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 204 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

An “issue” is defined as a topic of controversy, dispute or concern over resource 

management activities or land uses within the planning area boundary. In order to 

be considered “significant” by the agency, an issue must be well defined, relevant to 

the proposed action(s) in question, and within the authority and ability of the agency 

to address in the development of a reasonable range of alternatives or mitigation 

measures. The agency must consider the issue in the environmental analysis of the 

various alternatives.

The following Planning Issues will be utilized to develop management guidance 

alternatives for the planning area. These alternatives, along with a description of the 

environmental consequences implementation of these alternatives would have on the 

public lands will be described in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 

Water Resources

The public expressed concerns over the management of riparian areas:

Management of riparian areas should be consistent according to resources

Cooperative Management Efforts

Water quality efforts should be supported in the RMP

Forest Health

The public expressed concern regarding the management of timber resources

Management guidance should allow for a range of resource management objectives

Fire and Fuels Management 

Much of the planning area has missed at least one disturbance event or fire

Current RMP guidance is unclear with respect to management in wildland urban 

interface areas

Public Land Access and Travel Management

BLM policy requires resource management plans to delineate travel management areas. 

The need to identify roads and access to BLM and private lands has been anticipated 

by the BLM as the result of changes in land status and accessibility

Public concerns include recent reduction in access as the result of closure of routes 

on BLM lands and adjacent private lands

Off Highway Vehicle Use Designations

Designations are required by BLM policy: either open, limited or closed

The situation has changed since last plans.

The public expressed concern about OHV use in the Little Canyon Mountain Area

 Two viewpoints expressed:

 Close BLM lands to protect resources

 Designate large areas for OHV use to provide recreational opportunities
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 205 —

Chapter 7 – Scoping Report

Land Tenure Zoning Designations

Under 43 CFR 2400 the BLM is required to identify lands that should be retained, 

disposed, or acquired to serve the national interest. 

Though the John Day, Baker, and Two Rivers RMPs did this the subsequent Oregon 

Land Exchange Act of 2000 significantly modified land ownership in the John Day 

Basin creating a need to review and possibly change some land tenure designations.

Public concerns include BLM acquisition or disposal of lands in the Rudio Mountain 

area.

Special Management Areas

Wild and Scenic River (WSR) suitability recommendations

Suitability recommendations are required by BLM policy

Public concerns have a wide range:

 Include wild and scenic rivers wherever possible to protect resource values

 Exclude wild and scenic rivers because they restrict public use

Consider designations to protect specific resource values such as paleontological values

Areas with Wilderness characteristics

Policy concerning wilderness review undergoing revision

Public Concerns have a wide Range:

 Protect lands with wilderness characteristics

 Do not protect land with wilderness characteristics because it limits multiple use 

management

Management of Acquired Lands in the 

North Fork of the John Day Area

The Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 requires a development of a management plan 

for acquired lands before multiple uses can be considered.

Guidance for all resources must be provided

Visual Resource Inventory and Designations (Scenic Quality, etc.)

 Designations are required by BLM policy

Public concerns include a broad range

All issues described above plus:

 Grazing (comments for both pro and con)
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 206 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 207 —

References

Anonymous, 1911. cited in Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2003. Oregon’s 

bighorn sheep and Rocky Mountain goat management plan. Oregon Department of 

Fish and Wildlife. Salem, Oregon.

Asher, J., 1993. Noxious weeds in eastern Oregon. USDI Bureau of Land Management, 

BLM Oregon State Office. Portland, OR.

Audubon, 2006. Audubon watchlist for the long-billed curlew. http://audubon2.org/

webapp/watchlist/viewSpecies.jsp?id=124 accessed on February 22, 2006

Azuma, David L.; Hiserote, Bruce A.; Dunham, Paul A. 2005. The western juniper 

resource of eastern Oregon, 1999. Resource Bulletin PNW-RB-249. Portland, OR: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

18 p.

Barrett, S.W., S.F. Arno, and J.P. Menakis, 1997. Fire episodes in the inland Northwest 

(1540-1940) based on fire history data. General Technical Report INT-GTR-370, 

17 pp. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah. cited 

by Johnson, David H., and Thomas A. O’Neil (Managing Directors), 2001. Wildlifehabitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. 768 pp. Oregon State University 

Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Behnke, R.J., 1992. Native trout of western North America. American Fisheries Society 

Monograph 6. Bethesda, MD.

Benefield, Lorri, 2006. Personal conversation with Bob Young, Service Forester for 

Oregon Department of Forestry. 15 May. USDI Bureau of Land Management, 

Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR.

Buchanan, D. V., M. L. Hansen, and R. M. Hooton, 1997. Status of Oregon’s Bull Trout. 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Portland, OR.

Burkhardt, W.J., and E.W. Tisdale, 1976. Causes of juniper invasion in southwestern 

Idaho. Ecology 57:472-484.

Cheater, M., 1992. Alien invasion. Nature Conservancy (Sept/Oct.).

Cochran, P.H., and James W. Barrett, 1999. Growth of Ponderosa Pine thinned to 

different stocking levels in central Oregon: 30 year results. PNW-RP-508. March. 

USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Cochran, P.H.. and James W. Barrett, 1999. Thirty-five-year growth of Ponderosa Pine 

saplings in response to thinning and understory removal. PNW-RP-512. July. USDA 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Cochran, P.H., J.M. Geist, D.L, Clemens, Roderick R. Clausnitzer, and David C. Powell, 

1994. Suggested stocking levels for forest stands in northeastern Oregon and 

southeastern Washington. PNW-RN-513. April. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 208 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Collette, C., and J. Harrison (Eds.). 

1992a. Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Program – Strategy for Salmon, Volume I. 

Northwest Power Planning Council.

1992b. Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Program – Strategy for Salmon, Volume II. 

Northwest Power Planning Council.

Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC), 1996. Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-KishWit, spirit of the salmon: The Columbia River anadromous fish restoration plan of the 

Nez Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs and Yakima tribes. Volume I.

Cordell, H.K., 2005. Off-highway vehicle recreation in the United States, regions and 

states: A national report from the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment 

(NSRE). USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station. Asheville, NC. (online) 

URL: www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/ohv/OHV_final_report.pdf, accessed on 

07/15/06.

Cowlin, R.W., P.A. Briegleb, and F.L. Moravets, 1942. Forest resources of the ponderosa 

pine region of Washington and Oregon. Miscellaneous Publication 490. 99 pp. 

USDA Forest Service cited by Miller, R.F., et al, 2005. Biology, ecology, and 

management of western juniper. OSU/AES Tech Bulletin 152 (June).

Crawford, J. A., and V. L. Coggins (Eds.), 2000. The reestablishment of Columbian 

Sharp-Tailed Grouse into Oregon. Oregon State University. Oregon Department of 

Fisheries and Wildlife. Salem, OR.

DiTomaso, Joseph M. 2000. Invasive weeds in rangelands: Species, impacts, and 

management. Weed Science, 48:255-265.

Environmental Protection Agency, 2003. Ecoregions of Oregon. (online) URL: www.epa.

gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/or_eco.htm, accessed 10/5/06.

Environmental Protection Agency, 2006. Ecoregion maps and data. Western Ecology 

Division. (online) URL: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/wed/ecoregions/or/or_eco.html#section1.2.2.

Federal Fire and Aviation Leadership Council, 2006. Interagency standards for fire and 

fire aviation operations. January.

Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG), 1998. Stream 

Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices. ISBN-0-934213-59-3, 

pp. 7-32 to 7-35 (October).

Fitch, Lorne, B. Adams, and K. O’Shaugnessy, 2003. Caring for the Green Zone: 

Riparian Areas and Grazing Management. Third Edition. Lethbridge, Alberta: Cows 

and Fish Program. ISBN No. 0-9688541-2-5.

Fitzgerald, Stephen A. (Ed.), 2002. Fire in Oregon’s forests: risks, effects, and treatment 

options. p 7. October. Oregon Forests Resources Institute. 

Friedel, M.H., 1991. Range condition assessment and the concept of thresholds: a 

viewpoint. Journal of Range Management, 44(5):422-426.

Frost, W.E., and E.L. Smith, 1991. Biomass productivity and range condition on range 

sites in southern Arizona. Journal of Range Management, 44(1):64-67.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 209 —

References

Gast, William R., Donald W. Scott, Craig Schmitt, and Charles G. Johnson Jr., 1991. Blue 

Mountain forest health report-new perspectives in forest health. Pacific Northwest 

Region; Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests, USDA Forest 

Service. Baker City, OR. 

Gedney, D.R., D.L. Azuma, C.L. Bolsinger, and N. McKay, 1999. Western juniper in 

eastern Oregon. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report NW-GTR-464 cited 

by Miller, R.F., et al, 2005. Biology, ecology, and management of western juniper. 

OSU/AES Tech Bulletin 152 (June).

Grant County Oregon, 2006. Welcom to Grant County Oregon. (online) URL: www.

el.com/to/grantcounty/, accessed on 10/20/06.

Hall, Fred, 1980. Fire-history – Blue Mountains, Oregon. In: Marvin A. Stokes and John 

H. Dieterich (Technical Coordinators) Proceedings of the Fire History Workshop, 

October 20-24, 1980, Tucson, Arizona. GTR-RM-81. USDA Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Fort Collins, CO cited in USDA 

Forest Service, 1994. Draft viable ecosystems management guide. Ochoco National 

Forest. Prineville, OR.

Hall, Frederick C., 1976. Fire and vegetation in the Blue Mountains: implications for land 

managers. In: Proceedings, Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference; 1974 Oct. 16-17; 

Portland, Oregon No. 15. Tall Timbers Research Station. Tallahassee, FL. 155-170. 

cited in USDA Forest Service, 1994. Draft viable ecosystems management guide. 

Ochoco National Forest. Prineville, OR.

Hemmingsen, A. R., S. Gunckel, P. Sankovich, and P. Howell, 2001. Bull trout life history, 

genetics, habitat needs, and limiting factors in central and northeastern Oregon. 

2000 annual report. U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration. 

Portland, Oregon.

Holechek, J. L., R. D. Pieper, and C. H. Herbel, 1998. Range management principles 

and practices. 542 pp. 3rd edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 

Johnson, David H., and Thomas A. O’Neil (Managing Directors), 2001. Wildlife-Habitat 

Relationships in Oregon and Washington. 768 pp. Oregon State University Press, 

Corvallis, OR. 

Jones, Jeffrey L., and Wendel J. Hann, 1996. Broadscale vegetation patterns within the 

Interior Columbia River Basin and adjacent areas. Landscape Ecology Stars Report. 

Chapter 13c. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Missoula, MT.

Jones, Jeffrey L., and W.J. Hann, 1996. Compositional trends of broadscale vegetation 

types within the interior Columbia River basin. ICRB Lanscape Ecology Stars 

Report. Chapter 13A. 2 May. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Missoula, MT.

Jones, J.L., P.F. Hessburg, and B.G. Smith, 1996. Broadscale vegetation departures 

within subbasins of the interior Columbia River basin. ICRB Landscape Ecology Stars 

Report. Chapter 13b. USDA Forest Service.

Knapp, P.A., and P.T. Soule, 1998. Recent juniperus occidentalis (western juniper) 

expansion on a protected site in central Oregon. Global Change Biology 4:347-
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 210 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

357, cited by Miller, R.F., et al, 2005. Biology, ecology, and management of western 

juniper. OSU/AES Tech Bulletin 152 (June).

Landfire BPS Draft, 2006. Unpublished Multi-Agency Draft Biophysical Settings, 

personnel communications John Foster Nature Conservancy. (online) URL: www.

landfire.gov/index.php 

Laycock, W.A., 1991. Stable states and thresholds of range condition on North American 

rangelands: a viewpoint. Journal of Range Management 44(5):427-433.

Leopold, Luna B., 1994. A View of the River. p.3. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 

MA. 

Leopold, L.B., and C. Vita-Finzi, 1998. Valley changes in the Mediterranean and America 

and their effects on humans. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 

142(1):1-17.

Lindsay, R.B., W.J. Knox, M.W. Flesher, B.J. Smith, E.A. Olsen and W.S. Lutz, 1986. 

Study of wild spring chinook in the John Day River System. Final Report of Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife (Contract DE-AI79-83BP39796) to Bonneville Power 

Administration, Portland. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. US Department 

of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration. Portland, OR.

Miller, R.F., 2001. Managing western juniper for wildlife. Washington State University 

Cooperative Extension, US Dept. of Agriculture.

Miller, R.F., and J.A. Rose, 1995. Historic expansion of juniperus occidentalis (western 

juniper) in southeastern Oregon. Great Basin Naturalist 55:37-45, cited by Miller, 

R.F., et al, 2005. Biology, ecology, and management of western juniper. OSU/AES 

Tech Bulletin 152 (June).

Miller, R.F., and J A. Rose, 1999. Fire history and western juniper encroachment 

in sagebrush steppe, cited by Miller, R.F., et al, 2005. Biology, ecology, and 

management of western juniper. OSU/AES Tech Bulletin 152 (June).

Miller, R.F., J.D. Bates, A.J. Svejcar, F.B. Pierson Jr., and L.E. Eddleman, 2005. Biology, 

ecology, and management of western juniper (juniperus occidentalis). Oregon State 

University Agricultural Experiment Station. Tech Bulletin 152 (June) 77 pp.

Miller, R.F., R.J. Tausch, and W. Waichler, 1999. Oldgrowth juniper and pinon woodlands. 

Pp. 375-384. In: S.B. Monsen, R. Stevens, R.J. Tausch, and R.F. Miller (Compilers). 

Proceedings: Ecology and Management of Pinon-juniper Communities within the 

Interior West. RMRS-P-9, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 

Ogden, UT.

Morgan, P., S.C. Bunting, A.E. Black, T. Merrill, and S. Barrett, 1996. Fire regimes in 

the interior Columbia River basin: past and present. Final Report, RJVA-INT-94913. 

USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory, Intermountain 

Research Station. Missoula, MT.

Morris, G. 1999. The Value of the Benefits of U.S. Biomass Power. A report prepared 

for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory by Green Power Institute. NREL/SR507-27541. 23 p.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 211 —

References

Morgan, R.L., 2002. Status and habitat use of the Washington ground squirrel 

Spermophilus washingtoni on Bureau of Land Management Lands, Horn Butte, 

Oregon in 2001.

Morris, John L., 1997. Personal communication with T. Unterwegner of Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. USDI Bureau of Land Management, John Day 

Office. John Day, OR.

Morris, John L., 1999. Personal communication with T. Unterwegner of Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. USDI Bureau of Land Management, John Day 

Office. John Day, OR.

Morris, John L., 2006. Personal communication with T. Unterwegner of Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. USDI Bureau of Land Management, John Day 

Office. John Day, OR.

Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC), 2003. Retail Sales Reports. Based on ATV sales and 

2003 MIC Motorcycle Statistical Annual. p 28.

Mrazikk, Steve, 2005. Oregon water quality index: summary report water years 1995-

2004. (online) URL: www.deq.state.or.us/lab/wqm/OWQI%20Summary04.pdf, 

accessed on 05/01/06.

Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC), 2005. John Day subbasin revised 

draft plan. Prepared by the Columbia-Blue Mountain Resource Conservation & 

Development Area. Northwest Power and Conservation Council. Portland, OR. 

Oosting, H.J. (Ed.), 1956. The Study of Plant Communities: An Introduction to Plant 

Ecology. Second Edition. W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, CA.

Oregon Administrative Rules, January 2006. Water Resources Department, Division 506, 

John Day Basin Program. Oregon State Archives.

Oregon Administrative Rules, November 2004. Department of Environmental Quality. 

Table 170A, Designated Beneficial Use John Day Basin. Oregon State Archives.

Oregon Climate Service, 2005. Oregon climate zone summary: north central zone. 

(online) URL: www.ocs.oregonstate.edu/index.html, accessed on 01/25/05.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2006. Map of Idaho, Oregon, Washington 

air non-attainment & maintenance areas. Oregon State Smoke Management Plan. 

Oregon State Implementation Plan.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2006. Visibility protection plan for Class I 

areas. OAR 340-200-0040, Section 5.2. Oregon State Implementation Plan.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 1989. John Day River Resident Fish Plan. 

Unpublished document. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. John Day, OR.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 1990. John Day River subbasin: salmon and 

steelhead production plan. September. Columbia Basin System Planning, Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. Portland, OR. 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 212 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2003. Oregon’s bighorn sheep and Rocky 

Mountain goat management plan. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Salem, 

Oregon.

Oregon Department of Transportation, 2006. Journey Through Time Scenic Byway Trip 

Check. Oregon Department of Transportation website. (online) URL: www.tripcheck.

com/Pages/SBJourneyThrTime.asp, accessed on 10/5/06.

Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, 2003. State Park Statewide Comprehensive 

Outdoor Recreation Planning (SCORP) survey for northeastern Oregon. (online) 

URL: www.oregon.gov/OPRD/PLANS/scorp_review.shtml, accessed on 07/19/06.

Oregon State Archives, 2006. Oregon Historical County Records Guide. (online) URL: 

http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/county/cpinvlist.html, accessed on 05/14/06.

Oregon Water Resources Department, 1986. John Day River basin report. State of 

Oregon Water Resources Department. Salem, OR.

Oregon Water Resources Department, 2000. Streamflow Data: Gauge 14044000, 

Middle Fork John Day River at Ritter, Oregon. State of Oregon Water Resources 

Department. Salem, OR. (online) URL: www.wrd.state.or.us/cgi-bin/choose_gauge.

pl?huc=17070203, accessed February 2006. 

Pagel, J.E., 2001 (Unpublished Report). Habitat analysis of Prineville District, Bureau of 

Land Management land for peregrine falcons in Central Oregon.

Phelps, Berry, 2006. Personal and email communication with Jim Nieland, retired USFS 

Region 6 Cave Specialist. 8 March. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Prineville 

District Office. Prineville, OR.

Phelps, Berry, 2006. Personal communication with Greg Currie, BLM Prineville District 

Cave & Karsts Program Coordinator. February - March. USDI Bureau of Land 

Management, Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR.

Phelps, Berry, 2006. Personal conversations with Heidi Mottl, current BLM Prineville 

District Recreation Planner. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Prineville District 

Office. Prineville, OR.

Phelps, Berry, 2006. Personal e-mail from Dan Tippy, BLM NOALE legal description of 

acquired lands. 6 January. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Prineville District 

Office. Prineville, OR.

Phelps, Berry, 2006. Personal phone and email communications on BLM Visual 

Resource Management inventory and management with Brian Cunninghame, 

previous BLM Prineville District Recreation Planner. USDI Bureau of Land 

Management, Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR.

Phelps, Berry, 2006. Personal phone conversations with Kevin McCoy, Recreation 

Planner for BLM Baker District Office, Baker, OR. USDI Bureau of Land 

Management, Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR.

Priester, K., D. Schultz, and J. Resnick, 2006. Community reports and scoping support 

document for the BLM planning effort in the John Day River basin. Prepared by 

James Kent Associates for USDI Bureau of Land Management, Prineville District 

Office. Prineville, OR. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 213 —

References

Quigley, T.M., and S.J. Arbelbide (Tech. Eds.), 1997. An assessment of ecosystem 

components in the interior Columbia Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great 

Basins. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405, Vol. I-IV. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Ratliff, D. E., and P. J. Howell, 1992. The status of Bull Trout populations in Oregon. 

Pages 10-17. In: P. J. Howell and D. V. Buchanan (Eds.), 1992. Proceedings of the 

Gearhart Mountain Bull Trout workshop. Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries 

Society. Corvallis, OR.

Ruediger, B., et al, 2000. Canada Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy, 2nd 

Edition, USDA Forest Service, USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, USDI Bureau of Land 

Management, and USDI National Park Service. Forest Service Publication #R1-00-

53. 142 pp. Missoula, MT. 

Schmitt, Craig L., and Donald W. Scott, 1993. Catastrophic stand conditions in the Blue 

Mountains: discussion, guidelines, and rating system. BMZ-93-05. October. p 1. 

Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, Blue Mountains Pest Management Zone, USDA 

Forest Service. La Grande, OR. 

Smith, E.L., 1989. Range condition and secondary succession: a critique. In: W.K. 

Laurenroth and W.A. Laycock (Eds.), 1989. Secondary Succession and the 

Evaluation of Rangeland Condition. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

State of Oregon and Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, 1976. Easement of Way, R11. pp. 

1077, 79847. BLM Microfilm: 21 October.

Stinson, D.W., Hays, D.W. and Schroeder, M.A., 2003. Draft Washington State Recovery 

Plan for the Sage-Grouse. 103 pp. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 

Olympia, WA. 

Taylor, George H., and Raymond R. Hatton, 1999. The Oregon Weather Book: A State of 

Extremes. ISBN 0-87071-467-8. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR.

Thomas, J. W., Donavin A. Leckenby, Mark Henjum, Richard J. Pedersen, and Larry D. 

Bryant, 1988. Habitat-effectiveness index for elk on Blue Mountain winter ranges. 

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-218. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. Portland, OR. 

Tiedeman, J.A., R. Beck, and R. Vanhorn Ecret, 1991. Dependence of standing crop on 

range condition rating in New Mexico. Journal of Range Management 44(6):602-605.

Toweill D.E., V. Geist. 1999. Return of royalty: wild sheep of North America. Foundation 

for North American Wild Sheep. Cody, WY, and Boone and Crockett Club. Missoula, 

Montana.

US Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. 

Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, DC.

USDA Forest Service, 1994. Draft viable ecosystems management guide. 

Ochoco National Forest. Prineville, OR.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 214 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

USDA Forest Service, 1996. Status of the interior Columbia Basin: summary of scientific 

findings. Gen Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-385. November. Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. Portland, OR. (http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/sum1.pdf )

USDA Forest Service, 2002. Science update - fire risks in east side forests. September. 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

USDA Forest Service, 2003. 2003-2006 Joint aquatic and terrestrial programmatic 

biological assessment for Federal lands within the Deschutes Basin administered by 

the Bureau of Land Management Prineville Office and for Federal lands administered 

by the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests. 06 June.

USDA Forest Service, 2004. Draft Current Management Situation Report, Blue Mountain 

Forest Plan Revision. October. Forest Plan Documents. Malheur, Umatilla, and 

Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. (online) URL: www.fs.fed.us/r6/uma/blue_mtn_

planrevision/documents.shtml, accessed 10/5/06.

USDA Forest Service, 2004. The tri-forest current management situation report for the 

U.S. Forest Service Blue Mountain plan revision. (online) URL: www.fs.fed.us/r6/

uma/blue_mtn_planrevision/documents/2004_10_01_draft_cms_001.pdf, accessed 

on 08/03/06.

USDA Forest Service, 2006. Blue Mountain Scenic Byway. USDA Forest Service 

website. (online) URL: www.fs.fed.us/r6/uma/recreation/scenic_drives.shtml, 

accessed on 05/12/06.

USDA Forest Service, 2006. Elkhorn Scenic Byway. USDA Forest Service website. 

(online) URL:

www.fs.fed.us/r6/w-w/recreation/byway/byway-elkhorn.shtml, accessed on 05/12/06.

USDA Forest Service, 2006. Umatilla National Forest. Recreational Opportunities, Blue 

Mountain Scenic Byway, February, 8, 2006. (online) URL: www.fs.fed.us/r6/uma/

recreation/scenic_drives.shtml, accessed 10/5/06.

USDA Forest Service, 2006. Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. Recreation, Elkhorn 

Mountain Scenic Byway, February, 8, 2006. (online) URL: www.fs.fed.us/r6/w-w/

recreation/byway/byway-elkhorn.shtml, accessed 10/5/06.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1995. Decision Notice/

Decision Record, Finding of No Significant Impact, Environmental Assessment for the 

Interim Strategies for Managing Anadromous Fish-Producing Watersheds in Eastern 

Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and Portions of California. Decision Notice/Record, 

Finding of No Significant Impact. USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land 

Management, and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1997. Eastside Draft EIS. 

Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) 1(1):7. USDA 

Forest Service. Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1997. Eastside Draft EIS. 

Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) 1(2):69. USDA 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 215 —

References

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1997. Eastside Draft EIS. 

Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP). May 1(2):63. 

USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. 

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2000. Scientific Findings. 

Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Interior Columbia Basin 

Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP). March. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2003. Interior Columbia 

Basin Strategy. Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Program 

(ICBEMP). USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, 

OR.

USDA Forest Service, BLM, EPA, FWS, and National Marine Fisheries Service, 2002. 

Interagency Memorandum of Understanding for the Interior Columbia Basin Strategy. 

USDA Forest Service, Regions 1, 4, 6, Pacific Northwest and Rocky Mountain 

Research Stations, USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon, Washington, 

Idaho, and Montana, USDI Fish and Wildlife Service—Region 1 and Region 6, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Region X, and NOAA National Marine Fisheries 

Service NW Region. FS Agreement No. 03-RMU-11046000-007. 6 pp.

USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, and State Governors, 2001. 

A collaborative approach for reducing wildland fire risks to communities and the 

environment: a 10-year comprehensive strategy.

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1997. National Range And Pasture 

Handbook. Washington, DC.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1982. Public domain timber management policy 

statement. 12 March.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1983. John Day Resource Management Plan 

Proposed Land Use Alternatives. Burns District Office. Burns, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1984. Draft John Day Resource Management Plan. 

June. p 15. Burns District Office. Burns, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1984. Proposed John Day River Management Plan 

Record of Decision. pp. 14, 15, 27. Burns District Office. Burns, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1984. Proposed John Day Resource Management 

Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement. November. Burns District Office. 

Burns, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1984. Two Rivers Resource Management Proposed 

Land Use. August. Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1984. Visual Resource Management - BLM Manual 

8400. 5 April. Bureau of Land Management. Washington, DC. (online) URL: www.

blm.gov/nstc/VRM/8400.html, accessed 10/5/06.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 216 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1985. Draft Two Rivers Resource Management 

Plan, Environmental Impact Statement. Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1985. Final Proposed Two Rivers Resource 

Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement. September. Prineville District 

Office. Prineville, OR. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1985. John Day Resource Management Plan, 

Record of Decision, Rangeland Program Summary (RPS). BLM-OR-PT-86-001-

1794. August. Burns District Office. Burns, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1986. Two Rivers Resource Management Plan, 

Record of Decision, Rangeland Program Summary (RPS). BLM-OR-PT-86-014-

1792. June. Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1989. Baker Resource Management Plan, Record 

of Decision. BLM-OR-PT-89-10-1792. Baker District Office. Baker, OR. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1991. Final environmental impact statement: 

vegetation treatment on BLM lands in thirteen western states. BLM-WY-ES-91-022-

4320. BLM Wyoming State Office. Cheyenne, WY.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1991. Lower John Day Wild and Scenic River 

Resource Assessment. Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1991. Riparian-wetland initiative for the 1990’s. 

BLM/WO/GI-91/001+4340. 50 pp. Washington, DC. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1992. Riparian area management TR 1737-7: 

procedures for ecological site inventory - with special reference to riparian-wetland 

sites. National Applied Sciences Resource Center. BLM Colorado State Office. 

Denver, CO.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1992. Wild and Scenic Rivers - Policy and Program 

Direction for Identification, Evaluation, and Management - Releases 8-61, 8-62, dtd 

5/19/92 and 12/22/93; http://www.blm.gov/nhp/efoia/wo/manual/8351.pdf accessed 

10/11/06

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1993. Riparian area management TR 1737-9: 

process for assessing proper functioning condition. National Applied Sciences 

Resource Center. BLM Colorado State Office, Denver, CO.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1995b. Interim management policy for lands under 

wilderness review. BLM Manual H-8550-1. Washington, DC.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1996. An evaluation of the willow recovery status 

along the John Day River. Prineville District Office. Prineville, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1997. Standards for rangeland health and 

guidelines for livestock grazing management of public lands administered by the 

Bureau of Land Management in the states of Oregon and Washington. BLM Oregon 

State Office. Portland, OR.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 217 —

References

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2000. Summary of the Analysis of the Management 

Situation, Lakeview Resource Area Management Plan. BLM/OR/WA/PT-00054+1792. 

July. Lakeview District Office. Lakeview, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2001. Analysis of the Management Situation (AMS) 

for the Upper Deschutes Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact 

Statement (RMP/EIS). BLM/OR/WA/PL-01/032+1792. October. Prineville District 

Office. Prineville, OR. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2001. National management strategy for motorized 

off-highway vehicle use on public lands. BLM publication No. BLM/WY/PL-01-

006+1610. p 24.

USDI, Bureau of Land Management,2004. Instruction Memorandum No. 2004-164. 

Guidance to Address Environmental Justice (EJ) in Land Use Plans and Related 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Documents

USDI, Bureau of Land Management,2004. Instruction Memorandum No. 2004-196. 

Clarification of Policy in the BLM Manual Section 8351, Wild and Scenic Rivers, with 

Respect to Eligibility Criteria and Protective Management Program Area: National 

Landscape Conservation System and Land Use Planning.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2004. National sage-grouse habitat conservation 

strategy. Washington, DC.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2005. Draft Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 

on BLM lands in 17 Western States Programmatic Environmental Report (PER). BLM 

Nevada State Office. Reno, NV.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2005. Five Year Strategy to Prioritize Hazardous 

Fuels Treatments on the BLM Prineville District. June. Prineville District Office. 

Prineville, OR.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2005. Land Use Planning Handbook (Public). BLM 

Handbook H-1601-1. Release 1-1693. 

11 March: www.blm.gov/nhp/200/wo210/landuse_hb.pdf, accessed 10/5/06.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2005. Riparian area management: riparian and 

wetland classification review and application. Technical Reference 1737-21. BLM/

ST/ST-05/002+1737. 26 pp. Denver, CO.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2005. Summary of the Analysis of the Management 

Situation. Coeur d’Alene Field Office Planning Area. January. Coeur d’Alene 

District. Coeur d’Alene, ID.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2006. Roads and trails terminology report. Division 

of Recreation and Visitor Services (WO-250) and Division of Engineering and 

Environmental Services (WO-360), Washington, DC.

USDI Bureau of Land Management, 2006. OR/WA BLM State Director’s Special Status 

Species List and Database. Accessed February 9, 2006 at http://web.or.blm.gov/

or930/sssdb/index.html
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 218 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

USDI National Park Service, 2006. John Day Fossil Beds National Monument website. 

www.nps.gov/joda, accessed on 09/15/06. 

Wall, T.G., R.F. Miller, and A.J. Svejcar, 2001. Juniper encroachment into aspen in the 

northwest great basin. Journal of Range Management 54(6):691-698 November, 

cited by Miller, R.F., et al, 2005. Biology, ecology, and management of western 

juniper. OSU/AES Tech Bulletin 152 (June).

Wells, Gail, 2006. High-desert dominator. Oregon’s Agricultural Progress, a publication of 

the Oregon State University Agricultural Experiment Station (Spring).

Westoby, M., B. Walker, and I. Noy-Meir, 1989. Opportunistic management for rangelands 

not at equilibrium. Journal of Range Management 42(4):266-274.

Wissmar, R.C., J.E. Smith, B.A. McIntosh, H.W. Li, G.H. Reeves, and J.R. Sedell, 1994. 

A history of resource use and disturbance in riverine basins of eastern Oregon and 

Washington (Early 1800s-1990). Northwest Science 68:1-35.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 219 —

List of Preparers

Lyle Andrews

B.S., Range Management, University of Idaho. Rangeland Management Specialist 30 

years experience

Lorri Benefield

B.S., Animal Science, Oregon State University; M.S. Fire Science, 1987, University of 

Washington, 27 years in Fire Management.

Carol Connolly

B. S., Speech Communication, Oregon State University; Public Affairs Specialist: 

20 years with government.

Scott Cooke

B.S., New Mexico State University, Wildlife Biologist 16 years experience.

Henry Eichman 

B.A. Biology, Colorado College. M.S. Agricultural and Resource Economics, Oregon 

State University. 2 years experience with regional economic analysis

Virginia Gibbons

Bachelor of Fine Arts, University of Arizona; Public Affairs Specialist, 15 years 

experience.

Ron Halvorson

B.S., Animal Science, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; 

MS,Renewable Resource Mgt., University of Nevada, Reno; 32 years experience in 

Rangeland Management and Botany

Douglas Kile 

A.S. Treasure Valley Community College, 11 years GIS specialist.

Monte Kuk

B.A. Wildlife Management,North Dakota State University, Bottineau, 

B.S. Biology, Northern Arizona University 

Wildlife Biologist 20 years experience

Ron Lane

B.A, Washington State University, 23 years experience in Lands and Realty.

Martinson, Kristen

BS, Recreation Resource Management, MS, Forest Management, Oregon State 

University; Interim Interdisciplinary Team Lead and Assistant Field Manager.

Craig Obermiller

B.S. Wildlife Resources, University of Idaho, M.S. Range Management, University of 

Arizona; 13 years experience as Rangeland Management Specialist

Berry Phelps; M.S. Geography; B.S. Recreation/Range Mgt., Brigham Young University. 

Recreation Planner; OHV & Wilderness Specialist., 29 years.

List of Preparers
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 220 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Purrington, Teal, B.A. Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz, M.S. Rangeland 

Resources, Oregon State University; Rangeland Management Specialist, 15 years 

experience. Interim Interdisciplinary team lead/Planning and Environmental Coordinator.

Brent Ralston

B.S. Oregon State University. Fisheries biologist, 13 years. Interdisciplinary team 

lead/Planning and Environmental Coordinator, 2 years.

John L. Morris

B.A. Oregon State University, 15 years experience as Fish Biologist

Anna Smith

B.S. construction Engineering Management

6 years experiences as Hydrologist.

Steve Storo

B.S. Geology - University of Alaska, M.S. Hazardous Waste Management - Wayne 

State University 21 years of experience as Geologist

Robert Vidourek

B.S - The Ohio State University, 33 years experience in Forest Management

Mike Williams 

B.A., M.A., PhD. University of California, Santa Barbara, Writer/Editor 14 years 

experience. 

John K. Zancanella

MA, California State University, Chico, 22 years BLM Archaeologist
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 221 —

Glossary

Abiotic - pertaining to the non-living parts of an ecosystem, such as soil, rock, air, and 

water.

Access - the ability of public land visitors to reach the areas they wish to visit.

Access Statement - a legal right to cross the land granted to the public by a landowner.

Acre - a unit of area used in land measurement, equal to 43,560 square feet. There are 

640 acres in one square mile.

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation - established by the National Historic

Preservation Act of 1966 to play a key role in the evaluation, nomination, and treatment of 

National Register properties.

Allotment - a specific portion of public land allocated for livestock grazing, typically with 

identifiable or fenced boundaries and permitted for a specified number of livestock.

Allotment Management Plan (AMP) - a BLM document that directs the management of 

livestock grazing on a specific area of public land.

Allowable Sale Quantity (ASQ) - the quantity of timber that may be sold from an area 

covered by a forest management plan during a time period specified by the plan. ASQ is 

usually expressed as an average annual quantity.

Analysis of the Management Situation (AMS) - Step 4 of the BLM’s land use planning 

project; a comprehensive documentation of the present conditions of the resources, 

current management guidance, and opportunities for change.

Andesite - volcanic rock with a silicon dioxide (SiO2) composition between 52 and 63 

percent by weight. Its color is gray to black and it erupts at temperatures between 900 

and 1100 C.

Animal Unit Month (AUM) - the amount of forage required to sustain one cow and calf for 

one month.

Appropriate (Fire) Management Response - specific actions taken in response to a 

wildland fire to implement protection and fire use objectives.

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) - a type of special land use designation 

specified within the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) used to protect 

areas with important resource values in need of special management.

Area of Traditional Cultural Significance - for the purposes of this plan, those locations 

used by Indian people to maintain their values, beliefs, and cultural identity, including, but 

not limited to, traditional plant collecting areas, fishing stations, or places for practicing 

traditional religious beliefs.

Ash - volcanic material consisting of rock, volcanic glass, and mineral fragments less 

than 2 mm in diameter.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 222 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Basalt - a dark-colored volcanic rock with less than 52% silicon dioxide by weight. Its 

temperature when erupting ranges from 1100 to 1250oC. Basalt is less viscous (more 

fluid) than andesite and rhyolite and is capable of flowing several tens of kilometers.

Best Management Practices (BMPs) - a set of practices which, when applied during 

implementation of management actions, ensures that negative impacts to natural 

resources are minimized. BMPs are applied based on site-specific evaluations and 

represent the most effective and practical means to achieve management goals for a 

given site.

Biodiversity (Biological Diversity) – the variety and variability among living organisms and 

the ecological complexes in which they occur (ICBEMP, 2000).

Biological Control Agent – The use of nonnative agents, including invertebrate parasites 

and predators (usually insects, mites, and nematodes) and plant pathogens, to reduce 

populations of nonnative, invasive plants.

Biomass - dry weight of organic matter in plants and animals in an ecosystem, both 

above and below ground.

Biotic - living.

Board Foot - the amount of wood contained in an unfinished board one inch thick, 12 

inches long, and 12 inches wide, commonly abbreviated BF; MBF = one thousand board 

feet; MMBF = one million board feet.

Broadcast Burning - burning natural fuels as they are, with no piling or windrowing.

Broad Scale - a large, regional area, such as a river basin, and typically a multi-state 

area.

Bureau Assessment Species (AS) - Plant and vertebrate species, which are not presently 

eligible for official federal or state status but are of concern in Oregon or Washington and 

may at a minimum, need protection or mitigation in BLM activities. These species will be 

considered as a level of special status species separate from Bureau sensitive species.

Clearances will be done for all assessment species subject to limitations in funding or 

positions. Impacts to the population and to the species as a whole will be determined and 

recommendations for the species will be considered on a case-by-case basis through 

the environmental analysis process in balance with other resource considerations. These 

species may not necessarily affect all proposed actions, but where possible, steps should 

be taken to protect the species.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) - government agency with the mandate to manage

Federal lands under its jurisdiction for multiple uses.

Bureau Sensitive Species - species eligible as federally listed or candidate status, state 

listed or candidate (plant) status, or on List 1 in the Oregon Natural Heritage Database, or 

otherwise approved for this category by the State Director.

Bureau Tracking Species (TS) - Species for which more information is needed to 

determine status within the state, or which no longer need active management. Districts 

are encouraged to collect occurrence data to enable an early warning for species 

which may become threatened or endangered in the future. Until status of such species 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 223 —

Glossary

changes to federal or state listed, candidate or assessment species, “tracking species” 

will not be considered as special status species for management purposes.

Candidate Species - any species included in the Federal Register Notice of Review 

that are being considered for listing as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service.

Cell - unique ecosystem type used by the Oregon Natural Heritage Plan to inventory, 

classify, and evaluate natural areas. Cells contain one or more ecosystem elements, 

which are assemblages of integrated organisms plus the environment supporting them.

Cinder - a frothy form of basalt formed by expanding gases during an eruption.

Cinder Cone - a cone-shaped volcano created by the accumulation of cinders around a 

vent, formed as an individual volcano or in groups on the flanks of larger volcanoes.

Cinnabar - mercury sulfide, an ore of mercury.

Climax - the culminating stage of plant succession for a given environment; the 

vegetation conceived as having reached a highly stable condition.

Closed: under 43 CFR 8340 a closed area means an area where off-road vehicle 

use is prohibited. Use of off-road vehicles in closed areas may be allowed for 

certain reasons; however, such use shall be made only with the approval of the 

authorized officer.

Collaboration - a formalized process of identifying and involving interactive participants in 

different parts of the analysis process. Collaboration is expected to result in some level of 

informed consent by all participants concerning the issues and range of alternatives.

For the purposes of this plan, that is intended to include members both exempt from and 

subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

Common use area – a generally broad geographic area from which BLM can make 

disposals of mineral materials to many persons, with only negligible surface disturbance.

The use is dispersed throughout the area.

Communication Site - (1) a hilltop or favorable signal receiving and transmitting location 

where a collection of facilities are sited; (2) a facility consisting of a small building and 

tower, used for transmission or reception of radio, television, telephone or other electronic 

signals.

Community Pit – a relatively small, defined area from which BLM can make disposals of 

mineral materials to many persons. The surface disturbance is usually extensive in the 

confined area.

Conglomerate - a clastic sedimentary rock composed of rounded to sub-angular stones 

(larger than 2 mm in diameter) cemented in a matrix of sand or silt.

Connectivity (of habitats) - the linkage of similar but spatially separated vegetative stands 

(such as mature forests) by patches, corridors, or “stepping stones” of like vegetation 

across the landscape; also, the degree to which similar landscapes are so linked (PNW 

GTR-328, 1994).
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 224 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Consultation - formal and informal consultation as defined by laws such as the National 

Historic Preservation and Endangered Species Acts. Also, any input formally requested 

for analysis purposes from any internal or external source.

Cooperators – tribal, local, state, or federal agencies with special expertise related to plan 

issues or that have legal jurisdiction within the planning area.

Critical Habitat -BLM Manual 6840 defines Critical Habitat (CH) as an area designated 

as such and listed in 50 CFR Parts 17 and 226 and is any air, land, or water area 

(exclusive of those existing manmade structures or settlements which are not necessary 

to the survival an recovery of a listed species) and constituent elements thereof, the 

loss of which would appreciably decrease the likelihood of the survival and recovery 

of a listed species or a distinct segment of its population. The constituent elements of 

Critical Habitat include, but are not limited to: physical structure and topography, biota, 

climate, human activity, and the quality and chemical content of land, water, and air. 

Critical Habitat may represent any portion of the present habitat of a listed species 

and may include additional areas for reasonable population expansion. The federal 

definition of critical habitat is: (i) the specific areas within the geographic area occupied 

by the species, at the time it is listed ...on which are found those physical and biological 

features (a) essential to the conservation of the species and (b) which may require 

special management considerations or protections; (ii) specific areas outside of the 

geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed ... upon a determination 

of the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species; and 

(iii) Except in those circumstances determined by the Secretary, critical habitat shall 

not include the entire geographical area which can be occupied by the threatened or 

endangered species (ESA Section 3).

Cultural Resource - material or non-material aspects of human culture which are 

significant to living cultures, including groups maintaining and preserving their traditions, 

and academic researchers such as anthropologists and historians.

Disturbance - any event which alters the structure, composition, or function of terrestrial 

or aquatic habitats (PNW GTR-328, 1994).

Ecological Integrity - in general, refers to the degree to which all ecological components 

and their interactions are represented and functioning; the quality of being complete; 

a sense of wholeness. Areas of high integrity would represent areas where ecological 

function and processes are better represented and functioning than areas rated as low 

integrity (ICBEMP, 2000).

Ecological Site Inventory (ESI) - the basic inventory of present and potential vegetation 

of BLM rangelands. Ecological sites are differentiated on the basis of soil type and kind, 

proportion, or amount of plant species.

Ecology - the science of the inter-relationships between organisms and their environment; 

from the Greek Oikos meaning “house” or “place to live.”

Ecosystem - a spatially explicit, relatively homogeneous unit of the earth that includes all 

interacting organisms and components of the abiotic environment within its boundaries.

An ecosystem can be of any size; e.g., a log, pond, field, forest, or the earth’s biosphere.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 225 —

Glossary

Ecosystem Health - a condition where the parts and functions of an ecosystem are 

sustained over time. The system’s capacity for self-repair is maintained such that goals 

for uses, values, and services of the ecosystem are met. Also includes forest health, 

rangeland health, and aquatic system health.

Ecosystem Management - the use of a “whole-landscape” approach to achieve multiple 

use management of public lands by blending the needs of people and environmental 

values in such a way that these lands represent diverse, healthy, productive, and 

sustainable ecosystems.

Ecotone - a boundary or zone of transition between adjacent communities or 

environments, such as the boundary between a forest and a meadow or the boundary of 

a clear cut next to a mature forest stand. Species present in an ecotone are intermixed 

subsets of the adjacent communities.

Eligibility - Qualification of a river for inclusion into the NWSRS through determination that 

it is free-flowing and with its adjacent land area possesses at least one river-related value 

considered to be outstandingly remarkable.

Endangered Species - any species defined under the Endangered Species Act as being 

in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Listings are 

published in the Federal Register.

Endemic Species - plants or animals that occur naturally in a certain region and whose 

distribution is relatively limited to a particular locality (ICBEMP, 2000).

Environmental Assessment (EA) - one type of document prepared by Federal agencies 

in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that portrays the 

environmental consequences of proposed Federal actions that are not expected to have 

significant impacts on the human environment.

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - one type of document prepared by Federal 

agencies in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that portrays 

the environmental consequences of proposed major Federal actions that are expected to 

have significant impacts on the human environment (see EA, above).

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.

Erosion (Accelerated) - erosion much more rapid than geologic erosion, mainly as a 

result of human or animal activities or of a catastrophe in nature, e.g., fire that exposes 

the surface.

Existing Management Situation (EMS) - a component of the Analysis of the

Management Situation; a description of the existing management direction governing 

resource management programs of a planning area.

Extirpated - having become extinct in a specific area while the species as a whole 

continues to exist elsewhere.

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) - a law mandating that the

Bureau of Land Management manage lands under its jurisdiction for multiple uses.

FMP (Fire Management Plan) - a strategic plan that defines a program to manage 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 226 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

wildland and prescribed fires and documents the Fire Management Program in the 

approved land use plan. The plan is supplemented by operational procedures such as 

preparedness plans, preplanned dispatch plans, prescribed fire plans and prevention 

plans.

Fine Scale - a single landscape, such as a watershed or sub watershed.

Fire Cycle - the average time between fires in a given area or a given plant community.

Fire Frequency - the return interval of fire.

Fire Preparedness - activities that lead to a safe, efficient, and cost effective fire 

management program in support of land and resource management objectives through 

appropriate planning and coordination.

Fire Regime - the frequency, predictability, intensity, seasonality, and extent 

characteristics of fires in an ecosystem.

Flood Plain - A relatively fl at area that borders a stream that is composed of deposited 

materials from the stream and is subject to periodic flooding unless protected artificially.

Forestland - land stocked with at least 10 percent live trees or land formerly having such 

tree cover and not currently developed for non-forest use.

Flow - The volume of water in a river passing a given point in a given period of time, 

usually expressed in terms of cubic feet per second or cubic meters per second.

Functional-At-Risk - riparian-wetland areas that are in functional condition, but an existing 

soil, water, or vegetation attribute makes them susceptible to degradation.

Game Species - wildlife species hunted for sport.

Ground Water - water filling all the unblocked pores of the material below the water table.

Habitat Fragmentation - the splitting or isolating of patches of similar habitat, typically 

forest cover (but could also apply to grass fields, shrub patches, and other habitats).

Habitat can be fragmented from natural conditions, such as thin or variable soils, or 

from management activities or development such as clear-cut logging, agriculture, or 

residential development.

Historic Condition - as used in this text, the condition of lands and ecosystems prior 

to European settlement. In central Oregon, European settlement occurred during the 

period from approximately 1850s to 1900. An approximation of these conditions is drawn 

from written and photographic accounts from the period and is used to determine the 

range of variability for plant and animal species across a landscape (Ochoco NF Viable 

ecosystems Management Guide, 1994).

Historic Range of Variability (HRV) - the typical fluctuations of processes or functions, and 

the typical proportions of ecosystem elements in an area over a period of time when the 

ecosystem was not significantly affected by European settlement and management.

HRV is the amplitude or minimum-maximum ranges of “natural” conditions.

Ignimbrite - a volcanic rock formed by the welding together of tuff material from an 

explosive volcanic eruption.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 227 —

Glossary

Impoundment - A body of water formed by any manmade structure.

Information Sharing - a process designed to keep everyone informed about what is 

happening in the planning effort. This includes but is not limited to published material on a 

variety of media, and management and public briefings and/or presentations.

Initial (Fire) Attack - an aggressive fire suppression action consistent with fire fighter and 

public safety and values to be protected.

Interdisciplinary - involving more than one discipline or resource management program.

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 Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) - a project conducted 

during the 1990s and early 2000s examining the effects (on a large, regional scale) of 

past and present land use activities on the Interior Columbia River Basin ecosystem and 

a small part of the Great Basin ecosystem.

Intermittent Stream - Any nonpermanent flowing drainage feature having a definable 

channel and evidence of scour or deposition. This includes what are sometimes referred 

to as ephemeral streams if they meet these two criteria

Issue - an opportunity, conflict, or problem about use or management of public land 

resources. The resolution of issues is the basis for preparing the resource management 

plan.

Landscape - all the natural features which distinguish one part of the land from another.

A spatially heterogeneous area with repeating patterns, similar climate, and landform, 

and the associated disturbance regimes.

Lava tube - a cave formed by the draining of molten lava from a channel covered by a 

surficial crust.

Leasable Minerals – minerals that may be leased to private interests by the Federal 

government and includes oil, gas, geothermal, coal, and sodium compounds.

Leave Tree – a tree left standing in an area where thinning or harvest has occurred.

Lek – an area used by sage grouse for courtship and mating.

Limited Area: under 43 CFR 8340 a limited area means 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 type 

of categories: Numbers 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. 

Litter - the dead remains of plants, usually lying on the soil surface.

Loam - a soil textural class composed of roughly equal amounts of sand, silt, and clay.

Locatable Minerals - minerals subject to exploration, development, and disposal by 

staking mining claims as authorized by the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. This 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 228 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

includes deposits of gold, silver, and other uncommon minerals not subject to lease or 

sale.

Management Concern - procedures or land-use allocations that do not constitute issues 

but, through the RMP/EIS preparation process, are recognized as needing to be modified 

or needing decisions made regarding management direction.

Management Framework Plan (MFP) – an older generation of land use plans developed 

by the Bureau of Land Management. This generation of planning has been replaced by 

the Resource Management Plan (RMP).

Management Opportunities - a component of the analysis of the management situation; 

actions or management directions that could be taken to resolve issues or management 

concerns.

Mesic - pertaining to sites or habitats characterized by intermediate moisture conditions, 

i.e., neither decidedly wet nor dry.

Microbiotic Crusts - lichens, mosses, green algae, fungi, cyanobacteria, and bacteria 

growing on or just below the surface of soils.

Mineral Estate - refers to the ownership of minerals at or beneath the surface of the land.

Minor Wildlife Emphasis - designated areas where wildlife typically receives a lower level 

of consideration to most other resource management programs. Generally, guidelines 

are tied to minimum legal requirements identified in the sections on “common” guidance 

(Standards for Rangeland Health, BLM Special Status Species Policy (6840)), and the 

Threatened and Endangered Species Act.

Mitigating Measures - modifications of actions that (a) avoid impacts by not taking 

a certain action or parts of an action, (b) minimize impacts by limiting the degree 

or magnitude of the action and its implementation, (c) rectify impacts by repairing, 

rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment, (d) reduce or eliminate impacts over 

time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action, or (e) 

compensate for impacts by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

Monitoring and Evaluation - the collection and analysis of data to evaluate the progress 

and effectiveness of on-the-ground actions in meeting resource management goals and 

objectives.

Multiple Use – the management of public land and its resources to best meet various 

present and future needs of the American people. This means coordinated management 

of resources and uses.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) - a law requiring all Federal agencies 

to evaluate the impacts of proposed major Federal actions with respect to their 

significance on the human environment.

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) - established by Congress with the passage 

of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, an ever increasing, formal list of sites 

that are culturally significant according to specific criteria.

National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) - an area administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service for the purpose of managing certain fish or wildlife species.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 229 —

Glossary

Non-functional - riparian-wetland areas that clearly are not providing adequate 

vegetation, landform, or large woody debris to dissipate stream energy associated with 

high flows, and thus are not reducing erosion, improving water quality, etc.

Non-game Species - wildlife species which are not hunted for sport.

Noxious Weed - a plant specified by law as being especially undesirable, troublesome, 

and difficult to control.

Obsidian - a volcanic glass with a bulk composition equivalent to that of rhyolite except 

that obsidian has lower water content.

Occupancy - The taking, maintaining, or holding possession of a camp or residence on 

public land either by personal presence or leaving property at the location.

Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) - unless otherwise stated, this generally refers to Class I allterrain vehicles, Class II full width four-wheel drive vehicles, and Class III motorcycles.

Old-growth - old forest often containing several canopy layers, variety in tree sizes and 

species, decadent old trees, standing and down dead woody material (PNW GTR-328,

1994).

Open Area: under 43 CFR 8340 an open area means an area where all types 

of vehicle use is permitted at all times, anywhere in the area subject to the 

operating regulations and vehicle standards (CFR 8341 and 8342).

Overstory - the upper canopy layer; the plants below comprise the understory.

Patch - an area of vegetation with homogeneous composition and structure.

Perennial Stream -a stream that flows continuously. Perennial streams are generally 

associated with a water table in the localities through which they flow.

Perlite - a volcanic glass with an equivalent composition to that of rhyolite, but with a 

higher water content than obsidian.

Planning Area – the area containing all BLM-administered lands that would be managed 

under the UDRMP.

Plant Association - the distinctive combination of trees, shrubs, grasses, and herbs 

occurring in a theoretical terminal or climax community or a series of communities (PNW 

GTR-328, 1994).

Potential Natural Vegetation - an historical term originally defined by A.W. Kuchler as the 

stable vegetation community which could occupy a site under current climatic conditions 

without further influence by humans. Often used interchangeably with Potential Natural 

Community.

Potential Plant Community - one of several plant communities that may become 

established on an ecological site under the present environmental conditions, either with 

or without interference by humans.

Preferred Alternative or Plan - the alternative plan in the Draft EIS that the agency has 

initially selected that best fulfills the agency’s statutory mission and responsibilities and 
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 230 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

offers the most acceptable resolution of the planning issues and management concerns.

Prescribed Fire - the introduction of fire to an area under regulated conditions for specific 

management purposes (usually vegetation manipulation).

Prescribed Natural Fire – a fire caused by lightning for which minimal to no suppression 

action is taken if it is under pre-determined conditions and within acceptable parameters.

Prescribed natural fire is used to accomplish certain resource objectives.

Pressure Ridge - a ridge formed during inflation of a basalt flow, often having one or more 

prominent tension cracks along the ridge axis.

Primary Wildlife Emphasis - designates that wildlife is one of the most important 

management considerations for an area. Areas allocated to primary emphasis are 

intended to benefit wildlife and retain high wildlife use by applying specific guidelines (see 

Chapter 2).

Primitive Road: a linear route managed for use by four-wheel drive or high 

clearance vehicles. These routes do not normally meet any BLM road design 

standards. 

Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) - adequate vegetation, land form, or large woody 

debris present to dissipate stream or wave energy, filter sediment and capture bedload, 

improve flood water retention, develop root masses that stabilize stream banks, islands 

and shorelines, develop channel characteristics to provide habitat for aquatic species, 

support greater biodiversity, reduce erosion, and improve water quality.

Public Land - any land or interest in land owned by the United States and administered 

by the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management.

Public Participation - a process designed to inform and involve all people and 

organizations not otherwise involved in the planning effort through Consultation, 

Cooperation, or Collaboration. Involvement includes opportunities to comment on 

preliminary and draft published materials, general public information or comment 

meetings, and periodic receipt of update material.

Pumice - a frothy, lightweight form of volcanic glass formed from expanding gasses in a

rhyolite magma.

Recreation and Public Purposes Act (R&PP ACT) - an act passed by Congress which 

allows state and local governments and nonprofit organizations to lease and eventually 

acquire title to public lands for recreational or community expansion and other public 

purposes. The act was passed in recognition of the strong public need for a nationwide 

system of parks and historic preservation areas along with lands for other public 

purposes such as schools, fire houses, law enforcement facilities, municipal facilities, 

land fills, hospitals, and fairgrounds.

Research Natural Area (RNA) - an area of significant scientific interest that is designated 

to protect its resource values for scientific research and study. Under current BLM 

policy, these areas must meet the relevance and importance criteria of ACECs and are 

designated as ACECs.

Resilience – 1) the ability of a system to respond to disturbances. Resiliency is one of 

the properties that enable the system to persist in many different states or successional 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 231 —

Glossary

stages; 2) in human communities, refers to the ability of a community to respond to 

externally induced changes such as larger economic forces.

Resource Area - the “on-the-ground” management unit of the Bureau of Land

Management comprised of BLM-administered land within a specific geographic area.

Restoration - as used in this text, vegetative treatments used to modify an ecosystem 

and designed to return plant and animal communities toward a condition and level of 

functioning that existed prior to human disturbance or influence.

Resource Area Profile (RAP) - a component of the analysis of the management 

situations; a description of the current condition, amount, location, use and demands of 

the natural resources in a planning area.

Resource Management Plan (RMP) - current generation of land use plans developed 

by the BLM under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. It replaces the older 

generation Management Framework Plans. Provides long-term (up to 20 years) direction 

for the management of a particular area of land, usually corresponding to a BLM resource 

area, and its resources.

Rhyolite - a light colored volcanic rock with a silicon dioxide composition greater than 

68% by weight. It commonly exhibits flow banding and its temperature when erupting 

ranges from 700 and 850oC.

Right-of-Way - a grant that authorizes the use of public lands for specified purposes, such 

as pipelines, roads, telephone lines, electric lines, and reservoirs.

Riparian - a form of wetland transition between permanently saturated wetlands and 

upland areas. These areas exhibit vegetation or physical characteristics reflective 

of permanent surface or subsurface water influence. Lands along, adjacent to, or 

contiguous with perennially and intermittently fl owing rivers and streams, glacial 

potholes, and the shores of lakes and reservoirs with stable water levels are typical 

riparian areas. Excluded are such sites as ephemeral streams or washes that do not 

exhibit the presence of vegetation dependent upon free water in the soil.”

Road: a linear route declared a road by the owner, managed for use by low-clearance 

vehicles having four or more wheels, and maintained for regular and continuous use. 

Sacred site - means any specific, discrete, narrowly delineated location on Federal land 

that is identified by an Indian tribe, or Indian individual determined to be an appropriately 

authoritative representative of an Indian religion, as sacred by virtue of its established 

religious significance to, or ceremonial use by, an Indian religion; provided that the tribe 

or appropriately authoritative representative of an Indian religion has informed the agency 

of the existence of such a site (Executive Order 13007, 1996:1).

Salable Minerals - high volume, low value mineral resources including common varieties 

of rock, clay, decorative stone, sand, gravel, and cinder.

Savanna - In this FEIS/RMP, non-forest (usually shrub-steppe) land where juniper occurs 

as widely scattered trees at less than 10% crown cover.

Scenic Corridor - an area of special aesthetic values, including scenic vistas, unusual 

geologic or vegetative features, or other natural elements.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 232 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

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.

Scoping - the process of identifying the range of consideration, issues, management 

concerns, preliminary alternatives, and other components of an environmental impact 

statement or land-use planning document. It involves both internal and external or public 

involvement.

Secondary Wildlife Emphasis – a designation where wildlife is one of several resource 

management programs that are of focus in an area, and typically receive a slightly lower, 

but still significant, level of management consideration. Areas allocated to a secondary 

emphasis are intended to support wildlife and maintain a moderate amount of use, as 

outlined in Chapter 2.

Seral Stage - the rated departure of a plant community from a described potential natural 

community (PNC) for a specific ecological site. Low-seral stage is an existing plant 

community which is defined as 0-25% comparability to the defined PNC; Mid-seral stage 

is an existing plant community which has 26-50% comparability to the PNC; Late seral 

stage is 51-75% comparable to the PNC; PNC is an existing plant community with 76-

100% comparability to the defined PNC.

Shield Volcano - a gentle-sloped volcano built primarily by successive low-viscosity basalt 

flows. Has a shield-shaped profile.

Silviculture - the practice of manipulating the establishment, composition, structure, 

growth, and rate of succession of forests to accomplish specific objectives.

Site Condition - the level of condition, or degree of function, used to express the current 

condition of a site in contrast to site potential.

Site Potential - a measure of resource availability based on interactions among soils, 

climate, hydrology, and vegetation. Site potential represents the highest ecological 

status an area can attain given no political, social, or economic constraints. It defines the 

capability of an area, its potential, and how it functions (ICBEMP, 2000).

Snag - a standing dead tree, usually larger than five feet tall and six inches in diameter 

at breast height. Snags are important as habitat for a variety of wildlife species and their 

prey.

Special Status Species – a plant or animal species falling into any one of the following 

categories: Federally listed threatened or endangered species, species proposed for

Federal listing as threatened or endangered, candidate species for Federal listing,

State listed species, Bureau sensitive species, Bureau assessment species (see 

separate definition for each).

Species Diversity - the number, different kinds of, and relative abundances of species 

present in a given area.

Stand - a contiguous group of similar plants. For forest use, a contiguous group of trees 

sufficiently uniform in age-class distribution, composition, and structure, and growing on a 

site of sufficiently uniform quality, to be a distinguishable unit.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 233 —

Glossary

State Listed Species - any plant or animal species listed by the State of Oregon as 

threatened or endangered within the state under ORS 496.004, ORS 498.026, or ORS

564.040.

Structure - the physical organization and arrangement of vegetation; the size and 

arrangement (both vertical and horizontal) of vegetation.

Sub-basin Review - an interagency, collaborative consideration of resources, resource 

management issues, and management recommendations for one or more sub-basins or 

watershed drainages approximately 800,000 to 1,000,000 acres in size.

Succession - the gradual supplanting of one community of plants by another. The 

sequence of communities is called a sere, or seral stage. A process of changes in 

structure and composition of plant and animal communities over time. Conditions of 

the prior plant community or successional stage create conditions that are favorable for 

establishment of the next stage. The different stages in succession are often referred to 

as seral stages.

Sustainability – 1) meeting the needs of the present without compromising the abilities 

of future generations to meet their needs; emphasizing and maintaining the underlying 

ecological processes that ensure long-term productivity of goods, services, and values 

without impairing productivity of the land; 2) in commodity production, refers to the yield 

of a natural resource that can be produced continually at a given intensity of management 

(ICBEMP, 2000).

Sustained Yield - maintenance of an annual or regular periodic out put of a renewable 

resource from public land consistent with the principles of multiple use. Also: The yield 

that a forest can produce continuously at a given intensity of management. Sustained 

yield management implies continuous production, so planned as to achieve, at the 

earliest practical time, a balance between increment and cutting.

Tephra - a descriptive term for materials ejected from volcanoes including ash, pumice, 

cinders, and volcanic bombs.

Terrestrial - pertaining to the land.

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) - a private national organization dedicated to the 

preservation of biological diversity.

Thermal Cover - cover used by animals to protect them against the weather.

Threatened Species - any plant or animal species defined under the Endangered Species

Act as likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range. Listings are published in the Federal Register.

Timberland - forestland capable of continuously producing 20 cubic feet or more per acre 

of industrial wood.

Trail: a linear route managed for human-powered, stock, or off-highway vehicle 

forms of transportation or for historical or heritage values. Trails are not generally 

managed for use by four-wheel drive or high-clearance vehicles.

Tuff - a volcanic rock formed by the welding together of ash and rock fragments from an 

explosive volcanic eruption.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 234 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

Underburn - burning by a surface fire, usually under a tree canopy.

Understory - collectively, those plants that are beneath the overstory. See overstory.

Upland - the portion of the landscape above the valley floor or stream.

U.S. Department of Interior (USDI) - government department which oversees the

Bureau of Land Management and many other agencies.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) - government agency responsible for managing 

fish and wildlife and their habitats.

Vegetative Composition - the plant species present in a plant community.

Vent -an opening at the Earth’s surface through which volcanic materials are erupted.

Viability - in general, the ability of a population of a plant or animal species to persist for 

some specified time into the future. For planning purposes, a viable population is one that 

has the estimated numbers and distribution of reproductive individuals to ensure that its 

continued existence will be well distributed in the planning area (ICBEMP, 2000).

Visual Resources - the aesthetic qualities of the landscape. This is determined by 

assessing the scenic quality of a site, the sensitivity of people to changes in the 

landscape, and the visibility of the landscape from major viewing routes and key 

observation points.

Watershed - the region draining into a river, river system, or body of water. A fifth-field 

hydrologic unit code of the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) comprising 50,000 to 100,000 

acres.

Weed - a plant considered undesirable, unattractive, or troublesome, usually introduced 

and growing without intentional cultivation. See also Noxious Weed.

Wilderness - an area that is essentially natural in character that has been designated by 

Congressional action in order to preserve that naturalness.

Wilderness Study Area (WSA) - public land under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land

Management which has been studied for wilderness character and is currently in an 

interim management status awaiting official wilderness designation or release from WSA

status by Congress.

Wildfire - any unwanted wildland fire.

Wildland Fire - any non-structure 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.

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.
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 235 —

Glossary

Woodland - a plant community in which, in contrast to a typical forest, the trees are often 

small or short-boled relative to their crown width or height. Collectively, the trees form an 

open canopy with the intervening area occupied by lower vegetation, commonly grass or 

shrub.

Xeric - pertaining to sites or habitats characterized by decidedly dry conditions.

Zones - BLM-administered lands are classified into four categories that establish 

guidance about their suitability for long-term ownership as follows:

• Zone 1 – lands with national or statewide significance (for wildlife, recreation, scenic 

or other values). Zone 1 lands are identified for retention in public ownership and are 

areas where management emphasis is being placed on increasing public land holdings through donations, exchange or sale.

• Zone 2 – lands with high resource values. Zone 2 lands are identified for retention 

or possible exchange for lands with higher resource values or transfer through the 

Recreation and Public Purposes Act.

• Zone 3 – lands that generally do not provide substantial resource, public, or tribal 

benefits; that many not be cost effective for BLM to manage; or that would represent 

a greater public benefit in other ownership. Zone 3 lands are potentially suitable for 

transfer, sale or other disposal, including lands identified as having potential land use 

benefits for local community expansion.

• Community Expansion (CE). Lands zoned CE are retained in public ownership until 

needed for specific community purposes.
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 236 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 237 —

Appendices

Appendix A: Special Status 

Plants Documented or 

Suspected on BLM Lands in the 

John Day Basin Planning Area STATUS (see text for explanation) Species Common Name Occurrence No. BLM Sites BLM Federal State ONHIC Achnatherum hendersonii Henderson’s ricegrass Suspected BSO CA 1 Achnatherum wallowaensis Wallowa rice grass Suspected BSO 1 Astragalus collinus var. laurentii Laurence’s milkvetch Suspected STO SOC ST 1 Astragalus diaphanus var. diurnus South Fork John Day milkvetch Documented 22 STO SOC ST 1 Astragalus tegetarioides bastard kentrophyta Suspected BSO SOC CA 1 Botrychium ascendens triangle-lobe moonwort Suspected BSO SOC CA 1 Botrychium crenulatum scalloped moonwort Suspected BSO SOC CA 1 Botrychium montanum mountain moonwort Suspected BAO 2 Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii 1/ Peck’s mariposa lily Suspected BSO SOC CA 1 Camissonia pygmaea dwarf evening-primrose Documented 1 BS CA 1 Carex eleocharis narrow-leaved sedge Suspected BA 2 Carex hystericina porcupine sedge Documented 12 BA 2 Carex idahoa Parry’s sedge Suspected BSO 1 Coryphantha vivipara var. vivipara cushion coryphantha Suspected BAO 2 Cymopterus nivalis Hayden’s cymopterus Suspected BAO 2 Cypripedium fasciculatum 2/ clustered lady’s slipper Suspected BSO SOC CA 2 Heliotropium curassavicum seaside helitrope Suspected BAO 2 Lomatium ravenii Raven’s lomatium Suspected BAO 2 Luina serpentina colonial luina Suspected BSO SOC 1 Mimulus evanescens disappearing monkeyflower Suspected BSO CA 1 Mimulus jungermannioides hepatic monkeyflower Documented 24 BSO SOC CA 1 Myosurus sessilis sessile mousetail Suspected BSO SOC CA 1 Phacelia minutissima dwarf scorpion-weed Suspected BSO SOC CA 1 Rorippa columbiae columbia cress Suspected BS SOC CA 1 Thelypodium eucosmum arrow-leaf thelypody Documented 45 STO SOC ST 1 Thelypodium howellii ssp. howellii Howell’s thelypody Suspected BAO 2 1/ Conservation strategy in preparation 2/ Conservation assessment prepared (related to Western Oregon Survey and Manage) Appendix A also indicates various status designations for each species. Following is an explanation of each:

BLM: BA – Bureau Assessment; BS – Bureau Sensitive; STO – State Endangered, Oregon; STO – State Threatened, OregonFederal: SOC – Species of ConcernState: CA – Candidate; SE – Endangered; ST – ThreatenedONHIC (Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center): 1 – Threatened with extinction or presumed to be extinct throughout their entire range; 2 – Threatened with extirpation or presumed to be extirpated from the state of Oregon
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 238 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 239 —

Appendices

Appendix B: Special Status Wildlife

Species Scientific Name Listing Status District / Planning Area Occurance. General Habitat Description (Csuti – 1997) ProvinceFederally Listed Species

Northern Bald Eagle (T) Haliaeetus leuco- cephalus Documented Rivers, lakes, & marshes with nearby tall trees or cliffs for nest- ing. Nests are usually 1 mile apart. May travel 10 miles from roost to forage. Nest in large tall tree within 1⁄2 m. of water. All

Canada Lynx (T) Lynx canadensis Suspected

Dense boreal forests that have openings such as meadows, bogs, or rock outcroppings. 14 sq. mile home range. Den under logs, hollow trees, under thick bursh.

EC, BM, HP, CB

Federal Candidate Species

Oregon Spotted Frog Rana pretiosa State – Critical Documented

Ponds, springs, marshes, & slow flowing streams & prefers water with a bottom layer of dead and decaying veg. Surrounding could be grasslands to forest. Cool, permanent, quiet water

EC

Yellow-billed Cuckoo 9/10/01 Coccyzus americanus BLM - Sensitive, State – Critical Unknown

Thick closed-canopy riparian forest with an understory of dense brush. Willow, black cottonwoods along rivers of E. OR Patches must be > 37 ac. in size with >7 ac. of closed canopy. Feed primarily amount cottonwoods.

EC, BM, HP

Washington Ground Squirrel Spermophilus washingtoni BLM – Assessment, State – Critical Unknown Arid deserts & grasslands, most freq. in sagebrush or grass- lands associated w/ river banks, hillsides, or ravines. CB

Bureau Sensitive SpeciesMammals

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Corynorhinus townsendii Federal – Former Candidate , State – Critical Documented Pacific coast east to Great Plains including arid eastern OR. The presence of suitable roost sites is more important than veg. Roosts in buildings, caves, mines, and bridges. Feed on moths. EC, BM

Fisher Martes pennanti 

Federal – Former Candidate , State – Critical 

Suspected

Mature closed canopy coniferous forests w/ some deciduous component. May travel 50 miles in 3 days. Den in hollow logs, brush piles, or rocks.

EC, BM

Birds

Greater Sage Grouse 6/6/01 Centrocercus urophasianus Federal – For- mer Candidate, State – Vulnerable Documented Areas dominated by big sagebrush with cover 15 to 50%. Males use open areas as leks. EC, BM, CB 

Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis

Federal – Former Candidate, State – Critical

Documented

Prefer late successional forests with large trees and considerable canopy closure, but in Blue Mountains are found in more open situations including aspen and juniper. Prefer N aspects near some water. Territory >400 ac.

EC, BM, HP

Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longi- cauda State – Critical Suspected

Nests in partially flooded meadows and grasslands, usually with a fringe of trees, and often in the middle of high-elevation sagebrush. Meadows are little grazed and have forbs. Perches in trees/snags surrounding the nest site.

EC, BM

Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis

Federal – Former Candidate, State – Critical

Documented

Soars over grassland, desert steppe, juniper woodlands. Requires ledges, cliffs, isolated trees, or riparian woodland for nesting. Home range of 3 miles for males.

BM, HP, CB

Yellow Rail Coturnicops nove- broacensis State – Critical Documented Freshwater marshes & wet meadows w/ sedges, usually sur- rounded by willow, standing water up to 1’ during breeding. EC
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 240 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement Species Scientific Name Listing Status District / Planning Area Occurance. General Habitat Description (Csuti – 1997) Province American Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus anatum State - Endangered Documented Suitable nest is most critical: cliffs, overlooking fairly open areas with ample food. Usually nest near where waterbirds are plentiful. Home range – 25 to 100 sq. miles. EC, BM, CB, HP Harleguin Duck (breeding pop.) 6/01 Histrionicus histri- onicus Federal – Former Candidate Unknown Relatively low-gradient slower-flowing reaches of mountain streams in forested areas. Needs remote streams w/ limited disturbance. During nonbreeding: swift waters and rapids. White River White River Northern Pygmy Owl Glaucidium gnoma State – Critical Suspected Coniferous and mixed Con.-deciduous forests. Moist forests, riparian woodlands, and drier p pine wlands. Hunts in open areas within the forest matrix. Uses abandoned woodpecker holes. BM Lewis Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis State – Critical Documented Open forests at lower elevation, white oak-pine, p pine, and cottonwood riparian woodlands in river valleys. 15 ac. territory. Eat berries and nuts in fall. Uses other WP holes. EC, CB Flammulated Owl Otus flammeolus State – Critical Documented Open forest with p pine association. Requires large trees, for- ages in grasslands or meadows and along the ecotones, nest in abandoned woodpecker holes. Mainly an insectivor. EC, BM, BR White-headed Woodpecker Picoides albolar- vatus State – Critical Documented Closely associated with P pine & mixed conifer with p pine. Requires large trees >20”dbh, 250 – 500 ac. home range. Nest on edge of a clearing. EC, BM, HP Black-backed Woodpecker Picoides arcticus State – Critical Documented Lower elevation lodgepole or p pine can be mixed with western larch, true firs, and spruce, nest trees < 20”dbh, Nest on edge of a clearing. 100ac. territory. EC, BM Three-toed Woodpecker Picoides tridac- tylus State – Critical Documented Above 4500 feet lodgepole pine can be mixed with other spe- cies. Nest in >11”dbh. 100 – 700 ac. territory. EC, BM Purple Martin Progne subis State – Critical Unknown Requires holes in trees close to open areas to forage. Use open forests or woodlands, would use scrub-land if there are trees near for nesting. Uses nest boxes and will be near cities. EC Pygmy Nuthatch Sitta pygmaea State – Critical Documented Open coniferous woodlands primarily p pine with less than 70% canopy cover. 2 to 4 ac. territory. EC, HP Burrowing owl Speotyto (=Athene) cum- icularia Federal – Former Candidate State – Critical Documented Open deserts, grasslands, fields, and pastures. Will use road- sides and airports. Most common in sagebrush steppe in OR. Nest in modified burrows made by ground squirrels or badgers. HP, CB, BM Amphibians & Reptiles Northern Leopard Frog Rana pipiens State – Critical Unknown Marshes, wet meadows, vegetated irrigation canals, ponds, & reservoirs. Quiet or slowly flowing water, needs cover. May forage in wet meadows far from water. BM, CB Painted Turtle Chrysemys picta State – Critical Unknown Shallow quiet waters with a muddy or sandy substrate. Lakes, marshes, ponds, and small streams. Variety of surrounding habitats – need cover and basking sites. BM, HP, CB Western Pond Turtle Chrysemys mar- morata Federal – Former Candidate State – Critical Unknown Quiet water in small lakes, marshes, and sluggish streams, & rivers. Muddy or rocky bottoms. Requires basking sites. Nest can be several hundred meters from water in a variety of veg. types. Can hibernate up to 1,600 feet from water. EC
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 241 —

Appendices

Species Scientific Name Listing Status District / Planning Area Occurance. General Habitat Description (Csuti – 1997) ProvinceBureau Assessment SpeciesMammals

Pygmy Rabbit Bachylagus ida- hoensis Federal – Former Candidate State – Vulnerable Documented Tall dense clumps of Great Basin sagebrush or greasewood. Deep friable soils to burrow. EC, BM, HP, CB

Spotted Bat Euderma macu- latum Federal – Former Candidate Documented Variety of habitats from p pine to desert water holes. Crevices in cliffs used for reproduction are more important than veg. type. Eats moths. BR, HP

Brazilian Free-tailed Bat Tadarida brasil- iensis Documented Northern limit is southwest OR. Caves, hollow trees, and buildings. Low elev., diet of moths above forest, meadows, grasslands, or pastures. Travel 30 miles to forage. EC

Birds

Tricolored Blackbird (breeding pop.) Agelaius tricolor Federal – Former Candidate Documented Breeds in freshwater marshes with cattails or thickets of wil- lows or shrubs. High elevation habitat use is unlikely. EC, BR, HP, CB

Bufflehead (breeding pop.) Bucephala albeola Documented

Nests near mountain lakes surrounded by open woodlands containing snags. Preferred nest trees: aspen, p pine, and doug fir. After breeding season found on open water or major rivers and that coast.

EC

Amphibians & Reptiles

Cope’s Giant Salamander Dicamptondon copei Documented Moist forests in clear cold streams (w/ water temp. between 8- 14 deg. C), brooks, & ponds with gravel bottoms and boulders. Under rocks, slabs of bark, or other cover in streams

Bureau Tracking Species 

(Species are not considered as special status species for management purposes)

Mammals

Pallid Bat Antrozous pallidus State - Vulnerable Suspected

Arid regions or open forests with p pine or oak. Uses desert vegetation (sagebrush, juniper, salt desert shrub). Cliff-faces, caves, mines or buildings. Forages on ground – crickets, beetles, grasshoppers, scorpions, mice, and lizards.

EC, BM, BR, HP, CB

Silver-haired Bat Lasionycteris noctivagans Suspected Older Douglas fir/western hemlock and p pine forests. For- ages over ponds, streams in woods, and roosts under loose bark. Moths, termites, and flies All

White-tailed Jackrabbit Lepus townsendii Suspected

Open regions such as sagebrush deserts and grasslands, but also open coniferous forests, even alpine meadows. Feeds on grasses and forbs. In areas shared w/ black-tailed jackrabbits, found more in open grasslands than sagebrush com.

EC, BM, BR, HP, CB

Western Small-footed Myotis Myotis ciliolabrum Federal – Former Candidate Suspected Cliffs and rocky canyons in arid grasslands and desert scrub, some mixed conifer and pine use. Rocks, boulders, bark, caves and mines. Small insects. EC, BM, BR, HP, CB

Long-eared Myotis Myotis evotis Federal – Former Candidate Suspected Forested habitats and edges (juniper, p pine, Doug fir, spruce, true fir, subalpine fir, riparian hardwoods. Eats moths primarily. All

Long-legged Myotis Myotis volans Federal – Former Candidate Suspected Doug fir, true fir, spruce, lodge pole and ponderosa pine, & oak woodlands. Uses riparian in arid areas. Cliffs, buildings, caves and mines. Eats moths – small bugs. All
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 242 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement Species Scientific Name Listing Status District / Planning Area Occurance. General Habitat Description (Csuti – 1997) Province Yuma Myotis Myotis yuma- nensis Federal – Former Candidate Suspected Wide variety of habitat- desert scrub, moist woodland, open forest, and riparian. Associated with water. Colonies in build- ings, mines, caves, or bridges. All California Bighorn Sheep Ovis Canadensis californiana Federal – Former Candidate Documented Steep rocky, high mountain meadows and steep canyons. 20 – 40 sq. kilometer home ranges. BR, HP, CB, BM Western Gray Squirrel Sciurus griseus Suspected Deciduous or broadleaf evergreen woodlands dominated by oak, sometimes mixed with pine. Riparian areas and in mixed forests of tanoak, maple, madrone, doug fir, p pine, white fir, sugar pine, & jef. Pine. Primarily low elevation. EC Preble’s Shrew Sorex preblei Federal – Former Candidate Suspected Permanent or intermittent streams in arid to semi-arid shrub/ grass association and dense high elevation coniferous forests. Sagebrush thickets and willow or aspen. BM, BR, HP Birds Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum State - Vulnerable Suspected Short grasslands with occasional shrubs < 35% CC. Prefer native bunch grasses on north slopes of hills with scattered shrubs. Use cultivated grasslands and pastures. 1-4 ac. terri- tory. CB Sage Sparrow Amphispiza belli State – Critical Suspected Sagebrush covered valleys, desert shrub communities. Re- duced breeding potential in grasslands w/ sagebrush or other shrubs that are to scattered or where junipers are too frequent. Nest about 1’ off ground. 4-8 ac. territory. CB Black-throated Sparrow Amphispiza bilineata Documented Nest at interface of valleys and hills with scattered desert shrubs and grass understory, often near rock piles. Less frequent in open flat valleys with sage, juniper, or salt-desert shrubs. Plants usually are >1/2 meter high. 1-4 ac. territory. BR Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni Documented Grasslands, sagebrush flats, juniper woodlands, larger meadows, and grasslands w/in forests. Nests in tree – often willow or juniper. 1-3 mile territory. Fire suppression, grassland conversion, and encroachment of JUCO have neg. impact. BM, BR, HP, CB Pileated Woodpecker Cryocopus pileatus State - Vulnerable Documented Old-growth doug fir and p pine mixed conifer forest with large trees, snags, & logs – forest over 70 yrs. old. 1000 ac. territory. BM, HP Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii brewsteri Federal – Former Candidate State - Vulnerable Documented Willows at edge of streams flowing through meadows & marshes. Thickets along edges of forest clearings. Tall brushy veg. near water, inc. spgs & seeps in desert areas. 1-3 ac. terr. EC, BM, BR, HP, CB Pinyon Jay Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus Documented Juniper & P pine woodlands of SC OR. Nest 6-20’ up. Good supply of conifer seeds to nest. EC, BM, BR, HP Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludocicia- nus State - Vulnerable Documented Almost any fairly open veg. where there are occasional tall shrubs or trees for perching and nesting. Sagebrush, bitter- brush, greasewood, desert com., juniper, very open pine or oak, and mountain shrub communities. 20-40 ac. territory. HP, CB Long-billed Curlew Numenius ameri- canus State - Vulnerable Documented Open grasslands, prairies, and meadows, often near scattered shrubs usually near water or wet meadows, but also in dry situ- ations. Travel up to 6 m. to forage. CB Mountain Quail Oreortyx pictus Documented Prefers open forest and woodlands with ample undergrowth of brushy veg. Chaparral thickets riparian woodland, meadow edges in forests, & brushy regrowth after timber harvest. Winters at lower edges of forests. Nest usually w/in 1⁄2 m. of water. 

5-50 ac. territory. 

BM, EC, HP, 
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 243 —

Appendices

Species Scientific Name Listing Status District / Planning Area Occurance. General Habitat Description (Csuti – 1997) Province

Pine Grosbeak Pinicola enuclea- tor Unknown High-elev. forest com. lodgepole, all firs, spruce, & mixed conifer types. Usually associated w/ wet meadows, lakes or streams. Open forests. Don’t use lower P pine. 26 ac. territory. BM

White-faced Ibis (breeding pop.) Plegadis chihi Federal – Former Candidate Documented Interior freshwater marshes, emergent hardstem bulrush. Feeds in marshes, meadows, edges of ponds, pastures, & irrigated alfalfa fields. EC, BR

Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea Unknown Variety of woodlands, in OR buckbrush chaparral & mt. ma- hogany of S.E. OR. 2-7 ac. terr. EC, BR

Bank Swallow Riparia riparia Documented

Nest tunnels in dirt embankments. Open habitat (desert scrub, grasslands, ag., & pastures) near nesting area. May nest up to 1⁄2 mile from water.

EC, BM, BR, HP, CB

Broad-tailed Hummingbird Selasphorus platycercus Suspected Not listed in Csuti. EC, BM, BR

Pygmy nuthatch Sitta pygmaea State - Critical Documented Open coniferous woodlands, primarily mature p pine w/ <70% CC. 2 – 4 ac. territ. EC, HP

Williamson’s Sapsucker Sphyrapicus throideus Documented Mature high elevation coniferous forests. Prefers open p pine but uses lodgepole, red fir, grand fir, doug fir, spruce, & aspen. 10 – 20 ac. territory. EC, BM, BR

Forester’s Tern Sterna forsteri Suspected

Breeds on lakes & marshes in floating nests, sometimes on mud or sand flats near water. Primarily in alkaline marshes of SE OR.

EC, BR, CB

Great Gray Owl Strix nebulosa State - Vulnerable Documented Nest: snags in old growth forest/N. aspects. Forage: open areas on small mammals. EC, BM, HP

Amphibians & Reptiles

Blotched Tiger Salamander

Ambystoma tigrinum melanostictum Undetermined

Breed in a wide range of envir. From clear mountain ponds to temporary turbid pools in the lowlands – free of fish. Wide variety of habitats.

BR

Cascade Frog Rana cascadae Undetermined

Closely assoc. w/ water: lakes, ponds, & small streams that run through meadows. Rarely below 2,600’, occurs up to timberline. Feeds on muddy or silty substrate in shallow H2o.

EC

Mojave Black-collared Lizard Crotaphytus bicin- vtores State - Vulnerable Undetermined Variety of desert shrub veg., needs rock outcrops, boulders, or talus slopes. SE OR is N. edge of range. BR

Long-nose Leopard Lizard Gambelia wisli- zenii Undetermined Open desert shrublands particularly where islands of sand have accumulated around shrubs. Absent where dense grass inhibits their ability to run BR

Desert Horned Lizard Phrynosoma platyrhinos State - Vulnerable Undetermined Flat or gently rolling deserts covered with sagebrush or salt desert shrub. Scattered bushes and loose, sandy soil, but will use rocky areas or hardpan. BR, BM

Northern Sagebrush Lizard Sceloporus gra- ciosus graciosus Federal – Former Candidate, State - Vulnerable Determined Sagebrush or chaparral, juniper woodlands, or coniferous forests. Require well-illuminated open ground near cover. EC, BM, BR,HP, CB

Woodhouses Toad Bufo woodhousei Undetermined

Permanent waters of ponds, streams, rivers, reservoirs, & irrigation canals. Can breed in shallow temporary ponds. Agricultural and semi-desert habitat.

CB

Western Toad Bufo boreas State - Vulnerable Documented

Wide variety of habitats: deserts, chaparral, grasslands, woodlands, and forests: sea level to timberline. Need a source of water for breeding

EC, BM, BR, HP, CB
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 244 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 245 —

Appendices

ALLOTMENT

NAME

# MIC BLM 

acres

AUMS

ACTiVE

AMP / 

CRMP

Resource

Plan

S&G 

FY

 done

S&G’s

 met?

Livestock

Cause

Standards 

not met

Action 

taken?

POTAMUS ??? I 4138 0 John Day

MORRIS ??? C 1097 0 John Day

BROSNAN RANCH ??? I 2138 0 John Day

FRANK ANDERSON 2500 C 80 10 TWO RIVERS

HERBERT ASHER 2501 I 1999 101 TWO RIVERS 2005 NO NO 2 NO

ASHER, HUBERT 2503 I 360 17 TWO RIVERS

BARKER 2504 C 160 18 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

BARNETT 2505 C 400 55 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

MAXINE BARNETT 2506 C 200 19 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO YES 1,2,3,4,5 NO

BROOKS 2507 C 40 3 TWO RIVERS

BEAR CREEK 2508 M 842 45 TWO RIVERS

BELSHE 2509 I 1610 62 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

HAYSTACK 2511 C 109 11

BIG MUDDY 2512 I 14890 615 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 1,2,3,4,5 YES

BIG SKY 2513 M 660 26 TWO RIVERS 2002 YES N/A N/A N/A

BLACK ROCK ASSOC. 2514 M 3325 224 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO 1,2,3,4,5 N/A

BANTAM 2515 C 40 6 TWO RIVERS

GABLE CREEK 2516 I 5025 210 CAP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO NO 2,3,4,5 YES

BORSCHOWA 2517 C 80 4 TWO RIVERS

PINE CREEK 2518 I 5418 346 TWO RIVERS

SMITH POINT 2520 I 2596 93 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 N/A

HORSESHOE BEND 2521 I 777 43 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

JAMES BROWN 2522 I 2687 68 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

BUCK HOLLOW 2524 C 441 10 TWO RIVERS

ROCK CREEK 2525 M 2074 231 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A N/A

PETER CAMPBELL 2526 C 760 60 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A N/A

SENTINEL PEAK 2528 C 1240 44 TWO RIVERS

F.C. CHERRY 2529 C 823 88 TWO RIVERS

CIMMIYOTTI 2530 C 712 118 TWO RIVERS

CIRCLE BAR 2531 I 19708 637 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO NO 3,4,5 YES

T. COLE 2532 C 540 19 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

SUTTON MOUNTAIN 2533 I 25315 489 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

RICHMOND 2534 C 240 10 TWO RIVERS

HAYFIELD 2535 C 345 81 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

SPRING BASIN 2536 I 5363 146 TWO RIVERS 2002 YES N/A N/A

DEAD DOG CANYON 2537 I 3906 243 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

DECKER 2538 I 2999 206 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

BIGGS JUNCTION 2539 C 109 14 TWO RIVERS

PERSIMMON WOODS 2540 C 40 5 TWO RIVERS 2002 YES N/A N/A N/A

EAKIN 2541 I 1760 12 TWO RIVERS

ELLSWORTH 2543 C 583 32 TWO RIVERS

CIRCLE S RANCH 2544 I 598 16 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

CHERRY CREEK 2545 I 11095 438 TWO RIVERS

FREEWAY 2546 C 40 2 TWO RIVERS

APPENDIX C (Allotments – Summary 

Info., Management Categories,

& S&G status)
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 246 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

SIXMILE 2547 I 2397 245 CAP TWO RIVERS 2004 NO YES 2 YES

HOGAN CREEK 2548 C 40 3 TWO RIVERS

HARDIE 2549 M 1002 84 TWO RIVERS

CLINTON O. HARRIS 2551 I 1646 98 TWO RIVERS

WILLOW SPRING 2553 I 1127 20 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

CHARLES H. HILL 2554 I 1835 86 TWO RIVERS

HOAG 2555 C 380 10 2002 YES N/A N/A N/A

MURRAY HOWARD 2556 I 846 33 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO NO 4 YES

HULDEN 2557 C 160 17 TWO RIVERS

SQUAW CREEK 2558 I 5086 301 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO YES YES

FOPIANO 2559 C 160 17 TWO RIVERS

BASE LINE 2560 M 559 27 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 1,2,3,4,5 N/A

GIRDS CREEK 2561 I 1607 61 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

J BAR S 2562 I 750 34 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A N/A

HORSESHOE CREEK 2563 M 1667 100 TWO RIVERS

CACTUS RIDGE 2564 C 325 20 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO YES 1,3 NO

LEROY A. BRITT 2565 C 431 33 TWO RIVERS

JUSTESON 2566 C 113 3 TWO RIVERS

KASER BROTHERS 2567 I 1509 59 TWO RIVERS

KEEGAN 2568 C 618 29 TWO RIVERS

ZACK T. KEYS 2569 I 1921 64 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO NO 4 YES

ZACK T. KEYS 2570 I 1607 58 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO NO 4 YES

HORN BUTTE 2571 I 5023 836 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO YES 2,4,5 NO

LAFOON AND 

CARLSON

2572 I 3520 83 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

L.B. RANCH 2573 C 23 2 TWO RIVERS

LEAR 2574 C 200 13 TWO RIVERS

ANDREW F. 

LECKIE, JR.

2575 I 55 1 TWO RIVERS

LEFT HAND CANYON 2576 C 120 3 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A

BYRDS POINT 2577 M 1455 94 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

LOGAN 2578 C 2194 111 TWO RIVERS

EUGENE LOGAN, JR. 2579 M 840 42 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A N/A

ELSIE MARTIN 2581 M 920 22 TWO RIVERS

MULKEY 2583 M 200 15 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A N/A

CATHERINE MAURER 2584 I 13967 789 TWO RIVERS

SEEK PEAK 2585 C 320 11 TWO RIVERS

TOM MCDONALD 2586 I 576 27 TWO RIVERS 2005 YES N/A N/A N/A

CORRAL CANYON 2587 I 2101 78 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 1,2,3,4,5 YES

SPUD 2588 M 608 40 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

MCQUINN 2589 C 40 1 TWO RIVERS

CARROLL RIM 2590 I 2572 101 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO NO 3,5 YES

MILLER 2591 I 1896 47 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

MARY MISENER 2592 I 595 51 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO NO 1,3,5 YES

VERNE A. MOBLEY 2593 M 1240 133 CAP TWO RIVERS

MOREHOUSE AND 

ELLIOT

2594 M 65 3 TWO RIVERS 2002 YES N/A N/A N/A

WINDY RIVER 2595 I 833 53 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 1,3,4,5 N/A

HOWARD MORTIMORE2596 C 40 6 TWO RIVERS

JOHN T. MURTHA 2597 I 8668 283 TWO RIVERS

HAY CREEK 2598 I 1518 1226 TWO RIVERS 2002 YES N/A N/A N/A

KENNETH MYERS 2599 C 160 10 TWO RIVERS

J. NARTZ 2600 C 935 48 TWO RIVERS

VICTOR B. NASH 2601 C 160 14 TWO RIVERS
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 247 —

Appendices

LEE H PETTYJOHN 2603 M 360 14 TWO RIVERS

PHILIPPI 2604 M 1022 64 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO NO 1,3,4,5 N/A

E. GLENN POTTER 2605 C 78 3 TWO RIVERS

WILLIAM W. POTTER 2606 C 80 4 TWO RIVERS

PRYOR FARMS 2607 M 800 50 TWO RIVERS 2005 NO YES 2,4,5 NO

RATTRAY 2608 I 10615 403 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A N/A

CROWN ROCK 2609 I 4241 105 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO NO 2,3,4,5 YES

VAN RIETMANN 2611 M 680 25 TWO RIVERS

ARTHUR N. ROBISON 2612 C 40 1 AMP TWO RIVERS

FRANK R. ROBISON 2613 C 80 2 TWO RIVERS

CLARNO HOMESTEAD2614 I 1893 63 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

ORVILLE RUGGLES 2616 C 162 11 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

EMIGRANT CANYON 2617 M 502 20 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 1,3,4,5 N/A

SID SEALE 2619 I 13676 733 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 NO 2,4,5 N/A

EVELYN E. SEE 2620 C 177 3 TWO RIVERS

EARL A. SMITH 2621 C 232 35 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

ALTA M. SPAULDING 2622 C 121 7 TWO RIVERS

BUTTE CREEK 2623 M 4376 230 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

BURNT RANCH 2624 C 288 5 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 1,2,3,4,5 YES

DAVID M. STIREWALT 2625 I 1340 65 TWO RIVERS

HARPER MOUNTAIN 2626 I 760 25 TWO RIVERS

ROBERT W. STRAUB 2627 C 1480 69 TWO RIVERS

FOURMILE CANYON 2628 I 840 152 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO YES 1 NO

TATUM 2629 I 2889 113 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

TRIPP 2630 I 80 7 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

DIPPING VAT 2631 M 1160 25 TWO RIVERS

LARSON 2632 C 80 5 TWO RIVERS

AMINE PEAK 2633 I 4349 294 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

CORRAL HOLLOW 2634 C 160 32 TWO RIVERS

RICHARD FOSTER 2635 C 289 20 TWO RIVERS

WEEDMAN RANCHES 2636 C 343 6 TWO RIVERS

V.O. WEST 2637 M 223 15 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 1,3,4,5 N/A

TUBB CREEK 2639 C 429 50 TWO RIVERS

NORTH EIGHTY 2641 C 78 3 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A

MASCALL-CANT 2642 I 4308 265 TWO RIVERS 2004 NO YES YES

HI MEADOWS 2644 M 640 98 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

CLARK 2645 I 4047 158 TWO RIVERS

LONEROCK 2646 C 147 27 TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A N/A

HARTUNG 2648 I 700 22 TWO RIVERS 2002 YES N/A N/A N/A

RIM 2649 C 301 3 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 1,3 YES

BULL CANYON 2651 C 280 3 TWO RIVERS

BROOKS LEASE 2653 C 38 2 TWO RIVERS

NORTON RANCH 2655 C 356 21 TWO RIVERS

DRY KNOB 2656 C 275 7 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

BRIDGE CREEK 2657 C 51 2 TWO RIVERS

PACKSADDLE MTN 2659 M 330 20 AMP TWO RIVERS 2003 YES N/A N/A

RATTLESNAKE 

CREEK

2660 C 280 11 TWO RIVERS

PEBBLE SPRINGS 2661 C 320 53 TWO RIVERS

JOHNSON CREEK 2662 I 7698 436 TWO RIVERS

SMITH HOLLOW 2663 C 680 51 TWO RIVERS

SPECKLE CANYON 2664 C 80 2 TWO RIVERS 2004 YES N/A N/A

WORKMAN 2665 C 39 3
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 248 ­— Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

GOOSEBERRY 2667 I 1224 43 TWO RIVERS

KIOSK 2669 C 160 16 2004 NO YES 1,3,5 NO

ROWE CREEK 2670 C 320 16 TWO RIVERS

RED ROCK 2671 C 1259 40 TWO RIVERS 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 YES

TABLE MOUNTAIN 2672 C 120 11 JOHN DAY

JOHNNY CREEK 

/DICK CREEK

4001 C 2158 423 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 NO

SLICKEAR MTN. 4003 I 3274 537 JOHN DAY

WINDY POINT 4007 I 2514 407 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 NO

BIRCH CREEK 4009 C 3009 350 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 NO

RIVER 4012 C 135 13 JOHN DAY

JOHN DAY 4013 C 40 5 JOHN DAY

MIDDLE FORK 4014 C 200 16 JOHN DAY

MUD SPRINGS 4015 C 586 30 JOHN DAY

DIXIE 4016 I 1900 236 JOHN DAY

MURDERER’S CREEK 4020 M 17315 860 CAP JOHN DAY

SIDEHILL 4026 C 40 6

NEAL BUTTE 4028 C 712 119 JOHN DAY

NORTH FORK 4029 I 2250 316 JOHN DAY

RIM 4035 C 654 41 JOHN DAY

STONEHILL 4036 I 520 80 JOHN DAY

DAYVILLE 4038 C 1640 141 JOHN DAY

ALDRICH MTN. 4039 C 40 5 JOHN DAY

MERRELL 4040 C 40 9

FRANKS CREEK 4041 I 2297 196 JOHN DAY 2005 NO YES 1,2,3,5 YES

JOHNNY CAKE MTN. 4042 C 280 30 JOHN DAY

MAHOGANY 4043 C 320 64 JOHN DAY

SODA CREEK 4044 C 2023 405 AMP JOHN DAY 2003 NO YES 1,2,3,4,5

BATTLE CREEK 4049 I 4958 830 AMP JOHN DAY 2004 YES N/A N/A

JINKS CREEK 4050 C 80 16 JOHN DAY

BIG BALDY 4052 I 10712 1743 AMP JOHN DAY 2004 YES N/A N/A

POINTER 4056 I 94 12

SUGARLOAF 4058 C 160 45 JOHN DAY

COLD SPRINGS 4059 C 240 30 JOHN DAY

SCOTT CREEK 4061 C 947 119 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 1,3,5 NO

ANTELOPE 4064 C 20 2 JOHN DAY

EAST FRANKS 

CREEK

4065 C 644 81 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 1,3,5 NO

KIDD CREEK 4066 C 723 91 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 1,3,5 NO

SHEEP CR. BUTTE 4067 C 850 153 JOHN DAY

SHEEP GULCH 4068 I 3499 250 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 3,5 NO

TAMARACK CREEK 4072 C 960 64

MCCARTY CREEK 4074 C 200 20 JOHN DAY 2005 NO YES 2 YES

ECHO 4075 C 32 5 JOHN DAY 2004 NO YES

COTTONWOOD 

CREEK

4076 I 3113 204 JOHN DAY 2004 NO YES YES

GIBSON HILL 4078 C 40 8 JOHN DAY

SOUTH STONEHILL 4080 C 320 63

JACK OF CLUBS 4082 C 80 8 JOHN DAY

19 20 4083 I 160 26 JOHN DAY

RUDIO MTN. 4086 I 3757 590 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 NO

BLUE BASIN 4087 C 1812 305 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 2,4 NO

WEST BOLOGNA 

CREEK

4093 C 80 12 JOHN DAY

FIELDS CREEK 4095 C 1092 214 JOHN DAY
Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement — 249 —

Appendices

INDIAN 4099 C 40 5 JOHN DAY

ROCKPILE 4103 I 4918 928 AMP JOHN DAY 2004 YES N/A N/A

SOUTH FORK 4104 C 240 47 JOHN DAY

IZEE 4106 C 200 41 JOHN DAY

CANYON TERRACE 4107 C 158 20 JOHN DAY

LITTLE WALL CREEK 4108 C 320 53 JOHN DAY

BIG CANYON CREEK 4109 C 146 20 JOHN DAY

CANYON MTN. 4115 C 41 5 JOHN DAY

BLACK CANYON 4119 C 944 188 JOHN DAY 2004 YES N/A N/A

FERRIS CREEK 4120 I 3135 277 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 1,2,3,5 NO

BIG BEND 4122 C 280 25 JOHN DAY

SMOKEY CREEK 4124 I 2213 307 JOHN DAY 2002 YES N/A N/A

UMATILLA 4125 C 1834 113 JOHN DAY

KIMBERLY 4127 C 240 40 JOHN DAY

DAY CREEK 4131 C 1583 160 JOHN DAY

GIBSON CREEK 4135 C 40 7 JOHN DAY

BONE YARD 4139 C 20452 92 JOHN DAY

SHIRT TAIL CREEK 4140 C 40 8 JOHN DAY

TWO COUNTY 4145 I 13796 1105 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 4 NO

KINZUA 4151 I 8292 539 JOHN DAY 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 NO

MORGAN CREEK 4154 C 1447 290 JOHN DAY

BLACKHORSE DRAW 4155 C 120 29 AMP JOHN DAY

RUDIO CREEK 4156 I 2328 369 JOHN DAY 2005 YES N/A N/A

MILLER MOUNTAIN 4159 C 40 5 JOHN DAY

BOLOGNA CREEK 4160 C 440 37 JOHN DAY

CREEK 4163 I 706 51 JOHN DAY

PASS CREEK 4184 C 80 10 JOHN DAY

BIG FLATS 4186 C 825 100 JOHN DAY

JACK RHODDEN 4191 C 200 26 JOHN DAY

WILLIAM HEALY 4192 I 3701 360 John Day

DOHERTY P.JOE 

SHEEP

4193 I 4378 360 John Day

COW CREEK 4352 C 360 10 JOHN DAY

HEALY 6549 C 3701 360 John Day
John Day Basin Resource Management Plan

— 250 — Analysis of the Management Situation and Preliminary Public Involvement

BUREAU OF

LAND

MANAGEMENT

PRINEVILLE

DISTRICT

OFFICE

BLM/OR/WA/PL-07/008-1792

UNITED STATES

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Prineville District Office

3050 N.E. 3rd Street

Prineville, Oregon 97754

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

PRIORITY MAIL

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

Bureau of Land Management

Permit No. G-76