The authors are solely responsible for the content of this technical presentation. The technical presentation does not necessarily reflect the 

official position of the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE), and its printing and distribution does not 

constitute an endorsement of views which may be expressed. Technical presentations are not subject to the formal peer review process by 

ASABE editorial committees; therefore, they are not to be presented as refereed publications. Citation of this work should state that it is 

from an ASABE meeting paper. EXAMPLE: Author's Last Name, Initials. 2006. Title of Presentation. ASABE Paper No. 068010. St. 

Joseph, Mich.: ASABE. For information about securing permission to reprint or reproduce a technical presentation, please contact ASABE 

at rutter@asabe.org or 269-429-0300 (2950 Niles Road, St. Joseph, MI 49085-9659 USA). 

An ASABE Meeting Presentation

Paper Number: 068010

Forest Road Management to Protect Soil and Water 

J. McFero Grace III, Research Engineer 

USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 520 Devall Drive, Auburn, AL 36849, 

jmgrace@fs.fed.us. 

Barton D. Clinton, Research Ecologist 

USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory, 3160 

Coweeta Lab Road, Otto, NC 28763, bclinton@fs.fed.us. 

Written for presentation at the 

2006 ASABE Annual International Meeting 

Sponsored by ASABE 

Portland Convention Center 

Portland, Oregon 

9 - 12 July 2006 

Abstract. The National Forest road system is the network that supports recreation which has 

become the primary use of the public lands. The pattern of use of National Forest roads for 

recreation by the public has increased dramatically since the late 1940’s and is expected to continue 

to increase beyond the rates observed today. However, research over the past 60 years clearly 

present forest roads as a major source of sediment and soil erosion from forest watersheds. Threats 

to healthy forests have received increased attention in the past decade. In particular, roads, road 

management, and travel management will likely be critical to addressing the four threats to the 

Health of the Nation's Forests and Grasslands. Road management is an important component in 

preserving and maintaining healthy forests throughout the nation. Sediment export from the existing 

forest road network is an issue of great concern in forest management. The objective of this paper is 

to provide an overview of issues involved in managing the nation's public forest roads for the 

protection of soil and water. The paper explores the benefit and efficacy of erosion mitigation, 

sediment control, and road BMPs in protecting soil and water. This paper also suggests areas 

requiring additional research and development to satisfy the goals of protecting forest soil and water. 

Keywords. Soil Erosion, Forest Roads, Soil, Water Resources, Conservation, Sediment Control 

BMPs 
2 

Introduction 

The Forest Service has been involved in controversy and debate over its management of the 

public lands since its creation in 1905. These debates, which originated in the 1890’s over 

management philosophies raged on for 100 years, continue to be debated. Forest Service 

Chiefs from Gifford Pinchot to Dale Bosworth have been charged to manage the public lands to 

satisfy multiple uses. Issues related to healthy forests have received increased attention in 

recent years. In particular, President George W. Bush's Healthy Forests Initiative was launched 

to reduce the risks of wildfires to people and the environment, and to restore forest and 

rangeland health. Road management is an important component in preserving and maintaining 

healthy forests throughout the nation. Roads are a vital link to accomplishing the initiative's 

goals because they provide access to assess current conditions, prescribe treatments, and 

conduct and evaluate effectiveness of practices (Grace, 2002d). However, forest roads have 

clearly been presented as a potential and present source of sediments on the forest landscape 

(Grace, 2005b). Sediment export from the existing forest road network is an issue of great 

concern in forest management. 

In 2003, USDA Forest Service Chief, Dale Bosworth, unveiled the Four Threats to the Nation's 

Forests and Grasslands in the 21st Century. The four threats identified included fire and fuels, 

invasive species, loss of open space, and unmanaged recreation (USDA Forest Service, 2004). 

Each of the four threats has a common component, the forest road system. This Forest Service 

road system consists of over 600,000 km of roads of varying classes. These roads are 

necessary for the majority of forest management activities as well as for recreation. Most of 

these roads were initially constructed for management activities such as harvesting and fire 

prevention. These lower standard roads were not intended to serve the purposes that they 

have evolved to serve. Revisions in the Forest Service timber management practices during the 

1990’s limited the activity for which the existing roads were designed, timber harvest. 

Consequently, timber harvesting only accounts for 0.5 percent of all forest road use. 

Research on the effects of forest roads has shown that forest roads can result in accelerated 

erosion and water quality impacts (Binkley and Brown, 1993; Grace et al., 1998; Grace, 

2002a,b,c; Grace, 2003; Grace 2005a; Patric, 1976; Swift, 1985; Yoho, 1980). For example, a 

survey conducted in one watershed in the southeast revealed that 80 percent of the sources of 

sediment delivery to streams and rivers were from the road prism; i.e., road surface, ditches, 

banks (van Lear et al. 1995). In an attempt to minimize the impact of roads on the nation's 
3 

public lands, the Forest Service has developed the Road Maintenance Management System 

(RMMS). The purpose of this paper is to detail the current Forest Service RMMS and provide 

an overview of issues involved in managing the nation's public forest roads. This paper also 

suggests areas requiring additional research and development to satisfy the goals of protecting 

forest soil and water resources. 

Road Maintenance Practices and Sediment 

In the past 60 years, recreational use of National Forests has dramatically increased to greater 

than 18 times the levels seen in the late 1940’s (USDA Forest Service, 2004). Forest roads 

have also received increased pressure and account for the largest recreational use (driving for 

pleasure) of National Forest (USDA Forest Service, 1999a). Coinciding with the increased 

recreational use of National Forests, there has been an eleven-fold increase in traffic in National 

forest in comparison to the 1950’s. Recreational use (and traffic in National Forests) is 

expected to continue to increase dramatically as the U.S. population increases over the next 

century (USDA Forest Service, 2004). 

The increased use of forest roads presents a challenge to National Forest road management 

related to road maintenance. Traffic and road maintenance are two components in road 

management that have the potential to influence sediment movement from forest roads. In 

general, there is a direct link between traffic level and maintenance intensity. Increased erosion 

losses can require increased maintenance to maintain drainage patterns and prevent (or 

minimize) the impact on downslope resources. At the same time, maintenance operations can 

increase soil erosion by removing armoring layers on the road surface and in the ditch that 

develop over time (Black and Luce, 1999). 

Criteria have been established in the RMMS describing how roads are to be maintained to 

consider adjacent resources, smoothness required for user comfort, season for road use, 

volume and type of traffic, and road operation and management strategies. The objective of the 

RMMS is ‘To maintain the forest transportation system to support resource programs; to protect 

the investment, environment, and adjacent resources; to meet applicable air and water quality 

standards; and to provide for user economy and convenience’ (FSH 7709.58, 10). Five levels of 

maintenance are supported and described below: 
4 

• Level 1. Intermittent service roads of any type, class, or construction standard that are 

closed (>1 year) to vehicular traffic and receiving custodial maintenance (to prevent damage 

to adjacent resources). 

• Level 2. Roads open for minor use by high clearance vehicles. 

• Level 3. Roads open and maintained for travel by a prudent driver in a passenger car, 

however, user comfort and convenience are not priorities. Roads are typically single lane 

roads with turnouts and may be surfaced with native or processed material. 

• Level 4. Roads that provide a moderate degree of comfort and convenience at moderate 

travel speeds. Roads are typically double lane and aggregate surfaced. 

• Level 5. Roads are typically double lane, surfaced structures that provide a high degree of 

comfort and convenience. 

These roads are the arteries that support recreation and management uses on National Forests. 

However, the combination of increased traffic and below standard (problem) roads has led to 

environmental concerns which must be resolved to fulfill the objectives of the RMMS. These 

'problem' roads have the potential to cause accelerated erosion losses and mass failures (Luce 

et al., 2001) which may lead to sediment introduction into forest water bodies. Fulfillment of the 

RMMS's objectives requires work in the area of traffic and maintenance influence on sediment 

movement. Upgrading roads in critical areas with alternative practices to mitigate sediment 

movement and reduce maintenance operations are likely key to reducing the environmental 

impact of roads. Improvement of critical roads can allow more efficient use of the maintenance 

funding provided for the maintenance of the road system. Upgraded roads can provide access 

to areas for management and at the same time provide recreational users access to their public 

lands with minimal environmental costs. 

Increased soil erosion has been attributed to traffic in previous roads research conducted in 

mountainous regions (Bilby et al., 1989; Burroughs and King, 1989; Foltz, 1999; Reid and 

Dunne, 1984). However, in an investigation of the influence of traffic and road maintenance on 

sediment production from forest roads in the Oregon Coast Range (Luce and Black, 2001), ditch 

grading had a greater effect on increased soil erosion than traffic. The investigators concluded 

that there was little difference in traffic and no-traffic given a graded ditch. Cleaning ditches 

and removing vegetation also results in an increase in soil erosion (6 times greater) in 

comparison to erosion losses from untreated and treated road surfaces (Luce and Black, 1999). 
5 

In a study of road surfacing types on sediment yield in the Pacific Northwest, Reid and Dunne 

(1984) found that over a 1-yr period, graveled road segments receiving heavy traffic produced 

130 times more sediment than road segments receiving no traffic. In this study, traffic intensity 

greatly influenced (7.5 times the rate measured during periods of no traffic) soil loss and 

suspended sediment concentrations in runoff. It was hypothesized that soil loss from the road 

segments was influenced by the frequency of road maintenance and grading. The 

investigators presented the extent that maintenance operations influence soil loss as an area for 

future research. However, there has been little published work in this area and maintenance 

operation’s influence on soil loss remains a critical gap in forest road management. 

In the southern Appalachians, the influence of surfacing types and maintenance on soil erosion 

has also been explored at the Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory (Kochenderfer et al., 1984; Swift, 

1984). Kochenderfer (1984) found that roads with high coarse fragment content have 

accelerated erosion losses and can expose gravel surfacing once fines erode from the road 

surface. Swift (1984) investigated the influence of graveled, ungraveled, and grassed road 

surfaces on soil erosion. Grass surfaced roads produced half the erosion as the ungraveled 

road surface receiving similar traffic. The investigator concluded that grassed road surfaces 

with low traffic intensity (20-30 trips per month) require low maintenance (Swift, 1985; Swift, 

1988). The graveled road surface with vegetated sideslopes was found to have the lowest soil 

loss in comparison to the ungraveled and grassed road surfaces. 

Clinton and Vose (2003) assessed varying levels of maintenance for one paved and three 

graveled road surfacing types in one of the few published studies investigating road surfacing 

and maintenance impacts on water quality. The gravel surfacing types were subjected to 

varying maintenance intensities which included unimproved gravel with grading annually, 

improved gravel with sediment control structures installed with grading three times a year, and 

improved gravel with grading four times a year. Predictably, the paved road surface had lower 

total suspended solid (TSS) concentrations in comparison to graveled road surfaces. Improved 

gravel surfacing with grading four times a year had the highest TSS concentrations at sampling 

locations closest to the road. The unimproved gravel surface generated higher TSS 

concentrations at greater distances downslope from road segments. The further sediment 

travels the more likely it is to reach a water course. With that in mind, even on the improved 

gravel road where BMPs were installed at the time of construction, failure of BMPs (due to lack 

of maintenance) resulted in high TSS concentrations great distances from the road. The 

investigators concluded that sediment movement was highly variable and influenced by 
6 

maintenance intensity and road drainage. However, additional factors that have been reported 

to influence soil loss, i.e. traffic intensity and the interaction of traffic intensity and maintenance 

intensity were not measured in the investigation. 

Issues related to Road Management Procedures 

Assessment of current road network 

The Forest Service began a fact-finding and research initiative in 1997 to determine what 

information was available on the impacts of forest roads. The result was a 222-page document 

entitled “Roads Analysis: Informing Decisions about Managing the National Forest 

Transportation System”. This document lays out a preliminary science-based tool for 

management of National Forest roads, which considers the ecological, social, and economic 

aspects of forest road management. The indicators for the analysis of water/road interactions 

and hydrologic condition assessment tools are presented. The research synthesized in this 

document makes giant strides in providing scientists and policy makers with an assessment tool 

to aid in the development of standards and policies to address the roads issue (USDA Forest 

Service, 1999b). 

Assessment of current road conditions and short-falls will aid managers in designing and 

maintaining a road system that meets social, environmental, and economic needs. The Roads 

Analysis Procedure (USDA Forest Service, 1999c) sets forth assessment procedures to 

address aspects related to provide a road system that is feasible to manage, address public 

needs and safety and consider environmental sustainability. This analysis procedure was 

defined to facilitate an interdisciplinary approach to identify modifications to the forest road 

system that may be required to meet existing and future management objectives on National 

Forests. Six fundamental steps are described in the Roads Analysis Procedure which include 

setting up the analysis (planning), description of the situation, issue identification, benefits and 

risks analysis, description of opportunities and setting priorities, and reporting (USDA Forest 

Service, 1999c). This procedure provides guidelines for a holistic approach to attain information 

required to make informed and sustainable decisions related to future road systems. 

Stricter decisions to build new roads 

The Forest Service road system is more extensive than the US Interstate Highway System but 

handles only a fraction of the vehicles per day (1.7 million vehicles per day) (USDA Forest 
7 

Service, 1999b). Many of these roads were designed to handle local traffic or traffic from timber 

harvesting operations. A large portion of these roads were constructed simply to serve as 

access into stands for management purposes when alternative approaches to access areas 

may have been more effective and environmentally acceptable. 

One alternative in road management is to limit the effects of new roads on the environment by 

making sounder decisions in road building. Stricter decisions will lead to the construction of 

only those roads necessary to promote multiple-use and sustained yield. Additional 

considerations, not considered in the past, have become the focus of the planning process for 

road building. The environmental, aesthetic, and social cost must enter into the road planning 

process. 

Standards for road building and maintenance 

As mentioned above, many of the existing roads in the National Forest System were built for a 

single intended purpose and not for multiple uses. This fact presents one of the major problems 

with the existing road system; below standard roads used for greater volumes than designed to 

handle. Increased recreational use has led to roads being used for purposes not intended when 

constructed. The combination of increased traffic and below standard roads has led to safety 

and environmental concerns which must be resolved in road planning and management. 

Minimum standard or below standard roads can result in accelerated soil erosion losses and 

mass failures which can lead to sediment introduction into the nation’s waterways. The impact 

of sedimentation on the nation’s waterways was not a major consideration when these roads 

were constructed (Swift and Burns, 1999) and has resulted in many of the environmental 

concerns related to forest road management. 

Once the decision to construct a new road has been made it is important to consider the 

construction standards involved to serve the purpose intended. Commonly, Forest Service 

roads are designed by a team made up of engineers, soil scientists, and other natural resource 

specialists. However, this has not always been the case. For example, many roads in the 

National Forest road system were inherited from previous ownership. As a result, some of 

these roads are more than 100 years old and were not built by current construction standards or 

BMP recommendations (Swift and Burns, 1999). Many of these roads were constructed along 

streams because this was often the easiest and quickest route, soil and water conservation was 

not a consideration. Consequently, management of these poorly planned and located roads to 

reduce environmental impacts is a major focus of public land managers. 
8 

Upgrading critical roads / Decommissioning non-critical roads 

Perhaps the most acceptable alternative to manage forest roads for soil and water protection is 

upgrading the most critical roads. Since some kilometers in the National Forest road system 

are below standards acceptable today and fail to incorporate sustainable sediment control 

practices, it only seems reasonable to upgrade these roads first. Upgrading critical roads would 

allow more efficient use of the maintenance funding. The new RMMS provides the framework 

for improved management of forest roads with soil and water protection as a major 

consideration. Improved management of roads provides access to areas for management and 

at the same time gives recreational users access to their public lands. Two concerns arise 

associated with this alternative; 1) how to identify and manage critical roads, and 2) how to 

manage non-critical roads? The RMMS assigns levels of maintenance to the road network in 

an attempt to address the concerns associated with this alternative. 

Identifying critical roads is not as straight-forward as it may seem to be upon initial investigation. 

Roads critical to the Forest Service for forest management, are not necessarily the same roads 

that are critical to the public for recreation. Non-critical roads have perhaps greater 

environmental impacts than critical roads because maintenance is typically less intensive on 

these roads. Decommissioning unneeded roads has gained support in recent years. 

Decommissioning can take place on several levels, which range from road closure by locking 

gates to complete removal of the road and re-contouring the slope. In some regions, road 

decommissioning has been met with fierce opposition from local communities and leadership. 

Historical use of roads, no matter their condition, is viewed by many as a public resource and 

their closure as an infringement on the public's right to access. In addition, the idea of 

decommissioning roads has received attention in the scientific community regarding the 

sustainability of this alternative. Past investigations have shown that roads continue to produce 

sediment whether traveled or not and poor maintenance can result in greatly accelerated soil 

erosion losses (Grace, 1999, 2002b, 2005). However, total removal of the road from the 

landscape can cause accelerated erosion loss in the short-term (Switalski et al., 2004), and the 

risk of mass failure may exist (Luce et al., 2001). Hence, road decommissioning is a multidimensional issue. Additional roads research is required to determine the effect of upgrading, 

decommissioning, or removing roads as a basis for sound policies relating to road management 

for soil and water protection. 
9 

Reducing the Impacts of Existing Road Systems 

Sustainable development and management of forest road systems for multiple uses while 

protecting natural resources requires a holistic approach to address issues related to road 

management. That is, sustainable development not only depends on administrative controls as 

defined by the RMMS but also engineering controls focusing on designs for storm runoff and 

sediment control alternatives. This combination of administrative and engineering controls can 

minimize the impacts of the existing road system while providing forest access necessary for 

multiple uses. 

Engineering controls represented by alternative road designs, such as broad-based dips, and 

outsloping, have been explored in previous research (Cook and Hewlett, 1979; Kochenderfer 

and Helvey, 1987; Packer, 1967; Swift, 1985). Designs proposed to minimize the impacts of 

forest roads have a common element - runoff control. The objective of runoff control is to direct 

water from the road prism at a non-erosive velocity. This reduces the energy of storm runoff 

and its ability to detach and transport soil particles. Broad-based dips are a design (runoff 

control) feature that minimizes erosion on the road surface by intercepting storm runoff and 

dispersing it across the forest floor. Outsloping is another design feature proposed to minimize 

erosion on the road surface by dispersing the storm runoff across the fillslope and minimizing 

flow concentration in the roadside ditch. Previous investigations on both of these design 

features have shown variable results (Cook and Hewlett, 1979; Eck and Morgan, 1987; Haupt, 

1959; Kochenderfer and Helvey, 1987). 

Reducing impacts of existing road systems also requires erosion control or soil stabilization; i.e. 

reducing soil erosion from the road surface, sideslopes, and ditches. Erosion control practices 

have been a consideration in forest road management as early as the 1930's (Hursh, 1938; 

1939), and have become common practice in road management in recent years as a result of 

recent studies covering a wide range of geographic areas (Benkobi et al., 1993; Burroughs and 

King, 1989; Cline et al., 1981; Foltz, 1999; Grace, 2000; 2002b; Swift, 1984). These previous 

studies have focused on techniques to minimize soil migration from the forest road prism which 

is perhaps the most important element in minimizing environmental impacts. 

However, reductions in soil erosion losses achieved through runoff control and soil stabilization 

techniques may not always be acceptable environmentally (e.g., areas that may contain 

sensitive terrestrial or aquatic species). In those situations, sediment and storm water control 

practices are essential to reducing the quantity of sediment introduced into forest stands and 
10 

available for transport directly to stream systems. Sediment control practices are installed in the 

path of sediment-laden storm runoff and are used to capture sediment as close to the source 

(e.g., the road prism) as possible (Grace, 2002c). These practices vary in efficacy and may 

include sediment basins, fences, traps, barriers, containment structures, dams, and inlet 

protection. Silt fences and sediment barriers (hay bale barriers) are typically the most common 

practices used in forest road applications. 

Summary 

In summary, the National Forest road system is the artery that supports recreation which has 

become the primary use of public lands. The pattern of use of National Forest roads for 

recreation by the public has increased dramatically since the late 1940’s and is expected to 

continue to increase beyond the rates observed today. Administrative controls have been 

employed in efforts to minimize the impacts of forest roads on the forest landscape by relieving 

traffic pressure on non-critical roads and improving road maintenance procedures. In addition, 

research investigations continue to evaluate engineering controls related to the effect of 

alternative road designs on soil erosion. 

Research over the past 60 years indicates that traffic intensity and maintenance are two of the 

primary causes of erosion from forest road surfaces. Maintenance prescriptions have been 

developed and continue to be refined based on previous research. However, previous research 

fails to fill critical gaps in understanding the relationship between traffic and maintenance on 

sediment movement. Traffic intensity, road maintenance, and the interaction between traffic 

and maintenance on unpaved road surfaces are issues that have to be explored for the 

development of designs and practices that minimize sediment movement from road systems. In 

addition, increased traffic pressure on the forest road system can influence the frequency of 

required maintenance to satisfy road management objectives. Maintenance intensity, in turn, 

affects maintenance costs in forest road management. Development and evaluation of 

alternative approaches to control sediment movement from forest road surfaces while reducing 

maintenance intensity may provide a solution to maintain and prevent degradation of forest soil 

and water, two of the nation's most valuable natural resources. 

Literature Cited 

Benkobi, L., M.J. Trlica, and J.L. Smith. 1993. Soil loss as affected by different combinations of 

surface litter and rock. Journal of Environmental Quality 22: 657-661. 
11 

Bilby, R.E., K. Sullivan, and S.H. Duncan. 1989. The generation and fate of road-surface 

sediment in forested watersheds in southwestern Washington. Forest Science 35: 453-

468. 

Binkley, D. and T.C. Brown. 1993. Forest practices as nonpoint sources of pollution in North 

America. Water Resources Bulletin 29(5): 729-740. 

Black, T.A. and C.H. Luce. 1999. Changes in erosion from gravel surfaced forest roads 

through time. In: Proc., pp. 204-218, Proceedings of the International Mountain Logging 

and 10th Pacific Northwest Skyline Symposium, eds. J. Sessions and W. Chung. 

International Union of Forestry Research Organizations and Oregon State University, 

Corvallis, Oregon. 

Burroughs, E.R. Jr. and J.G. King. 1989. Reduction of soil erosion on forest roads. General 

Technical Report INT-264. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Intermountain Research Station. 21 p. 

Cline, R., G. Cole, W. Megahan, R. Patten, and J. Potyondy. 1981. Guide for predicting 

sediment yields from forested watersheds. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northern and Intermountain Region: Ogden, UT. 

Clinton, B.D. and J.M. Vose. 2003. Differences in surface water quality draining four road 

surface types in the southern Appalachians. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 

27(2): 100-106. 

Cook, W.L. Jr. and J.D. Hewlett. 1979. The broad-based dip on Piedmont woods roads. 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 3(1): 77-81. 

Eck, R.W. and P.J. Morgan. 1987. Culverts versus dips in the Appalachian region: a 

performance-based decision-making guide. In: Proc.; pp. 330-340; Fourth International 

Conference on Low-Volume Roads. Volume 2; Transportation Research Record 1106. 

Transportation Research Board: Washington, D.C. 

Foltz, R.B. 1999. Traffic and no-traffic on an aggregate surfaced road: sediment production 

differences. In: Proc., pp. 195-204, Proceedings of the Seminar on Environmentally 

Sound Forest Roads and Wood Transport, Sinaia, Romania, Food and Agricultural 

Organization, Rome, Italy. 

Grace, J.M.III, B. Rummer, B.J. Stokes, and J. Wilhoit. 1998. Evaluation of erosion control 

techniques on forest roads. Trans. ASAE 41(2): 383-391. 
12 

Grace, J.M. III. 1999. Erosion control techniques on forest road cutslopes and fillslopes in 

North Alabama. In: pp. 227-234; 7th International Conference on Low-Volume Roads. 

Transportation Research Record No. 1652. Transportation Research Board – National 

Research Council. Washington D.C. 

Grace, J.M. III. 2000. Forest road sideslopes and soil conservation techniques. Journal of Soil 

and Water Conservation 55(1): 96-101. 

Grace, J.M. III. 2002a. Effectiveness of vegetation in erosion control from forest road 

sideslopes. Trans. ASAE 45(3): 681-685. 

Grace, J.M. III. 2002b. Control of sediment export from the forest road prism. Trans. ASAE

45(4): 1127-1132. 

Grace, J.M. III. 2002c. Sediment movement from forest road systems. Resource 9(12): 13-14. 

Grace, J.M. III. 2002d. Overview of best management practices related to forest roads: The 

southern states. In: Proc.; 2002 ASAE Annual International Meeting / CIGR XVth World 

Congress, 28 - 31 July 2002, Chicago, Illinois, ASAE Paper No. 025013. St. Joseph, MI: 

ASAE. 

Grace, J.M. III. 2003. Minimizing the impacts of the forest road system. In: Pp. 301-310; 

Proceedings of Conference 34; Intl. Erosion Control Assoc.; Steamboat Springs, CO. 

Grace, J.M. III. 2005a. Forest operations and water quality in the south. Trans. ASAE 48(2): 

871-880. 

Grace, J.M. III. 2005b. Factors influencing sediment plume development from forest roads. In: 

Pp. 221-230; Environmental Connection 05; Proceedings of Conference 36; 20-24 

February 2005; Dallas, TX. Intl. Erosion Control Assoc., Steamboat Springs, CO: IECA. 

Haupt, H.F. 1959. Road and slope characteristics affecting sediment movement from logging 

roads. Journal of Forestry 57(5): 329-332. 

Hursh, C.R. 1938. Mulching for road bank fixation. Technical Note 31. U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: Asheville, NC. 

Hursh, C.R. 1939. Road bank stabilization at low cost. Technical Note 38. U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: Asheville, NC. 

Kochenderfer, J.N. and J.D. Helvey. 1987. Using gravel to reduce soil losses from minimumstandard forest roads. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 42(1): 46-50. 

Kochenderfer, J.N., G.W. Wendel, and H.C. Smith. 1984. Cost of and soil loss on “minimumstandard” forest truck roads constructed in the central Appalachians. Research Paper 
13 

NE-544. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research 

Station. 8 p. 

Luce, C.H. and T.A. Black. 1999. Sediment production from forest roads in western Oregon. 

Water Resources Research 35 (8): 2561-2570. 

Luce, C.H. and T.A. Black. 2001. Effects of traffic and ditch maintenance on forest road 

sediment production. In: Proc., Pp. V64-V74, Proceedings of the Seventh Federal 

Interagency Sedimentation Conference, 25-29 March 2001, Reno, Nevada. 

Luce, C.H., B.E. Rieman, J.B. Dunham, J.L. Clayton, J.G. King, and T.A. Black. 2001. 

Incorporating aquatic ecology decisions on prioritization of road decommissioning. 

Water Resources Impact 3(3): 8-14. 

Packer, P.E. 1967. Criteria for designing and locating logging roads to control sediment. Forest 

Science 13(1): 2-18. 

Patric, J.H. 1976. Soil erosion in the eastern forest. Journal of Forestry 74(10): 671-677. 

Reid, L.M. and T. Dunne. 1984. Sediment production from forest road surfaces. Water 

Resources Research 20 (11): 1753-1761. 

Swift, L.W. Jr. 1984. Gravel and grass surfacing reduces soil loss from mountain roads. Forest 

Science 30 (3): 657-670. 

Swift, L.W. Jr. 1985. Forest road design to minimize erosion in the southern Appalachians. In: 

Proc., pp. 141-151, Forest and Water Quality: A Mid-South Symposium. B.G. Blackman, 

ed. 8-9 May 1985. Little Rock, Arkansas: University of Arkansas. 

Swift, L.W. Jr. 1988. Forest access roads: design, maintenance, and soil loss. In: Swank, 

W.T.; Crossley, D.A. Jr., eds., pp. 313-324. Ecological studies. Vol. 66: Forest 

hydrology and ecology at Coweeta. New York: Springer-Verlag. 

Swift, L.W. Jr. and R.G. Burns. 1999. The three R's of roads: redesign, reconstruction, and 

restoration. Journal of Forestry 97(8): 41-44. 

Switalski, T.A., J. A. Bissonette, T.H. DeLuca, C.H. Luce, and M.A. Madej. 2004. Benefits and 

impacts of road removal. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 2(1): 21-28. 

USDA Forest Service. 1999a. Transportation Policy Website. 

[http://www.fs.fed.us/news/roads/]. 19 July 1999. 

USDA Forest Service. 1999b. Road Management Web Site 

[http://www.fs.fed.us/eng/road_mgt/DOCSroad-analysisshtml]. August 1999. 
14 

USDA Forest Service. 1999c. Roads Analysis: Informing Decisions about Managing the 

National Forest Transportation System. Misc. Rep. FS-643. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Dept. of Agriculture Forest Service. 222 p. 

USDA Forest Service. 2004. Four Threats Website. [http://www.fs.fed.us/projects/fourthreats/key-messages/unmanaged-recreation.shtml]. 8 July 2004. 

Van Lear, D.H., G.B. Taylor, and W.F. Hansen. 1995. Sedimentation in the Chattooga River 

Watershed. Tech. Paper No. 19. Department of Forest Resources, Clemson University, 

Clemson, SC. 61 p. 

Yoho, N.S. 1980. Forest management and sediment production in the South--a review. 

Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 4(1): 27-36.